Compared to when? Compared to the peak it seems weird to even ask. We must have 10% of the posts that we did in the first 6 months of UP.
Things were pretty good when the people stirring up shit now all left
I donât know anything about that. The claim I am disputing is that weâve gone from multiple hundred daily users down to 25. This is blatantly false and I havenât had access to the data in a long time but every time someone starts claiming this I looked and it would be remarkably steady. Lots of people lurk, lots of people posting other places other than political forums, and there are many sub communities within this place that are pretty valuable and some of the discussion takes place outside of this forum.
I remember off the top of my head we were sitting at ~180 DAU and itâd occasionally dip to 150 but rarely ever less than that. Iâd be shocked if it were much less now.
I wasnât aware of about half of them ever leaving
Oh, OK. I thought the claim was about activity on the site, meaning posts, not daily log ins. Activity on the site has clearly fallen off a cliff.
I would agree with that but think the reasons for that are a bit more complex than users falling off. Iâd be interested to see the actual data but it doesnât matter much, I guess.
So far 20% of you are not taking my pole seriously.
my final shitpost of all this
I agree with this strongly but not for the reasons people might think. I think this âotheringâ into teams/sides is absolutely RIDICULOUS and has been from day zero. I never remembered signing up to be a horseman, or whatever theyâre called, and I remember being lumped in politically with the âhorsemenâ (for lack of a better term here, Iâm gonna keep using the nicknames) which I took great offense to because Iâm pretty sure ideologically I am not even close to aligned with many of the positions that group is perceived to have.
Likewise, I think a lot of the characterizations of captains are a bit stupid - many of those who Iâd consider âcaptainsâ or captain-adjacent or captain-curious have posted fairly peacefully in this forum for months now, even with people on the other âside.â What this really is is a half dozen personal feuds between various people who for whatever reason lump all their opponents on to one team, whether it makes sense or not, and then seem to use this to get people on their team riled up and join them.
FWIW I think both captains/horsemen do this to varying degrees and I have privately chided people (not my business, I know) that they were just fueling a stupid feud by responding to it.
I assume the departure of Trump has something to do with posting volume falling.
Also, as has been pointed out many times before, Trumpâs presidency was probably a unifying factor that reduced disagreements because it was easy to laugh at him or point out the ridiculousness of his presidency. Now it feels like thereâs more of a left/liberal divide in a lot of these arguments, and a lot more contentiousness. Not surprising that some people would be turned off by that and would reduce their posting or lurking.
I donât really want to re-re-re-litigate this issue, but surely you remember breaking into a private message between âcaptainsâ and posting it to the public for all the world to see. Perhaps that contributed just a tiny bit to you being lumped in with the âotherâ side.
Possibly. My opinion might be colored by the Korean War discussion we were just having, which does seem to fit that mold. It might be oversimplifying things.
to which I explained my motivations and reasoning and why/how it happened, none of which was believed (and probably still isnât by many). Doesnât matter, I donât and never had a side, and Iâm pretty sure if a lot of people are truly truly honest with themselves here, they donât really either.
even before that happened I was getting lumped in with them by simply trying to support the mod team. even down to me being called a centrist, deplorable, etc despite like, not agreeing with barely anything the people in that group post about. however, unlike a lot of you, I dont need to agree lockstep with someones views to be friends with them, because at the end of the day none of what we believe about anything can possibly matter in the scheme of things.
In this Perry Mason novel Iâm reading they keep calling Della a âgirlâ and I can tell if sheâs supposed to be younger in the books than on the TV show or if itâs just old-timey sexism.
Iâll never know if youâre incapable of understanding any alternative to this strawman or if youâre just that dedicated to pretending.
This surprised me because I didnât remember it. I guess youâre referring to this post from an hour ago?
It seems a little different than making a blanket statement that âcalling them orcs is goodâ but thatâs fine, yea, I see your point. BBBâs post earlier in the thread was also the one that brought up the Korean War, which prompted a discussion, though, so I disagree that all that matters is who posted it.
Edit: putting the full bbb quote in for context
It canât possibly be that people saw no point in trying to converse with someone who would say such a thing, and that the postâs existence itself said all that needed to be said, given the context of the discussion that led up to it
Edit: @goofyballer I thought you were talking about an entirely different post by an entirely different user. My bad. I did remember a lack of response to âactually itâs goodâ posts and thought you were talking about any of those.
âPretty goodâ = no one opposed your Conservatism.
Oh, I thought bbb had to be a nickname for one of a couple different posters who made posts that fit gfyâs description and lack of response. I didnât realize there was someone actually named bbb and I hadnât seen that post.
I also think this name is hilarious even though I largely disagree