you are seriously asking why founding members of a community want to remain in the community that they helped build?
eta, not gonna post anymore on this.
That’s not a reminder, it’s irrelevant. This is an online community, not stackoverflow dot com where people drop by to have questions answered then disappear.
Being a founder member doesn’t and shouldn’t confer any extra rights to anyone but it could be a sign of someone’s commitment and how much it affects them when they’re banned.
You’ve proven that like white people in gated communities prove they can leave their doors unlocked.
4 Likes
I enjoy posting in this forum and do so in many different threads across the platform including poker, music, sports, food, politics. I don’t think i’ve ever had a meaningful interaction with you, so i’m not sure who “us” are in your post.
There are many posters here i enjoy chatting with and i’m hopeful that eventually they will get tired of the small group who tries to take ownership of this place for years
I mean make a third? I mean wasn’t that the plan (not of you but of others)? Let this place die (edit: I think it would continue as a lot of people like both places) and take consolation in the fact that the other side ruined it. Fwiw I love this place and enjoy and appreciate the content from 98% of posters. I hope it can survive.
Uh no, because the door isn’t unlocked, unfortunately and neither do we discriminate in any other way apart from not letting people in who will be detrimental to the community by agitating for bans. Poor analogy.
There’s truth to this, but also bear in mind that the vast majority of the posters here get along perfectly well with one another. I’m not even sure the people who stir up drama really hate anyone so much as they enjoy the negative attention they get. It all as you say a silly game to send someone a nasty pm.
1 Like
Not a bad idea imo.
1 Like
This is the funniest thing about all this btw.
Funny because it’s laughably false, right.
Unless being regarded as capable of posting decently with all other people and not agitating for bans are “very strict rules”.
1 Like
Hmmm the person who reported a ton of posts here is somehow allowed to post at NMNM despite ‘not agitating for bans’ being a rule. Fucking weird.
We’ve been told to flag posts that are in breach of mod rules, and flagging a post is not “agitating for bans”.
The good discourse is clearly ending and the sniping starting, so I’m out of this discussion. Have fun.
I mean… what happens when a mod agrees with your flags jal?
edit: you know what? that’s my bad for engaging with your dishonest nonsense.
1 Like
I’d like to thank Unstuck–both sides in fact–for contributing to my positive mental health. Threads like this do wonders for my self-esteem because it makes me feel better about myself relative to pretty much everyone involved.
5 Likes
This is a terrible idea for a number of reasons . The first one being the history of posters on this site getting doxxed by mods/admins/other posters. I come here to get the news and read opinions from people much smarter than me there is zero reason I would ever need any personal info attached to my username. Protecting user privacy is 100x more important to me than ensuring fair UP elections.
A secondary but potentially even more important reason is that in the event of a Trump assassination, this is going to be one of the first places the FBI comes looking.
2 Likes
Not sure if serious
1 Like