Furthering the point a little, if we were recreating the entirety of 2p2, it would seem logical that the first nonP forum would be PUnchained.
Oh fuck I don’t think I knew that.
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/AptFearfulAnophelesmosquito-size_restricted.gif
once, and it were the initials. not like I couldn’t remember the full name if doxxing were the aim. CN making me sick with their continual exaggeration
2 Likes
This is an extremely poor argument for why it’s okay to bandy about someone’s irl name after they’ve requested it not be used.
2 Likes
One of my theories is that there are some posters who wanted a sort of OOT version of a political forum and others who wanted a BBV4L version and I don’t know enough about the latter to figure out how right I am, but I think some use those forums as a model of what sense of community they are looking for.
Everyone had an idea of what they wanted the forum to feel like. Some people didn’t feel comfortable with compromises or didn’t have room to compromise.
Thebayyareabeast, aka TBABs, was a degen OOT sports bettor who had a serious conflict with jmakin of the sort that many would probably want moderation to prevent. He supposedly showed up here once.
1 Like
Well, I don’t know what he was here for, but since people seem to have doxxing concerns re CW, to be fair, Jmakin decided to go BAB’s sister’s house irl uninvited, so there’s that.
Would it help if we just stopped using “fascism” and replaced it with “police state”?
I could abide that; giving up the alliteration of “forum fascism” is fine when we get to say “Unstuck Policestate”.
You know that I’m underlyingly sincere too. The analogues there are way better than focusing on a fascist dictator.
1 Like
But you recall Unchained (and pv7 and other iterations). If we don’t allow nazis and other deplorables, that’s fine, it would be a place for leftist and centrists and, uh, compassionate conservatives to fight with each other.
Bear in my mind I’m not saying this is ideal or good, present or past. My point is focusing on that, without details being hammered out, it would be extremely logical for people to assume that’s what would be recreated here.
I been thinking how to TLDR my opinion about this.
I think the core thing or things being protected grounds the structure and management of an organization and community.
Sometimes that’s a product. Sometimes it’s an idea. Sometimes it’s a goal to cultivate a concrete outcome you can see and touch. But it has to be accessible and clear.
At 2+2, the poker business was the fundamental product. Everything else was tangential. Even the politics. This attracted a large community of people who are intellectually curious to a fault and love games of psychological warfare.
Unstuck Politics has no such grounding. To me, it seems we tried to create a place where the fundamental product or idea or goal is: “Productive conversation about our preferred topics.”
We are seeing what happens when we turn our drive to obsessively nitpick politics, ethics, and communication strategies on our own community without any static core to ground us.
Idk if we will ever find anything that so uniquely and thoroughly aligns our interests as a poker-based community once did. The Trump era did for a while I think because it had the same appeal as Hold’em: seconds to explain but a lifetime to really understand.
8 Likes
Right, like, and you’re gonna think I’m getting too cute, and I am lol, but this is all just theoretical past tense: Why wouldn’t a solution just be to permaban Jmakin and avoid whatever gravitational force he brings? Again, this is from the perspective of making a new POLITICS forum.
But they soon found banning people was so much more fun and addictive.
No thanks.
2 Likes
…So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark.
2 Likes
good thing neither I or the post I was responding to said it was ok or accused anyone of using his name.
1 Like
I think there’s a reasonable dispute over whether moderation should only address behavior on the forum or directly as a result of it, whether moderation should address past behavior. I wasn’t keen on the whole “ban on sight” conversation because I thought posters deserved a chance to re-establish themselves and have a second chance and that we should go through the motions for the sake of fairness even if a bunch of those names were so obviously going to blow it and do stuff that most people would think deserves a ban.
If we use the forum moderation=policing metaphor, then what do our beliefs about justice say about how we handle posters who have done bad things in the past?
That’s one possible solution. Is it the right solution? What’s the right process for deciding if it is the solution? Is a preemptive ban consistent with the basis you want for a new politics forum?
I don’t think it’s the solution, like I said I was getting cute.
What I’m really getting at is that when creating/maintaining/whatevering a community it’s important to analyze any implicit assumptions. I’m saying this as the one guilty of making the assumptions. It wasn’t until just now that I’m able to articulate something that I suppose has been a super subtle nagging thought for awhile: I assumed this would have been a P and PUnchained forum and not a 2p2 forum, and never realized I was doing so. I still don’t actually know what a “draft” is or how it works!
But you’re okay with his irl initials being used after he’s asked people not to? Maybe I misunderstand but JFC it seems like to simplest possible courtesy to simply not disclose someone’s actual, real-life initials. It’s a testament to how utterly toxic this place has become that we’re angleshooting when it’s okay to leak bits of a poster’s PII.
1 Like
p.s. Like I said, it’s most logical that we would be making a new P and PU forum, but it’s not illogical that we would just make another 2p2! So me assuming the former and not considering the latter would make me ruin my own forum experience if these assumptions weren’t addressed (and more likely plant a seed of strife that might turn into a big ass california tree in the future, with people assuming the latter).
Real talk can you take this to one of the other threads? Or make a new META thread?