We might get more for UP than they got for 2+2! 
1 Like
Is less fighting really a fix?
1 Like
not really:
1 Like
This is kind of interesting to meā¦ in your mind, would there be any gatekeeping? Or would everyone get to decide if they are part of Group A or Group B or cool enough to hang in both?
cuse left because he started a fire in the communal kitchen that he couldnāt control, and ran out screaming.
You criticise Jbro for relitigating something then do the same yourself in the same paragraph lol.
Sorry to hear that Be Kind isnāt your bag. I feel it was worth a shot.
6 Likes
Jal thats hilarious youāre toxic everywhere. Hell last week you were insufferable about the euros.
2 Likes
And you werenāt? jfc
2 Likes
is this Kind?
And I realised that seeing your name here brings a sense of disgust because of the massively net negative impact your career choice has had on the worldā¦and how gleefully you talk about being part of a vast killing machineā¦enabled by the tech youāve worked on because you think itās kewl, either turning a blind eye to how it will be will be used or too callous to care about its impact on your countryās human targets.
3 Likes
No. And I regret that. As I hope you regret your response.
5 Likes
Jal serious despite the points about hypocrites that goofy brings up Iām going to have to score my twenty points at the absurd notion that you can belong to any group whose mantra is ābe kindā. Honestly itās just funny to me.
2 Likes
Thank you for saying so.
At many points in this saga, both of us have been unkind. Perhaps rather than digging in, we could both admit that and move on.
You HAVE been kinder than some lately.
slightly unrelated question for you that I hope you answer.
In real life, a set of standard norms for a group that can be enforced by anyone who is leading (sometimes groups last years, with many leaders) are established for the direct purpose of avoiding perceived bias. My question for you is this:
Had there been a set of pinned, ratified rules (by the RFC/vote process) that ANY mod could have pointed to when all of this began (C-word and before), would you have been less inclined to feel that mods were biased?
2 Likes
Thank you for your kind words.
Language being as subtle as it is I think itās an impossible task to construct what sounds like an algorithm to do this. Determined people will always find a way through it.
I want fewer rules and more collective responsibility - either short term rotating mods that include all regs, or no mods at all.
2 Likes
Iām not talking about an algorithm.
Iām talking about something you could have used back then to hold mods accountable. Rules arenāt just for posters. If you felt there was bias, would it not have been easier/more effective if you could have presented solid evidence to show it?
āhereās the rule, hereās how many times so-and-so was banned for violating it, hereās how many times whosit was banned, canāt you see the bias?ā
We on the left are supposed to love facts and be convinced by evidence.
Iām a scientist, if you could have pointed numbers at me, I might have been more convinced. As it was, all I had to go off of were feelings.
I donāt honestly know.
I (and others) have been banned for ābody of workā. Also, itās been stated that due to the number of bans I and others have had, if we and someone unbanned all make the same unacceptable post we, the previously banned, will get a much longer temp than the 1 day the other will.
Iām not convinced itās possible to roll this style of modding into what youāre suggesting.
Thereās a huge problem here in that bans arenāt recorded and shown on a single page (meb has suggested this in his RFC), and reasons are often not even given for the ban.
Imagine if someone banned you for a few days and didnāt bother to explain why.
6 Likes
If the schuh fits? I could be wrong, I think I called it a āPM putschā, so if youāre not a fan of alliteration I can see objecting. But here is the key difference, if I throw a word like āputschā around you know, or should know, that since I obviously donāt believe that the captains are Nazis, my use of the word is hyperbole, an attempt to be both cute and provocative. When you call people on this site brain dead republicans, and suggest they should fly blue lives matter flags, it doesnāt come across that you donāt actually believe those things about those posters.
P.S. isnāt it nice to be able to search for posts to refresh your recollection of what was said?
1 Like
Yeah thatās going to be a fundamental core values issue that I donāt think we can ever resolve. 6ix is the definition of shitposting in my book.
So if someone kept posting pro-Nazi memes here we couldnāt perma-ban them? Where do you draw the line with this one-size-fits-all stance?
Well, thatās the second part of my question (I guess I didnāt say thereād be a second part, lol)
Beyond having concrete rules to point to, the second part is having a standardized list of acceptable consequences for posters who break said rules.
I 100% agree with you, and I think we (all mods over the past however many years, not just me and Wookie) have done a terrible job keeping track, but part of it is, we also donāt have any guidelines for what should be appropriate consequences.
of note, the bans are tracked in the mod panel we see on a posterās profile, but nowhere public.
If itās escalating temp bans, thatās one thing. If itās something, else, we should talk about that. But having zero standards leads to hurt feelings and accusations.
If ā¦
People always say what if Nazi this Nazi that but afaik this has never happened here in how many years?
Itās an extraordinary situation by definition, so the community should agree a way to deal with it the same as if someone walked into the bar you and your community own and started shouting racist bs.
The point is obviously thereās a line. I draw it at shitposting. Youāre saying there is no level of shitposting that should result in a perma-ban. I donāt agree. Not much more to discuss.