I think the reason we set up the RFC process is that going straight to a poll inevitably leads to the “losers” of the poll (people who voted for the losing side) feeling like they really had no say in the process. The RFC was meant to foster discussion on said outcome. I truly wish people would use it that way, but instead, both sides jump in the RFC threads and start derailing them back toward the same old debates.
In MY perfect forum world, an RFC on a proposed policy would have the language, then posts by people who want to amend the language, then updated language, then finally, a vote.
Having a vote on incidents like Suzzer’s hypothetical seems like it would get overwhelming quickly, especially if it keeps happening. The whole point of having established norms is so we don’t have to do that every single time.
I do ignore him. The problem is others don’t and it turns into a gigantic mess, which he clearly enjoys creating and has even admitted to clovis. That’s the whole point.
It doesn’t matter if 6ix makes a good point every once in a while. The way he posts, the frequency of his posts, and the 99% of the time he doesn’t make a good point = shitposting. Nothing is ever going to change my mind about that.
Dunno. Feel like it would be self policing in many cases, like how some people here post on 2p2 and here and some people just post here and some just on 2p2 or same thing with The Captains Forum or same thing with the forum where other people (not in the PM thread) who left or mostly left UP have posted. But some places like the various Slack channels or Discord or group PM threads or group emails or group texts have been invite only, the way a lot of communication is.
Some people had been hoping that in a new subforum people (just to pick the most obvious example) like jalfrezi would stay on one side and jman on the other or at least not fight when they cross lines. That’s not so weird is it? FlyWf used to post in OOT alongside all kinds of people he fought with in P and behaved very differently when there.
Lol ok are seriously being disingenuous now and I’m done.
It would be shitposting if I mutli-quoted 10 other posters, then made basically the same post 10 different ways in 30 minutes, and was absolutely all over the place.
Instead I’m making my point and leaving, like sane posters who aren’t just trying to stir up shit for their own enjoyment do.
He’s often long-winded and overdramatic so I scroll past plenty of his posts, but I think he makes points much more often than you are giving him credit for–and often good points, if you take the time to read them. (Also, if we want “making points” to be the measure of a good post, a lot of us are fucked.)
Regardless, and to get back to the topic at hand, I think it’s fine for you to ignore him (and it sounds like more folks should follow that lead), but by banning him or pushing him out of the community you’re effectively forcing everyone else here to add him to their ignore lists too. I think there are plenty of folks here who enjoy talking to him and want him to remain around so they can continue that.
I think the same applies to many other posters here, such as CaffeineNeeded. I think a lot of people take issue with his posting at times but there are a lot of folks here who want to talk to him, especially about topics like COVID where he can add a unique and valuable perspective.
I also don’t want to be a mod (though I would try my best if drafted), so I want to use representative democracy rather than direct democracy to make decisions about moderation as much as possible.
Sorry, I actually ninja-edited that to “his posting” because I wanted it to be as neutrally-stated as possible and didn’t feel that I had done that properly with my original language. You caught me in-between edits. I’m sorry if it came off like I was attacking you there–I was trying to do the opposite.
I assure you that I’m serious and am trying to do whatever I can to keep this community around with as many members as possible.
Suzzer, I read almost everything 6ix posts, carefully and often more than once. He makes tons of good points. And if you read the entire long posts or series of posts you’ll often see they are not nearly as combative, condescending, abusive as it seems. I understand not wanting to read huge posts…I skim lots of posts even from people I like a lot. But, a lot of what 6ix writes gets extracted, misconstrued, repeated and then the misinterpretation becomes “common knowledge”. I’ve done this to him myself!
I think it’s reasonable for the forum to police a poster whose constant multi-quote barrages always end in some kind of massive thread blowup - first with warnings, then with temp-bans.
Otherwise you’re basically saying trolls can do their best to burn the forum down, and there’s nothing we can do about it, even when their intentions seem obvious to a majority of posters.
All this mod drama shit is making this forum a lot less fun for me, which I have a strong feeling is the intention of a small group of posters.
If I’m always at the middle of a giant shitstorm - feel free to ban me. I’d get temp-banned on 2p2 when I got 1/10th as out of control as 6ix, and I deserved it every time. The cooldown was exactly what I needed at the time.
Hard for me to believe in the sincerity of this whatsoever. But sure. (to the first part)
Anyways, this entire conversation is fucking stupid, my part included. The drama will continue at this point. Nothing tangible will be done. Y’all are basically the US Senate at this point.
I guess you don’t have to believe me, but I was using you as an example of someone on the “other side” from 6ix to make the point that there are other posters here who get criticized frequently who are positive members of the community. Another reason I chose you is because you and I had disagreed recently (in the COVID thread, coincidentally) and I wanted to make clear that I viewed you as a positive member of the community. My apologies.
We can drop it, just wanted to clarify my intentions.
I feel that norms are being attack in normal everyday walks of life outside of this forum and moderators and some posters are partly reacting to that by wanting more rigorous enforcement of norms.
Count me as someone who disagrees with you on the last category. People should be given a chance to start here with a clean slate.
You can always write the rules to allow for mods to initiate a fast-track process to ratify certain types of mod decisions. Or just temp-ban the racist newb for as long as it takes for the RFC process to unfold.
I think the general sense of the forum is that any permanent ban should be ratified by community decision. Being given the night off is just a flesh wound that shouldn’t require a community vote.
Do you believe that intelligent people can have differing but rational views on what the c-word debate was about without someone being malevolent? I think that both sides have come away with a preference for the least charitable explanation of the other side’s motives.