The process is, straw poll in op, discussion, final vote. People advocating for the sub have asked for some time. What more do you want? What is this with the ,“I want what I want and I want it yesterday” thing that’s been going around lately?
2 Likes
I voted an extremely reluctant yes to the subforum, but I also want to take a moment to advocate somewhat for the huge number of us who - surprise! - like being part of a community with all of you. I’ll grudgingly support a theoretical subforum, but what I want is to be able to read the science musings and badass cooking TRs of @MrWookie while also being inspired by @MysteryConman’s considerate thoughtfulness and @■■■■■■■’s revolutionary passion. I want to load unstuckpolitics.com and see hundreds of new posts, from wildly disparate viewpoints, driving intellectual discourse and creative problem-solving. I want hundreds of posts here instead of here. And I want us all to feel enlivened by shared participation rather than feeling progressively drained and drawn into bifurcated internet caves.
I trust you all do proceed in a way that seems best for the community. But please just don’t forget about the many of us who prefer a community with all of you involved. And if reconciliation becomes impossible and a subforum is what arises, I hope we can all be thoughtful about how to navigate that in a way that still keeps relationships and communities - as much as possible - intact and growing.
22 Likes
So we’d probably want to commence this uber long RFC process in a week or so
Or is max mod term 6 months + drawn out RFC culminating in a postal vote?
1 Like
I got saltier than I needed to be with Yuv and Clovis; here’s where things are afaict:
Jmakin posted a formal RFC to start a new subforum. JT asked him to withdraw it, saying it was rushed and he wanted time to work out the details. Then JT asked for a 2-week ban. I think Keed said he would wait for JT to come back and they’d work out a plan. In the meantime, trolling and sniping has been reduced to a low simmer thanks largely to bans and throttles.
I wish people would turn to the RFC process as a first resort to changing how this place works instead of these loosely-organized trolling campaigns. It’s the closest thing we have to a process that the community can accept as legitimate. It does actually work if you give it a chance.
Yuv had a good point that losing an RFC vote shouldn’t just mean we say “shut up, you lost.” Are there other ways we can make the experience better for aggrieved parties? Are there specific things the mods should be doing? Would another mod reduce tensions?
At the same time, if the community just doesn’t want what you want and you’ve put it up to a community RFC vote, at some point people just need to learn to deal with it instead of endlessly complaining and litigating.
2 Likes
Thanks for posting this. Maybe we should have a stickied post for all official rules? Lol me if it already exists!
For the record, I like wookie and his positing here. I just think he is human, like all of us, and his bias has been effecting his objectivity lately. It seems like it’s impossible for this not to happen after dealing with a group of people over time. It isn’t a weakness of wookie. It’s basic human nature.
My suggesting he take a term off as mod is not meant as an insult in any way. I just feel his taking a term off would help diffuse some of the tension here.
That said, ggoreo’s post is correct that is topic for August.
1 Like
2 Likes
People interact with each other here exactly the way that they want to.
All these silly jokes about how they’d interact differently if someone asked them nicely, or if the mods were different, or if their typing was under a different navigation heading on the website are not grounded in reality.
You know how I know? Everyone has always had and continues to have the explicit opportunity to be nicer to each other, and every single time the usual suspects just nope it up and choose to continue interacting in the exact way that they desire. When all available evidence points in a certain direction, you’re just wishcasting to hope otherwise.
3 Likes
Incumbent mods don’t need an RFC thread. They can proceed straight to a vote https://unstuckpolitics.com/t/consolidated-ratified-forum-rules/4567/3:
If a moderator wishes to be re-elected to another term, then within the last month of their term, they may start a re-election thread containing a yes or no poll that shall remain open for at least one week in About Unstuck, and they shall solicit an admin to make a banner about it. This is in lieu of going through the full RFC process again, although users may naturally state their cases for or against re-election in this thread. The moderator is or is not re-elected according to the same 2/3 threshold.
1 Like
How do we treat polls though. There are people who accept that poll then deny the results of other polls.
I would like to see some consistency on this from people.
1 Like
I’ve said more than once that I don’t think people should just pick sides. They should express their honest thoughts and opinions, and if that leaves them clearly on a side, after hindsight analysis, then so be it.
So, um, that said, oh man you really should get your side together, maybe in a top-secret PM, and get all the ducks in a row. You really haven’t noticed that the omg-long-term-good-posters-are-leaving talking point has been totally abandoned? It’s long been abandoned after it’s shown that they’re leaving because of you (not even the royal ‘you’ to some degree; like, specifically what you personify here)!
I’ve had multiple lurkers/infrequent-posters PM me and share that they’re not even going to lurk anymore because Team Trolly is so gross, but that they’ve always liked my posting and wish me well.
I mean, how many PMs like that did you receive, should we go tit-for-tat? Do you think anybody is going to lament Awkward Okaaaay Guy From K&P Sketch: Politics Forum Version never posting again?
You flippantly insult people by describing this as “perpetual whining and trolling” and other people, both longterm members and lurking infrequent posters, find that super gross!
Clovis sharing a new opinion he formed based on analyzing new information is not needless agitation, and it’s super weird you think that it is.
Trolly needs the memos as he’s accidentally not toeing the line, because,
he’s right, it is a difference of moderation standards. The main standard being having some sort of standards in the first place! And by having standards, fostering some sort of actual sense of community.
These are all my impressions and I don’t speak for everybody and could potentially not be speaking for anybody: I’m suspecting they didn’t spell this out to you due to a sense of diplomacy. Lead by example, right? Start a subforum and not try to finally come to some understanding about the calvinball that this forum has been?
Lol I literally asked in the about-moderation thread the other day if there were stickies with links to actual rules and, if not, where the rules were posted, if they existed (I found something that read like Discourse’s General Suggestions but wasn’t sure). I was ignored, and then banned later for some other calvinball thing, without a word of explanation before, during, or after!
So the idea is, like, hey, you know, maybe just not do that. No point in shitting on MrWookie with more constructive criticism over a questionable decision, instead just do a subforum that actually fosters a culture of respect. Again, nobody gives a shit about getting banned, they care about what those obtuse and rash decisions give a green-light to.
If you don’t think the microcosm of forum politics and civics, plus the fallout from failed (?) mini-political-experiments of alternative modding, on a politics forum is interesting and fascinating and worthy of discussion (hey look the leftist/left-liberal mods went full-fasch, I thought the Stanford Prison Experiment was fake?), I don’t even know what to really tell you. I’d just hope people don’t try to shame and deride others for what they find interesting. At this point, from my vantage point, I see a bunch of actual scientists, like, people with advanced degrees, screeching at others like “omg why are you whining and crying about the rat maze who cares omg it’s just some rats in a maze what a stupid thing to care about omg!” I mean, if this forum is supposed to just be “grrr Manchin!” over and over I dig wanting that but it sounds boring as fuck.
5 Likes
Shouldn’t using a gimmick to continue fighting while banned result in a longer ban for the primary account and a snap ban for this gimmick?
20 Likes
As a lurker with no dog in this fight, and someone who does the responsible thing by using the ignore function liberally, I’m getting REALLY TIRED of constantly having to update that list because someone decides their voice is too important to miss. Gimmick accounts need to be at the head of the class for drawing a ban.
9 Likes
What happens if no one can get a two-thirds majority?
1 Like
7 Likes
2 Likes
Is this the designated spillover thread for people to post in with the subforum RFC closed?
We should probably hash this out? It seems not likely to happen but also I don’t think there’s a plan if they both get voted down for another term.
Either 1. We have no mods for a while until new ones get approved by the community, or 2. Wook and Sky stay on until new mods get approved and then they hand over the keys.
Or else we have replacements lined up and voted on ahead of time? What do y’all think? Should we write up an RFC to cover this possibility?
Should probably figure out what “no mods” actually means. Someone is going to be on the hook best to make sure they are well aware of the possibility of this before it happens.
Well, for one, we have a few volunteers who look like locks to get elected by then.
We talked about this in the RFC, and it wasn’t as popular as just having people come forth spontaneously to be mods and hoping they naturally offset.
Anyway, TTHRIC, as Sabo is banned.