Forum Death Pool

[Ex-User (9062)]

Thanks for answering.

Sorry for the delay.

I have a some more question for the purpose of disambiguating, I think (I think!). If the questions feel too many and laborious to respond to due to the lengthy nature of our current conversation, that is understandable.

I will try to answer, although sometimes i may have trouble finding the right words.

What constitutes having the chance to self-improve? Do you prefer the chance to be limitless or do you have a kind of threshold of tolerance in mind, but one that is higher than and/or different to what is currently in practice?

The chance is constituted within and without.
Consider the nature/nurture debate.
For some, the point may be reached quicker than for others.
For instance, i had some trouble with Base groove in the past,
mostly because of foul language and passive-aggressive behaviour.
I don't know what happened, but somehow in the most recent times i had noticed a significant improvement in this regard.
So, from my viewpoint, he was well on his way
and a little more patience wouldn't have hurt.
I don't know if you had BAP on your mind, when you asked the question.

I'm unsure about the nature of and how categorical you are in the belief that societies are self-correcting organisms.

Well, there's only 3 possibilities:
Growth, equilibrium and decline.
Growth and decline shift away the collective attention from self-correcting mechanisms, but they fortunately don't have a long shelf life.

Take for instance the thought experiment of a community of 100 people, where one of these people will walk around and yell in people's ears every day as much as it can muster, especially when it sees them trying to have conversations. If the community attempts to reform this person up to the point where it sees itself as having run out of feasible ideas, is it ideal if the society endures the behavior of that one person with the idea that they have failed in helping the person ceasing to behave the way it does, and should indefinitely try to find new ways to remedy the situation without the exclusion or restraining of that person?

This can also extend to scenarios involving people who display patterns of violence and so on.

I have made this little graph, i hope it illustrates my idea.

Do you also not view moderation as a subsystem part of the self-correcting organism that is this forum? Or do you view it more like it currently being so, but a self-correcting organism without moderation (apart from spambot bans and such), would be one more suitable to your tastes, and/or more self-correcting in nature due a flatter structure? (Another option?)

Well, moderation can be a part of this,
but it can also be detached from this process.
Take for instance the criminalization of marijuana in the U.S.
Most people (i think it was well over 75% of the general populace last time i read an article about it) are not concerned about it and do not favour criminal prosecution.
The law and the law enforcement group do not care about this.
In this case, law and law enforcement have become detached from their original function.
There are many more examples, but i took this one because it does not appeal exclusively to either side of the political spectrum.

Do you think with the absence of moderation, people would have reacted to occurrences such as the example I mentioned in a way that would have morphed it more positively than what happened because they knew the moderation cavalry simply didn't exist to resolve such?

I've gotten the impression that in the absence of moderation, negative tone developments occur. That people take it upon themselves to act in ways that serve to make another person feel unwanted, if they deem the person to be incorrigible and thus an undesirable community element... which does and will happen, I think. If they see this function of exclusion of incorrigible elements as being handled by the subsystem that is the mods, I would think they are less inclined to try to adopt a role that fills this function, and also less inclined to actively evaluate whether someone's behavior is incorrigible. I think the void and freedom from feeling less inclined towards that increases the tendency of the average forumite to be constructive and try to rehabilitate people who are struggling in a destructive manner, as the monopoly on exclusion is to a large extent effectively held by the moderators.

Initially, there would be more conflict, etc., but eventually people would have to find ways to resolve their issues on their own, therefore learn how to deal with problems more responsibly, without hoping for a resolution via external authority.

My perspective could possibly sounds a bit human-nature-pessimistic.

Yes, it's the bellum omnium contra omnes argument that has been used many times over for centuries to legitimize power of an authority.

 

[The Introvert]

The drama queens are mounting a full scale offensive!

Yes, the forum is dead and banning four people from an online forum constitutes someone being power-hungry and delusional. Oh and yes you're certainly going to get perma-banned for that post...who's supposed to be the delusional one here again?

Although to be fair at least you didn't go straight to the Nazi routine.

If someone honestly thinks he's going to get permabanned for making such an innocuous post, I end up mistrusting his entire perspective.

The 'perma-ban' point was an attempt at satire; I don't think any of the recent bans, save for possibly BAP, were justified. I've been notified that THD is on the verge of permaban (whether or not he asks for it is a moot point). Sorry for the confusion there. I thought that putting it at the end, with a *, would indicate the silliness of the suggestion.

The four people being banned was not the only indication of mods being power hungry or delusional. Simply the icing on the cake. Many of my same concerns are expressed through other member's posts ITT.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

https://encyclopediadramatica.es/Democracy

1. That's the first strawman I've seen from you since... the last strawman I saw from you.
2. http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=20247
3. TOGTFO

Yeah. Fine. And to think I counted you as a friend. I think I was an idiot for that.

I only caught a glimpse of your initial post ITT pre-edit because I was working through the links in that monstrosity and it changed when I refreshed. I think it mentioned something about me being on the madmin team before, but that's all I caught. Anyway, I'm just using this to foray into an explanation that this isn't a vendetta against people, but structure.

Friend and user get conflated as often as friend and mod. You shouldn't favor me as a user just like I shouldn't behave simply because you're one of the mods and I happen to like you.

I think it was kind of unfair for THD to make you pull the trigger. Again, like Jesse told Walt on Breaking Bad, "if you want it....do it yourself!"

Yellow.

Yes..burn you filthy bridges burn.

Indeed. Can't have them coming over to my side of the river. My side's awesome.

Hey THD (when/if you come back), why didn't you post your comments in the recent thread discussing the state of the forum?

Because it was closed before I had a chance to read it.

It's been a while since my days of daily logins. My login rate of every few days (or less frequently) likely matches the bulk of the user base now.

This is BULLSHIT and YOU KNOW IT.

Fleshing out the broad rules that were there before doesn't make the original version right to begin with.

We make a genuine effort to improve moderation and communication and suddenly we're the thought police?

If the shoe fits...

This is BULLSHIT too. There are some examples in the threads you linked in that childish thing you did down here. Did you even read those?

Here's one.

I have no idea what you're referencing there. That's a statement in response to Redbaron, not a warning to me. Otherwise I probably would have responded directly to it in that thread.

Some of those threads actually hold plenty of examples of the opposite of what you're pretending not to argue here. I'm not saying we're perfect but to assert we're some foolish, wilful tyrants is disproportionate, defamatory, disingenuous and frankly hurtful coming from someone that knows better.

Then again, nobody's supposed to read all those threads, or take them in context, and this is all a game after all, right?

Context is incomplete without the modbox archives, imho.

OH and by the way, THD, you do remember when you banned someone on a whim?

Yeah. I even linked it in my criticism.

the wolf peach might be a tomato without eating it.

I've never heard or read anything like that. Watch out for the hammer, it's around the corner.

Have you guys actually been to other forums? This is one of the only forums where moderators even allow people to continuously discuss bans or issues they have with the moderating team.

Which I find curious in a way because it's one of the only forums I've seen where someone doing what BAP did would last more than one day.

That's because those mods fuck up for different reasons.

The drama queens are mounting a full scale offensive!

*observes Redbaron continuing to post*

-----------------------------------------------------

Response to Rook's thread:

So we've got a meaningless poll (sorry, Rook ) that was up for a whopping 3 days, collected 32 yes/no responses (at the time I type this) for a generic question of "change," and was closed prematurely because mods felt they were obligated to both read and respond to Grayman's posts and didn't want to. Yet it was some of the best feedback they've ever had!

(I laugh because it actually makes sense, because they don't ask for it).

5-6 users actually came out to support more bans out of the... what, 100-150-200 who log in every day? No mention of actual usage stats supporting the need for any proposed change.

"New registrations, posts per day, threads per day, login rates? Nope, not needed! Just need an excuse to act on the stuff we've been thinking about and looking for an opportunity to do."

I'm monstrously guilty of inactivity in tending the garden.

Okay... So assuming that's true, you've now let a gaggle of douche canoes direct you towards a monoculture instead of allowing the real integration necessary to produce a stable system? You're forgetting that the users do the integration, not madmin. Self-design.

How about... only banning users that other users actually report having substantive problems with, as opposed to users who mods think or are told to think are problems? Don't want to answer for banning offenders? Let the offended do it. That's what community discourse is. If it's not enough of a problem in the present to report and then defend taking action against it, then it's not a problem.

Let me look at my Ignore list. (I swear, pretty much anyone who I finally put on the list gets banned.)

^This. The ignore list. The most underutilized forum function ever, near completely unreferenced and unmentioned by madmin, it could have been used successfully in place of 9/10 of the last bans (Variform's excluded). Its degree of underutilization is followed closely by that of the unsubscribe button.

Coincidence?

I'm convinced that those in the current system wouldn't know interwebz jurisprudence if it burned when they peed and they had to get a shot to cure it.

The problem with banning is that we exist in the year 2014 and every butt-scratching Joe 6-pack and his dog knows how to use VPN/VPS+SOCKS5. It's very difficult to ban someone from a forum who actually wants to be there. The challenge always has been keeping people, not weeding them out. Blaming users for driving others off, as has been the case for a long time here, is akin to blaming allelopathy for desertification and functions only to create rifts within what little remains of the active user base.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Keep it up and you might get your martyrdom.

New month.

OrLevitate - October 9, 2014
Methodician - September 1, 2014
Hadoblado - April 17, 2015

But let's revisit the clusterfuck of the current system for a minute and pretend I have no idea where the ignore button is. Normally if A & B have problems, A & C have problems, A & D have problems, etc., then A is identified as being the problem. But let's listen to this former mod of another forum who's self-professed reason for leaving it is because it died, possibly because his own recommendations killed it.

Stop giving the figurative rope to people

The ironic beauty here is that by taking this advice, you're directly contradicting that very advice. I want to stand as an equal influence as this guy and be unbannable. No, no I'm not going to brownnose by stating how the mods are only human, thus justifying any of their screw-ups that don't benefit me. No, no I'm not going to pretend that under the conditions of statements made assuming the ignore button doesn't exist I suddenly no longer support my response to LoR above.

But hey, it's already happened and a large portion of it can't be undone. Resume the recursive circle-jerk.

 

[Jennywocky]

Wait, what does yellow mean again?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Wait, what does yellow mean again?

The statement in yellow (+ the link, but links never hold their color )

I meant to prod the madmin team as a whole, not Cav in particular.

 

[Jennywocky]

Actually, after time for reflection, I think the right answer was, "SLOOOOW DOOOOWWWWWWN."

Spoiler

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvn-tBeLpCk

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Sometimes it means speed up if you're in a hurry.

 

[Absurdity]

Any group of people who work together irrespective of the diversity of their origins will eventually collapse into a monoculture. So now you've taken it upon yourself to shove the system back in the opposite direction and get some of us to either radically change our minds or resign and let new blood in. Maybe not a bad idea.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Any group of people who work together irrespective of the diversity of their origins will eventually collapse into a monoculture.

This is only true if those working together have an undue influence over others. The monoculture will reflect those with influence.

*EDIT: I should also add that any monoculture is a reflection of scale. Zoom in on a cornfield and you'll find an amazing diversity of individuals and genetic material.

Something about a forest and trees or something like that.

So now you've taken it upon yourself to shove the system back in the opposite direction and get some of us to either radically change our minds or resign and let new blood in. Maybe not a bad idea.

That's how I roll, nigga.

Ironically enough my preferred new blood has been permabanned. lofuckingl

 

[redbaron]

The only rift is the one people project.

I mean people actually liken mods to Nazis who are throwing people into a flaming pit because they ban someone from a forum...

Yes. The moderators want to see an entire culture of people wiped out. They better be careful though because people are starting to get on to them. Let's hope the NSA doesn't get wind of their genocidal plans or they might be prosecuted!

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

The only rift is the one people project.

The same works in reverse.

I mean people actually liken mods to Nazis who are throwing people into a flaming pit because they ban someone from a forum...

Yes. The moderators want to see an entire culture of people wiped out. They better be careful though because people are starting to get on to them. Let's hope the NSA doesn't get wind of their genocidal plans or they might be prosecuted!

I didn't write the Encyclopedia Dramatica article, it just matched up so perfectly... Base Groove is actually the one who linked me to it, so I can't take all the credit.

 

[TimeAsylums]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVkUvmDQ3HY

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Response to Rook's thread:

So we've got a meaningless poll (sorry, Rook ) that was up for a whopping 3 days, collected 32 yes/no responses (at the time I type this) for a generic question of "change," and was closed prematurely because mods felt they were obligated to both read and respond to Grayman's posts and didn't want to. Yet it was some of the best feedback they've ever had!

(I laugh because it actually makes sense, because they don't ask for it).

5-6 users actually came out to support more bans out of the... what, 100-150-200 who log in every day? No mention of actual usage stats supporting the need for any proposed change.

"New registrations, posts per day, threads per day, login rates? Nope, not needed! Just need an excuse to act on the stuff we've been thinking about and looking for an opportunity to do."

Exactly. There were many complaints, as always, but:

1. Was change really needed? Or was a there a vocal minority?
2. Should a member's opinions of the forum be measured according to their (in)activity?
3. Of all people in favor of changes how many of them actually thanked the administration for the changes so far to express their gratitude?
4. And have those members evaluated the forum's progress so far? Do they think the forum is getting better or worse? Has it made them want to login or post more?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

EyeSeeCold: July 20, 2014

 

[Grayman]

Exactly. There were many complaints, as always, but:

1. Was change really needed? Or was a there a vocal minority?
2. Should a member's opinions of the forum be measured according to their (in)activity?
3. Of all people in favor of changes how many of them actually thanked the administration for the changes so far to express their gratitude?
4. And have those members evaluated the forum's progress so far? Do they think the forum is getting better or worse? Has it made them want to login or post more?

Have you read the rules? This is not a democracy, the majority does not matter. This forum has a purpose and the only thing that matters is if is achieving that purpose.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Have you read the rules? This is not a democracy, the majority does not matter. This forum has a purpose and the only thing that matters is if is achieving that purpose.

http://www.intpforum.com/showpost.php?p=58742&postcount=144

(and Puffy as a possible lone exception)

Puffy only stays because he's a masochist. Troof.

 

[Jennywocky]

Exactly. There were many complaints, as always, but:

1. Was change really needed? Or was a there a vocal minority?
2. Should a member's opinions of the forum be measured according to their (in)activity?
3. Of all people in favor of changes how many of them actually thanked the administration for the changes so far to express their gratitude?
4. And have those members evaluated the forum's progress so far? Do they think the forum is getting better or worse? Has it made them want to login or post more?

EyeSeeCold: July 20, 2014

 

[Grayman]

http://www.intpforum.com/showpost.php?p=58742&postcount=144

That, in an exaggerated way, is the byproduct of what they are trying to achieve. I believe their goal is to have a constructive and healthy environment for the standard INTP mind to learn, grow, and then interact.

Their goal is not to satisfy the majority of the existing members.

Saying how they are failing to satisfy the majority of the members is a mute point and likely unconcerning to them. Only two productive arguments can occur at this point and that is...

1) That the goals of the admin for this forum are misaligned or wrong. (It is a subjective argument and it only matters what the owner thinks.)
2) The things they are doing or not doing are failing to achieve these goals.

*Keep in mind the goals in 1 and 2 are stated above as the purpose of this forum.

 

[redbaron]

Was change really needed? Or was a there a vocal minority?

Are that many people really upset about the moderation, or is it just a vocal minority?

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Are that many people really upset about the moderation, or is it just a vocal minority?

I wouldn't know. My own disagreement is with complaints against how the forum is and needs to be/used to be.

I don't have any irreconcilable issues with any active members or admins themselves. I thought INTPf has been moderated fairly well so far since joining in 2010, which is why I don't think such calls for 'change' is warranted or objective.

 

[Jennywocky]

I actually did not vote in that poll, because I guess I really didn't have an opinion even to the degree of not being sure enough to even vote "I don't care."

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

1) That the goals of the admin for this forum are misaligned or wrong. (It is a subjective argument and it only matters what the owner thinks.)
2) The things they are doing or not doing are failing to achieve these goals.

Meh. There's plenty of available reference material from Ragnar/Claverhouse even if he himself isn't readily available. Most of it's in the modbox.

I'm up for this weird combination of the two, wherein 1 is only valid because it's been misinterpreted with just a tinge of cognitive dissonance and leading to 2.

Are that many people really upset about the moderation, or is it just a vocal minority?

Let's roll with this for a sec:

*user gets banned that a particular member likes*
Member: wow you guys are Nazis.

Reminds me of toddlers having tantrums yelling, "I HATE YOU!!!" at the supermarket because for once in their lives their mother doesn't allow them to have every single bag of lollies in the store.

So we have two vocal minorities: the aforementioned toddlers, and their 7 year old sisters who insist that mom wipe their ass (ban) for them because they don't want to do it themselves (ignore list) because it's icky. Albeit there'd be more toddlers if they weren't permabanned...

 

[redbaron]

Make up your mind.

How about... only banning users that other users actually report having substantive problems with.

Do moderators count as users? What if they're having substantiative problems with someone? By your reasoning this gives them the all clear to ban them. Hey, I agree!

Also I wonder if you realise how contradictory it is to make that statement and then follow it up by prattling on about the ignore list.

Then fuether on you start saying that it's a good thing for users to speak their mind and have input on decisions. But then right after saying that, you go ahead and insult the mods for doing just that and deride those users as children.

Seems more like what you want is for the mods to just listen to the opinions that you agree with.

I suppose the greatest irony is if the mods start taking your advice that'd make you a shit-smeared 7 year old by your own reasoning. Pretty funny actually.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Make up your mind.

Do moderators count as users? What if they're having substamtiative problems with someone? By your reasoning this gives them the all clear to ban them. Hey, I agree!

Also I wonder if you realise how contradictory it is to make that statement and then follow it up by prattling on about the ignore list.

I'm also a bit confused as to your motives here. On one hand you're saying that it's a good thing for users to speak their mind and have input on decisions. But then right after saying that, you go ahead and insult the mods for doing just that and insult those users.

Seems more like what you want is for the mods to just listen to the opinions that you agree with.

Mods are users too. If they have problems, they can communicate them in the same way as any other user. The Arena would be perfect for such a thing. Fuck, I'm doing it right now. The thing that prevents you from deflowering my ignore list is that the act of placing you on it wouldn't change madmin's policy re: the ignore list (i.e.... promoting its use).

I can't really address the other stuff without specific quotes (let's be honest, there's tons of material). The furthest I can go until then is to state in general terms that mods seem to have a habit of speaking with their banhammers.

 

[loveofreason]

THD, I wish you'd had a chance to contribute thoughts before the thread closure. We just have what we have now; we're all part of the system - here as in the rest of life - a thing in which the notion of mistakes is misplaced.

[Never mind the psycho-guilt-blame-drama that we all get caught in from time to time or for whole lives - that is, in my experience, an illusion that takes us out of real time.]

"You're forgetting that the users do the integration, not madmin. Self-design." False dichotomy. What I haven't forgotten is that the madmin are users too. We are not a class of agents seperate from the forum and other users. We are a subset with additional parameters governing. We are part of the system and as much a part of integration as every other factor.

I've watched the autogenesis of this place almost since its first few months post-inception. The spectre of cultivated monoculture comes and goes, but the forum is not in fact subject to outside agency, except in cases where technology fails. The madmin are part of the system, the structure created by Ragnar is part of the system - all of our personalities and perspectives in ongoing interacting trajectories....

And we have all the ingredients necessary for a complex system that will continue to defy entropy. We have polarities and we have struggle. If there were no opposition or tension there would be no life. Perhaps I misunderstand where you're coming from, but the system you decry as one imposing monoculture, is a notion of fancy. You have it in your mind, but is it the real system in which we alll share agency and effect?

To what extent is your personal struggle a recursive one based upon your notion of the reflection you face?

As you say, people will return here if they really wish. It's not a closed system - though interesting things happen when it is closed for a time, a different type of dynamic and reflection.

Given this opportunity to reflect... I think also among the many attributes of humans, they are recursive beings. Societies are incredibly recursive. Or should the correct term be reiterative?

Can't remember where I first crossed the expression of the idea, but it has been said that if the struggle between individual and society were ever to be decided, it would be a tragedy for both.

That's where I'm at, personally. Not concerned with 'winning' or convicted of the absoluteness of either side of the river, but taking part in the 'self-design' of a dynamic human system.


edit: cross-posted with THD above.

 

[Absurdity]

Mods are users too. If they have problems, they can communicate them in the same way as any other user. The Arena would be perfect for such a thing. Fuck, I'm doing it right now. The thing that prevents you from deflowering my ignore list is that the act of placing you on it wouldn't change madmin's policy re: the ignore list (i.e.... promoting its use).

I can't really address the other stuff without specific quotes (let's be honest, there's tons of material). The furthest I can go until then is to state in general terms that mods seem to have a habit of speaking with their banhammers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOmp3HpAGgM&feature=kp

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

"You're forgetting that the users do the integration, not madmin. Self-design." False dichotomy. What I haven't forgotten is that the madmin are users too. We are not a class of agents seperate from the forum and other users.

The dichotomous presentation was based on your allegory for pruning. Those who are pruned are separate from those with the shears.

And yes, madmin are separate agents. They try not to be, but it comes with intrinsic abilities that aren't shared and are immune to other natural forces such as competition. They also come with perceived responsibilities, such as pruning and slaying dragons. (This is the part where I don't chock up mistakes to being human).

We are a subset with additional parameters governing. We are part of the system and as much a part of integration as every other factor.

^This would be true if:

How about... only banning users that other users actually report having substantive problems with, as opposed to users who mods think or are told to think are problems? Don't want to answer for banning offenders? Let the offended do it. That's what community discourse is. If it's not enough of a problem in the present to report and then defend taking action against it, then it's not a problem.

Mods are users too. If they have problems, they can communicate them in the same way as any other user. The Arena would be perfect for such a thing.

And we have all the ingredients necessary for a complex system that will continue to defy entropy. We have polarities and we have struggle. If there were no opposition or tension there would be no life. <-This is exactly why I don't shut up... Perhaps I misunderstand where you're coming from, but the system you decry as one imposing monoculture, is a notion of fancy. You have it in your mind, but is it the real system in which we alll share agency and effect?

Oh, it defies entropy. Too much. That's the problem. It looks like this:

Spoiler

[bimgx=500]http://wordsmith.org/words/images/topiary_large.jpg[/bimgx]

*dons his black southern preacher voice*

"And I say to you... freeee the bush, so that true elephants might one day show up and start eating... start breeding... start rubbing their asses on the newfound growth! CAN I GET A HALLELUJAH!?!?!

To what extent is your personal struggle a recursive one based upon your notion of the reflection you face?

So many big words. This doesn't register, so I'm going to say I don't have one. My personal struggle is one of not wearing shoes as often as I apparently should, given the number of bee stings I've gotten this year.

As you say, people will return here if they really wish. It's not a closed system - though interesting things happen when it is closed for a time, a different type of dynamic and reflection.

Not everyone knows how to return ad infinitum; in fact I mentioned VPN+SOCKS5 as a seed in an attempt to ensure future madmin headaches. And not everyone who supports a return expresses it. I know this (can PM specifics if need be). This is also why I know the madmin/user dichotomy is true, because this sentiment exists.

Given this opportunity to reflect... I think also among the many attributes of humans, they are recursive beings. Societies are incredibly recursive. Or should the correct term be reiterative?

There's a difference between this kind of recursion:

Spoiler

and this kind of recursion:

Spoiler

Can't remember where I first crossed the expression of the idea, but it has been said that if the struggle between individual and society were ever to be decided, it would be a tragedy for both.

Meh. Net change would be 0.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOmp3HpAGgM&feature=kp

Mods in general encompasses mods in other forums. "The mods" would have been specific to this one.

This is something that Hawkeye would have pointed out. Step it up, n00b.

 

[Black Rose]

@THD

I don't think I will be banned, anyone who takes that bet will lose. Thanks for thinking of me in my best interest though.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

@THD

I don't think I will be banned, anyone who takes that bet will lose. Thanks for thinking of me in my best interest though.

Puhleeze. Kuu farts and you, Salmoneous, et al are gone in the same fell swoop.

(This month's prediction for Animekitty: March 29, 2015)

 

[loveofreason]

We are a subset with additional parameters governing. We are part of the system and as much a part of integration as every other factor.

^This would be true if:

:
How about... only banning users that other users actually report having substantive problems with, as opposed to users who mods think or are told to think are problems? Don't want to answer for banning offenders? Let the offended do it. That's what community discourse is. If it's not enough of a problem in the present to report and then defend taking action against it, then it's not a problem.

Mods are users too. If they have problems, they can communicate them in the same way as any other user. The Arena would be perfect for such a thing.

For the most part the forum - as I have experienced it - has been this way. Being part of the community the mods have been aware of the problems between other users - aware of when a user becomes a detriment to the community - and this is when action is taken. And we aren't immune to the issues that 'problem' users create. We experience it too.

For the longest part of the forum's history mods haven't had exclusive problems with any user - I'm not sure it is that way now... it seems inconclusive. But the push to make mods a seperate class that don't share the range of sentiments and experience of the community arose at some stage - it was an attitude brought here by a few users.


The garden allegory is imperfect. I think at some stage in discussion it was bought up; IB mentioned how imperfect it is. The use of a garden for illustration certainly doesn't hold, and it doesn't determine the actual relationships between actors.


I might have a kind of rosy view of how forum dynamics work due to having experienced the best of the health of the system and being absent for other periods. I might have an antiquated forum in my mind, so that I don't see what you have issue with, but I see what I remember being there. It's quite possible.

...but I also think that what you have reacted to recently is itself a reaction - a compensatory adjustment - to having tolerated too much of the divisive attitude toward modminship that some users brought to the forum. The determination of some users to make the mods isolated agents so that the dramas of authority issues could be projected upon them.

To regard the banned merely as victims of miscarriages of justice is to deny them the power that they had to form their experiences here, and to deny their influence and just basically to deny the humanity of all involved. There is no similarity between having a discussion and just watching someone act out their psychodramas on whatever they imagine you to be.


Which ever way I look at the forum, I still see something much closer to a sunflower than I do a circle.

 

[Cavallier]

I'm going to move this thread to the Suggestions subforum because it seems the whole point of the thread has drifted in that direction. Perhaps that was the original intent of this thread veiled in good natured Arena style combat? *shrug* It's hard to tell anymore. Either way, this is moved to the Suggestions subforum.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Moderation is fine who gives a fuck ffs. Can people bitch about something new instead of old?

 

[Helvete]

Cherry Cola 3/8/14

 

[The Introvert]

Fuck off, Cherry

 

[Inappropriate Behavior]

Cherry Cola 3/8/14

*invents time machine in under 15 minutes because I can motherfuckers!*

*attempts to ban CC early last March*

Damn, the only time I ever wanted administrative powers and I don't have them!

*gets back in time machine to prevent the murder of this obscure Austrian artist whose work ended up on my grandfather's wall. I always felt he showed promise*

 

[Jennywocky]

Cherry Cola 3/8/14

*invents time machine in under 15 minutes because I can motherfuckers!*

*attempts to ban CC early last March*

... you know, Doc Brown, it's probably easier to just take Cherry to a country using the dd/mm/yyyy format.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Moderation is fine who gives a fuck ffs. Can people bitch about something new instead of old?

There's something new to bitch about?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

For the most part the forum - as I have experienced it - has been this way. Being part of the community the mods have been aware of the problems between other users - aware of when a user becomes a detriment to the community - and this is when action is taken.

This is simply not true. BAP was the same BAP 4,000 posts ago, just as Blob was the same Blob and Base Groove the same Montresor. Their modes of inference didn't change; their targets did, or the status of their targets did. Grayman has already been dubbed BAP2.0 and remains unbanned for the time being.

But the push to make mods a seperate class that don't share the range of sentiments and experience of the community arose at some stage - it was an attitude brought here by a few users.

Again, not true. The downward spiral began with Cog's initial ban of Da Blob that was made without discussion with active madmin (that same thing Redbaron criticized me for when I banned bronto), which in turn spawned the bans of the resulting critics of said ban: BAP, Lightspeed, and eventually Hawkeye, and shaped madmin attitudes toward critics in general like DeadonDreaming, Ribald, Gargamel.

It's created stagnation and redundancy, which will only be increased by the "MOAR BANS!" crowd.

[bimgx=50]http://th00.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/f/2011/285/c/2/lol_face_by_rober_raik-d4cm1yl.png[/bimgx]​

"Blaming users for driving others off, as has been the case for a long time here, is akin to blaming allelopathy for desertification and functions only to create rifts within what little remains of the active user base."

I might have a kind of rosy view of how forum dynamics work due to having experienced the best of the health of the system and being absent for other periods. I might have an antiquated forum in my mind, so that I don't see what you have issue with, but I see what I remember being there. It's quite possible.

This paragraph exemplifies why absenteeism among the decision-making caste should be frowned upon; they become an external influence (<-those things that don't exist outside of forum outages ) upon their return, like Lightspeed. The forum moves on without them, but they can't let go.

...but I also think that what you have reacted to recently is itself a reaction - a compensatory adjustment - to having tolerated too much of the divisive attitude toward modminship that some users brought to the forum. The determination of some users to make the mods isolated agents so that the dramas of authority issues could be projected upon them.

Someone very good at marketing would plant that type of seed. It's complex enough that 1) it preoccupies one from thinking of alternatives 2) there's not enough time to properly work through the more simplistic alternatives or assessments that lead to that conclusion 3) it thus allows one to convince themselves that it was their own thought to begin with via the availability heuristic. These are the same reasons that cake mix to which you add water and an egg outsells same price cake mix with egg included to which you add only water.

This isn't about making admin the targets of rotten digital fruit from the masses or bowing down to the whims of one THD, it's about reprieve. Moving on, specifically for the whiners like myself who y'all think are so annoying. You keep shooting down everyone who reacts to or mentions the initial downward spiral simply because you once had a hand in it.

The key to the success of the ignore list is a special type of laid back admin who can deal with the occasional heat without being reactionary while also abstaining from headhunting. Cav has apparently just taken a massive step towards this, which I fucking applaud like you have no idea.

Which ever way I look at the forum, I still see something much closer to a sunflower than I do a circle.

Once upon a time in the modbox Fukyo pointed out that content attracts users. I in turn pointed out that users create content.

The oft touted golden age of this place was while the seed was growing. As soon as the poor thing starts to form a flower head, it gets cut off under the guise of pruning, every time, leaving us only with bottom up recruitment from people who google "INTP," follow the link from typelogic, or get banned from another typology forum. Flowers are never allowed to bloom, go to seed, and recruit peers. Yes you do have a circle on your hands, it's a single sunflower, a sink where noobs go to die.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

5-6 users actually came out to support more bans out of the... what, 100-150-200 who log in every day? No mention of actual usage stats supporting the need for any proposed change.

"New registrations, posts per day, threads per day, login rates? Nope, not needed! Just need an excuse to act on the stuff we've been thinking about and looking for an opportunity to do."

Exactly. There were many complaints, as always, but:

1. Was change really needed? Or was a there a vocal minority?
2. Should a member's opinions of the forum be measured according to their (in)activity?
3. Of all people in favor of changes how many of them actually thanked the administration for the changes so far to express their gratitude?
4. And have those members evaluated the forum's progress so far? Do they think the forum is getting better or worse? Has it made them want to login or post more?

These will never be addressed.

 

[redbaron]

The downward spiral began with Cog's initial ban of Da Blob that was made without discussion with active madmin (that same thing Redbaron criticized me for when I banned bronto), which in turn spawned the bans of the resulting critics of said ban: BAP, Lightspeed, and eventually Hawkeye, and shaped madmin attitudes toward critics in general like DeadonDreaming, Ribald, Gargamel.

Ah yes. You were called out for being a power-tripping dickhead of an admin and now you're desperately trying to become involved in the decision-making process of the forum again. How many people do you think are actually going to fall for your thinly veiled desperation for the limelight?

Don't answer that.

This isn't about making admin the targets of rotten digital fruit from the masses or bowing down to the whims of one THD, it's about reprieve. Moving on.

"It's just about moving on and I'm completely impartial. As long as you move on in the way I see it best to move on and the forum runs the way that I like it to run."

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

"Someone very good at marketing would plant that type of seed. It's complex enough that 1) it preoccupies one from thinking of alternatives 2) there's not enough time to properly work through the more simplistic alternatives or assessments that lead to that conclusion 3) it thus allows one to convince themselves that it was their own thought to begin with via the availability heuristic. These are the same reasons that cake mix to which you add water and an egg outsells same price cake mix with egg included to which you add only water."

Gaslight much?

 

[Pyropyro]

I thought THD was different given the relatively positive experience I have with them. I thought they're just a weird but fun person to hang out with. I've waited until they will get unbanned to hear their side. I was thinking they're just fooling with the others. I thought it was typical ARENA behavior and hopefully no hard feelings and everybody will forgive and forget.

I guess I was wrong.

I've seen this kind of act before. Admins who get disciplined or admin candidates who didn't make the cut want to break the system. It's not because of change for the better and all that, it's because they want others to be at their level. If they can't be in charge then nobody can. They do cover their campaign with revolutionary stuff to make it appealing to everybody.

THD, you're more than willing to harass a user (Cav) to prove your point. Besides, you're also guilty of the very things that you want removed from the forum in the first place. Those actions shows your true motives. I wonder who you're targeting next: redbaron?

 

[loveofreason]

"Someone very good at marketing would plant that type of seed. It's complex enough that 1) it preoccupies one from thinking of alternatives 2) there's not enough time to properly work through the more simplistic alternatives or assessments that lead to that conclusion 3) it thus allows one to convince themselves that it was their own thought to begin with via the availability heuristic. These are the same reasons that cake mix to which you add water and an egg outsells same price cake mix with egg included to which you add only water."

You mean I could be getting paid for this?

Dang.

 

[TheScornedReflex]

Sooooo, how bout those rainbows?

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Oh lawd, it's spreading. I'm actually glad though.

There was no intent to target Cav at all. A few madmin didn't make it into the first round of criticism because I was mostly using the first examples that came to mind, many of which were recent. Some also haven't banned anyone in a long time, so it's hard to find fault even if you're intentionally looking for it. I actually still owe Puffy a criticism at his request.

I also have no interest in being an authority figure here. The existing system broke me. I'd prefer to be here for awesome & interesting conversation, but there's hardly any stimulation left to spark that process. We prefer to see ourselves as antibodies against stagnation and comfort. They are the true horrors. Many of the banned fit this antibody profile.

Besides, you're also guilty of the very things that you want removed from the forum in the first place.

Exactly. How else do I highlight unequal treatment? The same way BAP did? Or Hawkeye? I've said all along ITT that I've been given it.

I wonder who you're targeting next: redbaron?

Anyone else who interacts with him in a way that doesn't favor him seems to get banned, so why not? FWIW, Cav actually did something just a few hours ago that I think is absolutely awesome. She put me on her ignore list, demonstrating its possible even if it wasn't her intent. I think it's time I follow suit.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Dang.

Make sure you catch the pink highlight in my last response to you, for clarity.

Ignore list promotion would reduce that workload you don't get paid for. Just sayin'

-Less explaining, less nagging
-Less banning
-Less mothering
-Lower risk of psycho chimp outs...

 

[Rook]

Hmmm.......

 

[loveofreason]

Make sure you catch the pink highlight in my last response to you, for clarity.

Ignore list promotion would reduce that workload you don't get paid for. Just sayin'

-Less explaining, less nagging
-Less banning
-Less mothering
-Lower risk of psycho chimp outs...

haha - yeah. They're all valid criticisms.

*on hols*

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

haha - yeah. They're all valid criticisms.

*on hols*

So none of them are?