Reforming the #intpforum.com

[FacetiousPersona]

You could use a little work on your logical cohesion. This same statement could be said about the system you are trying to preempt with your aggressiveness. Who's to say that enforcing politeness won't make for a stronger community. If memory serves that's how this forum functions and it is quite robust.

No one will think poorly of you if you simply tell us why it is that you prefer your style. Your attempts to prove its logical superiority aren't working.

The condition is for us to allow the norm to be dominant and control the direction. It's about letting the norm have control, not being fully logical. Being logical could easily require an authority figure or contradicting system to my suggestions. Will logic always gurantee success? Perhaps, but we are discussing values which must be integrated into this logic. Pure logic does not always seem to be accepted.

People seem to support that the community should remain strong, thus I follow this path. We cannot be certain it will be. This is all heavily dependent on assumptions and theory. We decide from probability or independent thoughts, becuse the concrete data is not very conclusive for our thoughts.

It's about the norm remaining in control, essentially. I wish for this to remain with the community continuing to function. Enabling this rule of politeness will cause this norm to be eliminated, thus destroying my reason for opposing all of this.

 

[Ogion]

Face: My insult in German is a minor one, and i think i earned it to once answer back with a statement that basically says "You really fucking annoy me". You insulted me so often, people asked me how i would not tick off. Well, i don't, but i think i am well in the justified zone to make that statement.

In a serious discussion, why do you think you need to make a "random jeering comment", a joke?! The only purpose i can see in tha tis to maipulate and bring the other OffTopic.

And you know what? We, as in not you, do not have this discussion "just for fun"! This is a serious topic about something that is important to some people. If you gain your fun by annyoing and pissing off other people, then you are most certainly not someone who is a community-builder.
And you easy use of the "we" shows that you do not really have interest in the topic debated, but just want to make sure you have more wight in the argument.

Well, as you just confessed yourself, you obviously only want to have fun in debating this, so that robs you off any credibility of being sincere.

Ogion

 

[FacetiousPersona]

Face: My insult in German is a minor one, and i think i earned it to once answer back with a statement that basically says "You really fucking annoy me". You insulted me so often, people asked me how i would not tick off. Well, i don't, but i think i am well in the justified zone to make that statement.

In a serious discussion, why do you think you need to make a "random jeering comment", a joke?! The only purpose i can see in tha tis to maipulate and bring the other OffTopic.

And you know what? We, as in not you, do not have this discussion "just for fun"! This is a serious topic about something that is important to some people. If you gain your fun by annyoing and pissing off other people, then you are most certainly not someone who is a community-builder.
And you easy use of the "we" shows that you do not really have interest in the topic debated, but just want to make sure you have more wight in the argument.

Well, as you just confessed yourself, you obviously only want to have fun in debating this, so that robs you off any credibility of being sincere.

Ogion

Could I not justify my insult to Jules like this? He seemed to be becoming personal. Also, it is possible for me to have fun while debating my sincere thoughts.

 

[Ogion]

You started that by caling him a drug addict and 'thus inable to be channel op'. Don't twist it.

Ogion

Oh and did you notice i wrote several other posts with arguemtns? Do you have anything to say about them?

 

[Decaf]

The condition is for us to allow the norm to be dominant and control the direction...

It's about the norm remaining in control, essentially.

What is the norm and why should it be protected? Why should it remain in control? If it is truly superior, couldn't it protect itself?

Pure logic does not always seem to be accepted.

That's because pure logic is like mathematics. Insofar as mathematics refers to reality it is not certain and where it is certain it does not refer to reality. Pure logic is not the strongest form of reasoning.

Enabling this rule of politeness will cause this norm to be eliminated, thus destroying my reason for opposing all of this.

Wouldn't that suggest that the new form of the channel would become the new norm? What makes one norm better than the other? I really want to hear some rationale for why a deathmatch IRC is superior to one with some social conventions. I promise I won't discount it out of hand.

 

[FacetiousPersona]

What is the norm and why should it be protected? Why should it remain in control? If it is truly superior, couldn't it protect itself?

The norm will not necessarily survive when there is a deliberate action taken against it. It's superior when all is natural, not when constructed, external conditions or variables are introduced to affect the system.

I'm speaking of the community as an isolated entity without the external world (events not truly involved with it). However, you could say that all is truly related to it, etc.

I think of the community like a natural system which is fine until another ecosystem begins to disrupt it. I wish for it to isolated without interference.

That's because pure logic is like mathematics. Insofar as mathematics refers to reality it is not certain and where it is certain it does not refer to reality. Pure logic is not the strongest form of reasoning.

Yes, I'm aware, which was the reason I was integrating values with my logic. This is how people seem to often decide, it seems. I'm asserting my point, which obviously contains feelings. I think accurate, pure logic is impossible without the sufficient knowledge to support it.

We clearly lack it in this situation and have to decide with the logic which has values integrated it. People disagree with values, hence this dispute.

Wouldn't that suggest that the new form of the channel would become the new norm? What makes one norm better than the other? I really want to hear some rationale for why a deathmatch IRC is superior to one with some social conventions. I promise I won't discount it out of hand.

I'm referring to what is ideal for the present norm. How they feel and think is relevant to our planned actions and current movements. If this norm is satisfied with the current room, should there be the introduction of new rules which may endanger their feelings, potentially disrupting this norm we wish to maintain?

A new norm may come and take over, but I'm concentrating on maintaining the present norm. This is the present community which I support and wish to continue. It does not have to be superior, per se, necessarily for me to support it. Nothing is immune. If it's possible for me to protect it, I shall try.

I concur, Decaf, that I may not be right with my actions, but I have confidence they will be. Perhaps misplaced, but we all seem to act with minimal certainty. Most is very unknown to our minds, yet we move ahead- hoping our advancements are correct.

I have acknowledged others' opinions internally and that they may be right. I shall probably be willing to accept any path which is decided for the community.

 

[Decaf]

So my one unanswered question remains. What is the norm? Can you put into words what the values are that represent what you view as the norm that you are trying to protect? I want to try to get a handle on what you believe you'll be losing by trying to make room for those with a more timid or sensitive demeanor.

 

[Ogion]

Don't you see that you are the one who is imposing the most?
What i argue for is to have the #intpforum.com (as the official channel of http://intpforum.com ) as a common room that is the frame to subrooms. I don't say: We create different room, everyone chooses one room and will be confined to that. No. I'm saying: Let's create multiple rooms, and then let everyone, at any moment, decide in which he/she wants to partake in the conversation.

The main reason behind this is, that we have several people leaving the community altogether, because they are greeted by insults and harsh language, before they even can learn that there might be topics too that may interest them.

I don't know. How do you act in Real Life. Like you come in a new class (dunno wether you're in school or university or so, but i guess you know "coming into a new class") and greet everyone by "FUCK YOU BITCHES!"? Because that is what indeed happened a lot on the channel. I'm pretty sure that in most social situations that behaviour is not desired.
Now instead of just wanting to forbid that language altogether, i say, let's create a subroom to #intpfroum.com in which people who like this language can freely talk in it.

Really, the only thing i would like to introduce to the main chan is common politeness.

Ogion

 

[Thaklaar]

So my one unanswered question remains. What is the norm? Can you put into words what the values are that represent what you view as the norm that you are trying to protect? I want to try to get a handle on what you believe you'll be losing by trying to make room for those with a more timid or sensitive demeanor.

This is a very good question. I barely ventured into the IRC chat, but as I'm in the (as I perceive it) timid majority in this group, I'd be far more likely to participate in a moderated chat. And we are in the majority around here. It just doesn't take very many screaming, poop-flinging monkeys in a chat room to convince us it's not the place for us.

 

[FacetiousPersona]

So my one unanswered question remains. What is the norm? Can you put into words what the values are that represent what you view as the norm that you are trying to protect? I want to try to get a handle on what you believe you'll be losing by trying to make room for those with a more timid or sensitive demeanor.

The norm are those who dominate the room. They're the people who apply the most energy the room- creating the activity within it. They define the theme of it through their activity and essentially control the overall flow.

You could argue that when these are allowed to dominate fully, there is no opportunity for an alternate norm to take over, which prevents a potentially superior norm from taking over. However, my interest is in maintaing the present community. Developing it. I think these rules would impair the norm based on their attitude and behaviour.

Will the community certainly die without allowing another norm to take over? Can we take this risk? If the norm define this community, does it die when a new norm arrive or assume control?

Now, I think there is a process for this norm to evolve, but it's gradual. People are slowly replaced. Basically, new people are accepted into it. This is how a change of the theme occurs. I accept this gradual transaction of the norm as it's natural, not strongly forced.

Would I treat it as a new norm when all have left? Yes, because the new norm should have an alternate theme. They're individuals, not the identical people as before. However, I would be accepting of this new norm on the basis of how it developed and occurred. It's the process, I guess.

This has strong subjective elements and I cannot be certain with my opinions. Perhaps I have dedication to my values which establish these opinions? If I am wrong, I shall be wrong.

Perhaps I need to define my opposition of artifically produced norms opposed to naturally produced norms more clearly. You could categorize all of these as 'natural' or even 'artifcial'. I explained two processes, though, which I use to distinguish between the two.

Basically, the norm are the highest number of people who apparently seem to interact with the chat room most and be compatible with it.

 

[Ogion]

One question: Why is one group exerting opression by sheer force of 'voice' acceptable, even desirable, the very epitome of wha tis 'good of r a commnity', yet another group of people, trying to change that bad, evil, 'faschists'??

Ogion

 

[FacetiousPersona]

We cannot truly ascertain who are the norm. Oh no!

 

[Ogion]

What?

Ogion

 

[EloquentBohemian]

This is a very good question. I barely ventured into the IRC chat, but as I'm in the (as I perceive it) timid majority in this group, I'd be far more likely to participate in a moderated chat. And we are in the majority around here. It just doesn't take very many screaming, poop-flinging monkeys in a chat room to convince us it's not the place for us.

I would agree with you here Thaklaar. I ventured into chats previously on other forums and left because of this sort of behaviour. I refrain from chats because of these experiences.
That being said, I consider a common room of a chat to be like the central area of a mall or marketplace. There are certain basic human courtesies which I think are inherent in a common area. In a mall, if a group of individuals wish to carouse and permeate their speech with insults and profanities, they are asked either to respect others or to depart.
I see no problem with adding one or two adjoining rooms onto a central core. One does not put an arcade or a pub out in the central area of a mall or marketplace. This area is for people to gather. If a deeper discussion ensues between several people, they can retire to an adjoining room. If what one is seeking is the raucous and the total abandon, I have no issue with this, but take it to an adjoining area. If someone else is seeking similar, what prevents them from opening the door and taking a look at the proceedings? If they like it, they can join in. If not, they can look somewhere else.

...my 2 cents.

 

[Decaf]

The norm are those who dominate the room. They're the people who apply the most energy the room- creating the activity within it. They define the theme of it through their activity and essentially control the overall flow.

Hmm... I think you may have erred in your choosing an INTP forum for this kind of community. It may be perfectly suited for the more aggressive members, but you can not believe that even the timid members would simply lie down and take the intentional domination of another. The reactions of the channel admins is an example of that and I'm sure you could find more if you cared to look.

I think rather than craft a community you've rather grown a weed in the middle of an existing community. The original IRC community was weak because being INTPs many members of this thriving community were uninclined to join what seemed socially demanding at the time. In its weak, but growing, state another culture grew up (referred to you as 'the norm').

This culture has its own place and I won't try to damage its credibility, but lets take a quick look at what the channel is there for and I think it becomes less simple. The forum is a haven for outcasts, where those of us with battle scars can give advice to those with scars yet to earn (sometimes in addition to those already accumulated). Its been that way since I first showed up and its done an incredible job of it. Its probably the only reason I stuck around.

So what is the channel? Originally I believe it was primarily curiosity. Those of us who generated friendships trying to share a more intimate connection with others. Again, this is an IRC chat for outcasts. Curiosity would have led to a 'community' of individuals feeling the freedom to express themselves in a world that often yells over top of them. That didn't happen.

You talk about protecting 'the norm' when 'the norm' is already responsible for crushing the life out of the original intention of the channel. Your version of a channel has already compartmentalized the community into those that use the forum and those that use the channel. Nearly every fault you credit your attackers has been perpetrated by your 'norm'.

I'm sorry, but I don't think it has any place on an intpforum IRC channel. That being said, I'm a very tolerant person and I'd be fine if it had a room in the channel to exist on its own.

 

[FacetiousPersona]

Hmm... I think you may have erred in your choosing an INTP forum for this kind of community. It may be perfectly suited for the more aggressive members, but you can not believe that even the timid members would simply lie down and take the intentional domination of another. The reactions of the channel admins is an example of that and I'm sure you could find more if you cared to look.

I think rather than craft a community you've rather grown a weed in the middle of an existing community. The original IRC community was weak because being INTPs many members of this thriving community were uninclined to join what seemed socially demanding at the time. In its weak, but growing, state another culture grew up (referred to you as 'the norm').

This culture has its own place and I won't try to damage its credibility, but lets take a quick look at what the channel is there for and I think it becomes less simple. The forum is a haven for outcasts, where those of us with battle scars can give advice to those with scars yet to earn (sometimes in addition to those already accumulated). Its been that way since I first showed up and its done an incredible job of it. Its probably the only reason I stuck around.

So what is the channel? Originally I believe it was primarily curiosity. Those of us who generated friendships trying to share a more intimate connection with others. Again, this is an IRC chat for outcasts.

You talk about protecting 'the norm' when 'the norm' is already responsible for crushing the life out of the original intention of the channel. Your version of a channel has already compartmentalized the community into those that use the forum and those that use the channel. Nearly every fault you credit your attackers has been perpetrated by your 'norm'.

I'm sorry, but I don't think it has any place on an intpforum IRC channel. That being said, I'm a very tolerant person and I'd be fine if it had a room in the channel to exist on its own.

As I stated previously, I am defending the present norm, not the previous one or future one. I agree that it has likely done this damage, but I consider this one as my norm, thus I strive to protect it. I aim to protect the physical state of it, not defend it from how it replaces the previous norm.

I also stated that I approve of the natural processes which allows the norm to be transferred. I thought this had occurred. The people who were present when I arrived are mainly present now.

It's like societies and how they replace each other. The citizens of each society often want their society to remain. They're protective and will defend it. I'm defending this norm due to it's mine and I am bored.

I said before that I'm I'm opposing forced changes (the norm could be forced to leave through regulations, for it entirely opposes their dominant theme), not natural ones. I did not think of the previous changes as forced ones, per se. Perhaps you can classify 'forced' and 'natural' differently, which brings this to a deeper subjective discussion.

If another larger community arises, I shall understand the process of natural selection with the downfall of this community. I might attempt to prevent it, which is for preservation. I'm a variable within the system of natural system for this element, which should allow me to act to influence the outcome.

If the previous norm failed to overcome this 'natural seletion', they should accept it, like you spoke of before. They could have taken action. I'm unsure if it was forced, though.

 

[Decaf]

With that in mind, you might think of it this way. The impositions of the channels admins are the reactions of the original form reasserting itself. Even with a cultural transfer on the channel, it is really only a branch extending off the forum and will in time regrow.

Many invasive species have to contest with the durability of the native species. The invasive species is not ill-suited to the climate, has as much right to live as any other, but if the native species has the strength to contest, the invasive species must move on.

The strength of the rooted forum community is stronger (in this case in the form of administrative privileges earned by means of the creative act) than the invasive channel community. Survival of the fittest.

If all you need is an IRC channel to thrive, why must it be #intpforum.com? You admit yourself that you have no special connection to the term, so why this one?

 

[Ogion]

Thank you Decaf, very good post(#67).

Face: I see yoir stance. I do. But this is not #faceshischannel. This is about the main (i'm not talking about possible adjacent rooms) channel of this forum, intpforum.com. Being thrice, mod on this forum, op in the channel, and INTP that liked the old, first culture of the channel (which was the reason why i brought it into existence, btw; with Jules finally creating the room, but me really lobbying for it) i feel obliged to defend that original purpose of the channel.
That that is not what you perceive as "your norm" is obvious.

I am not even just throwing your norm out, i agree that it has its own value, and that there are a few people more than only you following it. Thus i propose to make an adjacent room, in which your norm should be the norm. This room is not meant as a different marketplace/mall (as EB compared the rooms to a mall) but an adjacent room to this mall (again 'stealing' from EB). I think that is a good offer.

But be it this or that way, i intend (and i do say i because, as above stated i do have some justification) to bring this main channel back to the purpose it was originally meant for. Being a safe place for introverts , social Outcasts to follow their curiosity and get to know each other, or talk about stuff that interests them. Btw there doesn't have to be only one 'adjacent room'. We can make some more, for different topics or purposes.
But the main room is going to be that what Decaf described.

Ogion

 

[FacetiousPersona]

With that in mind, you might think of it this way. The impositions of the channels admins are the reactions of the original form reasserting itself. Even with a cultural transfer on the channel, it is really only a branch extending off the forum and will in time regrow.

Many invasive species have to contest with the durability of the native species. The invasive species is not ill-suited to the climate, has as much right to live as any other, but if the native species has the strength to contest, the invasive species must move on.

The strength of the rooted forum community is stronger (in this case in the form of administrative privileges earned by means of the creative act) than the invasive channel community. Survival of the fittest.

If all you need is an IRC channel to thrive, why must it be #intpforum.com? You admit yourself that you have no special connection to the term, so why this one?

Perhaps I have become attached to the norm, which is comparable to a man being loyal to his nation (think national pride)? They defend it and aim to protect it. It's for their current nation, not the nations which were upon the land before.

Your theory is interesting, but I think that when the norm is disbanded, they become new groups. It's like surrendering a title. These are two individuals- barely creating the former norm if they were a member of it.

They should adapt to the norm and try to enter the natural process, not try to dictate their wishes through this force. It is more overtly aggressive to me.

I consider these actions as two individuals external to the dominant norm who wish to control it. They are forcing an advancement of this norm, not allowing it to develop gradually. I consider 'force' as imposing something this strongly and to this extent. However, it is difficult to gauge all of this, I admit.

 

[Ogion]

This is not just about two individuals, Face.

And really, to stay in Decafs analogy: There is conflict, that should be obvious. The question is, do you choose 'bloody war', or do you choose 'peaceful coexistence'? (You=your norm, the invading species)

Ogion

 

[FacetiousPersona]

I think of the natural process for this norm as evolution, metaphorically. The room progressed into this norm and it's defending itself. The previous norm has been removed and it's no longer existent in the present. You are trying to enforce a new norm, which will certainly not be an identical norm to the one before our current one.

Should you be defining how these developments occur this forcefully? Is it right? This norm became present through the natural conditions, not introduced factors through aggression. Did we truly force our norm into existence through aggression? I do not think we truly intimidated all of the other norm away. They seemed to gradually be replaced due to a natural process. We did not murder them or force them to leave with an ultimatum.

It is irrating that you insist on responding to me, Ogion, when I have stated it is not my wish to communicate with you. Your responses have not been interesting enough for me to truly follow. They might be right, logical, or intelligent, but they do not interest me. It's as if you wish to have a discussion with yourself. Simply stop replying, okay? You're not leaving me alone and it's irritating me.

This discussion seems mostly subjective and highly speculative, which leaves the decisions to our feelings and thoughts, not any concrete data. I doubt my opinion will be taken due to my position on this forum. Those with authority will have confidence in their feelings and take action accordingly. Will they be correct? I hope.

 

[Ogion]

You err. To stay in the analogy: Evoution it would be if the previous culture would have evolved, changed, to 'your norm'. Well it didn't. 'Your norm' invaded, trying to subdue the prevous 'norm'. The problem is, the 'previous norm' is not dead, extinct, and is certainly not defenseless.
There is no right or wrong in this. You want one 'norm'. That 'norm' though is at least not compatible, in some cases even opposing to the intended 'norm'.

I think you don't get it. You either talk with me, with 'the old norm', or you don't. But if you don't you won't have any room for 'your norm'. Your 'norm' would have to wander off, to another island (ie irc-network).

Ogion

 

[FacetiousPersona]

Ogion, I've not read your response. You seriously do not know when to shut up. I've told you to shut up over 2 times and you continue. I need to do other stuff than listen to your consistent responses. If I read them, I feel compelled to reply, and this only consumes all of my time.

 

[Jules]

The lovely thing about a forum is that you can choose what not to read, Face.

 

[Ogion]

This is not your thread, Face.
I'm tired of you insulting me with no end out of fake reasons.

I'm also tired of your self-proclaimed domincance and essence-being of our irc-channel.

You're not welcome in it anymore.

________________

To everyone else: This thread still is meant as a place to discuss channel-matters.
To be honest, if i don't see anyone saying in here, i will just assume you agree.
I'm quite a bit surprised that on the channel people created such an uproar last night, but now, here, they all just say nothing. No interested anymore?
To be fair, many might just sleep, depending on timezone and personal rythm. So i won't decide anything over night here.

Ogion

 

[Anthile]

So, this is the point where everyone is too emotional. The next personal attack from whatever side will lead to a closing of this thread.


So here are my points of critique:


-Inflicting the subjective world view of two individuals on the whole community.

-Not involving the community at any point.

-Not involving the staff at any point. Personally, I feel deceived by you two and I am very disappointed.

-Inflicting censorship on the community with a not very well working bot. The bot has not even been tested before. No testing, no plan, no backup.

-Making rules and exclude yourselves from them.

-Favoritism: Individuation has been made a half-op for no reason. He's not even active on the forum. Wisp and Saffy have been made half-ops although they never use their powers except for kicking people arbitrarily. Wisp way less so than Saffy. Heck, you even made me a half-op, before I became a moderator, just for asking.

-Saffy has been demoted for a because she abused her powers for a while. This decision made by the staff has been revoked without any justification by Jules and/or Ogion. Don't tell me that this wasn't about favoritism.

-Making Groosalugg, who is not even on the forum, a half-op although he insulted nearly everyone in the channel and made a lot of racist and misogynistic statements. There was never any reasoning or justification behind that. People left because of him. I was told that he got demoted meanwhile but it still took several days of heavy protesting.

-Creating a hostile, dictatorial atmosphere with statements like "This is not a democracy", making obscure decisions and because-we-say-so argumentation.

-Inflicting a ludicrous punishment on Face for protesting. Don't tell me this wasn't personal.

-Concealing that Fukyo left the mainchannel because of all this.



Personally, I won't - can't - stay in the mainchannel any longer. I feel wounded and betrayed.

 

[Jules]

So, this is the point where everyone is too emotional. The next personal attack from whatever side will lead to a closing of this thread.


So here are my points of critique:


-Inflicting the subjective world view of two individuals on the whole community.

You are using a subjective argument to accuse people of acting subjectively?

-Not involving the community at any point.

Hello, channel operator. Where have you been all the time?

-Not involving the staff at any point. Personally, I feel deceived by you two and I am very disappointed.

I remember asking all channel operators how they would deal with abusive language. Guess how many responses I got? Including yours: NONE.
How do you involve the operators when they appear not to care about being involved?

-Inflicting censorship on the community with a not very well working bot. The bot has not even been tested before. No testing, no plan, no backup.

In case you hadn't noticed, the bot is gone.
When channel operators do not appear to care about what's going on in a channel (see above comment) and when there's even channel operators who refuse to act in any situation whatsoever. How many options do you see left?

-Making rules and exclude yourselves from them.

I'm not really getting your point here? Why would we want to stop people from swearing, excessive caps usage etc and then start doing that ourselves??

-Favoritism: Individuation has been made a half-op for no reason. He's not even active on the forum. Wisp and Saffy have been made half-ops although they never use their powers except for kicking people arbitrarily. Wisp way less so than Saffy. Heck, you even made me a half-op, before I became a moderator, just for asking.

You mean the same favoritism used to decide who does and who does not get to join this 'secret' channel which was created precisely because the level of the main channel was going down? Do I smell hypocrisy?

-Saffy has been demoted for a because she abused her powers for a while. This decision made by the staff has been revoked without any justification by Jules and/or Ogion. Don't tell me that this wasn't about favoritism.

You mean demoted without informing Saffy, me and Ogion? Weren't you just accusing me and Ogion of the same thing? Hypocrisy again?

-Making Groosalugg, who is not even on the forum, a half-op although he insulted nearly everyone in the channel and made a lot of racist and misogynistic statements. There was never any reasoning or justification behind that. People left because of him. I was told that he got demoted meanwhile but it still took several days of heavy protesting.

That was a mistake, true. However, I do ask myself where all the heavy protesting went to? None of the ops responded (where have I seen that before?)

-Creating a hostile, dictatorial atmosphere with statements like "This is not a democracy", making obscure decisions and because-we-say-so argumentation.

Please remind me of where I have used a statement like "This is not a democracy" or have used because-we-say-so argumentation.

-Inflicting a ludicrous punishment on Face for protesting. Don't tell me this wasn't personal.

Protesting is ok, doing this in full caps with loads of swear words is not a sensible way of protesting. That's called provoking.

-Concealing that Fukyo left the mainchannel because of all this.

Concealing what? Are you serious? As if we have any say in what you, Fukyo or anyone else for that matter can notify the community.
I think you are overestimating what we're capable of.

Personally, I won't - can't - stay in the mainchannel any longer. I feel wounded and betrayed.

That is too bad, but still your own decision.

 

[Hawkeye]

All this could have been solved with a simple poll instead of four - five people trying to decide what is best for the whole community.

You go with the majority. It happens everywhere from ants to elephants. More importantly, it works.


[edit]

you also have to remember that you are dealing with an INTP majority who (according to the decription) don't take well to rules and authority. They tend to treat all with equal standards which is why decisions should be democratically discussed...

 

[Oblivious]

It seems a lot has happened during my minigun massacre on team fortress today.

 

[Fukyo]

*Sigh* Right,I see this is getting very personal and emotional and that is certainly not good.I see many posts laced anger and annoyance.

Since I support the idea of resolving the issue with peaceful cooperation I'm going to try and explain here my thoughts and conclusions about the problem we seem to have here.
I essentially agree with Anthile's post and I will clarify further on that.I'm not personally attacking or insulting anyone,I just strongly disagree with the way the channel has been managed so far.

- I noticed a significant amount of hypocrisy in the way the bans and kicks are issued.This is mainly done on a whim of the operator and what they themselves consider annoying or obnoxious.Example:
The females in the channel are very often the targets of extremely vulgar and sexual jokes,things that even border on cybersex,yet nothing substantial,except for an occasional kick or a verbal warning has ever been done about this.
_

- I question the way why certain people get to be the operators in the channel.Primely Groosalugg,who is not a member of the forum,let alone an admin/mod there,a person who acts the same as FacetiousPersona and Melkor(whose behavior is greatly frowned upon)or even worse.Why is such a person made a half operator and given the right to moderate the channel and remove people from it?
This is what I'm referring to:

18:35.17 {Groosalugg} !k rosaline I can still kick you.
18:35.18 ••• Midnight has kicked rosaline from #intpforum.com stating I can still kick you. (Groosalugg)
18:35.18 ••• Joins #intpforum.com: rosaline ( something@fire.flies )
18:35.21 {Ogion} !info
18:35.32 {Groosalugg} /msg botserv help
18:35.38 {Ogion} yea
18:35.43 {@Anthile} So why can Groosa kick people for fun?
18:35.44 {rosaline} oh
18:35.52 {Ogion} uhm
18:35.57 {Ogion} because Groosalugg is halfop

- The bot Midnight,which was an extremely strict rules enforcer.Any use of a "bad word",caps,or repeating the same line only 3 times would result in a kick by the bot.3 kicks=ban,which would be removed 30 minutes later by another bot in the channel.Also the matter of these rules not applying to anyone above regular user on the channel.I'm not implying the ops would abuse this,but the mere fact that they had the freedom of doing so,while others didn't is an example of double standard.
Note that I am aware the bot and Groosalugg as an h-op have been removed,but I felt this was important to address in any case.

- On the matter of other rooms.I don't really have much against them.They might cause damage to the community in the long run,because they'll be taking away the users and changing the atmosphere in the main channel.(which wasn't always so bad.)I do agree we need some guide lines for behavior as excessive profanity and personal attacks aren't everyone's cup of tea.But it would also be exaggerating to say that they are the bigger portion of the channel's activity,which they aren't.Please note that the insults and attacks were mostly jokes meant without any serious malevolent intention.Also I'm not going to say I never cussed or have been an exemplary user on the channel.Therefore I apologize if I've ever insulted anyone with a crude joke,remark or anything else.

As a suggestion,I think that every user needs to have a say in the making of these guide lines and I prefer that this be discussed in the forum as it allows for easier and clearer communication.

Final note:I'm not personally attacking or provoking anyone with this post,I'm only criticizing the decisions that have been made.

 

[Jules]

.....

- I noticed a significant amount of hypocrisy in the way the bans and kicks are issued.This is mainly done on a whim of the operator and what they themselves consider annoying or obnoxious.Example:
The females in the channel are very often the targets of extremely vulgar and sexual jokes,things that even border on cybersex,yet nothing substantial,except for an occasional kick or a verbal warning has ever been done about this.

Who are you targeting here? The operators? That includes all of them, you know. Have you inquired with any of them about this? How did they respond?

- I question the way why certain people get to be the operators in the channel.Primely Groosalugg,who is not a member of the forum,let alone an admin/mod there,a person who acts the same as FacetiousPersona and Melkor(whose behavior is greatly frowned upon)or even worse.Why is such a person made a half operator and given the right to moderate the channel and remove people from it?
This is what I'm referring to:

As I have said earlier that was a mistake and has been undone.

- The bot Midnight,which was an extremely strict rules enforcer.Any use of a "bad word",caps,or repeating the same line only 3 times would result in a kick by the bot.3 kicks=ban,which would be removed 30 minutes later by another bot in the channel.Also the matter of these rules not applying to anyone above regular user on the channel.I'm not implying the ops would abuse this,but the mere fact that they had the freedom of doing so,while others didn't is an example of double standard.
Note that I am aware the bot and Groosalugg as an h-op have been removed,but I felt this was important to address in any case.

Again, if you have channel operators who appear not to care about what's happening on the channel (I hear about vulgar and sexual jokes? Why wouldn't all these operators act upon that?) then how many options do you have?

- On the matter of other rooms.I don't really have much against them.They might cause damage to the community in the long run,because they'll be taking away the users and changing the atmosphere in the main channel.(which wasn't always so bad.)I do agree we need some guide lines for behavior as excessive profanity and personal attacks aren't everyone's cup of tea.But it would also be exaggerating to say that they are the bigger portion of the channel's activity,which they aren't.

Can do nothing but agree with you there. It's not the bigger portion of the chat but it is a portion of the chat that generates more irritation than the actual bigger portion of the chat.

Please note that the insults and attacks were mostly jokes meant without any serious malevolent intention.Also I'm not going to say I never cussed or have been an exemplary user on the channel.Therefore I apologize if I've ever insulted anyone with a crude joke,remark or anything else.

However mostly jokes were serious enough to make it the first point you are making with your post.

As a suggestion,I think that every user needs to have a say in the making of these guide lines and I prefer that this be discussed in the forum as it allows for easier and clearer communication.

Agreed, the forum is also better for keeping track of the history of the discussion.

Final note:I'm not personally attacking or provoking anyone with this post,I'm only criticizing the decisions that have been made.

No worries, I'm not feeling personally attacked or provoked with your post.
And I'm not personally attacking nor provoking anyone either.

 

[Fukyo]

Right,after reading this thread I've come to the conclusion that this has become quite a personal issue to some people,and I'd rather not add to it.
I'm just hoping no damage will come to the channel because of it and that the issue will be resolved with tact,which is sorely missing here.

 

[Jules]

Somehow I find it illogical that some of the persons against the recent events on irc are the very same who were in charge of channel management as operators in the first place. As I have said earlier I inquired with every operator about what their response would be to uncivilized behavior like Fukyo described, but absolutely none of them responded.
Can any of you elaborate?

 

[Ogion]

instead of writing a post with a minutely answering of the raised topics, i want to say this:

So far, in the past, the channel has been pretty authority-free. There were a few kicks, and seldomly a short ban, but that was all. My trying to talk with people to bring them to stop the personal insults and the general hostilty were completely fruitless.
Since a few people have been driven away by it, and since it more or less domintates almost every conversation in the channel, i think it is time to do some changes.

The goal is to bring the main room (only talking about the main room here) to a standard level of netiquette. But since obviously there is a need to have this unpolite behaviour/communication, we will make a subforum, where people fomr the main room can let out their aggressivity and freely indulge in that sort of behaviour. And when they wish more for a polite serious discussion, they can just talk in the main room about it. Or even create another subroom. That is how the medium irc is meant.

I agree that in the recent attempt to do some changes, there have been some mistakes/misjudgements (Groosalugg and the bot mainly). That was unfortunate, but mistakes and misjudgements hppen. BTW, until now, i still have seen very little interest in participating in this matter.
Could more people come here and state their opinion, on for example wether we should go for room+subroom(s), wether a basic netiquette should be in place in the main room (and we could then have a dedicated subroom where there is no netiquette)...?

Ogion

 

[Jules]

Right,after reading this thread I've come to the conclusion that this has become quite a personal issue to some people,and I'd rather not add to it.
I'm just hoping no damage will come to the channel because of it and that the issue will be resolved with tact,which is sorely missing here.

Really nothing personal. But I'm still curious as to how the ops responded to your complaints about sexual remarks and all.

 

[Fukyo]

The point I was making with bringing up sexual remarks was to illustrate the fact that the absence of specific rules had the effect of people being banned for trivialities,while things that were more serious got overlooked.
With that being said I will repeat what I've stated earlier.

I do agree we need some guide lines for behavior as excessive profanity and personal attacks aren't everyone's cup of tea.

Rules,or guidelines ARE needed,but everyone should have a say in what these rules are,not only channel staff.

 

[Ogion]

Ok, we agree on that then. Good.

Now, that is what this thread was menat and is meant for. To let people come and together find some form of netiquette.

I am quite astonished though to see zero reaction from 'the community'...

Ogion

 

[preilemus]

i dont really have much to add, as I do not think rules in general are a good idea, but after all, they are in place for the benefit of the majority, so I would have to say that personal attacks of any kind shouldnt be allowed on the main channel.

we have #risque for that sort of thing, but as far as I know, it doesnt get much use. maybe if it was advertised a bit more, we could get more people in there.

so yeah, thats my only suggestion. the rules should be centered around maintaining an open environment for everyone, so things like caps lock, swearing etc. dont need rules against them, but things of a hurtful, personal nature should be handled seriously.

 

[Fukyo]

An idea just occurred to me regarding to the making of these rules.

Maybe a making of a new thread where anyone with time,desire or willingness will compose a complete list of rules regarding user conduct in the channel as they see fit,then submit them as a post in that thread.Later when all lists are submitted a poll is made,where users will choose a list or a combination of lists(maybe even improve on them,add points and generally discuss pros and cons/change the rules).

 

[Ogion]

That would be great. Sadly so far i don't see much participation.

Ogion

 

[Tyria]

Ok, we agree on that then. Good.

Now, that is what this thread was menat and is meant for. To let people come and together find some form of netiquette.

I am quite astonished though to see zero reaction from 'the community'...

Ogion

I'm just reading what everyone has wrote so far. There's a lot to look over, and plenty of points to consider. I consider this an important issue, so I'm taking the time to look over it.

 

[Ogion]

Thanks, Crimson_Knight.

Ogion

 

[Hawkeye]

An idea just occurred to me regarding to the making of these rules.

Maybe a making of a new thread where anyone with time,desire or willingness will compose a complete list of rules regarding user conduct in the channel as they see fit,then submit them as a post in that thread.Later when all lists are submitted a poll is made,where users will choose a list or a combination of lists(maybe even improve on them,add points and generally discuss pros and cons/change the rules).

Thats what I said on the first page of this thread...

I then re-enforced it on page 8

 

[Ogion]

I would have assumed that most people have read this already, but just to make clear:
http://wiki.ecnet.org/wiki/Rules
These are network-wide rules. They are in place whatever we do or decide, as long as we use ecnet...

Ogion

 

[Kuu]

My gods, this is ridiculous. Are we gonna be having this kind of soap operas every couple of weeks? I'm beginning to get tired of it.

I agree thoroughly with Anthile's post. Sometimes the mods seem to suffer from groupthink. Fortunately they are wise enough to open issues such as this to the community (although, sometimes, only after some mistake has been made...).

And I agree with the previously stated position that the #intpforum channel shall be left as is, and allowed to grow naturally through the input of its regular members.

I like to think that we are all smart enough, web-savvy enough to know that the internet can be a wild place, in which jokes and sarcasm can be easily confused with actual insults and bad intentions. When you walk into the irc, you know what it is, you know that you can't take everything too seriously, and you must have thick skin and be ready to dismiss comments you dislike. If somebody keeps harassing you after you asked hir to stop, then put hir on ignore. If somehow it continues, go to the mods. If you are not satisfied with the mods decisions, then you leave.

I think that the randomness, and the transitory nature of many users of the channel is actually a strength to it. To assume that all members want politeness and quiet discussion is a big mistake. I have always disliked forced politeness and I do not think it should be applied there. If members want to make it a more polite place, then they should do it by example, and attempt to change it by natural, involved means of equal peers.

I have no qualms about creating a separate, "forcibly polite" channel, if enough people are interested in that (Or any other channel, for that matter. People are, after all, free). But it should be a sub-channel, not the main one. The main one shall remain as-is, free, natural and ever-changing. Sometimes I hate it, sometimes I love it. But if it sucks I'd rather it suck by its own chaotic unpredictable nature than it sucking because of bad moderation or no freedom of speech.

Those are my opinions.

 

[Venture]

My gods, this is ridiculous. Are we gonna be having this kind of soap operas every couple of weeks? I'm beginning to get tired of it.

I agree thoroughly with Anthile's post. And I agree with the previously stated position that the #intpforum channel shall be left as is, and allowed to grow naturally through the input of its regular members.

I like to think that we are all smart enough, web-savvy enough to know that the internet can be a wild place, in which jokes and sarcasm can be easily confused with actual insults and bad intentions. When you walk into the irc, you know what it is, you know that you can't take everything too seriously, and you must have thick skin and be ready to dismiss comments you dislike. If somebody keeps harassing you after you asked hir to stop, then put hir on ignore. If somehow it continues, go to the mods. If you are not satisfied with the mods decisions, then you leave.

I think that the randomness, and the transitory nature of many users of the channel is actually a strength to it. To assume that all members want politeness and quiet discussion is a big mistake. I have always disliked forced politeness and I do not think it should be applied there. If members want to make it a more polite place, then they should do it by example, and attempt to change it by natural, involved means of equal peers.

I have no qualms about creating a separate, "forcibly polite" channel, if enough people are interested in that (Or any other channel, for that matter. People are, after all, free). But it should be a sub-channel, not the main one. The main one shall remain as-is, free, natural and ever-changing. Sometimes I hate it, sometimes I love it. But if it sucks I'd rather it suck by its own chaotic unpredictable nature than it sucking because of bad moderation or no freedom of speech.

Those are my opinions.

I just want more INTP forum members!!!

Calm down already....

 

[Thaklaar]

@Tekton - What, precisely, is wrong with expecting some minimum of polite behavior? I don't think anyone's saying we should turn it into your great-aunt Frannie's parlor with everyone sipping cups of virtual tea and making polite noises at one another. On the other hand, there's little I think to say positively about people's freedom to sit in there randomly screaming "COCK" every three seconds. You can have lively and entertaining conversation without turning it into a Tourette's convention.

 

[Kuu]

@Tekton - What, precisely, is wrong with expecting some minimum of polite behavior?

Expecting? Nothing. ...demanding? I thought I was clear: it is to assume too much, that everybody wants that.

On the other hand, there's little I think to say positively about people's freedom to sit in there randomly screaming "COCK" every three seconds. You can have lively and entertaining conversation without turning it into a Tourette's convention.

I frequent the IRC a lot. Although this happens once in a while it is not all the time. And I tend to find it funny almost half of the time.

What's so bad about COCK anyway? Seriously? Sometimes, being "a haven for INTPs" also means accepting INTPs complete lack of social tack, and the traditional taboos of society.... If you are not in the mood for such humor, then don't go to the IRC.

I see this all as such a huge over-reaction to a non-issue...

 

[Anthile]

Rules don't make sense as long as they don't get persecuted consequently.
It was mostly me who banned people from the channel for racist, misogynistic and flame statements. I banned Luzi permanently for molesting people. But for some reason he got unbanned. No one cared.

The other point is that I have a life too. I have this forum where I have to moderate and which is, to make it clear, more important to me than the IRC. Sometimes I even have to sleep so I can't watch all day what's going on in the IRC. This leads to the situation that some people get away with inappropiate behavior. So people started to complain "Why did I ger a ban and x not?" and I just could say "Because I wasn't there". So I stopped banning people because no one cared anyway and because I created injustice with that.

 

[Fukyo]

I must say I agree with Tekton completely...

@Thaklaar: The situation regarding swearing is not as serious as you seem to perceive it.We're talking about jokes.I don't think you've ever been to the channel,(I might be wrong though)so your view of the channel is rather incomplete and possibly false in that case.