@lotherio said in Something Completely Different:
I mean not all Germans
You brought it up yourself, but I'm gonna say... maybe not the best logical leap to make. You might want to rethink it. You might also want to rethink the idea that many of the people who left did so because of either an evil, charismatic leader or propaganda.
@seraphim73 said in Something Completely Different:
@lotherio said in Something Completely Different:
I mean not all Germans
You brought it up yourself, but I'm gonna say... maybe not the best logical leap to make. You might want to rethink it. You might also want to rethink the idea that many of the people who left did so because of either an evil, charismatic leader or propaganda.
If we're going to say a number of people expressing an opinion are right because a lot of people are saying it, then I'm going to point a group consensus that I do not think was right.
Just to point out, this is exactly what @Devrex was just saying. I never said everyone who left was following anyone or buying propaganda or evil. You said that about me. I even pointed out that those leaving are not all the same group, but it gives the perception.
Uh. The 'vocal majority' is the majority on an internet message board. People supporting you in emails but not posting aren't participating in the thing that a message board exists for. Maybe they'll post more with the 'vocal majority' having departed, cool if so, but it's kind of hilarious to argue that the majority of people who post on your board shouldn't have their concerns addressed (concerns addressed is not catering or bowing to whims, good grief).
@devrex said in Something Completely Different:
@GreenFlashlight
I saw a lot of weaponized victimization in the aftermath of that post. The actual opinion? The actual words? Were at no point actually engaged with.
Fucking yikes.
I've got thoughts on this discussion, but lemme boil it down to two things:
Furthermore, I've got some serious objections to the widespread idea that it's more important for there to be peace and decorum than it is to address genuine issues. That is a form of silencing, to expect someone who has been harmed to just be quiet about it to avoid disturbing the perception that everything is okay. It is not weaponizing victimization to point out that you have been harmed, or who harmed you. It is not being a bully to tell other people that someone has been harmful. It is not worse to call someone out for their behavior than it is for that person to engage in said behavior. Are there limits that should be imposed, care that should be taken, instances where the dogpiling itself has been weaponized? Absolutely. A community needs to have its own standards, rules, and ways of dealing with this, and every community is going to draw the line in a different place. But holy hell is that phrase gross.
And to speak somewhat generally so as not to open that particular wound? Politics is nothing but emotion. Politics is everything, because it's what determines how we live. If you (general you) Kramer into a discussion where a lot of people are upset and hurt (and scared) to show off how calm and logical you are, then you are, indeed, being a fucking asshole. There's a really toxic perception in our society that having feelings about something is bad, strong feelings even worse, and that the admirable person is the one entirely divorced from caring.
In any case
@jomomomo said in Something Completely Different:
The hog pit was literally the dog's house on fire meme. "This is fine". Most toxic place anywhere.
@jomomomo said in Ethics:
These people trying to go out like a war heros or something. Or in Kanye's case, practically begging to be banned as if it were some badge of honor.
Like, just shut up and leave?
This narcissistic behavior is exactly what makes the hobby so toxic.
lmao
@lotherio Sorry, I actually did read your post a little too quickly and thought that you were saying that some of the folks who left did so because they bought into the propaganda/perception of reality. I see now that you were speaking directly about Germans in the '30s and '40s. I apologize for the misreading. I still don't think it's a great idea to use Nazis as an example for a group (or several groups) of people who have a different opinion from you.
@seraphim73 said in Something Completely Different:
@lotherio Sorry, I actually did read your post a little too quickly and thought that you were saying that some of the folks who left did so because they bought into the propaganda/perception of reality. I see now that you were speaking directly about Germans in the '30s and '40s. I apologize for the misreading. I still don't think it's a great idea to use Nazis as an example for a group (or several groups) of people who have a different opinion from you.
No need to apologize I respect you. A lot of those leaving I am sad to see go, those who walked and some of the banned even. I was saying some of the activity here isn't looking good. I agreed in the initial post making that leap to Nazis had plenty wrong with it (Hasty Generalization Fallacy). On the other hand there is no love lost for some that have left and have behaved assholishly. I'm not on their side and I'm not apologizing for the stuff in the Politics threads and any characters behavior. I still believe in Gany, I believe in Meitze who trusted Gany. All things aside, there is always hope for this community.
@kalakh said in Something Completely Different:
Furthermore, I've got some serious objections to the widespread idea that it's more important for there to be peace and decorum than it is to address genuine issues. That is a form of silencing, to expect someone who has been harmed to just be quiet about it to avoid disturbing the perception that everything is okay. It is not weaponizing victimization to point out that you have been harmed, or who harmed you
I appreciate this and again to point out, before you joined the community, there was political shake up and a push for these very things (peace and decorum through moderation) by the very people you may be defending, not saying you are defending but its perceived that way. Some of the recent folks banned pushed for this form of silencing, and the old large group that left 3-4 years ago said exactly the same thing you are now, its a form of silencing and it won't do for MSB. There were some bans and many good-byes (though some of those voices returend, many are long gone).
ETA: This is just to note the irony between the group that advocated for the changes to MSB then and where they are now. I still support moderation and a more civil place.
I haven't really weighed in on the whole kerfuffle except to say that it brought to mind 'In order to save the village, we had to destroy it'. I still get that impression. But since it began, I think something has crystallized about what exactly happened and why some people are reacting so strongly.
Once upon a time, the moderators of this board in all its various incarnations did so as custodians of the community. By which I mean that the board functioned basically as the community as a whole wanted it to be and the moderators used a light touch to keep it that way.
At some point, and this is just my impression, this became @Ganymede 's board and people could either like it or leave. I make no comment on whether that's a good or bad thing but it seems like the custodians have become the staff.
That's going to stick in some craws. And here we are.
@tnp said in Something Completely Different:
At some point, and this is just my impression, this became @Ganymede 's board and people could either like it or leave. I make no comment on whether that's a good or bad thing but it seems like the custodians have become the staff.
Exactly this. It didn't mystically become 'Ganymede's board', when Gany started they were like prior staff. Stewards to make sure the place ran and the lights stayed on and the heat mostly worked, and on the side to keep out the really bad apples too. The vocal majority started asking for staff to become like staff and be more active in moderating, attacks and negativity to the hog pit, fork threads, be more active, leaving the outside the hogpit for constructive criticism, civil debates and peace and decorum. And it was said in response by custodians then, if that's the will if the people so it shall be. Gany is following this will of the people and the vision of a few others as even they have pointed out. From my perspective at least.
I'm just a surge protector doing my job, sir.
@lotherio said in Something Completely Different:
Gany is following this will of the people
Would you say that the will of the people is represented by a vocal majority?
@misterboring said in Something Completely Different:
@lotherio said in Something Completely Different:
Gany is following this will of the people
Would you say that the will of the people is represented by a vocal majority?
I can't speak of modern politics to point out how the most vocal lost the last election through all the lies, that gets very political. I would say no, the vocal majority is not the will of all the people. There is still now and always has been a greater silent majority around MSB. Some of those recently banned are the ones that asked for the civil decorum and moderation, I supported it with them then. I still support it now.
Gany hasn't maliciously gone after anyone here, despite how any vocal majority might want to paint it. The perception is that they said, hey lets stop this until staff can review it. It was clearly laid out, but the line was skirted.
I would argue that if there is a silent majority, then its will is to be silent, not to effect change; so their stance isn't really relevant to issues the vocal majority weighs in on.
@lotherio As @Kalakh noted, and I agree with, a silent majority in a message board community isn't. It's the lurkers (nothing wrong with lurking, I lurk more than I post here, particularly now). Those who participate in the community are the community when the community is about participating. (Is that a tautology? I think that's a tautology, but I think it got the point across). I'm not saying that there can't be a community here that grows and even flourishes with a number of vocal participants having departed, I'm just saying that when the majority of the vocal participants leave a community, it's not the same community anymore.
I don't think that it's helpful to compare those who left to Germans in the '30s and '40s, nor to compare those who left to those pushing The Big Lie about the 2020 US Presidential election. I think that contributes to pushing people into their own echo chambers and reinforces distrust and disgust already built up by the use of strawman arguments.
Also, I believe that it's absolutely possible to want more active moderation without wanting someone who is not trusted by a significant and vocal portion of the community to moderate them. I also believe that it's absolutely possible to want more active moderation without wanting discussion to be shut down and directed to DMs -- particularly since one of the best parts about this board (to me) is the ability to express dissatisfaction and complaints about MU*s in the open.
@seraphim73 said in Something Completely Different:
Those who participate in the community are the community when the community is about participating. (Is that a tautology? I think that's a tautology, but I think it got the point across). I'm not saying that there can't be a community here that grows and even flourishes with a number of vocal participants having departed, I'm just saying that when the majority of the vocal participants leave a community, it's not the same community anymore.
I've been here as part of the community and I didn't leave when a lot of old friends left a few years back. Some of them are still around and have a voice. It just isn't as vocal as a number that have left. There are a lot of folks here who still talk with each other in PM/DM or discord and have hopes for this place. I'm not silent and haven't been, I haven't posted much this last year but I've been here.
I don't think that it's helpful to compare those who left to Germans in the '30s and '40s, nor to compare those who left to those pushing The Big Lie about the 2020 US Presidential election.
I'm not saying anyone is a Nazi or a pusher of the Big Lie. I'm saying vocal majority of a community isn't whole representatino of a community. I'm not on the slippery slope trying to say because they have a voice of opposition they're Nazi's or part of the small vocal majority putting out Big Lie or replacement theory ideas. Not by a long shot. You keep suggestion I am saying everyone who left is similar. Again, many of those who left are people I like.
How does the silent majority represent the will of the people here at MSB if they never express their will to begin with?
I would rather propose that the vocal minority has triumphed over the vocal majority here, becoming the will of the people, and due to the events that have transpired in the last month, also become the vocal majority.
The silent majority can never represent the will of the people on an online forum because if you are silent you are non-participatory in the forum and expressing the will of the people on an online forum does require some level of expression.
@misterboring so what you're saying is, they're the clique who drove people away now?
@misterboring We agree to disagree. The vocal majority that recently left wasn't the vocal majority when they started here. They were a minority that got some changes to take place. They changes didn't favor them now.
@Selira The thing is, no clique drove anyone away, it was bad acting under some conduct they help get in place a few years ago.
pretty strong rewriting of history
it was a protest against an admin, a ban widely seen as unjust, and an authoritarian stomp down on anyone who expressed disagreement with it or didn't stay quiet when they were asked to, despite that never having been a thing before, and despite that being specifically one of the things that the protest was about.
the logs are there, i know you weren't here, go read them.
@selira said in Something Completely Different:
authoritarian stomp down on anyone who expressed disagreement
This is part of where we are in disagreement. It was a 'hey can we stop this until I talk with another admin to get a handle' and then it kept going, and going, and was still going even this week.
@lotherio which had never been listed as a bannable offense before, ever. The first few bans were even before time was asked for.
Again, you can spin this in your head however you want, but that's what happened. Administration that was widely seen as unjust led to protest, which led to bans, and the combination of the two led to people walking.
@selira said in Something Completely Different:
Again, you can spin this in your head however you want, but that's what happened. Administration that was widely seen as unjust led to protest, which led to bans, and the combination of the two led to people walking.
We're actually in agreement on this, mostly. They no prior warning thing is questionable. Gany has shown that when she asks something to stop she means it. The only thing different this time is the vocal majority though they could skirt the line from my perspective.
I'm not spinning anything in my head. What went down wasn't pretty all around and I'm voicing that opinion, it doesn't look as good as some folks want to think it does. Majority or otherwise.
