Commentary on the current affairs of The Sietch

Status
Not open for further replies.
This board is what? About a month old or so? Created by first timers without any admin experience. It's going to take time to get everything lined up, to clarify or adapt certain policies, to find best practices and ways of doing things.
It's an evolutionary process, you don't shake a box and tip out a perfectly functional internet community. You see what works and what doesn't, learn from it, adapt if needed, then move on to the next step.

There are inevitably going to be errors especially at this very early stage and with the newness of both board and staff. I don't find that surprising
 
Bad optics gives the mob power. I really don't like the mob.

While there's certainly a case to be made for putting the best foot forward and having the best optics you can, "good optics" are not the be all, end all PR move. I think it's better to be upfront and transparent first, optics are useful but I've seen great ideas with bad optics and terrible ones with great ones.

And given that, at the moment, we have issues or potentional issues with one very specific mob, trying to appease that group is pointless, they've made their decision and now are just looking for evidence to support it. As for the undecided.....if someone is stupid enough to believe that bunch, I think TS would be better off without them.
 
This isn't intended as an insult, but good lord, calm down. If you get this riled up over legitimately offered constructive criticism, you are going to have a hard time dealing with people showing up to actually shit on you. You need some thicker skin if you want to make it as a moderator and people that react this much make perfect targets for trolls.

Please do note that I did not address this to *anybody* in this thread, nor did I name any names, or anything else. As far as I can tell, most everybody here falls under the first three categories, since I don't see you simply throwing shit for the purpose of throwing shit. If you are so defensive over my characterization of bad faith actors (and we have them) then perhaps you should look within yourself.

And trust me, you have *not* seen me riled up. It takes far more than criticism to rile me up.
 
Oh, and in the event that you (a generalized you to all of TS's users) perceive some need for you to have an alt account then make a thread in Staff comm's asking permission to make one and laying out the reason(s) that you need one.

If the staff feels that your need is sufficient then you will be allowed an alt; any alt's made without permission are on the hook for summary banning and will get your regular account warned as well.
 
If you are so defensive over my characterization of bad faith actors (and we have them) then perhaps you should look within yourself.
Friend, you got really upset over discussion of optics and I'm the one who brought the entire thing up, aside from UA. If you weren't directing at me, then I apologize, but if so its down to poor communication on your part rather than anything inside me.

And if this is you calm, well, sorry if I have trouble believing that.
 
The SB mega-PM had enough members to beat any SB spin-off after SV and QQ.
Not even close. The PMs had less than a hundred members, they currently make up under 20% of the TS userbase.

To be blunt, this isn't an attitude that will help you or your site in the long run. Optics do matter, especially when you're trying to promote the free exchange of ideas... while simultaneously struggling with a widespread perception that you're far-right or alt-right, even while also your owner and administrator is embroiled in scandal, not to mention openly a fascist.

To be honest, I'm not sure I could do anything so publicly disastrous if I tried. You as a group need to be learning lessons from this.
Except that optics don't really matter to TS. The platform will either speak for itself over time or it won't. If it does then placating people that we don't much care about (again, this is a pro free speech site - if you get bent out of shape because someone has the "wrong" ideas then you aren't our target market) is a waste of time and effort that will also isolate those we do care about (very few sites are willing to tell the "SJW" crowd to fuck off publicly). If the platform doesn't speak for itself then trying to advertise it is ultimately a waste of time and effort.

@Zoe isn't actually a fascist, but she could be and it wouldn't matter to us. The one unifying thread of this forum is to create a place for the relatively civil exchange of virtually all views. Until and unless a staff member starts allowing their personal views to interfere with how they handle their staff duties - we (TS) do not care about what those views actually are.

I think you're substantially misunderstanding the situation here: I'm not feeling attacked (at least not in any way I would ever be concerned about), I'm pointing out errors you're making in an official capacity. I feel a bit silly and awkward for having to ask, but are you aware that you will have to act in an official capacity at some point? With your actual account? Maybe it would be good to post more carefully and with more attention with your official identity?
I am acting in an official capacity. There is a reason that this account has those "Staff" and "Super Moderator" banners.

And again, since you forgot to answer the question: What is the security risk of having a single account on a single forum?
That depends. Let's say that you are a well known individual somewhere else and have a following there. Sadly, this identity might possible be linkable to PII. You want to bring others with you but want to be able to express ideas that are liable to cause others to attempt to identity and harass you. So you make an Admin account that is easily linkable to your established identity and then don't use it for anything controversial. You then establish a second account and use it to post your views and interact with people; being careful to not disclose PII on that alternate account.

You're jumping to some conclusions here. Discussions of ideology were minimal in my posts, limited to me saying that an admin saying they're a fascist is a Bad Look for a forum with your genesis, but there were many other criticisms there. I feel this is what you want my criticisms to be about, and are going to ignore areas that you could possibly improve in as a result.
You consider an admin saying they are a fascist a "bad look". We (the staff at TS) consider an admin saying they are fascist to be utterly irrelevant. Fascism is a stupid, deeply flawed, ideology but people are free to hold said ideology just like they are free to believe in many other idiotic ideologies. So long as those ideologies don't interfere with a staff members ability to perform their staff functions; we (the staff) do not care.

If we did care then we would be acting directly against the primary reason that this site was established.

I don't want to care about optics, but I have a life of experience with falling on my face socially.

Bad optics gives the mob power. My perception is the mob can cause the board problems.

Giving into the mob gives the mob power. Mocking the mob and taunting them with the fact that they don't actually have any power tends to cause them to get enraged and eventually go bother someone else. The only power that the mob has on this forum is that which we (the staff) choose to allow them to have.
 
The only power that the mob has on this forum is that which we (the staff) choose to allow them to have.

A bit of correction, it's WE, as in the majority or total of the forum that chooses to give them any bit of power. At most said power Is just letting any who come, say whatever they want and disagree with the majority of us.
 
To be honest, I was intending to be provocative with the comment because I felt everyone was just being led along with summary condemnations of an ideology perfectly irrelevant to the thread at hand, a me-to-ism of a ritual requirement to condemn fascism when you also condemn communism. Suharto killed substantially more people than Mussolini but you never hear ritual pro-forma condemnations of the New Order. The comment certainly succeeded at being provocative, but as several people here have observed, none of my views reflect the condemned, pro forma definition of fascism.

Heavens, I support direct democracy at the township, borough or ward level! New England Direct Democracy, elections or sortition for most major offices at higher levels. I am even prepared to entertain reparations for slavery unlike most conventional conservatives here, I would wager, as long as they were land instead of money.

Certainly my beliefs are far outside the mainstream but you all need to get less upset about a word that ultimately has been redefined many times to support the agenda of the person using it, and I, of course, need to avoid being baited. All fair in the end, I suppose.

Most interesting is the fact that I know what the responses to this post will be; fortunately they don’t matter, because this post is really addressed to the people reading this thread but not participating in it.
 
The SB mega-PM had enough members to beat any SB spin-off after SV and QQ.

AFAIK the SB PM group was only a few dozen people, not even triple digits. So... your just completely wrong?

To be honest, I'm not sure I could do anything so publicly disastrous if I tried. You as a group need to be learning lessons from this.

Yes on SB... it usually requires a group staff effort to make things so publicly disastrous. (y)

This isn't intended as an insult, but good lord, calm down. If you get this riled up over legitimately offered constructive criticism, you are going to have a hard time dealing with people showing up to actually shit on you. You need some thicker skin if you want to make it as a moderator and people that react this much make perfect targets for trolls.

Good lord, calm down.

This place already got the trolls shitting on it bro. And trying to shut it down apparently. And they are freely posting so far... except the self admitted Nazi and Pedophile.
 
Wait, who was the self admitting Nazi and Pedophile? Because I’m guessing he(Did you just assume my gender!?)admitted it to get banned as a test
 
I don't think @Jessica Atreides has been anything but calm and has intended to be helpful in offering advice and perspective on the forum. We need to be careful not to get so wound up at the real enemies off The-Sietch that we start imagining everyone who has some critical perspective or even just says what we don't like hearing is an enemy.

I hope branding will be improved once the logo contest is concluded and it'd sure help to get a better dark theme if we could. It seems petty but a good looking board with a distinct look would help drive growth. And as much as creating the site was focused on the PM we've got to outgrow that too. Politics is all nice but board growth is gonna be driven by creative works and providing some unique content. And yeah that whole getting tightly wound and defensive inside the community is kinda offputting to new people who might come here without any preconceptions. Or who come here out of curiosity because we're getting cursed out elsewhere.

The alt-account stuff just really needs to be resolved transparently in one way or another everyone can live with too. Everything else will just be a non-starter until that's put behind us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top