6101

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On the notion of FES reunification

« on: July 27, 2014, 01:47:03 AM »

Is this conversation going to progress soon?

Well, this conversation has basically reached its conclusion: there is a vast support for re-uniting. We're now working out the details and seeing if a sensible solution can be reached. If it can, it'll probably take a while to implement because we want to do things right.

If we're reuniting, we intend for no posts to be lost anyway, so there's no need for urgency. This site (and presumably the old site) will continue to operate as normal until we're either ready to merge the fora or we conclude that it can't be done.

6102

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On the notion of FES reunification

« on: July 27, 2014, 12:07:47 AM »

We don't need Daniel Palpatine.[...]

I was hoping this wouldn't be necessary, but...

Guys, can we please not set up new accounts to weigh in in this thread? Well, unless you're a regular from the old site that never migrated here, in which case please identify yourself. If you want to make an anonymous remark, feel free to pass it on to me and I'll post it here without revealing your identities.

A half-assed investigation suggests you have an account with 23 posts on the old site registered about 3 months ago, and you've registered here just now. Generously assuming that you're not just an alt enthusiast, I'm not sure how genuine your sentiments in this post can be.

6103

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Frank Zappa 1984 tour 30th anniversary extravaganza

« on: July 26, 2014, 09:26:02 AM »

Secret words: matches, tunnel

Those aren't very secret if you just slam them down like this. At least use the [spoiler] tag

6104

Technology & Information / Re: Adding an email account to messaging apps

« on: July 25, 2014, 03:50:05 AM »

What exactly do you need to talk about that can't be discussed via PM or through the forum itself? Seems like a weird Bishop request.

I think the idea was that ZC members could poke each other when some of them get inactive and their votes/input are needed.

6105

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On the notion of FES reunification

« on: July 24, 2014, 09:47:45 PM »

Oh noes.  Secret negotiations. 

Daniel is paying us top dollar to screw all of you guys over.

On a more serious note, he didn't say anything more than what he said in public.

6106

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On the notion of FES reunification

« on: July 24, 2014, 07:52:49 PM »

It seems more like "testing the waters" to me.

That's exactly what it is.

If Daniel wants to offer an olive branch that's very different from us going and asking for a solution.

In hopefully reassuring news, Daniel reached out to us via PM on this site before any of us contacted him. He initiated the dialogue between us.

If large factions of this site end up not happy with the terms and conditions, we simply won't go back.

That is our position as well. We will not implement a solution that is not popular with a vast majority of the userbase. The way I see it, this general idea has gathered a lot of support and not that much dissent, so it could potentially work out. Once we have a more concrete policy sketched, we'll open it for comments, and if we reach a point where it doesn't seem like much more needs changing, we'll put it to a vote. That should hopefully address most concerns and stop any such large factions from forming.

6107

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Nuclear power

« on: July 23, 2014, 11:33:14 PM »

Should I assume you have access to some sort of dimensional gateway? You seem to be trying to make the argument that life would be better with nuclear power being more prominent, but since there are no examples of it, I'm wondering where your observation comes from.

It's a belief, not an argument. Cheap, stable, reliable and clean energy would make it easier for us to use energy, and using energy leads to good stuff.

Also, France and South Korea are relatively reliant on nuclear power, and they seem to be doing pretty damn well. I wouldn't want to claim that I can factually argue causation (or even correlation), but since I'm only talking about my beliefs, that's fine :^)

6108

Arts & Entertainment / Re: It's official - Hollywood has run out of movie ideas

« on: July 23, 2014, 09:39:39 PM »

Are you sure about that?

Holy shit, I need to watch that.

6109

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Nuclear power

« on: July 23, 2014, 10:57:40 AM »

Except the world can live pretty well without nuclear.

People lived pretty well during the industrial revolution, too. The fact that they didn't know how much better it could be was just a bit of a psychological luxury.

6110

Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud

« on: July 20, 2014, 07:57:16 PM »

I feel like I've lost the debate even though it's been demonstrated that I am right about the OP.

Yeah, there's a difference between making a number of valid statements and presenting a coherent and comprehensive point.

6111

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: And now, the moment we've all been waiting for...

« on: July 20, 2014, 07:54:37 PM »

In addition to Tausami's link to the rules, we have the manifesto, which regulates how we execute the rules.

6112

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On the notion of FES reunification

« on: July 20, 2014, 06:03:44 PM »

Hi Daniel

6113

Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud

« on: July 20, 2014, 05:43:52 PM »

You must engage.

And we have been. Again, you're probably not seeing the full picture, but you're eager to assume.

6114

Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud

« on: July 20, 2014, 05:34:35 PM »

both forums are ignoring G+.

Incorrect.

6115

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On the notion of FES reunification

« on: July 20, 2014, 01:31:29 AM »

I think Tom's argument could be diluted and made more appealing to the other side without removing much substance from it. How about something along these lines:

Daniel can be our leader, there's no problem with that. He can lead projects when he's around (hopefully often) and drive the society forward. What's important is that we have a structure to continue driving the society when he's not around. This could (should?) be periodically elected to try and minimise standstills.

I feel that this covers all bases. Daniel isn't just a figurehead, unless he's gone, in which case he is being deputised by a group of dedicated volunteers. His absence would not stand in our way, but he could still do everything he currently does. From my point of view (except for technical issues), when Daniel is around, he's doing a good job. It strikes me as reasonable that he should continue doing this job. It's just that when he disappears, the Society shouldn't suddenly come to a stop - and that's where direct member involvement could go a very long way.

6116

Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud

« on: July 20, 2014, 01:23:53 AM »

Maybe posts are hidden or something.

You won't be able to see most social interactions. In our case, they will usually happen on people's walls, and those are often private.

pizaa, why don't you move shitposting threads to designated shitposting areas?

This might be a shitty argument, but it's a solidly technical one. It belongs here imho.

6117

Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud

« on: July 20, 2014, 01:19:43 AM »

All 21 social interactions.

You bore me.



I don't know where you get your numbers from, but you have yet to get one right.

6118

Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud

« on: July 20, 2014, 01:15:06 AM »

What the fuck are you talking about?

The very claims you make, sadly. It's not my fault you're contradicting yourself so much.

I brought up SEO because the fact that it is easier to find the old site makes it seem less likely that your site is more popular than the old one.

It is, however, easier to find our Facebook page, and most of our acquisition comes from social interaction started by people who already liked the site.

6119

Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud

« on: July 20, 2014, 01:10:52 AM »

Looks like click farm stats to me.

To reiterate:

Yes, some of our likes from Nigeria are probably not useful. Even if you slash 715 likes from us, we're at 2.2k, just about to double the other site's likes. If you decide you don't like Mexico too, we're still ahead, albeit not by much. That is assuming that all our likes from the top 2 countries are completely fabricated (n.b. they're not, we get a fair amount of shares from Mexico and we've had an ok amount of comments from Nigeria), and that all of the old site's likes are 100% genuine (which they likely are not).

By the way I know that their domain reputation is higher than yours. That was precisely my point.

So your point was "precisely" that they're an older site, and therefore your Facebook argument has nothing to do with this? Congratulations, you knew why you were wrong and you still driveled about it.

6120

Technology & Information / Re: Facebook fraud

« on: July 20, 2014, 01:05:42 AM »

Oh so now you think Lagos is the only place that has like farms?

No, I'm addressing your claim that most of our insights (sic) come from Lagos, Nigeria. Here, have a quote:

I did look at the page and it seems that most of your insights come from Lagos, Nigeria. Boy that sounds genuine.

They don't. We have 243 likes from Lagos. That is less than 10%.

I can only imagine what the rest of those analytics look like. Maybe you could end this by just taking a screenshot. Show all those likes that cone from countries that actually use the internet.

k:



Yes, some of our likes from Nigeria are probably not useful. Even if you slash 715 likes from us, we're at 2.2k, just about to double the other site's likes. If you decide you don't like Mexico too, we're still ahead, albeit not by much. That is assuming that all our likes from the top 2 countries are completely fabricated (n.b. they're not, we get a fair amount of shares from Mexico and we've had an ok amount of comments from Nigeria), and that all of the old site's likes are 100% genuine (which they likely are not).

when you do an incognito search on google the old site is first

Learn some SEO. Their domain reputation is pretty high, given that they've been around for 9 years. We've been consistently (and very slowly) climbing up in Google results.