The Flat Earth Society
The Flat Earth Society => Suggestions & Concerns => Topic started by: Tom Bishop on May 18, 2018, 11:29:14 PM
-
This is a continuation of Debate Club: A fundamental change to how the public perceives the forums (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9685.0)
On Thork's recommendation I am creating a new thread to discuss execution. We will focus only on the technical forums for brevity. There was nary a word of dissent for this idea. Please discuss any lingering concerns with the concept in the thread above. This thread is for execution.
Future threads may involve the slogans idea, what we want to do with the community project forums, or other things mentioned in that thread. Lets focus on the meat of the matter.
We will need to change three elements:
- Front Page Text: We need to describe how we present the forums in the small text area.
- Table of Contents Text: We need to describe the concept.
- New Forum Layout and Partitioning: We need to decide how we want to rename or combine the discussion/technical forums.
Current Elements:
(https://i.imgur.com/cm0Ukgw.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/9PyYBc0.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/bZIz5rD.png)
-
For the header, if we think that a constant header at the top is too annoying, I like the feature of a closable header box on The Wild Heretic Concave Earth (http://www.wildheretic.com/forum/index.php) forum. There is a top level header message that can be hidden with a little x in the corner. Otherwise we could take the [expand this] approach. A constant plain text header would not really bother me, however.
-
For the header, if we think that a constant header at the top is too annoying, I like the feature of a closable header box on The Wild Heretic Concave Earth (http://www.wildheretic.com/forum/index.php) forum. There is a top level header message that can be hidden with a little x in the corner. Otherwise we could take the [expand this] approach. A constant plain text header would not really bother me, however.
Or we could add a cookie notification style bar that tells you once you enter a board what the board is about. You can close the notification, but say every 60 days it expires and gives you a little reminder. That would force you to acknowledge it, and agree to the 'terms of service', if you will.
Something like this could be very easily added and reapplied. https://cookieinfoscript.com/
Renaming
I propose the following as a starter.
Change Zetetic Council to 'Flat Earth Community'. This can be the place we discuss things like this in the future, changes to the wiki, our media plans or interview requests. The oil for the machine if you like. It has similar posts already. We could just open it up to all so everyone can contribute. We aren't using it. A name change is really all that is needed. I see this as the simplest change.
I'd just move the ENaG workshop into that forum then. It only has a page of threads and is under utilised. It would fit in this new re-purposed forum.
Flat Earth Information Repository I propose to rename "Flat Earth Media". A place where we can drop in external sources such as youtube videos, new FE books, articles, anything about flat earth that is out there in the mainstream that we wish to discuss.
I'd rename Flat Earth General as Flat Earth Investigations (as per Tom's suggestion) and have all just leave all the flat earth conspiracy theory threads in there. Sure, the emphasis is now on anything but FET, but its provides a full board of threads to get us going.
I'd then amalgamate FE debate and FE Q/A into the one forum so any defence work is all done in the same place. One board to check as per Tom's suggestion.
So the new format would look as proposed.
Flat Earth Society Investigations A community board to discuss ROUND EARTH doctrine, to challenge institutions and authoritative claims on anything from chem trails to moon hoaxes.
Flat Earth Media For discussing Flat Earth articles, youtube videos, books, interviews and social media.
Flat Earth Theory A place to examine the Flat Earth Theory and its doctrine.
Flat Earth Community A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for Flat Earth Theory.
And that's it. 4 boards instead of 6.
I dropped the 'attack FET' board into 3rd place ... hopefully as a new person you start with the top board and see all kinds of discussions that pique your interest first before just writing 'flat earthers are gay'.
I suspect only boards 1 and 3 will be the high traffic ones, reducing the workload on mods. I see no reason why people like Pete and Tom can't moderate the Community and Media boards (2 and 4)to keep them neat and tidy. they won't be volatile boards.
As far as groupings go, maybe 'Technical Discussion' for the flat earth boards and 'Social Discussion' for the what is currently called 'other'?
-
I see no reason why people like Pete and Tom can't moderate the Community and Media boards (2 and 4)to keep them neat and tidy. they won't be volatile boards.
I already have a sheriff's badge, pardner.
That said, this seems to be a sensible direction. I fear that "Flat Earth Theory" will gobble up most of the traffic of the current top 3 boards, and that not much will change. Then again, perhaps the presence of the new boards will invite some additional contributions that we're currently not seeing. I'm cautiously optimistic.
-
Having them all in one place though does limit them. They drop off the first page very quickly. Having 3 boards of 20 posts each on the first page means invariably there are 60 threads live at any one time, all attacking FET. Making that 20 and opening up other areas for discussion may stem that somewhat. It'll also make the boards we have more current. If I look at FEG, I can see the bottom thread was last used 10 days ago. With 3 boards in one, that means most live topics against FET will be 3 days or less.
Hey, I don't know any more than you if this will work out, but we are at the point where we want to try something new, so lets do that.
And congrats on your gong. I hadn't noticed. I thought you only administered but couldn't be trusted to marshal forum peasants like myself. I'll make sure to curtsy and doth my hat next time I see you in the upper fora.
-
Some thoughts:
I am warming to Thork's basic idea of having one round earth related forum and one flat earth related forum. I would like to play around with those ideas a bit more. This is what I am thinking:
- One forum which invites the user to question the status quo and challenge authority.
- The second forum will invite the user to explore the physical possibility of a flat earth. Is a flat earth strictly and physically impossible?
This speaks back to pitting users on both You vs. Authority and You vs. Nature tracks. I gave some examples in the parent thread on the good ideas behind those concepts.
Both are debate club forums, and will get contrarian opinion, but we are guiding our users towards goals in those forums... and that goal is not "debate the experts who know that the earth is flat."
In fact we should pound that concept in very strongly in the descriptions and headers.
I do think the names can use some more thought though. "Flat Earth Society Investigations" may sound like the Flat Earth Society is investigating a Flat Earth, rather the concept of encouraging our users questioning the status quo. Also, it does suggest to the user that they should go in and see what the FES is investigating, which may spark some "I am not them" and inevitably the "where are you guys?" mentality. We want to encourage them to be the investigator.
Per the descriptions, I would axe mention of a "Flat Earth Doctrine," since we want the users to think of the idea as more fluid to which they are the innovative theorists. Doctrine also implies authority.
Also, I feel that the upper discussion forums should focus only on Flat Earth related subject, not chemtrails and other unrelated hoaxes. But I would like to hear your thoughts on why that should be the case.
I think your ideas when mentioning Flat Earth doctrine may somewhat relate to your mention of wanting us to be curators of FES history and theory, but perhaps this can be expressed in our wiki and library and lower community forums dedicated to that purpose. Then we won't have people bothering us.
I like the forum for Flat Earth community projects.
-
I do think the names can the names can use some more thought though. "Flat Earth Society Investigations" may sound like the Flat Earth Society is investigating a Flat Earth, rather the concept of encouraging our users questioning the status quo. Also, it does suggest to the user that they should go in and see what the FES is investigating, which may spark some "I am not them" and inevitably the "where are you guys?" mentality. We want to encourage them to be the investigator.
Yeah, I was thinking they are the 'flat earth' forums so I kept putting flat earth in the title as they are now, but we could move away from that to make them the technical forums or something. One of the good things about the David Ike forums is that it is just a free for all on attacking authority in any guise. Are you interested in banking fraud? Expose it. More into false flags, 911, conspiracies ... go for it. Its a wide range of topics with a huge active user base. With that kind of traffic, if you want to just hide in an FE forum, you can do so. There's enough lively debate going on without you. And you can pop in on anything you are interested in. So if someone is making a pharma thread uncovering Pfizer cornering the market and you have something to say on Vitamin C, you'll get the good debate because it wasn't you that started the topic. More people with more interests are now participating. If this new format is a success, we could then start splitting it up (categorising) to match traffic as David Ike has done.
https://forum.davidicke.com/forumdisplay.php?f=12
I'd note not everything in the main forums is about David Ike or his beliefs. I don't think everything has to be about earth's shape here. Its just the challenge to authority you mention.
Per the descriptions, I would axe mention of a "Flat Earth Doctrine," since we want the users to think of the idea as more fluid to which they are the innovative theorists.
Sure. Flat Earth possibilities? Flat earth exploration? How would you phrase it?
Also, I feel that the upper discussion forums should focus only on Flat Earth related subject, not chemtrails and other unrelated hoaxes. But I would like to hear your thoughts on why that should be the case.
Because you just said
- One forum which invites the user to question the status quo and challenge authority.
A challenge to authority is just that. You can't say the government is evil because they hoax moon landings and we aren't interested and wish to turn a blind eye to the same government departments running similar programs on other projects. If you are out to discredit NASA and NASA are running a chem trail program, you should be talking about chem trails. If you are out to discredit google maps and prove google is in cohoots with the government, why wouldn't you investigate google's work and acquisition of Boston Dynamics. It is about trust and if you find abuses of trust, they should be exposed, whatever they are. A conspiracy boils down to one thing and one thing only ... money. And to follow the money, you need to see where any dirty money is flowing. On a cynical note I'd add it opens the discussion up to far more topics and as someone who is just done with the Bedford level experiment and having never done a chem trails thread or a HARP thread (honestly, I've never done either)... it gives lots more options for technical research and discussion. It broadens the topic range and will help stave off "oh god, not tides and gravity again".
I'd also add that it will encourage a wider audience. You mention youtube comments. How do we get the best moon debunkers here? How do we get the best NASA exposers here? Surely we loosen the reigns and let them produce evidence and talk about whatever they like within the scope of investigating or challenging 'our foes'. They then don't need the yolk of keeping things flat earth. If we had an expert on here who had no interest in earths shape, but was epic at moon hoaxes because that's his specialist subject, would we not want him making threads specifically on moon hoaxes ... even though the evidence he is presenting might be about inconsistencies with the launch pad and nothing to do with earth's shape either way? I thought this is what you meant by challenging authority ... not challenging round earth specifically ... that is going to remain a hard sell. But challenge the institutions that uphold it as well ... is that not still worthwhile? If I want to investigate the catholic church and its funding Nazi Germany, that's still a challenge to authority and uncovering an institution with a stake in earth's shape albeit on another topic entirely.
Or are you wanting to just have people create threads challenging round earth? Cos that will just be the same 4 or 5 people on one side and everyone else on the other. If we are to blur the lines and get people fighting both sides, we need to blur the range of topics available. So I'd make the 'round earth forum' more generic to foster round earther on round earther debate as they themselves question what they know. My enemy's enemy is my friend type thing? FErs and RErs joining forces. It might also mix the 'teams' up. I might end up on the side of some round earthers in an attack on Boeing being a glove in hand government puppet, and as a proud American you and other round earthers may choose to defend them on a particular issue. I don't always have to be on the same side as the other FErs and likewise we can split RErs up. What is a 'debate club' if you don't mix and match the teams?
-
You do make very good arguments, Thork. Much of the resurgence of FE on YouTube seems to come from the question authority types who have made mentions of having discussed the possibility of other hoaxes, although it is probably profoundly unfair to suggest that this description applies to all.
I don't really see a problem with "NASA is lying about climate change, here is evidence" posts. It somewhat relates to the subject matter. Nor do I really have a problem with "Here is evidence that the government is known for lies" type of things. Less relates, but still related.
Perhaps we can compromise. We won't mention chemtrails specifically, but word it that it leaves it open to investigating hoaxes and generally challenging authority, in addition to what you said about exposing Round Earth proofs. We can leave it open and see how it goes. If we start mentioning alien abductions and mind control or whatnot in our top level descriptions it may create a certain perception.
Perhaps in the future if such things get off the ground and we develop a community of people who like discussing something we can start creating more forums with certain names and expand it out as you have said.
I will share my version of some reworded titles and phrases. I am still giving it some thought.
-
After giving the matter some thought, I am leaning towards the idea that it may be most sensible for the Flat Earth Investigations forum to be about the investigation of a Flat Earth. Makes sense, right?
Per the name of the Round Earth/Question Authority forum, I have been thinking of a perfect name for that. I do like Thork's concept. I have come up with the name of Questioning the Status Quo. A different naming convention such as this shows that the contents will have a new twist. It is not necessarily about Flat Earth directly related things; as Thork has strategized the scope to be broader to attract others in the greater skeptical community to challenge authority.
Questioning the Status Quo - Investigate authoritative claims on any topic. Question our institutions and challenge school taught doctrine.
Flat Earth Investigations - A place to explore and investigate the possibility of a Flat Earth. Is a Flat Earth strictly and physically impossible?
Flat Earth Media - Discuss Flat Earth articles, YouTube Videos, Books, Interviews, and Social Media.
Flat Earth Community - A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for the Flat Earth movement.
We take Flat Earth General, Q&A, and Debate and just dump it all into the Flat Earth Investigations forum.
The Flat Earth Investigations forum is worded to be entirely non-combative, and does not portray the idea of our superior knowledge over the user, which causes the trolls. It is merely a place to explore and investigate.
The Questioning the Status Quo forum does reinforce the idea that this society is all generally a place to question the status quo, whether that be questioning authority or questioning what we are taught about nature.
Edit: Ah, perhaps a better idea. I replaced "challenge Round Earth doctrine" with "challenge school taught doctrine." Question the authority of our schools and institutions. People know the name of this website, and what we are suggesting. Wording it in this way leaves the scope open to broader topics as well.
This brings me to something I mentioned in the other thread. To truly be more palatable to the public we should seek to get away from the whole FE vs RE and FE'er vs RE'er thing.
Inviting the public to consider whether they are a Round Earther or a Flat Earther, or what shape they support, is a losing tactic. They should instead consider whether they want to challenge authority or support authority -- this formula works on YouTube and it will work here.
-
I'm 95% on board with this.
I'd make one change. I'm not happy with "challenge school taught doctrine." either. It sounds very anti-education. How about "challenge conventional wisdom" ... that opens it right up to debates on all sorts.
Questioning the Status Quo - Investigate authoritative claims on any topic. Question our institutions and challenge conventional wisdom.
Flat Earth Investigations - A place to explore and investigate the possibility of a Flat Earth. Is a Flat Earth strictly and physically impossible?
Flat Earth Media - Discuss Flat Earth articles, YouTube Videos, Books, Interviews, and Social Media.
Flat Earth Community - A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for the Flat Earth movement.
I'd only sticky the FAQ in FE Investigations.
Other than that ... I think this new format sounds good.
So does anyone have any objections before we go to the administration and ask for the changes?
-
Personally, I liked Thork's initial proposal much more. "Questioning the Status Quo" sounds clunky, and, at least to me, is completely unclear as to its purpose. Also, Thork's idea of "Flat Earth Society Investigations" (attacking RE) was vastly superior to Tom's "Flat Earth Investigations" (which IMO will turn into attacking FE).
The new proposal eliminates all of the selling points that originally had me on board. We're back to putting "hey guys, come and talk smack about FE" to the 1st position (Thork's version had it at 3rd), and we still don't have a specific anti-RE board. Questioning authority on other subjects already has a place - it's Science & Alternative Science.
If this is the implementation you want to go with, then I'm flipping my position to "against".
-
Back to Tom ...
-
We can agree on the Flat Earth Media and Flat Earth Community. Lets put those aside.
The Attack RE Forum:
A Flat Earth Society Investigations forum that is dedicated to attacking RET is good concept that I would want to see in full force, I completely agree. I do, however, still steel feel that the regular users of the public who come here know that they are a not part of the Flat Earth Society; so why would they come and argue in favor of it? That particular name is less inviting. It creates an expectation that you are going to click on that link to see what the Flat Earth Society is investigating, and inevitably the "where are you guys" and "The Flat Earth Society isn't doing a good job" if there are not enough debators. The message that we want them to be the investigators is lost.
Thork made some very good points that we are seeking to generate a movement, and that a forum dedicated solely to attacking RE won't really go anywhere since there are not enough content providers due to the failure of us having created a movement. We can't expect a plathora of threads attacking RET when there are only a few people willing to debate on that subject. Once we generate a movement we can think about a forum solely dedicated to attacking RET specifically. We just don't have the manpower. Creating a forum does not create that manpower.
The goal of this Attack RE forum, as Thork agrees, should also be of a Question Authority one. We can put in "examine Round Earth doctrine" back in the description. We can change the name of the Questioning the Status Quo forum, to a better name if that does not exactly roll off of the toung (although I am having a hard time thinking of a great name). The subject matter should be left more open and general to attract the grander skeptic internet communities and YouTube fold who do put a lot of the focus on questioning authority.
The FE Forum:
Per comment that "Flat Earth Investigations - A place to explore and investigate the possibility of a Flat Earth. Is a Flat Earth strictly and physically impossible?" may invites attack on FET; of course it may invite those sort of attacks. So does "Flat Earth Theory - A place to examine the Flat Earth Theory and its doctrine" in Thork's original idea, and to which Thork agreed with would be the case. Practically anything we name the Flat Earth forum will have attacks. The investigations name just lightens the idea and creates a goal for the forum that it is a place for investigating the concept.
There is no deterrent for attack unless we totally disallow debate against FET.
The description goal for the Flat Earth Investigations forum is actually now for anti-Flat Earthers to suggest that an FE is impossible or improbable, which we have seen is so far impossible over the last ten years. If they want to continue beating that drum, let them, in a debate club designed for our users to debate the subject.
Not only do they have that working against them, there is also the the Debate Club. We hammer in the idea that the forum is a Debate Club and such back and fourth discussions would be sustainable. When they start threads with objections, the literal purpose of the forum is to find an issue with the evidence or objection they present, which allows for better discussions.
This equation will tip the balances and cause a cultural shift.
Here are a compromise to the various complaints and ideas:
---
Flat Earth Forum Comprimise:
Flat Earth Theories - A place to explore and investigate the possibility of a Flat Earth. Is a Flat Earth strictly and physically impossible?
Comment: Does away with the word "Investigation," if that is so controversial. This name may spark more of an idea that there are multiple theories, and that users are invited to explore and investigate.
Round Earth/Question Authority Forum Comprimise:
Questioning the Status Quo [Placeholder] - Examine Round Earth doctrine and authoritative claims on related topics. Question our institutions and challenge the conventional wisdom.
Comment: We put back in the "examine Round Earth doctrine" line and also left the forum open for related subject. This compromises with the scope complaint. I do not have a better name for the concept than Questioning the Status Quo, however.
---
What is an alternative, better name, to Questioning the Status Quo and Flat Earth Society Investigations that fully captures the idea we are trying to capture?
-
Ehhh. I still don't think we're quite there. This is just a reshuffling of posts into new buckets - I don't think it encourages the transformation we were originally aiming for.
I still think that Flat Earth [Society] Investigations is a good term to describe investigations by (or on behalf of) the Flat Earth Society than investigations of the Flat Earth Society. I'd propose that this should be the name of the "anti-RE" board, and that it's the other board that's in need of a new name.
I also don't think asking the question "Is a Flat Earth strictly and physically impossible?" is wise. From my perspective, it actively encourages low-content posting and puts us heavily on the defensive (see Thork's original remarks about how he'd like to turn the tables a bit, at least as far as our focus goes). We should be focusing on questioning RET and sharing news about FET, not on constantly defending ourselves and arguing that FET is "not impossible" - that's what got me on board in the first place.
My suggestion is that we reintroduce Thork's naming back for the anti-RET board, and that your new description is appropriate. The FET board should not be the top one on the list, and both the name and descriptions need more thought.
That said, I appreciate that I'm just sitting here complaining and not providing any proposals myself. I'll see if I can come up with something when I have the time. In the meantime, don't take my objections as authoritative in any way - I'm just adding my thoughts to the mix. If others agree that this is the way to go, hey-ho.
-
I still think that Flat Earth [Society] Investigations is a good term to describe investigations by (or on behalf of) the Flat Earth Society than investigations of the Flat Earth Society. I'd propose that this should be the name of the "anti-RE" board, and that it's the other board that's in need of a new name.
Really my hope for this board was that it wouldn't just be us doing the investigating. And whilst I don't think many new users will jump in to destroy round earth theory, they may be more than happy to have a pop at the moon landings or shady government programs. These are mainstream topics that could garner new users creating topics that others oppose. In other words a self-regulating forum that organically spawns debate without us having to make the other side of the argument all the time. I wanted this to be a low maintenance topic generator without us doing all the leg work to keep it alive. And I felt to achieve that, we'd have to broaden its appeal and widen the array of things you could debate. I don't think anyone is disputing this as a sensible line to pursue, so its just about execution ... the right title and the right description.
I also don't think asking the question "Is a Flat Earth strictly and physically impossible?" is wise. From my perspective, it actively encourages low-content posting and puts us heavily on the defensive (see Thork's original remarks about how he'd like to turn the tables a bit, at least as far as our focus goes). We should be focusing on questioning RET and sharing news about FET, not on constantly defending ourselves and arguing that FET is "not impossible" - that's what got me on board in the first place.
I have a foot in both camps over this. Again I'd like us to take some of the heat out FET debate, more giving info and the history of FET rather than trying to shoehorn a new theory about aircraft flight times into it. I don't want to HAVE to defend everything and anything, even if I'm literally making it up on the fly. Sure, its been fun in the past, we've come up with all sorts from bendy light to UA to lunar bioluminescence but TFES is no longer new. We've done it all. And now we just repeat the same old theories and the same old jokes. And there is an identical forum for that run by John Davis. We could look to project a much more credible and less divisive society by becoming more like a knowledge base on FET ... again maintaining expert status but by being historians, not scientists. Preserving FET, not 'creating' new FET. I'd rather tell someone about Wilfred Voliva, than have to make up what I think Voliva would have said about GPS and defend his theories in that context. Voliva's story is interesting and I can tell you all about it if you care, without you resorting to 'thats BS'. Sure, people will still attack FET, but then it is no longer personal. You don't agree with this 900 year old monk? OK. But this is what he said about discovering the edge of the earth. I also figured this would be a way to build the wiki into something credible and actually very useful. Populated with some of the in depth answers we give in the future. I have done a lot of work with Tom for example on Rowbotham. Having his business exploits, his education and his inventions as a referrable resource in our wiki then makes it valuable. No one else outside this forum knows he made a forerunner for what would be Dr Pepper later. Even Christine Garwood realised he use the Flat Earth Society to peddle Dr Birley's phosphorus tonic ... BUT she didn't look at the ingredients and realise it to be a very very early form of coca cola ... complete with tons of sugar and phosphoric acid to make it taste like flat cola. Flat cola ... the irony.
I think the media would really see us as an authoritative source in that sense and the other forum as the joke.
But, my other foot does fear people come here to have a pop at FErs and we may lose traffic. I'm hoping those same people will instead be interested by the new debate forum and vent that anger at organised religion, NASA or the government instead.
My suggestion is that we reintroduce Thork's naming back for the anti-RET board, and that your new description is appropriate. The FET board should not be the top one on the list, and both the name and descriptions need more thought.
That said, I appreciate that I'm just sitting here complaining and not providing any proposals myself. I'll see if I can come up with something when I have the time. In the meantime, don't take my objections as authoritative in any way - I'm just adding my thoughts to the mix. If others agree that this is the way to go, hey-ho.
So I would maybe put flat earth investigations as FLAT EARTH THEORY. And if you ask for it, we'll provide the theory. Just like the natural history museum would tell you about dinosaurs, we'll tell you about flat earth theory. It may raise the quality of those threads immeasurably as junk like explain gravity disappears, and we can get deeper into more complex subjects (we may also find our RErs help us locating sources that we can't find as that's now just being helpful). Again, its a risk going this way. We may lose traffic. But we might emerge as the only people that actually tell you everything you ever wanted to know about the society in a way no one else could. We have the best FErs on earth right here. No one knows more about the history, the theories, the people, the organisations ... we are blessed to have people like Tom Bishop and Pete Svarrior here ... people who really know everything. No youtuber can do that. They don't know Lady Blount from John Hampden. They get views from clickbait titles and trying to convince people their new theory on Nazis explains why people are wrong about earths shape. We can be better than that. We could actually be incredibly well respected if we create our own wiki/library of great FE resources and content because we do know this stuff, better than anyone else.
Flat Earth Society Investigations A community board to discuss ROUND EARTH doctrine. Investigate authoritative claims on any topic. Question our institutions and challenge conventional wisdom.
Flat Earth Media For discussing Flat Earth articles, youtube videos, books, interviews and social media.
Flat Earth Theory A place to examine the Flat Earth Theory and its doctrine. (This is the bit where we give info out like historians)
Flat Earth Community A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for Flat Earth Theory.
So to Tom ... this is where I originally started but for a few tweaks. That first board is the 'debate club' you wanted to foster, getting more people debating either side. The new FET format is now to hand out info or discuss and research amongst ourselves FET, and you don't have to defend it any more. That's the bit that is the risk ... but a) we can always go back if this is a disaster and b) it was you that started the thread asking for a way where we aren't just battered by RE noobs. We are all tired of doing the age old threads ... you've done more than anyone else. If you are ready to stop looking out of your window and instead become the genuine expert relaying your knowledge and expertise on the subject ... we're all good. If you enjoy that side of it though and just wanted more help, I've been way off base all along.
I also have a side fear that people like Sandokhan and john Davis will turn up posting walls of text in our new FEt forum claiming to be authoritative instead of actually being helpful, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. We could for example only fully endorse the wiki once rewritten, rather than anything on the forum itself. Make that more of the intro to FET to get you started.
-
Also, we know the rough shape of this (I think).
If we agree on the ethos (I think we do) why don't we just do it, see the effects it has on traffic, sentiment and our enjoyment of the forum and then tweak as necessary? Trying to nail down the exact text and predict the unpredictable is just going to slow us down and I don't think we'll get it right first time anyway.
-
Thork, Pete, something important: Are you suggesting to take away the user's ability to debate against FET?
This seems to be the message you guys are suggesting. "We want to focus on debating against RET" and " and any Flat Earth Forum is "just for us to hand out information" Is Junker, then, to start deleting threads challenging FET? There will be tons of challenges in there. This is a very controversial subject. Of course people are going to challenge it. Lets be realistic. That forum is going to be filled with the same threads we have now. There is no way to get around that.
I remind you that the original idea was to turn the upper discussion forums (and I believe it was understood that I was talking about the current Flat Earth Discussion Forums) into a debate club to make the discussions self sustaining. There was universal agreement with that idea.
Then it became more complex with how we want to also attract other groups and how we want the main forum to be Anti-RE and a sub forum about FET mainly for us to just to hand out information.
Compromise:
Flat Earth Society Investigations - Examine Round Earth doctrine and authoritative claims on related topics. Question our institutions and challenge the conventional wisdom.
Flat Earth Theories - A place to explore and investigate the possibility of a Flat Earth.
Flat Earth Media - Discuss Flat Earth articles, YouTube Videos, Books, Interviews, and Social Media.
Flat Earth Community - A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for the Flat Earth movement.
-----
I don't like the name Flat Earth Society Investigations for this particular forum, for all the reasons I have listed. It causes the user to think that he is not the Flat Earth Society and that he should come in and see what we are investigating. It is not an inviting name that invites the user to join in and investigate. There isn't even a way to join our Flat Earth Society. Questions such as "Why isn't the Flat Earth Society investigating a Flat Earth?," "they aren't saying much, where are they?," "They must not be doing a good job since there are so few of them against all of us". It doesn't even fully achieve Thork's goal of attracting third party communities and skeptics, who may not be fully vested in arguing on our behalf, to participate in questioning authority.
But fine, I will compromise. We can discuss changing it later.
The second forum, Flat Earth Theories, definitely does need to allow discussion and refusal of FET. I don't believe that there is consensus with disallowing or discouraging debate in the parent thread. But, again, it's a debate club and the discussion will be self sustaining.
-
Thork, Pete, something important: Are you suggesting to take away the user's ability to debate against FET?
Are you happy being the only person defending it?
How would you like us to square this circle ...
There needs to be a fundamental change to how the discussion forums are perceived. It has reached a tipping point. Many threads consist of multiple RE'ers posting in a row attempting to challenge FET, and then questioning the lack of response.
The public perceives the forums as an invitation to come and debate against the Flat Earth Society, despite that there are few FE'rs who even post. Those few who do post are from the old guard. There have been very few new people attempting arguments in favor of FET or arguments against RET. Everyone who comes here believes that they need to debate against some kind of established organization. That is the current perception, and it needs to change.
You've said lots of people posting and a lack of response. We can't magic new FErs. So I suggested we stop people asking the things we don't respond to, and they start topics on things we and others will. A fundamental change in how the forum is perceived as prescribed by you.
I know the risks. I outlined them. But we can't make a fundamental change to the forum without fundamentally changing how the forum works.
Are you suggesting we continue doing exactly what we did before and this time it will be different?
When users visit the forum, I propose that they arrive under the impression that they are participating in a debate club of sorts, with instructions that may choose to debate as an FE'er, or as an RE'er. The discussions will contribute to the overall quality of the movement. Perhaps a header message can be implemented that clearly describes this.
This won't happen. It never has. RErs will not take the position of FErs. They see it as dishonest or evil or whatever. Also new RErs coming to the site taking the position of FErs ... troll central. The ability of a noob REr to put up FE arguments will be farcical. This is why I hatched the plan of new forum with a broader array of topics that people would take both sides on.
This seems to be the message you guys are suggesting. "We want to focus on debating against RET" and " and any Flat Earth Forum is "just for us to hand out information" Is Junker, then, to start deleting threads challenging FET? There will be tons of challenges in there. This is a very controversial subject. Of course people are going to challenge it. Lets be realistic. That forum is going to be filled with the same threads we have now. There is no way to get around that.
Sure. But right now they have an expectation we will defend FET to the bitter death no matter what the subject. If we change that expectation and they can only expect to be told what FET is, and not get a blood and guts fight over buildings disappearing over the horizon, where's the problem?
I remind you that the original idea was to turn the upper discussion forums (and I believe it was understood that I was talking about the current Flat Earth Discussion Forums) into a debate club to make the discussions self sustaining. There was universal agreement with that idea.
And we are still in universal agreement. And the two steps I have put forward to acheive this are ...
1) Broaden one forum to allow more topics of debate in areas people MAY take either side.
2) Just hand out FET info, which I'd imagine RErs wouldn't mind helping out with. There is no FET to defend, purely an inquiry as to its nature.
Then it became a whole lot more complex with how we want to also attract other groups and how we want the main forum to be Anti-RE and a sub forum about FET mainly for us to just to hand out information.
Because no one will take the FE side, Tom.
I DON'T like the name Flat Earth Society Investigations for this particular forum, for all the reasons I have listed. It causes the user to think that he is not the Flat Earth Society and that he should come in and see what they investigating. It is not an inviting name that causes the user to contribute. There isn't even a way to join our Flat Earth Society. Questions such as "Why isn't the Flat Earth Society investigating a Flat Earth???" It doesn't even fully achieve Thork's goal of attracting third party communities and skeptics, who may not be fully vested in arguing on our behalf, to participate in questioning authority. But fine, I will compromise. We can discuss changing it later.
Again, I really don't care about the name. We need to agree on an ethos first. We can tinker with text once we see how it plays out.
The second forum, Flat Earth Theories, definitely does need to allow discussion and refusal of FET.
Again, no one is going to be doing any refuting apart from the same handful of old guard people. This is the problem you came to S&C with originally.
-
I very respectfully disagree with the assessment that no one will participate in such a debate club. I have created a poll in the general forum (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9779.0) to see what our users have to say.
-
1) And what do you hope to achieve?
2) Supposing your poll comes back with plenty of people willing to argue in favour of FET, do you think they will on a regular basis after the novelty wears off,
3) and do you think they'll be any good at it at? Enough to hold the interest of the REr.
4) Also, does transparently turning The World Famous Flat Earth Society into a debate club, not destroy its value? A bunch of people arguing for the sake of arguing without offering anything unique?
-
1) And what do you hope to achieve?
2) Supposing your poll comes back with plenty of people willing to argue in favour of FET, do you think they will on a regular basis after the novelty wears off,
3) and do you think they'll be any good at it at? Enough to hold the interest of the REr.
4) Also, does transparently turning The World Famous Flat Earth Society into a debate club, not destroy its value? A bunch of people arguing for the sake of arguing without offering anything unique?
I hope to achieve a growing, self sustaining, movement.
Right now of the most ardent Round Earth proponents on the forum is Max. I've abused Max pretty thoroughly on the forums lately to the point where he is now just spamming random stuff from MetaBunk, and even he thinks that arguing in favor of Flat Earth is good fun:
I've argued in favour of a flat earth in real life, and it's pretty good fun.
...
So though I'm tempted to say "yes", given that I would expect good questions to be asked here, I'm gonna have to go with "no".
Voted "no" out of spite, perhaps.
His words, however, admits the notion that many of these guys are easily flipped to argue with us. He is a MetaBunk anti-FE debunker on the MetaBunk website and, still, he admits to arguing in favor of an FE. They just need the right culture. The current culture is "debate the experts who know that the earth is flat," which causes instant aggression similar to a UFO forum with the message of "debate the experts who know that aliens have visited earth" would. That is the only problem. "Have good fun here considering on the possibility of aliens" would be a great alternative to that. It is more interesting to see what people have to say, and welcomes one to join in. It's a common platform for discussion, not a preaching one.
If some people are having fun with it, why not let them have a lot of fun arguing and coming up with creative arguments, which we can put to good use in our Wiki? Our current Wiki is nearly all a result of the anti-FE forum debates. We need iron to sharpen iron.
Bobby is so into the topic that he sometimes even argues against himself, posting good content points (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9765.msg153111#msg153111) we can use in the future in Wikis and such.
9 out of 10 registered a month ago and already he's posting pro FE threads (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9762.0) which supports Dr. Rowbotham's ideas.
CuriousSquirrel seems to bounce back and fourth between posting pro or anti FE.
All of the above posters are RE'ers, but they are posting in favor of FE for the fun of it. Some of those people will be so encouraged by their results that they will want to get more into it, some eventually becoming real FE'ers.
I will let you in on something. This is such an interesting topic that people want the earth to be flat. We just need to allow them a path for growth. This is how we generate a movement.
The concept is open to debators of all skill levels. Some will be poor debaters and automatically jump to "it's fake." Others will try to explain the phenomenon or muddy the waters. There already is a question if anyone "really" believes in Flat Earth, and that notion will continue whether we turn our forums into debate clubs or not. It does not degrade our value at all.
I have provided a path to real growth of the movement, and this is a far grander plan than an attempt to eliminate all debate against FE. It turns a pain in our side into a tool for growth. You should join me in this effort.
-
Bobby is so into the topic that he sometimes even argues against himself, posting good content points (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9765.msg153111#msg153111) we can use in the future in Wikis and such...
All of the above posters are RE'ers, but they are posting in favor of FE for the fun of it. Some of those people will be so encouraged by their results that they will want to get more into it, some eventually becoming real FE'ers.
I will let you in on something. This is such an interesting topic that people want the earth to be flat. We just need to allow them a path for growth. This is how we generate a movement...
I'd like to provide some insight, about me, at least.
I do consider this "fun," but not in the sense a troll would. I consider debate not a way to win an argument, but a way to learn. It forces me to evaluate my position, to understand why I think, believe or believe I know what I do. It doesn't mean I can be won over, necessarily. But it's always healthy to flex yourself, test, and examine what your basis for beliefs or reasonings are.
For instance, I'm an evangelical Christian. That doesn't mean fundamentalist, though my congregation is. One of the most healthy and growth-oriented bible study sessions I've ever had was with a Jehovah's Witness. No one else in my church would consider such a thing. But instead of being threatened or combative, he and I walked through "What Does the Bible Really Teach?" and it forced me to consider what I believe and why. It had the contrary effect on me than one might expect. It didn't convert me. It didn't make me angry. Rather, the strength of my understanding of orthodox Christianity grew and I felt better prepared as a result. And what was best was that even though he and I never came to an agreement, we became friends.
It drives my wife and kids crazy, but I do like to take contrary positions, not to be annoying but to press people (and myself) into thinking through why they hold to a conviction or believe something to be true. Doing it is a challenge, because you have to present a credible argument in order to generate a credible response. And sometimes the exercise does make me reconsider my stance. Frankly, that's what I thought this Flat Earth trend was about. Was FEism just something to goad people into doing some critical thinking? I wasn't even aware of it until Kyrie Irving (NBA basketball star) revealed he considered some of the notions worth considering. Then, it seemed to be popping up in places or with people, unexpected. I was intrigued, not by the notion that the world could be flat, but by what is it that convinces some people to entertain the idea? What did some people find so compelling.
Never say never, they say, but I'll never be swayed. I'm more likely to be suspicious that we're living inside a "Matrix" than a flat earth has been hidden from me. The phenomenon I can witness, the details of my work with satellites and my career in naval aviation just make a flat earth an impossibility. But I do like the challenge of trying to defend it and to understand the counter proposition.
So, having said that, it may explain why I might seem to "argue with myself." I'm not hostile to flat earth. I've read a few screeds that make it sound like flat earthism is a threat and that we shouldn't entertain dialogue with flat earthers because it gives you the notice and publicity that you want. I don't buy that. Flat earth isn't a threat to me (as long as you're not sabotaging my work or threatening me in real ways.) When I engage, I try to be fair. I don't argue to win at all costs. If I see a chink in my reasoning or logic or evidence, I'll reveal it myself even if my opponent didn't see it. If I see a "round earth" argument that isn't sound when trying to ally with me, I may remark or critique it if I want to remain segregated from it. (Likewise, I disagree fundamentally with argumentum ad hominen, which is a too-often emotional reaction. I do, however, tend toward cheekiness at times, which I've had to learn to control on these fora since the moderation is quite strict.)
I'm probably rambling, but I just wanted to give you one Globe Advocate's perspective, which may not be typical. I can already feel my interest in this subject waning, so it's possible I may not even be logging in come a few weeks or months time. A "Debate Club" concept could light a spark. I encourage it, not because I'd like to see Flat Earth find "evangelical" success in promoting FE, but because I'd like to see folks stretch their minds. I used to participate on TheologyWeb. This Debate Club idea reminds me of that. (Not sure if it's still what it was 15 years ago.)
Thanks for listening. Hope this helps.
/Bob
-
Thork, Pete, something important: Are you suggesting to take away the user's ability to debate against FET?
No, I want to change our focus. It's not a binary decision between allowing it and banning it. Currently, we encourage it too much, and I felt that your proposal carried the same problem. Hence my insistence on pushing the appropriate board down to the third position.
I am absolutely not interested in the Dubay model of "if you disagree, you get the boot." And I'm sure we'll continue getting droves of RE'ers asking the same questions (though I would suggest we might want to consider a restriction on RE'ers "answering" FE questions by just regurgitating RE mantra).
Tom, would dropping "Society" from "Flat Earth Investigations" alleviate your worries a bit?
-
Thanks for the comments, Bobby.
Thork, Pete, something important: Are you suggesting to take away the user's ability to debate against FET?
No, I want to change our focus. It's not a binary decision between allowing it and banning it. Currently, we encourage it too much, and I felt that your proposal carried the same problem. Hence my insistence on pushing the appropriate board down to the third position.
But that is not what everyone agreed upon. The concept of the parent post was that it was better if the current top level Flat Earth debate and discussion forums were debate clubs.
Then, after everyone agreed on that, and we were considering the board changes, there were efforts to add on to that movement to either disallow Flat Earth debate altogether or disenfranchise it.
That seems out of scope to the agreement. Thork has different ideas than you on what debate should look like. I have different ideas. I am sure that others have different ideas as well. Even when legislation is passed in the United States Congress, changes after the fact are pushed back for Congress for debate and discussion when someone tries adding significant changes at the end.
Why not just add the headers to the top level forums first, so as not to cause a gridlock, and then we can all talk about significant scope changes and resolve the best way for disenfranchisement of Flat Earth Debate and the new focus for the entire forum, if that is indeed the best path forward? As it is, I feel that some are trying to squeek in significant add ons.
-
Why not just add the headers to the top level forums first, so as not to cause a gridlock, and then we can all talk about significant scope changes and resolve the best way for disenfranchisement of Flat Earth Debate, if that is indeed the best path forward? As it is, I feel that some are trying to squeek in significant add ons.
Agreed. Assuming the admins don't mind doing it in two bits.
So what we have agreed. Please check.
4) Merge ENaG Workshop and Zetetic Council and rename to Flat Earth Community A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for Flat Earth Theory.
2) Rename the Information Repository to Flat Earth Media For discussing Flat Earth articles, youtube videos, books, interviews and social media.
3) Merge FE debate and FE Q&A and rename Flat Earth Theory A place to examine the Flat Earth Theory.
Now pending the final name and description (we could change later)
1) Rename FE General to Flat Earth Investigations Investigate authoritative claims on any topic. Question our institutions and challenge conventional wisdom.
The specifics of what we use the boards for are then up to us. If we want to just hand info in board 3, we can do that. If we want to argue the toss over the Bedford Level experiment we can do that. Board one (now more flexible) can be used for discussing all kinds of things, including specifically challenging RET if you want.
Now no one is committed to anything, but both views can persist. We can then see what is more effective without having changed the society into a debate club or changed it into an information source either. It is a step to something, what that is we are still free to deliberate and push towards in a second iteration.
-
But that is not what everyone agreed upon.
I am no longer convinced that everyone agreed upon anything. Communications must have broken down at some point, and a misunderstanding led us to believing that each of us is supporting a different proposal.
I agreed with Thork's proposal of a focus change, and with moving away from this being a "grill the FE experts" forum. That was the selling point that got me on board with considering this. If you now want to take it out of the deal, then I'm not particularly interested.
Now, I was under the impression that you were also on board with that. I interpreted your words to that effect when you said things like: We know what the problem is. The problem is the "debate the experts" theme, I like the investigations forum idea, or They should not be expecting to come and engage in a debate against us at all, or have the faintest idea in their mind that we are asking them to do that. We need to move away from the "we are the experts, debate us" theme. It was this fundamental choice of direction that I agreed with, and which I still support.
Lets just add the headers to the top level forums first, so as not to cause a gridlock
Which headers are you referring to?
-
4) Merge ENaG Workshop and Zetetic Council and rename to Flat Earth Community A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for Flat Earth Theory.
Yes, the longer I'm reading this the more convinced I am that you've completely lost me. Flat Earth Community was supposed to be the new FEG - a discussion of community aspects that don't directly relate to FET. ENaG Workshop might arguably believe there, but ZC completely does not. And why is FEG going anywhere else than its successor?
-
4) Merge ENaG Workshop and Zetetic Council and rename to Flat Earth Community A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for Flat Earth Theory.
Yes, the longer I'm reading this the more convinced I am that you've completely lost me. Flat Earth Community was supposed to be the new FEG - a discussion of community aspects that don't directly relate to FET. ENaG Workshop might arguably believe there, but ZC completely does not. And why is FEG going anywhere else than its successor?
Nah, you're just mixing the titles up.
The community board was a place to discuss community projects from the outset. That's what the ENaG Workshop and the ZC were supposed to do anyway. Sort community projects.
FEG is something else. Currently it is the 'conspiracy' board and the one I suggested changing to a debate anything board. IE bung moon hoaxes in there etc. Tom's challenge to authority board.
ZC and ENaG have always been low traffic boards so sticking them together and giving them a new community purpose seemed sensible. We don't use them at present. But they have threads about the wiki and stuff in them and to my mind, that's community projects.
-
Lets just add the headers to the top level forums first, so as not to cause a gridlock
Which headers are you referring to?
I am referring to the headers that execute the Debate Club idea:
From the original thread:
When users visit the forum, I propose that they arrive under the impression that they are participating in a debate club of sorts, with instructions that may choose to debate in favor of FE, or in favor of RE. The discussions will contribute to the overall quality of the movement. Perhaps a header message can be implemented that clearly describes this.
And I gave an example as such:
Welcome to the Debate Club
The top level Flat Earth Discussion Forums are a Debate Club. As in any debate club, the goal is to exercise your ability in debate to poke holes in arguments and expose weaknesses, even if you do not believe in that position yourself. Keep in mind that this is a friendly debate. Post in the Flat Earth Debate Club and join the fun!
Turning the current top level Flat Earth discussions into a Debate Club was the original idea. And there was nary a dissenting opinion. The only argument in there was from a person who started with "I agree," and continued with "but you guys will really need to step it up..." All of the long time posters who appeared gave positive reviews. So lets just do that. Start the Debate Club.
If we jumped the gun and turned it all into a major conspiracy forum, or disenfranchised Flat Earth debate, or turned it into a place where any Flat Earth discussion was just a place where we handed out links and information, or very significantly refocused the discussion, that is a serious modification to the basic concept, and a serious change to the the forums. We should have wider buy-in for that. I do like a lot of the ideas, and will be willing to agree with with Thork and you on many subjects, but we can't just tack on such serious changes to the end of a project after we were able to get buy-in on something.
I do like Thork's last idea for renaming and general purposing of the forums:
4) Merge ENaG Workshop and Zetetic Council and rename to Flat Earth Community A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for Flat Earth Theory.
2) Rename the Information Repository to Flat Earth Media For discussing Flat Earth articles, youtube videos, books, interviews and social media.
3) Merge FE debate and FE Q&A and rename Flat Earth Theory A place to examine the Flat Earth Theory.
Now pending the final name and description (we could change later)
1) Rename FE General to Flat Earth Investigations Investigate authoritative claims on any topic. Question our institutions and challenge conventional wisdom.
With the exception that the Earth Not a Globe Book forum should be a sub forum or separate forum, this is a great compromise. I like the words used. We aren't changing the main formula too much, just generalizing some concepts.
With the generalized name changes Thork has suggested, we have full agreement with me on the matter.
-
With the exception that the Earth Not a Globe Book forum should be a sub forum or separate forum, this is a great compromise.
Really? There is only one thread that has been posted in, in the last 5 months. It doesn't need a separate forum to my mind. And it won't be buried as ZC isn't high traffic either. I wanted to make some of these ghostly boards seem at least a little more active. ZC hasn't had a post in it for 2 years! So the thread you are using for ENaG will be right at the top anyhow. Its not busy enough to need a sub forum, nothing will be buried. There aren't lots of community programs running. ENaG is a community project. Stick em together and lets reduce the clutter.
I'm more opening up the ENaG forum for more uses (barely used) and just finding a home for the old ZC posts. ZC is long dead.
-
FEG is something else. Currently it is the 'conspiracy' board
That's not what it's supposed to be, as I already explained - the problem is that people are misusing it, and we were originally aiming to fix that as part of this restructure.
FEG, by design (and by explicitly stated description as of right now) is for subjects that relate to the Flat Earth Society/community, but not to FET itself. Space conspiracy topics happen to be a common subject, but it's not the only one by far. We need a place for discussions like "are FE'ers religious?" or "do they exist in <region of the world>?", and that's exactly what FEG is designed to do. This is why I opposed to Flat Earth Media, and suggested Flat Earth Community. I'm not sure why they suddenly got split into separate things, but we are now once again missing that essential area.
we can't just tack on such serious changes to the end of a project after we were able to get buy-in on something.
I've ignored this accusation the first time around. This time I'll politely ask you to stop making it. From my perspective, it seems like it is you who's changing things last-minute, erasing every bit of the proposal that originally had me supporting it (or buy in, as you termed it) in favour of the bits I was willing to ignore as long as we achieve the rest.
I'm willing to put it down to miscommunication - as I'm sure we both have only the best intentions and simply misunderstood one another's priorities - and I'm willing to try and find common ground, but this has to be a bilateral process.
-
Yes, there was miscommunication. I do only have the best intentions. I was mostly talking in general to you, Thork, and the audience, on the matter of a large and concerted attempt to eliminate or disenfranchise FE discussion. I don't think you want to do that, and I think Thork is more on board now. I do enjoy Thork's last proposal. He has my support on his steps of renaming and merging. Rename of FEG to Flat Earth Investigations and the specific actions and texts he envisions sounds great.
We can always adjust later, as Thork says.
This thread was mainly for the Technical Forums. Unless there are some major issues, I think that we may be at a point to where we can start talking about the community/lower forums. I will start another thread on the community forums. The multi-use of the community forums, for also being a place where people come ask us questions like "Are FE'ers religious?" sounds like a good idea.
-
All of my contentions are to do with the upper fora, of which FEG is one (and should remain one, under a new name and description)
The current description of FEG is not at all a subset of the proposed FEI. I do not understand at all why you'd like to merge in hundreds of irrelevant threads into this new board.
-
This is going in circles, and I'm part of the problem.
Give me a day to formulate a coherent counter-proposal. I think I see a way to resolve this, but it's just not something I want to try and describe whilst mobile. If my proposal is rejected, I'll step back and help with the implementation.
-
I'm at the point where I have given my suggestions.
I don't like the current structure. If you change it to something else I don't like, it isn't going to worry me.
To reiterate,
- I feel there are too many non-used boards and merging some might make the boards seem more alive and reduce clutter.
- I'd like more freedom in the upper fora as personally I've had every conversation that could be had under the current rules. I also feel that would bring in more users.
- I'm not confident getting RErs to argue FE is wise or practical ... but that's just an opinion; I have no way to quantify that.
I will optimistically look forward to the changes when you agree amongst yourselves.
All of my contentions are to do with the upper fora, of which FEG is one (and should remain one, under a new name and description)
The current description of FEG is not at all a subset of the proposed FEI. I do not understand at all why you'd like to merge in hundreds of irrelevant threads into this new board.
At no point have I ever suggested merging anything into FEG. I only suggested renaming it to allow broader topics.
FEG is something else. Currently it is the 'conspiracy' board
That's not what it's supposed to be, as I already explained - the problem is that people are misusing it, and we were originally aiming to fix that as part of this restructure.
And that's exactly what renaming was supposed to do. Only I felt that 'conspiracy' is pretty woolly anyway and extending to moon deniers, chem trail fanatics and 911 hunters is really an extension of the same thing anyway.
FEG, by design (and by explicitly stated description as of right now) is for subjects that relate to the Flat Earth Society/community, but not to FET itself.
Which is why I picked it out as the board for Tom's FE investigations Status quo or whatever it gets named.
Space conspiracy topics happen to be a common subject, but it's not the only one by far. We need a place for discussions like "are FE'ers religious?" or "do they exist in <region of the world>?", and that's exactly what FEG is designed to do. This is why I opposed to Flat Earth Media, and suggested Flat Earth Community. I'm not sure why they suddenly got split into separate things, but we are now once again missing that essential area.
I kind of figured they'd end up in the new FET board as we answer people's questions about the society. ???
Anyhoo, yeah, you have my thoughts.
-
Lets be happy about what we have discussed and strategized. We got in many good ideas.
I understand that there is jadedness after sitting here for years, and on the other site, looking at the state of the discussions; but that jadedness is tainted because the original formula was not a winning one.
I think we have reached a pretty good and fair compromise on this. We will wait for Pete to respond on his particular concerns with forum merging and old threads.
-
Okay, here are my issues/suggestions for the current implementation.
- Flat Earth Community - I feel that we slightly missed the point of that one. Collaborating on "projects" is a nice idea, but in practice I strongly suspect it will end up being the new ENaG Workshop. As such, I don't think it should be the #1 forum. I also dislike the name, because I suggested a different board with the exact same name, and we're currently missing a good equivalent.
- We still do not have a good replacement/successor for Flat Earth General. This board is essential, even if currently widely misused (that's something I'm working on from a moderation standpoint). We need a board for topics like "Do Flat Earthers believe in climate change?" or "Are they generally religious?" It doesn't belong with other FET subjects, but I strongly believe it is a core function of the Society to try and document these sort of issues. To me, subjects about the community should live in Flat Earth Community. This board would also naturally include any media coverage, rendering Flat Earth Media redundant.
- Flat Earth Theory and Flat Earth Investigations are spot-on. I'm generalising for brevity, but I think the separation between "anti-RET" and "anti-FET" boards will be a very productive addition
I believe that the changes I'm suggesting are relatively minor, but please correct me if you see any massive negatives. It's just an attempt at re-organising things in a slightly neater manner, and at ensuring that we do not lose the array of subjects that FEG currently allows in the upper.
My final proposal would be something along these lines:
4) Merge ENaG Workshop and Zetetic Council and rename to Flat Earth Projects [name to be discussed] A place for the society [and other individuals] to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for Flat Earth Theory.
2) Rename the Flat Earth General to Flat Earth Community For discussing subjects concerning the Flat Earth community as a whole, as well as Flat Earth articles, youtube videos, books, interviews and social media.
3) Merge FE debate, FE Q&A and FE Information Reporistory* and rename Flat Earth Theory A place to examine the Flat Earth Theory.
Now pending the final name and description (we could change later)
1) Create Flat Earth Investigations Investigate authoritative claims on any topic. Question our institutions and challenge conventional wisdom.
Here's why I believe this would work better:
- It would be very difficult to isolate threads that should live in Flat Earth Investigations without importing a whole boatload of threads that don't belong there. I'll be happy to try and fish some out manually, but I don't think moving an existing board in there piecemeal makes sense. I would consider it a priority that FEI is strictly a "challenging the mainstream" board, and not noobs going "if the Earth is flat then why <x>?", and currently every board is littered with these.
- I do not believe we need a separate board for media and community matters, and the two largely overlap (most community discussions will begin because of some media outlet saying something). However, we should be flexible enough to allow both to take place. It also makes sense to me that community subjects would be called "community". We could throw in "& Media" if you prefer
- If you want a board to discuss projects, why call it anything else than "projects"? In five years' time people will have forgotten what the intention was, and unless the board name is intuitive, we'll end up in the same mess as we did with FEG now. That way we can also easily make ENaG workshop a sub-board if Tom intends on carrying on with it - and any other major projects can have their subboards if these ever come to life.
I hope this is acceptable. Let me know what you think.
-
I'm going to disagree on one point.
3) Merge FE debate, FE Q&A and FE Information Reporistory* and rename Flat Earth Theory A place to examine the Flat Earth Theory.
- I do not believe we need a separate board for media and community matters, and the two largely overlap (most community discussions will begin because of some media outlet saying something). However, we should be flexible enough to allow both to take place. It also makes sense to me that community subjects would be called "community". We could throw in "& Media" if you prefer
I do believe we need a repository of some kind (that could be mixed with media). The repository is very handy for dumping something you find. So Let's say I find something like ... well I remember the first time I found Rowbotham's gravestone. On it was his title 'dr'. Something that was always getting disputed before that. Its nice to be able to drop a source in a place with no justification. I don't need to make a thread, I don't need to discuss the relevance, I can just drop a flat earth article or trinket of some sort on the forum, that I may use later, or that someone else might read for interests sake. Maybe a link to a Voliva's leaflet, or an image of Lady Blount's mansion. Maybe just a flat earth map that is different and cool. And I just want it in a searchable place. I know we have 'search' but you type in 'flat earth map' and you aren't going to find the one you saved on this forum.
It isn't a high traffic forum by any means, but it is helpful and I do use the repository for digging out things now and again, although I should use it more. To my mind it should have been merged with the FE media, as you can then just dump tweets and stuff in there too and if people want to discuss they can. But the instant you merge with FE Debate and FE Q&A anything you wanted to save is going to be buried.
I know this isn't helping, but even with tweets, if you want an Elon Musk tweet 6 months later for a rebuttal and its somewhere 19 pages deep under FE debate, that's lost. I like a quick drop dumping ground for source materials.
-
I see your point. We could still have a media dumping ground as a sub-board of my version of FE Community (& Media), perhaps? It could still be called Flat Earth Information Repository.
That way you can choose between making a thread to discuss a piece of media, or just dumping it for future reference. That way, if a media dump thread evolves into a discussion, there's an obvious place to move it, too
-
No further questions, Your Honour.
Actually, whilst we are on this ... I am a little nervous of a photobucket scenario playing out over the internet again. Should tinypic do the same, all my image would go too.
Out of scope, but has there ever been any thought to hosting out own images allowing users upload? If that is too scary regarding potential size, maybe we could just host the images we use again and again in a kind of library ... but out of scope for now.
-
Out of scope, but has there ever been any thought to hosting out own images allowing users upload?
This is already possible, although it might be worth considering increasing the size limit.
-
I've never even noticed. How strange. The attachments thing under the body. Mind = blown.
-
I don't have any objection to what has been discussed.
I do intend on continuing that ENAG book project and a sub forum in projects that is not seen on the main board would be fine. I would prefer to keep the notes together.
I also do not have an objection to mixing in "examining Round Earth proofs" into the Flat Earth Investigations description if you guys still wish to do that, I noticed that it was taken out.
-
I didn't consciously take it out - I just copied and edited the most recent proposal I could find. I have no strong opinion either way on this one