The Flat Earth Society

The Flat Earth Society => Suggestions & Concerns => Topic started by: Parsifal on July 19, 2014, 06:37:29 PM

Title: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on July 19, 2014, 06:37:29 PM
As has been alluded to in another thread (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1704), the possibility of a reunification between this Society and theflatearthsociety.org is now open for discussion from the community. Given the uncertainty evident in that thread as to what exactly a "reunification" entails, I want to lay down specifics and allow people to comment on them.

Let me say, first and foremost, that this site exists and always has existed to serve its members. I don't have a political agenda beyond doing what is right by you guys; I've taken the lead in running this website because I sincerely believe I am best qualified, not because I want to be in charge. I will happily work with the other website or independently of them, whichever best suits the community's needs.

It is therefore imperative that everyone has a chance to express an informed opinion prior to a major organisational change, such as a reunification.


As it stands, reunification would likely entail Daniel assuming leadership of the unified Society, while we (myself and pizaaplanet) assume control of the unified online community. Daniel's purview would include things such as the Flat Earth Library and press releases; ours would include things such as the forum and the wiki.

There are details that would need to be worked out, but from a technical perspective, I know very well what concessions I would need from any reunification agreement in order to continue managing the forum as well as it is currently. Rest assured that no reunification will be agreed to that compromises our ability to support the community; any discussion or debate of specific details now would be premature and futile.


What I would like people's opinions on is whether or not an agreement of this sort is, in principle, something the community wants to pursue. If the answer is yes, then we can figure out the details later. If it is no, then there are no details to work out. Please try to keep to the topic; it's much simpler to answer one question at a time than to figure out all the tiny details at once.

To summarise, please consider whether you would like to see a reunion where Daniel heads the Society and myself and pizaaplanet head the online community (forum and wiki). If no, but you would be open to a reunion under different broad terms, please say so. If you would like to discuss something not covered by that, please create a new thread.

Of course, if anything I've said is unclear, please ask me about it. I understand that this can be a delicate situation for all involved, so I want to be crystal clear rather than risk a misunderstanding. Likewise, if anyone responds unclearly, I will ask for clarification.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 19, 2014, 06:40:04 PM
We have already received 3 of the 5 Zetetic council opinions. Therefore it is the Council's position that we do not want Shenton as leader of the flat earth society.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Ghost of V on July 19, 2014, 06:47:25 PM
How would this work?

Would this forum cease to exist? Because I don't like that.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on July 19, 2014, 06:48:09 PM
To summarise, please consider whether you would like to see a reunion where Daniel heads the Society and myself and pizaaplanet head the online community (forum and wiki).
Although some probably wouldn't be happy with Daniel being involved at any level, I think that this is probably the most reasonable solution.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Blanko on July 19, 2014, 06:52:09 PM
Personally, I don't see this as something to be actively pursued until Daniel himself comes forward with wanting to reunite. As far as I'm aware, we've been open to this discussion from the get-go, and I don't see how that situation has changed at all, with the exception of Wilmore (not Daniel) coming to speak on unrelated matters.

So no, I'm not opposed to the idea of reunification, but I don't see the point in making terms for negotiations that might not ever happen. If anything, that would just divert our attention from what we should be doing until the situation changes, i.e. treating our society as a separate entity and improving/growing it with that in mind.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on July 19, 2014, 06:55:03 PM
Thanks for the opinions thus far. I'm only individually addressing them where clarification is needed at this point, but I appreciate all of your involvement.

We have already received 3 of the 5 Zetetic council opinions. Therefore it is the Council's position that we do not want Shenton as leader of the flat earth society.

Acknowledged, but for the record, the Zetetic Council has only as much influence in this matter as its constituent members. The Council was elected by the community, but as it has no constitution to set election terms, there is no way for the community to speak through the Council. This thread is intended to solicit opinions from the community.

How would this work?

Would this forum cease to exist? Because I don't like that.

All of your posts here will continue to exist. I don't know if they will be merged somehow into the other forum, or vice versa; that counts as a detail that can be discussed later. All I can say at this early stage is that we will not make any decision that compromises our primary goal of servicing the community, and forcing everyone to up and leave this forum and all their posting history doesn't qualify as servicing the community in my book.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 19, 2014, 07:05:10 PM
I'm in favor in principle, but I share Blanko's concerns.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 19, 2014, 07:22:04 PM
I say hold a vote on main forum of the other site on who would like to see fair and open elections. If the results rule that the society would like to see elections, Daniel will be embarrassed to do anything otherwise. As I said, I believe many people would be embarrassed to say "I'm the president. No elections!"

Let the community decide on how the power structure should be set up.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on July 19, 2014, 07:27:36 PM
To summarise, please consider whether you would like to see a reunion where Daniel heads the Society and myself and pizaaplanet head the online community (forum and wiki).
Although some probably wouldn't be happy with Daniel being involved at any level, I think that this is probably the most reasonable solution.
Agreed.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Foxbox on July 19, 2014, 07:44:24 PM
Personally, I don't see this as something to be actively pursued until Daniel himself comes forward with wanting to reunite. As far as I'm aware, we've been open to this discussion from the get-go, and I don't see how that situation has changed at all, with the exception of Wilmore (not Daniel) coming to speak on unrelated matters.

So no, I'm not opposed to the idea of reunification, but I don't see the point in making terms for negotiations that might not ever happen. If anything, that would just divert our attention from what we should be doing until the situation changes, i.e. treating our society as a separate entity and improving/growing it with that in mind.

I agree with this.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Nostromov on July 19, 2014, 07:44:40 PM
[..] between this Society and theflatearthsociety.org is now open for discussion from the community.

Right; && I'd just joined teh other - b4 noticing da fork. :-f
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 19, 2014, 09:45:46 PM
I say hold a vote on main forum of the other site on who would like to see fair and open elections. If the results rule that the society would like to see elections, Daniel will be embarrassed to do anything otherwise. As I said, I believe many people would be embarrassed to say "I'm the president. No elections!"

Let the community decide on how the power structure should be set up.
I don't use the other site. Besides, I could create 35 accounts and sway the election. But mainly I'm not keen on the other site deciding our fate. They are the people that chose to stay, after all.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: beardo on July 19, 2014, 10:09:32 PM
To summarise, please consider whether you would like to see a reunion where Daniel heads the Society and myself and pizaaplanet head the online community (forum and wiki).
This is all I wish for.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Sean on July 19, 2014, 10:24:50 PM
First I want to ask, has there been any private conversation with Daniel in regards to any of this? If not I think we should have a baseline for discussion, what we would want to even consider reunification, but beyond that not really be concerned with the idea until Daniel comes forward publicly. It really seems like a waste of time. We could continue building this site instead of worrying about Daniels site.

Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on July 19, 2014, 10:37:48 PM
First I want to ask, has there been any private conversation with Daniel in regards to any of this? If not I think we should have a baseline for discussion, what we would want to even consider reunification, but beyond that not really be concerned with the idea until Daniel comes forward publicly. It really seems like a waste of time. We could continue building this site instead of worrying about Daniels site.
Agreed.

Daniel should probably come post here and state what he thinks.

Of course, if he doesn't then I think that's really all the answer we need.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tau on July 19, 2014, 10:40:32 PM
I think we ask too much when we say that Daniel should resign. Not because he shouldn't, but because he's the one we're trying to convince. All that really matters, from my point of view, is that he be put in a position where he can't hurt anything. Let him remain president, but take away his powers. Let a council do his job, and let him be a figurehead who pretends he still matters. We can even let him remain in control of t-shirt sales.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Blanko on July 19, 2014, 10:42:22 PM
We can even let him remain in control of t-shirt sales.

But he's not good at that.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tau on July 19, 2014, 10:53:35 PM
We can even let him remain in control of t-shirt sales.

But he's not good at that.

But do we care? If six months from now he still can't give us our shirts on time, we can take that privilege away from him too. But as an initial deal it seems reasonable to me.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 19, 2014, 11:01:53 PM
Daniel is already pretty much a figurehead. I suppose I'm okay with Daniel keeping his title and him continuing to do what he's already doing with the Library and t-shirts. I don't even mind him contacting the press from time to time, as he does. He can just keep doing what he already does.

What's more important to me is that he allows the society to succeed. Sharing access to the forum to our technical leads as Parsifal suggests in the OP and allowing something like an elected Zetetic Council to exist to organize community projects and give direction and leadership would be a fair compromise.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 20, 2014, 12:57:29 AM
To summarise, please consider whether you would like to see a reunion where Daniel heads the Society and myself and pizaaplanet head the online community (forum and wiki).
This is all I wish for.

And it's all we're ever going to get, at best.  I don't know why you guys are talking about officially making Daniel a "figurehead," let alone his resignation.  Why don't you ask for a nice foot rub from him while you're at it?  Getting him to agree to turn over technical control will be tough enough.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 20, 2014, 01:08:23 AM
And it's all we're ever going to get, at best.  I don't know why you guys are talking about officially making Daniel a "figurehead," let alone his resignation.  Why don't you ask for a nice foot rub from him while you're at it?  Getting him to agree to turn over technical control will be tough enough.

I'm fine with keeping Daniel where he's at, to continue doing what he has been doing.

He just needs to allow us to do our thing. If Daniel becomes a figurehead that's his own prerogative. If he does nothing with the society, disappears for months at a time, checks in now and then for the sake of appearances, then he is a figurehead. If he gives the society the attention it needs and leads projects, events, participates in discussions, well, then he's a leader. What he is and is not can be entirely up to him. He just cannot limit growth of the society with his own personal inactions.

That is a compromise I am willing to take, and which I believe is fair for all.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior 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.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: DuckDodgers on July 20, 2014, 01:48:40 AM
Daniel does appear to do things for the society itself with interviews etc., this is something a president would do and he appears to do it pretty well.  The biggest issue I have with him is the way he operates the forums.  I'd be fine with him continuing as the president and him abdicating administration of the forum to Parsifal and Pizaaplanet, or other qualified people.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tau on July 20, 2014, 01:55:29 AM
I like all of this. Personally, I don't really care one way or another what happens to Daniel. I have nothing against him. I'm only concerned with what will work for the society.

So Daniel stays where he is, the Council operates pretty much as outlined in our constitution, and the three P's operate as they do here. Does this sound good to everyone?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 20, 2014, 02:44:36 AM
That sounds good to me.We should go to them with what pp wrote.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: junker on July 20, 2014, 04:07:26 AM
That sounds good to me.We should go to them with what pp wrote.

Absolutely agree.  Anything less and we would be going back to the same thing that we left in the first place.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on July 20, 2014, 06:03:05 AM
Thanks for staying on track and having a productive discussion, everyone. I'm going to wait at least 48 hours from the date of the OP, just to make sure everyone gets time to have their say, before proceeding any further.

For the people who posted early on, feel free to present your thoughts on pizaaplanet's revised statement.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Gayer on July 20, 2014, 08:59:43 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.
Sounds good to me
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 20, 2014, 09:51:40 AM
I just don't see the point. Daniel isn't going to change. He'll continue to be ever-absent. If he is in any way an obstacle after a re-unification, it is pointless to go back. Hey, we aren't doing so bad. We are killing them at social media and with a few additional changes such as membership and T-shirts, we'll get some good momentum going. Its Daniel that has the problem right now. Not us. Lets see what if anything he is willing to concede before we give away the independence we worked so hard to achieve.

Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 20, 2014, 10:49:23 AM
I just don't see the point. Daniel isn't going to change. He'll continue to be ever-absent. If he is in any way an obstacle after a re-unification, it is pointless to go back. Hey, we aren't doing so bad. We are killing them at social media and with a few additional changes such as membership and T-shirts, we'll get some good momentum going. Its Daniel that has the problem right now. Not us. Lets see what if anything he is willing to concede before we give away the independence we worked so hard to achieve.

If he is absent then he won't prevent the Council from doing what needs to get done.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 20, 2014, 10:53:07 AM
I just don't think we need him. He doesn't offer much.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 20, 2014, 11:10:34 AM
I just don't think we need him. He doesn't offer much.

Neither does the Queen of England. If Daniel wants to be the Queen of England, he can be Queen. That's fine in my book.

As long as Parliament can do what needs to get done, it doesn't matter if the Queen is an absent ruler. Everyone knows she's a running joke. If Daniel doesn't want to be a running joke then he should try hard not to be a figurehead like the Queen is. The choice of being a figurehead or a leader is entirely up to him.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 20, 2014, 11:24:15 AM
The Queen of England is hardly a running joke. She is one of the wealthiest people on the planet and hides her wealth behind the Bank of England nominees. She has the power to dissolve parliament, is head of our armed forces and has the power of veto over any law parliament wishes to pass. Lets not make Daniel quite that important.

I just don't see why he should be figurehead any more? He doesn't do anything to warrant it. We don't need him. 
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tom Bishop on July 20, 2014, 11:39:07 AM
The Queen of England is hardly a running joke. She is one of the wealthiest people on the planet and hides her wealth behind the Bank of England nominees. She has the power to dissolve parliament, is head of our armed forces and has the power of veto over any law parliament wishes to pass. Lets not make Daniel quite that important.

I just don't see why he should be figurehead any more? He doesn't do anything to warrant it. We don't need him.

Daniel owns the site, which is #1 in Google. That is equivalent to your analogy of the queen's wealth making her important and deserving.

We are already enemies with virtually every country on earth and you want us to go off on an island somewhere to make our own competing country with the name of England. That seems less desirable than joining forces with England to make her a better country.

It doesn't matter if Daniel is around or not. The leaders of the Flat Earth Society will make themselves apparent. Respect is earned, not granted with a title. I doubt he cares to object to the community projects and things we want to organize.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on July 20, 2014, 02:28:30 PM
I just don't think we need him. He doesn't offer much.
He offers an FES site that actually discusses FET.  I realize that discussing FET doesn't interest you, but isn't spreading the word kinda the point?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: spoon on July 20, 2014, 03:09:35 PM
I like what PP posted.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 20, 2014, 03:31:15 PM
I just don't think we need him. He doesn't offer much.
He offers an FES site that actually discusses FET.  I realize that discussing FET doesn't interest you, but isn't spreading the word kinda the point?
Why do you come here then? Go discuss FET at theflatearthsociety.org. You can keep moaning at me, but I don't care if I'm not entertaining you. That's not why I come here. All you ever do is moan and criticise. You never contribute anything.

The Queen of England is hardly a running joke. She is one of the wealthiest people on the planet and hides her wealth behind the Bank of England nominees. She has the power to dissolve parliament, is head of our armed forces and has the power of veto over any law parliament wishes to pass. Lets not make Daniel quite that important.

I just don't see why he should be figurehead any more? He doesn't do anything to warrant it. We don't need him.

Daniel owns the site, which is #1 in Google. That is equivalent to your analogy of the queen's wealth making her important and deserving.

We are already enemies with virtually every country on earth and you want us to go off on an island somewhere to make our own competing country with the name of England. That seems less desirable than joining forces with England to make her a better country.

It doesn't matter if Daniel is there with us or not. The leaders of the Flat Earth Society will make themselves apparent. Respect is earned, not granted with a title. I doubt he cares to object to the community projects and things we want to organize.
And like England, the empire is disintegrating. He won't rank #1 for long. We will make up the ground. The main reason he ranks higher is because he has the search terms in the domain name. tfes.org is not doing us any favours as a domain name.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Foxbox on July 20, 2014, 04:35:31 PM
I also agree with what pp posted.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on July 20, 2014, 05:48:25 PM
I just don't think we need him. He doesn't offer much.
He offers an FES site that actually discusses FET.  I realize that discussing FET doesn't interest you, but isn't spreading the word kinda the point?
Why do you come here then?
To aggravate you.  :-*

Go discuss FET at theflatearthsociety.org.
I do. 

You can keep moaning at me, but I don't care if I'm not entertaining you. That's not why I come here.
Then why do you come here?  ???

All you ever do is moan and criticise. You never contribute anything.
Hello kettle.  Nice to meet you.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Daniel on July 20, 2014, 05:55:59 PM
I was holding back from posting in this thread initially because I felt my presence might be counterproductive.  That doesn't seem to be the case, though, so, here I am.  Hi.

For what it's worth, I don't have a problem with many of the suggestions in here in principle.  We'll have to work out the details but I generally agree with a lot of what's been said.  Having two competing websites isn't doing either site any favours.  I'd much rather have a unified Society to make better use of all of our efforts.

While theflatearthsociety.org's forums seem to be running reasonably smoothly now, we've obviously had plenty of issues (both technical and non-technical) in the past and it would have been useful to distribute power more broadly so that when these issues did arise and I wasn't able to deal with them, other people could have.  The tfes.org crew is clearly capable of keeping a forum running smoothly.  I'd be happy to concede a considerable amount of power on the forums in the interest of reunification.  I'd also be very happy to have other members of the community contributing to the front page in the form of articles, blog posts, etc.

I also appreciate the fact that most of you seem to have a genuine interest in furthering the spread of Flat Earth Theory through non-forums projects.  I love the idea of an annotated Earth Not A Globe being made available to the public.  Coincidentally, I registered earthnotaglobe.com several years ago and you're more than welcome to use that domain to host and/or promote the project if you want.

It's late here now and most of tomorrow will be spent traveling home.  I'll check in again when I'm settled back in HK.  I'm sure we'll be able to hammer out something that's acceptable for both sides.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on July 20, 2014, 06:03:44 PM
Hi Daniel :D
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on July 20, 2014, 06:30:12 PM
I was holding back from posting in this thread initially because I felt my presence might be counterproductive.  That doesn't seem to be the case, though, so, here I am.  Hi.

Hi, and welcome!

It's late here now and most of tomorrow will be spent traveling home.  I'll check in again when I'm settled back in HK.  I'm sure we'll be able to hammer out something that's acceptable for both sides.

Sounds good, have a safe journey. As I previously stated, I want to wait at least 48 hours for people to have their say, of which there are now 24 remaining. After that point, hopefully we can iron out the details.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: jroa on July 20, 2014, 08:10:32 PM
I also agree with PP.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: The Terror on July 20, 2014, 08:57:20 PM
I also agree with PP also.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: squevil on July 21, 2014, 06:32:53 AM
I prefer this forum. I like the changes that were made at the type of people who post here.
My worry is that those who help a lot here would get side lined and the community built here will be diluted.
I do not see a need to merge back. Is this forum not good as it is? I do t think I'd like to converse with the bottom feeders that lurk the other site. At least the community here is a mature one (well as far as forums go) and is welcoming.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Yaakov ben Avraham on July 21, 2014, 02:20:53 PM
Given as I post on both fora, and am easily recognisable from my nick, I shall agree with the above poster who said that you have all done a fine job in creating a forum here independent of the other one. At the same time, I recognise the value of having one united FES, which would do much to preserve the "image", if you will, of the society, in the eyes of the common public. Round Earther though I may be, it is not my desire to see any of you look like schmucks to the outside public. If you are going to seriously try to make yourselves into a true organisation rather than just an online debating group, then I do think that reunion with the other group is, if not essential, then at least extremely high on your list of things to do.

Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on July 21, 2014, 09:39:33 PM
I prefer this forum. I like the changes that were made at the type of people who post here.
My worry is that those who help a lot here would get side lined and the community built here will be diluted.
I do not see a need to merge back. Is this forum not good as it is? I do t think I'd like to converse with the bottom feeders that lurk the other site. At least the community here is a mature one (well as far as forums go) and is welcoming.

As I've stated before, the forum will continue to be run as this one is now. There would naturally be some merger of this forum community with the other one, but none of the people who post here will be forced to leave, and the administration here will remain.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on July 23, 2014, 10:01:17 PM
It's been quite some time, and the overwhelming consensus seems to be a "yes" vote to reunification. I'll post a proper announcement in Announcements when I'm not on my phone, but just so you're aware, we'll be discussing the details with Daniel directly. As has always been the policy on this forum, the community will be consulted on any matters amounting to more than technical details.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 24, 2014, 03:15:20 PM
Don't give away the family silver. Daniel needs us as much as we wish to be unified. We are perfectly capable of going it alone and being successful. That has to be the starting point of any debate.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on July 24, 2014, 04:43:11 PM
Don't give away the family silver. Daniel needs us as much as we wish to be unified. We are perfectly capable of going it alone and being successful. That has to be the starting point of any debate.
Wait....
The starting point of the "let's get back together" is " we don't need you?"

I think there's a flaw in your strategy.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 24, 2014, 04:58:51 PM
I don't see why we are initiating the conversation. We aren't the ones with a problem.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on July 24, 2014, 05:03:59 PM
As I recall, Wilmore initiated the conversation.  Most people here just happen to agree that it might have the potential to become a workable idea.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 24, 2014, 05:17:27 PM
Yes, but Daniel DIDN'T.

Lets not go crawling to Daniel because Wilmore happens to be reasonable. If Daniel wants to offer an olive branch that's very different from us going and asking for a solution.

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

As someone who straddle's both sites like a cold dark rain shadow pissing it down on anything you hover over, your opinion isn't really that important to me. Of course you want unification. You can rain your misery in one convenient place.

But as someone with the conviction to leave the old site and put my time into this site, the thought of going back to make it convenient for the likes of you isn't going to pique my interest.

tl;dr its hot, I'm going to the lake for a swim. 
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on July 24, 2014, 05:32:37 PM
Yes, but Daniel DIDN'T.

Lets not go crawling to Daniel because Wilmore happens to be reasonable.
Who's crawling anywhere?  It seems more like "testing the waters" to me.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 24, 2014, 05:36:46 PM
Then let Daniel test. He's the problem.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Saddam Hussein on July 24, 2014, 06:00:45 PM
Relax, Thork.  I'm sure that Parsifal and pizaaplanet aren't going to desperately begging Daniel to take us back.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Rama Set on July 24, 2014, 07:45:59 PM
Relax, Thork.

lol no
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior 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 (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1722.msg35988#msg35988) 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.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on July 24, 2014, 07:56:16 PM
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.
Oh noes.  Secret negotiations.  :o
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on July 24, 2014, 09:47:45 PM
Oh noes.  Secret negotiations.  :o
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.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Wilmore on July 25, 2014, 10:39:22 AM
Delicious t-shirt money.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 25, 2014, 12:54:35 PM
Delicious t-shirt money.
So that's why you are here! >o<
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Wilmore on July 25, 2014, 01:09:48 PM
Delicious t-shirt money.
So that's why you are here! >o<


(http://prettyfitlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/DSC03155.jpg)


(As per the picture, it also paid for my fabulous new nails)
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tintagel on July 25, 2014, 03:08:01 PM
Well, this is something!  Huzzah for progress! :)

Though it may be a little belated,  I support this.  This forum is run very well, but I will always support solutions that will move the Society (and not just the forum) forward.  I believe that a reunification can only be positive, so long as contingencies can be made to not allow the society to stagnate when one or more members go quiet for a while  (whatever their rank - I'm aware I've been silent for a bit).
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: squevil on July 26, 2014, 12:34:45 PM
Oh noes.  Secret negotiations.  :o
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.

I suggest you don't take it further then. If it was me in charge I'd be excited about bringing the society back together. Certainly wouldn't leave the idea hanging for days. It's typical behaviour of him and the reason we are talking here in the first place.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Yaakov ben Avraham on July 26, 2014, 01:04:55 PM
It seems to me that the primary reason we are all here is that Daniel has very little to actually do with the operation of the old site. Its like he pops in for a few days, and then is gone for months. I am a REer, and many of you may wonder why I care. I care simply because I think that the FES is a valuable free-thinking society in which anything, not just the physical shape of the Earth, can be discussed.

To be honest, I would like to join the FES for that reason alone. And I mean become a full member. The FES can have a lot of value if it is run correctly. Its not that Daniel runs it INCORRECTLY. Its that he doesn't seem to run it at all.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: jroa on July 26, 2014, 07:58:57 PM
To be honest, Daniel is the President of a Society, not the President of a Forum.  That being said, I think he does OK at his position.  He just needs to let someone who is capable run the forums. 
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on July 26, 2014, 08:02:49 PM
But the forum is the society.  Isn't it?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 26, 2014, 08:11:55 PM
To be honest, Daniel is the President of a Society, not the President of a Forum.  That being said, I think he does OK at his position.  He just needs to let someone who is capable run the forums. 
He doesn't do anything. Stop bum-licking. He hasn't got anyone else to mod his forum anyway.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Phantom Menace on July 26, 2014, 11:40:05 PM
We don't need Daniel Palpatine.
Tfes.org was created because we were sick of his tyrannical half assed rule.
If he truly cared about the society, he would of done something about it long ago when the mutinee started.
All the best FE'ers are here, the site works lovely and quick.
Its all trolls and noobs on the other site. lets leave them there.
Markjo would be a more productive president than Shenton.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior 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.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Sean on July 27, 2014, 12:59:14 AM
Is this conversation going to progress soon?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior 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.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: squevil on July 27, 2014, 08:48:03 AM
This is crazy. He said he will get back to you a week ago and didn't bother.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Rama Set on July 27, 2014, 11:41:03 AM
This is crazy. He said he will get back to you a week ago and didn't bother.

Maybe he did via PM.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on July 27, 2014, 07:14:00 PM
Daniel PM'd us on the 23rd of July. Relax, guys. There's no point in rushing this - we want to do this right.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 27, 2014, 07:43:36 PM
Daniel PM'd us on the 23rd of July. Relax, guys. There's no point in rushing this
With Daniel, there is never any rush to do anything.

So in the interest of transparency, are we going to get to see the PM? It effects everyone, right? Its not like you'd secretly negotiate without informing everyone what you are saying, would you?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on July 27, 2014, 10:39:54 PM
So in the interest of transparency, are we going to get to see the PM? It effects everyone, right? Its not like you'd secretly negotiate without informing everyone what you are saying, would you?
As explained previously, this conversation is mostly about personalities and our goals. Since Daniel and the two of us have a history of clashes, we need to sort those out before we do anything. That doesn't directly affect you as it's not an organisational or political matter, but rather a personal one. Then there are technical details.

To remind you: Wilmore suggested that we should have this chat before we do anything, I objected and said that we first need to have consultation with tfes.org's community first to figure out what everyone needs. He agreed, and we've done that. Now it's time for addressing any potential personality issues. After that's done, and we've hammered out the general terms of reunification based on the consultation we've had before, we will open it for comments, amend as necessary, and put it to a vote. Please see my previous response to you here:

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 (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1722.msg35988#msg35988) 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.

and Parsifal's explanation here:

It's been quite some time, and the overwhelming consensus seems to be a "yes" vote to reunification. I'll post a proper announcement in Announcements when I'm not on my phone, but just so you're aware, we'll be discussing the details with Daniel directly. As has always been the policy on this forum, the community will be consulted on any matters amounting to more than technical details.

Now, while it hurts a bit that you'd seriously accuse us of doing negotiation behind people's backs, I'll humour you. Here's what Daniel said:

Ok, I'm back home now.

I'm not sure how the technical side of integrating the two forums will work but I'm assuming it's possible.  I'm fine with moving the admin/moderation team over as is.  I'd like to remain as an admin on the forums but primarily as a just-in-case measure.  As you might have noticed by now, my approach to forums administration is pretty hands-off.  You'll do a much better job of managing the community, so I'm fine with keeping out of the way there.

The Joomla front page is working well and should remain as is.  As you know, the Library expanded greatly a couple months ago and there's much more to come in the near future.  I'm happy to add content that tfes.org people (or anyone with an interest in Flat Earth Theory, really) wants to contribute.  That could be blog posts, news articles or projects like the annotated Zetetic Astronomy.  The more content we have, the better it is for the Society.

Not sure what to do about the Wiki.  I updated the theflatearthsociety Wiki to the latest version of TikiWiki and moved all of the old articles over.  I don't know how the content there differs from the version you have on here now.

I think Wilmore is planning on emailing everyone so we can discuss the details more privately.  Probably better to hammer out the details there.

Please don't do this again, Thork. We're working pretty hard to make good things happen, and your attempts at spreading dissent are just tactless. You've had your say during consultation, and you'll have your say before and during the final vote. If at any point a subject that's not a personal or petty technical issue, people will also be consulted.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: squevil on July 28, 2014, 12:35:44 AM
Thork at the end of the day we are the only ones who do not like the idea. We just need to put up and shut up. Nobody is forcing us to visit either site if its not to our liking. Sadly we live in a democracy and the majority want the merger.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 28, 2014, 07:23:39 AM
I'm just not entirely enthusiastic about having Daniel still able to pull up the drawbridge (looks like he wants total control of the front page for example) and the no one has mentioned the idiot John Davis yet. Daniel is likely to keep a special place for his retard friend and I don't want to be on a site where he is an admin. We ban almost no one here and there isn't much drama. Davis was forever banning people and rubbing the community up the wrong way.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Particle Person on July 28, 2014, 07:44:47 AM
I'm just not entirely enthusiastic about having Daniel still able to pull up the drawbridge (looks like he wants total control of the front page for example) and the no one has mentioned the idiot John Davis yet. Daniel is likely to keep a special place for his retard friend and I don't want to be on a site where he is an admin. We ban almost no one here and there isn't much drama. Davis was forever banning people and rubbing the community up the wrong way.

Calm down. This process seems to be progressing surprisingly well, and I suspect that's mostly due to the fact that everybody involved is being mature about it. Things are going to halt very quickly if we start calling members of the other society retards. Behavorial issues and administration policies can be addressed later, once we know that reunification is feasible in a technical sense.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: jroa on July 28, 2014, 09:25:11 AM
It effects everyone, right?

AFFECTS.  It's a verb.  Look it up. 
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on July 28, 2014, 12:47:47 PM
Thork, I'm a patient man. Numerous times over the past seven months, I've argued in favour of letting misdemeanours on this forum slide when everyone else was calling for a ban. I firmly believe that self-moderation is the best form of moderation, and that everyone ultimately has good intentions, and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for that reason. Now you are trying even my patience.

The decisions we make now are going to shape the Flat Earth Society for years to come. Don't kid yourself into thinking that any of us underestimates the importance of making the right choice. That's why we've been careful to let everyone have a fair chance to speak their mind, something most web forums don't even pretend to do. The idea that reunification is mutually beneficial is the first thing we've seen eye to eye with the other camp on for years, and I won't let you or anyone else throw a spanner in the works.

I'm only going to say this once: When you post in this thread, you will be civil. Go and post whatever obscenities you want in Angry Ranting, and nobody will stop you. But if you make another post like that in this thread again, you will get to be one of the vanishingly small group of members we've issued bans to.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on July 28, 2014, 05:07:29 PM
Holy shit, Parsifal snapped.

Anyway, I see your point, Thork, and I share some of your concerns. This is why we're taking our time to talk things through and make sure that these sort of problems won't come up. I told Daniel that I'm a bit concerned about preserving the mentality and atmosphere we've built here, and so far he's been very receptive and open to change.

We haven't actually discussed how mods/admins for the merged site would be chosen yet, but in Daniel's original PM he said that he wouldn't mind just carrying on with our current team. Trust me, no one (Daniel included) wants to see the return of the status quo where people constantly complained and no one quite knew how to address these complaints. We're trying to work out a solution that lets us bring the positives together while weeding out the negatives.

While Parsifal's tone may be a bit OTT, I have to agree with him. You're not being civil. You're attacking whoever you can, whenever you can, just to get yet another stab at the concept of reunification. Please keep in mind that if by the end of our talks the general userbase is not happy to proceed with reunification, we won't proceed. We'll either restart talks or just scrap the idea altogether.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 28, 2014, 06:40:47 PM
Thork, I'm a patient man. Numerous times over the past seven months, I've argued in favour of letting misdemeanours on this forum slide when everyone else was calling for a ban. I firmly believe that self-moderation is the best form of moderation, and that everyone ultimately has good intentions, and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for that reason. Now you are trying even my patience.

The decisions we make now are going to shape the Flat Earth Society for years to come. Don't kid yourself into thinking that any of us underestimates the importance of making the right choice. That's why we've been careful to let everyone have a fair chance to speak their mind, something most web forums don't even pretend to do. The idea that reunification is mutually beneficial is the first thing we've seen eye to eye with the other camp on for years, and I won't let you or anyone else throw a spanner in the works.

I'm only going to say this once: When you post in this thread, you will be civil. Go and post whatever obscenities you want in Angry Ranting, and nobody will stop you. But if you make another post like that in this thread again, you will get to be one of the vanishingly small group of members we've issued bans to.
I've no idea why you are so keen to give up a site that YOU run, and put your efforts into a site that SOMEONE ELSE runs. Especially when this site will become the de facto site when all you have to do is keep doing what you are doing and let Daniel keep not doing what he is supposed to be doing.

I've also no idea why I have to be civil to someone who isn't a member here. Obama doesn't post here. Do I have to be polite about him too?

I don't know why you are puckering over forum comments? Its not our side that needs a reunification and I'll remind you that a lot of the people in favour, are those who have an account on both sites. Not those who exclusively put there trust in you and PP as I did.

Ban me, don't ban me. The threat of a ban has never stopped me posting what I like before.

I don't think Daniel should run the society. He doesn't put anything into it. The society doesn't need him. It just needs him out of the way. Why should everyone run around making FES as good as possible so that Daniel can do nothing and say what a great society he runs? We left because of Daniel. No other reason. We came here because it is Danieless. I don't want more Daniel in my life.

And my loathing of John Davis is no secret. He won't lose any sleep over it.

Holy shit, Parsifal snapped.

Anyway, I see your point, Thork, and I share some of your concerns. This is why we're taking our time to talk things through and make sure that these sort of problems won't come up. I told Daniel that I'm a bit concerned about preserving the mentality and atmosphere we've built here, and so far he's been very receptive and open to change.

We haven't actually discussed how mods/admins for the merged site would be chosen yet, but in Daniel's original PM he said that he wouldn't mind just carrying on with our current team. Trust me, no one (Daniel included) wants to see the return of the status quo where people constantly complained and no one quite knew how to address these complaints. We're trying to work out a solution that lets us bring the positives together while weeding out the negatives.

While Parsifal's tone may be a bit OTT, I have to agree with him. You're not being civil. You're attacking whoever you can, whenever you can, just to get yet another stab at the concept of reunification. Please keep in mind that if by the end of our talks the general userbase is not happy to proceed with reunification, we won't proceed. We'll either restart talks or just scrap the idea altogether.
I still haven't been given a reason why merging the sites would be good for users. If I wanted to post there, I'd have an account there. Its not a disaster to have to post on two sites. I don't because I have no interest in the old guard. They are never there. I also prefer the rules here. Are we going back to fearing the 'n-word' etc? Of course we would be. Daniel isn't going to be moved on that.

This is a thread for posting opinions on reunification. You might not like them, you might not find them constructive, but they are my opinions and I'll keep posting them until I get that ban.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on July 28, 2014, 07:18:48 PM
I've no idea why you are so keen to give up a site that YOU run, and put your efforts into a site that SOMEONE ELSE runs.
What, exactly, makes you think that someone else would be running the reunified site? We haven't even settled that yet.

I've also no idea why I have to be civil to someone who isn't a member here. Obama doesn't post here. Do I have to be polite about him too?
You have to be civil, full stop. Especially in this thread, because it's important.

Its not our side that needs a reunification
We already went through the reasons for a reunification. You're welcome to re-read them. You will also recall that a potential reunification was relatively high on our priority list since day 1. Besides, the idea was met with overwhelming support from the community here. Even if we don't need it, it's clear that people want it.

Ban me, don't ban me. The threat of a ban has never stopped me posting what I like before.
It's not what you say, it's how you say it. This is why you've been asked to be civil, rather than to stop opposing reunification. Act your age, that's all.

I don't think Daniel should run the society. He doesn't put anything into it. The society doesn't need him. It just needs him out of the way. Why should everyone run around making FES as good as possible so that Daniel can do nothing and say what a great society he runs?
Your opinion has been noted. Granted, it contradicts facts, but it has been noted. The facts are that Daniel is active less often than not, and that's a problem we hope to address with a more robust power structure (Daniel+ZC, probably). When active, Daniel contributes a lot, in ways none of us ever have (just look at the library for a quick example - this isn't stuff that was easily available before he made it so). Yes, there are problems with how FES is run, and reunification on good terms is exactly the way to tackle that.

We left because of Daniel. No other reason. We came here because it is Danieless. I don't want more Daniel in my life.
Please speak for yourself, not for others. Judging by the general responses in this thread, most people don't have much of an issue with Daniel, but simply with the way things were organised.

And my loathing of John Davis is no secret. He won't lose any sleep over it.
There you go, you're making progress. You expressed the same sentiment as before while remaining reasonably civil.

I still haven't been given a reason why merging the sites would be good for users.
You have, you simply don't like those reasons. And that's fine, we'll take it into account during the democratic vote.

If I wanted to post there, I'd have an account there. Its not a disaster to have to post on two sites. I don't because I have no interest in the old guard.
That's why we're not considering restoring the old guard. Have you even read Daniel's PM that I quoted here?

I also prefer the rules here. Are we going back to fearing the 'n-word' etc? Of course we would be. Daniel isn't going to be moved on that.
No, our proposal is to use our rules as the foundation, with the potential for a few minor tweaks. Banning the word "nigger" would be a dealbreaker for me, and as far as I know, for Parsifal too.

This is a thread for posting opinions on reunification. You might not like them, you might not find them constructive
I don't find them constructive, because you do exactly the same thing that Round Earthers do when they come to our site(s). They make up their own version of FET and then attack it. The things you're saying suggest that, in your mind, the reunification would be their site annexing us back on the old terms. That will not happen.

The concerns you're raising have already been put on the "to do" list before you raised them. You've been informed of that, but you're still shouting. This simply doesn't help anyone, including yourself.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tau on July 28, 2014, 09:13:29 PM
Really, Thork. Have some faith in PP and Parsifal. And have some dignity, too. There's no reason to be rude.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: squevil on July 28, 2014, 09:20:10 PM
Have you considered what the dedicated users of the other site would feel about you 2 running the forum? If a similar thread is there id image they would strongly oppose you guys running their forum. Ultimately that could halt any merger happening at all. You mentioned that the mods and admins here will be running it. I don't think the mods there would be so happy about that idea either. That's a detail for you to work out later though. I'm interested how the other forum feel though, especially the reputation PP had/has.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on July 28, 2014, 09:25:29 PM
Have you considered what the dedicated users of the other site would feel about you 2 running the forum? If a similar thread is there id image they would strongly oppose you guys running their forum. Ultimately that could halt any merger happening at all. You mentioned that the mods and admins here will be running it. I don't think the mods there would be so happy about that idea either. That's a detail for you to work out later though. I'm interested how the other forum feel though, especially the reputation PP had/has.
I bet they'd be ok with it.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on July 28, 2014, 09:28:09 PM
Well, that's not really our remit.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Blanko on July 29, 2014, 04:24:44 AM
It's fine, the other site is used to Daniel changing shit up at whim.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Gayer on July 29, 2014, 08:25:50 AM
It's fine, the other site is used to Daniel changing shit up at whim.

We like it, makes life more interesting.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on July 29, 2014, 12:27:37 PM
It's fine, the other site is used to Daniel changing shit up at whim.

We like it, makes life more interesting.
Isn't there an an ancient Chinese curse that says something about hanging out on interesting web sites?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on July 29, 2014, 01:03:21 PM
Guys, please try to keep to the topic. Take it elsewhere if you want to ramble about Chinese proverbs.

I've also no idea why I have to be civil to someone who isn't a member here. Obama doesn't post here. Do I have to be polite about him too?

In S&C, yes, as per the forum rules (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=977.0) (rule 1, and to a lesser extent, rules 3 and 6).

I don't know why you are puckering over forum comments?

I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that making personal attacks in S&C was up for discussion. Nobody is criticising you for expressing your opinions, and we've taken those into account. Unfortunately for you, most people don't share your view, and you're going to have to accept that instead of flying off the rails and making wildly inaccurate assertions.

If you want to make a counterpoint, then fine, but stay calm and be civil in the upper fora. Making personal attacks (whether directed at people who have registered here or not) doesn't lend your stance any credibility, nor does it do our public image any favours, either as an independent society or with a view to reunion.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: sandokhan on July 31, 2014, 10:22:40 AM
As has been alluded to in another thread (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1704), the possibility of a reunification between this Society and theflatearthsociety.org is now open for discussion from the community.


A reunification would be great.

However, there is only one problem to be solved: the quality of the moderation (something which all of you tried to improve/upgrade here on this website).

There should be a team of moderators which would include members from BOTH websites; and decisions should be taken together, after some kind of deliberation.



Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on July 31, 2014, 01:16:50 PM
As has been alluded to in another thread (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1704), the possibility of a reunification between this Society and theflatearthsociety.org is now open for discussion from the community.


A reunification would be great.

However, there is only one problem to be solved: the quality of the moderation (something which all of you tried to improve/upgrade here on this website).

There should be a team of moderators which would include members from BOTH websites; and decisions should be taken together, after some kind of deliberation.




How about Wilmore, Jroa and Roundy from the other site? As long as its not John Davis.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 03, 2014, 07:07:35 AM
Just for the sake of transparency: we're still exchanging e-mails at a fairly leisurely pace. It seems like trust/personality issues have been put aside, since the discussion mostly deals with technical details (such as how DNS would be managed, how we'd merge the two sites' databases, etc.).

There are a few things I feel comfortable saying by now, but please don't take any of this as promises or declarations. Things might change, they might change suddenly, and they might change drastically. But here's where we are for now:

Again, none of that is final. It's an educated guess on my part based on the direction the conversation has been taking so far. It's been going pretty smoothly thus far.

How about Wilmore, Jroa and Roundy from the other site?
As far as I'm concerned, that sounds sensible. We haven't discussed the details of the moderation team yet, but if I'm reading Daniel's messages right, we shouldn't have much trouble reaching an agreement there.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Vindictus on August 03, 2014, 07:53:06 AM
Yay. Happy that the users finally did something, and it eventually resulted in what everyone wanted.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 03, 2014, 08:08:17 AM
@PP

Can you bring discussions about T-shirts and membership? The way it was run on the old site was an embarrassment. It would be nice to either 3rd party the merch or have someone who will actually send it out the same week look after it.

When you take people's money, you have a responsibility to deliver as promised.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on August 03, 2014, 12:14:36 PM
This is good news.
Anyone know how the other forum feels?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Particle Person on August 03, 2014, 01:31:31 PM
This is good news.
Anyone know how the other forum feels?

I don't think the general population over there is even aware of the situation. I created a thread in their Lounge describing the possibility of a reunification and to ask for opinions. Hopefully I don't get bing bong banny whammed for mentioning this website. I'm not sure how taboo the subject is there.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Ghost of V on August 03, 2014, 07:44:50 PM
I support reunification as long as we keep Tapatalk support.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 03, 2014, 09:40:54 PM
Can you bring discussions about T-shirts and membership?
Sure.

I support reunification as long as we keep Tapatalk support.
Assuming we carry on with the idea to use this forum as the base for reunification, we wouldn't be losing anything from the technical POV.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: gotham on August 03, 2014, 09:51:54 PM
With PP's/Parsifal's suggestions and Daniel's acceptance, reunification can only help TFES. Solidarity between the two sites can strengthen our message and purpose.

It seems to me that the other site will be accepting of the merge for all the right reasons. To those of us who do care about what TFES represents and its future, this makes good sense.  You know where to find me here and there if there is anything I can do to help.     
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: jroa on August 04, 2014, 04:58:25 AM
I would suggest that PP and Parsifal keep this site open.  If nothing else, it would be a place to fall back to if the other site crashes. 
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on August 04, 2014, 09:28:00 AM
I would suggest that PP and Parsifal keep this site open.  If nothing else, it would be a place to fall back to if the other site crashes.

If I'm understanding PP's post this forum will be the official one and the other forum will be merged into here.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 04, 2014, 09:47:29 AM
If I'm understanding PP's post this forum will be the official one and the other forum will be merged into here.
That's the hope. It's not final yet.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: squevil on August 05, 2014, 01:09:37 AM
If I'm understanding PP's post this forum will be the official one and the other forum will be merged into here.
That's the hope. It's not final yet.

Id fully back that notion.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pongo on August 06, 2014, 08:01:20 PM
Thork will come back for me.   :-*
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 14, 2014, 09:17:36 AM
Thork will come back for me.   :-*
I love you very much, sweet Pongo, but I really don't want to go back. Daniel is a cancer.

So something a bit more positive. If the site merges (and we all know I am not keen on that), but if it merges Daniel owns the domain name. Frankly, I think we should own the forum database. We are the ones that put all the content in there in the first place. All those millions of posts were written by the society, and should belong to the society.

I think from an angle of power sharing and protection of the users, the Zetetic Council/new thing we set up, should be ultimately responsible for that database. Then should Daniel do something Danielish, we can up sticks and take our community with us with minimal disruption. The thing that hurts us most as a community is losing all our posts. Its why we left last time when Daniel deleted 3 months worth.

Daniel has his website domain, he admins have their powers to run the site. I believe the community itself or its representatives should have a stake too, and that stake should be ownership of the forum database.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on August 14, 2014, 09:47:41 AM
Thork will come back for me.   :-*
I love you very much, sweet Pongo, but I really don't want to go back. Daniel is a cancer.

So something a bit more positive. If the site merges (and we all know I am not keen on that), but if it merges Daniel owns the domain name. Frankly, I think we should own the forum database. We are the ones that put all the content in there in the first place. All those millions of posts were written by the society, and should belong to the society.

I think from an angle of power sharing and protection of the users, the Zetetic Council/new thing we set up, should be ultimately responsible for that database. Then should Daniel do something Danielish, we can up sticks and take our community with us with minimal disruption. The thing that hurts us most as a community is losing all our posts. Its why we left last time when Daniel deleted 3 months worth.

Daniel has his website domain, he admins have their powers to run the site. I believe the community itself or its representatives should have a stake too, and that stake should be ownership of the forum database.
Is the community going to pay for the hosting too?
How will the community control the database?

Let's say the council somehow gets funding and now has their own server.  You have to give someone the keys so they can fix stuff.  What's stopping that person from taking complete control?  Nothing. 

Also, whose name would we put the server under?  And what if that person leaves?

Also, why would we want the council to have access to every PM and every password? That's just asking for abuse.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 14, 2014, 11:41:33 AM
Thork will come back for me.   :-*
I love you very much, sweet Pongo, but I really don't want to go back. Daniel is a cancer.

So something a bit more positive. If the site merges (and we all know I am not keen on that), but if it merges Daniel owns the domain name. Frankly, I think we should own the forum database. We are the ones that put all the content in there in the first place. All those millions of posts were written by the society, and should belong to the society.

I think from an angle of power sharing and protection of the users, the Zetetic Council/new thing we set up, should be ultimately responsible for that database. Then should Daniel do something Danielish, we can up sticks and take our community with us with minimal disruption. The thing that hurts us most as a community is losing all our posts. Its why we left last time when Daniel deleted 3 months worth.

Daniel has his website domain, he admins have their powers to run the site. I believe the community itself or its representatives should have a stake too, and that stake should be ownership of the forum database.
Is the community going to pay for the hosting too?
How will the community control the database?

Let's say the council somehow gets funding and now has their own server.  You have to give someone the keys so they can fix stuff.  What's stopping that person from taking complete control?  Nothing. 

Also, whose name would we put the server under?  And what if that person leaves?

Also, why would we want the council to have access to every PM and every password? That's just asking for abuse.
Calm down and come back after you have used a few minutes to think for yourself.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: squevil on August 14, 2014, 03:23:12 PM
The joke of a council should be discontinued if there's a merger.
First point, the council doesn't do anything, let alone earned the right to have any control over any forum administration. It's just a title that was given during a popular flat earth advocate contest.
Second point is that there's a whole other website that didn't vote for the council members. You would instantly need a reelection.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tau on August 14, 2014, 03:46:43 PM
Thork will come back for me.   :-*
I love you very much, sweet Pongo, but I really don't want to go back. Daniel is a cancer.

I still don't see any valid reason why Daniel would make a bad Queen of England.

And also, Parsifal and PP are both at least as hostile toward Daniel as you are. If they think, based on their communications with him, that it'll go well I see no reason to disbelieve them. Let's be optimists here. The society is currently in a great position to go nowhere but up and I suggest we celebrate rather than worry.

The joke of a council should be discontinued if there's a merger.
First point, the council doesn't do anything, let alone earned the right to have any control over any forum administration. It's just a title that was given during a popular flat earth advocate contest.
Second point is that there's a whole other website that didn't vote for the council members. You would instantly need a reelection.

Haters gonna hate.

But seriously, I agree that there will need to eventually be a reelection.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 14, 2014, 04:09:48 PM
I'm not suggesting the society do anything with the database at all. Only that it is deemed their property. Not Daniel's. Not PP's. Not Parsifal's. The content was generated by the society, it should belong to the society.

All this Lord Dave bollocks about hosting and maintenance is nonsense. The IP should belong to the society.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on August 14, 2014, 04:33:33 PM
I'm not suggesting the society do anything with the database at all. Only that it is deemed their property. Not Daniel's. Not PP's. Not Parsifal's. The content was generated by the society, it should belong to the society.
When did Daniel, or anyone else, ever claim ownership of the content generated by the society?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 14, 2014, 04:36:26 PM
I am suggesting it is time the society claimed ownership of it. Keep up Markjo.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on August 14, 2014, 04:52:45 PM
Last I knew, Daniel was still the leader of The Flat Earth Society.  The content on his site lives on his servers.  There's an old saying that possession is 9/10 of the law.

I'm know that Parsifal and PizzaPlanet have been discussing the technical aspects of the merger with Daniel, but I have seen little discussion of the leadership of the merged society.  Perhaps the ZC should be discussing any potential leadership changes with Daniel and the other FES members before they get too far into the new constitution.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 14, 2014, 04:57:40 PM
The opinions of the council have been largely ignored. The site administration has decided it will do all the negotiation. Not one member of the council is involved in these discussions.

And yes, we could put absolutely everything on hold for 2 years whilst Daniel makes infrequent updates to the situation, or we can carry on as though we don't really care about his opinions. I'm for the latter.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on August 14, 2014, 05:58:27 PM
And yes, we could put absolutely everything on hold for 2 years whilst Daniel makes infrequent updates to the situation, or we can carry on as though we don't really care about his opinions. I'm for the latter.
I could be wrong, but I'm thinking that with Parsifal and PP on the job, the process should take significantly less than 2 years.  My WAG (wild ass guess) would be closer to 2-3 months.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tau on August 14, 2014, 06:11:52 PM
There's no reason to put things on hold. The denizens of the other forum have every opportunity to come over here and chime in as they desire. And, changes to the council's membership shouldn't really have any effect on the constitution. It is what it is, and it's supposed to be able to hold up to many different iteration of the Council.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on August 14, 2014, 08:09:06 PM
I'm not suggesting the society do anything with the database at all. Only that it is deemed their property. Not Daniel's. Not PP's. Not Parsifal's. The content was generated by the society, it should belong to the society.

All this Lord Dave bollocks about hosting and maintenance is nonsense. The IP should belong to the society.

OOoohhh is THAT what you mean?  I assumed you meant something less useless.

Well, why don't you go get a lawyer to do the legal work of making this the Official Flat Earth Society and copyrighting the forum and it's posts?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on August 14, 2014, 08:11:05 PM
I'm not so much concerned with the constitution holding up to different iterations of the council as I am with the constitution holding up to different iterations of the society.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 14, 2014, 10:21:49 PM
Apologies in advance for a disorganised post.

So something a bit more positive. If the site merges (and we all know I am not keen on that), but if it merges Daniel owns the domain name. Frankly, I think we should own the forum database. We are the ones that put all the content in there in the first place. All those millions of posts were written by the society, and should belong to the society.
Can you clarify what you mean by "own the database"?

If you mean literally own the database, then I don't really agree that this is an option, or that it will ever be. There's a plethora of concerns, security and otherwise, associated with this idea - Lord Dave has done a great job explaining some of the most important ones.

If you mean ownership of the content of posts from a copyright perspective (as later indicated by your "I'm not suggesting the society do anything with the database at all" post), that's not only legally complex (and in some countries outright invalid), but also horribly restrictive. It also brings us no legitimate benefit whatsoever, as far as the mission statement of the FES1 goes.

The only potential use I can see for this is malicious: If someone posted a piece of their own creative content and then profited from a derivative thereof, you'd have a vague case for demanding royalties. We have always been opposed to policing people's posts beyond necessity.

Of course, comments are welcome, and if the majority decide that that's what they want to do, then that's what we will take to Daniel, but as far as I'm concerned, the posts should belong to the posters (as they do by default under most countries' copyright, so this requires no action on anyone's part) and not to an organisation - that is what I see as the community owning its content. Anything else would be taking the control away from the community.

I still don't see any valid reason why Daniel would make a bad Queen of England.
I feel that this isn't representative of the agreement we've come up with in this thread. By what we agreed upon, Daniel wouldn't really be the Queen of England - rather, he would be deputised when absent. See below for my response to markjo.

I'm know that Parsifal and PizzaPlanet have been discussing the technical aspects of the merger with Daniel, but I have seen little discussion of the leadership of the merged society.  Perhaps the ZC should be discussing any potential leadership changes with Daniel and the other FES members before they get too far into the new constitution.
We did discuss it to some extent in this very thread. Here's my understanding of things, please correct me if anyone feels I misunderstood or misrepresented: Parsifal opened this thread by saying: "To summarise, please consider whether you would like to see a reunion where Daniel heads the Society and myself and pizaaplanet head the online community (forum and wiki). If no, but you would be open to a reunion under different broad terms, please say so. [...]" There was some contention regarding Daniel's leadership, of which I think the key turning point was Tom Bishop's proposal (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1722.msg35972#msg35972) and my counter-proposal (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1722.msg35988#msg35988) based on Tom's concerns. In the end, my suggestion was met with overwhelming support, so unless a new popular suggestion arises or any major difficulties come up, we'll be going with that.

I could be wrong, but I'm thinking that with Parsifal and PP on the job, the process should take significantly less than 2 years.  My WAG (wild ass guess) would be closer to 2-3 months.
That sounds like a decent guess, but I wouldn't want to put a timeline on it just yet.


1 - I'm going with Daniel's FES here, since ours doesn't really have a mission statement per se.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 14, 2014, 10:41:10 PM
In the end, my suggestion was met with overwhelming support
No it wasn't.

so unless a new popular suggestion arises or any major difficulties come up, we'll be going with that.
I really don't want to see reunification but somehow you seem to have made yourself in charge of our destiny and are now telling us what you have decided to do. Don't we even get a vote?

I'm still waiting for someone to give me a reason why we need Daniel.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Particle Person on August 14, 2014, 10:43:51 PM
Is anybody other than Thork opposed to this?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on August 14, 2014, 11:00:32 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to give me a reason why we need Daniel.
Check me if I'm wrong, but PP just said that the proposed new power structure would essentially see Daniel giving up control over the merged site, so I don't see what you're worried about.  Or are you still confusing the site with the society?  If so, then think of it this way:  The society is the members while the site is the pub where the members hang out.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 14, 2014, 11:02:28 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to give me a reason why we need Daniel.
Check me if I'm wrong, but PP just said that the proposed new power structure would essentially see Daniel giving up control over the merged site, so I don't see what you're worried about.  Or are you still confusing the site with the society?
No, he said Daniel was in charge, unless he was away and then we all run around picking up his slack. Again, why do we need Daniel?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on August 14, 2014, 11:13:25 PM
No, he quoted Parsifal as saying:
...where Daniel heads the Society and myself and pizaaplanet head the online community (forum and wiki).
Again, the site (online community) and society are not one in the same.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 14, 2014, 11:24:46 PM
Yes, so its very easy for PizzaPlanet to relinquish all control of the society back to Daniel, huh? I don't think we need him. In fact, I just see him undoing things when he returns thanks to the 'Daniel is in charge when he is around', clause. It seems like a very unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Snupes on August 15, 2014, 12:10:01 AM
In the end, my suggestion was met with overwhelming support
No it wasn't.

so unless a new popular suggestion arises or any major difficulties come up, we'll be going with that.
I really don't want to see reunification but somehow you seem to have made yourself in charge of our destiny and are now telling us what you have decided to do. Don't we even get a vote?

Er...who, other than you and like one other person, doesn't support this?


I'm still waiting for someone to give me a reason why we need Daniel.

Because just about nobody else is going out and doing FES stuff in the real world. He's gotten a huge archive of historical flat earth documents and literature, which nobody else has bothered to do. While I don't deny at all that this site could succeed without him, we haven't exactly done much to push the Society itself forward.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Saddam Hussein on August 15, 2014, 12:22:51 AM
In the end, my suggestion was met with overwhelming support
No it wasn't.

It looks like DuckDodgers, Tom, Tausami, Junker, Gayer, markjo, spoon, Foxbox, The Terror, Dave, Tintagel, jroa, beardo, Particle Person, Vindictus, gotham, Snupes, Blanko, and I are all in support of the reunion.  Hell, even sandokhan approves.  The only people who actively oppose it are apparently you and maybe squevil.  So yes, this does have overwhelming support.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 15, 2014, 12:38:15 AM
In the end, my suggestion was met with overwhelming support
No it wasn't.
I'm sorry, Thork, but it's you versus world, and quite literally so. We have to act in the interest of the community, and not your vision of it.

I really don't want to see reunification but somehow you seem to have made yourself in charge of our destiny and are now telling us what you have decided to do. Don't we even get a vote?
You do, as stated here:

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 (http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=1722.msg35988#msg35988) 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.

And here:

So in the interest of transparency, are we going to get to see the PM? It effects everyone, right? Its not like you'd secretly negotiate without informing everyone what you are saying, would you?
[...]
After that's done, and we've hammered out the general terms of reunification based on the consultation we've had before, we will open it for comments, amend as necessary, and put it to a vote. Please see my previous response to you here:

Here:

Please don't do this again, Thork. We're working pretty hard to make good things happen, and your attempts at spreading dissent are just tactless. You've had your say during consultation, and you'll have your say before and during the final vote. If at any point a subject that's not a personal or petty technical issue, people will also be consulted.

Also here:

I still haven't been given a reason why merging the sites would be good for users.
You have, you simply don't like those reasons. And that's fine, we'll take it into account during the democratic vote.

Note that each of these posts was addressed to you, in response to your concerns. 3 separate posts and 4 separate statements. Let me say it again. Yes, Thork, you will get a vote.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on August 15, 2014, 01:36:20 AM
Yes, so its very easy for PizzaPlanet to relinquish all control of the society back to Daniel, huh? I don't think we need him. In fact, I just see him undoing things when he returns thanks to the 'Daniel is in charge when he is around', clause. It seems like a very unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Perhaps you might feel better if Daniel's, Parsifal's and PizzaPlanet's roles in the merged society were clearly defined in the constitution?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tau on August 15, 2014, 01:51:41 AM
Yes, so its very easy for PizzaPlanet to relinquish all control of the society back to Daniel, huh? I don't think we need him. In fact, I just see him undoing things when he returns thanks to the 'Daniel is in charge when he is around', clause. It seems like a very unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Perhaps you might feel better if Daniel's, Parsifal's and PizzaPlanet's roles in the merged society were clearly defined in the constitution?

Nope. We're not going down that path again. The constitution has nothing to do with the website and that's that.

Thork, it's not gonna be a bad thing. It's not. Have some faith in everyone around you. Have some faith in the dozen or so other regulars who think this is a good deal. If it turns out you're right, you at the very least get a massive told-you-so, and then we can renegotiate. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on August 15, 2014, 03:14:37 AM
I'm not suggesting the society do anything with the database at all. Only that it is deemed their property. Not Daniel's. Not PP's. Not Parsifal's. The content was generated by the society, it should belong to the society.

All this Lord Dave bollocks about hosting and maintenance is nonsense. The IP should belong to the society.

What do you mean by "own" it? It's not possible to own a database, and the only IP law I'm aware of which could possibly apply to a forum database is copyright law. Since (in most jurisdictions) authors have automatic copyright over their work, we would need to get everyone to agree to hand copyright for their posts over to some legal entity, which would need to be valid in the USA (where the primary copy of the forum database is stored) and Australia (where the backups are stored).

Even assuming you did all that, what are you going to do to enforce it? Take me or Daniel to court if things don't go the way you like? Seriously, Thork?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on August 19, 2014, 04:15:46 PM
Good Lord, all this talk of 'reunification,' 'zetetic councillors,' 'constitutions,' 'elections' seems to overlook one serious point.

We're a website with about 20 regular members. This isn't reunifying East and West Berlin, it's reuniting the Window and Door sides of my bedroom when my brother and I had an argument when we were kids. (For the record, Window was always willing to look at merging our communities, but it was Door's insistence of keeping control of immigration matters which stalled the process)

I don't know about the rest of you but I'll just post where there happens to be interesting conversation.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 20, 2014, 01:16:04 AM
Good Lord, all this talk of 'reunification,' 'zetetic councillors,' 'constitutions,' 'elections' seems to overlook one serious point.

We're a website with about 20 regular members. This isn't reunifying East and West Berlin, it's reuniting the Window and Door sides of my bedroom when my brother and I had an argument when we were kids. (For the record, Window was always willing to look at merging our communities, but it was Door's insistence of keeping control of immigration matters which stalled the process)

I don't know about the rest of you but I'll just post where there happens to be interesting conversation.
Some of us care about this society. You are more than welcome not to.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Ghost Spaghetti on August 20, 2014, 07:58:01 AM
I do, I just don't care for the pomposity.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 20, 2014, 02:08:46 PM
I do, I just don't care for the pomposity.
Okay. Well, we're trying to merge the two groups back into one, and make sure that everyone enjoys things more as a result. I agree that everything else is mostly word salad, but I don't think it's really harmful in any way.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lemon on August 20, 2014, 03:31:41 PM
A king and a parliament.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pongo on August 28, 2014, 01:34:00 PM
Can I get an update on the progress of this conversion?  I need to present in front of the board in 25 min.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 28, 2014, 01:45:04 PM
We're currently waiting for Daniel's response to a question about DNS management - fairly mundane stuff. We asked it 3 weeks ago, then 1 week ago Daniel responded acting as if he never received the question (saying that he's ready to proceed if we are, etc), so we re-sent it.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 28, 2014, 02:24:12 PM
This is such a waste of time. Daniel is terrible.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 29, 2014, 01:09:29 AM
This is such a waste of time.
But we're not wasting time on anything, unless you count the maybe 20 minutes we spent writing e-mails. It's not like this site is shut down or put on hold while we talk about things. It's business as usual, and if we manage to reach a conclusion, all that will happen is us importing all of their posts and members here.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on August 29, 2014, 03:05:08 AM
ITT: Thork knows terrible
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pongo on August 29, 2014, 04:35:18 PM
Thank you for your response, Pizzaplanet.  Have you entertained the idea that Daniel may not know the answer to your query and as a result is avoiding sending a reply?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 29, 2014, 04:43:55 PM
Thank you for your response, Pizzaplanet.  Have you entertained the idea that Daniel may not know the answer to your query and as a result is avoiding sending a reply?
Well, a large part of the question is whether or not he'd let us manage the DNS, in full or partially. We can't really proceed before we have these sort of details sorted out, since our approach to things will vary greatly depending on the response.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 30, 2014, 10:52:20 AM
Update: we got a response. We will have to reach some sort of compromise when it comes to DNS management (of the theflatearthsociety.org domain). This really shouldn't affect anything. We should be able to reach a sensible balance, and if worse comes to worst we can always use tfes.org as a fallback.

I think this is the last of technical details that need to be discussed. We'll probably move on to organisational stuff once we reach a final agreement on that bit. Shouldn't be much longer before we're ready for final consultation/voting!
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on August 30, 2014, 09:39:28 PM
Banning the word "nigger" would be a dealbreaker for me, and as far as I know, for Parsifal too.

Have you agreed on this yet? There is no point in pushing on with technicalities when deal breakers still hang in the air.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on August 31, 2014, 12:59:54 PM
Banning the word "nigger" would be a dealbreaker for me, and as far as I know, for Parsifal too.

Have you agreed on this yet? There is no point in pushing on with technicalities when deal breakers still hang in the air.
Our proposal is to use the current set of rules of tfes.org with the possibility of minor tweaks if those become necessary1. Daniel admitted that he finds it difficult to find the balance between overmoderation and undermoderation, and we have his concession to carry on with our moderation and administration team/approach pretty much as-is. One condition on his side is that he gets to still be an admin as a preventive/emergency measure, but he has no intention to interfere with how things are managed. So yeah, this is as good as agreed.

1 - I genuinely can't think of any tweaks right now. It's likely that none will happen. I just don't want to promise that because I expect that a larger influx of noobs may pose some new challenges.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on October 08, 2014, 04:18:42 PM
How's this going?  Haven't had an update in over a month.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on October 08, 2014, 04:35:18 PM
I doubt Daniel has been online for about a month. What did you expect?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on October 08, 2014, 05:14:24 PM
How's this going?  Haven't had an update in over a month.

Neither have we. I'll send Daniel a follow-up e-mail later today.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on October 08, 2014, 05:36:27 PM
Attach a virus to it.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Particle Person on October 08, 2014, 07:09:43 PM
Attach a virus to it.

Okay, I think we're all aware of your position regarding the re-unification.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Daniel Jackson on October 08, 2014, 07:17:08 PM
How's this going?  Haven't had an update in over a month.

Neither have we. I'll send Daniel a follow-up e-mail later today.

I have yet to receive an email from you about this issue.

The real Daniel Jackson demands correspondence.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: junker on October 08, 2014, 07:36:33 PM
How's this going?  Haven't had an update in over a month.

Neither have we. I'll send Daniel a follow-up e-mail later today.

I have yet to receive an email from you about this issue.

The real Daniel Jackson demands correspondence.

Thanks for that, Vauxy. Not in the upper, please.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Wilmore on October 11, 2014, 12:24:25 AM
I think this was partly my fault. Daniel had sent me an email asking about some stuff, and I took a while to respond, which probably slowed things down a bit. My bad etc.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on October 11, 2014, 01:43:38 AM
Bad Wilmore.  >:(
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Ghost of V on October 11, 2014, 02:22:29 AM
Gotta respect the honesty though.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on October 11, 2014, 04:01:07 PM
I think this was partly my fault. Daniel had sent me an email asking about some stuff, and I took a while to respond, which probably slowed things down a bit. My bad etc.
Take your time. We shouldn't rush into this. I think we have tried to go too much too soon. Maybe a little cooling off period for reflection is needed.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Particle Person on October 11, 2014, 04:12:21 PM
Maybe Thork needs to take some time to cool off as well. I suggest 100 days.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Rushy on October 12, 2014, 12:26:09 AM
Why does anyone want to merge the old site when it is obvious that the old site is run by people who take days to weeks to respond to email or forum messages?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on October 12, 2014, 12:35:29 AM
Why does anyone want to merge the old site when it is obvious that the old site is run by people who take days to weeks to respond to email or forum messages?
Because some people haven't moved over so this is a way to get them over while also having one and only one forum for all Flat Earthy needs.

And Steve and PP would run it so I fail to see a downside.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on October 12, 2014, 03:19:05 AM
Why does anyone want to merge the old site when it is obvious that the old site is run by people who take days to weeks to respond to email or forum messages?
We get their long backlog of posts and domain name (== Google results == good), they get our organised approach, active moderation/administration and software support. It's a win-win for everyone, and so far we haven't agreed to give away anything of significance. We had to compromise slightly on DNS management, but it seriously shouldn't get in the way.

Of course, this may change as discussions (slowly) progress, but so far we have yet to hit any major issues. Unless something goes horribly wrong, it'll be beneficial to both sides.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Vindictus on October 12, 2014, 04:02:47 AM
FES forum merge: expect it Summer, 2016.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on October 12, 2014, 04:46:19 AM
To be fair, it doesn't matter when it will happen. This place is running as usual, so it's not like anyone is suffering from the delays.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Vindictus on October 12, 2014, 07:34:28 AM
I would like my posts back, so hurry up.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Gayer on October 12, 2014, 03:26:22 PM
To be fair, it doesn't matter when it will happen. This place is running as usual, so it's not like anyone is suffering from the delays.

I am suffering immensely, I still have to post on two different sites  >:(
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on October 12, 2014, 09:52:14 PM
I am suffering immensely, I still have to post on two different sites  >:(
You don't have to, you could just post here :^)
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Gayer on October 13, 2014, 07:37:25 PM
I am suffering immensely, I still have to post on two different sites  >:(
You don't have to, you could just post here :^)

Not possible. I want to talk to Cowgirl and she doesn't post here so hurry up you guys.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Ghost of V on October 13, 2014, 07:40:35 PM
Not possible. I want to talk to Cowgirl and she doesn't post here so hurry up you guys.

Convince her to join us. I don't understand her reluctance.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Saddam Hussein on October 13, 2014, 08:06:36 PM
Not possible. I want to talk to Cowgirl and she doesn't post here so hurry up you guys.

Convince her to join us. I don't understand her reluctance.

SCG has always been a bit more forgiving of the issues with administration there than most of us.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: junker on October 13, 2014, 10:11:33 PM
Not possible. I want to talk to Cowgirl and she doesn't post here so hurry up you guys.

Convince her to join us. I don't understand her reluctance.

I did convince her, and she did. Then you all ruined it.

The sooner this all happens, the better. I think.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Ghost of V on October 13, 2014, 10:18:18 PM
I did convince her, and she did. Then you all ruined it.

What are you going on about?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: junker on October 13, 2014, 10:41:20 PM
I did convince her, and she did. Then you all ruined it.

What are you going on about?

Lurk moar....

But since you are permanoob:

I wish SCG would come over to the dark side. Maybe if we stop talking to her over there she'll jump ship.

I am diligently working on this.

SUCCESS  :D
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Ghost of V on October 13, 2014, 10:42:57 PM
So you were successful, but how did we ruin it?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: junker on October 13, 2014, 10:46:16 PM
So you were successful, but how did we ruin it?
She stopped posting. Therefore, you ruined it.

Keep this thread on topic  >:(
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 23, 2014, 10:32:56 AM
Okay, a much-awaited update and a request for comments!

So far, Daniel agreed to pretty much all our demands, with the notable exception of which logo to use in the post-reunification forum. Our proposal was to hold a vote after the reunification to determine which logo should be used. Their stance is that we should firmly stick to their logo, claiming that it's an integral part of the society's visual identity, and that it's easy to use in one-colour screen printing.

For the time being, I've done my best to address their concerns and made another case for the vote. That said, if the community would prefer their logo, or doesn't care about being able to choose, then perhaps this isn't something that even needs to be discussed? What do you guys think: should we have a logo vote?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Dave on November 23, 2014, 11:20:32 AM
I don't care which logo we use.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tintagel on November 23, 2014, 12:42:55 PM
Okay, a much-awaited update and a request for comments!

So far, Daniel agreed to pretty much all our demands, with the notable exception of which logo to use in the post-reunification forum. Our proposal was to hold a vote after the reunification to determine which logo should be used. Their stance is that we should firmly stick to their logo, claiming that it's an integral part of the society's visual identity, and that it's easy to use in one-colour screen printing.

For the time being, I've done my best to address their concerns and made another case for the vote. That said, if the community would prefer their logo, or doesn't care about being able to choose, then perhaps this isn't something that even needs to be discussed? What do you guys think: should we have a logo vote?

FWIW, I can easily create a 1-color version of the new logo, print quality for screen printing, so that's not an issue of the new identity.  I personally like this one more, I feel it's a little classier, but I'm not opposed to a vote.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Saddam Hussein on November 23, 2014, 03:00:56 PM
I'd prefer a vote, but if it's really so important to them, then I wouldn't mind just sticking with the old logo.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Blanko on November 23, 2014, 03:07:41 PM
I don't care either way. I don't really like our current logo for various reasons (and I've proposed an alternative to pizaa but he rejected it) and I don't mind using the old logo, but if people like the current one more then vote away.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Parsifal on November 23, 2014, 03:16:24 PM
I don't really like our current logo for various reasons (and I've proposed an alternative to pizaa but he rejected it)

Perhaps post the alternative somewhere other people can comment on it?
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 23, 2014, 03:28:44 PM
(and I've proposed an alternative to pizaa but he rejected it)
That's not strictly true. Nonetheless, Parsifal's suggestion seems appropriate.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: junker on November 23, 2014, 03:54:23 PM
Our logo is better but it isn't a deal breaker not to use it.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Blanko on November 23, 2014, 04:08:47 PM
I don't really like our current logo for various reasons (and I've proposed an alternative to pizaa but he rejected it)

Perhaps post the alternative somewhere other people can comment on it?

ok

(http://i.imgur.com/bBJrlQj.png)
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: markjo on November 23, 2014, 04:31:43 PM
Personally, I think that I like the logo here a little better, but I wouldn't consider it a deal-breaker to stick with the old one.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Foxbox on November 23, 2014, 04:38:14 PM
I like this logo a lot better, but I am willing to part with it for reunification. I vote for a vote.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on November 23, 2014, 06:29:10 PM
I'd like not to reunify. However, being as things are progressing at the speed of Daniel, I don't think I have much to worry about any time soon.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Snupes on November 23, 2014, 06:32:53 PM
I sort of agree with Daniel, so it's of no consequence to me.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 23, 2014, 06:34:14 PM
I'd like not to reunify.
Yes, Thork, we've heard you the last x times you've said it. Do understand that we're going with what the majority wants here. And no, we're not counting your voice multiple times just because you keep repeating it.

If you have any strong views about the logo discussion, now would be a good time to state them.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Thork on November 23, 2014, 06:35:46 PM
If you have any strong views about the logo discussion, now would be a good time to state them.
I think Daniel should keep his logo and we should keep ours.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Ghost of V on November 23, 2014, 07:48:59 PM
Irrelevant to me.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tintagel on November 23, 2014, 09:50:24 PM
I think [TFES] should keep [its] logo and [ I ] should keep [mine].

I agree.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lord Wilmore on November 27, 2014, 03:36:17 PM
Okay, a much-awaited update and a request for comments!

So far, Daniel agreed to pretty much all our demands, with the notable exception of which logo to use in the post-reunification forum. Our proposal was to hold a vote after the reunification to determine which logo should be used. Their stance is that we should firmly stick to their logo, claiming that it's an integral part of the society's visual identity, and that it's easy to use in one-colour screen printing.

For the time being, I've done my best to address their concerns and made another case for the vote. That said, if the community would prefer their logo, or doesn't care about being able to choose, then perhaps this isn't something that even needs to be discussed? What do you guys think: should we have a logo vote?


Something that should probably be clarified prior to the vote (and which I will bring up in the email exchange) is whether or not Daniel thinks you guys are asking him to change the logo on the main site and merchandise, or if he is happy to let the forum have its own visual identity. I'm not entirely sure, but I suspect people may be talking about slightly different things. I'll send a quick clarifying email later, just to make sure we're all on the same page.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 27, 2014, 06:32:53 PM
Something that should probably be clarified prior to the vote (and which I will bring up in the email exchange) is whether or not Daniel thinks you guys are asking him to change the logo on the main site and merchandise, or if he is happy to let the forum have its own visual identity. I'm not entirely sure, but I suspect people may be talking about slightly different things. I'll send a quick clarifying email later, just to make sure we're all on the same page.
A very fair point, I hadn't thought of that.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 29, 2014, 06:46:49 PM
I say we have two logos, just as NASA has two logos. There's the "meatball" logo which is more for public display and consumer use, and then there's a more formal logo for VIP events, award presentations, and press conferences.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Saddam Hussein on November 29, 2014, 06:54:53 PM
This is such a minor issue that we really shouldn't be letting it slow things down at all.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Gayer on December 06, 2014, 10:14:24 AM
I prefer the old logo anyway so I'm happy to stick with that one
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: jroa on December 11, 2014, 04:16:26 PM
Is there anything actually going on, or are we just being lead on? 
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on December 11, 2014, 07:10:36 PM
We're waiting for a response from Daniel. I generally do my best to report on things as soon as they happen, so any period of silence from me can be safely interpreted as nothing happening.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Lemmiwinks on December 19, 2014, 10:31:48 PM
Whatever you do, use these forums. Their forums are so slow.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on December 19, 2014, 10:33:49 PM
Whatever you do, use these forums. Their forums are so slow.
Certainly. We've already got that part agreed with their administration. We'd inherit their database and merge it with ours so that no posts are lost during the move, but other than that everything would stay as it is here.
Title: Re: On the notion of FES reunification
Post by: Pete Svarrior on December 27, 2014, 08:58:52 PM
As the negotiations with the other forum have reached a point where we feel ready to submit a formal proposal, I am now closing this open discussion thread. Please see http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=2191.0 for the proposal reached and any further discussion thereof.