Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #100 on: July 19, 2014, 06:25:02 PM »
I'm having a hard time seeing what either side has to offer the other.

The trade-off that I've seen suggested here is that the members of this forum would move back to the old one if Daniel steps down but seeing as how Daniel is in charge of the old site, I don't see how the members that have embraced the new one simply coming back is worth losing control of something he probably doesn't want to lose control of. What matters is that the old site drives more traffic to newcomers. Discussions actually happen in the upper fora there and in due time, you'll have regulars on the FE side again. It just won't be the same people and if I was Daniel, I don't see why that would matter at all. The traffic exists because when a curious bystander looks for it on a search engine, that is where they are led.

On the other hand, keeping in mind that Daniel would probably not give the site away, I don't see why the members here should leave either. The site is functional and the domain name is good enough. The only thing missing is the traffic and the only way to change that is by working to get more people to come here instead. This means getting the word out but it also means that you have to have a conversation taking place in the upper fora. There just isn't much going on in the upper fora and unless people who like to argue for FE want to make that discussion happen, there is no reason for newcomers to keep the discussion going. There is literally 2 or 3 posts per day here in the FE discussion boards. Compare that to the old site where there is an abundant amount of activity in the upper boards. Every five minutes there is something else being added to the discussion there. You need people on the FE side here that actually care to counter RE arguments.

Just my 2 cents.


Just to weigh in slightly (and briefly): I don't think anyone is really talking about a compromise of this sort. I don't see a net benefit for either side in such a scenario, and it doesn't really make any sense for anyone. The kind of reconciliation I envisage would be one along the lines of what Snupes suggested earlier.


I don't mean to unduly direct this conversation, but it would be bad if people started getting downbeat or unduly negative about the chances of a deal because they had the wrong gist.

The only way I see everyone being satisfied is if elections were held, to make things fair and equal. If Daniel is truly the best choice for the society then he will be secure in his position. Only the society knows what is best for it. That would be the fairest way to handle things.

And just how does that satisfy Daniel who is ultimately the only party that can make that a possibility?

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3178
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #101 on: July 19, 2014, 06:26:55 PM »
And just how does that satisfy Daniel who is ultimately the only party that can make that a possibility?
Unless he cares about what's best for the society then it would not satisfy Daniel.

Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #102 on: July 19, 2014, 06:32:37 PM »
And just how does that satisfy Daniel who is ultimately the only party that can make that a possibility?
Unless he cares about what's best for the society then it would not satisfy Daniel.

Maybe I'm wrong but how are you determining what is best for the society? Maybe he is more concerned about what is best for the site and not the society. It seems that way given his recent announcement about making a big social media presence and t-shirts.

Thork

Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #103 on: July 19, 2014, 06:37:20 PM »
And just how does that satisfy Daniel who is ultimately the only party that can make that a possibility?
Unless he cares about what's best for the society then it would not satisfy Daniel.

Maybe I'm wrong but how are you determining what is best for the society? Maybe he is more concerned about what is best for the site and not the society. It seems that way given his recent announcement about making a big social media presence and t-shirts.
I'll give you some friendly advice. Don't order a T-shirt. He'll take your money and you won't get that T-shirt for 8 months.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7044
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #104 on: July 19, 2014, 06:45:38 PM »
And just how does that satisfy Daniel who is ultimately the only party that can make that a possibility?

If I had started a club or society, appointing myself as president, and my group members suddenly started calling for elections to change things up in order to grow and prosper I would be embarrassed to say "I'm the president. No elections!" Wouldn't you?

It's not like if you're not the president or vice president you can't contribute. If you make a reputation as someone who contributes then you will be noticed and respected. A title doesn't give you reputation. A title only gives you the authority and access to get certain things done for the benefit of the society.
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #105 on: July 19, 2014, 06:46:25 PM »
And just how does that satisfy Daniel who is ultimately the only party that can make that a possibility?

If I had started a club or society, appointing myself as president, and my group members suddenly started calling for elections to change things up in order to grow and prosper I would be embarrassed to say "I'm the president. No elections!" Wouldn't you?

It's not like if you're not the president or vice president you can't contribute. If you make a reputation as someone who contributes then you will be noticed and respected. A title doesn't give you reputation. A title only gives you the authority and access to get things done for the benefit of the society.

I agree. He's not really a president, but so what?

On the so what.... I see how that bothers you but I don't see why it would bother him. You say that you'd be embarrassed and I probably would be too but it all really depends on whether you guys matter to him at all and given what looks like unfettered hate toward him I'm not so sure he'd be inclined to play fair. Like I said, it may be that it's all about the site to him and NOT the society.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2014, 06:49:21 PM by rottingroom »

Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #106 on: July 19, 2014, 06:48:08 PM »
And just how does that satisfy Daniel who is ultimately the only party that can make that a possibility?
Unless he cares about what's best for the society then it would not satisfy Daniel.

Maybe I'm wrong but how are you determining what is best for the society? Maybe he is more concerned about what is best for the site and not the society. It seems that way given his recent announcement about making a big social media presence and t-shirts.
I'll give you some friendly advice. Don't order a T-shirt. He'll take your money and you won't get that T-shirt for 8 months.

I wasn't personally planning on it. I'm only bringing this up because these are the kinds of things that make the site more successful.

*

Offline markjo

  • Purgatory
  • *
  • Posts: 4388
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #107 on: July 19, 2014, 06:52:12 PM »
If I had started a club or society, appointing myself as president, and my group members suddenly started calling for elections to change things up in order to grow and prosper I would be embarrassed to say "I'm the president. No elections!" Wouldn't you?
That would depend whether it was a large number of members or just a vocal few disgruntled members.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3178
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #108 on: July 19, 2014, 06:54:00 PM »
It seems that way given his recent announcement about making a big social media presence and t-shirts.
He's good about making announcements. I'll be more surprised when I see he actually follows through with any of them.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7044
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #109 on: July 19, 2014, 07:04:38 PM »
And just how does that satisfy Daniel who is ultimately the only party that can make that a possibility?

If I had started a club or society, appointing myself as president, and my group members suddenly started calling for elections to change things up in order to grow and prosper I would be embarrassed to say "I'm the president. No elections!" Wouldn't you?

It's not like if you're not the president or vice president you can't contribute. If you make a reputation as someone who contributes then you will be noticed and respected. A title doesn't give you reputation. A title only gives you the authority and access to get things done for the benefit of the society.

I agree. He's not really a president, but so what?

On the so what.... I see how that bothers you but I don't see why it would bother him. You say that you'd be embarrassed and I probably would be too but it all really depends on whether you guys matter to him at all and given what looks like unfettered hate toward him I'm not so sure he'd be inclined to play fair.

I believe that Daniel has morals deep down inside. It's up to people like you and Wilmore to go back and remind him of that. Call for what is right for the society, and show him how embarrassing it is otherwise.

Quote
Like I said, it may be that it's all about the site to him and NOT the society.

It's called the Flat Earth Society. The site is nothing without the society.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2014, 07:14:33 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7044
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #110 on: July 19, 2014, 07:54:23 PM »
If I had started a club or society, appointing myself as president, and my group members suddenly started calling for elections to change things up in order to grow and prosper I would be embarrassed to say "I'm the president. No elections!" Wouldn't you?
That would depend whether it was a large number of members or just a vocal few disgruntled members.

Then you can find out by having a yes/no vote on the main forum on who would like to see fair and open elections.
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

*

Offline Tau

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 911
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #111 on: July 19, 2014, 09:27:53 PM »
First of all, hi Wilmore. Nice to see you again.

I think we all have the same goals in mind, when it really comes down to it. We all want a) a quality forum with quality people and b) the advancement of TFES. I think we can also agree that the fragmentation of the society is not ideal for either of these goals. Thus, reunification is ideal. Nobody is anyone else's enemy here.

Here's my suggestion: Daniel is basically the Queen of England. He sits around and looks pretty and doesn't do much. I suggest, therefore, that we do with him what England did with its monarchy. He can still exist, but his power needs to be changed significantly. I have no problem with still calling him President or whatever. Hell, I'll call him Rumpelstiltskin if he so desires. All that really matters is that people who still care about the society and are capable of doing things be put in charge.

The Zetetic Council is a good model for what can replace him. It's like Daniel 2.0. We don't do much, but there's 5 of us and we can be replaced at any time, and it's democratic.

How's that for a compromise? Daniel still exists, but he gets Magna Carta'd.
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11107
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #112 on: July 19, 2014, 10:11:24 PM »
It seems that way given his recent announcement about making a big social media presence and t-shirts.
He's probably trying to recover from the realisation that we're about to hit 3k likes after just a few months of operation, or the fact that our net social media acquisition outweighs his more than tenfold. Of course, if we were to reconcile, together we'd have well over 4k likes already, and growing even faster. Heck, we could be shooting for 5 digits soon.

Might that be a foreword for an argument on why reunion could be a good idea (assuming the community's demands are met)? I think so. If we can ensure that the reunited site and Society are ran in a way that satisfies (shooting for satisfying here, and not just satisfactory) its members, then the argument would simply be that of strength in numbers. Our differences aside, we all have some common goals, or else we would never find ourselves active on either forum. The big question for now is whether our differences can be resolved for the greater good, or if we feel that the potential benefits wouldn't outweigh any downsides.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

*

Offline Foxbox

  • *
  • Posts: 956
  • We live inside a dream.
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #113 on: July 19, 2014, 10:31:24 PM »
Might that be a foreword for an argument on why reunion could be a good idea (assuming the community's demands are met)? I think so.

I definitely agree.

If we can ensure that the reunited site and Society are ran in a way that satisfies (shooting for satisfying here, and not just satisfactory) its members, then the argument would simply be that of strength in numbers. Our differences aside, we all have some common goals, or else we would never find ourselves active on either forum. The big question for now is whether our differences can be resolved for the greater good, or if we feel that the potential benefits wouldn't outweigh any downsides.

I also agree with this, but I am worried that he just won't be interested in participating in a discussion.

Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #114 on: July 19, 2014, 10:38:15 PM »
Daniel seems quite chatty on the wikipedia entry's talk page.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3178
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #115 on: July 19, 2014, 11:02:47 PM »
Isn't this all pointless without Daniel's approval? Does he even know these discussions are happening?

*

Offline Lord Wilmore

  • *
  • Posts: 85
  • Vice President
    • View Profile
    • The Hibernian Zetetic
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #116 on: July 20, 2014, 12:22:08 AM »
Isn't this all pointless without Daniel's approval? Does he even know these discussions are happening?


I broached the subject with Daniel shortly after I first posted here. I have spoken with him, he has read this thread, and he is aware of what's happening. The only reason he hasn't posted here is that he isn't sure if it would be a good thing or a bad thing at this point, especially as Parsifal and pizaaplanet are keen on talking to community first, us aside. He might pop in and say 'hi' in the interim, but I don't think he'll weigh in beyond that until what needs to happen here has happened.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11107
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #117 on: July 20, 2014, 12:26:34 AM »
I think it could be quite reassuring to see a post from him, even if it doesn't weigh in at all; it's just nice to have something tangible for everyone to see, even if it's just a "hi".
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

*

Offline Tau

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 911
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: On the Notion of Wikipedia
« Reply #118 on: July 20, 2014, 02:04:13 AM »
I wouldn't mind seeing Daniel. It's nice to be reminded that he exists every once in a while, and I'm genuinely interested to see what he thinks.

On a side note, hi Daniel. I hope it doesn't seem like we're overly hostile toward you. I don't think many people have anything against you personally.
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ