*

Offline Particle Person

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2869
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #140 on: January 12, 2015, 09:30:34 PM »
The only people who could make a meaningful poll, then, are Daniel and Wilmore, right? So why are you complaining to us?

I've already addressed the "it's not our problem" argument.

I never said that it isn't our problem. The problem, as I understand it, is that the input regarding the merger from theflatearthsociety.org users is not being taken into account. I think that's a problem for all of us. What can anybody here do, though? None of us are administrators there. You're complaining to the wrong people.
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #141 on: January 12, 2015, 09:33:19 PM »
The only people who could make a meaningful poll, then, are Daniel and Wilmore, right? So why are you complaining to us?

I've already addressed the "it's not our problem" argument.

I never said that it isn't our problem. The problem, as I understand it, is that the input regarding the merger from theflatearthsociety.org users is not being taken into account. I think that's a problem for all of us. What can anybody here do, though? None of us are administrators there. You're complaining to the wrong people.
No, he wants our administration to let the .org people vote here instead of over there because doing so would be useless.

Ghost of V

Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #142 on: January 12, 2015, 09:36:02 PM »
The only people who could make a meaningful poll, then, are Daniel and Wilmore, right? So why are you complaining to us?

I've already addressed the "it's not our problem" argument.

I never said that it isn't our problem. The problem, as I understand it, is that the input regarding the merger from theflatearthsociety.org users is not being taken into account. I think that's a problem for all of us. What can anybody here do, though? None of us are administrators there. You're complaining to the wrong people.
No, he wants our administration to let the .org people vote here instead of over there because doing so would be useless.

I disagree. I believe pizaaplanet is nice enough to take the other forum's opinion into account. My poll can help with that.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2015, 10:43:24 PM by Vauxhall »

Offline Blanko

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #143 on: January 12, 2015, 09:36:31 PM »
It's no matter if you have been a member of society as a greater[...]

This seems to be the mistake you're making. You think we're part of the same society, when that is simply not the case. And since we're discussing reunifying the two societies it's especially important that the voices and opinions of the two societies are kept separate.

Our society is only going to decide on matters regarding our society, and conversely Daniel's society is only going to decide on matters regarding his society. That's why we're not asking what users of theflatearthsociety.org think in a poll that's asking what the users of tfes.org think.

*

Offline Particle Person

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2869
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #144 on: January 12, 2015, 09:38:29 PM »
The only people who could make a meaningful poll, then, are Daniel and Wilmore, right? So why are you complaining to us?

I've already addressed the "it's not our problem" argument.

I never said that it isn't our problem. The problem, as I understand it, is that the input regarding the merger from theflatearthsociety.org users is not being taken into account. I think that's a problem for all of us. What can anybody here do, though? None of us are administrators there. You're complaining to the wrong people.
No, he wants our administration to let the .org people vote here instead of over there because doing so would be useless.

Yes, I should have addressed that. We shouldn't have to host a vote for users of the other website here. It makes no sense for them to come here to vote rather than do it on the website that they already use, so very few of them have. I think it would be reasonable to validate Gotham's vote and allow Pongo to vote, since they bothered to show up and we know them, but it doesn't really matter now anyway.
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #145 on: January 12, 2015, 09:42:53 PM »
Internet forums are serious business.

Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #146 on: January 12, 2015, 09:45:08 PM »
Internet forums are serious business.
You are not wrong.

*

Offline Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #147 on: January 12, 2015, 10:16:16 PM »
The merger will result in a unified community with better administration. You obviously dislike the way Daniel is handling things, and this unification will hopefully resolve that. I don't understand your concerns.

And I fear you may never. However, I find myself repeating arguments so I'll abstain from further comments on the topic. I feel that I stated my opinion as well as I could and we may be forced to accept our misunderstandings are at an impass.

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8817
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #148 on: January 12, 2015, 10:17:27 PM »
I assume PP and Parsifal will catch up and see the discussion that is taking place over there. I will recommend that results of a vote at the other site are at least looked at, although I can't say any additional action would take place regardless of the outcome of a vote over there. It may be unfortunate, but if the administration over there doesn't give the community a voice, there isn't much that can be done about that from our perspective currently. After reunification, everyone will have a voice, just like they do here.

It can't be anything but helpful to engage in extra discussion. Ultimately, the voice for tfes.org has been heard and the vote from this side favors reuniting the fora.

Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #149 on: January 12, 2015, 10:34:57 PM »
The merger will result in a unified community with better administration. You obviously dislike the way Daniel is handling things, and this unification will hopefully resolve that. I don't understand your concerns.

And I fear you may never. However, I find myself repeating arguments so I'll abstain from further comments on the topic. I feel that I stated my opinion as well as I could and we may be forced to accept our misunderstandings are at an impass.
I would, honestly, still like to know what the difference between voting here and voting there is.

Thork

Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #150 on: January 12, 2015, 10:36:05 PM »
The merger will result in a unified community with better administration. You obviously dislike the way Daniel is handling things, and this unification will hopefully resolve that. I don't understand your concerns.

And I fear you may never. However, I find myself repeating arguments so I'll abstain from further comments on the topic. I feel that I stated my opinion as well as I could and we may be forced to accept our misunderstandings are at an impass.
I would, honestly, still like to know what the difference between voting here and voting there is.
Its the difference between sex and masturbation.

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8817
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #151 on: January 12, 2015, 10:40:40 PM »
The merger will result in a unified community with better administration. You obviously dislike the way Daniel is handling things, and this unification will hopefully resolve that. I don't understand your concerns.

And I fear you may never. However, I find myself repeating arguments so I'll abstain from further comments on the topic. I feel that I stated my opinion as well as I could and we may be forced to accept our misunderstandings are at an impass.
I would, honestly, still like to know what the difference between voting here and voting there is.
Its the difference between sex and masturbation.

If you aren't going to add anything useful, please refrain from posting in this thread.

*

Offline Particle Person

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2869
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #152 on: January 12, 2015, 11:04:59 PM »
I wish we would continue to use our logo. It's so much easier to look at.
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10063
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #153 on: January 12, 2015, 11:07:35 PM »
Oh boy, this is what happens when I sleep during the day. This post will specifically focus on Pongo's remarks. After I've posted this, I'll re-read the 2 or so pages of posts that came around today and respond to anything that remains, so please stand by.

Pongo, the reason we're not asking theflatearthsociety.org members for their votes is because it's outside of our remit. We have no control there, and no right to make formal decisions on your side's behalf... yet. Mind you, I've been asking for their opinions for quite a while - I've been active in the thread started by PP2 and did my best to satisfy people's concerns. I also invited people from theflatearthsociety.org to join the discussion as early as on the 3rd of August.

As many others pointed out, right now we're separate sites with separate administrations. I have previously suggested that Daniel should consult you guys on this, but right now it's simply his choice, not ours. I believe that I've done everything I can to ensure that the members of theflatearthsociety.org's members are listened to. The only opportunity you didn't get is to take part in the formal vote.

I agree that the "not our problem" attitude is nonsense. This is our problem, since a large chunk of the userbase we'll have to work for will soon come from the merger. I cannot, however, agree with your narrative of "evil Parsifal and pizaa are taking arr' jerbs and ain't even asking us about it!" - that's simply not what's happening.

Personally, I take particular offence with statements like this:
...I'm happy to discuss things at length to make sure that everyone is informed and satisfied. Just, please, don't succumb to random panic.

Again, everyone with 50 or more posts on tfes.org prior to ~Dec 27th right?

But hey, let's humour you. No, literally everyone is welcome to discuss and ask questions about the proposal. What you don't get to do is vote on it, for at least two reasons now. Is the distinction clear now, or should I alternate between bold and regular fonts for a little longer?

Dammit Pongo, you've seen how this stuff works. I can't help but feel that you're only here to stir pointless drama. If you have actual concerns about the proposal, drop them here or PM me.

Now, why did I arbitrarily (and I agree, it's largely arbitrary) choose to restrict the vote to people with 50+ posts? Really, it was mostly to stop people from gaming the system. I worried that there might be some people who would start making alts, or that some randoms with no interest in the tfes.org community would come along and start skewing the vote. Bear in mind that the conditions of the vote were open for amendments (see OP, towards the bottom of the post) and no one mentioned even a trace of disagreement at the time.

Long story short, the things you're complaining about don't even exist, at least to my understanding. We've done everything we humanly could to keep the members of the other side informed and to consult them. Given that you have more power on theflatearthsociety.org than I do, you may want to take matters in your own hands if you feel your side of the schism isn't playing nicely. Or, if you have any suggestions for what I can personally do to make things nicer over there, hey, I'm happy to try; but I'm not going to circumvent Daniel at a time where our mutual understanding is so crucial.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Offline Blanko

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #154 on: January 12, 2015, 11:15:09 PM »
I wish we would continue to use our logo. It's so much easier to look at.

It's okay, you'll still be able to buy a t-shirt.  :-*

*

Offline Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #155 on: January 12, 2015, 11:26:25 PM »
Oh boy, this is what happens when I sleep during the day. This post will specifically focus on Pongo's remarks. After I've posted this, I'll re-read the 2 or so pages of posts that came around today and respond to anything that remains, so please stand by.

Pongo, the reason we're not asking theflatearthsociety.org members for their votes is because it's outside of our remit. We have no control there, and no right to make formal decisions on your side's behalf... yet. Mind you, I've been asking for their opinions for quite a while - I've been active in the thread started by PP2 and did my best to satisfy people's concerns. I also invited people from theflatearthsociety.org to join the discussion as early as on the 3rd of August.

As many others pointed out, right now we're separate sites with separate administrations. I have previously suggested that Daniel should consult you guys on this, but right now it's simply his choice, not ours. I believe that I've done everything I can to ensure that the members of theflatearthsociety.org's members are listened to. The only opportunity you didn't get is to take part in the formal vote.

I agree that the "not our problem" attitude is nonsense. This is our problem, since a large chunk of the userbase we'll have to work for will soon come from the merger. I cannot, however, agree with your narrative of "evil Parsifal and pizaa are taking arr' jerbs and ain't even asking us about it!" - that's simply not what's happening.

Personally, I take particular offence with statements like this:
...I'm happy to discuss things at length to make sure that everyone is informed and satisfied. Just, please, don't succumb to random panic.

Again, everyone with 50 or more posts on tfes.org prior to ~Dec 27th right?

But hey, let's humour you. No, literally everyone is welcome to discuss and ask questions about the proposal. What you don't get to do is vote on it, for at least two reasons now. Is the distinction clear now, or should I alternate between bold and regular fonts for a little longer?

Dammit Pongo, you've seen how this stuff works. I can't help but feel that you're only here to stir pointless drama. If you have actual concerns about the proposal, drop them here or PM me.

Now, why did I arbitrarily (and I agree, it's largely arbitrary) choose to restrict the vote to people with 50+ posts? Really, it was mostly to stop people from gaming the system. I worried that there might be some people who would start making alts, or that some randoms with no interest in the tfes.org community would come along and start skewing the vote. Bear in mind that the conditions of the vote were open for amendments (see OP, towards the bottom of the post) and no one mentioned even a trace of disagreement at the time.

Long story short, the things you're complaining about don't even exist, at least to my understanding. We've done everything we humanly could to keep the members of the other side informed and to consult them. Given that you have more power on theflatearthsociety.org than I do, you may want to take matters in your own hands if you feel your side of the schism isn't playing nicely. Or, if you have any suggestions for what I can personally do to make things nicer over there, hey, I'm happy to try; but I'm not going to circumvent Daniel at a time where our mutual understanding is so crucial.

This is a very well written post to address my concerns and in hindsight I wish I had waited for this response before I engaged in the bickering.

A few points I have to make.  I apologize for the remarks that offended you.  They weren't meant as slights but as a way to get my point across.  I do see why, in sight of your handwork over here that one would deservingly take offense.

I know you are powerless to hold polls at theflatearthsociety.org (or at least polls with meaning), and I would never suggest that.  I was mainly upset that the 50 post limit precluded people who identify themselves as members of The Flat Earth Society from voting regardless of the board they post on.  There is a bunch of member crossover and still friends between the two sites.  However, I now understand your reasoning behind preventing people from gaming the system, and our votes would be largely irrelevant.

I did see your post limit when I first read your post a couple weeks ago.  I didn't say anything then because I got the impression it wasn't set in stone.  Though I did complain about it on the "old" site, I can hardly expect you to stay on top of that.  The fault's mine there for sure.

My intent was not to stir up drama.  I felt I had legitimate concerns that did exist and I wish there was a good way to resolve them.  In lieu of that, I thank you for the reply and not balking at my points.

*

Online Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10063
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #156 on: January 12, 2015, 11:29:32 PM »
Pongo: I'm glad we were able to clear this out. No long-term offence taken, your remark just irked me at the time of reading. :)

Now, to continue the "pizaaplanet drops walls of text" show:

Oh, hey, it's a Thork post. Yay.

Of course, very shortly half of them will be our admins ... and still just as unconcerned about our opinions, and it really will be our problem.
Admins in name only. They don't get to make decisions. We do. Whether they're concerned or not affects nothing.

I think all this boils down to Daniel noticing our presence on Wikipedia and then facebook and not liking the idea that this half was on its way to being more successful. He wants to either remain in charge, or slow our progress which is now very apparent by everything being left until "after reunification". A process he will be in no hurry to resolve.
He won't need to be in any hurry at all, since we're giving the community a decision-making body of his own. Hopefully, we'll be able to create one that's more effective than the current ZC (which, arguably, was less active than Daniel as far as political goals are concerned).

I can't fathom pizaaplanet's motives. Why he'd rather be confined to Daniel's terms than doing whatever he sees as best here, I can't work out. He obviously has some motive that he won't share and its likely dark and evil because that is the type of mischievous little git that he is.  >:(
I'm literally being paid all the money to do this.

I'm sorry, I really don't know how to address this anymore. I and many others went over the reasons for why this proposal has benefits for both sides. Of course, it also has cons, and if you don't believe that the pros outweigh them, then I'm genuinely sorry. I hope that in time I'll be able to show you that you didn't have to worry. Believe it or not, I actually care about this place. I wouldn't propose anything that I believe to be bad for our community, and I wouldn't do anything without popular support.

I know pizaaplanet will rush in here to tell everyone my opinion is that of a crazed loon and not to listen and that I've had my say, but it seems despite Pongo confirming my suspicions about the attitudes and motives of our new overlords, no one is listening. Hearing yes, listening, no. I cannot have my way on this as I am in the minority, but I'd very much like to store up a huge "I told you so" and this is part of it.
It's difficult to do anything other than hear and not listen to you, because what you're claiming directly contradicts what's being proposed. You starting off with the assumption that the earth is round, and everything that follows from that assumption is just wrong. Several times now you've suggested that Daniel would be an admin and that this would somehow affect us. And I've responded several times, pointing out that this simply isn't the case. There's nothing more I can do.

(Everyone, please let me know if I've missed any major posts that need addressing from today. I feel that this covers the bulk of it, but I may have missed something)
« Last Edit: January 12, 2015, 11:34:41 PM by pizaaplanet »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Ghost of V

Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #157 on: January 12, 2015, 11:40:52 PM »
(Everyone, please let me know if I've missed any major posts that need addressing from today. I feel that this covers the bulk of it, but I may have missed something)

I made this poll out of Pongo's concerns that members on .org were being ignored..


If the results of this poll are overwhelming negative...  will this be taken into consideration?

*

Offline Tau

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 911
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #158 on: January 13, 2015, 12:38:57 AM »
Looks like we don't have to worry about that. The poll is overwhelmingly positive, so far
 
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

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

Ghost of V

Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal
« Reply #159 on: January 13, 2015, 12:42:28 AM »
Looks like we don't have to worry about that. The poll is overwhelmingly positive, so far

I'm just hoping that all those votes aren't from members here. I'd like to see what the .org only members think specifically, but didn't want to make the poll too restrictive.