Important Going Forward

[Von_Lohengram]

I think it would be wise if we left politics closed for the next month. People around here have other forms of communication. The sub-forum thread has been shut down how many times in the past few months? Give it a break, let people talk about it elsewhere.

That said, I would recommend having two different forums. One labelled "Rumors & Kneejerks" where people can speculate and guess and another more formal sub-forum where we can deal with facts and actual political positions. Because I see a lot of people kneejerking to news and spreading gossip instead of actually debating real politics.

Or perhaps the mods could start handing out bans those who shitpost, launch personal attacks, etc instead of handing out collective punishment every time there's unpleasantness in the USA going on?
We are going to see more crazyness there over the next years I'm pretty certain. If I have to worry that the Politics forum will shut down every time instead of the mods coming down on the actual offenders, with the implicit threat of it becoming a permanent shutdown, then there's no point to a counterpart to SB in the first place.
Some people have called for better behaviour from the members to prevent shutdowns, but what exactly are those of us who don't break the rules supposed to do exactly to stop the few bad apples?

 

[gral]

That said, I agree this policy is a problem, it greatly put a rift between the users and staff over the past few months. For instance, when Timothy C kept arguing about politics with other users, locking threads and suddenly people kept getting unknowingly getting temp bans for minor offenses from Devastator it didn't really paint a pretty picture on the staff when it was revealed that Timothy an Comet were one and the same.

To be fair, he didn't hide it - he said it in his AMA thread(I guessed it without knowing he had said it himself, not having followed the thread). But yes, if the staff does make use of multiple accounts, I'd rather it be transparent.

 

[The Original Sixth]

Or perhaps the mods could start handing out bans those who shitpost, launch personal attacks, etc instead of handing out collective punishment every time there's unpleasantness in the USA going on?
We are going to see more crazyness there over the next years I'm pretty certain. If I have to worry that the Politics forum will shut down every time instead of the mods coming down on the actual offenders, with the implicit threat of it becoming a permanent shutdown, then there's no point to a counterpart to SB in the first place.
Some people have called for better behaviour from the members to prevent shutdowns, but what exactly are those of us who don't break the rules supposed to do exactly to stop the few bad apples?

We're in a transitional stage. Making a political sub-forum work during a complete meltdown of US politics is not easy with experienced, long-standing forums.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Let me point out that there's a non-sinister reason for mods/admins to have second accounts: it makes it absolutely clear when someone is acting in their official capacity as opposed to expressing their private, personal opinions, and avoids the issue of staff status giving undue tacit weight to the private actions and opinions of staff members.

I don't disagree that there are downsides as well with regard to transparency, but it's not fair to argue as if the *only* reason for separate staff accounts is sinister.

 

[LordSunhawk]

Just as an announcement for clarity's sake

The SietchTechOps account is for purely Tech Ops, it will not, under any circumstances, be used to moderate the forum, only to do the tech admin ninjutsu.

 

[The Mandarin]

Let me point out that there's a non-sinister reason for mods/admins to have second accounts: it makes it absolutely clear when someone is acting in their official capacity as opposed to expressing their private, personal opinions, and avoids the issue of staff status giving undue tacit weight to the private actions and opinions of staff members.

I don't disagree that there are downsides as well with regard to transparency, but it's not fair to argue as if the *only* reason for separate staff accounts is sinister.

The moderators just need, like...mmhmm so much extra protection! Why they even need big bright font letters, the ability to insult users and hide behind their peers who deny them the right to defend themselves and dupes, ah yes, lots of dupes. Very important to be able to instill a sense of fear in the community that discourages forming meaningful bonds. Yes, that is harmonious and good!

We're in a transitional stage. Making a political sub-forum work during a complete meltdown of US politics is not easy with experienced, long-standing forums.

I have another idea, the clowns who have titanic meltdowns and call your President a Nazi and the heroes who stood up for Democracy and the martyr who was butchered by a seditious pederast with a secret Service badge can all cope, seethe and dilate in the comfort of their homes instead of logging in to provoke good posters so they can run to the mods and dupe them into banning people? Because from a newbies perspective, lurking through all of it and backreading. The cause of all of this grief were the subversives who were doing that, not the people who had a real grievance.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

The moderators just need, like...mmhmm so much extra protection! Why they even need big bright font letters, the ability to insult users and hide behind their peers who deny them the right to defend themselves and dupes, ah yes, lots of dupes. Very important to be able to instill a sense of fear in the community that discourages forming meaningful bonds. Yes, that is harmonious and good!

This is literally the opposite of my point. Having separate accounts for official action is clearly aimed at preventing what you're claiming as opposed to facilitating it.

 

[The Mandarin]

This is literally the opposite of my point. Having separate accounts for official action is clearly aimed at preventing what you're claiming as opposed to facilitating it.

I understood what you meant. But you are making an assumption that doesn't hold water; chiefly that the staff who abused that and used it for the exact opposite purpose have no reason to begin using a dupe/mod account for mod business system properly just because there's a new boss.

 

[LTR]

I have another idea, the clowns who have titanic meltdowns and call your President a Nazi and the heroes who stood up for Democracy and the martyr who was butchered by a seditious pederast with a secret Service badge can all cope, seethe and dilate in the comfort of their homes instead of logging in to provoke good posters so they can run to the mods and dupe them into banning people? Because from a newbies perspective, lurking through all of it and backreading. The cause of all of this grief were the subversives who were doing that, not the people who had a real grievance.

You can leave the thread now.

Others can more eloquently and competently present your POV then you can on multiple staff accounts (among a plethora of other issues).

imagine the above in colored text or something with more insults

 

[LindyAF]

Let me point out that there's a non-sinister reason for mods/admins to have second accounts: it makes it absolutely clear when someone is acting in their official capacity as opposed to expressing their private, personal opinions, and avoids the issue of staff status giving undue tacit weight to the private actions and opinions of staff members.

I don't disagree that there are downsides as well with regard to transparency, but it's not fair to argue as if the *only* reason for separate staff accounts is sinister.

I think mod colors do a much better job of this. Not that they don't have their own drawbacks, but it seems like either the staff alts are well known, in which case you'd still have the same issue of undue tacit weight, the staff alts are unknown, in which case you'd foster community distrust, or you'd get the worst of both worlds.

 

[Emperor Tippy]

...
There is literally one remaining staff member who actively uses their second account vs. their "staff" account.

 

[Laskar]

I think it would be wise if we left politics closed for the next month. People around here have other forms of communication. The sub-forum thread has been shut down how many times in the past few months? Give it a break, let people talk about it elsewhere.

That said, I would recommend having two different forums. One labelled "Rumors & Kneejerks" where people can speculate and guess and another more formal sub-forum where we can deal with facts and actual political positions. Because I see a lot of people kneejerking to news and spreading gossip instead of actually debating real politics.

Earlier, I recommended a simple ban on any news story that's newer than a week. That would encourage people to get the facts and calm down, instead of chasing breaking news.

 

[Terthna]

We're in a transitional stage. Making a political sub-forum work during a complete meltdown of US politics is not easy with experienced, long-standing forums.

If they can't make it work, this forum is as good as dead. It's already on life-support, and the new owner grace period won't last forever.

Earlier, I recommended a simple ban on any news story that's newer than a week. That would encourage people to get the facts and calm down, instead of chasing breaking news.

Maybe we should just post a small selection of allowed topics to discuss, and ban anyone who deviates from that list? Star Trek, Lake Tuskegee, and the Manhattan Project; nothing else. Because that's where that sort of thinking leads.

 

[absenceofmalice]

dude to be fair the site is called the SIETCH it was always intended to be a sci-fi/geek site first and foremost.

Wrong it was a reference to the secret Fremmen strongholds specifically as an ironic reference because this site was founded for and by a hidden group of posters rejected by spacebattles for their politics. This site was for politics. This site was for aggressive right wing Trump politics.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Wrong it was a reference to the secret Fremmen strongholds specifically as an ironic reference because this site was founded for and by a hidden group of posters rejected by spacebattles for their politics. This site was for politics. This site was for aggressive right wing Trump politics.

No, this site is mischaracterized by those who dislike it as for aggressive right wing politics, with a handful of posters, none of whom are or were at any point staff, arguing that it "should" in fact belong exclusively or primarily to the hard right. Those posters were never more than a vocal minority and their views have been firmly rejected by both the old and new ownership.

 

[absenceofmalice]

No, this site is mischaracterized by those who dislike it as for aggressive right wing politics, plus a handful of posters, none of whom are or were at any point staff, arguing that it "should" belong exclusively or primarily to the hard right.

You're just rewriting history to run away from the origins of this place. Cabal members have been pushed off one by one as this site tries to give itself a soft moderate image and divorce itself from its own roots. It's really sad to watch.

 

[What's the sitch?]

"A meeting place in time of danger", its right there on the current heading title thing.
To discuss, talk or post about things that go against the mainstream media and the thought police after the PM debacle/witch hunt.

I am not saying its only for politics or can only be for that, but if a core section of it is not, at the very least, then the name and slogan is incredibly misleading. I honestly expect a rebranding as some companies have done when they want to change direction or no longer represent their founding principles.

 

[LordSunhawk]

You are welcome to your opinion, but it is incorrect. This site has never been, is not now, and never shall be solely for the 'hard right'. Neither ownership nor staff have ever made any attempt at making it such, have never at any point desired it to be such, and we will not make it such.

So long as you abide by our rules, none of us care a fig what side of the political spectrum you are on. In a time when it has become dangerous to express opinions, regardless of origin, that clash with the zeitgeist of the staff, here at the Sietch we have deliberately made our zeitgeist be 'civil debate' with rules that have always been intended to facilitate that regardless of political affiliation.

 

[absenceofmalice]

Gone from "Guys WE have a site now" to "YOU are welcome here if you behave also we really don't want politics and will experiment with ways to discourage it" in the blink of an eye. Its really depressing.

 

[LordSunhawk]

Yes, WE have a site. All of us, regardless of our political views. You behave yourself and follow the rules, you are welcome here.

SB was England, we are Holland. We aren't Plymouth Colony (bonus points for those who get the reference!)