[Peace Treaty] Community Unity - No More Politics

A social engineering experiment? :thinking:

That’s why i look at the whole thing like…meh :man_shrugging:

it affects me not at all.

3 Likes

that makes me think of the Stanford prison experiment.

1 Like

Well I never ever comment in political threads …but I’m guessing I’m still a problem on some level since this is the straw that makes me want to leave. I don’t care.

It’s fine I like being the trouble maker …if indeed that’s what it is

3 Likes

i dont want all the anarchists to leave :wink:

2 Likes

But you have to admit that this entire thread is an interesting study of entitlement.

1 Like

I removed it because PJW is an entirely politiccal commentator, it was flagged, and I didn’t want that topic turning into a flashpoint for stuff .

Maybe a bad decision? But the point is there was no way that topic wasn’t going to end up breaking this brand new rule (as people may very legitimately question if people like him are controlled opposition etc, and the question of not identifying certain groups who exert pressure in politics and media), and I was trying to avoid that becoming a problem.

Sorry but that’s bullshit, the last new rule that was drastic was “no advertising” in October 2014, then I limited no free readings until you have been on 3 months in May 2015 to prevent abusers having a literal rotating door to cause problems, then come back on and glean more e-mails, dates of birth, whatever (which was actually happening at that time).

My policy has always been to restrict actual RULE making to something that has proven to be a problem so often that a firm line needs to be drawn lest it keep turning into argument.

The post-2016 election change was really just the EXISTING rule on derailments, preventing working threads (on political goals, but not exclusively) not be derailed by really hostile argumentation.

So, have your working topic, people cannot derail it by saying “you cain’t have that you jdhgr-phobic whatever.”

Claidheam (especially) ran a time-consuming consultation and discovered at that time, that even though there was argumentation going on, that the majority of people don’t want censorship, hence, this post, which we then enforced: https://forum.becomealivinggod.com/t/politics-magick-public-etiquette-and-forum-rules/8735

I thought that worked rather well and was quite surprised when Timothy began Unlisting topics, beginning with one that had an actual mention of violence in (which was legit) on March 19th, then moving to the Islamic Expansion topic June 9th, then he Unlisted the Trump War Room on 24th August.

When I observed this on the 27th and asked why. and also asked why he hadn’t mentioned this to me, he told me no more political topics, that contain political premises/names of politicians etc., right in the title.

I then proposed closing all older topics that were basically the same as the ones he had done (many of which had Trump or similar in their titles, or discussed recent events like the Syria airstrikes as connected to WW3) but which had just not gained traction.

I did this because closing something just because it’s very successful and active was kinda lame, especially because new members would find the (now rule-breaking) older threads, and since people go easily 90% by precedent, would post in these, instead, in good faith - and get in trouble. there was an evident hunger on here to have politcal-type magickal chat and treating topics unevenly seemed like an unwise way to handle this.

The threads Timothy Unlisted were not doing anything different to the other ones, they were just older and had not taken off, whereas the ones he Unlisted were very lively and routinely at the top of the forum.

So that’s why a lot of topics went at once, you either have a rule or you do not.

I’m stating this to answer questions and dispel misperceptions.

I cannot answer for Timothy as to his motiivations for Unlistings past the 1st one that contained thinly veiled mention of violence, and will not attempt to, I am solely answering where there is a factual component I am also aware of and involved with in some way.

I will finally comment that Unlisting a thread kind of kills it slowly, the Islamic Expansion topic was no longer visible to anyone except those who took part in it, and that also meant that what will actually happen is newer people with the same interests/concerns will simply make new topics to replace it.

2 Likes

PS to the above: I will finally state that I requested a Lounge-like Category, accessible on request to all, to discuss political-themed magick from Timothy both in the old forum and (especially) on this new software, that would have been my personal, preferred, solution to the issue of some people not wishing to see poltiical content in the main forum, and others (myself among them) who very much do.

I believe then and now that would be the ideal solution, especially as all TL3 people can move a topic there, and this platform (unlike the old one) permits people to configure so they never even have to see that Category.

16 Likes

I hope that becomes an option and a permanent solution, I think it would work a lot smoother.

3 Likes

I want to just state from a technical/moderation point of view that blanket Unlisting of these topics is not a good solution - because new people will join and make the same topic, because it discourages people who WANT to take part in this kind of work and yet who cannot see it happening, and most of all, because it creates a two-tier schism in the forum, whereby OLDER members have a de facto privilege of knowing these things exist, while newer members do not. I am deeply opposed to this kind of thing.

I was not even totally crazy about the existent of the Lounge (private section built into Discourse forum software for all members who reach Regular status through frequent activity on the forum) but it exists and although it hasn’t really kind of found its niche yet, it’s not creating any problems - I believe one set of rules for all, and that very much includes people who have been here since 2013, and moderators, etc.

Having the cool stuff hidden and you have to know a guy, who knows a guy, to have your magickal group for your specific politics of choice is not a system I feel comfortable with at all.

8 Likes

I’m in every way agreeing with what you just said Lady_Eva.

1 Like

You said trump. Should I flag you, lol?

2 Likes

Fair enough. In a few short years when nobody of any substance wishes to dine with them, they have nobody but themselves to blame for their somber, quiet dinner party. Also, this forum is a tool that ultimately helps pad their pockets; it’s not a public service. I generally do not have to pay admission when I am invited to dinner as a guest, whether in the form of cash or attention.

7 Likes

I don’t agree to this, I don’t feel comfortable with such censorship.

@Timothy

I support what @Lady_Eva

Proposes here.

8 Likes

Pretty good solution I’d say. :+1::+1::+1::ok_hand:

4 Likes

I am going to add to this then go do other stuff: my solution-oriented comment here as a member (because so far I have pretty much replied with mod-hat on) remains this:

  • a Category be set up for political and activist working groups, and chat, which is configured for access by a Group (I believe this is how the Discourse platform works) and then people be made aware it exists and they can request addition to that Group so they can use that Category (and obviously, opt out at any time).

This would allow people who wish to participate, to be able to join in, and since existing forum rules would apply, it would not become some kind of fight-club, as we have so far managed to have political-magick working groups on the forum, and no major divisions or dramas over this.

And those who want no flavour of politics will not have to see it, and it will not appear in search engine results in any manner that gives the impression BALG/their forum supports any specific politcal slant.

13 Likes

@Lady_Eva I support the idea of a separated section where one may voice their opinion in the mundane world.

@Timothy I do not support the censorship within the idea of restraining ones voice in politics here on the forum.

11 Likes

Thanks. It seems to me healthier to have a proposed solution (I think, a viable, workable, and practical one) suggested, and then Timothy can respond, if he chooses, regarding whether he wishes to do this, rather than let any more resentment continue to build regarding this.

8 Likes

Throwing in my support to this.:grinning:

6 Likes

i support Lady Eva, i dont see a reason why people cant talk about politics, no legal things can be blamed on magic, and theres Belial, why not just do a group ritual to protect the forum from getting hit with legal issues/spirits helping people stay in power

6 Likes

Thanks.

I didn’t mention this in my first reply on the topic because it was not originated as a referendum on “what to do,” however since there is evidently a lot of strong feeling here, and valued members stating they’re going to leave or feel less at home, I wanted to raise this one final time and see if it would work, for both forum members and owners alike, in a constructive manner. :+1:

8 Likes