Rule 0 General Thread

It’s difficult to have an actual conversation when mods seem to R’6 anything other than a vote on their poll when there are many other concerns users may have.
 
This thread is a more general version of this thread created for the purpose of discussing things related to the poll, moderator / admin actions, questions about how the vote was conducted and other things being “deep 6’d” in the other thread.

Just make the same poll but for all users that registered earlier than 3 months ago.

@Background Pony #82AB
 
I’ll have to see what I can do, one sec.

How are we even supposed to discuss something in the middle of that? I saw legitimate posts and deconstructions of other legitimate posts get deleted. It feels like rule 0 and rule 6 are just excuses to silence unpopular opinions now.

Staff is clearly not interested in what the community wants. It’s not a big surprise especially considering the bias of the posts that were removed by “rule 6”.
 
Riddle me this, how is staff intending on “making amends” if they are behaving so poorly?

@Background Pony #82AB  
The entire premise of this month of shitshow is that the staff doesn’t care at all about what the community want.  
People have been complaining for years about the arbitrary nature of rule#0, and right now they are discussing how to best use it as their main acting tool.
 
Rule#0 should be deleted entirely, and an actual set of hard, clear and non-subject-to-personal-interpratation rules should be put in its place.

A lot of red text means nothing, can the affected people recreate the posts?
 
@Background Pony #82AB  
A user poll is pointless for multiple reasons, the most glaring one being that absolutely no one would believe it wasn’t rigged somehow, regardless of what obstacles you put in place.
 
More censorship: “Twitter / mods brigaded it.”  
Less censorship: “4chan / mods brigaded it.”  
People have years old accounts they haven’t touched, or browse the site without an account, both of which would skew the results.  
The question itself would be under scrutiny, a hyperbolic example of a poor question would be “Do you want this to be a nazi site or do you want total censorship”  
Both sides would use it to confirm their own views regardless of what the results were, it’d just divide people further.

@GreyGears  
Honestly I’d be down for replacing Rule 0 with a “no personal attacks” one, but the “Be excellent to each other” rule gives extreme latitude to mods that have shown time and again they prioritize their personal ideologies above the users and site health.
 
 
@Background Pony #82AB  

 
Trying to set one up now, I’m not seeing any way to limit it to “accounts older than 3 months”. I think that’s important, as it prevents new sockpuppets and abuse. Would you happen to know if this is possible?

How are we supposed to believe the new, even more convoluted, rule will be applied consistently when even obvious rules like rule 6 aren’t?

@Background Pony #4EBB  

 
We also don’t know if admins can manually edit poll results. I’d assume they can, whether they would or not… well that’s up to whatever you believe. Personally based on their past conduct, I’d fully believe that they’d take advantage of it.

@Iamunknown  
Anyone with access to the database can modify the votes, yes. We just have to assume that they’re not going to.

@Background Pony #CC83  
The rules in the previous thread for what was considered “on topic” were way to suffocating. All of this boils down to simply “does art on this particular website that references Nazis create more Nazis down the line?” And literally all of the evidence points to “No.” This is directly related to policy making because the whole point of the policy is to limit the creation of Nazis. If it doesn’t create Nazis (and isn’t illegal/a call to violence/etc), then it should be allowed. I have literally yet to see a single person become a Nazi because of art they saw on this website. This point is literally never addressed.
 
Arguing for “user comfort” is also pointless, because that changes from person to person. Some people don’t get offended at anything, some people get offend at everything. There have been people of multiple instances of people from various ethnic backgrounds (the ones these rules are supposed to “protect”) chiming in and saying that the “problematic” art does not offend them. But by and large, these viewpoints are ignored for those that are offended, for a reason I cannot discern other than mod bias.
 
I doubt this thread will last, because pic related shows someone on the mod team doesn’t like our “looking at art that references Nazis doesn’t make you support Nazis” opinions.  

@Frosku  
Problem: from the logs at 1:30pm on July 9th, Luna von Rainy:

@Frosku  
That’s extremely difficult to do. The mods current list of sins is pretty damn long at this point.
 

@Background Pony #0CC5  
To be fair, the thread was about the policy and whether it was a good idea or not.  
The post on the left is talking about the policy.  
The post on the right is dissecting the other guys post and arguing it and not the policy.

@Background Pony #CC83  
You forgot the message after that:  

@Background Pony #CC83  
TLDR, they’d Derpstapo it such that only users that agreed with what they wanted would have their results counted. Even if the mods pushed back on that, there’s no guarantee that TSP doesn’t just come down with another ‘submit or I pull the plug’ ultimatum / tantrum.

@Background Pony #4EBB  
That is incredibly strict. That means my post here is off topic to this thread because I’m replying to you. I guarantee you if the replies were agreeing with the mods then they would stay.

@Background Pony #4EBB  
Which is why that thread was terrible, because you were not actually allowed to point out flaws in someone’s logic for why the policy was good/bad.

@Rene_Z  
Very good points. We still can’t rule out that the mods wouldn’t change results on the backend, and based on previous conduct I don’t see them allowing a fair, unbiased poll full-stop.

@Infrayellow  
@Background Pony #0CC5  
Never said i agreed with it, just that it’s the probable reason.  
It doesnt help that arguments about this have been done to absolute death across multiple threads.  
If it was me i’d have warned before locking the thread, specifically because it looks incredibly biased even if you’re being charitable.

@Rene_Z  
You forgot the message after that: 5:48pm on July 9th by WifiWitch  

@Background Pony #4EBB  
Maybe they should include their patrons as best they can in the polling somehow. Those are the people who are largely funding this place after all.

@Iamunknown  
I think the new version of Rule 0 will include some form of that.
 
@Iamunknown  
@Frosku  
That’s quite clearly a conspiracy theory. Doing anything like this would be painfully obvious to others (everyone can see what they voted on), so it’d fall apart pretty fast.

@Princess Luna  
I did say it’s technically possible and I’m assuming it wont happen.