No.1826[Last 50 Posts]
File: 1514586308846.png (955.59 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, Happy Celestia.png) ImgOps Google
LINK to PROPOSITION:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1F3rN8g4x4pFfNKkaPP_SbxL_XiZu_DOBHxA8cpAN7BI/edit
Good evening, my little ponies! It has come to the attention of the staff that the issue of politics on our humble home has caused quite a bit of distress to the community at large!
Political threads, posts, and derails have caused no small amount of alienation, and can be very disruptive to the posting environment. The staff has heard your concerns, and has come up with what we feel is a good solution towards addressing them.
Politics on Ponyville Proposition 1 [3P1] is a proposed change in policy that will invite greater staff scrutiny when it comes to political posts and threads, substantially escalating the likelihood that these posts will be interpreted as rule-breaking.
At the same time, we believe the implementation of the proposition is such that it will not unduly infringe upon any poster's right of free expression, nor be too burdensome to the undramatic discussion of politics.
To greatly paraphrase [TL;DR]: Politics on Ponyville Proposition 1, future political posts will be analyzed either as being regular posts, or as "political drama." Posters who have a history of political drama, or posts that are very close to that line, will have all future political posts analyzed with heightened scrutiny.
Posters with no posting history at all, such as those posting under fresh IP's, shall have all political posts analyzed with heightened scrutiny, as well.
For the sake of absolute transparency, I will include here the staff's complete policy document, outlining in detail the reasoning behind this approach, how the proposition will be implemented, and with examples of that implementation in action.
The proposition will be considered over the weekend by the community, at which point the staff will elect either to implement or reject the proposition based on user input by the start of the new year on Monday.
The staff has another working document which is currently not up for implementation, which we are calling Politics on Ponyville Proposition 2 (3P2) that is a substantially stricter version of the above policy.
We believe this current one is the most equitable however, and that 3P1 meets all the needs of dissolving political drama, while maximally preserving the right of posters to freely communicate and enjoy discussions.
Please let us know what you think! As always, your Ponyville staff are here to listen and do our best for you. Let us hope that this proposition can bring greater harmony to our humble little home.
Yours in Harmony,
File: 1514586393936.png (881.43 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, Thinking Celestia.png) ImgOps Google
And another post, just to make sure the complete text of 3P1 can be easy accessible to our users!
Complete Document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1F3rN8g4x4pFfNKkaPP_SbxL_XiZu_DOBHxA8cpAN7BI/edit
File: 1514587453626.png (157.42 KB, 577x1229, 577:1229, summer_skirt_by_rakkuguy-d….png) ImgOps Google
Sounds great to me. Although i havent seen any political drama here in a while(thank goodness), I think this is a good rule to have on the books.
File: 1514588316779.png (436.27 KB, 954x710, 477:355, 532423.png) ImgOps Google
Get rid of bitcoin threads too.
File: 1514588671720.jpg (51.95 KB, 964x808, 241:202, eh heh.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
my understanding is that there is only that one thread :c
it is not okay? why not?
File: 1514588720905.png (18.46 KB, 104x186, 52:93, rk1.png) ImgOps Google
No real reason, felt like giving them shit too.
File: 1514591003769.png (572.72 KB, 1024x1024, 1:1, maid_celestia___jj_commiss….png) ImgOps Google
Tracer's stand against Bitcoin should be viewed as a political post and judged accordingly. Just kidding.
So, basically anything deemed political will be given more weight when deciding whether to take action? In theory this seems a very comprehensive approach and I hope it works out.
Just my two bits on the topic: I find that some "political" posts seem intended to inspire negative emotion in others, such as defensiveness or anger and I hope this sort of baiting others is high on the list of things disfavored.
Further, the use of circular reasoning and illogical conclusions tends to drive people mad with frustration and I think while such things can sometimes be mistakes, they are more often used intentionally to drive people crazy and I also hope such things will be targeted for action (not just those who get angry and act out as a result) because they serve little purpose other than to create ill will and dissent.
(image chosen as tribute to the OP's efforts to make Ponyville a tidier place)
File: 1514592542546.png (140.59 KB, 900x754, 450:377, 138128786157.png) ImgOps Google
File: 1514594282983.png (67.25 KB, 370x360, 37:36, 749870__artist needed_safe….png) ImgOps Google
File: 1514604173371.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google
as investors in cryptocurrency, i think we already have plenty of that, thank you c: >>1833>>1834>>1828
i am glad at least there is some agreement. i know, optimally, we could do nothing. but yet, nothing has proven not to suffice.
File: 1514610333227.png (63.39 KB, 420x524, 105:131, Well your evolution would ….png) ImgOps Google
don't do nothing.
mods doing nothing is why i left that other site
File: 1514610828151.png (312.85 KB, 980x720, 49:36, 1284070(1).png) ImgOps Google
No offense to anybody, but most of the rules and discussions about them are extremely wishy washy. Lewd is forbidden, but not really, offensive language is forbidden, but not really, now we're trying to figure out how to ban political discussions without really doing anything.
It's not my place to judge, but for my two cents these aren't rules. These are guidelines. It's a list of suggestions, and looking at the rules page, if I were a mod, I'd have no clue what is or isn't bannable outside of an obvious raid.
As far as I can tell from the rules present and the enforcement history that I'm aware of, what you actually want to ban is "disruptive behavior" without actually saying that.
I know y'all are going for nuance, but this is just confusing. If you wrote a "nuanced" rule on political discussion then I'd have absolutely no clue what was or wasn't acceptable, and I consider myself to be a pretty reasonable guy.
File: 1514617745409.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google
None taken. lewd isn't forbidden, pornography is. offensive language isn't forbidden, but trolling and sh*tposting is.
but aren't those somewhat synonyms? well, yes. our rules are sort of open ended because we try to apply them in a way that is relatively gentle.
and that means not drawing too many hard lines.
the proposal is a list of policies. it gives examples of what is and isn't appropriate. but the nature of these rules is that they cannot be too detailed either, nor would it be possible for us to draft them so conclusively that everything is outlined or detailed :c
at the same time, we cannot be too open ended, either. banning "disruptive behavior" in any set of rules is very dangerous - such rules invite tyranny by being simply too open ended.
disruptive behavior could be anything, unless it is clearly categorized. if it is clearly categorized, then it is no different than a set of rules, as we have.
if we get more specific after that, we risk falling into that trap of being too meticulous and squeezing the fun out of posts by forcing users to always be slightly paranoid of moderator lightning strikes
i have found that a good balance is categorized rules, a gentle touch, a lot of one on one interaction, and the usage of enforcement guidelines and policies, not black letter rules, is a good way to prevent these issues. >>1836
...it is long overdue. i hope it is not too little too late.>>1837
we won't do nothing. our team is very active! this document alone was the work of very active discussion and debate between very different members of our community.
the drafting process was quite strenuous as well. of the past week, i myself have put maybe fifteen hours of work in my free time in drafting, discussing, refining, and researching the topic.
this is not including the rest of the staff, who have also put in substantial effort to think and write and debate about this issue!
File: 1514618236148.png (98.75 KB, 703x824, 703:824, ba6f8cf5-2a89-4cc5-91c4-a1….png) ImgOps Google
Wow, this is such a pleasure to read. I wish I had those kinds of formatting and structuring skills. I think, even if it is still a bit subjective and fuzzy what is and isn't political drama, the proposition will hopefully make it easier to identify.
File: 1514619728358.jpg (785.47 KB, 892x736, 223:184, Princess_Cadence_MLP_FiM.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Thank you guys for putting in the work on this.
The statement in the example post is just about the equivalent of saying "New York would be better without Muslims".
Whether you believe that the truth or not, that is an inflammatory statement bound to cause drama. So the post would be viewed with "heightened scrutiny" which is essentially assuming the worst intentions from the post. Depending on the users past history on the site, they'd probably be warned or if this is a recurrent problem then banned.
File: 1514622984872.png (76.21 KB, 300x189, 100:63, pony-cry.png) ImgOps Google
Gosh my opinion isnt worth a horse's ass but i think the idea is just to increase the weight that reports in divisive topics will have, in terms of mod commitment to examine the posts more thoroughly and consider the context of the poster to determine intent, no?
An issue such as racism for example, or any where posters' prejudices may outweigh reasonable discussion. And certain assumptions might be made based on context of the subject material and the individuals involved to shift the balance points between allowing a discussion to proceed productively or keep it from making people run away with hurt feelings and potentially never return.
No. I was referring to others, though i was having a hard time myself at the moment i wrote that.>>1845
Oh look my pain has returned.
File: 1514661561046.jpg (30.2 KB, 500x375, 4:3, Shuichi-Shindou-gravitatio….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>1847>Oh look my pain has returned.
Please don't be rude.
Obviously you guys don't like each other, so why not do the mature thing and ignore each other instead of making comments like that?
File: 1514662186619.jpg (54.06 KB, 600x600, 1:1, 0d0e7dc411f4eb76d8ba47ba76….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
I'd like to add that you should specifically not do these things in this thread, which is going to be limited strictly to discussion of the actual topic. Any further off topic posts will be deleted.
File: 1514672124909.jpg (26.25 KB, 636x519, 212:173, bb.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
It's usually fairly easy to discern whether or not someone is intentionally trying to upset others via context. They're just specifying it down to the subject of politics, and it seems this is just a fair warning to those who seem in necessary to talk about it all the time and intentionally upset others. Moony simplified it in the OP; >Politics on Ponyville Proposition 1, future political posts will be analyzed either as being regular posts, or as "political drama."
People are more than welcome to discuss politics. It'll just be under the mods eye to see if it's just a subject to upset others.
Seems pretty straightforward to me. Albeit a bit too much legaleze for my taste, lawyers gonna lawyer.
Not always. there are people who react violently to any kind of political discussion that disagree with their own views, and there are those who report any political discussions because of their own dislike of the topic or the person involved in the discussion, not because of what is actually being discussed.
I can see this rule being used as a bludgeon against any political views that deviated for the accepted norm if we do not carefully word and implement it.
File: 1514672865076.jpg (182.63 KB, 511x720, 511:720, dcfacfa134528588289d735ed5….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>1854>there are people who react violently to any kind of political discussion that disagree with their own views
There are people who violently react to X because Y. >not because of what is actually being discussed.
Probably why Moony said:>future political posts will be analyzed either as being regular posts, or as "political drama.">I can see this rule being used as a bludgeon against any political views that deviated for the accepted norm if we do not carefully word and implement it.
I mean, if the mods were brainless trigger happy fools that don't take such things into consideration sure. But thankfully they have the tact to read into things before making a decision.
File: 1514672995460.png (62.22 KB, 289x194, 289:194, rk9.png) ImgOps Google
Simple, it's anything obviously garnering to upset people. It's the opinion of the mods that matter there.
File: 1514676728244.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google
The document has a definition for "Political Drama" in its definitions section
Politically charged posts or threads, or posts or threads with political undertones which cause disruption to the atmosphere of the site and create the effect of goading or baiting, regardless of whether this effect is intended or otherwise.
you will note, no where does the definition mention anything involving the interpretation of individual opinions. If the political post causes the effect of goading or baiting, regardless of intention, then it will be seen as political drama.
instead, it is a simple cause and effect analysis
The mods notoriously have a hard time differentiation between "unpopular (or even differing from the majority) opinion" and "trolling". Because they are operating from user reports and users almost always assume trolling over other explanations. I've seen this in action.>>1858
See, that's a problem Moony. Because it means no one will be allowed to discuss anything that goes against the "accepted view" of the site. For example, let's say we have a post here who gets "goaded" or "baited" when the actions of the Republican party are questioned. You would then declare any criticisms of Republicans as "political drama" and not allow it to be discussed. That's kind of stifling people's ability to discuss things with real effects on their lives.
File: 1514677888377.png (18.46 KB, 104x186, 52:93, rk1.png) ImgOps Google
Well really it's just your opinion now. Because I haven't seen anything like that. Mods attend to reports because sometimes that's the fastest way for them to see a situation. If no one reports then the mods have no real reason to interfere unless it's blatantly against the rules.
File: 1514678310633.png (18.46 KB, 104x186, 52:93, rk1.png) ImgOps Google
You get really easily offended by people all the time, so I'm not too surprised. >not ever trolling anyone
Well, if multiple people feel like your attitude is abrasive for no reason, I can see why they would find your motivations suspect.> Really these rules just seem like a good way to stifle certain opinions
It's meant to stifle drama from political threads and talks.> It really needs to be very clearly defined what is and is "political drama", beyond "if someone doesn't like your political opinion, then it's political drama."
Moony did specify. Why are you doing this.
Then this is, as I said, a rule that only exists to supress certain opinions and stances that go against the site's "accepted view" How is that going to foster an environment where people feel safe discussing themselves and their lives freely? Politics don't have "time in the sun". They don't go away and they don't stop affecting people's lives just because you're sick of hearing about them. Why should my life not be allowed to be discussed in a way that helps me cope with what's going on in it? Does that sound like a "nicer posting experience"? Should I ask all trans people on the board not to discuss that topic in kind? I don't think that would fly, nor would I want that enshrined in the rules, despite it making MY posting experience less annoying. >>1863
He specified, and his definition given means that it IS "a good way to stifle certain opinions". Because any unpopular views are deemed "drama" and banned, no matter if they are actually the views held by the poster about things that have a real affect on their life. Doesn't matter. If people are upset by you saying it, it's banned. We don't do that with any other topic, like I explained above with the topic of transsexuals. We wouldn't say that topic is banned because it upsets some people, because that's unfair to the people who's lives are affected by transsexualism and who should have the right to discuss their own lives here.
This isn't Manleyville. You are free to talk about an abundant amount of topics here, but you can't just say anything anymore. If you don't like that, you can always talk politics on Twitter and leave this place for talking about pokemon and batman, which everyone would love to talk to you about.
Besides, it isn't like politics or having unpopular opinions is banned. It is just a matter of how you frame and present it. In the last thread that blew up, things were going fine until a certain turning point. He called you a troll and you called him an asshole. I aint a mod but I'd say if you had reported him for saying your sincerely held beliefs were trolling and not called him an asshole, you'd have been 100% in the clear. Ya didn't though, ya had to get your say in regardless of whether that would burn the whole thread to the ground. I don't care if you are defending yourself from unfair accusations, you won't be allowed to do that. Learn to report and move on and you'll probably never get in trouble.
File: 1514679122178.png (18.46 KB, 104x186, 52:93, rk1.png) ImgOps Google
>>1864> Because any unpopular views are deemed "drama" and banned
The unpopular views seem to be the subject of politics in general. Not a single viewpoint.
It's only bannable if you bring it up repeatedly ignoring warnings.>We don't do that with any other topic
Well, except for anything straightforward bullying, or mocking, or harassment, or trollish, or derailment, or illegal, or racist, but yeah this is totally new.> like I explained above with the topic of transsexuals
I ain't reading anything not relating to this conversation.>We wouldn't say that topic is banned because it upsets some people, because that's unfair to the people who's lives are affected by transsexualism and who should have the right to discuss their own lives here.
Alright, name a politician that posts here.
File: 1514679198928.jpg (6.46 KB, 184x184, 1:1, a700067476a2caefb52ff87afc….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
This post certainly brought some context to my attention.
File: 1514679247439.png (171.42 KB, 400x600, 2:3, um 3.png) ImgOps Google
why? it just means everyone gets to either talk about politics like adults, or not at all.
you should know how closely my own political stance aligns to your own. the entire policy is politically neutral for the specific reason that political opinion isn't really the problem - the problem is a toxic attitude in how political threads and posts have been handled. >>1861>>1864
so, wouldn't it be nice if, if you weren't the person causing the political drama, to have those causing that for you warned? >>1865>>1867
...it makes me think this is a good reason why such a policy is needed. there must be some reinforcement to the notion that explosive political fighting on the boards is not okay.
File: 1514679311226.jpg (6.46 KB, 184x184, 1:1, a700067476a2caefb52ff87afc….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Politics are at fault.
No other reason.
You don't have to be a politician for politics to affect your life. That's kind of a silly argument. >>1868
We still need a definition on what is and isn't "politics", Moony. Like I said before Do you mean any and all posts relating to government or government officials? Of what country? Not all Ponyville posters are American. Will threads on American government get more "scrutiny" than threads on the governments of other countries? What about government policies that affect our daily lives? What about topics that don't deal with governments, but are deemed "political" for some strange reason, like racism or prejudice? These need to be defined before punishments are dealt out. >>1864
Actually our discussion in that thread was me being upset over something he said, and him insisting he was right and refusing to listen. He only resorted to calling me a "troll" near the end, because he had no argument. And yeah, I called him an asshole because it was clear I was actually upset, and I should be able to tell another poster that something they said upset me without being accused of being insincere. But my point is, the problem was not that our discussion involved the political (which it didnt, it involved racism), but how he reacted.
So why'd you say that?>>1872
I want to respond to that, but we are getting off topic.
File: 1514680684605.jpg (6.46 KB, 184x184, 1:1, a700067476a2caefb52ff87afc….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
I've suddenly lost interest in the conversation, after I learned of some new context.
File: 1514680862060.jpg (122.46 KB, 800x800, 1:1, 121558.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Take some time off from being a lawyer kid. You aren't getting paid for this.
File: 1514682120581.png (262.51 KB, 1002x1080, 167:180, 531741.png) ImgOps Google
Too fancy for me. Was chatting with a friend and I liked his suggestion.
File: 1514682361766.png (22.71 KB, 200x177, 200:177, rk12.png) ImgOps Google
>>1877>Don't be a shitter
Welp, guess I'm fucked.
File: 1514682427178.png (128.6 KB, 321x442, 321:442, 921482__safe_artist-colon-….png) ImgOps Google
I bet he has business cards with 'Esq' post-nominals.
eyeh. The rules are fine.
File: 1514682513043.png (297.05 KB, 3120x3269, 3120:3269, 1309102.png) ImgOps Google
I bet he didn't even make them himself!
Yeah, it's kinda flippant.>>1878
Eh. You might be okay anyways.
File: 1514682665320.png (45.34 KB, 268x197, 268:197, rk24.png) ImgOps Google
Ehhh, Moony just tolerates me because of my old name.
File: 1514682935714.jpg (225.27 KB, 600x526, 300:263, 596809__safe_artist-colon-….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Despite trying to be the resident Oscar the grouch, I imagine you're hardly the most troublesome poster.>>1880
He probably has a fetish for pens too.
File: 1514682976649.png (155.15 KB, 1023x880, 93:80, 801550.png) ImgOps Google
That's unfortunate. But if it works then it works.>>1882
That may be slightly more unlikely but I do not know enough to rule out the possibility.
File: 1514682989078.png (28.73 KB, 190x160, 19:16, rk30.png) ImgOps Google
File: 1514683511091.png (190.26 KB, 566x514, 283:257, 948221__safe_solo_spitfire….png) ImgOps Google
Oh, you like it? I'll wear this scent more often if you want.>>1884
Definitely carry a sceptre. I doubt he would use anything that could draw blood.>>1883
He's probably too shy to mention the specific uses he has for each pen. One for contracts, one for guests, one for personal messages.
File: 1514683604096.png (28.53 KB, 209x171, 11:9, rk31.png) ImgOps Google
I assumed you just stank like that all the time.
File: 1514686763351.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google
i don't even carry a business card! and if i did... i would never, ever have esq. on it.
there is nothing special about being a lawyer. i am good at writing big, long, ugly documents. it is no more or less special than making a great meal, providing a great service, or anything else. there is nothing fancy about it, i am thinking! >>1887>>1888
flick smells nice.
hi tracer! you smell nice too!
File: 1514686847554.png (32.12 KB, 214x179, 214:179, rk2.png) ImgOps Google
Yes I am.>>1889
Pretty creepy, Moony.
File: 1514686972640.png (307.62 KB, 787x641, 787:641, eh heheh.png) ImgOps Google
no! not creepy! i am sure it is true? right?
Liar. You probably have your framed diploma hanging in your office.>>1891
Well Tracey at least introduced himself before taking a whiff.
File: 1514694441074.jpg (51.95 KB, 964x808, 241:202, eh heh 2.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
my diploma is rolled up sitting behind my printer right now. c:
...it's just a piece of paper. one i am not terribly happy about.
File: 1514694720540.jpg (182.63 KB, 511x720, 511:720, dcfacfa134528588289d735ed5….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
You're not happy at the idea of being the only morally good lawyer in the world?
File: 1514695748890.jpg (422.47 KB, 1162x1920, 581:960, 248076__safe_humanized_equ….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
mmm fair enough, moony. Try to at least make the most of lawyerising.
im like that with my diploma too
i havent even taken mine out of the envelope
i new you were to good to be a lawyer
File: 1514999513298.jpg (51.95 KB, 964x808, 241:202, eh heh.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
i am not even sure where my college diploma is. i only have the law school one because it is fairly recent.
my thought on the subject has always been, the diploma is a piece of paper.
Some of the wisest and frankly smartest people i have ever met do not have that piece of paper. Some of those people never will have one. But they are wise, smart, and some are even very successful - more than i could be, in all three respects.
some people have more impressive pieces of paper. some have less impressive pieces of paper. some have no pieces of paper, to put on their walls, in fancy frames.
when i see the papers, i feel nothing but disappointment. a frustrated feeling that more could have been done, but that instead, i did that. i got a paper. two of them. and i didn't even want them, to begin with.
File: 1514999648407.png (157.54 KB, 435x360, 29:24, you are wonderful.png) ImgOps Google
The staff will consider the comments made in the thread, deliberate, and make a decision as to the proposition before Friday.
If the proposition is accepted as is, it will be put into effect immediately.
If the proposition is modified, it will posted again for consideration for a period of two days, upon which it will reconsidered again for adoption by Monday, or otherwise given another round of consideration in case of any revisions.
Thank you for your understanding!
File: 1515476709041.jpg (156.27 KB, 479x604, 479:604, 1511772756014.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
I propose that for one day a year, exactly 17 days after the ides of March, the rule against political trolling be suspended.