[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/arch/ - Ponyville municipal archive

Nice threads of days past
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags  
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]

 No.1826[View All]

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,

!!Celestia
25 posts and 17 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.1852

Ok, in regards to the topic.

I'm gonna need a minute (and a team of Sherpa guides) to read the entire proposition, but I think the biggest problem here is what is and isn't considered "political" or "politics". It's really a vague term to use in this context.

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 goverment get more "scrutiny" than threads on the governments of other countries? What about government policies that affect our daily lives? Let's say, for example, the new tax laws that are about to make things difficult for the middle class and poor. Would talking about the effects of that be considered "politics"?

You use phrases like "undramatic" and "political drama" without actually defining what you mean by "drama" in this context. Is it any posts that have caused people to disagree with you? Because that seems to be putting a limit on anyone discussing anything that goes against the majority's views. And who decides what is and isn't accepted views of the site? The Staff? The posters? I think this is a dangerous road to go down just because a few people "don't want to hear about politics". Some people have no choice but to live with how "politics" is affecting their lives and don't have the option to "opt out" of them. So why should they be scrutinized or punished for discussing that facet of their lives?

And targeting people "with a history" or "political drama" is probelmatic. It assumes anyone who speaks about "politics" and causes "drama" (whatever you have deemed those words to mean in this context) is someone who is trying to "troll" (someone who is trying to intentionally aggitate and cause turmoil) This is not always the case. Some people have a genuine concern about what is going on in theirs and others sphere politically. That sounds too much like a witch-hunt to me or something that could be made into one. "This person cares about politics, so we will make sure they do not get to express their views on politics." I think this has a lot of problems that need to be ironed out before anything is implemented.

 No.1853

File: 1514672124909.jpg (26.25 KB, 636x519, 212:173, bb.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1852
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.

 No.1854

>>1853
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.

 No.1855

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.

 No.1856

>>1855
But, as I mentioned, we still don't have a consensus on what is or isn't "political drama".

 No.1857

File: 1514672995460.png (62.22 KB, 289x194, 289:194, rk9.png) ImgOps Google

>>1856
Simple, it's anything obviously garnering to upset people. It's the opinion of the mods that matter there.

 No.1858

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

 No.1859

>>1857
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.

 No.1860

File: 1514677888377.png (18.46 KB, 104x186, 52:93, rk1.png) ImgOps Google

>>1859
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.

 No.1861

>>1860
I get accused of "trolling" all the time, because it's easier to assume that someone is just fucking with them than that they actually hold opposing views. And I thus get reported for "trolling" often, despite, you know, not ever trolling anyone. Really these rules just seem like a good way to stifle certain opinions. 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."

 No.1862

>>1859
Ponyville was made by people who wanted a nicer posting experience and were trying to escape drama. Politics have had their time in the sun here and now they have to take a backseat to the users who want less drama. So yeah, if your opinion is unpopular and will ruffle feathers, you might not get to say it anymore unless you can do so without causing an uproar. As with the tax bill and every other piece of regulation out there, there are winners and losers and if you liked to say anything you want without repercussions before then you'll end up a loser under the new rules. That's how the cookie crumbles.

 No.1863

File: 1514678310633.png (18.46 KB, 104x186, 52:93, rk1.png) ImgOps Google

>>1861
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.

 No.1864

>>1862
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.

 No.1865

>>1864
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.

 No.1866

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.

 No.1867

File: 1514679198928.jpg (6.46 KB, 184x184, 1:1, a700067476a2caefb52ff87afc….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1865
Ah.

This post certainly brought some context to my attention.

 No.1868

File: 1514679247439.png (171.42 KB, 400x600, 2:3, um 3.png) ImgOps Google

>>1859
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.

 No.1869

File: 1514679311226.jpg (6.46 KB, 184x184, 1:1, a700067476a2caefb52ff87afc….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1868
Yes.

Politics are at fault.

No other reason.

 No.1870

>>1866
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.

 No.1871

File: 1514679631415.jpg (6.46 KB, 184x184, 1:1, a700067476a2caefb52ff87afc….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1870
Yes.

Very silly.

 No.1872

>>1870
Sure, say "that upsets me" all you want. I'm not gonna stop you. Don't call him an asshole. That escalates the situation and doesn't add and value to the conversation. You call him an asshole, you're gonna get in trouble end of story.

 No.1873

>>1871
So why'd you say that?

>>1872
I want to respond to that, but we are getting off topic.

 No.1874

File: 1514680684605.jpg (6.46 KB, 184x184, 1:1, a700067476a2caefb52ff87afc….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1873
I've suddenly lost interest in the conversation, after I learned of some new context.

 No.1875

File: 1514680862060.jpg (122.46 KB, 800x800, 1:1, 121558.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1826
Heh.

Take some time off from being a lawyer kid. You aren't getting paid for this.

 No.1876

>>1875
I think he secretly likes lawyering.

 No.1877

File: 1514682120581.png (262.51 KB, 1002x1080, 167:180, 531741.png) ImgOps Google

>>1876
Too fancy for me. Was chatting with a friend and I liked his suggestion.

 No.1878

File: 1514682361766.png (22.71 KB, 200x177, 200:177, rk12.png) ImgOps Google

>>1877
>Don't be a shitter
Welp, guess I'm fucked.

 No.1879

File: 1514682427178.png (128.6 KB, 321x442, 321:442, 921482__safe_artist-colon-….png) ImgOps Google

>>1877
I bet he has business cards with 'Esq' post-nominals.

eyeh. The rules are fine.

 No.1880

File: 1514682513043.png (297.05 KB, 3120x3269, 3120:3269, 1309102.png) ImgOps Google

>>1879
I bet he didn't even make them himself!

Yeah, it's kinda flippant.

>>1878
Eh. You might be okay anyways.

 No.1881

File: 1514682665320.png (45.34 KB, 268x197, 268:197, rk24.png) ImgOps Google

>>1880
Ehhh, Moony just tolerates me because of my old name.

 No.1882

File: 1514682935714.jpg (225.27 KB, 600x526, 300:263, 596809__safe_artist-colon-….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1881
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.

 No.1883

File: 1514682976649.png (155.15 KB, 1023x880, 93:80, 801550.png) ImgOps Google

>>1881
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.

 No.1884

>>1882 the pen is mightier...

 No.1885

File: 1514682989078.png (28.73 KB, 190x160, 19:16, rk30.png) ImgOps Google

>>1882
Yeah.

Well.

You smell.

 No.1886

File: 1514683511091.png (190.26 KB, 566x514, 283:257, 948221__safe_solo_spitfire….png) ImgOps Google

>>1885
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.

 No.1887

File: 1514683604096.png (28.53 KB, 209x171, 11:9, rk31.png) ImgOps Google

>>1886
I assumed you just stank like that all the time.

 No.1888

>>1887
Meanie.

 No.1889

File: 1514686763351.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google

>>1879
>>1877
>>1876
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!

 No.1890

File: 1514686847554.png (32.12 KB, 214x179, 214:179, rk2.png) ImgOps Google

>>1888
Yes.

Yes I am.

>>1889
Pretty creepy, Moony.

 No.1891

File: 1514686972640.png (307.62 KB, 787x641, 787:641, eh heheh.png) ImgOps Google

>>1890
no! not creepy! i am sure it is true? right?

 No.1892

File: 1514687673236.gif (41.83 KB, 171x199, 171:199, did i say it was meant to ….gif) ImgOps Google


 No.1893

>>1889
Liar. You probably have your framed diploma hanging in your office.

>>1891
Well Tracey at least introduced himself before taking a whiff.

 No.1894

File: 1514694441074.jpg (51.95 KB, 964x808, 241:202, eh heh 2.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1893
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.

 No.1895

File: 1514694720540.jpg (182.63 KB, 511x720, 511:720, dcfacfa134528588289d735ed5….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1894
You're not happy at the idea of being the only morally good lawyer in the world?

 No.1896

File: 1514695748890.jpg (422.47 KB, 1162x1920, 581:960, 248076__safe_humanized_equ….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1894
mmm fair enough, moony. Try to at least make the most of lawyerising.

 No.1897

>>1894
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

 No.1898

>>1897
>>1894
My diploma is drawn with a crayon and it broke in the middle so it just says im a "dip"

 No.1899

File: 1514999513298.jpg (51.95 KB, 964x808, 241:202, eh heh.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1897
>>1898
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.

 No.1900

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!

 No.1901

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.


[]
[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]