The Flat Earth Society

The Flat Earth Society => Suggestions & Concerns => Topic started by: John Davis on May 24, 2016, 02:24:36 PM

Title: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 24, 2016, 02:24:36 PM
*These posts were split from another thread -Pongo*


My words were a bit harsh. Calling them terrorists is a bit much, and their choice to make their own site really doesn't affect us. I've talked a bit with the other side today and extended my apologies. I expressed some interest in unification. The term used was that we would be "amiable" towards talks. I still feel their actions were a bit beyond the line, but there were problems on both sides.

There is clearly risk here though. Both sides seem to agree that the terms would have to change. I honestly don't see much hope in it, but due to me speaking so harshly, I thought it would be best to reach out and see the interest on both sides. There seems to be more interest on the other side than I previously thought.

Currently our entire moderation/administration team except 3 are against it. Unless this changes, the merger won't happen. It also seems like they are demanding jroa be demodded. I'm not crazy about this. He's manned the guns for far to long and the idea of throwing him to the curb really isn't sitting well with me.

I have also been contacted regarding this from several of our users talking against the merger.

None of this will happen without the blessings of our users, the administrators, the mods and Daniel. So. There's not really any hope, but there is.

It might be best if we all continued our own ways. What are your thoughts?
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 24, 2016, 02:57:46 PM
I still see no reason why the forums should be merged.
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: markjo on May 24, 2016, 03:44:03 PM
I still see no reason why the forums should be merged.
As I recall, the primary reason for the forums to be merged was to that the "official" site would have full time technical support and maintenance by people who actually know how to properly support a web site in a timely manner, rather than halfhearted support whenever an admin (or, heaven forbid, Daniel) decides to stop by.
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 24, 2016, 03:46:31 PM
The official site does have full time technical support. Are you having issues with the forum?
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: John Davis on May 24, 2016, 04:03:51 PM
Thank you SCG!

But, I see Markjos point - if I were hit by a bus tomorrow we would be in trouble. On the otherhand, I may be able to recruit some more tech talent. I've had decent success recruiting bloggers.
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Dinosaur Neil on May 24, 2016, 04:04:19 PM
It also seems like they are demanding jroa be demodded. I'm not crazy about this. He's manned the guns for far to long and the idea of throwing him to the curb really isn't sitting well with me.
 What are your thoughts?

Toss him out of the car, laugh scornfully, and roar off into the sunset in a cloud of dust. The fact that he's been smearing his own droppings all over this forum for what amounts to about twenty entire days of his life (yes, I did the maths) doesn't negate that he's smearing crap rather than cleaning up.
I mean, don't you ever wonder why the other site don't want him? If he's as good as his buddies here make out, why would other FE'ers reject him?
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Son of Orospu on May 24, 2016, 04:20:09 PM
I mean, don't you ever wonder why the other site don't want him? If he's as good as his buddies here make out, why would other FE'ers reject him?

Did it ever occur to you that the other site does not like me and I don't like them for something other than my moderation skills? 
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: markjo on May 24, 2016, 04:36:54 PM
Thank you SCG!

But, I see Markjos point - if I were hit by a bus tomorrow we would be in trouble.
Come now John, you show up out of the blue and are active for a while but then disappear for weeks or months at a time.   And when is the last time that Daniel has done much of anything for this site, let alone his beloved society?
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 24, 2016, 04:44:25 PM
Thank you SCG!

But, I see Markjos point - if I were hit by a bus tomorrow we would be in trouble.
Come now John, you show up out of the blue and are active for a while but then disappear for weeks or months at a time.   And when is the last time that Daniel has done much of anything for this site, let alone his beloved society?

Daniel has paid to host this fine forum for a very long time, isn't that something?

I don't understand why people who hate the way this forum is run don't just leave and hang out on the other site. The internet is big enough for both.
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Jack on May 24, 2016, 06:53:19 PM
Exactly, SCG. It's perhaps unfair to say Daniel has done next to nothing to this site when he's the one paying the bills. Now, we're doing just fine without them, and they're doing just fine without us. Reunification is pointless.
Title: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: markjo on May 24, 2016, 07:15:24 PM
Exactly, SCG. It's perhaps unfair to say Daniel has done next to nothing to this site when he's the one paying the bills.
Don't get me wrong, I don't really have anything against Daniel.  My boss at work is a lot like him.  He's a really nice guy who pays the bills and shows up for about 15 minutes every few weeks or so, basically leaving the rest of us to run the day to day operations.  Of course it also means that he's not always around to make timely decisions either.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Pongo on May 24, 2016, 07:17:52 PM
I split these posts because I thought this topic deserved its own thread.
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Blanko on May 24, 2016, 07:43:32 PM
I mean, don't you ever wonder why the other site don't want him? If he's as good as his buddies here make out, why would other FE'ers reject him?

If you're really interested, the reason jroa was demodded (and will never be remodded as long as we have control over it) on our site was because he sexually harassed several of our users and on multiple occasions used his powers to create threads in Announcements to spout crude insults at our users (including myself). We were extremely patient with him. People in the real world get fired for much less.

Now, if your side wants to continue shielding a predator, that's your pregorative - but, for the sake of honest discourse, it's better for all of you to know what you're dealing with.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 24, 2016, 09:02:48 PM
What in the world is even the point of this thread?  Who cares what the non-moderator members of this website think about the merger?  The all-powerful mod team has already secretly considered and rejected the proposal.  Obviously, that's as far as it goes.  There's no need to pretend that what the dirty peasants might think will have any bearing on the subject.  They can't even be trusted to know what it is that the mods might be planning at any time, let alone voice an opinion on it!

Everyone get back to whatever you were doing before viewing this thread.  The mod team knows what's best for you.  Do not question their secret decisions.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 25, 2016, 07:53:00 AM
What in the world is even the point of this thread?  Who cares what the non-moderator members of this website think about the merger?
We care. Hence the thread.
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Dinosaur Neil on May 25, 2016, 10:26:08 AM
I mean, don't you ever wonder why the other site don't want him? If he's as good as his buddies here make out, why would other FE'ers reject him?

Did it ever occur to you that the other site does not like me and I don't like them for something other than my moderation skills?

Of course. They probably dislike you for the same reasons that I dislike you, which are too rude to post in this thread and would be classed as a personal attack.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Son of Orospu on May 25, 2016, 10:49:29 AM
Meada.  Quepasso? 
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Pongo on May 25, 2016, 12:49:52 PM
Let me summarize the issue and detail what we are discussing so everyone is on the same page.

A few years ago, many users of our storied forms decided to split off and form their own Flat Earth Society. They were unhappy with how the forums were ran and their concerns were valid. Our administration here was more concerned with other aspects of the Flat Earth Movement. While they acknowledge that the forums were (and still are) an important part of the society, in their eyes it's not, and has never been, the most important part.  The people that left saw, as I believe many of you do, the forums as the most important aspect. It's a place to debate, learn, and perhaps above all else, socialize.

In the time since our division, we've made great strides in addressing and fixing many issues; things like load times comes to mind. Regardless, there has been talk of offering the other site near-complete (if not complete) control of the forums and allowing our administration to focus on other facets of the society like raising awareness though articles, interviews, books, and more. By outsourcing control of the forums to them, it allows our current leadership to focus on more important issues to the Flat Earth Movement as a whole. We would like to hear everyone's opinion on what we consider to be "outsourcing the forums." 

Advantages

Disadvantages:

Please remember that we don't have to see this as an "us versus them" debate. We all came here or there for a common reason; the discussion or intrigue of the flat-earth.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 25, 2016, 12:52:30 PM
What in the world is even the point of this thread?  Who cares what the non-moderator members of this website think about the merger?
We care. Hence the thread.

At least we are having the conversation on this website. The first time around Wilmore and Daniel were only interested in the opinions of the defectors.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Dinosaur Neil on May 25, 2016, 01:17:52 PM
You forgot to list "having to put up with Thork, Parsifal and Monterey Bay Peeping Tom Bishop" as disdvantages.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 25, 2016, 01:41:41 PM
I'd like to second Thork as a disadvantage. If jroa leaves a bad taste in their mouths, it barely touches the taste Thork leaves in all of our mouths. I would expect him to have no dealings with the Society at all as he is a ridiculous.

Parsifal I haven't had any issues with.

What in the world is even the point of this thread?  Who cares what the non-moderator members of this website think about the merger?
We care. Hence the thread.

At least we are having the conversation on this website. The first time around Wilmore and Daniel were only interested in the opinions of the defectors.
All I care about right now are the opinions of our users. More so than the moderation staff even, though their say matters too. Daniel also has had a change of heart and really doesn't care much either way - "The more groups the merrier" I believe he said.

Thank you SCG!

But, I see Markjos point - if I were hit by a bus tomorrow we would be in trouble.
Come now John, you show up out of the blue and are active for a while but then disappear for weeks or months at a time.   And when is the last time that Daniel has done much of anything for this site, let alone his beloved society?
Yes Markjo. That's why I pointed it out - what happens if I get hit by a bus.  I thought I was being rather fair pointing that out.

Other than weekly meetings with me to plan various stuff coming up for the Society, Daniel also spent the majority of his vacation helping me sort out the new site stuff (including the server you are enjoying) and otherwise contributing.

I don't really understand the mentality that validates the statement: Since Daniel is the President of the Society .: he should be active on the forums.  Because I don't see that being the case on really any societies site I know of, though I'm sure there are a few counter-examples.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Pongo on May 25, 2016, 03:01:18 PM
You forgot to list "having to put up with Thork, Parsifal and Monterey Bay Peeping Tom Bishop" as disdvantages.

Yes, thank you. Please bring up any more advantages and disadvantages you have. It's difficult for any one person to see them all. This one especially so for me as I have no issues with the people you listed.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 25, 2016, 03:51:10 PM

Advantages
  • First and most importantly is the unification of the user base. Together we are one society with a diverse collection of flat-earth discussion and many friendships forged in the lower fora.
  • Increased moderation. Together we will have more mods on around the clock.
  • Post count retention. Your posting history will be preserved and enriched if you've posted on both sites.
  • Strengthening the movement. United we stand, and all.

Disadvantages:
  • Moderation and Administration changes would be made. There will be a discussion of who to keep and at what title, but Jroa would almost certainly be removed as a moderator. He has provided years of loyal service to us, but he leaves the other site with a bad taste in their mouths.
  • Adaptation to new rules and policies. The vast majority overlap, but there are some minor differences.
  • Scary new frontiers. With all endeavors comes the unknown and unforeseeable.



Re Advantages:
1) How is "unification of the user base" an advantage? There's nothing stopping people on either site from posting here or there OR here and there.  I realize it was kind of a big deal when the split first happened because this website was a bit dead for awhile, but the upper forums are as busy as ever now. People on the internet come and go all the time.
2) The moderation of this site could easily be increased. (pls don't choose crappy mods, tho)
3) Are the posts in danger of disappearing?
4) They are forums, a movement can (and probably should) have more than one place to discuss things.

Re Disadvantages:
1) I think you're understating this one a bit. They want to be in charge of the site.
2) Their rules aren't as convoluted as the ones here. I would count their rules as an advantage.
3) Other forums are scary!  :P

The only thing they want is everything, but they want people on this side to think they're the ones with everything to give. They want to dictate the terms of the merger. Give us the database, but we won't take it unless you do all these things...  ::)

Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: hoppy on May 25, 2016, 07:14:01 PM
I like the reunification idea. The more regular users that we have on one site , the less of a fringe movement we appear. Some of the users on the other site have a lot of FE knowledge and can answer questions well, especially to the noobs. Neither site is all that it could be, I think together we would be stronger.
 John, thanks for getting this site running better, faster speed and all that.
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Symptom on May 25, 2016, 07:48:13 PM
Thank you SCG!

But, I see Markjos point - if I were hit by a bus tomorrow we would be in trouble.
Come now John, you show up out of the blue and are active for a while but then disappear for weeks or months at a time.   And when is the last time that Daniel has done much of anything for this site, let alone his beloved society?

Daniel has paid to host this fine forum for a very long time, isn't that something?

I don't understand why people who hate the way this forum is run don't just leave and hang out on the other site. The internet is big enough for both.

Because hate is the law.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Jack on May 25, 2016, 10:11:17 PM
They've already said they want to keep the various services on their site unchanged, so it's clear the only thing they want from us is control over our forum. We might end up gaining almost nothing from reunification, John. I still don't see any problems with both sites going their separate ways; they're doing fine on their own.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Bullwinkle on May 26, 2016, 12:45:41 AM
Do what is in your best interest.

Will your core values be maintained?
Will you be surrendering control of your empire?
Will it be a marriage or a takeover?

What do you get out of the merger?
What do you want out of the merger?
What do you expect from the merger?

Can you trust your partner?
DO you trust your prospective partner?

Membership will adapt.
They already provide you with nothing.

These are upper management decisions.

Do what is in your best interest.





Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Blanko on May 26, 2016, 08:01:21 AM
They've already said they want to keep the various services on their site unchanged, so it's clear the only thing they want from us is control over our forum. We might end up gaining almost nothing from reunification, John. I still don't see any problems with both sites going their separate ways; they're doing fine on their own.

Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You would get our superior services, our superior technical expertise and active administration, our superior design and branding, and you would no longer have to worry about falling behind in SEO and social media reach. All this without putting in any effort on your part.

All we want out of this is a unified userbase, which I'm sure most can agree is a good thing for everyone. If that's not something you want, fine - we'll eventually overtake this site on our own. The reason we're reaching out is because we care about the society as a whole.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 26, 2016, 08:24:22 AM
Your social media reach is a joke, to be frank. Thork just friended every foreign user on twitter. Look at your follow/following ratio.  Its a good thing they can't read english, because just weeks ago he insulted all non-english speaking internet users. You know, cause Thork. That and his constant threats to folks that they have made " a very powerful enemy."  If there is interest, this would be a point that would need to be negotiated.

Facebook we are steadily growing faster than yours and we have more reach to start with better content posts and better engagement. We have a very active community on facebook, that dwarfs even your own sites userbase.

Your technical expertise does not seem better.  Unless you happen to have somebody with experience working on Enterprise level sites in E-Commerce, let alone the contacts that come with that. Though expanding our team would be an advantage, due to the possibility of me getting hit by a bus.

This is simply our first iteration of branding, and the next I'll likely hand off to my design firm https://www.facebook.com/mjdesignbureau/ and http://mjdesignbureau.com (excuse the site, we are busy enough that we seldom can justify updating or even working on it in the first place).  However, this is a possible benefit if folks like yours better. Really though as we are working on every aspect iteratively, nobody should fall in love with our current branding as its really just a temporary theme to allow for growth into our new technologies.  Likely, I'll get my business to help with some of the tech aspects too if this merger doesn't happen.


Our services are bettering each day and soon that argument will be moot. Especially if I move us over to a cluster. which is on the roadmap. Not mentioning our unannounced plans.

As far as SEO, you'll never beat us. You guys knew that when you bought your domain, and I think you still know that now. Once our wiki goes, you need to be asking yourselves what kind of effect that will have on your ranking.

Really the benefit I see are the users, the Society itself, and the brand.

Edit:  You are also better are running forums, but I include this in the users.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Son of Orospu on May 26, 2016, 08:46:50 AM
I think John nailed it on the head. 
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: sandokhan on May 26, 2016, 09:31:40 AM
Both websites feature a faq/wikipedia section which is wholly and totally based on the UA concept.

Thus, the best proofs for the existence of FET, based on the concepts of aether/ether, are not being taken into consideration at all.

The best FE model, stationary flat plane with an aether dome, is not featured at all.


Issues like who is paying for the web hosting/domain, page design, team of moderators, pale in comparison to the main, outstanding problem: as it stands now, both websites are selling to the public the following FE version:

Earth is accelerating upwards

3000 mile distance to the Sun/Moon

32 mile diameter of the Sun/Moon

No ether/aether

Total reliance on Earth is not a Globe (even though Rowbotham committed several important mistakes, especially when it comes to facts pertaining to solar astrophysics)

Everything is left to chance: no explanations for stellar/planetary gravity, gravitational anomalies, ether drift results, FE cosmology, and much more

No mention is made of the fact that the biographies of Kepler and Newton, Copernicus and Galilei, Hipparchus and Ptolemy were falsified/forged; thus, any RE can immediately invoke the axial precession data/facts (as recorded by the official chronology of history) and prove their point





Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 26, 2016, 09:39:20 AM
Both websites feature a faq/wikipedia section which is wholly and totally based on the UA concept.
This will change shortly - we are removing UA from the FAQ  and removing the wiki.

Quote
Thus, the best proofs for the existence of FET, based on the concepts of aether/ether, are not being taken into consideration at all.

The best FE model, stationary flat plane with an aether dome, is not featured at all.
This is also changing - we will have a lot of content regarding various dome models.

Quote
Issues like who is paying for the web hosting/domain, page design, team of moderators, pale in comparison to the main, outstanding problem: as it stands now, both websites are selling to the public the following FE version:

Earth is accelerating upwards

3000 mile distance to the Sun/Moon

32 mile diameter of the Sun/Moon

No ether/aether

Total reliance on Earth is not a Globe (even though Rowbotham committed several important mistakes, especially when it comes to facts pertaining to solar astrophysics)

Everything is left to chance: no explanations for stellar/planetary gravity, gravitational anomalies, ether drift results, FE cosmology, and much more

No mention is made of the fact that the biographies of Kepler and Newton, Copernicus and Galilei, Hipparchus and Ptolemy were falsified/forged; thus, any RE can immediately invoke the axial precession data/facts (as recorded by the official chronology of history) and prove their point
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Jack on May 26, 2016, 10:00:21 AM
Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You would get our superior services, our superior technical expertise and active administration, our superior design and branding, and you would no longer have to worry about falling behind in SEO and social media reach. All this without putting in any effort on your part.
So basically we just have to leave everything to you and pray that you won't screw us over. This reunification deal is horribly lopsided, I must say. I think we'll be fine on our own.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Blanko on May 26, 2016, 12:50:50 PM
Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You would get our superior services, our superior technical expertise and active administration, our superior design and branding, and you would no longer have to worry about falling behind in SEO and social media reach. All this without putting in any effort on your part.
So basically we just have to leave everything to you and pray that you won't screw us over. This reunification deal is horribly lopsided, I must say. I think we'll be fine on our own.

I'm not suggesting you wouldn't have a say in how the site is run. Personally, I would be fine with every admin on this site keeping their admin status.
Title: Re: Re: Is it normal for Moderators to be so immature?
Post by: Papa Legba on May 26, 2016, 01:36:23 PM
This thread is so chock-full of voodoo I don't know where to begin.

But I do know that this is lulzy:

Now, if your side wants to continue shielding a predator, that's your pregorative - but, for the sake of honest discourse, it's better for all of you to know what you're dealing with.

I have seen the movie 'Predator' & am now very worried indeed that a giant, crab-faced alien big-game hunter is moderating us all...

Oh, jroa - you MONSTER!
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 26, 2016, 01:39:24 PM
We've all made mistakes in the past. Throwing someone to the curb is not a solution to this, if it indeed even happened. I've seen no evidence of this here, and I doubt I ever will.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Bullwinkle on May 26, 2016, 01:51:51 PM
Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You would get our superior services, our superior technical expertise and active administration, our superior design and branding, and you would no longer have to worry about falling behind in SEO and social media reach. All this without putting in any effort on your part.

But, wait, if you act now, your site will be absorbed and consumed.

That does not sound like a merger.


All we want out of this is a unified userbase,

And in exchange you are offering this site assisted suicide.


If this is the extent of the deal, they are offering nothing.


Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Papa Legba on May 26, 2016, 01:55:36 PM
We've all made mistakes in the past. Throwing someone to the curb is not a solution to this, if it indeed even happened. I've seen no evidence of this here, and I doubt I ever will.

Of course you haven't.

Cos this thread is just mad voodoo bullshit.

Plus, if we're gonna be FE-specific, this:

Both websites feature a faq/wikipedia section which is wholly and totally based on the UA concept.

Thus, the best proofs for the existence of FET, based on the concepts of aether/ether, are not being taken into consideration at all.

The best FE model, stationary flat plane with an aether dome, is not featured at all.


Issues like who is paying for the web hosting/domain, page design, team of moderators, pale in comparison to the main, outstanding problem: as it stands now, both websites are selling to the public the following FE version:

Earth is accelerating upwards

3000 mile distance to the Sun/Moon

32 mile diameter of the Sun/Moon

No ether/aether

Total reliance on Earth is not a Globe (even though Rowbotham committed several important mistakes, especially when it comes to facts pertaining to solar astrophysics)

Everything is left to chance: no explanations for stellar/planetary gravity, gravitational anomalies, ether drift results, FE cosmology, and much more

No mention is made of the fact that the biographies of Kepler and Newton, Copernicus and Galilei, Hipparchus and Ptolemy were falsified/forged; thus, any RE can immediately invoke the axial precession data/facts (as recorded by the official chronology of history) and prove their point

You might want to ask sceptimatic's opinion too; he's the only other FE-er here worth shit.

Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Saddam Hussein on May 26, 2016, 02:02:15 PM
Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You would get our superior services, our superior technical expertise and active administration, our superior design and branding, and you would no longer have to worry about falling behind in SEO and social media reach. All this without putting in any effort on your part.
So basically we just have to leave everything to you and pray that you won't screw us over. This reunification deal is horribly lopsided, I must say. I think we'll be fine on our own.

How could we "screw you over"?  What does that even mean in this context?  Accidentally delete six weeks' worth of posts while trying to move the site to a new server?  Routinely ignore requests to fix trivial technical errors simply because the person proposing them is someone the site owner dislikes?  Have every single admin frequently be inactive for years at a time?  Have the site run out of bandwidth and be inaccessible at the end of almost every month?  Even if we assume that the merger hits a few unforeseen technical snags, there is no way that the new site could possibly end up being as badly-run as this one has been in the past.  Sure, it's running well now, but for how long?  It wasn't all that long ago that every page took about thirty seconds to load (if you don't remember this, it's probably because you were on one of your lengthy breaks).  The only thing that's necessary to turn a well-run site into a shitty one is neglect, and no amount of professional qualifications in the world will change that.

We've all made mistakes in the past. Throwing someone to the curb is not a solution to this, if it indeed even happened. I've seen no evidence of this here, and I doubt I ever will.

Look, obviously it's your site and your decision, but I have to say that I think you're going about this all wrong.  The retention of mod powers shouldn't be a reward, nor the removal of them a punishment.  Leave the past where it is and judge the situation based on the present.  Is jroa, at this time, doing good work as a mod and being beneficial to the website?  If so, then leave him as a mod.  Or is he, at this time, doing bad work as a mod and being detrimental to the website?  If so, then demod him.  That's all you really need to consider here.  You keep talking about this as if it's a matter of loyalty, or owing jroa one, and I just don't see how it's relevant.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 26, 2016, 02:18:05 PM
Loyalty is always relevant. I hold myself to a moral standard. Is he doing well as a mod now? Yes. Has he done anything to warrant his mod to be removed? No.

As far as neglect, I suppose time will tell on that one. Or we will merge and it won't.


Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You would get our superior services, our superior technical expertise and active administration, our superior design and branding, and you would no longer have to worry about falling behind in SEO and social media reach. All this without putting in any effort on your part.

But, wait, if you act now, your site will be absorbed and consumed.

That does not sound like a merger.


All we want out of this is a unified userbase,

And in exchange you are offering this site assisted suicide.


If this is the extent of the deal, they are offering nothing.



I have to admit, I laughed. And a good point - it doesn't sound like a merger.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Parsifal on May 26, 2016, 02:51:55 PM
Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose.

While I agree that both sides would have something to gain from reunification, I don't think it's fair to say that nobody would lose anything. Even if true, this is not a good way to go about convincing someone -- it's a slightly less direct way of saying "your concerns don't matter", which is only likely to enhance any distrust that may exist.

Personally, I don't think reunification can work without at least some concessions from both sides. I don't think we're likely to reach a mutually acceptable agreement, so as much as I personally would like to see reunification take place, I doubt it will.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Blanko on May 26, 2016, 02:53:01 PM
Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You would get our superior services, our superior technical expertise and active administration, our superior design and branding, and you would no longer have to worry about falling behind in SEO and social media reach. All this without putting in any effort on your part.

But, wait, if you act now, your site will be absorbed and consumed.

That does not sound like a merger.


All we want out of this is a unified userbase,

And in exchange you are offering this site assisted suicide.


If this is the extent of the deal, they are offering nothing.

I guess I don't understand what you want out of the merger. Do you want a site that loads slow, suffers from frequent downtime and is deliberately broken in functionality? Because we're offering to eliminate all that.

To further clarify, I'm viewing the prospects of a merger in terms of what each of our strengths are and what is the best way to combine them. In my view, our side has the better forums, wiki and branding. Your side has the better social media reach and domain value. So the most pragmatic solution would be that we keep our forums, wiki and branding, while your side retains the social media platforms and domain. It's my view that both sides would be much better off, so the idea that you would be "surrendering" anything doesn't really register with me. You'd simply be upgrading, and so would we.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Papa Legba on May 26, 2016, 03:06:10 PM
I guess I don't understand what you want out of the merger.

I don't want you.

Or your 29,000,000 sock-puppets either.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Bullwinkle on May 26, 2016, 03:11:55 PM
Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You would get our superior services, our superior technical expertise and active administration, our superior design and branding, and you would no longer have to worry about falling behind in SEO and social media reach. All this without putting in any effort on your part.

But, wait, if you act now, your site will be absorbed and consumed.

That does not sound like a merger.


All we want out of this is a unified userbase,

And in exchange you are offering this site assisted suicide.


If this is the extent of the deal, they are offering nothing.

I guess I don't understand what you want out of the merger. Do you want a site that loads slow, suffers from frequent downtime and is deliberately broken in functionality? Because we're offering to eliminate all that.


Don't assume I want a merger.


So, call now and have my credit card ready?
I honestly have no idea who you are and I don't care.

From a strictly business viewpoint,
you are offering flash-bang grenades and poison gas.

I see absolutely no benefit to this site being offered.

"turn over the keys to the kingdom" is not an offer.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Bullwinkle on May 26, 2016, 03:26:22 PM

To further clarify, I'm viewing the prospects of a merger in terms of what each of our strengths are and what is the best way to combine them. In my view, our side has the better forums, wiki and branding. Your side has the better social media reach and domain value. So the most pragmatic solution would be that we keep our forums, wiki and branding, while your side retains the social media platforms and domain. It's my view that both sides would be much better off, so the idea that you would be "surrendering" anything doesn't really register with me. You'd simply be upgrading, and so would we.



Just saw your edit.

Sounds like you want control of the "look and feel".
That is called the "brand"

You claim to have superior, basically, everything.

All you need to complete the takeover is our userbase.

Lets talk about leadership. Who will own the brand outright?

Ultimate decision maker?


This is not a simple handshake kind of thing.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Blanko on May 26, 2016, 03:50:49 PM
You claim to have superior, basically, everything.

Incorrect.

Quote
All you need to complete the takeover is our userbase.

I've just offered a solution in which your leadership would continue to have a say in how the site is run and hold control of social media. Would you care to explain to me how that constitutes a "takeover"?

Quote
Lets talk about leadership. Who will own the brand outright?

The society.

Quote
Ultimate decision maker?

I don't see why there has to be one. But, for example - Parsifal could be the ultimate decision maker for the forums, and John could be the ultimate decision maker for social media.

Quote
This is not a simple handshake kind of thing.

Of course, that's why we're talking about it.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Pongo on May 26, 2016, 04:12:52 PM

I guess I don't understand what you want out of the merger. Do you want a site that loads slow, suffers from frequent downtime and is deliberately broken in functionality? Because we're offering to eliminate all that.

To further clarify, I'm viewing the prospects of a merger in terms of what each of our strengths are and what is the best way to combine them. In my view, our side has the better forums, wiki and branding. Your side has the better social media reach and domain value. So the most pragmatic solution would be that we keep our forums, wiki and branding, while your side retains the social media platforms and domain. It's my view that both sides would be much better off, so the idea that you would be "surrendering" anything doesn't really register with me. You'd simply be upgrading, and so would we.

That was very well worded with reasonable tones and propositions. You could have rallied an entire barony to your cause with a speech like that.

It's silly to think nothing will be gained from a merger, just as it's silly to think nothing will be lost. However, is the loss acceptable to accrue the gains? I think it is.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Bullwinkle on May 26, 2016, 04:23:13 PM
You claim to have superior, basically, everything.

Incorrect.

Quote
All you need to complete the takeover is our userbase.

I've just offered a solution in which your leadership would continue to have a say in how the site is run and hold control of social media. Would you care to explain to me how that constitutes a "takeover"?

Quote
Lets talk about leadership. Who will own the brand outright?

The society.

Quote
Ultimate decision maker?

I don't see why there has to be one. But, for example - Parsifal could be the ultimate decision maker for the forums, and John could be the ultimate decision maker for social media.

Quote
This is not a simple handshake kind of thing.

Of course, that's why we're talking about it.


I obviously overstepped my authority.
When I see a negotiation my instinct is to jump in.

Oooops!   ;D
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 26, 2016, 04:31:43 PM
Maybe you guys should've made this pitch before John got the forum working properly... because all this "loads slow, suffers from frequent downtime and is deliberately broken in functionality" just isn't true now.

What y'all want are all the hits this site gets.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Blanko on May 26, 2016, 04:39:31 PM
Maybe you guys should've made this pitch before John got the forum working properly... because all this "loads slow, suffers from frequent downtime and is deliberately broken in functionality" just isn't true now.

Funny you should mention it, because there was a lengthy downtime just earlier today. And I've had several 20+ second page loads just trying to post in this thread.

And John was the one who introduced an arbitrary word filter, so in that regard the forum was actually working better before he stepped in.

Quote
What y'all want are all the hits this site gets.

If that were true, wouldn't you also want the hits our site gets? Again, it's mutually beneficial.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 26, 2016, 04:49:51 PM
The other site has 17 guests viewing the forum, this one has 81.  That is the value this site brings. You shouldn't deny it, if you're being honest.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Blanko on May 26, 2016, 04:58:03 PM
How is that even a concern? It's not like you would be losing any of those hits in a merger.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 26, 2016, 05:31:04 PM
This site has value, one of those values is the number of hits it gets. The other FES pretends this site has no value, so Daniel should hand it over. I never said a thing about this site losing hits in a merger, it is not a "concern".  You have rabinoz over there complaining about how dead it is. 

Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Blanko on May 26, 2016, 06:06:49 PM
If it's not a concern, I don't see how this is relevant. I've never claimed that this site has no value, and I'm sure most people on our site haven't either.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Pongo on May 26, 2016, 06:28:50 PM
The other site has 17 guests viewing the forum, this one has 81.  That is the value this site brings. You shouldn't deny it, if you're being honest.

If this is an issue for you, think of it as this site gaining many more flat-earthers without getting porportionally as many roundies.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 26, 2016, 08:18:35 PM
I've never claimed that this site has no value, and I'm sure most people on our site haven't either.
Wait, haven't what?

Yes, we both have value. Value derived directly off the Truth. Its not about our value or yours, its about whats best for the idea, and the Flat Earth Society. It might be that its better to have us separate. I think we both have a point of view that's worth while, and I'm not sure its the same one. Though they might live well together. At the very least, we need to be working together, not against each other. We don't need to repeat the mistakes of Ferrari and Shenton.

It seems we aren't as enthusiastic as I might have thought. Perhaps we put a pin in this, and see how things go. If we can't work together for a bit, we have no hope of working together for a long time. Let's work on some small efforts, then see if either of us want to move forward.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: PizzaPlanet on May 27, 2016, 01:42:54 AM
The other site has 17 guests viewing the forum, this one has 81.  That is the value this site brings. You shouldn't deny it, if you're being honest.
The spambots hammering this website are not a benefit, they're a problem that, in John's credit, has been partially solved (it looks like most of them are unable to register at this point). They're also likely linked to the forum's performance issues. Again, I appreciate that the forum isn't as slow as it used to be, but it's hardly been fixed. If you want to see what a forum that isn't slow looks like, you know where to find us.

It seems we aren't as enthusiastic as I might have thought. Perhaps we put a pin in this, and see how things go. If we can't work together for a bit, we have no hope of working together for a long time. Let's work on some small efforts, then see if either of us want to move forward.
I think I'm leaning towards agreeing with you - but for all the "wrong" reasons. The reunification is completely achievable and workable - the only thing that's stopping us from working together is the continuous accusations levied against us.

"You're DDoSers... oh, no, you're not, sorry about that. Boom, let's put forward a word filter to remove all links to your site... oh, no, no, we're sorry about that too, that was misguided... actually nevermind, the word filter comes back. YOU'RE ALL TERRORISTS!!! Oh, no, you're not terrorists... hey, let's talk about the merger again!"

I would like to request that you pick a line of reasoning and stick with it. If you despise us and think that we're everything that's wrong with the world (attackers, terrorists, a menace, usurpers, whatever) - that's fine. We can all go our own way and pretend the other group doesn't exist. We don't need to get in each other's way, and we can all live happily ever after. If, on the other hand, you think that the Flat Earth cause is important enough to look past our occasional differences, then I implore you to cease these spontaneous outbursts.

It's not to say that apologising after you've done something like that is the wrong move, but the apology only means something if you avoid doing the exact same thing 2 months later. With you, it's consistently... inconsistent, and from my perspective, your flip-flopping simply makes you look incredulous.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Jack on May 27, 2016, 02:32:47 AM
How could we "screw you over"? What does that even mean in this context? 
My point is that we're uninsured against any scenario detrimental to us or our (or Daniel's) interests. For instance, there's no guarantee that your administration won't forcibly do to the unified FES something we reject completely, and since we no longer have the keys we won't be able to do anything about it.

Actually, you would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. You would get our superior services, our superior technical expertise and active administration, our superior design and branding, and you would no longer have to worry about falling behind in SEO and social media reach. All this without putting in any effort on your part.

But, wait, if you act now, your site will be absorbed and consumed.

That does not sound like a merger.


All we want out of this is a unified userbase,

And in exchange you are offering this site assisted suicide.


If this is the extent of the deal, they are offering nothing.
I agree. I think we should put this matter to rest and move on. If any of our users wants "superior" services, he or she can always go to the other site for them. Plus in the event that, for whatever reason, one of the sites is no longer accessible, rendered unusable or simply gone, at least those still interested in FES stuff will have something to fall back on.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Parsifal on May 27, 2016, 05:01:52 AM
My point is that we're uninsured against any scenario detrimental to us or our (or Daniel's) interests. For instance, there's no guarantee that your administration won't forcibly do to the unified FES something we reject completely, and since we no longer have the keys we won't be able to do anything about it.

Under the terms we had previously negotiated with Daniel, he would retain control over the theflatearthsociety.org domain name. That was one point we were happy to concede in exchange for control over the forum, with the understanding that in the event of a major falling out, he would be able to switch over the DNS to something under his control. Put another way, we would have the keys to the car, but you would be able to lock the garage.

While those terms are no longer considered suitable from our side, that is one particular aspect I see no reason to change if we were to renegotiate.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 27, 2016, 07:46:21 AM
The other site has 17 guests viewing the forum, this one has 81.  That is the value this site brings. You shouldn't deny it, if you're being honest.

If this is an issue for you, think of it as this site gaining many more flat-earthers without getting porportionally as many roundies.

You're still not getting it. Some of the defectors go on about how terrible this forum is, as if it has no value and nothing to offer. They just want a unified userbase! I'm calling bullshit on that. This site is active, this site gets tons of noobs, this site gets tons of views (even if a good deal of them are spambots). This is the site people come to after one of John Davis, or Daniel's interviews. They built this up, and Daniel has foot the bill. Value.

This is not a hateful message!

Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: PizzaPlanet on May 27, 2016, 07:53:22 AM
They just want a unified userbase!
I don't think that's what anyone on our side claims, and if it came across that way, I would suggest it's a simple miscommunication. Then again, I shouldn't be speaking for others, so here's my own view in a nutshell:

A unified userbase is an important and arguably main benefit to me, but absolutely not the sole one. Providing visitors with a single port of call rather than a number of fragmented resources is another. More traffic to the combined site is a mutual benefit (and yes, we'd be getting a bigger boost than you - there, I said it).

However, I personally don't think that we should be downgrading our services to accommodate that - I'd rather have a smaller site that provides a good service to its members than a large website that doesn't work so well. As such, I'd be a strong supporter of keeping our homepage (which anyone can easily post announcements to), our more-up-to-date-wiki, and our slicker forum setup. If anything, I would say that the technical implementation of this site has questionable value.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 27, 2016, 09:12:02 AM
Ran a quick test. grepped out the ips from the guest list then threw them at a spam database api.  18 / 114 were marked as spam bots with over 50% confidence.  With 10% (a very generous confidence, meaning they are only 10% confident it is a spammer) this jumps to just 30/114. With 1% we jump to 35/114.

To me this is a good indicator that a large number of our guests are lurkers.

Obviously there are flaws with this method as no db is going to have all the spammers. Its hard to assess a false-negative rate in general, let alone here. I could add more calls to other databases, but it certainly doesn't seem necessary. Perhaps I'll add this lookup to some key performance hog pages, though its hard to believe any one page would be more of a performance hog than waiting on a foreign hosted api.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Pongo on May 27, 2016, 09:38:04 AM
You're still not getting it. Some of the defectors go on about how terrible this forum is, as if it has no value and nothing to offer. They just want a unified userbase! I'm calling bullshit on that. This site is active, this site gets tons of noobs, this site gets tons of views (even if a good deal of them are spambots). This is the site people come to after one of John Davis, or Daniel's interviews. They built this up, and Daniel has foot the bill. Value.

This is not a hateful message!

So, your objection to the merger (or at least this objection) is that you believe some people on the other site are misrepresenting their motives for the merger? As in, they say this site has nothing to offer but a combined userbase and you disagree with what they say and don't want to merge because of it.

Do I have that correct or am I completely misreading you?

I'm not trying to be hateful either, I don't think any discussion will get very far if we are hateful to one another.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 27, 2016, 10:04:51 AM
You're still not getting it. Some of the defectors go on about how terrible this forum is, as if it has no value and nothing to offer. They just want a unified userbase! I'm calling bullshit on that. This site is active, this site gets tons of noobs, this site gets tons of views (even if a good deal of them are spambots). This is the site people come to after one of John Davis, or Daniel's interviews. They built this up, and Daniel has foot the bill. Value.

This is not a hateful message!

So, your objection to the merger (or at least this objection) is that you believe some people on the other site are misrepresenting their motives for the merger? As in, they say this site has nothing to offer but a combined userbase and you disagree with what they say and don't want to merge because of it.

Do I have that correct or am I completely misreading you?

I'm not trying to be hateful either, I don't think any discussion will get very far if we are hateful to one another.

This was my objection to the way it was/is being negotiated. If they wanted a friendly merger they should stop acting like this site is a shithole with nothing to offer, or that Daniel owes them the database.  There's an underlying dislike of John Davis that drives a lot of this, which I don't get because he's almost always been nice about things. When he says something out of order he apologizes for it. People say lots of nasty shit to him, so it should be understandable that he snaps back sometimes.

My main objection to the merger is that it's unnecessary. Everyone who posts over there are still welcome to post here, even Thork!  Why should Daniel hand it all over to people he doesn't know and isn't friends with? John has been steadily making the technical side better, and no matter how good Parsifal is, no one is perfect. Any forum that draws this kind of attention is going to lag or have downtime now and then.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Blanko on May 27, 2016, 10:41:24 AM
If they wanted a friendly merger they should stop acting like this site is a shithole with nothing to offer, or that Daniel owes them the database.

Can you name anyone who acts like this, aside from Thork?

Quote
There's an underlying dislike of John Davis that drives a lot of this, which I don't get because he's almost always been nice about things. When he says something out of order he apologizes for it. People say lots of nasty shit to him, so it should be understandable that he snaps back sometimes.

In actuality, most of his resentment towards us is completely unprovoked. He employed a hostile word filter against us without provocation, and called us terrorists and deplorable human beings without provocation. Apologies hardly mean anything if you continue to repeat your mistakes.

Despite that, I don't think it's true that a dislike for John is driving this conversation. If anything, the opposite is true. If we weren't willing to cooperate with him, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Quote
My main objection to the merger is that it's unnecessary. Everyone who posts over there are still welcome to post here, even Thork!  Why should Daniel hand it all over to people he doesn't know and isn't friends with? John has been steadily making the technical side better, and no matter how good Parsifal is, no one is perfect. Any forum that draws this kind of attention is going to lag or have downtime now and then.

Let me ask you this: don't you want the userbase to be unified? Because that really is the crux of the issue. You might think it's unnecessary, but even if you think there's any benefit to having a unified userbase, I think it warrants discussion. We both miss out on a huge amount of discussions that could be better served in a single forum, and for those who do use both sites it's a nuisance to have to browse two different sites and talk to two different sets of users.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 27, 2016, 11:40:37 AM
I think there definitely is quite a bit of dislike towards me. If I recall, the last time we had these talks, it was explicitly declared that I would have no part of the Society at all. On your forums, there's a funny little thread about me masturbating with piss stained pants that is fairly recent.
Negotiations were not short. John reclined into his dilapidated arm chair. Little chunks of yellow stuffing adorned the floor and an old dog blanket with matted tassels hung limply over the chair's arms. The room stunk like someone had slaughtered a soaking sheep in there several months before, but the reality was more disgusting. The rotting microbes from John's breath had filled the room as the slow-witted mouth-breather rolled his eyes up into his head to contemplate. John swigged from a super-market home-brand vodka bottle, clutched in his grubby nicotine stained paws. How could he still retain power and be Lord of the Flat Earth? Master of all.

A noisy blue arsed fly was lapping triangles above his head but he paid it no attention. Those evil bastards had created another website. One that worked exactly like the one he loved, only the page load times were significantly improved and its users didn't have to put up with his shit as an out of control admin. They had to be crushed.

Stage one would be a delaying tactic. By promising a merger would happen, the terrorist faction would not be in such a rush to duplicate and improve on features such as the wiki and social media platforms. They'd also struggle with things like membership packs and a shop.
Stage two would be a smear campaign. Ensure that anyone who listened was told they were impostors. Had no legitimacy. Were all shills. Had herpes. Were immigrants. And most damning of all, worked for NASA.
Stage three ... eliminate their existence from the records. Remove all links to their site, ban talk of it on the forums, inform media outlets that they are just a parody and expunge them from wikipedia.
Stage four, start legal proceedings. Claim their wiki is somehow your own. It doesn't matter that they wrote it. Claim the name 'flat earth society' as a trademark despite it being in the common lexicon for over 200 years.

With the first four stages complete, parasite Davis licked his greasy lips. Stage five. Having amassed a fortune in T-shirt money, it was time to call an old acquaintance. Davis pulled his iPhone 2 out of his jacket. Pocket detritus filled the cracks in the screen but enough still worked to make a call. 'Calling Lord Steven Christ'. Lord Steven Christ was every bit as unhinged as Davis. This wide-eyed fuckwit had been making videos on youTube for the last year about how round the earth was. He'd stay up until the early hours making live streams, calling out flat earthers to debate him. His massive square head lit up from a single bulb and the rest of the room in darkness, which if Davis' room is anything to go by is a blessing.

"Is that you Christ?", asked Davis in a raspy tone. "Davissssss" hissed Lord Steven. "What can I do for you, Master?"
"I need you to whack a few flat earthers for me. Don't leave any trail. They just need to disappear ... like Daniel." the lack of remorse in Davis' voice chilled even the untalented youTuber.
"$2000 per hit. You know how much I love killing flat earthers. Do you have that kind of money?" asked Lord Steven greedily.
"You should see how many people are waiting for hoodies. I've got shit loads of cash. The targets are as follows." Davis rattled off the names.
"No Dubay or Powerland?" Lord Steven asked, unable to hide his disappointment. "If we don't do it soon master, Dubay will become flexible enough to suck his own cock and put it on youtube! My youTube!".
"Stick to the list, I'll wire you the money. Unless you'd like some T-shirt credit instead?" The phone clicked dead. Davis knew the rules. No takebacksies.

Davis put down his phone and began undoing his trousers. Stuffing one of his hairy little hands into his urine caked y-fronts, he began to masturbate aggressively. Alcohol abuse and chain smoking had deadened his manhood as he tugged away at his flaccid unwashed tiddler. Within a couple of minutes he'd nodded off unfulfilled and proceeded to snore loudly, hand still clasping his chipolata.

So in answer to the OP, no ... the merger is not going ahead because this is the kind of individual we are having to deal with.  >o<

Like Rowbotham, truth is so much in my favor that I can well afford to be dainty in my selection:

"John Davis is crazier than a barrel full of raccoons."

"I won't miss Davis one bit. He's like Daniel's little poodle. Yap yap yap. "

"It is a shame Wilmore, Davis and Shenton all insist on continuing despite none of them actually wanting to put any effort into improving things. They just drag the name through the mud again."

"I'm certainly done now. I thought I could appeal to John Davis' tech knowledge, only to find out that he has no clue what he's talking about."

"John Davis drinks. He's better avoided."

"Maybe they are finally pulling the plug? I doubt it though. Davis and Shenton aren't that classy."

"John Davis also runs a FES chapter of his own in Tennessee his head."

"Actually, it looks like John Davis is having his 54th go at building a successful flat earth website.
http://theflatearthsociety.net/

Its full of his usual nonsensical stories

Quote from: http://theflatearthsociety.net/contexts.html
Eshu was walking down a road one day, wearing a hat that was red on one side and black on the other. Sometime after he entered a village which the road went through, the villagers who had seen him began arguing about whether the stranger's hat was black or red. The villagers on one side of the road had only been capable of seeing the black side, and the villagers on the other side had only been capable of seeing the red one. They soon came to blows over the disagreement which caused him to turn back and rebuke them, revealing to them how one's perspective can be as correct as another person's even when they appear to be diametrically opposed to each other. He then left them with a stern warning about how closed-mindedness can cause one to be made a fool.

As parables go, that's a pretty awful one. I have to wonder what goes through his mind. Does he think this is clever? Or would he get into a fight over the colour of someone's hat?

The whole site is filled with this uninteresting garbage."

"Like it says, though, Eshu was apparently a trickster deity, and I suspect that this story was meant to be more of an illustration of his trollish nature than a sincere fable about the need to broaden one's mind and consider other perspectives.  It's not a bad moral to teach, but there are other fables that teach it in a much better way, like the one about three guys arguing over what color a chameleon they saw is.  That one works better because we already understand that chameleons can change color, but at the same time we can appreciate that someone who didn't know anything about chameleons wouldn't expect that at all.  A guy walking down the street wearing a multicolored hat, however, is just silly."

"John Davis: I'M SUPER SERIAL GUISE DON'T POST I AM TRYING 2 FIX FORUM THAT I BROKE"

" It was mostly James and John Davis that made ridiculously quotable posts,"

"We had a bit of an incident with a serial murderer killing everyone who walked in. We've dispatched John Davis to resolve this, so you should expect the zoo to be a safe space in approx. 1-2147483648 days." response: "pp when will you stop mentioning jd get over it"

"If there's a process in place to free the site of tyrants or useless leaders we won't have to worry about a John Davis type situation. "

"John has made a powerful enemy."

"Didn't John Davis start a religion where he said he was god?"

Name 10 idiots: "4. John Davis (since that yo mama for some reson doesent cownt even tho im going on a hot date with her and your sister tonite! OHHHHH!!!!!! SWAG x10000000!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 27, 2016, 11:50:28 AM
That said, I hope that's not what is driving this conversation. However, this isn't meant to be a conversation with you guys about the merger. It was supposed to be one with our userbase to see if they actually wanted it. I'm not seeing anybody that wants it that isn't already at Voldemort.org
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Blanko on May 27, 2016, 12:25:21 PM
That's fine, I just wanted to clear up misconceptions that we want a "hostile takeover" or some other ridiculous notion like that. If these misconceptions are the basis on which your side are forming their views, they should be addressed, no?
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 27, 2016, 12:50:04 PM
Of course. I think there are some misconceptions on both sides.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 27, 2016, 03:06:51 PM
Blanko, if you read this (I don't wanna post a huge quote thingy) -

I don't actually long for a unified userbase. I'm not seeing what the benefit of that is, other than having the gang all together again. (I miss some of you nerds, of course.) Maybe you guys should think about creating a unique FE website. Come up with your own names for forums, find your own direction. I've been a member of several spinoff boards over the years, but none of them copied the forum they spun off from like you guys have done.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Parsifal on May 27, 2016, 10:01:20 PM
Maybe you guys should think about creating a unique FE website. Come up with your own names for forums, find your own direction. I've been a member of several spinoff boards over the years, but none of them copied the forum they spun off from like you guys have done.

Aside from the forum names, which work well and I don't see a reason to change, we haven't really copied anything. We had the same theme for a while, but only because our forum started as a way of testing themes for the contest here a while back. In other words, we had the tintagel_fes theme before you did. Our forum rules are original, our homepage content is original, and our wiki is original -- barring a few duly credited descriptions of theories posited here.

Perhaps more importantly, we never wanted to be a spinoff forum. My own preference, and that of some others, was to help improve this one. There are numerous threads and other private correspondence prior to the schism where I offered (increasingly impatiently, I'll admit) to help with a problem this site was having, only to be ignored without so much as a "no thank you", or even a "fuck off".

The sole reason we created our site in the first place is that we were never given the time of day when we tried to make things better here. Being expected to come up with something of our own, when all we ever wanted was to improve what we already had, is missing the point.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: PizzaPlanet on May 28, 2016, 03:12:33 AM
On your forums, there's a funny little thread about me masturbating with piss stained pants that is fairly recent.
I thought you already said you know that Thork isn't to be taken seriously?

Also, the same forum has multiple posts about Parsifal and me having sex. A thread about Parsifal being a gorilla. A thread dedicated to insulting Thork. The sense of humour of some of our posters may be crude, but it's hardly targeted.

And it's not like there wasn't a precedent of that happening here. Let's be serious.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 28, 2016, 08:06:11 AM
On your forums, there's a funny little thread about me masturbating with piss stained pants that is fairly recent.
I thought you already said you know that Thork isn't to be taken seriously?

Also, the same forum has multiple posts about Parsifal and me having sex. A thread about Parsifal being a gorilla. A thread dedicated to insulting Thork. The sense of humour of some of our posters may be crude, but it's hardly targeted.

And it's not like there wasn't a precedent of that happening here. Let's be serious.
Fair enough, then hopefully my reply isn't too much there.

Anyways, I'm not really interested in a bunch of drama fighting. If this is what it degrades to, then theres no point in a merger.

The wiki is largely derivative and contains portions of mine and Daniels work, and I'm sure other members you didn't get permission from before you released them under a license we didn't agree to. But I don't think we are going to get anything out of bringing up ancient history.

What I'm seeing right now is that none of the moderators on our side are interested. None of the users are interested. Its really just me, Pongo and the absent Wilmore. It might be best to wait a few months, act nicely to each other (other than Thork, cause Thork), and re-evaluate then. What do you think?

Another option is perhaps a smaller concession from both sides. Something like treating your group as a branch of the larger Society. See how that goes, then move forward later.

I have no doubt you did what you did because you felt it was what was best for the FES forums. I have no doubt thats why you are here today, talking about the merger. I have no doubt we both know we both have value. I suggest we stop going on about the past, myself included (lolz terrorism).
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: PizzaPlanet on May 28, 2016, 09:02:13 AM
Fair enough, then hopefully my reply isn't too much there.
As far as I can tell, everyone thought it was hilarious.

What I'm seeing right now is that none of the moderators on our side are interested. None of the users are interested. Its really just me, Pongo and the absent Wilmore. It might be best to wait a few months, act nicely to each other (other than Thork, cause Thork), and re-evaluate then. What do you think?

Another option is perhaps a smaller concession from both sides. Something like treating your group as a branch of the larger Society. See how that goes, then move forward later.
Personally, I like the sound of both ideas. However, I fear that neither will ever be feasible or popular if the userbase of this site is exposed to stuff like jroa's "those other guys stole our site" narrative, especially when it goes unchecked and uncorrected. Eliminating this sort of misinformation (on both sides) is essential to reaching agreements. Is addressing these sort of issues what you mean by "acting nicely to each other"?
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Dinosaur Neil on May 28, 2016, 11:10:11 AM
Much as I hate the nasty little bastard, Thork's story was hilarious. Especially the bit about Daniel having been "disappeared" - because it's so accurate. It was pretty mean to John though, and much as I slag him off for his pathetic FE arguments, he is one of the most civilised FE'ers and I can't understand the level of hatred.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 28, 2016, 07:32:27 PM
He's said to me that those sort of things will end. Another issue that came up is that you guys seem to have some visibility into our private forums. I'm sure its a matter of one of ours simply talking about stuff he figured was public enough, and I don't really know the details, but it would be nice if that kinda stuff would stop as well.

Let's move forward with the smaller concession plan. I'll drop by at some point this week and we can talk it over.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 28, 2016, 07:32:56 PM
And yes, Thork's post was quite funny.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Bullwinkle on May 28, 2016, 08:16:02 PM
They just want a unified userbase!
I don't think that's what anyone on our side claims,



All we want out of this is a unified userbase,



 :-*
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Symptom on May 28, 2016, 09:30:38 PM
So much drama.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Parsifal on May 28, 2016, 11:08:48 PM
What I'm seeing right now is that none of the moderators on our side are interested. None of the users are interested. Its really just me, Pongo and the absent Wilmore. It might be best to wait a few months, act nicely to each other (other than Thork, cause Thork), and re-evaluate then. What do you think?

Indeed, it doesn't look particularly promising at the moment. It just seems like a lot of the objections raised in this thread are based on misinformation, either about the merger or about what we want out of it. I agree with SexWarrior's point about stopping that kind of thing.

Personally, I've always striven to be nice to you guys, as I've never really had anything against this forum. I will request that our users act nicely and make it clear that it is a two-way street.

Another option is perhaps a smaller concession from both sides. Something like treating your group as a branch of the larger Society. See how that goes, then move forward later.

Sounds good to me, depending on how the specifics turn out of course.

I have no doubt you did what you did because you felt it was what was best for the FES forums. I have no doubt thats why you are here today, talking about the merger. I have no doubt we both know we both have value. I suggest we stop going on about the past, myself included (lolz terrorism).

Agreed.

He's said to me that those sort of things will end. Another issue that came up is that you guys seem to have some visibility into our private forums. I'm sure its a matter of one of ours simply talking about stuff he figured was public enough, and I don't really know the details, but it would be nice if that kinda stuff would stop as well.

How did that issue come up? I'm just curious what you've seen, in case I can identify the source of it. Feel free to PM me the information if you'd rather not draw attention to it here.

While we obviously can't stop people with access to that forum talking about it if they want to, I will ask them to stop if I see it happening. That said, it might not even be apparent if they don't mention the source of the information, so I can't make any guarantees.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Pongo on May 29, 2016, 07:51:54 PM
He's said to me that those sort of things will end. Another issue that came up is that you guys seem to have some visibility into our private forums. I'm sure its a matter of one of ours simply talking about stuff he figured was public enough, and I don't really know the details, but it would be nice if that kinda stuff would stop as well.

How did that issue come up? I'm just curious what you've seen, in case I can identify the source of it. Feel free to PM me the information if you'd rather not draw attention to it here.

While we obviously can't stop people with access to that forum talking about it if they want to, I will ask them to stop if I see it happening. That said, it might not even be apparent if they don't mention the source of the information, so I can't make any guarantees.

I'm curious about this as well.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Dinosaur Neil on May 30, 2016, 04:45:05 AM
I have a concern that some of the denizens of the other forum still like to pretend that some of the concepts that have been largely dumped by this forum are still viable.
For example, the ridiculous (and long disproved) bendy light theory, which the FE'ers here have dropped since it is readily shown not to fit observations. I notice Parsifal still has "Bendy Light Specialist" on his profile. Then there's the large presence of Peeping Tom Bishop and his restoration of invisible items with a telescope, which also does not fit observations except - magically - by Bishop himself.
These two characters cannot be argued with on their pretense of these beliefs, because they do not engage with the counterarguments. However, incorporating them among the FE'ers on this forum will give the impression to newcomers that these ideas have some sort of validity. This will throw the progress of FE research (which has come up with many more advanced ideas) back by several years.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: PizzaPlanet on May 30, 2016, 06:33:42 AM
[EAT] is readily shown not to fit observations.
If it's so easy, why haven't you done it yet in an appropriate thread?

Tom Bishop and his restoration of invisible items with a telescope, which also does not fit observations except - magically - by Bishop himself.
Or, you know, plenty of other people who successfully reproduced his results. If you'd like to present some evidence to the contrary, I once again invite you to do so in the right place.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Dinosaur Neil on May 30, 2016, 11:45:36 AM
[EAT] is readily shown not to fit observations.
If it's so easy, why haven't you done it yet in an appropriate thread?

Tom Bishop and his restoration of invisible items with a telescope, which also does not fit observations except - magically - by Bishop himself.
Or, you know, plenty of other people who successfully reproduced his results. If you'd like to present some evidence to the contrary, I once again invite you to do so in the right place.

To respond to the EAT question - this is exactly what I mean by non-engagement with the counterarguments. There are plenty all over this site which a cursory search would easily find, yet Pizza Hackit pretends that these threads do not exist.
 
To respond to the Magic Bishop Restoration - again, there are many accounts (and even photographic evidence) in many places on this forum demonstrating that this effect does not occur, but of course the pretence that there aren't any is trotted out again. Note also that he makes a claim that "plenty of other people successfully reproduced his results" without naming any of them. My statements can be verified by a search of the forum - his cannot, because they are lies.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 30, 2016, 12:01:19 PM
 People are allowed to post their theories, even if you don't like them, or don't like how they engage. What's it got to do with "Opinions on the Merger" tho?
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Dinosaur Neil on May 30, 2016, 12:12:05 PM
People are allowed to post their theories, even if you don't like them, or don't like how they engage. What's it got to do with "Opinions on the Merger" tho?

That's my whole point - they ARE allowed to post their theories, and there are theories among the FE'ers on that site that FE'ers on this site don't support, because they've been critically looked at and FET has moved on from them. I wanted to be sure that Mr Davis et al were happy to let the progress made on FET that has happened on this site by debunking these comical ideas, be thrown in the garbage by joining up with a site that is fundamentally behind the times when it comes to FET. Everyone has been working on the premise that the only difference between their site and ours is the personalities involved, when that's not quite true.
It's a bit like asking a modern medicine forum if they're happy to merge with the homeopathic witchdoctor's forum.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on May 30, 2016, 02:39:17 PM
It's a valid point. With some recent changes and upcoming changes we are radically shifting the position of the Society (while we don't ever have an official model, we still have ones that end up getting emphasized on our user facing content) to bring us towards two models: the non-euclidean and the infinite plane both which function with or without firmament. This might leave some of your users uneasy about the whole thing. Especially since they weigh heavily on Rowbotham and we are attempting to reunite with the efforts of Johnson and Shenton.

Its reasons like this that the 'Chapter of the FES' idea really shines. You guys also have a lighter view of things, often mixing serious debate with humor. While I've been known to do that as well, its certainly not the same as it once was here.

Something to keep in mind, but I doubt its a deal breaker. We are after all an organization of free-thinkers.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: Space Cowgirl on May 30, 2016, 03:15:06 PM
People are allowed to post their theories, even if you don't like them, or don't like how they engage. What's it got to do with "Opinions on the Merger" tho?

That's my whole point - they ARE allowed to post their theories, and there are theories among the FE'ers on that site that FE'ers on this site don't support, because they've been critically looked at and FET has moved on from them. I wanted to be sure that Mr Davis et al were happy to let the progress made on FET that has happened on this site by debunking these comical ideas, be thrown in the garbage by joining up with a site that is fundamentally behind the times when it comes to FET. Everyone has been working on the premise that the only difference between their site and ours is the personalities involved, when that's not quite true.
It's a bit like asking a modern medicine forum if they're happy to merge with the homeopathic witchdoctor's forum.

Oh, okay. I see what you're saying.
Title: Re: Opinions on the Merger
Post by: John Davis on June 02, 2016, 09:26:40 AM
Opinions have been gathered. I will have a discussion with the other side at some point. Thanks everybody for your participation and patience.