23
24

Its time for me to Sublime. (self.TheCulture)

[deleted] が 投稿

I am deleting my reddit account, nanoviral can takeover or someone else can be promoted to mod. I'm frankly disgusted by the behavior I've seen the last couple months. The number of personal attack threads, baseless reports, and inflammatory mod-mails is just abominable. I had intended this sub to be a place where the Culture's values of free-speech and inclusion would be honored. I envisioned the moderation to be very much like Peace Faction. However there are a significant number among you who do not agree. To all of those who didn't fan the flames of drama and harassment, I wish you the best. To the rest, I hope you are seen for the Affront you truly are.

全 85 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]oatmealicus 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Reconsider. Staying would only accentuate the openness and inclusivity of the Culture, which we all try to abide by. Don't let temporary unpleasantness take that from you.

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sorry to see things have come to this, hopefully you'll reconsider and stay.

[–]GOU Overwhelmingly Underestimated (Murderer Class)gatheloc 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm very sorry to hear this. Seems a lot happens beneath the surface that we're not privy to. There has indeed been a lot of drama, but it's a shame to learn that the drama has evolved into nastiness and aggression. I'd quite hoped the level of immaturity we had collectively reached was that observed in public, but clearly in private that level goes a lot lower.

In the face of this type of behaviour any sub needs a level-headed and impartial moderation team to weather behaviour that goes against the values of the sub, and to my view you have always steered us right. I urge you not to leave but if your mind is made up I wish /u/nanoViral the best in dealing with us rambunctious lot alone.

[–]ROU Diplomacy Through Other Meansspatialcircumstances 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (17子コメント)

I'm sorry to see you go. I always appreciated the minimalist moderation approach in this sub.

I guess it's time for me to leave too. Since this is already established as the dramatic exit thread, I hope it's okay for me to piggyback on.

Full disclosure; since /u/Grapp ignored all my attempts to directly engage with him about his posting habits, I messaged the mods this morning with (what I thought was) a polite request to set the submission limit to 1/day, in a last effort to try to improve a sub that I love rather than just walk away from it. Apparently this makes me an Affront, I guess?

As much as I love the Culture and most of this community, I'm not interested in subscribing to /r/TheGrapp. I'm sure I'll still check in here occasionally, but I'm tired of trying to reason with a spammer who is more interested in an echo chamber than a dialogue. Time for me to head off into the black and be Eccentric for a while.

[–][deleted] 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Full disclosure; since /u/Grapp ignored all my attempts to directly engage with him about his posting habits, I messaged the mods this morning with (what I thought was) a polite request to set the submission limit to 1/day, in a last effort to try to improve a sub that I love rather than just walk away from it. Apparently this makes me an Affront, I guess?

Your message was reasonable, even though I don't agree with your solution. I've been getting other messages that are just outright vile. I suppose I could have been more explicit.

[–]GCU CowcaddensCitizendAreAlarmed 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I've been getting other messages that are just outright vile

Can you post some examples? I get some people dislike Grapp but I never saw outright vile posts.

Also, if people are being so vile, why not ban them?

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

why not ban them?

That's not really in keeping with the theme of The Culture; free-speech and inclusion.. which is what Lifixs was hoping for. Banning people isn't the answer. Once a sub starts doing that, there's only one way for it to go :/

[–]aeon_floss 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

We're here to discuss the Culture, not to be the Culture. We don't have infinite resources like the Culture, so we couldn't be them if we tried.

But hey, try moderating for a while and have the trolls exploit your good nature and excellent intentions. You'll soon enough realise you need to be practical more than infinitely fair.

[–]GCU CowcaddensCitizendAreAlarmed 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

It's difficult to be inclusive when some people are rejecting inclusiveness. The Culture is able to deal with free speech and inclusion by having trillions of independent people making social groups as they wish. r/TheCulture isn't The Culture, reddit is The Culture. This sub is a small social group which apparently has been infiltrated by 'vile' people.

If we don't make it clear that they're not welcome, we make it clear that they are welcome.

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, warnings should be issued, but outright bans first time shouldn't. I believe Lifixs believes on minimal moderation though, so I'm not sure they'd want to send messages warning people. I don't know what, if any, warning messages have been sent.

[–]GCU I'd Rather Ask God But You'll Have To Dograpp 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (9子コメント)

I'd like the idea of a once a day limit

Full disclosure; since /u/Grapp ignored all my attempts to directly engage with him about his posting habits

I post on several subs tens of times a day. Sometimes there's like 15 comment replies in my inbox when I get back to my computer after dinner. I genuinely don't remember ever having seen your username before, although I'll take your word for it if you claim I've been blanking you.

[–]ROU Diplomacy Through Other Meansspatialcircumstances 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (8子コメント)

I'm glad you're onboard with the 1 post/day limit. I'd encourage you to try it voluntarily, regardless of subreddit rules; I think it would encourage more thoughtful and higher-quality posting.

Here are some examples of my attempts at dialogue with you over the past month.

[–]GCU I'd Rather Ask God But You'll Have To Dograpp -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (7子コメント)

That's the issue of soft vs hard barriers

Two of those were threads you started without telling me. Most of The rest weren't really invitations to have a discussion, they were just you giving me insulting advice. In the case of The one post I responded to, I did so because I thought your logic with regard to interpreting fiction was wrong, in other words I responded because you actually wrote something that engaged me.

Every one on this sub knows me, wants to debate me, wants to judge my behaviour and tell me what I should do, it strokes my ego a bit, it's a very little bit like being famous, but it does not engage me. I started ignoring the whole thing months ago

[–]ROU Diplomacy Through Other Meansspatialcircumstances 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Every one on this sub knows me, wants to debate me, wants to judge my behaviour and tell me what I should do, it strokes my ego a bit, it's a very little bit like being famous, but it does not engage me. I started ignoring the whole thing months ago

Aaaand here's the crux of the matter. You're addicted to the ego-boost of posting here but you ignore anything that makes you the slightest bit uncomfortable, i.e. when people point out that your frequent posting is often low quality. You're happy to post here, but you have no interest in participating because anyone not stroking your ego doesn't keep your interest.

Being part of a community means engaging and listening. You only want to talk.

The solution, which I've tried phrasing in all sorts of ways to get through to you, is to talk less and listen more. Engage in a discussion on a post that you didn't start yourself. Have a conversation; talk with someone, not at them.

Or just ignore this, too.

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Every one on this sub knows me, wants to debate me, wants to judge my behaviour and tell me what I should do, it strokes my ego a bit, it's a very little bit like being famous, but it does not engage me. I started ignoring the whole thing months ago

Wow. To everyone defending grapp's posting record.. this is what you're defending.

[–]ilaister 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I am relatively new to this sub and I have no idea who you are.

I am finding out though.

[–]GCU Entropic Data Jellyfishpwarren 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yep, I'm with you, perhaps to a different corner of the black :)

[–]GOU Never Mind The Debrisshinarit 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Whatever man. You created this sub. Are you sure you just want to leave it?

[–][deleted] 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Whatever man. You created this sub. Are you sure you just want to leave it?

I just cant stand how hateful people become over little to nothing. I was naive to think that those interested in the Culture would be beyond such petty BS. Perhaps its more reddit culture in general, but whatever the case its too toxic for me.

[–]GOU Never Mind The Debrisshinarit 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's fine, it's your decision. I just brought up the fact that as a founder you have a special relationship with the sub, or you might have. I can totally understand if you want to burn some bridges, sometimes you just need to.

[–]aeon_floss 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Moderating anywhere it is more important to delete / ban and move on than it is to care for the subject matter.

Internet forums is where good intentions go to die. I have seen a few communities disintegrate. But I've also seen a couple jump back by slapping down troll posts no matter who posted.

[–]GCU I Don't Answer to My Slave Nameemilyraven 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Go in peace /u/lifixs. May you find meaning and joy elsewhere on the internet, fair maiden. Love you sweetie pie!

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (32子コメント)

I'm sorry, you gave someone with manifestly poor self control and a history of acting as a nuisance mod powers. The inevitable meltdown and abuse of those powers happened, and now that person is compounding the ill will they created by using a fan sub as a political platform.

This is a mess you made. Go with peace into the great beyond by all means but don't go pointing out others' errors but acknowledge your own.

This was all inevitable once you gave a person as needy as grapp mod powers. Now we're just dealing with the results while you apparently storm off.

[–]GOU Overwhelmingly Underestimated (Murderer Class)gatheloc 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (25子コメント)

Regardless of how much you consider the mod appointment a mistake, personal attacks and inflammatory behaviour is definitely not welcome here, is not justified in the slightest and definitely should be called out, if all is as claimed.

At the end of the day, the quality of a sub depends on the participants much more than the mod team and, aside from intentional behaviour from a mod team to "ruin" a sub in some way or another, the responsibility for the subs failings falls squarely at the feet of the community involved in it.

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (24子コメント)

At the end of the day, the quality of a sub depends on the participants much more than the mod team and, aside from intentional behaviour from a mod team to "ruin" a sub in some way or another, the responsibility for the subs failings falls squarely at the feet of the community involved in it.

I agree with this. That being said, one user, a past mod, in particular is at the centre of every single drama we have. Others react and maybe not helpfully but it's still the same person in the middle.

It was manageable, and we all took it as part of life. Then he was made mod and worked to burn the place down over nothing. Far from keeping quiet and allowing things to blow over, he's continued to act as a nuisance. Are the members of the community wrong to have zero tolerance? Is it not the case that those objecting to this behaviour, whether you agree with them or not, are themselves trying to shoulder the responsibility of making things better that you ask for?

What's going on here is rubbish, and it absolutely stems from the decision to inappropriately empower an unqualified member. Speaking truth isn't calling out in this case.

[–]GOU Overwhelmingly Underestimated (Murderer Class)gatheloc 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (21子コメント)

Then he was made mod and worked to burn the place down over nothing.

I disagree with this entirely. That there was a situation he handled poorly, I agree. That his response to the situation was an overreach and a series of mistakes which made matters worse, I agree. But I have seen zero evidence that he "worked to burn the place down", and I think accusing him of this is untruthful and unfair.

Far from keeping quiet and allowing things to blow over, he's continued to act as a nuisance.

Again, I disagree. There was fallout from the incident, yes, and it gave the sub a very nasty air for about a week. Since then, though, I have seen no nuisance or aggravating behaviour, at least to my standard. For more than the past month, all of his submissions have been his standard innocent level of questioning, whether to your pleasure or distaste.

Are the members of the community wrong to have zero tolerance?

In my view, yes. As far as I am concerned, the event which cause all of this was dealt with and is over. The mod powers were removed, the tantrums were had, and since then everything has gone back to business as usual Except, apparently, there is an undercurrent of vitriol has been prevalent and is manifesting as personal attacks, contrary to the vision (and in fact, rules) of this sub. It has been stated multiple times by many users that no one is being forced to read or contribute to threads they do not agree with, and they can simply be ignored (indeed, there are tools to do so). Instead, it seems some members refusal to simply let the matter go has resulted in one of our two moderators deciding to leave.

What's going on here is indeed rubbish, but it stems only from the inability of some people to accept that not every single post in a subreddit will be to their interest and nothing else.

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (20子コメント)

In my view, yes.

OK. Also applies to all of the above. I could quote and counterpoint you as well, but I don't Fisk for the primary reason that it's a blunt tool that doesn't actually improve things.

The community is manifestly damaged. You say it's because of a bunch of people having problems. Isn't that what a damaged community is? Does the path to rebuilding involve cutting out everyone who gets annoyed at grapp? That's the nonsense here. Oh, here's another quote and response, just to show I can play that game:

As far as I am concerned, the event which cause all of this was dealt with and is over.

This is insanity. People are still feeling uncomfortable. It's therefore not dealt with, or over - it's just you saying it should be, so people should just shut up.

You think this is a place for political discussion? Grapp does. What happens when the alt right follows suit? Did you know that a mod of an alt sub offered to take over "just for a little while" in the middle of all the drama? I know, because I shut it down the instant I saw them posting.

I'll fight for this sub, and I recognise you're doing so too. Stop pretending people who are fighting a different way from you are the problem.

[–]GOU Overwhelmingly Underestimated (Murderer Class)gatheloc 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (13子コメント)

You're right. An argument of beliefs or views is pointless, particularly if they differ from the outset.

However, the event which generated all of this is most definitely over. From your own words, people are upset that someone unqualified was elevated to mod. That person is no longer elevated. Following that, the gripe was that the person has continued to be a nuisance about that event, which is no longer true; the user in question has gone back to posting in the same way as they were before the event. The event is most definitely dealt with and over. If people are still uncomfortable, it is therefore no longer about the event, but rather because they disagree with or dislike that persons posting habits. Given that the community is divided on this, and the posts are (majorly) on-topic and not against the rules, the easiest, fairest solution for everyone involved is that those who dislike the participation ignore it and refrain from participating themselves. Again, there are tools for this.

Do I think this sub is a place for political discussion? No, I think it is a place for discussion about The Culture, as stated in the rules. If a post is off-topic, it can be reported to the mods, and the decision to remove the post or not is up to them. This can be done on the merit (or not) of the post itself with zero need to bring up the character of the person posting. Now, I will admit that I have not reported any of the political posts today because the odd off-topic post really doesn't bother me; I choose to ignore them and not participate. I think we are lucky in that off-topic posts are historically few and far between. You can rest assured though, that if the subject of the sub is being continuously derailed with off-topic posts, I will absolutely be reporting them and become vocal about them if nothing is done.

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (12子コメント)

I just think people are on a different point on the journey to reporting off-topic and timewasting posts than you are. You admit yourself it's the journey we're all on.

I also just think that there's one person at the centre of every damn drama we have. You know it as well. If it was somebody else bringing politics here it wouldn't have the same reaction, and the reaction is "oh what now?" because it's always the same name.

If I had a group of friends and every time we had a drama one of the group was somehow involved I'd start distancing myself from that person.

In this context, I think we've got a person with poor self-regulation and a situation that is manifestly having longer term consequences for the simple fact that other long-standing members of the community are still feeling that it wasn't handled right. It's no good saying "it's over" because it's not. I am 100% on "let him be" but I also 100% recognise the validity of the views of people who don't feel that way. They're not the Affront (well except for old what's-his-name who does think we're a roleplaying sub and he's the Affront).

I don't have a solution other than post-by-post management either. I just wish an obviously stupid action hadn't been made, and I'm frustrated that the person who made that decision has just walked away from it.

Grapp's helpless in who he is. He needs to be managed. At his best, he's the starter of many discussion but at his worst he's the heart of the storm. The worst incident isn't over because it split us as a community. We're just not talking about our relationship problems right now.

We can talk about the people who have a problem with grapp. But we also need to talk about grapp.

[–]GOU Overwhelmingly Underestimated (Murderer Class)gatheloc 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, even on other members of the sub, that we can agree on.

However, vitriol, personal attacks, inflammatory reports are not behaviours that members are entitled to subject other members to. That is the affrontish behaviour that is being referred to.

There is really no need to talk about anyone on the sub, given that everyone is free to ignore whomever they please. What we need to talk about is behaviour that goes against the first rule of this sub, behaviour which has driven out the original creator of the sub.

It would be nice if we could drop the drama and get back to talking about the Culture, while being polite and courteous to the people engaging in the discussion regardless of what we may think of them.

At this rate we're gonna be the front page of /r/subredditdrama...

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (10子コメント)

It would absolutely be nice if we dropped the drama.

It remains that one person is involved every single time. It remains that bad feelings still exist, at least for a proportion of the sub. Are they being Affronters? Maybe, or maybe not - maybe one member has pushed too many buttons and continues to do so. Can we defend that one member forever? It just seems head-in-the-sand to me.

We deserve to be on the front page of /r/subredditdrama because that's what we're doing right now. You think top mod quitting isn't worthy fodder? You think his actions aren't also a part of what's happened here? Of course they are, which goes back to my original point.

He made someone inappropriate a mod.

That person abused their powers.

That abuse resulted in a flame war.

What went down was in no way addressed by the mods, apart from by demodding.

That lack of accountability - not the behaviour of grapp - has left a sourness in the sub.

This was handled badly. This is the last part of bad handling related to the matter. I hope nanoviral can do better. I hope nanoviral brings other users on to help him.

[–]GOU Overwhelmingly Underestimated (Murderer Class)gatheloc 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (9子コメント)

That "this" was handled badly is not the issue at hand. I refer you to my original response to your point that regardless of how anyone feels the situation was handled, personal attacks, bogus reports and inflammatory messages are not a justified response and is behaviour that has no place in this sub, both due to the values of the the fictional universe which we discuss and due the rules of the subreddit.

As for defending members... you can be sure that as long as a member is posting rule-abiding content that instigates discussion, I will absolutely defend their posting habits and speak against anyone who thinks that personal attacks and inflammatory behaviour are an acceptable way of disagreement, especially when other options exist.

[–]ratioprosperous -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

You're putting words in people's mouths that they didn't say ("shut up"), you're calling people, or their ideas, or their expression of their ideas "insanity", when the notion in question is 1) explicitly subjective ("as far as I'm concerned") and 2) literally the case (when the "cause of all this" was a moderatorship which has been over for weeks), and dismissing arguments contrary to what you think is salient by calling "nonsense" on positions no one has taken.

One doesn't have to "pretend" to find this disingenuous, if intentional then possibly moderately disrespectful, and counterproductive.

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Look, at the heart of what you're talking out is a logical impossibility. Rather than using rhetoric, I'll address it logically.

P1: There is no lasting effect from "the grapp incident" P2: People are still upset from "the grapp incident"

Your P3 is:

P3: People who are still upset from "the grapp incident" are wrong.

I don't have a P3 because P1 and P2 are mutually exclusive.

My logic is:

P4: Entity A (you) believes P1 (There is no lasting effect from "the grapp incident") is true P5: Entity A believes P2 (People are still upset from "the grapp incident") is true

Therefore:

P6: Entity A is not thinking things through clearly.

I'm not using the word "insanity" in anything more than a rhetorical fashion. You're holding two mutually exclusive thoughts in your head and arguing to make them true.

The other option is:

P7: Entity A only wants people who agree with them to speak in the sub - which is "shut up" in my book.

That might be true, and I'd rather you were mistaken than thinking in this way.

[–]ratioprosperous -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Entity A wants all courteous and respectful non-copyright-infringing enthusiasts of the Culture stories to speak in the sub, including those who disagree with it (although Entity A finds this notion bemusing, because Entity A is a purveyor of exceptionally reasonable and affable opinions as well as diligently researched and widely interesting facts).

Entity A is simultaneously aware of both the timeline of events, which have transpired in the past, in the sub and what has been wisely called the "undercurrent of vitriol" which obtains in the present.

Entity A has been trying to gently gesture toward the idea that your hyperbolic misrepresentations of people's motivations and the consequences of their actions might, might, not be the best way to get the bulk of conversation around here back to more of the kind of on-topic posts we all nominally want to see, and cautions you, respectfully, to consider whether your own statements, however well reasoned, based on views however dearly held, do not venture into the undesirable territory of "personal attacks, contrary to the vision (and in fact, rules) of this sub".

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

OK. So, we've agreed on terms of the discussion. I'll refrain from hyperbole and you'll, I hope, refrain from responding in pastiche as you have above. Where are we at on the larger conversation? Agree to disagree?

I think there's a problem because there's a problem. I think there's lasting effects because there's lasting effects. You still havent's responded to the conflict inherent in:

P1: There is no lasting effect from "the grapp incident"

P2: People are still upset from "the grapp incident"

Until you can - instead of debating how I talk - we can't really proceed.

[–]ratioprosperous -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I honestly, earnestly, meant nothing more than, let's say, self-consciously weary self-deprecation with my little pastiche. I'm not making fun of anything except my own inability to make myself clear. Equally seriously, I recognize -- and feel -- that there is trouble afoot, so to speak. Something is getting in the way of how both you and I think things ought to work around hear in an ideal world; you and I agree.

Since you have conceded hyperbole, I have nothing more to dispute. I object to patiently reasoned opinions being called nonsense and insanity, and I protest the use of the language of ruination and downfall and the like, not because I disagree with where you're coming from, but because it is important to me to express that the people invested in the maintenance of decorum around here have not been derelict, and that while frustration and disappointment may legitimately abound, it would do them unwarranted discredit to have that perspective predominate unmitigated by a reasonable acknowledgement of the patience and emotional capital they've invested here, and a repudiation of unsubstantiated indictments of their motives.

[–]bonochromatic -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You don't speak for all of us. Just saying.

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Of course I don't.

[–]ratioprosperous -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Uncalled for and unbecoming.

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (4子コメント)

True and accurate. We should offer a fond farewell to a sub owner instrumental in its downfall who leaves calling members "affronters" rather than work more actively to fix the problem?

I'm for grapp staying. I'm for helping him. A resource in that help is washing their hands. He's no longer part of the Interesting Times Gang. The Culture doesn't just hold hands, it wins wars.

[–]ROU Diplomacy Through Other Meansspatialcircumstances 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

"We're all the fucking peace faction."

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Good point, well made. Everyone should stay, issues should be worked through, but hands shouldn't be held.

[–]ratioprosperous 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The way you characterize what happened in your first paragraph is true and accurate. The rest is caustic and uncharitable. It's either a petty, melodramatic parting shot at someone who will never hear you, or exactly the opposite of anything that might incentivize a volunteer moderator (who hasn't actually left yet) lately disheartened by inflammatory and attacking behavior to remain and continue a five year-plus effort to make this sub a dignified, valuable place.

Edit: *when I wrote this post, Lifixs was still listed as moderator. As of this edit, that is disappointingly no longer the case.

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

We don't need to agree. That's dignified. Undignified is one needy manchild being the constant centre of attention and being enabled for it. And by the way, we're taking under a deleted account. The hands are washed and the problem is ours. Time for open mod calls.

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (23子コメント)

And the guy who created this sub that we all enjoy has gone. Account deleted. Another user lost to /u/grapp treating this sub as his personal dumping ground. Well done grapp, hope you're happy. You say ignorance is bliss and you didn't want to be sad that we were bitching about you. You should have taken a moment to consider other people, that you were dragging others down by flooding this sub with your low effort posts.

[–]bonochromatic 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (16子コメント)

I don't see how comments like this are constructive or do anything besides throw more wood in the fire.

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (15子コメント)

I'm annoyed that grapp is still an issue on this Sub. That we're still losing people to this drama. And now with grapp saying this all boosts his ego I'm even more annoyed. We need to move on from this but can't if grapp continues to post as much as he is.

[–]bonochromatic -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (14子コメント)

I personally feel it's the anti-grapp faction that's the issue here. So did our now-departed moderator, who specifically called you out on it.

The Culture has, as one of its core values, inclusivity over exclusivity. That means the they include everyone, including those that they may find occasionally irritating or otherwise problematic. That's part of the social construct. They make it work.

I'm not sure what "moving on" from this looks like, but I don't think it looks like The Culture.

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (13子コメント)

There's no faction. Can you show me where I was 'called out' please? It's possible I've missed it (Watching the election results), but I don't recall seeing it.

I'm not against grapp. I'm against the volume of his posts. But there's no talking to the guy, no trying to reason with him. He himself has said he'd rather live in ignorance. He's also likened his status to that of a celebrity or serial killer... Work that one out.

Unfortunately we're not the culture. We're a collection of culture enthusiasts. Do you think Ian Banks would operate under ultimate inclusivity? I don't believe he would. He was a political activist, that means having strong opinions and opposing people. Maybe people in his books did, but they had the option to go live in a different orbital, SV or planet. We don't. We only have this one outlet.

Moving on is this Sub reaching a harmony where drama like this doesn't pop up every week or two.

[–]bonochromatic 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (12子コメント)

But the drama is being initiated and ratcheted up by meta shitposts that have nothing to do with The Culture complaining about other users, abuse reports against valid (albeit vapid) posts, and apparently, abusive mod mails. None of those are being done by grapp.

At least his posts are actually about The Culture - how does shitposting and bitching about the sub contribute positively? Nobody comes here for that shit.

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Because people have issue with how things are. With grapp drowning the sub. What do you want people to do? Lifixs' stance was to not get involved, let things sort themselves out. That obviously hasn't worked as people still have issue with the sheer volume of tripe that grapp posts and his lack of involvement in discussions. If the mods didn't fix it then posting about it is the next step. Other than that users have tried to make new subs, that just splits the community. Call it 'bitching' if you will but what else do you want people to do, just sit back and let the sub be drowned?

Grapps posts, at times, can be very, very loosely related to the culture. I believe it's a volume issue. Not content. No one wants to see posts that are just dumped here than abandoned. People see they're posted by grapp and know it's pointless getting involved as he's more than likely not going to reply

Once more, please tell me where I was called out. If you can't, can you please edit your post. I'll not be accused of baseless accusations. If I have been, then I apologise, I just have missed it.

[–]bonochromatic -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (10子コメント)

The anti-grappers were called out in OP's post right there at the end. I won't go so far as to call you Affront, but I will say that I am dead set against the personal attacks and bitching I've seen here in this thread.

When I was growing up I was taught to take the good with the bad and not complain. Many of grapp's posts touch on some profoundly interesting questions - and some are utter garbage - probably a lot like anyone's post history. So I take the good with the bad because I'm not the kind of person who's willing to tear a sub apart because he doesn't like one member of it.

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sorry, I'm not really going you but:

When I was growing up I was taught to take the good with the bad and not complain.

That's what parents want of a child. If an adult sees a problem, they're actually allowed to fix it. There is a problem, and if "make everyone be the same as /u/bonochromatic" was the fix, that'd be wonderful.

We need leadership, and we're not being given it. I don't think it's about grapp at all, he's just the figurehead of a problem. When I, as an Australian, come to a sub about a fictional version of our universe and get told how I should vote in the UK elections, I think it's right to say it's ridiculous.

For the record I didn't.

For the record I support his right to make inane posts.

That doesn't mean he gets a right to say anything he wants, and other people who we're now calling "the affront" don't.

They're not the affront. They're us. We need to bring them inside, not call them out. That's being like The Culture.

[–]GSV Don't Ask Me, I Just Work HereBiscuits0 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Disagreeing with grapp doesn't make someone an anti-grapper. Don't tar everyone with the same brush.

I won't say much else apart from; I agree with /u/seanfish's reply to you.

[–]ROU Is That Your Final Answer?seanfish 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

As an Affronter I object to your agreeing with me.

[–]bonochromatic 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Our fearless leader quit for a reason; in these comments you've pretty clearly aligned yourself with a group of people whose desire is to attack and ostracize another member of the group.

You complain about content - but fail to produce much beyond a few top level comments and some drama shitposting and personal attacks.

Said it before - from my perspective, you're more of a problem here than grapp is.

[–]GSV Stand On Zanzibar018118055 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh, the humanity!

Edit: I'll say it more plainly. Moderation has been disastrous for a long time. This situation is entirely of your own making (deleted account or not, I'm sure you will revisit the scene of crime) and you simply reaped your reward. This exit message is the most disgraceful you could possibly have made it. You should have been profusely apologising, instead you blame others for your own errors. Good riddance.

[–]HUB The Ringworld Is Unstable!Flyberius -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

/r/Grapp/ for classic grappisms.