I think we have to distinguish between CTs and politics. We should vote/negotiate on both separate topics. Personally I think I would be OK with a subforum inside Other Stuff that relates to CTs, maybe a category a bit larger, but where the understanding is we shouldn't use it to promote political agendas - but perhaps that's impossible. Could be public or private. Maybe something separate purely related to politics but invitation-only. Perhaps both could not appear in "unread posts" so as not to overtaken the "unread posts" menu page.
It perhaps might be helpful yes to summarize the different possibilities.
It looks like it might not be necessary to summarise the different possibilities if folks are willing to coalesce around the possibilities that Sci and Ian have laid out in the last two posts. These definitely seem like a good starting point for any consensus. I will investigate the possibility of invitation-only subforums.
(2017-08-19, 05:40 AM):Sciborg_S_Patel Wrote: [ -> ]Well I think one of the options Jim offered was pretty fair if possible to implement - a private invitation forum for politics. So it doesn't get seen unless people ask to be invited to see the topics?
Is this feasible? I ask b/c it would affect how I vote.
thanks!
Sci
Unfortunately it doesn't look possible to me - but please don't take my word for it, I'm new to the MyBB world, so I'm perfectly willing to be corrected if folks discover that it is, after all possible. I searched the plugins for "invitation" here:
https://community.mybb.com/mods.php and came up with nothing, but maybe I'm missing something.
It certainly
is possible to:
- Hide (sub)forums from non-logged in members.
- Hide the posts in (sub)forums from the "Unread posts" list.
Would that be enough to satisfy those who don't want to view or engage with CT/political threads? We could perhaps have a forum for each, with each forum hidden from non-logged in members and with the posts of each hidden from the "Unread posts" list (but not from the "New posts" and "Today's posts" lists, because this apparently isn't possible with MyBB - but again, I could be wrong).
(2017-08-19, 05:22 AM)Laird Wrote: [ -> ]My understanding is that the remaining Skeptiko forums do not support CT or political content (except perhaps for the Shows forum if/when Alex discusses such topics on his podcast). Perhaps, though, David could clarify for us.
This from David on Skeptiko seems pretty definitive:
Quote:Alex would like to prune out the political stuff
(2017-08-19, 07:12 AM)Laird Wrote: [ -> ]This from David on Skeptiko seems pretty definitive:
How can you possibly divorce CTs like 9/11 or Pizzagate from politics? Good luck to those that stick at Skeptiko and have to figure that one out without getting booted in this new era of uber sensibility. Apparently, only malf knows how to word "This is BS" in a way that doesn't set off Alex's seek and ban program.
(2017-08-19, 10:01 AM)E. Flowers Wrote: [ -> ]How can you possibly divorce CTs like 9/11 or Pizzagate from politics? Good luck to those that stick at Skeptiko and have to figure that one out without getting booted in this new era of uber sensibility. Apparently, only malf knows how to word "This is BS" in a way that doesn't set off Alex's seek and ban program.
Actually, Malf was temporarily banned (his account set to "requires activation email"). He had to communicate with Alex via email to have his account restored. This was in the (paraphrased) "Global warming: are sea levels rising?" thread.
(2017-08-19, 10:04 AM)Laird Wrote: [ -> ]I
Actually, Malf was temporarily banned (his account set to "requires activation email"). He had to communicate with Alex via email to have his account restored. This was in the (paraphrased) "Global warming: are sea levels rising?" thread.
I meant during this week's 'purge' (the one that got most of us banned). When Alex implied that the new Skeptiko=Pizzagate podcast, malf quoted him directly and said "So scurrilous rumour with a tangentially related interview that doesn't support the rumour?". Hilariously, Alex didn't seem to notice that malf criticized both the topic
and the podcast, which is exactly the excuse that he used to ban a few people (I will exclude myself, since telling him to seek help that would allow him to solve the unfinished issues in his life may have been too much to ask from a person that was acting irrationally ATM).
(2017-08-19, 10:19 AM)E. Flowers Wrote: [ -> ]I meant during this week's 'purge' (the one that got most of us banned). When Alex implied that the new Skeptiko=Pizzagate podcast, malf quoted him directly and said "So scurrilous rumour with a tangentially related interview that doesn't support the rumour?". Hilariously, Alex didn't seem to notice that malf criticized both the topic and the podcast, which is exactly the excuse that he used to ban a few people (I will exclude myself, since telling him to seek help that would allow him to solve the unfinished issues in his life may have been too much to ask from a person that was acting irrationally ATM).
Fair enough. I don't know what saved Malf that time. But yes, Alex is behaving... strangely. And pointing him to "unfinished issues in his life" may well have been... impolitic!