I disagree with the claim that people don't understand how to have scientific discussions; there are in fact a number of professional scientists and mathematicians who occasionally stop by the forum, and I doubt any of them really object to having more actual science discussions instead if the usual gibberish and posts about alcohol.

Actually dealing ITT with real posters, not imaginary stereotypes and dreamy ideals.

Did you all miss compromise is on the table?

"Knock it off and reach Masque via PM if you think you need to personally influence him" seems to be the offer floating.

Why not agree to something like this, let masque know, and move on to a fresh start?

Actually the offer floating seems to be: come back wordy one, if you're so inclined. Or don't.

What is Masque conceding in this compromise?

He seemed affirmatively open to receiving PMs, which concedes the criticisms like that he doesn't take personal criticism.

Because it does nothing to address what posters perceive as the problem that he creates?

This.

They'll have to live with unsettled perspectives, I suppose.

I very much doubt that masque is conceding that he doesn't take personal criticism. Anyway, masque has no leverage here. He wants the posting habits of long-time SMP posters to change to be more like his own, but himself uses a posting style that is (as far as I can tell) universally disliked. Furthermore, he also refuses to change how he posts to be more agreeable to other posters.

It's almost like SMP is not a collaborative science project where the members have a common goal, but rather is just a bunch of people primarily posting for their own amusement.

It's easier to ignore PMs than it is to ignore public criticism.

Why would anyone take the time and effort to write M a private message to criticize one of his post's content/verbosity/attitude/arrogance/...?

You do realize that this would be the equivalent of "shaking fist at cloud".

It's understandable that spectators want the argument to continue for entertainment. No joy in PM's, eh? Oh. Well.

youcan'talwaysgetgetwhatyouwant.youtube

I think the issue is more that PMs have been historically shown to have no impact. Indeed, we've seen mods and non-mod-friends post that they've had conversations with him over PMs about his posting, and they have not convinced him to change his posting style.

In fact, the only reason this has become a public conversation is a direct result of the failure of private conversations to take effect.

So if he says he's willing to take PMs but it doesn't change anything, it's like having your suggestion box feed into a shredder. And with the suggestions goes anything resembling a compromise or cooperation towards a common goal.

But if there's something you want (say, if you're Masque and you desire substantive conversation and positive posting interactions), there is a way to get it. The pathway has been laid out for him. It's up to him to choose whether to follow the path or ignore it and continue getting what he's been receiving.

Well, if anyone is still deluded by notions of controlling masque, then no joy all around is very predictable. You can't even explain why such an effort should work or demonstrate that it does.

I think control has been exerted by Masque himself in that he's apparently restraining his posting. As I've noted, while it's not the ideal outcome, it's perfectly acceptable and (at least in my opinion) a preferable outcome to his continued posting in his current style in SMP.

So I think my hypothesis that taking the conversation to a very public place to apply public pressure to get him to reevaluate his posting has demonstrably worked, at least for the interim.

The question at this point is whether Masque will continue to exert control over himself, or whether he will choose to lapse back into his previous habits without taking full stock of the advice that has been given to him by both friends and non-friends. I hope for the best possible outcome. But I will wait until I see the evidence of positive SMP interactions before believing that he's actually put forth the effort to change his posting.

Until then, I simply will not see what he has to say because there's currently no reason for me to read it.

On July 4, next year we are having a get together in a London pub to formally appoint an Emperor, and instigate a charter of membership and universal goals. You are invited. I suspect nothing will be decided and we will disband in disorder and disarray to stagger about the concrete and brick canyons of the London Metropolis until arrested by some overbearing moralistic police sergeant.

Passing through this bit of joking and amusement, I think whatever collaborative goals any forum on this site is under is somewhat subjective, especially one that covers so wide a range of subject matter as SMP - as opposed to a forum on say, low limit hold'em for example.

A random group of internet know-it-all's is just going to be chaotic, pedantic, and dysfunctional. By mistake or accident there have been some very good and involved threads and discussions in SMP. A further upside is that it is not academic and for the most part can't really be taken too seriously. Does anyone take the 2+2 Politics forum seriously? Or PU? I submit that only the terminally insane would do so. Apparently that is a sizable cut of the population, but I digress.

I sense that not much can or will be resolved by this thread. Perhaps some good will come out of this. But certainly at some point an end is needed and the thread closed (see Aaron's very reasonable post above). Least it bifurcate into random paths that lead to a full castigation of every forum on the 2+2 site and all but a handful of its posters. Not a wise course IMO. We may find out that we are all rather useless. Never a comforting thought for most.