It's true that Mat shut the forum down for this post and one poster joined in ****ting on SHS but I don't think either poster would be considered part of the "in" crowd unless that's just Inso for "liberal".

It's sort of true, and sort of not true. It's true that what happened publicly involved Mat responding to a post where someone said something nasty about SHS, and then quickly closing the forum after that (n.b. the politics mods have indicated their agreement that the post in question would have been moderated, this all happened really fast on a Friday night of a holiday weekend. So I don't want to give the impression that it was something they refused to moderate. They were completely unaware of it and they had no chance to react)

What's not really true is that this specific incident was the straw that broke the camel's back, I don't think. There was apparently some other stuff going on too in the background, I don't really know the details, *waves hands*. I think Mat responding to that specific post was somewhat incidental to a much longer-term set of reasons.

But yes, there was a certain irony in how it went down.

The future of the forum is being discussed, if you want to give input all you need to do is sign up.

I'm so shocked.

if you make a policy that benefits one race over another it's racist, it doesnt matter which race is benefitting. how is this hard to understand?

your whataboutisms aren't good. and sports is clearly a terrible one, because sports aren't fair to begin with. sports have always been geared towards the genetically gifted over the average.

#notallmen #we'reonyourside!

Hmm. A clear hierarchical structure, inability of those below to critise the powers that be without severe censure, obvious doublethink phrases like "vigorous debate" and the unpersoning of an entire forum of people overnight.

Apologies, I didn't realise at first when you said the spirit 1984 that you meant it as a blueprint rather than a warning.

Seems very likely in the short term that it will still be heavily male-dominated, but it already has more women posting than here, I think. Not that this means you wouldn't find that you still had similar objections. In the long-run, I have no idea.

Before I could form memories I attended a church slip-n-slide. Sometime during this party I took off all my clothes/bathing suit and refused to put them back on until they went to get my parents and kicked me out.

I could give a **** about anyones objections, and this is a 30+ year tradition. I'm amazing.

ICWYDT

I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding you now, or you misunderstood me, but I meant I thought you might still find you had similar objections to the new forum as you had about stuff here. Just to be clear. I didn't mean you would find other people objecting to you, although that's probably also true, I guess. :P

Excuse me for taking things the way I assumed you would mean them. Our history is bizarre, and thats your fault.

Honestly the cognitive dissonance required to think you're Winston Smith when you're so clearly big brother is flabergasting. Want to take bets as to masons response to a reasoned and logical argument that contradicts his fundamental beliefs?

A) counter argument and logical refutation

B) acceptance of the logically sound argument

C) bannings, post deletions (down the memory hole) , pretending it never happened, declaring victory and telling everyone that chocolate rations have gone up 5 grams.

I know what my money is riding on.

it obv wont close if it turns into chiefsplanet

Yes and if I hated flying unicorns that farted rainbows - and the forum became dominated with them - that would bug me too.

CN,

Believe or not, your participation here is playing heavily in thoughts and considerations of the new site. There is an active and widespread desire to broaden appeal to as many people as possible and especially not alienate women based on off handed comments or even direct sexism.

I think you could be a good asset there and help inform and guide the subject even more as a participant. I can’t promise you all puppy dogs and rainbows all the time but a huge part of the structure of the new site is very aware of how various decisions and actions might be off putting and they are working to make it as open and inclusive to as many people as possible.

This includes right wing and centrist posters of any sex and more extreme left wing posters who go beyond the general demographic. While I am not involved in the overall design and structure (although we all are contributing to the project) I support that openness. And again I think you could be a highly valued contributor there.

Obviously nobody will fault you one way or the other but like many, you are free to participate here and there. There seems to be a handful of moderators who are openly hostile to people who choose to participate in both sites but I assume the upcoming civility sweep will allow those mods to adjust themselves and not drive off more high quality users.

You can certainly try both and go where you feel more comfortable, which may be one or the other, neither or both.

I agree, so my original post, which you may not have seen, about immigration is not at all racist.

Yes I'll admit you can't quite come up with a perfect analogy since in this case one side is objectively correct.

My point being that all this Milton Friedman laissez-faire stuff is basically taken on faith. It can be very jarring and upsetting to see it being mercilessly mocked and refuted, and not being able to form coherent arguments in support of it. You are just left feeling that people are *wrong* on the internet, it's just that in this case it's *your* internet. So I can sympathize.

I just wish we could dispense with the whole show about how it's really about the "tone" or lack of "free exchange of ideas", or whatever.

Then your position is that basketball is racist(policy of high of net, etc). Thanks for being clear. Fortunately it is *only* your opinion.

By your definition, open borders are racist because they benefit those who are close more than those who are far(which is distinguishable by race). It's quite a mess you've got yourself into.

In my view, it absolutely should close now. The big disagreement between your perception and "ours" was that a lot of us viewed the forum as actually a really high value place with a lot of high quality posters. Those posters have now, for the most part, left to a new place. We don't want to splinter the community any more, this forum should be closed to encourage the full politics community to remain together.

No it's not true. Ins0 is FOS as usual. It was vaya and then TheHip34(?) - hardly prolific politics posters. Definitely not "the in crowd",

A couple posters called them out on it. Mat said they were going to get banned when a mod showed up, which would have happened. Except Mat got impatient and nuked the forum instead.

Nice job spreading propaganda Ins0 - your heroes in right-wing media would be proud.

You can see it all here: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...69/?highlight=

Mostly he just ignored me pointing out the ludicrousness of the idea that he should make major changes in 2p2 business policy based on his personal income tax on income over $400k going up 3.9%.

Other posters had better luck getting responses at least.

Then he locked the thread.

Why should Mason care about the full politics community?