They fired the Escapist's editor, and the video team, Yahtzee resigns

[Arnoxthe1]

Sorry, i think i was the one who brought Houseman up first. Mostly because i had taken a look at excape_pot and sanctuary and seen him very active on both sides.


Sorry to say, but why would we hate you ? As for me, i can't remember a single issue you were involved in. If there were any that might have produced probably were all on the v1-forum that where way bigger and people did overlook each other more easily and probably partly in the Wild West to which i never had access nor interest for but suppossedly had some drama. Or was it with some of the old mods and their style ? Those are long gone and their ideas were never the ideas of the community.
So whatever it was that makes you think you are hated, i don't know of it. And i am not sure others hold onto grudges against you for so long either. Have you checked whether the people who had issues with you are even still here ?

I think the main reason people wouldn't like me here is simply because I created and still support a forum that they think is some sort of /b/ environment where we're all super mega racists and we ask new people to commit suicide on the daily. I'm also super proud of the site and the community, and this pride I have combined with this attitude I also have where we drill into others of investigating things to their limits and not being afraid of improper questions or disturbing the social status quo sometimes gets me to forget that I'm not on Sanctuary anymore and people are not used to that sort of thing.

-

As for the molesting children to save their life question on there, to answer other people here about that, these threads are actually pretty rare on Sanctuary, but they are still allowed because we don't flinch just because a question or an argument might be considered impolite or not in good taste. There needs to be a space where people can relax and stretch out and ask questions that they would otherwise be officially penalized for by moderators nowadays as "trolling" or "hate speech" or etc. By doing this, we are actually curbing extremism, believe it or not, because the only way for extremism to BE curbed is to bring extremists back to normality. And for that, there needs to be a place for them to discuss things. There are many other arguments as well for the loose rules, but yeah. That is one of them.

I briefly tried to join Sanctuary when it was newish, and found it to be pointlessly hostile and aggressive. It was just as susceptible to dogpiling as the forums it was supposedly created to act as an alternative for... only with more gratuitous shitslinging.

Judging by its description here as "fair but merciless", it's probably still much the same. If someone says a place is "fair but merciless", it's a fair bet the place cares much more about the 'merciless' than the 'fair'.

I remember that conversation well. At the time, many of the community were afraid that a "takeover" would happen. This was before they knew what Sanctuary fully was about at its core, so they got defensive and circled the wagons. I did tell them off, but admittedly not in any official capacity. Much more as a regular user of the site. And what I said to you back then still applies even now.

I understand that people here are being pretty confrontational perhaps, but don't give up and leave just yet. Try posting a few threads. Questions, cool things, etc. And if you're still not happy with all this, then by all means, leave. I know that I wouldn't have found one of the best forums I'd ever posted in if I didn't stick around after getting flamed for making a, in hindsight, pretty silly thread.

In an environment that encourages free speech, you can and perhaps often, will run into opposition. People will challenge your ideas and preconceived notions freely just as you challenge theirs. They may not do a very good job of it. Hell, it may even be a horrible job. But the point is that it will happen.

Stick with it. I don't think you're used to this kind of environment yet. No one wants to see you go here. Especially not me. Stay with us and you may find this to be the best place to be and to post.

 

[BrawlMan]

I think the main reason people wouldn't like me here is simply because I created and still support a forum that they think is some sort of /b/ environment where we're all super mega racists and we ask new people to commit suicide on the daily. I'm also super proud of the site and the community, and this pride I have combined with this attitude I also have where we drill into others of investigating things to their limits and not being afraid of improper questions or disturbing the social status quo sometimes gets me to forget that I'm not on Sanctuary anymore and people are not used to that sort of thing.

I don't 'hate' you specifically (we've barely ever talked to each other, though I know we never got into big arguments nor beefs), but I sure as hell don't trust a site like that. Especially one that let's people like Houseman run unfiltered with ease or act without consequence. I did read your entire post, but none of your explanations put me at ease. I know there are some decent people on the site, yet all I am seeing is another version of NeoGaf, Redditt, and GameFAQs forum. Yet Sanctuary looks arguably worse.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

I don't 'hate' you specifically (we've barely ever talked to each other, though I know we never got into big arguments nor beefs), but I sure as hell don't trust a site like that.

What exactly don't you trust though?

 

[BrawlMan]

What exactly don't you trust though?

1. Freedom of Speech Since 2014. That's slogan is full of shit. There's freedom alright, but not "free speech". The freedom of hate speech and being an asshole. While this site might (I doubt it) might be barely better than something like KiwiFarms (another champion of "free speech") that doesn't make it much of a milestone, nor something person should hold as some ultimate virtue.
2. Houseman is there and I refuse to join a site with sorry dumb ass roaming around. I don't care if there's an ignore option; it's the principle of the matter. Fucker couldn't make it any where else, because most places with decent people can't stand someone like him, and his ass would get kicked out within less than a month.

3. I think the main reason people wouldn't like me here is simply because I created and still support a forum that they think is some sort of /b/ environment where we're all super mega racists and we ask new people to commit suicide on the daily. I'm also super proud of the site and the community, and this pride I have combined with this attitude I also have where we drill into others of investigating things to their limits and not being afraid of improper questions or disturbing the social status quo sometimes gets me to forget that I'm not on Sanctuary anymore and people are not used to that sort of thing.
   
   -
   
   As for the molesting children to save their life question on there, to answer other people here about that, these threads are actually pretty rare on Sanctuary, but they are still allowed because we don't flinch just because a question or an argument might be considered impolite or not in good taste. There needs to be a space where people can relax and stretch out and ask questions that they would otherwise be officially penalized for by moderators nowadays as "trolling" or "hate speech" or etc. By doing this, we are actually curbing extremism, believe it or not, because the only way for extremism to BE curbed is to bring extremists back to normality. And for that, there needs to be a place for them to discuss things. There are many other arguments as well for the loose rules, but yeah. That is one of them.

   All of that is off and not right. The first paragraph, all you're doing is softening the blow of giving them the excuses to act like and be shit. Topics like this rarely and never curbs extremism. All it does is allow to stay trenched into the worse of their desires, vices, or continue to be shit. As for that "hypothetical topic", no sane site nor forum would have something like running for so long. It's another variation of the "I'm just asking questions/I'm just saying" shitty excuses.
4. Fuck any site lets anyone like Houseman act like the shit heads they are and he is. A man known visit forums or hate sites heavy with racism and sexism all across the board.
5. I've been around long enough to see the writings on the wall on places that give or have nothing but bad vibes.

For the record, I am not turning this into a back and forth all night. I am not wasting my entire Saturday evening. If you don't like my reasons, think there's something wrong with them, or puts you in a bad mood, then too bad. I. do. not. give. a. shit.

You do whatever you want and have a good night. If you're not on Sanctuary anymore, then I see no reason for desperate attempts to defend the forum, other than confirmation bias or you only trying convince yourself. You sure as hell ain't convincing me and most others on this forum.

 

[bluegate]

I think the main reason people wouldn't like me here is simply because I created and still support a forum that ...

I think you might be wrong about that, I mean, it all depends on how you'd carry yourself, now doesn't it?

If you were to simply participate in conversations like other people on here, no one here would care that you run a separate forum somewhere on the internet. But if you were to constantly bring it up and make it your entire identity and personality while interacting with people here, then yeah, people might find that a wee bit obnoxious.

I feel like I'm stating the obvious, but criticisms of your forum aren't neccesarily criticisms of you as a person. I might be totally off base here, but I reckon that mostly although people aren't enamored by Sanctuary, they don't dislike you personally over it.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

1. Freedom of Speech Since 2014. That's slogan is full of shit. There's freedom alright, but not "free speech". The freedom of hate speech and being an asshole. While this site might (I doubt it) might be barely better than something like KiwiFarms (another champion of "free speech") that doesn't make it much of a milestone, nor something person should hold as some ultimate virtue.

Well, I do think you're being a bit of a hypocrite here as well since people are being assholes right in this thread, including me. Let us be clear here that the Escapist forums are not some oasis of social perfection. Not even close. And for the record, we are not aligned with Kiwi Farms at all. Or at least, I'm not. They only care about the freedom to harass others. Nothing else. Their site philosophy is degenerative and counter-productive.

The freedom of Sanctuary means a lot more than the freedom to say the 'n' word with a hard 'r'. It means the freedom to disagree with someone, even incredibly strongly, and not get censored for it or even downvoted. It means the freedom to criticize the site staff without fear of reprimand. It means the freedom to lambast greedy self-serving corporations without fear of shutdown and legal punishment. It means the freedom to share information with others that would get you banned otherwise on certain other sites. (For example, how to bypass Google's adblock, where to buy marijuana and psychedelics online, and, most recently, how to show evidence of something that, theoretically, can't be convincingly generated by AI.) It means the freedom to critically think for yourself instead of being told what to think. And yes, the freedom to share radical views and be given alternative and more logical and reasonable views in turn so they can understand that there's more shades to this world than black and white.

2. Houseman is there and I refuse to join a site with sorry dumb ass roaming around. I don't care if there's an ignore option; it's the principle of the matter. Fucker couldn't make it any where else, because most places with decent people can't stand someone like him, and his ass would get kicked out within less than a month.

Houseman wanted me to point out here that you've "accumulated at least three official warnings on the Escapist forums (he says he only got one), and if the rules were enforced as written, you would be banned, so you should pause and reflect."

3. All of that is off and not right. The first paragraph, all you're doing is softening the blow of giving them the excuses to act like and be shit. Topics like this rarely and never curbs extremism.

As opposed to what though? For starters, how would we define "hate speech" and "trolling"? There is no definition of those two that won't be loaded with personal bias because it is based on the question of offense and personal intentions. Such things are incredibly fluid things that are taken entirely according to the person on the receiving end. Because they are fluid, they cannot be nailed down into something concrete and objectively provable, and the most effective rules need to at least be objectively provable. Thus, offense and personal intentions cannot be effectively moderated for.

The second thing I will point out is our current state of politics. Divisiveness and fighting are now more prevalent than ever, and if we look into why, this is due to issues of intolerance. Censorship. Kicking people out simply because we don't like them or what they have to say. This censorship and intolerance creates anger and even more intolerance which sustains and strengthens itself in a sort of cursed feedback loop. If it is to be stopped, then there must be freedom. There must be a place where people are not afraid to express the ideas that they wish so they can be discussed and worked out.

4. Fuck any site lets anyone like Houseman act like the shit heads they are and he is. A man known visit forums or hate sites heavy with racism and sexism all across the board.

See above.

5. I've been around long enough to see the writings on the wall on places that give or have nothing but bad vibes.

And yet we are still around. After ~10 years of operations.

You sure as hell ain't convincing me and most others on this forum.

You do not speak for others on this forum. (And neither do I of course.)

I feel like I'm stating the obvious, but criticisms of your forum aren't neccesarily criticisms of you as a person.

Very fair.

 

[BrawlMan]

Well, I do think you're being a bit of a hypocrite here as well since people are being assholes right in this thread, including me

Speak for yourself, not me. I've had my own jerk moments here and there, but usually to people who started it first. Otherwise, I am usually cool with most on the thread and other places in general.

Let us be clear here that the Escapist forums are not some oasis of social perfection.

I never said, nor made that claim. The Escapists ain't perfect, but is better than a good amount of places.

And for the record, we are not aligned with Kiwi Farms at all.

You don't have to be aligned to be similar to each other.

Or at least, I'm not.

Good on you, but I know you can't speak for everyone on Sanctuary.

Their site philosophy is degenerative and counter-productive.

Yeah, and they're suffering big time for it. Sanctuary is not immune to the same fate. I wouldn't be surprised if several users are active in both places.

The freedom of Sanctuary means a lot more than the freedom to say the 'n' word with a hard 'r'. It means the freedom to disagree with someone, even incredibly strongly, and not get censored for it or even downvoted. It means the freedom to criticize the site staff without fear of reprimand. It means the freedom to lambast greedy self-serving corporations without fear of shutdown and legal punishment. It means the freedom to share information with others that would get you banned otherwise on certain other sites.

Most forums already let users do that, so long as it's nothing really morally dubious or illegal. Even then most forum got rid of downvotes. It's either likes only, or nothing at all. The Sanctuary ain't special nor unique for doing that.

And yes, the freedom to share radical views and be given alternative and more logical and reasonable views in turn so they can understand that there's more shades to this world than black and white.

Highly debatable. I'm sure some understand a gray area and there are those that "understand a gray area " (when it's only about them or a specific group they care about and nothing else). A forum such as this is not needed to understand gray areas, nor is it the bastion of freedom you like to claim. It's people fighting for their own self-serving "freedom". Not the freedom of others and of what is actually right and important. It's nothing more than a shallow "freedom" with a price.

Houseman wanted me to point out here that you've "accumulated at least three official warnings on the Escapist forums (he only got one), and if the rules were enforced as written, you would be banned, so you should pause and reflect."

So what? He actually got banned, for being a shit head and making excuses for racism and sexism. While one of those warnings did involve insulting him, Houseman instigated it. Besides, I ain't the only user with 1-3 warnings. His word is shit otherwise. The moderators, admins, and other users got sick of him for a reason. You can hang around him all you want, but fuck heads like him will only drag you down further. Houseman only gets pleasure from hearing what he only wants to hear, or wants always be the victim when being the aggressor. Houseman failed to mentioned when getting rightfully called out by me and others with plenty of evidence, that he would try to shift the blame or act like the victim. A reminder, this the same man that made a "takedown video" of the Escapists after immediately getting banned, hoping to get some big attention and views. No one rightfully smart or sane gave a shit, or only heard a tiny voice pointlessly pissing in the wind. All that sound and fury, signifying nothing. I use fury very loosely.

As opposed to what though? For starters, how would we define "hate speech" and "trolling"? There is no definition of those two that won't be loaded with personal bias because it is based on the question of offense and personal intentions. Such things are incredibly fluid things that are taken entirely according to the person on the receiving end. Because they are fluid, they cannot be nailed down into something concrete and objectively provable, and the most effective rules need to at least be objectively provable. Thus, offense and personal intentions cannot be effectively moderated for.

The second thing I will point out is our current state of politics. Divisiveness and fighting are now more prevalent than ever, and if we look into why, this is due to issues of intolerance. Censorship. Kicking people out simply because we don't like them or what they have to say. This censorship and intolerance creates anger and even more intolerance which sustains and strengthens itself in a sort of cursed feedback loop. If it is to be stopped, then there must be freedom. There must be a place where people are not afraid to express the ideas that they wish so they can be discussed and worked out.

Yuh-huh, heard it all before and you're not impressing me.

And yet we are still around. After ~10 years of operations.

Good for you; I still won't be joining. There are other forums that have been around since the mid 90s, so Sanctuary is still young and not special in that regard.

You do not speak for others on this forum. (And neither do I of course.)

I don't have to speak for them. They already made their choices or are not interested as seen on this topic. The evidence is already there. Not my fault you don't pay attention. Most of the people here active on the forum rather go to the dedicated Sub-Reddit or Discord @Chimpzy made, or somewhere else entirely not Sanctuary.

 

[Silvanus]

I remember that conversation well. At the time, many of the community were afraid that a "takeover" would happen. This was before they knew what Sanctuary fully was about at its core, so they got defensive and circled the wagons. I did tell them off, but admittedly not in any official capacity. Much more as a regular user of the site. And what I said to you back then still applies even now.

I appreciate that perhaps people may not respond now as they did then. I'm afraid I also get the impression that the atmosphere that Sanctuary aims to create is not one i would find pleasant or enjoyable to spend time in.

As opposed to what though? For starters, how would we define "hate speech" and "trolling"? There is no definition of those two that won't be loaded with personal bias because it is based on the question of offense and personal intentions. Such things are incredibly fluid things that are taken entirely according to the person on the receiving end. Because they are fluid, they cannot be nailed down into something concrete and objectively provable, and the most effective rules need to at least be objectively provable. Thus, offense and personal intentions cannot be effectively moderated for.

There's quite a common misconception about law, that functional law must strive for objectivity. I think that misconception often gets carried over to other people tasked with regulation (like site admins).

In truth, no modern legal system requires an infraction to be "objectively provable". There's a high evidential threshold for the most serious criminal infractions (often 'beyond reasonable doubt', as decided by a jury or judge), but often a much lower evidential threshold for lesser infractions. And every legal modern legal system also acknowledges a wide range of subjective judgements.

Think how often a law /as written/ contains the words, 'within reason' or 'reasonably consider'. Then the interpretation of that ends up in the hands of courts, representatives, juries, and judges. Ditto with liability, ditto with judgements of severity like the 'grievous' in 'grievous bodily harm'.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

You don't have to be aligned to be similar to each other.

The only thing they have in common with us is that you're allowed to call people mean names on both sites. Well, that and their use of XF. I actually got banned there simply for making a silly thread. We are not the same, nor are we even similar to each other.

Sanctuary is not immune to the same fate. I wouldn't be surprised if several users are active in both places.

I don't think we're "immune" to many fates. The question instead is, how likely is it that we will meet a certain fate, in this case, KF's? And KF was and is doing its damnedest to burn every single bridge it can, and then burn every bridge on the way down too. We are focused on self-improvement, freedom, and responsibility. KF is focused simply on bringing people down.

Most forums already let users do that, so long as it's nothing really morally dubious or illegal. Even then most forum got rid of downvotes. It's either likes only, or nothing at all. The Sanctuary ain't special nor unique for doing that.

Keep in mind, corporations don't have to be "right" in order to sue you. You just need to be within range. (This is partly why Sanctuary is hosted off-shore.) It doesn't matter if what you're doing is technically legal or not. Our legal system is in such a state to where if a big enough company doesn't like you for any reason, they can just sue you into oblivion. And no, a lot of forums DON'T allow what we allow. For example, discussion of piracy and how to do so successfully is not allowed on many forums. On Sanctuary, it is permitted.

As to likes and upvotes and the like, we don't even allow that either. We think that, at best, such a system is utterly pointless and contributes nothing to the discussion or the community. At worst, it allows even further dogpiling and introduces audience bias. "Oh, this response from Poster A got 5 likes, and this response from Poster B got 1 like. Clearly Poster A knows what they are talking about." On Sanctuary, if you disagree with someone, you say it in a post and you put yourself out there to be responded to. You can't just hide behind a Likes system.

A forum such as this is not needed to understand gray areas,

Yes, it is. See my point above on the current extremism of this day and age caused by broken as hell social media systems that we've been slowly conditioned to accept along with corrupt corporations and news media almost acting in tandem. Communications in this world is mostly thoroughly broken. Critical thinking is now no longer practiced effectively by the general population (even though they would all say they do practice it I'm sure.) A site like Sanctuary is now no longer a simple luxury, it is a necessity.

It's nothing more than a shallow "freedom" with a price.

The price of freedom is responsibility. The more freedom, the more responsibility, both to yourself and to the community. You must be mature enough to handle it. If you are not mature enough to handle it, then it must follow that someone else must take that freedom away and tell you what to do.

So what? He actually got banned, for being a shit head and making excuses for racism and sexism. While one of those warnings did involve insulting him, Houseman instigated it. Besides, I ain't the only user with 1-3 warnings. His word is shit otherwise. The moderators, admins, and other users got sick of him for a reason. You can hang around him all you want, but fuck heads like him will only drag you down further. Houseman only gets pleasure from hearing what he only wants to hear, or wants always be the victim when being the agressor.

I'll forward this last response of his and leave it at that. If you wish to fight this out all the way, you can go to the Sanctuary forums and make a thread about it with the guest account. (You don't need to log in. Just go to Spurious Generalities and post a thread there.)

> So what? He actually got banned, for being a shit head and making excuses for racism and sexism

So that should tell you that the rules are not being equally enforced, and my banishment should not be taken as some sort of proof of wrongdoing on my part. If we both got what we "deserved", according to the rules as written, you would be banned and I would not be. Also none of my official or unofficial warnings said anything about racism or sexism, so this is just a claim with no evidence.

> The moderators, admins, and other users got sick of him for a reason.

Not even I know what that reason is. All of BrawlMan's warnings, however, are for insulting other users, so we know why BrawlMan would deserve to be banned.

Yuh-huh, heard it all before and you're not impressing me.

If you've heard it all before, then you must have a ready response to it.

There are other forums that have been around since the mid 90s, so Sanctuary is still young.

The 10 years isn't to show that "OMG Sanctuary is so old" (although actually, it's MUCH older than that if you count all of our predecessor sites) but simply to have it be shown that we aren't going anywhere.

I don't have to speak for them. They already made their choices or are not interested as seen on this topic.

And bluegate and Signa have also started posting again on the Sanctuary forums. Just sayan.

I appreciate that perhaps people may not respond now as they did then. I'm afraid I also get the impression that the atmosphere that Sanctuary aims to create is not one i would find pleasant or enjoyable to spend time in.

Well, you won't know until you try it. <3

In truth, no modern legal system requires an infraction to be "objectively provable".

Yes, but who says that our current legal system is really what we should be taking our cues from when discussing ideal governmental systems?

 

[Drathnoxis]

As for the molesting children to save their life question on there, to answer other people here about that, these threads are actually pretty rare on Sanctuary

The site would probably be a lot less boring if they weren't so rare (not specifically threads about molesting children, but you know what I mean.)

 

[Arnoxthe1]

The site would probably be a lot less boring if they weren't so rare (not specifically threads about molesting children, but you know what I mean.)

"You have too many weird threads!"

"You don't have enough weird threads!"

XD

 

[Satinavian]

The freedom of Sanctuary means a lot more than the freedom to say the 'n' word with a hard 'r'. It means the freedom to disagree with someone, even incredibly strongly, and not get censored for it or even downvoted. It means the freedom to criticize the site staff without fear of reprimand. It means the freedom to lambast greedy self-serving corporations without fear of shutdown and legal punishment. It means the freedom to share information with others that would get you banned otherwise on certain other sites. (For example, how to bypass Google's adblock, where to buy marijuana and psychedelics online, and, most recently, how to show evidence of something that, theoretically, can't be convincingly generated by AI.) It means the freedom to critically think for yourself instead of being told what to think. And yes, the freedom to share radical views and be given alternative and more logical and reasonable views in turn so they can understand that there's more shades to this world than black and white.

I can disagree with people, even strongly, here just fine without being censored or downvoted. Have you taken a look in the "Woke","Palestine", "Ukraine" or "mask/Vaccine" threads ? I actually do appreciate that we do get different opinions here.


Critizising staff is a rule i have never seen enfored and no wonder that seems one of those that Nick just ditched in the reformulated Second Wind CoC. Along with the GG forbidden topic rule. Which i also have not seen enforced in a while. (Not that that many people want to discuss it anymore). Which leaves the "illegal acts and materials" prohibition which is basically a legal requirement for some regions.
Which leaves the infraction topics : piracy, adblock, narcotics and porn. Do i feel a need to have them prohibited ? No. Do i miss them ? Also no. I certainly have no difficulties finding porn on the internet. Or adblockers. Or places where all those four topics can be discussed. Sure, i can't discuss them in this community, but i can't do that over in the sanctuary either because there is a different community.


But what makes you think that the sanctuary allows people to "critically think for themself instead of being toold what to think" ? I would guess the opposite, honestly. A pleasant envirenment is far more enticing for people to lay out well crafted arguments and make honest attempts at convincing each other than one where people are alllowed to shout at each other until the other doesn't respond anymore.
There is hardly anything that turn people off a discussion than the impression that the opposite side does not actually read their post or is gaslighting or otherwise not argumenting in good faith. Then everything written just feels like a waste of time.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

I can disagree with people, even strongly, here just fine without being censored or downvoted. Have you taken a look in the "Woke","Palestine", "Ukraine" or "mask/Vaccine" threads ? I actually do appreciate that we do get different opinions here.


Critizising staff is a rule i have never seen enfored and no wonder that seems one of those that Nick just ditched in the reformulated Second Wind CoC. Along with the GG forbidden topic rule. Which i also have not seen enforced in a while. (Not that that many people want to discuss it anymore). Which leaves the "illegal acts and materials" prohibition which is basically a legal requirement for some regions.
Which leaves the infraction topics : piracy, adblock, narcotics and porn. Do i feel a need to have them prohibited ? No. Do i miss them ? Also no. I certainly have no difficulties finding porn on the internet. Or adblockers. Or places where all those four topics can be discussed. Sure, i can't discuss them in this community, but i can't do that over in the sanctuary either because there is a different community.


But what makes you think that the sanctuary allows people to "critically think for themself instead of being toold what to think" ? I would guess the opposite, honestly. A pleasant envirenment is far more enticing for people to lay out well crafted arguments and make honest attempts at convincing each other than one where people are alllowed to shout at each other until the other doesn't respond anymore.
There is hardly anything that turn people off a discussion than the impression that the opposite side does not actually read their post or is gaslighting or otherwise not argumenting in good faith. Then everything written just feels like a waste of time.

Well, now I'm a little confused. If I'm reading you correctly, it seems like the Escapist forums and the Sanctuary forums are nowadays actually much more alike than we thought. You say you can do (almost) everything I discussed here on the Escapist forums, but if that is true, then it would follow that you guys are actually slowly slipping into our own way of thinking and doing things as well. There may be a few small differences here and there still of course, but regardless, it looks like you guys have begun to come over to our side.

If I'm wrong and you still see significant differences though, let me know.

 

[Satinavian]

If I'm reading you correctly, it seems like the Escapist forums and the Sanctuary forums are nowadays actually much more alike than we thought.

In many ways they probably are quite similar. I am vaguely aware that you made sanctuary at a time when management and moderations acted far more heavyhanded and there was a lot of grumbling. But it turned out that was just a phase. As soon as the pressure stopped, everything reverted back because the community had not really been behind those measures.

But what is a difference is the communities. The people who first jumped over were those who most often clashed with others, either because of combative nature or because of divisive topics they were invested in. And others went there because of the promise to tolerate stuff that wouldn't fly on other forums, being escapist or not.

Many of the more reserved or laid back people instead waited here, maybe grumbled a bit and then felt validated when the forum recovered. As did those with a more timid personality or those who are sensitive to internet abuse. And those who who feel way too old for all the mudslinging.

So the forums might technically be similar. But members sorted themself based on overblown reputation of both places to some extend.
And now people are asking themself with which crowd they want to hang out more. Where are the members whos posts actually gave them new insights, important information about stuff they didn't know. Whom did they have fruitful discussions with. And whose name do they primarily associate with flamewars aand trolling.

If there was a mass exodus to sanctuary, most would probably join because of all the others. But this is not happening.

 

[bluegate]

And bluegate and Signa have also started posting again on the Sanctuary forums. Just sayan.

Don't mistake my one-off post in your forum's child rape thread for an indication of further participation in conversations on Sanctuary.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

Don't mistake my one-off post in your forum's child rape thread for an indication of further participation in conversations on Sanctuary.

Don't worry, bluegate. I won't tell your mom that you recently posted on Sanctuary.

In many ways they probably are quite similar. I am vaguely aware that you made sanctuary at a time when management and moderations acted far more heavyhanded and there was a lot of grumbling. But it turned out that was just a phase. As soon as the pressure stopped, everything reverted back because the community had not really been behind those measures.

But what is a difference is the communities. The people who first jumped over were those who most often clashed with others, either because of combative nature or because of divisive topics they were invested in. And others went there because of the promise to tolerate stuff that wouldn't fly on other forums, being escapist or not.

Many of the more reserved or laid back people instead waited here, maybe grumbled a bit and then felt validated when the forum recovered. As did those with a more timid personality or those who are sensitive to internet abuse. And those who who feel way too old for all the mudslinging.

So the forums might technically be similar. But members sorted themself based on overblown reputation of both places to some extend.
And now people are asking themself with which crowd they want to hang out more. Where are the members whos posts actually gave them new insights, important information about stuff they didn't know. Whom did they have fruitful discussions with. And whose name do they primarily associate with flamewars aand trolling.

If there was a mass exodus to sanctuary, most would probably join because of all the others. But this is not happening.

There is indeed a difference in communities... If we're just going by sheer content amount, then Sanctuary just cannot compete with those numbers right now. This is true. When it comes to the variety of content though, I think we would win, hands down.

 

[Silvanus]

Yes, but who says that our current legal system is really what we should be taking our cues from when discussing ideal governmental systems?

Not just our current one; every functional legal system in modern history. I'm not saying that anyone should be taking cues from them, I'm just pointing out that when you said rules must at least be objectively provable, that certainly isn't true. It's actually borderline untenable, unless you want to end up permitting some pretty egregious behaviour.

Plus-- there are a lot of issues with modern legal systems, but 'they're not libertarian enough' is absolutely not one of them.

 

[Baffle]

There is indeed a difference in communities... If we're just going by sheer content amount, then Sanctuary just cannot compete with those numbers right now. This is true. When it comes to the variety of content though, I think we would win, hands down.

If I had a bowl of sweets I'd taken a shit in and a bowl of sweets I hadn't taken a shit in, I'd probably eat the bowl that had less variety. Happy to let the guy who eats the other one think he's a winner though.

 

[Chimpzy]

Ah, this feels nostalgic.

 

[Baffle]

Ah, this feels nostalgic.