Do we need to split SYM? (no spam)

[Luis Antonio]

[QUOTE=dragon wench]
Also, some individuals who were around when I first joined have changed dramatically, and in some cases inflated egos have amplified the problem yet further.[/QUOTE]

Well, sorry for using your words, but sometimes I feel this from the older folks. I dont really care, I learn a lot here, and I practice my english here (yes, it was worst than it is) so I keep on going. But sometimes, just because they have passed on an Tickle IQ test with a good score they think they can rule the world...

[Vicsun]

Having a discussion directly alluding to others without mentioning names is hard

[QUOTE=dragon wench]Also, some individuals who were around when I first joined have changed dramatically, and in some cases inflated egos have amplified the problem yet further.[/QUOTE]
I keep hearing about those inflated egos everyone keep talking about, and wonder if the reason I fail to see them is because people are talking about me.



And as a bonus, here is a highly symbolic picture.




That said, is the discussion of whether SYM should be split over? It's more than a page (at 40 posts a page nonetheless!) since fable's proposition was actually discussed; I fear this thread might turn into a drama fest concluding with the leave of more people.
But then again, I usually assume the worst and am only occasionally right.


edit:
[quote="Luis]and I practice my english here (yes"]
worse!

[C Elegans]

Simply put CE, people were a lot less prickly and in general far more likely to laugh things off. There was also a great deal more acceptance and mutual tolerance.

Yes, I've heard many people say approximately this, but "acceptance and tolerance" are very vague terms. Acceptance and tolerance of what? Please describe more in detail, if you can. I remember very well how Fable was flamed for not joining in the choir that Tolkien was the greatest fantasy writer. I remember how members were flamed and banned for discriminatory views, prejudice and ad hominems. "Cultural racism does not exist", "all atheists are immoral", and what have you. Also don't forget that SYM had much fewer members from the beginning that now - perhaps a more homogenous population.

Also, some individuals who were around when I first joined have changed dramatically, and in some cases inflated egos have amplified the problem yet further.

Can you give a (generalised) example of how inflated egos amplified problems? What type of behaviour from the inflated egos and what problems were amplified?

I understand what you are saying Aegis, although I still want to ask both you and DW: when was this? How long did it last? And do you include all the SYM-members in "all of us", or those few that remained your friends? I am just wondering whether selection bias in memory affect your evaluation of "Old SYM" versus the present SYM.

People these days are too concerned with labelling everything, and are far to conceited to take a joke as a joke, and see it as infringment upon their discussion.

Heh, you never read the atheism v religion threads at "Old SYM"?

@Vicsun: That's a wonderful illustration, although I feel sorry for the poor birds.

People started lamenting the "Good Old Days" about 6 months after SYM was created. Since then, I have seen numerous such complains, and to me, it would be a relief to understand what people are referring to.

[fable]

I don't see a "golden age" to SYM, either. I laughed just now when CE brought to mind that Tolkien incident, but I remember finding it exasperating rather than funny at the time how some people got very, very serious and threatened over my views. I also remember how Buck banned one SYMer for likening another to a Nazi. We had a third who loved to stir up trouble, causing flaming wars with his bigoted nationalist and political comments, who also got banned. A fourth got banned after launching into a knock-down argument with Waverly; she screamed at anybody who disagreed with her, and claimed authority over everything from science to religion. Yeah, those were the days of tolerance, alright.

SYM periodically reinvents itself. This happens naturally as some people move on, and others arrive. Arguing that SYM must keep its present form because of what it once was seems to be an argument both in wishful thinking, and futility. There are certainly good reasons for keeping SYM as one forum--and good reasons for changing it in multiple forums, too; but I don't think looking back to a mythical golden time for a current format is the way to go.

[Aegis]

I don't have much time to respond right now, but I will say this. I think you're horribly generalizing the issue, CE. Lamenting about the Good old days did not begin six months after SYM's creation. Nor am I using selective memory. If anything, the friendships I have now with members (Fas, and Brynn to name two) are far stronger than my friendships with many people at the begining. I'll remind you that at the beginning of SYM, I was really no different than many of the members who post the majority of the spam threads these days. I don't think I can honestly say I was a 'friend' of many people. I think in the very least, I was accepted and tolerated. I wasn't abrassive, but I wasn't the most mature or likeable person. In fact, I was outright ignored, for the most part, and not just in the spam threads, but the serious ones as well. My posts would passed over for the posts made by yourself, or Fable, or other such members. I worked hard to make myself a member of this community that is respected and liked, as is reflected when I mentioned the amount of effort I have invested here. That is why I am fighting as hard as I am to keep SYM the way it should be: A community where people can talk and laugh together, and not be so hung up if someone throws a loop into the flow of things.

You ask when the 'good old days' where. We've answered, you just don't seem to accept that answer. We don't need to attach a time frame to those days of SYM. What DW and I have done, is attached a frame of mind to them. That's what we're trying to regain. I think the problem with your understanding of this, though, lies in the fact that you never really participated in the other aspect of SYM. You really only made your presence known in the more academic and serious threads. That's why you're failing to see why the earlier days were more enjoyable, as well as more accepting of people.

[fable]

This is an interesting avenue to explore, guys, and that's why I haven't said anything about it in this thread of mine--but let's not invest too much emotional energy in it. If people are going to get sore, think first: is it worth it? I'm willing to disagree with others on this point and still play poker with them. But bottomline, if anyone starts getting very earnest and argumentative--I may still play poker with them, but they're going to have to buy the coldcuts.

[Luis Antonio]

There is a way, then, to avoid cutting SYM in half by classifying threads? I mean, if there is such a need for seriousness we should classify them in serious or free topics... Even though I find this most disturbing. For example, when I hit the "post new topic" button an option appears. If in my "properties" tag I informed the sistem that I dont want free threads, the serious threads will appear first or the free topics will be ignored by the user.

I really dont think that Cutting SYM in half is the solution, and this seems a less drastic (even though I dont know about the board software limitations and I have no idea if that could work) thing that may be done.

[fable]

Luis, it's just true that over time, numerous people have complained about this to me, and it seemed like a good idea to voice the subject. So no solution is needed, to those who feel that no problem exists. Even for those of us who see a problem, there are several possible solutions. I didn't expect this idea to get anywhere near half support (in fact, I'm surprised that it got as much as it did), but it's a subject that comes up in conversation--so why not voice it, provided it causes no hard feelings? Besides, some creative thoughts may come out of discussion.

[Yshania]

[QUOTE=Kayless]Perhaps "driven" isn’t the right word, but a good many posters felt sufficiently uncomfortable with the overall change in the forum's tone that they up and left. In fact, several years ago the DCI board was rife with anti-SYM sentiment. It wasn’t uncommon for the expatriates to take pot shots at SYM, primarily busting on what they felt was the detrimental change in outlook that the forum had underwent. This eventually ignited a huge flame war when Yshania stopped by the DCI forum and took umbrage with what was being said (at least I think it was Ysh, it's been a while). There was a lot of repressed acrimony boiling under the surface. [/QUOTE]

Without digging up too many old bones, it was me. I was invited by someone in SYM (whom I respected and had had enjoyed conversing with for some while) to also join the DCI forum.

When I arrived in DCI, I took offence to a particular thread, and a particular couple of members posting in said thread.

Let me stress, I DID NOT take offence to the board, the contributors (many of which I knew) or the general discussions on the board. Though if I were to be honest, I did feel a bit old over there

I reacted to the thread...maybe in SYM I might have been banned for the way I reacted (or at least for how the flame war evolved), but I wasn't banned from DCI. There was a tolerance level there that surprised me. As a result of my actions, however, one particular prolific SYMer swore never to return, and he hasn't. Whatever my differences might have been with this person, I do regret that, and I did ask him at the time to reconsider - let's face it, who was I to cause such a decision? I had said my bit, and that was it, as far as I was concerned. That said, though I was not banned from DCI, I thought it prudent I did not return, and gave my apologies for my actions where I thought they were due.

As to my opinion on whether SYM should be split, I am neither qualified (since I rarely post here anymore) nor do I really care (if I were to be honest). Nowadays, when I come on to the board, I tend to look for familiar faces and that tends to influence whether I am inclined to post or not, whether it be serious or spam. When I was a more regular participant, I liked having the choice all in one forum anyway...I guess I am not around enough to notice trends these days.

Over the four years I have been a member here, the dynamic of SYM has altered as you would logically expect a community to do. Many people come and go, it can be quite a transient place, it is to be expected. Some older members returning are as unfamiliar with the "new" regulars, as some of the newer members are with them, but you get out what you put in and I am nowhere near qualified to harp on about the good old days if I am not contributing to the good new days.

Kayless, I am sorry to see you go, one less face for me to look out for. I saw the humour in your post, and concur, even if I am impartial about a split.

Vicsun - that is one classic series of pics! Love them!

I miss Gruntboy in SYM, as I miss Waverly, Vehemence, Minerva, Sleepy and others...but you get out of it what you put in, who else can we blame?

I say blame BS and Fas

[Bloodstalker]

[QUOTE=Yshania]

I say blame BS and Fas [/QUOTE]

This illistrates the changing sense of community in this forum. I remember when I first joined, Ysh was the first friendly face I saw, leaping to my defense, indeed, becoming for all intents and purposes my champion for the moment. A friendship developed, drinks were shared liberaly, winks exchanged, and always I treated her with the utmost respect. Now, she has decided I am to share the blame for the state of SYM, good or ill, with fas. This day shall indeed go down as a black one in the annuls of SYM history

*Ahem*

@Ysh..... Post more dammit


And just to stay on topic, personally, I don;t care one way or another. I post where I have an interest in posting, and not simply confined to SYM To be honest, splitting the forum in two wouldn't affect my posting habits, I very rarely post in serious discussions anyway unless it's in something that I have a keen interest in. I do, however, read them from time to time just to get a glimpse into how other people think. To me, having a seperate forum simply wouldn't make a difference, just one more forum to lurk, and another chance at Modship (Only if they promise to refuse me BTW)

[CM]

Ok i have had it. I haven't read all of this. I frankly don't want to. I am gonna flame you all, i don't care if i get banned. You guys deserve it.

First of all SYM is no longer a place to discuss stuff. It is a place where the majority decide if you are acceptable to us. All of you old posters including me are responsible for it. We are annoyed with the new posters we are annoyed with the old posters? Why? Because they don't fit our model of SYM.

For all the B ull s hit (yes i am avoiding the filters so sue me) we state about individualism and independence people are required to conform to our views. This includes everybody, including myself, CE, Aegis, DW and Fable (taken as examples mainly as you guys have been posting the most here in this thread).

I know for a fact myself, Aegis and DW have been extremely annoyed that the new posters do not conform to our idea of what Spam or fun is. That is arrogant of us. Hell that is egotistical and close minded of us.

In the intellectual threads the same can be said for CE and Fable. This actually has been a gripe (with regard to you two) for more than two years now. You guys are bloody smart so it is very hard to argue with you, but you just don't give it a rest. You go after someone who holds different views until you feel that accept they are wrong and you are right. That is not tolerance. That is not acceptance.

Xandax you as a moderator have been flaming IIk911 alot. Fine he is annoying. Heck he annoys me, but your comments when he pointed out a spelling mistake just to be helpful were nothing but pathetic. You are a mod for all its worth you are supposed to set a better example not flaming new posters.

Another example is Kayless right now. How long has kayless been here? Has he ever in SYM history flamed someone? Not that i recall? He has always been funny jovial and respectful. What you three (Xandax, Fable and CE) did was take one comment out of context not looking at who was the man posting, not taking his personality in hand. Rather you took one characteristic. His political background and used that as an excuse to flame him. That is pathetic.

I havent read past page 4 or 5, the last post i read was where Vicsun defended kayless.

I am sick and tired of seeing people i respect act like complete fools. Flame me all you want, i don't give a damn anymore.

[C Elegans]

@Ysh: I have no idea about the incident you and Kayless are talking about, but let me point out that it is refreshing and revitalising to see one single person who can spell out something that has happened in the open, instead of using esotheric allusions and insinuations. There is no other way to get rid of the effects of stinking old conflicts. Your post made my night

@Fas: Nice to see you post your honest opinion, it is refreshing for the same reason as Ysh's post, although I don't agree with everything in your post. Plus, I think you don't need to get so emotionally upset about it.

@Aegis: Just for fun (don't be sore) I dug up this thread from 2001-06-26, it's called "The good old days"
http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/showt ... hp?t=10804

And here is one called "Spamming is a dying art" from 2001-05-12
http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9970

And what about those two I am leaving because of the flaming and whining and flaring emotions at SYM, from May 2001?
http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/showt ... hp?t=11017
http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/showt ... hp?t=10932

You ask when the 'good old days' where. We've answered, you just don't seem to accept that answer.

I could not find an answer to when this occured in neither yours or DW:s post.

We don't need to attach a time frame to those days of SYM. What DW and I have done, is attached a frame of mind to them.

I have asked when these "Good Old Days" occurred, since I don't remember a time when SYM was free from conflicts. Of course you are not obliged to answer my questions, but merely describing how wonderful you found that time and

Something that made me even more curious about time points was DW:s comment that:

You really only made your presence known in the more academic and serious threads.

Maybe so, but the more reason for you to reply to my inquiries rather than refusing to give a time point, or give concrete examples.

I don't see a "golden age" to SYM, either. I laughed just now when CE brought to mind that Tolkien incident, but I remember finding it exasperating rather than funny at the time how some people got very, very serious and threatened over my views. I also remember how Buck banned one SYMer for likening another to a Nazi. We had a third who loved to stir up trouble, causing flaming wars with his bigoted nationalist and political comments, who also got banned. A fourth got banned after launching into a knock-down argument with Waverly; she screamed at anybody who disagreed with her, and claimed authority over everything from science to religion. Yeah, those were the days of tolerance, alright.

Some of the first discussions I posted in at SYM was about the Israel/Palestine conflict, racism, discrimination of gay people and the Talibans. Not to mentiona the religious issues. The first Evolution-Creationism was alreay ongoing when I started posting at SYM Waverly was a class flamer

I am still intrigued by the fact that you and I share perception of SYM's past, wheras Aegis and DW has a contradictory memory. That's why I would be very interesting in knowing when this occured in time. Aegis posted above that I "never really participated in the other aspect of SYM". Maybe you and I posted more in the politics and religious threads where flaming, banning and emotional outbreaks were as common as it is today, and Aegis and DW focused on other threads back then.

EDIT: Poor Fable, I bet you had no idea your innocent thread would end up in emotional outbreaks and flames. Oh, how happy I am that I am not a moderator of SYM

[Yshania]

[QUOTE=Bloodstalker]This illistrates the changing sense of community in this forum. I remember when I first joined, Ysh was the first friendly face I saw, leaping to my defense, indeed, becoming for all intents and purposes my champion for the moment. A friendship developed, drinks were shared liberaly, winks exchanged, and always I treated her with the utmost respect. Now, she has decided I am to share the blame for the state of SYM, good or ill, with fas. This day shall indeed go down as a black one in the annuls of SYM history

*Ahem*

@Ysh..... Post more dammit
[/QUOTE]

LMAO! I will never forget that day...I have a twisted sense of pride in that sense...I saw potential, and in my absence, you remain, and you infuence.

The forum reveres Weasel...yet it was Ysh who released BS upon the unwitting thousands

Slowly slowly, for good or ill! It is the contrast my friend, Fas denies the hugs, you crave them...yet you are equally desperate. I love the balance.

BTW!! *hug*

[fable]

Gods: from angst to hugs. Next, Barney will posting here that we need to make one-third of the posts devoted to "I Love You, You Love Me."

Oh, well. I guess this merry thread has chugged along as far as it can under it's own steam. Can we get a forum mod to close it? Preferrably before it's renovated into a tavern.

[Aegis]

CE, those links I can hardly considering 'lamenting' about the 'good old days' for a very specific reason. Only one of them last more than 40 posts. not only that, but look at the amount of times people would cause drama at that point about leaving (The Good-bye form is a prime example). That's not lamenting about changed ways, that's attention seeking, and to an extent, serious spam.

As for the time frame, why is it you need an exact date? Must we be so immaculate in even our dates, lest we be swept under the rub? Really? Why is it you can't expect 'earlier in SYM's time' as an answer? If you ask me, you can make a pretty good assessment as to when that time frame is. If you really are that anal about the details, I will gladly begin sifting through mindless posts simply to appease you, but to be honest, I have better things to do with my time.

Also, I question the comment made towards DW. That really has little bearing on the discussion at hand, especially when her stance has not changed on the matter. People here have become more sensitive, and thin-skinned. That much is obvious by the fact there have been requests to delete posts in a serious thread. And that even plays back to the comment I made about our conceited attitude towards the importance of the threads we start (One prime reason why I know longer start threads, or at least rarely).

Maybe so, but the more reason for you to reply to my inquiries rather than refusing to give a time point, or give concrete examples.

This is the only part of your post I feel is deserving of being quoted. This plays back to my comment earlier about your disregarde of facts that don't meet your certain criteria. We've given you time frames, we've given you frames of mind. We've alluded, and we've spelt out. It bothers me that not only have you ignored what DW and I have said about SYM in a time when we were obviously more thick skinned, and full of self-depreciating humour, but you dismiss it because we don't put an exact date on it. I'm not sure about other people, that strikes me as a serious 'holier-than-thou' attitude, and only reinforces what some of us have been saying about SYMian attitudes as a whole.

[C Elegans]

[QUOTE=Aegis]As for the time frame, why is it you need an exact date?
<snip>
Why is it you can't expect 'earlier in SYM's time' as an answer? If you ask me, you can make a pretty good assessment as to when that time frame is.
[/QUOTE]

I have not asked for an exact date, I have asked when. You could have replied 1 year ago, about 2-3 years ago, etc.

It in incomprehesible to me why you seem upset over my questions. And why do you assume that I could make an assessment myself of that point of time? If I could, I wouldn't need to ask you and DW for it? Since I have stated I don't understand what you are referring to when you talk about the "Good Old Days" when people where optimally sensitive to your liking, how can I be expected to even speculate in when that time was? "Earlier" could be anything from yesterday to almost 4.5 years ago. However, I understand from your upset tone that you are not willing to reply to my question, so I hope DW wish to reply (or is she speaking through you now?), or someone else who share your opinion.

EDIT: @Fable: Sorry, I didn't see you wanted to close the thread. I won't post anything more here.

[dragon wench]

No CE, Aegis is not speaking for me. We simply happen to be on the same page where this issue is concerned.

As far as replying to your question. I suppose I could, in fact I suppose I could say many things. But the fact of the matter is, I have stated all I intend to say on the issue, and I have neither the time nor energy to further invest in a thread that has become petty and absurd in the extreme.

[Aegis]

[QUOTE=C Elegans]I have not asked for an exact date, I have asked when. You could have replied 1 year ago, about 2-3 years ago, etc.

It in incomprehesible to me why you seem upset over my questions. And why do you assume that I could make an assessment myself of that point of time? If I could, I wouldn't need to ask you and DW for it? Since I have stated I don't understand what you are referring to when you talk about the "Good Old Days" when people where optimally sensitive to your liking, how can I be expected to even speculate in when that time was? "Earlier" could be anything from yesterday to almost 4.5 years ago. However, I understand from your upset tone that you are not willing to reply to my question, so I hope DW wish to reply (or is she speaking through you now?), or someone else who share your opinion.

EDIT: @Fable: Sorry, I didn't see you wanted to close the thread. I won't post anything more here.[/QUOTE]
I would just like to point out that I was not the one who used the good old days as an argument in this thread. The closest to it I have come was in a comparisson of what SYM was like at one time. There were exceptions to that, of course, but there are exceptions to everything. You, however, seem to be focusing on those exceptions, and willingly blinding yourself to recognizing when that time was. But then, as you have always maintained yourself as a strict academic presence here, I wouldn't expect you to have a great recollection of what the less serious posters of the time were doing. Essentially, you placed yourself in a comfortable little bubble of academia, in which, unless it was topic matter that you could support with dates, and authors and researchers, you didn't venture deep into. This is where I feel your biggest incomprehension of what both myself and DW, not to mention other posters, have been saying. Not only that, but now you dwell on the whole good old days argument that has someone formulated into this thread, and as thus, seem unwilling to even move from that point until someone satifies your lack of understanding.

[Luis Antonio]

[QUOTE=fable]Luis, it's just true that over time, numerous people have complained about this to me, and it seemed like a good idea to voice the subject. So no solution is needed, to those who feel that no problem exists. Even for those of us who see a problem, there are several possible solutions. I didn't expect this idea to get anywhere near half support (in fact, I'm surprised that it got as much as it did), but it's a subject that comes up in conversation--so why not voice it, provided it causes no hard feelings? Besides, some creative thoughts may come out of discussion. [/QUOTE]

Sorry Fable, I guess I am rather drastic (and simplistic) sometimes, and I just wanted to give my opinion... Sorry

[fable]

Luis, you have nothing to apologize for.

On the other hand, I've already requested others in the forum to please keep a lid on their angry feelings. So far, that hasn't apparently made a difference. So I'm asking again, pending this thread's closing by a mod.