If anything, you've engaged in good faith effort posting, which I find encouraging.
My time on 4chan more or less made me immune to the problem you're discussing, but I can see where other people less familiar with the internet would have issues with some of the people I don't have problems just shouting at me. Keeping the forum a place where they can feel welcome is a worthy goal.
Having been through the decline of Reddit and watching the leftist version of ideological possession making territory feel hostile, I can see bad faith actors as a problem in forum management. One I had little understanding of prior to your post. Managing right wing ideologues is a different beast, and I appreciate seeing your thoughts on the matter.
Regarding Impy in particular, I have posted "Impy was banned for our sins" and I stand by it. Our inability to engage with him and get him to even acknowledge when we make points contrary to his particular stance... It's our failure as a group to police the dialogue, which leaves that to the mods-- forcing your hand, per your post.
I can see how you'd interpret Impy subversive. I think he's a one-issue pony, and mentally ill. Regardless of motive, how you manage someone who's ideologically possessed and won't stop is pretty simple. It involves boundaries, and enforcing them when transgressed. It won't earn you friends, but it will control the behavior.
At any rate, those are my thoughts. I'm glad you took the time to reply in depth, thank you for doing so.
My time on 4chan more or less made me immune to the problem you're discussing, but I can see where other people less familiar with the internet would have issues with some of the people I don't have problems just shouting at me.
This is a huge thing, and why the real answer here is growth. A Liberal approach is what a government should take, because no citizen can actually rebel, and sometimes even leave, legally without severe consequences. But what we have here is a problem of toleration. Now, in a perfect world, subversion can't work because everyone looks at balkanization and agitation efforts with a stoic response of: "lol, fag." The problem is that most people aren't that. Worse, most rightists aren't that. They are, by their nature of being the cast out dissidents of a Leftist establishment: reactionary. Meaning they are already the victims of balkanization that has lead them to be subverted. All White Lives Matter activists, and even Blue Lives Matter activists, have been subverted by Leftwing narrative building. No Life Matters, or Each Life Matters Differently, is a completely different attitude which can't be subverted.
Now, I can't make people subversion resistant. Instead I have to allow them to build up resistance to emotional incontinence and manipulation. Now, obviously, going to 4chan builds that resistance, same with 8chan. What do we do with redditors? JFC. Well, we'd have to a) increase their investment into the environment so they are willing to stay, b) not shock them too bad.
The thing is, gatekeeping with shock and taboo works really well to keep many infiltrators out. Poal does this. You're urged to make a welcome post in the community, but most of the responses are anti-semetic slurs and buzzwords. Not because that's what everyone is, but because many people's sensitivities are so repelled, they won't stay unless they are prepared to invest in the community.
Unfortunately that limits growth, but gatekeeps well. So we've got to find a middle ground that is stiff enough to gatekeep, strong enough to build resistance in users, and soft enough to allow a redditor to participate.
What I've already seen, repeatedly, is light self-segregation. This is good because it means the users stay in posts and threads that don't overly agitate them, but are prepared to occasionally engage with users and topics that will. That's a good sign that the userbase is building stoicism and resilience. If you watch carefully, each post attracts slightly different audiences based on the OP, and based on the rhetoric.
The reason that's a problem for subversives is because they need the discourse to be dominated with their ideological possession. That resilience is the opposite of what they want to happen.
Now, there are smart ideological partisans who understand my rules and don't violate them. That's the key. They might be inclined to subvert, but by following the rules, and at least playing coy, they create an environment which both allows them to expound their narrative, but not to subvert the forum.
This whole thing is a work in progress, I'm watching how the sub interacts with Ukraine because it's a good test. Some people mistakenly thought that ideological homogeneity gives them a community, but there are so many varied narratives on what's happening, it's generating tension, because the sub can't get a single narrative. That's good because it promotes resilience by realizing that even your favorite users are going to be wrong about stuff and that's okay.
I can see how you'd interpret Impy subversive. I think he's a one-issue pony, and mentally ill. Regardless of motive, how you manage someone who's ideologically possessed and won't stop is pretty simple. It involves boundaries, and enforcing them when transgressed. It won't earn you friends, but it will control the behavior.
I don't intend to actually stop subversion or ideological possession. That's actually a trap in and of itself, in exactly the way you mentioned. Creating a hard partisan boundary can cause violence and division. The better solution is to allow subversion and ideological possession to manifest itself, and allow it to fail.
Impy, Jester, and some of the Alt-Righters are learning this the hard way. The more they obsess, the more of a meme they become, and the more people just watch them all fight each-other, and the more resilient and desensitized to the agitation everyone else gets. This incentivizes them to lessen their subversion and vitriol in order to be more successful at subversion. It's a negative feed-back loop.
The problem with Impy (and some of the Alt-Right), is that they leave the forum, go to their own special subverted forums, radicalize themselves, and then come back.
At any rate, those are my thoughts. I'm glad you took the time to reply in depth, thank you for doing so.
I don't intend to actually stop subversion or ideological possession. That's actually a trap in and of itself, in exactly the way you mentioned. Creating a hard partisan boundary can cause violence and division. The better solution is to allow subversion and ideological possession to manifest itself, and allow it to fail.
Yep. Exposure is the only way to ensure awareness and continued vigilance.
Glad you're on the mod team, given your attitude on the subject.
If anything, you've engaged in good faith effort posting, which I find encouraging.
My time on 4chan more or less made me immune to the problem you're discussing, but I can see where other people less familiar with the internet would have issues with some of the people I don't have problems just shouting at me. Keeping the forum a place where they can feel welcome is a worthy goal.
Having been through the decline of Reddit and watching the leftist version of ideological possession making territory feel hostile, I can see bad faith actors as a problem in forum management. One I had little understanding of prior to your post. Managing right wing ideologues is a different beast, and I appreciate seeing your thoughts on the matter.
Regarding Impy in particular, I have posted "Impy was banned for our sins" and I stand by it. Our inability to engage with him and get him to even acknowledge when we make points contrary to his particular stance... It's our failure as a group to police the dialogue, which leaves that to the mods-- forcing your hand, per your post.
I can see how you'd interpret Impy subversive. I think he's a one-issue pony, and mentally ill. Regardless of motive, how you manage someone who's ideologically possessed and won't stop is pretty simple. It involves boundaries, and enforcing them when transgressed. It won't earn you friends, but it will control the behavior.
At any rate, those are my thoughts. I'm glad you took the time to reply in depth, thank you for doing so.
+1 respect from this user.
This is a huge thing, and why the real answer here is growth. A Liberal approach is what a government should take, because no citizen can actually rebel, and sometimes even leave, legally without severe consequences. But what we have here is a problem of toleration. Now, in a perfect world, subversion can't work because everyone looks at balkanization and agitation efforts with a stoic response of: "lol, fag." The problem is that most people aren't that. Worse, most rightists aren't that. They are, by their nature of being the cast out dissidents of a Leftist establishment: reactionary. Meaning they are already the victims of balkanization that has lead them to be subverted. All White Lives Matter activists, and even Blue Lives Matter activists, have been subverted by Leftwing narrative building. No Life Matters, or Each Life Matters Differently, is a completely different attitude which can't be subverted.
Now, I can't make people subversion resistant. Instead I have to allow them to build up resistance to emotional incontinence and manipulation. Now, obviously, going to 4chan builds that resistance, same with 8chan. What do we do with redditors? JFC. Well, we'd have to a) increase their investment into the environment so they are willing to stay, b) not shock them too bad.
The thing is, gatekeeping with shock and taboo works really well to keep many infiltrators out. Poal does this. You're urged to make a welcome post in the community, but most of the responses are anti-semetic slurs and buzzwords. Not because that's what everyone is, but because many people's sensitivities are so repelled, they won't stay unless they are prepared to invest in the community.
Unfortunately that limits growth, but gatekeeps well. So we've got to find a middle ground that is stiff enough to gatekeep, strong enough to build resistance in users, and soft enough to allow a redditor to participate.
What I've already seen, repeatedly, is light self-segregation. This is good because it means the users stay in posts and threads that don't overly agitate them, but are prepared to occasionally engage with users and topics that will. That's a good sign that the userbase is building stoicism and resilience. If you watch carefully, each post attracts slightly different audiences based on the OP, and based on the rhetoric.
The reason that's a problem for subversives is because they need the discourse to be dominated with their ideological possession. That resilience is the opposite of what they want to happen.
Now, there are smart ideological partisans who understand my rules and don't violate them. That's the key. They might be inclined to subvert, but by following the rules, and at least playing coy, they create an environment which both allows them to expound their narrative, but not to subvert the forum.
This whole thing is a work in progress, I'm watching how the sub interacts with Ukraine because it's a good test. Some people mistakenly thought that ideological homogeneity gives them a community, but there are so many varied narratives on what's happening, it's generating tension, because the sub can't get a single narrative. That's good because it promotes resilience by realizing that even your favorite users are going to be wrong about stuff and that's okay.
I don't intend to actually stop subversion or ideological possession. That's actually a trap in and of itself, in exactly the way you mentioned. Creating a hard partisan boundary can cause violence and division. The better solution is to allow subversion and ideological possession to manifest itself, and allow it to fail.
Impy, Jester, and some of the Alt-Righters are learning this the hard way. The more they obsess, the more of a meme they become, and the more people just watch them all fight each-other, and the more resilient and desensitized to the agitation everyone else gets. This incentivizes them to lessen their subversion and vitriol in order to be more successful at subversion. It's a negative feed-back loop.
The problem with Impy (and some of the Alt-Right), is that they leave the forum, go to their own special subverted forums, radicalize themselves, and then come back.
Thank you for your patience.
Yep. Exposure is the only way to ensure awareness and continued vigilance.
Glad you're on the mod team, given your attitude on the subject.
Thanks for engaging in the dialogue about it.
No problem, and thank you for your patience.