Making it Better: The future of WP

Post Reply New Topic

Alex, please do not make PPR optional like AF. I believe that would be one of the worst decisions that could be made for the future of Wrong Planet. It works on AF because the rules are enforced consistently regardless of which forum people attend.

WP would improve if we could all use PPR without fear of being mocked, heckled, insulted, or attacked for our opinions. It is the only "academic" area of WP and as an academic I would like the opportunity to discuss Politics, Philosophy or Religion within the rules you have already established. I would like to debate or argue on an academic level. If PPR becomes optional, a few problems will occur:

1) Making PPR optional would suggest that anyone who ventures inside did so "at their own peril", or their own risk of being bullied. There is a belief that PPR does not uphold the same rules as the rest of WP, and this would put users in double jeopardy. I can picture that if PPR is segregated and a member elects to join, they will be told "we warned you!", if something goes wrong. We have already heard the rhetoric of "you shouldn't have gone there!" or "it was your own decision!", and this rhetoric is used to discredit members' legitimate concerns when rules are broken within that forum. In this regard, it would be counterproductive, and promote more shaming / blaming for victims who get attacked.

We already have members being told that they should grow thicker skin, not be sensitive, not voice opinions they might espouse, and not speak up against people who break rules. We don't need to reinforce an idea that PPR takes no prisoners, or that we are responsible for anything that goes wrong in attendance.

2) PPR is an intellectual forum, and many members would like to discuss Politics, Philosophy, or Religion in an intellectual way. We should all be permitted to discuss academic topics without feeling restricted from any area of the forum. I studied and taught Philosophy. I shouldn't have to decide whether I will join PPR, or risk being blamed for that choice if someone breaks the rules to attack me.

3) WP is meant to be inclusive of all members and all members' opinions, so long as they do not break the rules.

The focus here needs to be on enforcing rules, and allowing members to use the entire site without disclaimers. All fora should be moderated equally and everyone regardless of their opinions should be safe, provided they don't break your rules.

Please keep PPR accessible for us all. I would not want to participate in WP if I felt I had to choose between academic discourse, vs the possibility of being blamed with "I told you so!", if I step into PPR.

That being said, a forum like PPR requires by the nature of the thing some greater leeway for things like mockery and heckling (no excuses for outright attacks, though).

We could at least issue everyone with pepper spray to be on the safe side before they enter PP&R and News &Current Events, it would have helped me when I wandered in innocently on my first day and was pulverised within moments.

Last edited by Teach51 on 22 Aug 2020, 1:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.

When half the scientist say mask don’t work. It becomes political.
While I wear mask and supoort making mask mandatory, there is issue of if it’s constitutional for government to strip peoples rights away to do it. Science can’t decide what’s right or what works and doesn’t. Last I heard the one half were saying mask aren’t enough, you’ve got to wear googles.and it can spread 16 feet away, doesn’t help mask makers put on their boxes, “doesn’t prevent COVID-19” doesn’t help the half saying mask work original said mask didn’t help at all so they could prioritize mask for doctors. Where they could said masks help but please make sure doctors get them first. I remember fighting with people about it. Why wouldn’t mask help it’s airborne like the flue mask help prevent spreading cold and flue. If mask don’t work why do doctors need them? And I got criticized for it. Then months later. They say just kidding mask help.

Stopping travel from infected nations was originally called racist. Seems fighting the pandemic was politically later on it was why didn’t we do thst sooner

And then people are and we’re more concerned with the economy then fighting pandemic. I got beat over the head here for saying f**k the economy peoples lives matter more.

Do you interact with people on the right? I do. And I can tell you most of them 100% support trump and every anti trump news just makes them support him more. I work at conservative store. All my friends are conservative. A lot of them are active or former military. They see democrats as trying to destroy the economy on purpose to fight something no worse then the flue. That said I’ve found right leaning people are more accepting of others then left leaning people who on surface claim to be accepting of all.
You’d think they’d defriend me for being on welfare and disabled. But the ones who know didn’t. I do wish they’d stop seeing me as the exception, but atleast they aren’t mean to me like people on the left have been. I tell you 2016 was real eye opening experience for me. Shows me who true friends are as well as people on the left real selfs.

News and events is just ppr2.
The reality is you can’t expect someone to fight in ppr or news and events and then be friends In other areas. That’d be like going to lunch with your mugger.

One can’t hold that stance and complain that there’s too much American political talk here though.



I’m part of a shave group that gets heated potlical and people complain, but never has anyone called anyone else a nazi, racist, or white supremist. If I wasn’t afraid of telling people I’m Aspie I’d point them to this thread and be like if you think this is bad read wp.
Their version of heated(causing crackdowns by mods) is baby level compared to here.
So why can rabid anti trump and super pro trump people get along and remain civil there? The rules to be civil are strictly enforced if anyone did call someone a racist there they’d be banned instantly and their post taken down. Some posts have violated the rules but are taken down so quick and poster banned I hardly see any of them.
The good rule is king there. That’s a shave group by way. Like everywhere it’s mostly political posts now but they remain civil.

Last edited by sly279 on 22 Aug 2020, 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

For a paralell pile of conflicting narratives, just look at the circus surrounding hydroxocloroquine.

retracted opinion, want to read what more people say

Last edited by Feyokien on 22 Aug 2020, 1:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Or, we could enforce the rules so that everyone can participate.
Heated debate about a topic is great, but there's no reason why members should be attacked or subject to lies.
It's not OK to say this is acceptable in PPR, or that we should only join if we're willing to forgo our rights.

I fully agree with IsabellaLinton's posts on this issue.

And BTW, the PPR hasn't always been this bad, not by a far stretch. There have always been some fights in there, but the mods in general and GGPViper, in particular, used to keep a pretty clean shop in there. Lots of more varied and interesting discussions too, not the same thing over and over again with the same 10 people shouting at each other

I think two aspects would be key here: on one hand, active, consistent and cohesive moderation and on the other freedom for people to discuss whatever they want, including controversial subjects while holding them to a higher standard of posting.

If people actually want to troll or scream at each other there are plenty of places on the internet for that, if you want an actual exchange, choose your words with a minimal amount of mindfulness.

Obviously, the mods should send people who break the rules to the naughty corner or whatever they use, regardless who does it or whether they agree with them or not.


On a related issue, something else that concerns me is that some of the worst behaviours in here have been posted in the past on ableist sites like Heartless Asperger's etc to show how bad autistic people are "straight from the horse's mouth". I find this very disturbing because a handful of people who act in a selfish manner can't seem to understand that they can affect all of us, including Alex who's a public figure.

Absolutely, ideally respect should be maintained for all points of view and no personal insults or slurs or derogatory labelling should be allowed. I agree if it would be possible in WP's present climate. I don't think it will be easy.

Why not "spin off" all of the Politics and News into a different website?

"You're Wrong! Planet"

And bigots will always find justifications to hate on a group. If they use this site and use this drama to justify why autistic people are heartless, they would have found other reasons too. You cannot convince someone. Just like how you cannot convince a racist there is systemic racism or that black people do get killed more by cops.

Okay that was a good little bit of word play

It won't be easy to enforce the rules, as written?

We've brought this issue to the attention of all the moderators as well as Alex. We all know the rules and we know that the rules are going to be enforced from here on in.

If someone personally chooses not to attend PPR until after the election, that's their own prerogative. But, adding an official written disclaimer that PPR is optional like it is on AF, would only serve to empower mods and rule breakers. It would allow political trolls and bullies to deflect responsibility for their actions, and blame those who opt to attend, given a caveat.

Let's not throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.

Leave PPR, and focus on people's accountability when and if they break the rules.

Sure, but do you feel particularly motivated to help them? And while the whole all autistics (particularly males) are evil psychos might affect you less personally, it will affect a lot more those who have a public image to maintain or get involved in activism.

And for what? If all the fights in here proved something is that you're not going to change anybody's opinion or vote by shaming or insulting them if anything they just dig their heels in deeper and feel more motivated to fight against you. Surely people aren't naive enough to think that a stranger calling someone out for racism online - be it justified or not - is going to change anybody's prejudices: they just learn to hide them better.

My meaning was it won't be easy for the problematic posters to comply, they haven't so far. It will not be a quick fix. It's ultimately far better to promote a sense of collective responsibility than fear of moderation. Rules will deter some but a climate of tolerance also needs to be encouraged.