Bannings

[Pavel]

@Testament said in Bannings:

Or maybe it was some kind of panic mode and pride prevents admitting fault.

Based on my conversations, this is the more likely reason. She’d gotten hardly any pushback on her decisions before.

[Kestrel]

?

[sao]

@Kestrel It is pretty remarkable how much the goalposts keep moving over there, isn’t it?

[Tez]

Another day, another weird take on history. Godspeed to them.

[Pavel]

@Kestrel Well. That’s not a totally inaccurate interpretation of things. We were rather sick of the secrecy around the decisions as well as the decisions themselves.

That said… I’m getting rather tired of this “rebuild trust in our fractured community” bullshit that’s being peddled. We’re done with MSB, in general. We’ll trade information when it’s pertinent, but otherwise we’re two distinct and independent entities that just happen to be about the same niche hobby.

[Third Eye]

@Kestrel
I was also briefly VERY CONFUSED about who was moneylaundering, but then I realized that by devoting thought to this I’d already lost.

[Kestrel]

@Third-Eye said in Bannings:

@Kestrel
I was also briefly VERY CONFUSED about who was moneylaundering, but then I realized that by devoting thought to this I’d already lost.

I am here to make losers of us all; but also to double check that I’m too young to be going senile already.

[Pavel]

@Third-Eye said in Bannings:

@Kestrel
I was also briefly VERY CONFUSED about who was moneylaundering, but then I realized that by devoting thought to this I’d already lost.

I dunno about money laundering, but I do know that in the past at least one erstwhile member of our community accepted financial assistance that was offered based on false assertions made by the recipient.

Which is a convoluted way of saying someone, allegedly, lied about a medical issue and received financial assistance from another person for said issue.

[SpaceKhomeini]

@Pavel

Isn’t that just called “Scamming?”

[Pavel]

@SpaceKhomeini said in Bannings:

@Pavel

Isn’t that just called “Scamming?”

It’s also called fraud.

[kalakh]

@Kestrel said in Bannings:

?

???

[Jennkryst]

Does it count as Politics-talk, pointing out how Musk is going full Ganymede on Twitter, throwing out all the banz? Because watching the death spiral is oddly similar.

[Pavel]

@Jennkryst Eh, it’s right on the edge I’d say. I’d generally prefer it not to become a significant topic of conversation, but I’m not against it officially.

[sao]

Even after everything that happened I wouldn’t go so far as to compare Ganymede to that puerile temper tantrum in the body of a dude.

[GF]

@Jennkryst If discussing a non-politician’s actions in the context of a privately owned company is politics, then I have no idea what isn’t politics.

[Coin]

@GF said in Bannings:

@Jennkryst If discussing a non-politician’s actions in the context of a privately owned company is politics, then I have no idea what isn’t politics.

Everything is politics. It’s just not necessarily partisan politics.

[Roz]

This seems like a really weird reason to resurrect this thread.

[Pavel]

@GF said in Bannings:

@Jennkryst If discussing a non-politician’s actions in the context of a privately owned company is politics, then I have no idea what isn’t politics.

It’s not politics per se (excepting the Coin Caveat that everything is politics) but it is Real Life Important Thing That Could Flare Tempers and Tensions, much in the same way political conversation is.

[tsar]

Oh man, I’d managed to entirely put this thread out of my mind. I saw it come up and was like DID SOMEONE GET BANNED.

Whoops. Just our origin story.

[Sammich]

@tsar said in Bannings:

Whoops. Just our origin story.

Makes us sound like superheroes!