/qa/ - Questions and Answers

>>5516
>What the heck is going on here
You've already stated it. Atlas transferred the server and domain name to Pupperwoff

>What led to this decision
Atlas having to deal with events in his personal life

>how was it decided?
100% entirely by Atlas. I don't think even Pupperwoff had that much say in it

>What does this entail for the future of mlpol.net?
Atlas - who has enough on his plate IRL - could not and did not always keep up with things like renewing the server while also dealing with his own entirely personal IRL concerns. Hence why the site went down on several occasions.

Pupperwoff - who is so incredibly talented and devoted to this website that he rewrote the entire code from scratch - is diligent, is in better circumstances, and can take care of these things.

So really, it means more stability for the website.

>why aren't you telling us about it?
Because we were concerned that people wouldn't understand that Atlas had basically stepped back years ago and could be gone for months at a time. We were afraid people wouldn't respect Atlas's decision and his personal reasons behind it, and would make big, red text threads inviting everyone to panic.

>Where is Atlas?
Last I heard, he was still dealing with the effects of working in an industry that has been devastated by the coronavirus quarantine, while living in an expensive urban area as well as dealing with being the victim of a home burglary.

>He was Lazy/disinterested
>He was always pretty chill about how he handled the site
>He stopped doing Tea With Atlas a long time ago
All of these, I think, are pretty fair, and they help explain why it happened and without much fanfare. He delegated running the website to other staff way back in August of 2017, and rarely intervened in site affairs after that, often considering himself to have less understanding about the situation on the board than us. He could be gone from the website and discord for months at a time. His sanguine personality, while having very many virtues, lacked in diligence and follow-through, traits that he recognized were better possessed by other members of staff, like Pupperwoff. He transferred the ownership of the server and the domain name to him, only telling us later.

I hope we will have a Tea Time again soon. But I am also not sure.

>>5526
>Because we were concerned that people wouldn't understand that Atlas had basically stepped back years ago and could be gone for months at a time. We were afraid people wouldn't respect Atlas's decision and his personal reasons behind it
Isn't that supposed to be something for the /mlpol/ community to decide? What about transparency? It's staff rule #2, ffs. I think the community deserved to know about something as big as this. The policy of transparency is the keystone on which the community's trust lies.
Were we just going to be kept in the dark forever about this because the staff didn't trust this glorious community with knowing who owns the fucking site? Do you take us for idiots?

What happened to this board? It isn't the same as it used to be. 3 Years ago, I felt like I always knew what the staff was up to, and everything felt transparent. Now I feel like everything is decided behind closed doors, and now I hear about this...

>2. Staff will maintain a level of transparency with the community
Tell me, what does this rule really mean?

>>5526
Again, why is this only being revealed now instead of when it happened? What happened to staff following staff rules? Desu, I think everyone should just get sacked for breaking them, because this is unacceptable. I doubt a simple apology would suffice in current situation. As far as I know, you and the others may very well be compromised.

Fuck this...

>>5546
>Why is this being revealed now?
Because you asked about the site staff, and I answered

>Why wasn't it revealed at the time
Because I have been on /mlp/. I have read the "OH MY GOD THIS PERSON QUIT THE FANDOM DIED FIVE YEARS AGO" posts that make up at least half of that board. The lack of such posting is the best thing about /mlpol/ over /mlp/. Atlas went quiet a long time ago, and for reasons that are his own. Making a big deal out of it could only end badly.

>>5559
>The lack of such posting is the best thing about /mlpol/ over /mlp/.
No, the best thing over /mlp/ this site has is supposed to be transparency and community input.
Having secret regime changes to avoid looking bad is communist-tier skulldudgery.

>>5559
Hard disagree there, this IS a big deal, not like you would be capable of understanding that. After all, what if there is more secrets that you are keeping from the community that never should have been secrets in the first place? Why should staff be trusted when they do not follow the policy? If we are to follow it, the current staff must get dismissed, no exceptions, because it proved itself untrustworthy, thus the community itself must choose the new showrunners, because there will be no one left in line to take up the admin mantle.

>>5545
Is there any kind of standard for what qualifies as "transparency" on this site? How is this decided?

>>5575
In this case, transparency means open disclosure

>>5576
That should require community discussion.

>>5577
Ideally

>>5581
Not "ideally", necessarily.
I was under the impression that that's what this community was supposed to be about. Now I see that that's not the case. I feel betrayed.

>>5546
How would we, the community, go about forcibly changing the administration of this site? Is the only real option to start over again elsewhere and see if we can actually get things rebuilt?

>>5589
By making the whole site aware that it is possibly being compromised, for example. I believe this discussion should be brought to /mlpol/ instead of letting it die off in /qa/.

>>5590
At the very least, this issue deserves more attention.
>>5589
Idk. Currently, I'm reconsidering just how much trust I want to put in the administration. I've had this vague suspicion that things were getting less-transparent and less-inclusive for years now; I also knew that Atlas was less involved as he used to be. I let it all slide because I always believed "if they're going to do anything big, they'd let us know first": that is how important transarency is to me.
If staff rule #2 isn't being enforced, I can't be sure what or if any site policies are being followed. It's a scary idea. I trust the staff on this site with (an encryption of) my IP address. Every now and then I post little bits of my daily life that, if pieced-together by someone who had my IP hash, could be made into a doxxable map of my personal identity. It makes me second-guess if I want to express my political opnions...

>>5590
>By making the whole site aware that it is possibly being compromised
>>5591
>less-inclusive
I see where this is going.
You won't succeed faggot.

>>5592
I meant less inclusive within the community; meaning community opnions haven't been included with decision making processes.

>>5592
Ah, I see. You are going to be a treacherous dicksucker in here too, huh? How much do they pay you?

>>5594
>How much do they pay you?
I'm still waiting for the digging out the train with nazi gold.

>>5590
A fair idea, thread made on the main board.

>>5591
I've at least made that thread to inform everyone else on this matter, hopefully this helps get the word out properly.

>>5591
I have flagrantly disparaged 'proper opsec' at leisure. Users can rest assured. I am still the canary in the coal mine.
Users, take heart. They'll come for me long before they come for you

Who's idea was it to keep all of this a secret anyway?

Would a weekly/monthly/quarterly/bi-yearly/yearly update be unfeasible?
You're our friends and that means something.
Okay so let's get to the point of (OP)'s op there are at least three. Reworded in a sensible way. Says the nonsense magic man.
1. Information that was common knowledge is outdated, if one does not trawl through every post and is upto date on things. With good intentions given there isn't a place that has a reflection of that in a consolidated manner.
2. /mlpol/ staff are autonomous which can be good, and is so. However multiple autonomous means stuff have gone on, and spontaneity of circumstances have lead to changes.
>The point is that without diving in deep into the habbenings some information is lost.
3. Not wanting to rock the boat. While a fine reason for other sites such as 4chin, this is /mlpol/ the community is made of sterner stuff than those fags.
Especially is the information is painful and scary.
With those points said having an easy to reach place for up to date information is vital. Needing to be spoon fed aside, it's a useful way to increase community interactivity such as a staff tea time.
That being said, (OP) how the fuck did you not know? I know I'm in the right place at the right time, and magic up information as needed, that is browsing perhaps to an unhealthy degree.
Delegation happens, and as per the shit hitting the fan plan goes (in broad strokes that have been posted) someone who has the capacity, and willingness, and the heart to take on the responsibility is always in the plan. Delegating so that admins and mods, and janitors are able to work just in case such an event occurs. In this case irl being a cunt for multiple personal reasons, which makes sense due to the events that have transpired.
If you need help I will.
The logical course of action is what is going on now.

The community at large must always be interested, and the /mlpol/.net community is. It's all of our home for pony and politics and everything else as well. The sticky notes on the fridge fell off, and some missed that.
A changelog thread of the goings on is interesting. I also want our staff to be safe, and every Anon, and our home.
It's a large task, and mistakes, accidents, incidents, and stuff going on can prevent that for a time.
<3

I can understand why we aren't being told what's keeping Atlas from the site. That's personal shit and we have no right to know it.
But something as important as who runs the site changing really should have been announced formally. People might have complained but nobody would have a reason to feel like something was hidden from them, even though this is a pretty small something. And some people knew anyway so it's not really a secret.
A changelog thread sounds like a good idea. Like the patch notes for a video game.

>>5599
I think this site could use quite the overhaul as far as transparency is concerned. Community interactivity as well.

>>5601
I'm just some asshole on the internet being a dick. But what's yanking your chain?

>>5602
What, you think it couldn't be even a little bit more transparent after what was just revealed?

>>5601
>Community
I'm also part of the herd faggot. The site works fantastic as it is, Why to change it? To please your whims? C'mon.

>>5605
Keeping major secrets from the community does not count as "working fantastic".

>>5606
This not a democracy, in case you didn't notice it. Precisely to keep faggots out and not to be taken over.

>>5603
Idk.. I guess I'm just kind of shocked. I never thought something like this would happen. I thought that any big changes would be announced, and hearing that things are moving behind closed doors just stirs something in me.

>>5607
>This not a democracy
Then what is it, a dictatorship? All the more reason for it to be transparent if only a few people are making decisions for the whole community.
There's also staff rule #3:
>Staff will take all community suggestions into account
And if we don't know what's going on, we can't voice our opnions on the matter.

>>5599
I agree, some kind of dedicated update thread for whenever something happens behind-the-scenes could very easily stop things like this from happening in the future and encourage further transparency in other areas. I personally would prefer it to be weekly, but monthly would also work. Any longer and I feel like it would start to get forgotten pretty quickly.

>>5601
>Community interactivity
The thread idea could also help there, where users become able to learn more about the higher actions of the staff and ask for clarification on confusing matters. It may also help us to keep the staff held to it, since people will probably end up throwing another shitfit if an update log is late.

>>5607
Nobody is calling this site a democracy, we peasants simply want to know what our monarchs are up to so they don't try to screw us over in the long run. If you have a problem with that, go ahead and get your data mined from 4chan or your house partyvanned from 8chan.

>>5610
>>5599
A dedicated thread could be comfy. It reminds me of the old days when I felt like I could interact with the mods on a near-daily basis.

>>5611
Mods are around. They just like to not have to namefag all the time. But if you ever want to say hi, just ask for one to wave.

>>5612
That's really just not good enough, considering the situation at hand. Secrets have been kept. Transparency needs to be fixed.

On reflecting the changelog idea is inherently dangerous as is all information. I still don't want anyone harmed, and the slow harm that can happen to the community and our cohesion is inevitable if nothing happens.
That's fairly damming on my part for the debacle, talking about something without the gumption of better means. I don't pry into matters that I shouldn't ought to be aware of.
I'm not really sure how to go about that in a meaningful way that satisfies all conditions.
Mods, Admins, Jannies?
Wat do?

>>5614
Sorry. I will try harder. How is this one?

>>5616
Heh, better.
Anyway, discussing it now is a step in the right direction.

>>5615
>Wat do?
If it's not broken, don't fix it.

>>5618
>don't ask what's in the sausages, goy. Just be grateful that you're permitted to eat meat
Nah, things need to be more transparent from here on out. I don't want anymore secret regime changes.

>>5615
I think you were onto something with the changelog thread, that seems like a good way to start. We just need the staff to also be on board with the idea, otherwise we're just right back to square one.

>>5592
Bro, he's not saying "inclusive" as to put some tranny in charge, it's pretty clear he's talking about the staff being open with the rest of the community.

That said, everyponer must be really careful with how we approach this, let's take our time before making a final judgement, it could be either the staff being compromised or an attempt of subversion by eroding the confidence shared in this place.

Afterall, there are very coordinated and relatively clever shills unto mlpol and have been trying for some time now, it could come from the inside as it could come from outside, id-less threads are their prefered playground, but even then, they can be wrong-footed if it drags on for too long, still, we should make it a covenant to avoid any such threads...naturally, /qa/ is ill suited for this discussion and it's a rather weird decision to make for a drama-magnet of a board.

>>5599
>>5620
>Would a weekly/monthly/quarterly/bi-yearly/yearly update be unfeasible?
>Changelog
This is hardly a terrible idea, but I'm not sure what information would be mentioned in the update.

Obviously any changes in policy should be announced, but I don't think much has changed in several years, and if anything did it was at least announced in capcode posts where it occurred.

We don't talk about staff changes because those are internal matters that should not be leaked onto the board.

If mlpol were financed by means of donations, then that would be a clear matter for regular updates. But mlpol is entirely privately funded I think.

Moderation is a sensible topic, but I think users should bring up concerns here on /qa/ as they arise.

Changes to the code, I think, are a good subject to keep a thread on, as they occur with some regularity.

The rules page could use an update, but adding and removing rules is hardly a simple clean up of the text.

>>5600
>something as important as who runs the site changing really should have been announced formally.
Maybe it should have. But for us, it felt like a formality, and a purely internal staff matter. Atlas had taken a step back for a while by that point, Pupper doesn't have any kind of new direction for the site and he had been basically running for a year or more anyways.

>>5621
I put the thread on /qa/ because it's a topic concerned with the site's meta. Feel free to check the other guy's thread on the main board.

>>5622
>What would be mentioned
updates to the site code, new potential features, changes to the major staff members (IE owners, admins, resident code monkey)? As for what to post if there's nothing new, then just say that there's nothing new. Anyone feel free to add to this list or to say why something isn't a good idea, this is just a starting point.

>>5623
K

>>5623
OP of the main board thread here, I put it there because somebody in here said it should be brought to the attention of as many users as possible and I agreed. I have no intention of harming the userbase of the site, I merely thought this sort of thing was important for us all to know. In the thread, I even told people to check this thread and the other thread here pertaining to this topic since I know that however I make my delivery, it'll still likely have flaws as a mere recap instead of posting both these threads verbatim.

>>5556
whoa someone saved my meme

>>5629
Based Teaposter.

>>5526
Eh, Pupperwoff's a cool guy that doesn't afraid of anything. The king is dead, long live the king, I guess. That said, I think keeping it quiet out of concern for anons ringing the bell and screaming the end is nigh is selling the rest of us short, as you know, OP is a faggot. If Atlas is having IRL troubles, then it's understandable and admirable that he transfer ownership to the next in line and I hope he continues to hang around. My only concern is whether Pupperwoff is prepared to deal with the increased responsibilities of being both the admin and codemonkey.

So, does this mean I can shitpost about Atlas shrugging now?

>>5622
>Atlas had taken a step back for a while by that point
Some of this might've been vaguely aware of this through other mediums, but there wasn't any announcement of that either.

>>5635
It probably is unfair to the great masses of Anons who have an interest, though I don't feel the events of today have proven me wrong about the panic/doom posters.

I can't say that the increased responsibilities isn't a valid concern. I figured the change would have no effect as things would continue as before, but the transition was accompanied by another change in staff structure. Things have stabilized now.

>Atlas Shrugged
I would like to think he will return as our emperor to lecture us over the state of the world while drinking tea. If not as an executive emperor, then at least as a symbolic one.

>>5636
When was the last time you saw Atlas announce a policy or other change? July of 2017? How many times have you seen him post since, particularly where the subject of the post was entirely serious? And compare that to the numerous times you've seen myself, Pupperwoff, John Elway or Ninjas post since then on serious issues of moderation. I really don't think anyone who has been around these three years can really say they didn't see this coming. It's reflected in the way staff interacted with the board just as surely as it has reflected in the staff discord server.

>>5637
He has indeed been mostly silent since 2018. The formal change in leadership, however, was quite the sudden revelation.
>When was the last time you saw Atlas announce a policy or other change?
That begs the question, how many more huge changes to site policy have there been since 2017 that haven't been announced?

>>5638
>Sudden change in leadership
It really isn't though. Atlas told me that the reason he set up the "dual admins" system that we maintained all the way until Atlas's 'formal' retirement, was so that Atlas could step back and not have to run the site himself. Atlas transferring the domain name changed absolutely nothing in how the website was run.

>How many more huge changes to site policy have there been since 2017 that haven't been announced?
I don't think there's anything? Somethings have changed, and they have been mentioned in capcoded posts.

>>5640
Then there's really no reason as to why these changes shouldn't have been announced, or why the policy page wasn't updated.

>>5640
The simplest solution to this issue is to stop making excuses and actually follow the policy set out.
As you've spent seven(ish) hours (and counting) making excuses as to why you didn't announce something so significant, i've got little reason to believe the staff isn't fucked.
You had one fucking job.
Goddamnit.
>We didn't tell you because we thought people would make big, red text threads inviting panic
And yet it happened anyways when people found out on their own.
Nice way to kick the can down the road.

I swear, every time i come back to this autism festival it's to worse and worse news. Fucking hell.
Is it too much to ask for this place to not be on fire somehow every time i visit?
Of course it is. Because the internet is now a meat grinder that devours everything on it in an endless cycle, and pony is first on the chopping block for bucking the trends for over a decade.

>>5644
>People found out on their own
I told them when they asked >>5498 →

>>5645
Should they have had to ask for something that big of a change?

>>5646
It really isn't a big change though. Nothing more than which account has a domain name. It wasn't a big deal either way, which is I why I didn't bother to omit the fact when someone asked "who is active on staff?" Anyone who followed mlpol.net to even the barest degree knew that Atlas wasn't active and wasn't managing the site. It makes no difference to the operation of the website except that server payments and domain name renewals are a bit more reliable now.

>>5647
Thank you for confirming that the site is fucked (and the staff is cucked) for the foreseeable future, given policy in place is not going to be followed.
A transfer of ownership, no matter how delayed or slow, should have been announced when it happened, not had to be asked about a year after the fact.
Personally i'd even hazard staff changes should be announced as well, but we'll start with the important shit (that won't ever be done).

>>5645
>>5647
The problem is that they never should have had a need to ask in the first place. Which could have been circumvented if staff was transparent on the whole matter as they were supposed to be. If you actually announced that Atlas stepped down due to IRL reasons and Pupperwoff is taking his place in the meantime, this would have been avoided. More over, all rule changes, no matter how minor, should be publicly announced, not kept secret. Failure to do any of that means that staff is compromised and must step down. Which leads us to now. Right now, there is no reason to believe that staff is not compromised, not when you keep on making empty excuses and refuse to accept responsibility. Why should anyone trust you? You all have failed and must be erased from the team and from the site as a whole. Failure to comply the policy must not be tolerated by anyone.

>>5622
>that fucking spoiler
Are you saying that staff isn't even entirely sure where the money for this site comes from? What? How? And again, what?

>>5648
>Thank you for confirming that the site is fucked (and the staff is cucked) for the foreseeable future
A peasant shitposter here.
The above statement makes no sense, be the owner/staff X or Y, my freedom to shitpost doesn't change a bit.
On the announcement side, what difference makes if the mod is T or S? None, as everyone is a poner who knows proper chan culture to interact with us.
On the trust side, what difference makes if the staff says D or F to reassure us of their good will? None, in the end you just trust your pony senses and do what you have to do.
All which bring an unavoidable conclusion, you are upset and can't reason properly to evaluate the huge effort you are putting for minimal details which are irrelevant for /mlpol/ operation.

>>5650
There's no reason for everyone to know where the funding comes from for the sake of privacy, what he probably means is that the site is funded on donations and there's no real way to verify exactly who's donating given how payment processors work. Only the site owner would have that info, which is the way it should be. I'm sure you don't blog your bank statements far and wide for god and all the world to see.

>>5650
No, I'm saying that I don't handle the money, because I don't handle the servers. It's privately funded, I believe by Pupperwoff. It used to be funded by private agreement by a different staff member who I don't think wants his name mentioned here. If he disagrees, he can say so here. I paid for it once. Pupperwoff owns the servers, so I believe it is him.

If we were accepting donations to pay for the upkeep of the site I would consider financial transparency extremely important, but since we don't take money from outside parties I don't think it's important so long as the servers remain running. What Pupperwoff does with his own money is his own business.

>>5652
I don't think we take donations. I think it is all paid for out of pocket by members of staff.

>>5653
Wait, we don't? Oh god, though I guess I shouldn't be surprised since relying on payment processors for revenue would never be a sure thing given the political climate. Maybe we could bullshit a church, take donations through that and funnel it to /mlpol/ as a community website for the church of horsefucking or whatever, it works for scientology.

>>5652
>>5653
That little indication of uncertainty, read as-is would imply to me that there exists the probability of the site being financed through means other than out-of-pocket payments from staff. That was what set off the alarm bells. If it really is privately funded and you don't take donations (either from individuals or organizations), please just say it with more clarity and certainty in the future, as the possibility opens up multiple cans of really nasty worms.
And while I'm typing, I'll take this opportunity to join the others and say that there was a point in time when the ownership change became official, and staff should've notified every of that when it occurred. Not telling us is lying by omission, and keeping that line about Atlas being the "super sexy owner of mlpol.net" on the policy page is just straight up lying, for a very long time.

>>5648
>>5649
What >>5651 says is correct. Who owns the servers and the domain name, and thus is "site owner" in the legal sense, changes absolutely nothing about what you are able to post or how you interact with the site, and it didn't really change much on our side either.

If I thought it were super important and absolutely needed to be kept secret, I wouldn't have casually mentioned it while answering a completely different question from an anon about who is active on staff. It was neither announced nor kept secret because it didn't affect much.

Of course you have your mind made up, and you probably did long before today.

>>5654
There was a paypal link and then a hatreon link in the very earliest days of the website, and then a store after that. But I think it has been privately funded for almost its entire existence.

>>5655
I am one member of staff, and I'm not responsible for the server upkeep. If Pupperwoff were posting here, he could give you the exact answer. But he isn't, it's only me. My knowledge is limited, but that doesn't mean that no one on staff knows. That just means that the people who know with certainty are not talking to you.

>that line about Atlas being the "super sexy owner of mlpol.net" on the policy page is just straight up lying
Having met and seen Atlas in person, I can tell you that sentence is lying about more than just Atlas being the owner of mlpol.net.

Although an announcement should have been made the reason it wasn't is clearly due to neglect, not out of mischief. If site ownership was a secret then it never would have been casually mentioned in the first place. People are overreacting due to a mistake, and although vigilance is needed in this political climate, paranoia towards the site isn't. Again, it hasn't affected how the site is run at all.

>>5655
In their defense, the policy page does make it clear that pupperwoff is next in line for site ownership, and he owns it now. So policy was followed in one way if not another. It was a mistake to keep it quiet this long, though I can't blame Atlas for possibly wanting to avoid questions as to why he'd transfer ownership, some would want to know the specific reasons, and he'd then have to blogpost about his troubles presumably.

Nothing has actually changed, the site continues to operate on the frontend as it always has, the mods continue to do their work as they have been (especially in regards to northeastern european promo shitposting and that one KYS fag), the site hasn't been taken in a new direction. A slip in transparency is nothing to scoff at, but some are turning molehills into mountains, and it's getting extremely tiring to see users maintaining hair trigger hypervigilance to the point of paranoia. Attaching a picture of a pony to baseless accusations and wild speculation does not make it any less irritating, either.

>>5656
Well, if the site had funding issues, I'm sure we really would be ringing the bells and screaming the end is nigh. Private funding out of pocket doesn't sound like a good long term solution to me, it reminds me a lot of 4chan in the early days come to think of it, though we aren't nearly as large a site or have as gay an administrator as moot, so what would I know.

>>5656
What >>5651 is completely incorrect. Everything he mentioned is very important and must not be kept secret. Hell, I am sure that this guy was you, because who else would be bullshitting this hard, but you? Sorry, mate, but your line about " It was neither announced nor kept secret because it didn't affect much" is simply not true. It really does affect much. And attempting to deny this only further confirms that the staff may as well be compromised.

>>5659
>Hell, I am sure that this guy was you
Sorry, not him; but me.
See:
>>5651
>>5618
>>5607
>>5605
>>5602
>>5595
>>5592

>>5656
>lying about more than just Atlas being the owner
Fine, that one got a chuckle, but you are still dancing around the point.
>>5657
>>5658
It's the principle of the thing. Trust has been broken. If the site is in better hands, that's great I guess, but the trust between staff and community (which is already kind of low, because most of us tend to be paranoid schizos one way or the other), and that trust has to be built back up now. Takes a bit longer than updating code, too.

>>5660
And in case of more doubts, see the (You)s.

>>5660
Thanks for confirming that you're the shill that was defending staff's incredibly poor decisions or...
>>5662
>Add (You) exists
...You could be making it all up, which means you could very well be Lotus samefagging. Not like it matters, because what matters is that you are being awfully defensive of staff breaking the policy.

>>5661
Well fine, you've made your point about that, but at this point we're all just talking in circles about it. Which begs the question, what do you actually want from them if we're going on about this slip for so long? For them all to resign? Update the policy page? Issue a public apology? I don't see anything constructive going on, just a bunch of posts beating the proverbial dead horse that, yes, this event did indeed happen and it's super bad that it did. It's starting to sound like a broken record.

>>5663
>Thanks for confirming that you're the shill that was defending staff's incredibly poor decisions or...
Actually it is fairness to me, not ass kissing.
The site runs smoothly, shills are properly managed, what else can I ask?
You on the other hand are sowing seeds of discord and aggressively addressing the staff for nothing burgers.
So, who is the shill here?

>>5659
>It really does affect much
What does it affect exactly? Because the only change I notice is that the website doesn't go down when Atlas forgets to pay the servers.

>it's very important
What is so important about it? Sure, it's better to announce who owns the servers when there is a transfer, but when announcing that will lead to questions about Atlas's personal life that violate his privacy, as well as doom posting about people leaving, then the tradeoff isn't worth it

>the site is compromised
Do you really think that having the guy who wrote the code of the site and is listed in the policy page as being the backup owner in case Atlas is unfit owning the site, is on the same level as federal agents having access to the website's backend? Do you honestly believe that?

>>5661
>the principle of the thing
And my principle is respecting Atlas's privacy and letting him go out quietly and with dignity as he wanted, without unnecessary questions or OH MY GOD HE BETRAYED THE FANDOM.

Again, if it were my intent to keep it super sekrit for all eternity, I wouldn't have mentioned it casually in answer to a different question.

>>5663
Are you trolling us?

>>5661
This little bit of negligence is enough to completely sever trust? Don't count on it. This drama is all so tiresome. Again, it never was deliberately withheld, there's nothing to gain from making a stink about it.

>>5667
>it was never deliberately withheld
Contested

>>5664
>what do you actually want from them
Address that it was bad, at the very least.
>Update the policy page?
That's a start.
>Issue a public apology?
Meh. That would be energy that could've been spent on making sure that transparency really is a thing from now on. A promise and demonstration of keeping said promise would go a lot further than any apology.
The reason this thread reads like a broken record, is that multiple anons want to voice their similar opinions about it.
>>5667
>it never was deliberately withheld
Read the post above yours.

>>5669
>Address that it was bad, at the very least.
It has been, and you're going to have to have patience for other staff to get around to this thread and make their statements. They ain't omnipresent.
>That's a start.
Agreed.
>That would be energy that could've been spent on making sure that transparency really is a thing from now on.
It is a thing, this was a minor infraction and it wasn't committed with malicious intent, which grants it a degree of leeway, at least in my opinion.

It's worth mentioning that changes to the public policy page must be made through server access. The page cannot be changed with a simple admin account. I assure you, there are plenty of other things that need addressing in the code.

>>5672
That just means it was deliberately withheld for a lesser amount of time than eternity. It also says
>And my principle is respecting Atlas's privacy and letting him go out quietly and with dignity as he wanted, without unnecessary questions or OH MY GOD HE BETRAYED THE FANDOM.
right above it, as the reasoning for why it was withheld. It's all there in plain English. If you actually have something else to add, then proceed, but that specific claim of yours is still invalidated by the post directly preceding yours.
Did they tell us? No. wɪðˈhɛld
Was it on purpose? Yes. dɪˈlɪbərɪtli

>>5667
Little bit of negligence, my ass! There is nothing little about this at all. And how can you say it wasn't deliberately withheld when it actually was? Staff told us nothing and they did it on purpose.
>>5666
>Do you really think that having the guy who wrote the code of the site and is listed in the policy page as being the backup owner in case Atlas is unfit owning the site, is on the same level as federal agents having access to the website's backend?
Given how the transfership got handled and only became known less than a day ago despite whole year or more passing since then? Despite him not even being listed as backup owner a year ago? Maybe only as a response to this day's thread, but before? I doubt that. Pupperwoff should've stuck to coding instead of administrating. If he was any good, he wouldn't have kept this transfership a secret, he would have said that Atlus is resigning due to IRL reasons and he's taking his place. That's what should have happened. Instead, he and the rest of the staff kept this a secret. They probably kept a lot more than that a secret. And would have kept it that way, if no one asked about the moderation team and you haven't revealed the news that should have been revealed a long time ago. This indicates that not only did the staff neglect upholding the transparency rule, they did it for so long that it should not be surprising that this might be seen as site being possibly compromised.
>And my principle is respecting Atlas's privacy and letting him go out quietly and with dignity as he wanted, without unnecessary questions
No question is unnecessary. Also, there is nothing wrong with questions about Atlas's personal life when you already have a good answer already, perhaps even several such answers. And the doompost part is just more useless excuses. It would be one thing if the event was very recent, that would be minor and forgivable. But when such an event is being kept secret for more than a year then it is no longer minor and much less forgivable.
>>5671
Then, I suppose we should wait for Pupperwoff to appear and explain just what the fuck was he doing and how many more things he keeps secret that really shouldn't be.
>>5664
>Which begs the question, what do you actually want from them if we're going on about this slip for so long?
>For them all to resign?
The community must decide their punishment.
>Update the policy page?
Only with the community's consent and the updates must be made clear.
>Issue a public apology?
Alongside with above, but they also must ensure that transparency will be a thing from now on and will be applied retroactively.

>>5674
You're fucking insane. Your priorities are utterly goddamned screwed if you're getting this worked up about something so minor. Get a sense of perspective, man, get some fucking humility. You're gonna talk about punishment like we're bringing up war criminals for tribunal? Go take a fucking walk outside for a while.

>>5676
TBH, it is like the family of AOC just parachuted here. Totally full SJW talking and attitude.

>>5676
I think he has a point.

>>5676
>gonna talk about punishment
I don't think "punishment" is the right course of action, but some apparent accountability would be good.
If the site policy rules can be broken with no regard, and nothing happens, how are we supposed to trust that they're ever being followed?

>>5678
OP is looking for some vendetta masquerading as a fair request.
Give an inch and they will take a mile.

>>5678
His only good point is that the transfer of ownership should have been announced at some point. That's something we can agree on. However, he goes off the rails with "this site is compromised" and "the community must decide their punishment." The staff don't work for us and certainly aren't our slaves, they're fellow horsefuckers who just want the /mlpol/ experience to stay alive. Asking them to be more open about such things as far as they can while respecting privacy is reasonable, constantly lambasting them (in reality only Lotus, who has put his neck out here) is not.

>>5680
Motte & bailey tactics.

>>5681
Motte and Bwhat?

>>5679
We're talking about holding a group of people who keep this site running out of their own time and money accountable for a minor slip up, when every single one of us should know damn well the policy is intended to protect this site and its community from malicious opacity. A zero tolerance enforcement of policy regardless of the circumstances will only do more harm than good. If you don't trust that the site is being run in good faith, then get involved in helping.

>>5682
In this case the "motte" is being disappointed that a change in site administration wasn't announced, the "bailey" is all the incendiary language you see.

>>5683
This.

>>5681
>Motte & bailey tactics.
It reminds me of the last posts in the books thread, one of them was very educative, at least for me:
>>>/mlpol/303876 → →