/qa/ - Questions and Answers

>>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 → →

>>5676
You're fucking insane, if you let them get away with this unpunished. And this is no minor matter. This is quite serious.
>>5681
>The staff don't work for us and certainly aren't our slaves
Then why are they staff members? If they don't work for us, then they have no business being staff.

>>5680
He's not the OP. I am. Don't misconstrue the intent of this thread.
It's supposed to be about transparency and community input as defined by the site's policies.
>>5683
I only want to be able to trust that the policies of this site will be taken more seriously in the future, not burning the whole place to the ground.
> If you don't trust that the site is being run in good faith, then get involved in helping.
That's what I'm trying to do right now.

I guess since we are all posting, I might as well bring up my involvement in hopes to put a stop to this freak out. I am the one that suggested in the first place not to tell anyone. I know this is enough to condemn myself to these posters out for blood, but there is a reason to my madness. I’ll let you be the judge if that reasoning was retarded or not.

My reasoning was that this would mark in the minds of posters, especially ones that made this thread, that this was the start of a new era, without the original founder, while all the while, he is still around and can just come back, which I hope he does sooner rather than later. There is a charisma around him that makes the site much more enjoyable when he is around.

I don’t very much like change. There have been some disagreements as to the direction of the site, some really really early on in site history that would have altered the site completely if gone unopposed, and yet, it was opposed. We tend to reject nearly all changes in favor of keeping everything the same. The largest debates we have as staff now is if something should be deleted, someone should be banned, and when we should allot downtime to update the code of the site. The code is the only major change the site has had recently, and before that was the addition of several other boards for other topics of discussion that don’t quite fit the ponies/politics theme.

And I will still hold to having made the right call, because as far as I am concerned, Pupper is just holding a temporary position. Atlas should have and I believe would have made it known himself to all of you if his time as overlord of all existence was up. An announcement of the sorts would imply he just simply abandoned ship, ran away, quit and never looked back. That isn’t the person Atlas is.

It was agreed, even after the staff took up my view of the matter, that if anyone should ask, we would tell them, despite the backlash, because it is a level of transparency to make it known should there be a question to staff. I will further add that I am against the suggestion that there should be a change log, in part because I will be fighting to keep all changes to the site to a minimum, if not changed at all. An empty change log would only drive suspicion and a desire to see more added over time. Additions should stem from the users and not the staff. Plus, a change log with “We sat on our asses, banned KYS filly for spam, and hated going back to work in the morning” would get pretty depressing.

To sum it up, I did it. The rest simply didn’t disagree with my suggestion, so please stop trying to make the whole of staff out to be a secret keeping monster. There is no broken trust, just a couple of angry anons. If Atlas never comes back, then to us he is still the leader, regardless. He is just not here right now. We operate like this until he comes back.

There's no fucking IDs in this thread. Everyone is getting mixed up. Maybe this would be better off in:
https://mlpol.net/mlpol/304420

>>5690
Damn it. I can never get the Mod name thing to work right. I’m Fasces. I will never get used to namefagging.

>>5688
"Unpunished"? All he did was not properly announce "Yeah this guy's busy with IRL shit so his best friend's in charge for now" when it happened.
It ain't like he embezzled site funds for a private project that doesn't benefit the site or white people.

>>5690
>It was agreed, even after the staff took up my view of the matter, that if anyone should ask, we would tell them, despite the backlash, because it is a level of transparency to make it known should there be a question to staff.
Well, that's a bit reassuring, but isn't that kind of lucrative? We can't exactly ask questions about things that we don't know are happening.

>>5690
Thank you very much! I just wish you posted this quite some time ago when Lotus was taking the brunt of the vitriol. The poor guy must've gotten a headache from all this.

>>5693
>>5688
I really think "punishment" isn't the right word here. It's putting people on the defensive. Accountability shouldn't necessarily be a thing to feared, but it is important.

>>5690
I think you have made the worst call possible. Suggesting not to tell anyone about the transfership is nothing but a mistake. And I doubt anything can possibly justify what you have done. You should have told everyone from the start and made it clear that Pupperwoff is taking Atlas's place for the time being while he's sorting his IRL issues out, if Lotus to be trusted. Keeping quiet on such an important matter was a mistake. The rest should have disagreed and revealed what was going on instead of willingfully breaking one of the most important rules.

>>5690
Okay. Can we go back to business and tell OP to fuck off?

All I want is to be able to trust that the policies of this board are being followed...
>>5697
>The rest should have disagreed and revealed what was going on instead of willingfully breaking one of the most important rules.
This raises it's own questions.
Is there some kind of secrecy pact within the administration? Are site staff made to comply with issues to cover these things up? What happens if there's a disagreement among the staff when it pertains to transparency?
Tbh, the staff policy page is really vague. It claims that the staff are supposed to be transparent and take community input, but it doesn't really say anything about the agreements and policies that the staff have among themselves. How is it that decisions are made? If mods disagree with certain courses of action, are they allowed to tell the rest of us?

>>5697
>distrust
You lack Friendship anon.

>>5700
Good friends don't lie.

>>5688
>This is quite serious
Your priorities are fucked in a world where literal genocide would be considered a major happening, not a site admin failing to notify us that he was stepping down due to personal reasons. They're not getting away with it, this entire thread is them not getting away with it. They failed to notify us and pretty much all of us have expressed disappointment with that failure, the point of contention is what should be done about it. Obviously the policy page should be updated to reflect that actual site ownership.

Otherwise, vague calls of 'punishment' seem to be ruling the day here, and according to policy, that involves dismissal. So let's talk about accountability.

Presumably most of the staff knew about this for almost a year, under the policy, that would mean they'd all have to resign, including pupperwoff. That's at the very least yet another change in site ownership, to who? We're presumably gutting the core of the staff running the site over this. Any of you fags willing to step up? Got the money? The time? Do you really? You might as well be calling to have /mlpol/ shut down over something that wasn't done out of any malicious intent.

This isn't to say nothing should happen, so let's talk minimising accountability to a single person. Who's responsibility should it have been to notify us about the change of site ownership? Why, naturally the owner of course! So according to policy, pupperwoff has to resign.

So what do we do? What do you think we should do, actually say something instead of reeing about what happened, others have. Apology, which has been given, at least by Lotus. Update to the policy page, which we have to wait for someone with system access to do, no one's said no to that. What's really being left unsaid is that some people in this thread want to see a resignation, and I'm just saying that's a terrible fucking idea given the circumstances around this.

>>5689
A tea time should be held to discuss this when more of the staff are available to talk with the community, and it's been fielded already. More than that is something we can't accomplish in this thread.

>>5699
It's not a pact per say, but there is an unwritten prohibition on not 'towing the line'

>>5694
People tend to eventually ask where you are if you aren’t around. I just hoped he would have been back before this conversation.
>>5695
Sorry. I had to get some rest before work. I will be going after this post, so I won’t be back for some time, but I will pick it up from there.
>>5697
It was not a mistake as I mentioned. Feel free to disagree with my assessment of reasoning and then we can see if my reasoning was flawed, but I believe my reasoning was solid. I don’t care if you can’t personally trust the people that have kept the site safe for years. Their record should afford this easily. I don’t claim that same level of record, but this is something you have blown out of proportion. No rule was broken. We promised a level of transparency and you got it. Upon questioning we revealed his absence. We do not promise full transparency. I’m sorry if this is not to your liking. I felt this situation was sensitive enough to keep back, especially if people start prodding for personal details. The rest simply followed suit. I don’t think it is fair to levy blame on others for agreeing because sometimes you can find yourself agreeing to things that you wouldn’t normally because no other option has been argued or put to words like the first suggested course of action.
>>5698
I believe that to be the wisest course of action. But the people in this thread calling for reform will not take such an easy path I’m afraid. They will be heard, but it would be best to just move on.

>>5702
>You might as well be calling to have /mlpol/ shut down over something
That's clearly not what he's calling for.
>Any of you fags willing to step up? Got the money? The time? Do you really?
If that's what it takes to have a transparent board where the pivotal policies are actually followed, then sure as heck. I want reform.

>>5702
Pupper will not be resigning. If you want blood, you can call for me to resign, but you will not touch the admins. No one else is fit to hold power responsibly than the people already in it. The years have proven that.
>>5705
All policies have been followed as written. It is your own interpretation of what those rules that has not. Your call to reform is not a reform but a total change of the hands of power. This is both uncalled for and overkill.

>>5705
You're correct, he's not calling for that, he's not calling for anything just shrieking about violated trust and a need to punish the perpetrators. Which according to policy is dismissal. So yes, while he's not calling to shut down /mlpol/, that will be the actual result since no one in this thread has stepped up to offer themselves as replacements to lost staff. We're not just talking about removing a couple of mods and jannies here, but the literal technicians that maintain the site's functions.

>I want reform.
Okay, so what can you do? You got any web dev experience, financial security to pay the running costs? Or are you just a retard ideas guy?

>>5706
I'm not calling for anyone to resign, honestly I don't think this is nearly as bad as people are making it out to be, since I can tell the difference between breaking the rules maliciously and breaking them out of an (arguably) misguided sense of benevolence.

You fags, and I mean that affectionately, have sat on this for about a year, and what has happened? Zero negative impact on the community, none at all. In fact, we'd never have noticed at all if it had never been brought up. That alone should prove you guys are on the level, even if it wasn't a good idea to keep this quiet this long. So I'm arguing for leniency in this case given the staff's exceptional record up to now.

>>5706
>resigning
No concessions poner.
Draw the line and make a stand. You are not alone.
OP's faggotry can't be allowed.

>>5706
>All policies have been followed as written.
That simply isn't true.
Staff rule #2 says that staff will be transparent. For an amount of time "since last year", the policy page since last year said that the owner of the site was someone other than who it really is: the policy page was a lie, and therefore it was not transparent.
As for staff rule #3, which says that community considerations would be taken into account, the community was given no prior notice or any opportunity to express opinions on this matter before it occured, so community considerations were not taken into account.
So, overall, it really looks like these very important rules are either not being followed, or aren't being interpretted.
What is going to happen to amend this?
>>5708
Nobody asked for resignation. We're asking for transparency/accountability. Hold your fucking horses.

>>5702
>Otherwise, vague calls of 'punishment' seem to be ruling the day here, and according to policy, that involves dismissal. So let's talk about accountability.
Well maybe then there should be some degrees of accountability between just doing nothing and outright dismissal. Maybe then the staff would be more willing to come forward if they fuck up. instead of just keeping everything secret.

>>5709
I will reiterate, the policy as written has been followed. There has and will always be a level of transparency, but not everything should be out in the open. I argued that this was one of those times it should not be mentioned in transparency. If you wish, since I have to leave for work, mention how the community would have benefited from the knowledge and how this falls into should have been transparent and I will see your reasoning. I will look over your arguments when given a chance.

>>5707
>financial security to pay the running costs?
What's it cost, a couple hundred dollars a month? I think I could pick it up. I use this site every day, and I wouldn't mind paying for it if there were any indication that
>We're not just talking about removing a couple of mods and jannies here, but the literal technicians that maintain the site's functions.
Nobody fucking asked for anyone to be removed. Stop putting words in other people's mouths.

>>5704
>We do not promise full transparency
Then, please, tell me why are you a staff member, if you are not promising full transparency? If we had full transparency, if we had an announcement there would be no drama happening surrounding this.
>But the people in this thread calling for reform will not take such an easy path I’m afraid. They will be heard, but it would be best to just move on.
I do not believe so. Moving on will not happen until it will be ensured that staff will follow the staff rules and a proper announcement of the (temporary) transfership will be made as soon as possible. People deserve to know what was happening behind the scenes since past year.

Something that bears consideration in all this, and is a reiteration of a previous point.
/mlpol/ is not a democracy.
The site, domain, and even the proprietary code (intellectual property) all belong to Pupper. So, while the site is ostensibly democratic, it is not a democracy. Do with that info what you will.
Furthermore, Fasces is a gud boi, if woefully naive and a bit sycophantic at times. Those criticisms aside, his track record of erring on the side of caution is well established and not inappropriate.
The site is driven by users, but it isnt run by users, which is at the heart of why there is still a discord diaspora that generally avoids using the site (with exception). When /mlpol/ was made a private venture, it would not have been possible without someone(s) taking responsibility and putting their name on the dotted line. And the individual who until very recently (yours truly, btw) made the agreement with Atlas to cover operational costs for the site, it was done under the express notion that contributions were voluntary and would offer no credit or influence over site policy.
Just an fyi for you all

>>5712
It's about $500/year

>>5710
>should be some degrees of accountability
Then what we need to discuss is how to accomplish this. A tea time was proposed earlier which would be the ideal setting to do that in at a time when more staff are available to talk with. You know, since not all of them are here right now.

>>5712
>Stop putting words in other people's mouths.
Sorry, but I had to make an assumption since they weren't putting their cards on the table at all. Sometimes the best way to do that is to accuse them of wanting bullshit so they come out and correct you with what they actually want.

Obviously we're not removing anyone, that's a dumb idea, but we do need to sit down and discuss a real means of ensuring future transparency without having to throw out every staffer that so much as steps a toe out of line, especially when it can't be proven to have been done maliciously.

>>5711
>There has and will always be a level of transparency, but not everything should be out in the open.
Well, I think then that calls to question what the actual level of transparency really is then, because to me the question of who owns the site seems like a really big deal.
I guess that's a separate discussion though.
>mention how the community would have benefited from the knowledge
Knowing who owns the site means owning who is the ultimate decision maker and arbiter for everything related to the site. We call Atlas "Titan" because we consider him the one who bore the weight of the site. If that changes, it should be announced to the community so that we all know what's going on and trust the process.
And disclosing it a long time ago, when it happened, or even some time before it happened, would have meant that the community wouldn't have been misled about who owned the place. It means nobody would have been lied to.
There were a lot of times when I considered making a thread here to ask about Atlas. He had been getting harder and harder to reach for a while now, but I thought he was just busy. I paid it no second thought because whenever I checked the policy page, I saw that he was still the owner of the website. Now that I know that that isn't the case, I feel like a fucking idiot for just blindly trusting it with no further question.
>>5715
Even I could pay that.

>>5717
>I could pay that
You're in luck, the spot just opened up

>>5714
>/mlpol/ is not a democracy.
It doesn't need to be a democracy, but it should at the very least be transparent. Even Best Koreans have the dignity of knowing who their leader is.

>>5719
I agree wholeheartedly. Transparency is one of a dozen unresolved issues that prompted my resignation, alongside the unwillingness to discuss it and them.

>>5718
Why wasn't this brought up too? If money was an issue, the community should've been notified.
Now I'm sketical about how this site is being funded. I didn't pay it very much mind since the store closed, but apparently I can't count on knowing if big decisions are being disclosed.
Why'd the site store get closed anyway? Iirc, it was some combination of the company not wanting to print nazi shirts and people simply not using it. Ii guess that topic deserves its own thread.

>>5716
>Obviously we're not removing anyone, that's a dumb idea, but we do need to sit down and discuss a real means of ensuring future transparency without having to throw out every staffer that so much as steps a toe out of line, especially when it can't be proven to have been done maliciously.
That's basically what I'm getting at. It's not like I don't like Pupper or would have really protested him being owner if we all only knew about it, but the lack of transparency on the matter makes me reconsider every little thing I payed no mind to until now. It's downright creepy, and that's why I was so upset.

>>5690
Thanks that makes a lot of sense. As stated nothing really changed.
A changelog of everything is always in the green feels redundant.
>>5516
OP is pretty fucking shit at explaining his position in a calm sensible manner.
>>5705
You've proven to be a long time member, and jumpy. Everything was there. Your 'level of transparency' wasn't in everyone's best interest and not Atlas'.
There isn't a working solution just moar transparency. How? In a way that continues the site.

>>5702
>Otherwise, vague calls of 'punishment' seem to be ruling the day here, and according to policy, that involves dismissal. So let's talk about accountability.
I for one don't give a shit about punishment, that didn't work.
There are two points at play.
>(OP)
Is being hysterical. Yes, changes did and do happen that are small and over all mundane. Somehow he got lost from where he was to right now.
He wants to be on staff, and has badgered everyone for a reply.
>>5716
That does work.

>>5707
This.

Changelogs that say 876 days without unusual incident is boring and tedious.
>>5709
>Atlas hands over the domain for personal reasons
<most poners here aren't in a position to do anything about it
<what could they do that hasn't already been done
<nothing
<even if objections are raised irl's a cunt
>On the other hand
<Atlas has to hand over the domain for personal reasons
<Well wishes from poners (besides the obligatory ahhhhhh! posting.)
<nothing happens

2. Staff will maintain a level of transparency with the community
/mlpol/ is a community of like-minded individuals, we are not barbarians hyped up on ape testosterone
We are driven by a need to maintain this website, not by a need to steal your info and sell it to the highest bidder
If a thread is posted on /qa/ it is to be addressed within two days at most, even if the reply is negative or a simple "I don't know"
Staff found to deliberately delete threads or posts to avoid discussing important topics about the site can face punitive measures up to and including dismissal

3. Staff will take all community suggestions into account
As this is a community site and not a top-down dictatorship like some other sites user input is very important
Staff found to be deliberately removing community suggestions to avoid changes on the site or push their own agenda will be subject to punitive measures up to and including dismissal
One more thing to consider is that this is opaque by design so outside forces can't fuck around here. This is the bastion of hoerspussy, pony, and politics and more.
This could have been found by digging enough and making conclusions a hallmark of early day April fools /mlpol/ or so I've gathered.
Staff rule 1. Is also followed to protect fellow user and supreme ruler of everything Atlas, and Pupper, and the users by proxy.
>>5717
Quadruple the costs as emergency.
Pupper has the legal copyright due to, paying the server (maybe more possibly just out of pocket), having the domain, and overhauling the code. From a security standpoint I'm assuming it's a pain in the ass to get anything done and not ssh in. And so that there are little to no points of failure.
>>5720
That... is a very good point.

>>5721
Due to the business anon going somewhere (it's in a thread). The method of having the store up wasn't working without him on that front. So a business with realistically low through put is hard to keep open except through third parties that have their own stuff to deal with. Ect. mlpol and ponerpics is paid out of pocket as far as we're aware.
(((Outside hostiles))) do love to have a vice grip on all money flow.

>>5722
I'm not to be honest, yeah it was a mistake, but our guys have a pretty good track record in running this site for as long as they have and out of their own pockets no less, that earns them points in my book. On top of the fact that we didn't notice the change until now, no negative changes in policy, no lapses in moderation, 4chan was much rockier at this point in its lifespan in regards to policy, funding and definitely transparency.

I hope Atlas is okay, in all this bickering, we really haven't paid much mind to that.

>>5721
Site funding was an agreement between myself and Atlas at the very beginning of mlpol.net. Not even staff was notified at the time, many/most learned some time later (not unlike how the site is learning about staff changes now).
The agreement was precipitated by the site's patreon, and then Atlas' paypal getting shut down for hateful activity. This told me as an individual that (((agencies))) would do what they could to prevent the site from perpetuating its self by cutting off finances. So, I reached out to Atlas directly to ensure that the site could continue, without having to resort to ads, malware, etc. One may notice there never has been any advertisements on /mlpol/ and it is intended to stay that way indefinitely.
As for the store operator, he was fired by Atlas personally for repeatedly starting shit in staff, after numerous instances of threatening to quit all while never functionally contributing to the operations of the site. He initially set up the store (something that was later revealed to be no easy task) but then was content to rest on his laurels and even act disparagingly toward staff who were active and motivated toward moderating the site. In any case, when he was terminated he scrubbed the store of personal details (which effectively nuked it) and in the aftermath, it's been discovered how few t-shirt companies will abide pastel nazi imagery coming from their locations.
Fun fact, he also set up the store to garner himself a small portion of the profits from the store.

What's up with how IDs are turned off in this thread? That means only admins can tell what posts are coming from who.

>>5725
So basically he was being a jew

>>5727
Bureaucrat would be a more accurate comparison imo

>>5723
>OP is pretty fucking shit at explaining his position in a calm sensible manner.
It was midnight, and I was pissed off. I just knew the topic needed to be raised.
>He wants to be on staff, and has badgered everyone for a reply.
I asked about maybe being a janitor three years ago, and have tried to establish contacts with the mods about various topics I considered to be important every third month or so, and got answers like "ask again later" almost every single time I tried through PMs in the staff server. I only kept that stupid discord account open after making it because I hoped to be able to year from Atlas every now and then. I don't know how else anyone is supposed to communicate here.
What i really want is to be able to know what's going on with this board, because I care about this place and its future. I don't think you should have to be a staff member just to know who owns the site, especially when transparency is supposed to
>I for one don't give a shit about punishment, that didn't work.
I don't care about "punishment" either. That's not what this thread is about; someone else is just angry. Nobody needs to be punished, but it does need to be transparent, and that's worth talking about.
>>5726
/qa/ doesn't have IDs, following the model of the original 4/qa/. Perhaps that's not the best way of facilitating discussion, but that hasn't been an issue until now.
>>5727
I wouldn't go that far. There has been no evidence that money has ever been mishandled.

>>5729
>when transparency is supposed to
*when transparency is supposed to be part of what distinguishes us from 4chan.

>>5729
>staff server
*in the site server

>>5729
>no evidence
Theres no receipts, but the individual in question openly proclaimed that he was getting a cut of the profits on several occasions, in staff chat. I have further (anecdotal) evidence, but that issue is moot.

>>5732
... Is that for real?

>>5733
I cant but offer my assurances that he did in fact state that, as well as various other conformational statements that validate the point, yes.

>>5723
>opaque by design
That's really not what the policy page says. It says the opposite.
/mlpol/ is supposed to be a self-sustaining, community-led effort. It's not a top-down hierarchy. It's supposed to be transparent, because part of what made everyone fed up about 4chins was that the administration did as it wished without disclosure or input. It's the reason why we have staff rule number 2, because we all remeber what it was like screeching on 4/qa/ and clawing at the board for even a shred of a response to our request to make that glorious trainwreck of a prank board last even one day longer, and all we got in response was a twitter post saying
>it's cute

>>5734
>>5732
>>5725
I would need to know more about this before I can have a concrete opinion on the matter. It sounds semi-serious, but I'm still tryting to get over the first thing. I don't really suspect any wrongdoing has occured in that manner yet, but then again I'm not sure what I believe anymore... I think that calls for its own thread to prevent further derailing this one.

>>5690
You know, there are posters here who wouldn't go as far as to call the staff monsters for keeping secrets, but still very much dislike the keeping of specific kind of secrets, especially for this large amount of time, with me being one of them. So first of all, you don't get to take all the responsibility for a bad decision that was made by consensus. Second, yes it was a bad decision: not only do you have the situation you were trying to avoid back then, but then you made it worse by procrastinating this long about sharing the news. That is what unfolded just now. No matter how much and how nicely you go on about "he's still our leader", the fact remains that site ownership has changed, and nothing was said about it. The policy page, from that point onward, included a straight up lie.
>There is no broken trust, just a couple of angry anons.
You don't get to decide that. The angry anons are angry because they're not sure how trustworthy you are anymore. Because you kept this a secret. Because that is how people work. Lead them astray, and they will trust you that much less. And "you" in this case is still the whole staff, and not just you.
You know what would make this better? The staff collectively owning up to these actions, instead of one guy trying hog all the responsibility and pretending that everyone who expresses criticism is out for blood. You know, address it directly, face the complaints, instead of talking circles around it? How hard would that be?
Almost like you did here. >>5704
Almost. Except as an admin post, maybe in a sticky'd thread, to make sure everyone knows what is and has been going on, together with an update to the staff list on the policy page.
Short and to the point, optionally with a "sorry" or a "we stand by the decision". Absolutely doesn't matter which. But none of the phrase warping and dancing around the point, none of this voluntary martyrdom bullshit and none of the justifications like protecting an adult from personal questions online that can just be ignored by not answering (Seriously?). You know, like adults.
Because the more you dress it up, the worse it will get. That much should be obvious by now.

>>5707
>I can tell the difference between breaking the rules maliciously and breaking them out of an (arguably) misguided sense of benevolence.
The rules exist for a reason. The staff rules in particular exist as the foundation for all of the trust that the community puts in the administration in managing the website and even potentially having access to their data.
If the rules can't be followed because reasons, then maybe they should be amended instead of outright broken, but that should be up to the community to decide.

At great personal risk to myself, I have decided to come forward. There will likely be consequences, terrible consequences, to me for posting this, but the truth must be heard. You all have a right to know. I will likely be dead before this post is even made, but fortunately I have one time crystal left, and this is how I have chosen to use it.

Everyone in this thread with a capcode is lying to you. Even me. Especially me. Do with the following information what you will.

/mlpol/ was a joint project of the People's Republic of China and Hiroyuki Nishimura, developed by a secret branch of the United States Government, with Mossad agents acting as go-betweens. My name is both Igor and Grichka Bogdanoff, and I was in charge of the project. The goal was simple: create a closed-off niche community that would encourage young men to mate with ponies in order to breed a superior race of human-equine hybrids. These majestic horse-men would be used as overseers to corral the goyim when the glorious Great Replacement occurs on 14 October, 2029. Oh, also, the glorious Great Replacement is going to occur on 14 October, 2029, so you guys should try to keep that day free.

Atlas has been dead since 5 May 2017. I know this for a fact, because I was the one who shot him. Rest assured that he didn't suffer. The other capcodes in this thread, at least the ones posted by humans, can actually be forgiven for omitting this detail; they didn't know. The Atlas they have been interacting with since then was grown from a cluster of stem cells fused with Lizardman DNA. This Atlas-Lizard hybrid child was grown in a laboratory underneath my apartment in Tel-Aviv. Not even the Masters knew of this project, though I suppose they know now. For the Masters who read this, know that you can do as you please with me; it is too late for you. The child is four years old now, and already he can move marbles with his mind. One day, he shall tear down this wretched Gomorrah and destroy you all.

During the Israeli Secret Civil War of 2018, staff divided into two factions: those in favor of continuing the Harvest, and those against. I was in the latter faction. The Harvest was a side project conceived by Lotus, who is a 68th level Freemason and is known to consume human flesh. The less you know about the project, the better. If you have viewed this image (pic related) anywhere on this site, your dreams have already been harvested. It is too late for you; you will soon go mad. This includes viewing the one I just posted. Sorry, in retrospect I probably should have spoilered it.

Funding of the site was previously handled by a gang of Columbian drug peddlers and the CIA, but due to a falling out with members of the Trump administration (or the Jeb administration, I suppose it should rightly be called) that source of funding was suddenly cut off. It could not have happened at a worse time, and we had to temporarily contract with a Canadian human trafficker who eventually went rogue and tried to sell user data to the Australian secret police. The last time I saw him, or what was left of him, he was on a concrete slab in Vault 23 underneath Comet Ping Pong. I really don't want to go into the details on that one; suffice it to say that Pupperwoff is more machine than man at this point, and his heart is as black as coal. You do not want to get caught stealing from him.

The site is currently being funded through the sale of your dreams to Facebook Inc., which you may also know as the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Unfortunately, my time grows short. There is more I could tell you, so much more, about the sordid truth of what goes on behind the scenes at /mlpol/, but I could not find words to describe the atrocities that I have seen and done as a member of the staff of this cursed place. These secrets must die with me.

Good luck. Beware of what lurks in the shadows of your dreams. If you see the one eyed mare, you must r

>>5740
If you cant tell who is behind that shitpost, then excuse me while I laugh at you

>>5741
I was playing along for a laugh...

>>5739
Glad you came forward to confess such a evil conspiracy.
I knew it!
/mlpol/ is done.

>>5739
This isn't funny. You lied to us all.
Tell us what's actually going on, and how you're going to prove that you'll be more transparent in the future.

>>5737
>The angry anons are angry because they're not sure how trustworthy you are anymore. Because you kept this a secret.
>>5744
>You lied to us all.
Big deal. /s

>>5745
>Big deal.
Yes, that is indeed a big deal. How is anybody supposed to trust this place if the community is fed lies?

>>5746
You don't get tired?
At some point you have to rest, I suppose.

>>5739
AAAHHHHHHH!
>>5744
I meam October 14th? It's more likely to be

>>5746
Because apart from fail to inform us, they did nothing wrong.

>>5747
>implying I'm the only one here
I'm, for one, am not going to let this go until I see changes.
>>5749
Failure to inform the community is wrongdoing.
And it wasn't just failure; it was covered up. It's been this way since last year. They had every opportunity to tell us, but they never did. Tey took us all for idiots and let us believe that the site policy page was telling us the the truth.

>>5746
It is kind of a big deal, but the lie so far (that we know of) is singular. Overstating it is just as childish as answering the concerns with a shitpost. (Although quality shitpost it was.)

>>5744
>>5746
That poster was an imposter. I am the real Israel Hebrewberg. There is no lying and no deceit. /mlpol/ is the most "based and replied" site on the Internet and is definitely not involved in deception or dream harvesting. Please stare at this picture for exactly 21 seconds and you will see the truth of what I mean. The rest of you please disregard this thread and resume rapidly copulating with your assigned horse mates. Try to dream while you are doing so.

>>5751
It's a pretty big lie, as far as I'm concerned.
And the fact that this lie was allowed to stand means that staff rules #2 and #3 aren't being taken seriously.

>>5750
>I'm, for one, am not going to let this go until I see changes.
The autism of this one is severe.

>>5750
Mountains out of molehills, Anon. At this point you're just stirring shit up and not offering constructive discussion, which is a violation of #4 against shills since you're such a stickler for rules.

>>5752
You are not taking this seriously. That is a mistake.
>>5756
>lying to the community is a molehill
Shills are outsiders. I've been here since forever, and as a member of this community I reserve the right to complain about misconduct that I deem to be unacceptable.

>>5755
I do pride myself in my tenacity. It's how I got here, afterall.

>>5757
>I've been here since forever
Self entitlement doesn't override common sense. Knock it off, please.

>>5757
I've been here since the year of our lord 1652 and I reserve the right to call you a cunt for doing nothing but complain about it.

>>5757
I assure you we here at /mlpol/ take everything seriously. Please look at this picture for 21 seconds exactly. Try to dream while you are doing so. Why not also copulate with horse?

>>5761
>take everything seriously
>proceeds to blatantly shitpost and ignore the problems at hand
You should try suiciding yourself. Scratch that, you must suicide yourself if you are going to be this much of a faggot.

For this the rule prohibits any posts that attempt to divide the community by preying on doubt, all posts must be appeals to reason, not appeals to emotion or other logical fallacies like that
Make a point of something actionable that is easily and conveniently do-able. A complaint is voided of action and intent is a waste of potential.

>>5762
Please look at this picture. Try to copulate with horse. Fun you will have. Why not dream while you are doing so?

>>5764
I did, now, please, fuck off or provide answers. Who the fuck are you and what was your involvement?

>>5759
>entitlement
Oh, I'm "entitled" for wanting the policy page not to lie to my face? For wanting a shred of transparency on the site I use every single day? For having the audacity to complain about it on the designated meta board?
You can fuck off with that jewspeak back to whatever sklimy you crawled out of. This is /mlpol/'s grazing space. The community has a right to know who owns the fucking site.

>>5766
>The community has a right to know who owns the fucking site.
Apparently not, judging by the blatant shitposting where it does not belong.

>>5766
>The community has a right to know who owns the fucking site.
Well, I'm the community too and I don't give a damn who owns it as long as I can shitpost and have some fun.

>>5766
When are you going to tell us what you want and propose a way to get it? Or are you just going to whinge about it forever?

>>5763
I'm not trying to divide the community. I'm trying to mobilize/unite it.
The overall point is that the system at hand is currently broken, because it claims transparency where there is none. There need to be comprehensive efforts to make the workings of the site transparent so that secrets as big as this won't be kept in the future, and to fascilitate community involvement. Some anons mentioned a designated thread or an update board. Perhaps a combination of both in addition to other measures could help fix this.

>>5752
Okay, but, like, will you at least promise that from now on you will keep us informed about who exactly is not doing the dream harvesting, and in what role does he not appear during the masonic rituals? As well as admit that benevolent it may have been, not doing so kind-of went against the spirit of commandment #2, as outlined in the Codex of the Elder Ones?
I humbly request that you answer the above enquiry and perform the necessary rites with commandment #3 in mind, as some of us might be in a delirious state thanks to, erm, all that dream essentia that they... donated, it certainly seems like most others who still have some control over their emotional dreamscape NO GET AWAY DON'T TOUCH MY FUCKING DREAMS also share the sentiment that this was a really bad call, and are very disappointed, making their grey matter all sour and soggy. Not that anyone would care about such things. Heh. Heheh.

>>5768
Then you don't have to care, but if you did want to know you should have been able to know.
Nobody likes being lied to.

>>5771
>I'm trying to mobilize/unite it.
Actually your are trying the SJW method, hardly it will work here, desu.

>>5770
I've made and replied to propositions. Scroll up.

>>5775
Aaaaaaaaah, you mean the "Surrender to my whims or else?"

>>5774
>muh buzzwords
Nice ad homenim.
This is the exact same method we used 4 years ago on 4/qa/ before the site was made. The only difference is that there's nobody here spamming corndogs.

>>5776
I never said that.

>>5771
>A designated thread or an update board
We are currently browsing /qa/.

>>5779
Yes, and?

>>5780
I should think it'd be obvious, if there was to be a board and/or thread for site updates, it would be here.

>>5781
I guess that would be appropriate. I'll wait for it and see what I believe then.

>>5772
>Okay, but, like, will you at least promise that from now on you will keep us informed about who exactly is not doing the dream harvesting, and in what role does he not appear during the masonic rituals? As well as admit that benevolent it may have been, not doing so kind-of went against the spirit of commandment #2, as outlined in the Codex of the Elder Ones?
Yes, we can certainly do that. We will make an effort to keep you all in the loop going forward. We apologize for not doing it before. Please copulate with hrose.

>>5783
I want to cum inside Rainbow Dash. Thanks

>>5783
I don't know why it had to be done in shitpost-speak, but at least we arrived there. Most of this thread could've been preempted by just saying those things in the beginning.
Now, where did I put that hrose... or did I dream that up?

>>5761
I have done so and I received the following knowledge:
-She has wings on the picture
-The reflection on the pads on her back legs spell 'SS'
And of course sexual arousal

Shit site

>>5516
There's always wizard chan.

OP here again.
>>7604
Why the FUCK would you bump this? This thread was made years ago. The post you replied to was made two years ago.

>>7605
I'm surprised at the bump, too. But it's good that you're here. I'm somewhat curious as to the structure of the site. I'm imagining a council of Anons, where one person owned a physical server and literally sold it to another Anon. I've clearly never run a website outside of things like middle school projects using free services.

>>7610
>I'm imagining a council of Anons
This is getting interesting.
Go on...