/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.