The PPC Posting Board - Latest posts

Are you saying that constantly getting shouted down, ignored, and outright attacked aren't valid excuses for getting angry?

I saw a post where she told someone that they had pushed her buttons and they dismissed it as untrue.

Zdemensia was not banned for being autistic. They were banned for repeated violations of the constitution and violations of temporary bans. The idea of mediation had been brought up before, and it became clear that it would not work.

Second, we have nothing beyond your word that you are not Zdemensia. Personally, I still think you are.

That's even richer than banning Bram for having autism.

To quote Maxewelle: There was the talking about "oh, they're autistic, what if we're just having a communication disconnect," and we eventually decided with some input from other autistic borders that this was not the case.

I'd like to know a little bit about the other autistic boarders and how well they can judge... Did they even acknowledge that all autistic people are different?

To put it more reasonably: We don’t want a mediator. The situation is resolved as far as the community is concerned, and Zdemensia returning can easily be settled by banhammer. At this point, there are no valid excuses for their behavior, and there is too much bad blood for a friendly result to moderation.

There are very few personal problems that cannot be solved through a suitable application of the banhammer.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Or do. It'll be funny.

I know her. I didn't want to tell you this immediately, but here we are.

A lot of the stuff you say about her is completely wrong. You've dismissed her point of view by calling her variations on crazy, which happens to be a gaslighting technique.

I don't completely have your side of the story, so there are some things that she said that might be inaccurate. The truth is probably between your two versions of what happened.

She's in an institution right now, so I'd like to wait until she gets out to discuss this.

You're probably going to have more problems with her if you don't let me mediate.

If you don’t want to talk to another member, then that should be allowed. If a situation is specifically making you uncomfortable, we have no right to force you to remain in that situation.

I probably should have said something sooner, actually... Sorry.

I'm not sure that the desire to not talk to someone should be absolute. Of course, that's probably why mediation is in the constitution.

There was this guy I knew who said he wanted to be just like Christopher Columbus. When the situation was finally resolved it turned out it meant that he wanted to do something worthy of being remembered as a hero. He was just going off of what he was taught in school.

One girl in the group knew the true history where Columbus was a sociopathic monster. She called him some pretty nasty names without explaining why she was mad. The guy kept his cool and asked her why she was going off on him, but she walked away and demanded that he not come near her.

He was bothered about it, but there was nothing he could do. The girl told others that the guy wanted to torture people that he didn't consider human. It wasn't resolved until after he was beaten up.

https://pokemonshowdown.com/

Saves your teams, which are all fully customizable in terms of moves, items, natures, and IVs.

It also has this nifty feature that lets you save battles so they can be linked in the document for posterity. :)

This is, unfortunately, not a great time for this to come up (seeing as we're having a state of the Discord thread above), but it needs posting anyway.

When Mythcreant came to the chat to complain that they couldn't post on the Board, I figured out that their IP matched the one that Makarra (zdimensia's most recent account) had posted from. I sent them to talk to the Nameless Admin about getting it fixed, since there wasn't any immediate indication this wasn't a case of a blocked IP address being reassigned to someone who wasn't banned.

However, over the few days since then, evidence that Mythcreant is another account created by zdimensia/Bramadin/... has accumulated. A lot of it can be found in the following chat logs, which contain just about any conversation Mythcreant was in. I've had several people point out zdimensia-like behavior (such as going "they said they're autistic" and "they did apologize" when looking over all the previous drama, showing up with agents almost immediately, knowing a whole lot of oddly-specific PPC trivia, sharing zdimensia's views on Breath of the Wild, and a certain "treated unfairly to the point it might be abuse" line that sounds like their thing.) in those messages.

Therefore, I've come to the conclusion that, based on their behavior (and the IP address match, especially since ISPs reassign IP addresses a lot slower than I thought they did), Mythcreant is very likely another one of zdimensia's occounts, and I propose kicks, blocks, and other such technical measures (unless Mythcreant has some very good explanations).

In other words, it looks like I was wrong about Mythcreant initially, paging the Nameless Admin.

- Tomash

Will we be using Pokemon Online or some other sim?

The main issue really is that stifling discussion will make some people angry, whereas a lack of filtering will hurt others.
In essence, you can't please everyone. I'll leave the nature of any compromise to those more learned.

And I personally wish we could avoid political discussions and talk of tragedies entirely on here. But I understand why that isn't necessarily feasible. It's just that I come here to escape such things rather than be surrounded by them.
But not everyone copes that way. I can understand why some may need a space to talk of these things safely. And therein lies the rub.
Namely that one person's coping mechanism or healing may be another's trigger.
And both have theoretically an equal right to speak and be heard.

As for politics... I think a solution might be similar to what we might do with the Categories. If we could, perhaps, separate some channels off as ones where discussions about politics could be tolerated, without making a #politics. The idea behind this being that it would allow people who didn't want to get into politics to mute certain areas and avoid that kind of thing, but it wouldn't be the kind of please-talk-about-politics-here thing that #heavy_stuff was. And, I think, some sort of stop button or threshold. Like, calling a vote or something and over a certain threshold stopping the discussion and moving on to something else.

I mean, seriously, let's take a look:

Genres:
Indie Pop, Alt-pop, Synthpop, Dance-pop, Alternative Electropop (by which I mean artists like Oh Wonder and Twenty One Pilots), Indietronica (basically the same thing, but it's considered a separate genre, for some reason), Alternative Rock, a bit of Folk-pop, and uh... normal Pop, I guess.

Artists (hoo boy, there's a lot):
AJR, Alessia Cara, Amber Run, Andrew Belle, Bleachers, Bridgit Mendler, Carly Rae Jepsen, CHVRCHES, Colbie Caillat, Duffy, Dustin Tebbutt, Echosmith (only their synthpop stuff, though), Ed Sheeran, Enya, Fleurie, Grace VanderWaal, Halsey, Hedley (again, only the synthpop), Hey Violet, Imagine Dragons, Ingrid Michaelson, Katie Herzig, Lenachka, Lindsey Stirling, Lorde, Maggie Whitlock (to be fair, I wouldn't have started listening to her if she hadn't been my babysitter), Mansionair, Meghan Trainor, Nina Nesbitt, Oh Wonder, One Direction, Rachel Platten, Regina Spektor, Ruelle, Ruth B., Sara Bareilles, Seafret, Syml, Taylor Swift, Twenty One Pilots, VÉRITÉ, Walking on Cars, and Yuna. Shout-out to Betty Who, Lemaitre, Passion Pit, The Chainsmokers, Vance Joy, and Zedd for making a few songs that I love, even if I'm not a fan of all their work.

Gosh, that took forever to type out. But, anyway, I recommend all of these artists; especially the really unknown ones that deserve a lot more love.

I'll leave the bulk of this to those more coolheaded than myself, but I'd like it to be known that the creation of a dedicated writing channel in discord has my full support.

Beyond that, I'm staying out of this. I'm exhausted, and I'm got way too many irons in the fire to worry about this at present.

It's looking to me like we need an on-Board discussion about this so we can get a sense of the consensus (or lack of consensus) about how the chat would like to handle the whole politics thing.

On the one hand, many folks want to talk about politics in the chat. It's an important topic that's often relevant to Boarders (and even more so in the case of some Boarders in marginalized groups - we've got at least a few trans folks around here). We're also a community that prides itself on the ability to have mature, civil discussions about this stuff, and we very often succeed in doing so.

On the other hand, as Delta put it a few days ago, "[T]his is not a space that focuses on politics." Furtheremore, there's other folks who've expressed their desire to not have certain heavy political topics (like mass shootings) pop up when they open up the chat, and there have been a few cases where some person has been asked to tone it down with the political posts because it was getting a bit much.

The "I don't want all this mass shooting stuff" is the main reason why #heavystuff (which just about immediately became #politics) was created. Unfortunately, "let's cordon off the politics into its own channel, so people can mute it if they don't want to see it" didn't seem to work. My theory is that an effect of making the channel was to encourage way more political discussion than previously, now that there was a place to put it, which wasn't something we wanted as a server. (This is, incidentally, why I'm supporting some form of #writing - we want to promote discussion of it.)

What seems to be the case is that there's such a thing as "too much politics [right now]" for most people in chat (which is person- and topic-dependent). It's rather unclear where the line is, other than "the point at which folks start asking you to tone it down".

I'm not sure how to articulate the standard here (or if there even is a way to do that), and so I'd like people to please chime in on this.

I do, however, want to repropose a suggestion that I remember someone making (even though I can't find it) from after the #heavystuff debacle: links that're very likely to tank someone's mood (the main example being heavy politics - shootings, police brutality, etc., but probably also suicides and similar) should be rot13'd. The reasoning here is similar to spoilers - let's not expose people who don't want to see this to such things by default.

- Tomash