[Vote] Rename 'The Mess' to 'Assholes'

[Gil Hamilton]

Voted "no" since I wouldn't hand over what would be interpreted as an accolade for what they did.

[Mad]

Abstain.

Part of the prank was specifically aimed at the Senate, so there's poetic justice in getting a bit of revenge. But if revenge/counter-prank is the goal, at least do it well... and this just isn't clever or funny enough as a counter.

[Coyote]

While I am tempted to vote Yes to experience the honor of the first custom-titling of an entire usegroup, the truth is all this will do is remind the Warwolves, every time we log in, that everyone else is a wanky-whiner.

It would also seem to be a violation of the "No Vendettas" rule, which, according to the letter of the law...







edited for spelling only.

[Kuja]

While I am tempted to vote Yes to experience the honor of the first curom-titling of an entire usegroup, the truth is all this will do is remind the Warwolves, every time we log in, that everyone else is a wanky-whiner.

It would also seem to be a violation of the "No Vendettas" rule, which, according to the letter of the law...

So you equate custom titles to a violation of the no vendettas rule now?


I'm tempted to change my vote just to spite you.

[Coyote]

So you equate custom titles to a violation of the no vendettas rule now?


I'm tempted to change my vote just to spite you.

I see the art of sarcasm is lost on you as well.

[Kuja]

So you equate custom titles to a violation of the no vendettas rule now?


I'm tempted to change my vote just to spite you.

I see the art of sarcasm is lost on you as well.

Oh, I thought your jokes were only supposed to be optionally funny.

[Frank Hipper]

I guess when you use an ab-lounge and you shit your pants, you call the mess an Abstain?

[Faram]

Reposted as requested from Lonestar.

First of all, I'd like to issue an apology to everyone who was offended by the prank. Having said that, I am very much not sorry about about the execution of said prank. Maybe if more people were offended, I would be, but that is not the case. On this board, as in life, you need to take care to not wear your heart on your sleeves. Personal sensibilities are offended all the time on this board, so what makes our prank unique? That we had the revelation at 1200 A.M. on the dot instead of trying to fake something that would end up in spamworld anyway on April 1st?

The phrase "sacred cow" has been tossed around a bit, specifically because one very narrow subset(very narrow, as in part of our Gay-Lesbian community, not all of it) say we shouldn't make light of homophobia. To which I respond: Fuck It and Drive On. None of us are seriously homophobic, but if cracks can be made about such cherished institutions as the Catholic Church, religion, and the United States' Air Force's "Bike Test"(okay, that's mostly limited to the Mess) there's no reason why it can't spread the gauntlet. If folks want to project their assumption that most military guys are homophobic nutjobs, so much the better. It made the prank funnier, for some folks.

Another complaint was that the Senator "saw a group of friends torn apart over this shit" in real life. What, if any, is the primary distinction with this prank and that one?
One is in real life and the other is on an anonymous message board. Most of us don't know others beyond occasional meets, or through other people(guys in the Mess who have old coworkers who are the current coworkers for instance) and the degree of anonymity offered should help you dust yourself off and keep walking. I believe that's precisely why Ein, Oni, and Ace Pace(who was punk'd in real life by Faqa, mind) among others were able to go "arrgh! You assholes!" and then chuckled.

One final comment: The prank(as the planning threads will reveal, when released) was originally intended to prove a point, however roundabout that was. The point was(and this has been the subject of serious discussion in the Mess) is that, despite all the talk of "supporting the troops" a certain perception of servicemen was branded into folks' mind around here, and we wanted to shake it up(Elfdart was considered for bringing in on the prank, then discarded). That it was blithely accepted that myself, Yenchin, and Kamikaze were all homophobes without questioning our sudden turnaround on such issues was mildly damning on the board's mentality. Not a "raaar! The board's culture sucks!" but still.

Here's a hint: Next time multiple people have radically changed viewpoints and are screeching assholes…pay attention to detail.

Hugs and kisses,

Lonestar

[Keevan_Colton]

We've had previously good posters melt down before.

[Spyder]

I abstain. I saw it comeing so it was a 'meh' event to me.

*slaps Spyder* Assholes?!?! Its Arseholes, your not a bloody American!

Figured it would be an easier sell, not that this actually had any chance of being carried out, even if the admins had wanted to messing with the name of a group for combat veterens is most likely a political no-no. That and Mike himself is also a member.

[LadyTevar]

Voted AYE.

[Patrick Degan]

Abstained.

[Kuroneko]

Abstain--I want no part of this nonsense in any shape or form.

[Surlethe]

Guys, how many of you actually think the administrative staff would approve this sort of gross retitling of a usergroup, even if it did pass?

Reposted as requested from Lonestar.

<snip>

That it was blithely accepted that myself, Yenchin, and Kamikaze were all homophobes without questioning our sudden turnaround on such issues was mildly damning on the board's mentality. Not a "raaar! The board's culture sucks!" but still.

Here's a hint: Next time multiple people have radically changed viewpoints and are screeching assholes…pay attention to detail.

Hugs and kisses,

Lonestar

I don't know if this is my failing or what, but, with the exception of a few cases, I don't follow a person's posting history or arguments he's made in the past, and I don't read each single thread. It's quite true that the board culture encourages piling onto unpopular positions, but it's also quite possible to survive for a long time with an unpopular (if not blatantly wrong) position by simply avoiding threads where it's discussed, as the late Kazuaki Shimazaki did.

The point here is that if they hadn't been keeping track of Kamikaze Sith's, Lonestar's, Dargos', and Yenchin's arguments in the past regarding the subject, it's quite possible that they'd simply forgotten about those statements. I mean, how many of us here's first instinct is to check a member's posting history for previous arguments on the subject when we see a bad argument made?

[Gil Hamilton]

I certainly wouldn't and didn't. Frankly, given that I've heard the exact same arguments out of people in real life from people in and out of the military, even at press conferences when discussion that issue (particularly "the Shower Argument"), it didn't seem unreasonable at all that they meant what they said.

I'm all for looking for context and questioning common assumptions, but for everyone going on about how "we should have known, they were so out of character"... well, no, they weren't all that out of character.

[CmdrWilkens]

I certainly wouldn't and didn't. Frankly, given that I've heard the exact same arguments out of people in real life from people in and out of the military, even at press conferences when discussion that issue (particularly "the Shower Argument"), it didn't seem unreasonable at all that they meant what they said.

I'm all for looking for context and questioning common assumptions, but for everyone going on about how "we should have known, they were so out of character"... well, no, they weren't all that out of character.

Emphasis mine...you hit the nail on the head, they played a character so when they turned around and suddenly reminded everyone that it was a character that's the prank. Everyone bought the character they played, responded to the character they played and now folks are angry when they found out it was just a character and not real at all. The whole nature of a prank is to present someone with something they expect to see (homophobic military personnel) then turn the tables by revealing that what you thought was there isn't (the military personnel are not homophobic).

Certainly our methods were not the best and utilizing the Senate was ill advised at best, that said if folks want to rename us assholes fine but Gil you basically pointed out exactly why this was a perfectly planned prank because we got everyone to believe in something that wasn't there and go chasing after it.

[InnerBrat]

Oh, how many fucking times does this need to be repeated?

Very few people saw homophobic military personnel. We saw homophobes, and the reason we saw homophobes is not because they were military personnel but because they were posting homophobic arguments.

Honestly, it's not about the army, it's never been about the army expect in your heads. It's about a usergroup on a board deliberately being dicks and supporting dickish behaviour and drawing attention to dicks, using the excuse that it's going to be April soon so we shouldn't expect serious debate anymore.

[Surlethe]

Emphasis mine...you hit the nail on the head, they played a character so when they turned around and suddenly reminded everyone that it was a character that's the prank.

Of course it was the prank, and a damned good one. That said, ...

Everyone bought the character they played, responded to the character they played and now folks are angry when they found out it was just a character and not real at all. The whole nature of a prank is to present someone with something they expect to see (homophobic military personnel) then turn the tables by revealing that what you thought was there isn't (the military personnel are not homophobic).

... why do you assume that the rest of the board expected to see homophobic military personnel in particular? Like I said above, I hadn't seen enough of the three pranksters' posting history to determine whether or not they were homophobes; you could have hired, say, Spanky the Dolphin, Col. Crackpot, or any other board member whose position on the topic isn't explicitly known to me to act like homophobes, and the prank would have gotten the same reaction out of me. I suspect that's the case with many of the people whom you accuse of assuming that military personnel are homophobic.

[Gil Hamilton]

Emphasis mine...you hit the nail on the head, they played a character so when they turned around and suddenly reminded everyone that it was a character that's the prank. Everyone bought the character they played, responded to the character they played and now folks are angry when they found out it was just a character and not real at all. The whole nature of a prank is to present someone with something they expect to see (homophobic military personnel) then turn the tables by revealing that what you thought was there isn't (the military personnel are not homophobic).

Certainly our methods were not the best and utilizing the Senate was ill advised at best, that said if folks want to rename us assholes fine but Gil you basically pointed out exactly why this was a perfectly planned prank because we got everyone to believe in something that wasn't there and go chasing after it.

No I'm pointing out that what you got was a null result.

As IB and Surlethe have said and apparently I wasn't clear enough, anyone could make those arguments and have in the past and people would have responded exactly the same way because it is perfectly reasonable way to respond to those arguments posted. That means the prank is a dud, you didn't get anyone to act foolishly, did you? No one in those threads responded any differently than they would have responded to anyone else, military or not.

So what it boils down to is you going "We got you! You all posted reasonable responses to clear garbage! We totally fooled you! Hur hur hur!"

Though remind me if we ever meet at an SD.net meet where I'm getting drinks to put phenolphthalein in your drink. After you are done shitting your pants, we can have a laugh about it. After all, I pranked you. You thought you were getting a normal drink, not one laced with a laxative. See? Fooled you! You should have questioned the common assumption that anyone serving a drink would be serving a normal drink, doubly so because the person serving it is a chemistry major who uses the substance in question as an indicator all the time! It's funny! Get it?

[Darth Wong]

The question of whether a prank was legitimately funny is totally irrelevant to any kind of Senate thread. It may be justification to flame somebody or say he has a shitty sense of humour in the main forums, but here it's just a waste of space. People raise a good point about not abusing Senatorship in the service of a prank, but debates over quality of humour do not belong here.

If we want to create April Fool's Day-related rules in order to allow pranks without allowing them to get out of hand, I think it would be a good idea to create a Senate thread to discuss what those rules should be, rather than ranting and raving about how you think somebody's an asshole.

[Stravo]

So was this a prank or a political/sociological statement?

For me a prank is a trick that you pull to make someone look foolish and you all laugh about it later. From what I gather from the intent of the Mess members was to turn the tables on a stereotype that frankly I never saw existed in the forum culture or atmosphere. Sounds like a political statement that could be found funny or pertinent by the members of the Mess and not so much a prank.

Just to be clear, I was not offended by it as some people here are, but clearly this was not so much of a traditional prank as it was more of an inside joke/political statement by a small minority of the board that dragged the rest of the board and the staff into a potentially offensive situation/reaction.

[Coyote]

We actually did make an attempt to keep threads out of the Senate. We toyed with the idea for a bit but Edi quite properly informed us not to abuse the Senate that way. When Ender posted his quick rant in the Senate, it was not planned-- he was in a hurry because he had to deploy and felt he'd "drop the bomb" so to speak and then be unavailable for comment to stir confusion.

In retrospect, I should have asked one of our supermods to move it out of the Senate and into someplace like HoS. I did make an effort to shut down Ender's thread in the Senate becuase of the circumstances but I probably should have nagged more.

[RedImperator]

No. Whether or not you thought the prank was good (I thought it was hilarious, personally), it's over and it's time we let the dust settle.

[Dalton]

A quorum has not been reached. The vote is now closed.