(Site is a graveyard - How can boards save itself?) Any update?

Imo your first point would just increase the amount of reregs for those that feel they are being censored, persecuted etc as that already occurs when some are site banned and still waste mod/admin time.

Absolutely, as good an example as any of my previous point.

If you took that comment to be directed at you then that's on you, not me. You've taken a generalised reply to another commenter and personalised it and I find that quite interesting.

Perception =!= Reality

Ah yes, you just have to defend yourself from a comment that was neither said to you or referenced you (or any other individual commenter) in any way whatsoever.

I re-read the last few pages of this thread in case I did actually reply to you or say something about you but I haven't and I don't think we've ever interacted before. You make a big deal about posters taking pot shots at you, following you around threads, having to defend yourself etc but you've taken a generalised comment by me to someone else and turned it into a personal attack on you.

I wonder how many other times you've done that.

Patronising much? The reality is that the alternative route is followed by many. Just let the profile slip and register again under a new profile. That some choose not to do this and to make helpful comments as to how the site can rectify these problems is generally a sign of good faith posting.

But also on the subject of site feedback - how is that the site has become like Hotel California?

"Mirrors on the ceiling, the pink champagne on ice, And she said, "We are all just prisoners here of our own device"

And in the master's chambers, they gathered for the feast, They stab it with their steely knives, but they just can't kill the beast

Last thing I remember, I was running for the door, I had to find the passage back to the place I was before

"Relax, " said the night man, "We are programmed to receive, You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave"

It used to be relatively simple to close an account through the user profile. Now it's like getting out of Colditz.

There is even handed moderation in those threads. And I'm not "pretending".

In the threads to discuss a two horse race (Harris v Trump), or a war between two countries (Russia invaded Ukraine):

So if you pop in with a criticism of one side, if you are claiming to be concerned about point A, why are you only bringing it up in relation to X and not Y? So it is entirely reasonable to ask, but what about Y where there is ample evidence of Y being far worse on that point A. It is not whataboutery, it is about establishing standards.

If the poster is actually concerned about point A that is… because very often there is no real concern about the point, because any real concern about the point would see the vast majority of their criticism directed at the other side.
Instead we very often see feigned ignorance and disinterest in any consideration of how the point applies to the other side.

So yes, it is perfectly possible to post in those threads in a balanced way.

But if it looks like you've just popped in to "just ask a question" (and usually the loaded question is a MAGA or Russian social media talking point) … then you can expect to be challenged on that.

And it is not a pile on if you make a point and are shot down by multiple posters. Posters are free to engage or not with posts. I've seen posters cry "pile on" for making a claim that is easily discredited by a quick google search, or already discredited on the thread and then try to play the victim when multiple posters reply to discredit it. A claim they could have conducted some basic scrutiny on themselves.

The threads are not moderated unevenly. What is uneven are the objective merits of each side of the argument, therefore it is very difficult for someone to consistently argue a contrary position in good faith. Instead we get 'guerrila' tactics of overt or low level trolling, hypocritical or bad faith arguments, just asking questions, link dumps etc.

Thing is @ancapailldorcha said the idea was interesting but the ability to increase sanctions based on a judgement call is already allowed. They did not argue for pursuing the idea. This more sounds like a personal grudge against a poster rather than an honest reading of their post.

And dispute resolutions also frequently has posters that are engaging in bad faith arguments. So think there very much are scenarios where increased sanctions are justified.

It seems the majority of the posts I see that poster respond to you are uncivil.

Although your not the only one who receives it.

When a mod is doing it, no wonder others feel they can get away with doing it.

Does anyone else see this thread lasting any longer?

I think it's done its job. Nothing positive is coming from it anymore, just personal gripes.

Unsurprising to see who is behind dragging it completely off topic to get it locked once the conversation turned to charters being rigorously enforced.

But look, it doesn't matter. None of it matters. We've not heard from management or the owners. The owner doesn't care. I'm sure boards is nothing more than something he bought a few years ago, gathering dust somewhere. It looks after itself and doesn't cause him strife.

To answer the thread question,

(Site is a graveyard - How can boards save itself?) Any update?

Boards can only save itself if boards (aka the owner/management) wants it to be saved. Right now, it causes no trouble and runs itself. Why fix something that's not broken in their eyes?