Let's establish some rules on rumors?

[David Greene]

I've come to realize that the "issue" is simply that a few members lack basic Interpersonal skills. Not a whole lot to do about that...

Yeah, and I'll just settle with that. This was a bad idea trying to create an environment where both sides can discuss things without arguments but that's clearly not wanted here.

Arguments are discussion. If the discussion doesn't include disagreements it gets boring pretty quickly. I haven't seen anything in this thread that looks like a personal attack to me.

I'm totally on board with your desire to organize to make things happen. It's what I do during part of my non-work hours. The community here has done it in some small ways but I agree with you that there's much more than could be done.

I think you've received some good suggestions on how to organize rumors. Let's do it!

[holmstar]

Where are we vilifying people that post rumors?...

...The rumor fetishes that some people have is just bizarre to me.

Irony.

[Nathan]

Where are we vilifying people that post rumors?...

...The rumor fetishes that some people have is just bizarre to me.

Irony.

If that's vilifying in to you... the internet must be a scary place.

[IllogicalJake]

Where are we vilifying people that post rumors?...

...The rumor fetishes that some people have is just bizarre to me.

Irony.

If that's vilifying in to you... the internet must be a scary place.

Why not just treat people with respect instead of criticizing the things they happen to like? Let them like what they want to like and just ignore it if you don't want to take part? There's nothing to gain from making snotty-ass comments.

This "It's just the internet!" BS is useless. No, this is a city-based community. We're doing real things and trying to make real progress for a better city. Saying "LOL You're mad at the internet!" is just undermining the real-world work that some of us are trying to be active in.

[David Greene]

Doubting is not attacking.

If you've received information from a trusted person who works in the development business and you decide to tell people on the forum, and they don't believe you, that sucks...Even people who actually have direct connection to these issues such as RetiredBanker. If he was called a liar or doubted, a person in the works being doubted by people on the internet, how do you think you'd feel? Trying to help someone and then being doubted when you're working hard to make it happen.

Ok. Here's what I don't get about RetiredBanker. He's apparently been deeply involved in major development projects throughout his whole career. Someone in a position like that thinks *very* strategically about how to operate. They do things very deliberately. He said as much in his most recent post on SSC. So his leaking these rumors is strategic. He thinks it will help him in some way, maybe by putting pressure on a reluctant developer, getting other investors excited about the project -- who knows?

So he posts rumors and gets upset when people are skeptical. Taking his marbles and stomping away doesn't seem to help his position. Engaging more with the community and getting people excited would seem to be the better course.

Powerful people do not act as you describe. They don't take doubt and skepticism personally.

Avian and min-chi-cbus seem to act as I would expect someone in the field to act. Sure, they might get upset from time to time (who wouldn't?) but they keep participating. A lot of people here have said how much they appreciate their posts (I certainly do!). Frankly, they're also much better at coming across as a "real person," while RetiredBanker likes to always trumpet his credentials. Credentialling is important in certain contexts, but what he does seems excessive to me. That's another part of what rubs me the wrong way about hists posts.

The above is *not* an attack, BTW. RetiredBanker may be a great guy in person -- I don't know him. I'm posting it as constructive feedback and as something for others posting rumors and getting furstrated to think about.

[FISHMANPET]

People can like rumors, that's fine, I don't care. What I don't understand is people that fetishize and worship the people that post rumors.

Let's remember, this latest dust up started because twincitizen was skeptical of something Avian posted, and Avian said he didn't like being called a liar (which twincitizen didn't do), and then people ran to Avian's "defense" and vilified twincitizen (for using critical thinking skills)

It's bizarre fetishization that puts someone posting a rumor and everything they say on a pedestal, and anything shirt of slobbering worship is seen as "vilification."

[David Greene]

To pull a page from Nick's playbook:

Where are we vilifying people that post rumors? All the vilification is directed at people that are skeptical.
The rumor fetishes that some people have is just bizarre to me.

lol. https://forum.streets.mn/viewtopic.php?f ... =40#p68966

Yep, that's not helpful. I commented earlier that we do need a culture shift. However, that particular post was not directed a someone posting a rumor. People here are wondering what people are referring to when the statement is made that people posting rumors are attacked and vilified.

[IllogicalJake]

People can like rumors, that's fine, I don't care. What I don't understand is people that fetishize and worship the people that post rumors.

Let's remember, this latest dust up started because twincitizen was skeptical of something Avian posted, and Avian said he didn't like being called a liar (which twincitizen didn't do), and then people ran to Avian's "defense" and vilified twincitizen (for using critical thinking skills)

It's bizarre fetishization that puts someone posting a rumor and everything they say on a pedestal, and anything shirt of slobbering worship is seen as "vilification."

I don't get why anyone that doesn't vilifying rumors must be worshiping them. No, I just think they have their place to exist.

[FISHMANPET]

There is a group of people who, when encountering anything less than blind worship and devotion to a rumor and its poster, vilify everyone involved that isn't part of the worshiping clique.

[Didier]

As I said last night, I enjoy the rumors for what they are, but I'm guilty of mocking some of the posters who really enjoy the rumors.

So while I'll continue being skeptical of anonymous leaks of insider information, and I'll be critical when I feel it's deserved, I'll make a point to not be dickish about it.

[Wedgeguy]

LOCK THIS THREAD!! THIS IS ABSURD TO KEEP THIS S**T UP FOR HOW MANY PAGES!!

[IllogicalJake]

LOCK THIS THREAD!! THIS IS ABSURD TO KEEP THIS S**T UP FOR HOW MANY PAGES!!

Oh, chill. I'm sure it'll be locked and/or deleted as soon as the next mod is online.

[Nathan]

Why not just treat people with respect instead of criticizing the things they happen to like? Let them like what they want to like and just ignore it if you don't want to take part? There's nothing to gain from making snotty-ass comments.

This "It's just the internet!" BS is useless. No, this is a city-based community. We're doing real things and trying to make real progress for a better city. Saying "LOL You're mad at the internet!" is just undermining the real-world work that some of us are trying to be active in.

How about real world like the actual meaning of Irony, some of us like to live in a world where people don't use irony incorrectly. FMP didn't actually villainize anyone with the second quote, merely said that culture was bizarre to him, not send them to jail or behead them. It's NOT irony, it's not real life, therefor a bunch of internet BS as well, why is it not appropriate to respond as such?

I think I showed I wanted to make the constructive changes that were suggested in this thread and there are more than a few of the pro rumors wherever people that just can't handle the conversation so they're getting what they came for.

[go4guy]

Avian, Retiredbanker and a few others are actually behind the scenes of these developments. What they share isnt a rumor. It is factual information they are sharing with the forums. I feel like some of you are confused about what a rumor is. Just because a plan isnt announced to the public via the Strib, does not make it only a rumor. If Avian shares with us a few different scanarios for a specific parcel based on what he has actually seen and heard in his line of work, that is factual information. NOT a rumor. If somone working for the Twins has knowledge that the organization is working on a contract with player A, and shares that information. That is a fact, not a rumor. If that player doesn't sign, it doesnt mean the negotiations weren't happening behind the scenes.

Some of the people who constantly bash "rumors" need to figure out what the word "rumor" actually means. Inside information is not a rumor. If you are not smart enough to determine that this information being provided is not a guarantee to become reality, you should probably not post.

[FISHMANPET]

Is inside information verifiable from another source? If not, then it's just a rumor. Like I said earlier, I have no doubt that the information they post is correct to their knowledge, I don't think they're making things up. But it's still unverifiable information until it's verified. And because things change, nothings set in stone until it's set in steel, wood, or concrete.

[grant1simons2]

But it's a fact that the developers talk about what they did. Let's just call it "unconfirmed news". Anyways I'm done with this thread, nothing here is worth arguing anymore.

[FISHMANPET]

And go4guy, a post like yours is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. People are being villified for not taking the things these posters say as gospel. You've put them on a pedestal and take everything they say as divine word, and anybody that doubts or question them becomes vilified.

And even in your baseball example. If one person says "the Twins are working on a contract with Player A" that's a rumor that the Twins are working on a contract with that player. It's not a rumor that the Twins are getting player A, and it's not a "fact" that the twins are getting Player A. If it's widely reported that the twins are working on a contract with Player A, then it's a fact that the twins are working on a contract with Player A. It's still not a fact that the Twins are signing player A, until they actually sign that player. But somehow I'm supposed to take one person say "the Twins are working on a contract with Player A" and take it as fact that the Twins are signing player A.

And anyone that says "hey maybe we won't end up with Player A" is vilified.

[FISHMANPET]

Unconfirmed news vs rumor is merely a semantic difference.

[Wedgeguy]

I see you on here Philmerphil. Let's get this locked or deleted ASAP! I see moderators on here. Get rid of this!!!

[go4guy]

Who said anything about taking it as gospel? I am taking it for what it is. Information on possibilities for a site. I have never said that any of the scenarios WILL happen. You are just putting words in my mouth.

How many people need to collaborate on information? Because we have more than one. This is NOT just Retiredbanker. Avian states he has seen the same stuff. That is 2 sources. That is enough for me to believe that the information is not just a baseless rumor.