OK, one by one now.
@eponymoushipster
“As was hinted at above, can you imagine if a bunch of new folks signed up for Twitter, let’s say, and went “You know, 140 characters is pretty small. I want bigger! Biz is a nazi for limiting it to 140 characters!” and bitched about it ad infinitum?”
This is not analogous. No one has suggested fundamental changes to Fluther, and certainly no one has “bitched about it ad infinitum.”
We merely want to have an open discussion. You do not.
“You don’t pay for it.
You don’t moderate it.
You don’t run it.”
As I have continually stated. No one is questioning Ben and Andrew’s authority to do whatever they wish with the site. We are questioning whether it is in Fluther’s best interest to let Ben and Andrew do whatever they wish.
We merely want to have an open discussion. You do not.
@3or4monsters
“I don’t understand sticking around if you’re not happy, or trying to change the community to fit the needs of one person. ”
I am not unhappy with the quality of the site, and I most certainly am not trying to change the community to fit the needs of anyone, much less myself personally.
We merely want to have an open discussion.
“Why should the majority change to accommodate the minority?”
No one is saying that they should. We are just saying that all ideas should be listened to and discussion should be encouraged.
We merely want to have an open discussion.
@shilolo
“he has expressed his opinion ad nauseum about Fluther’s so-called “flaws” and the need for “improvement”.”
I have done absolutely no such thing. Please cite examples to support your claim. There are very few things about Fluther that I believe could be improved upon. The only thing I have expressed ad nauseum is my desire to have an open discussion.
We merely want to have an open discussion. You do not.
“If you want (and insist that) Starbucks to start offering cheeseburgers, and they decide not to, you have two options. Accept that fact and buy your coffee there anyway, or, find another place that accommodates your needs. Why is that so hard to understand?”
No one is insisting anything. I, personally, have most certainly never insisted anything. The third option which you don’t seem to understand is the notion of having an open discussion with Starbucks about selling cheeseburgers. If they are willing to have an open discussion with you, perhaps you can reach a compromise, perhaps a better business model can be reached, perhaps the store can improve. If they don’t like your idea, then that’s fine. They won’t implement it. That’s no big deal. So long as they took the time and consideration to listen and discuss, that is all that is important. In that situation, no one loses.
We merely want to have an open discussion.
@eponymoushipster
“Perceived flaws do not flaws make.”
Certainly. No disagreement there. No one is saying that their perception is absolutely correct. We are only asking that you take our views into consideration just as we take yours into consideration.
We merely want to have an open discussion.
@shilolo
“You guys have expressed yourselves. Now, move on.”
That is not an effective strategy for progress. That is not an open discussion, that is a one-sided suggestion.
We merely want to have an open discussion.
@asmonet
“you don’t seem to realize the distinction between being listened to, having your idea considered, and being discarded as not a priority or as not in keeping with the site ideals.”
We would be entirely content with the fact that our ideas are not a priority so long as there was adequate discussion about them. That has not happened.
We merely want an open discussion.
“You can be listened to and not have people hanging on your every word as gospel. The impression Ivan and Mtl_zack and well, more recently J0E are giving is that being listened to equates to giving out orders that must be followed.”
Absolutely not. We do not wish for our “orders to be followed.” We aren’t making orders. We don’t expect or even want Fluther to adhere to our every demand.
We merely want to have an open discussion.
“We do take issue with whiny users who don’t understand what is and is not an appropriate avenue of communication.”
There is nothing inappropriate about open discussion.
@eponymoushipster
“if you walked in and tried to change things or “suggest” a new way to do things, they’d laugh at you and/or tell you to shut the hell up.”
That is clearly their own fault.
“make with the whiney-whiney in private”
Open discussion is not whining, and a private discussion wouldn’t be open.
@asmonet
“Do you see the difference in behavior?
No one rallying on either side?
No bickering?
No tantrums?”
There is no desire for bickering or tantrums. There is only the desire for open discussion.
We merely want to have an open discussion.
@3or4monsters
“Can’t there be compromise, or a work around, that satisfies the most people?”
That is the goal, yes. This is the result of open discussion. The Fluther vets seem very opposed to the idea of compromise and satisfying the most people.
@asmonet
“You’re not having a discussion or a debate, you’re whining. ”
No, we aren’t having a discussion or a debate, because discussion and debate take two parties. Your side refuses to participate, and therefore there can be no discussion.
We merely want to have an open discussion.
@uberbatman
“No beating a dead horse or whining when they arent “listened” to.”
None of that is happening. No discussion about Fluther has occurred on this thread, or any where else for the most part.
We merely want to have an open discussion.
That’s it. That’s all we want. We just want to have an open discussion. Not only have most Fluther vets seemed unwilling to engage in such discussion, most react to the idea with anger and hostility. We do not have a list of demands. We do not want to change Fluther to suit our needs. We just want an open discussion. That isn’t whining. That isn’t being a “brat.” That isn’t being immature. That isn’t beating a dead horse. That is simply the desire to have an open discussion.