You’re overlooking that the users don’t want to move. The mods seem to think that they’re the reason we use 196 and that they can just pack us into a suitcase and take us wherever they like, when the fact is we use blahaj zone for a reason and they can’t take us anywhere. They’re perfectly free to close the sub and make a new one elsewhere, but no one’s going to follow them.
It’s like, imagine you’re renting a house with a few people and one of the people none of the housemates really like (they don’t follow the house rules everyone has agreed on) marches in and announces “We all, as a group, are moving to Florida!” And then moves out and takes the refrigerator and expects you to follow. No thanks, good riddance, we’re getting a new fridge and a better housemate.
I understand I’m being a pedant but it sounds more similar to a landlord telling their tenants that the house being rented is legally being moved across state borders. The landlord had house rules under the umbrella of state law and wanted a new umbrella. Tenants are saying “this state is fine and, fuck off, we brought all the furniture in this house.”
If you want to be pedantic, the landlord is the admin and the house rules have been set by them. The only power the mod housemate has is ownership of something everybody uses that’s replaceable. We’re not going to Florida to follow the fridge.
I was wondering why this reply seemed so weird to me before realizing it was ultimately just saying, “but actually, what I originally said.”
I also didn’t explain why I thought my pedantic answer seemed more appropriate. I will do so here:
The instance admins are envisioned as [US] states because they hold general sway over a number of communities, in this metaphor “properties”. They have control, independent from over adjacent “states”. Community mods mirror “landlords” in that they own a “property”(community) and impose specific guidelines about how users, in this metaphor “tenants”, interact with the “property”. The “state”(instance) can arbitrate during disputes and generally won’t allow a “property” to apply guidelines that break their state laws.
Of course, the “tenants” are providing all the value. The “landlords” can also be replaced without much concern to the “tenants” unless the new landlord has new rules about interactions with the “property.” If the “landlord” has rules that are too annoying or even closes the “property”, the “tenants” might be annoyed but they can take all their stuff with them to a new “property” with different “landlords.” Maybe even move to a place in a new “state.”
If the guy with fridge says “no more fridge”, all the stuff in the house doesn’t get locked down.
You’re overlooking that the users don’t want to move. The mods seem to think that they’re the reason we use 196 and that they can just pack us into a suitcase and take us wherever they like, when the fact is we use blahaj zone for a reason and they can’t take us anywhere. They’re perfectly free to close the sub and make a new one elsewhere, but no one’s going to follow them.
It’s like, imagine you’re renting a house with a few people and one of the people none of the housemates really like (they don’t follow the house rules everyone has agreed on) marches in and announces “We all, as a group, are moving to Florida!” And then moves out and takes the refrigerator and expects you to follow. No thanks, good riddance, we’re getting a new fridge and a better housemate.
I understand I’m being a pedant but it sounds more similar to a landlord telling their tenants that the house being rented is legally being moved across state borders. The landlord had house rules under the umbrella of state law and wanted a new umbrella. Tenants are saying “this state is fine and, fuck off, we brought all the furniture in this house.”
If you want to be pedantic, the landlord is the admin and the house rules have been set by them. The only power the mod housemate has is ownership of something everybody uses that’s replaceable. We’re not going to Florida to follow the fridge.
I was wondering why this reply seemed so weird to me before realizing it was ultimately just saying, “but actually, what I originally said.”
I also didn’t explain why I thought my pedantic answer seemed more appropriate. I will do so here:
The instance admins are envisioned as [US] states because they hold general sway over a number of communities, in this metaphor “properties”. They have control, independent from over adjacent “states”. Community mods mirror “landlords” in that they own a “property”(community) and impose specific guidelines about how users, in this metaphor “tenants”, interact with the “property”. The “state”(instance) can arbitrate during disputes and generally won’t allow a “property” to apply guidelines that break their state laws.
Of course, the “tenants” are providing all the value. The “landlords” can also be replaced without much concern to the “tenants” unless the new landlord has new rules about interactions with the “property.” If the “landlord” has rules that are too annoying or even closes the “property”, the “tenants” might be annoyed but they can take all their stuff with them to a new “property” with different “landlords.” Maybe even move to a place in a new “state.”
If the guy with fridge says “no more fridge”, all the stuff in the house doesn’t get locked down.
The actual tenant here would be the admin. They own the house and don’t want to get involved in the housemates internal discussions