Objections to the April Fools Day prank.

[Violet]

I've done what I could, Syna... Can't be asked to do much more

[Epimethean]

How could the tune have changed before the fact, or indeed, during it? People thought that the puppets were real.

Because, sweetheart, other members dug into the ensuing "OMG! Hilarious! You had me fooled!" and made it malicious *after* the fact.

That isn't an answer to the root of the question, darling. I think there have been legitimate gripes voiced here, and many people were unhappy with this prank without going into histrionics. I think there may be some past history for a few, but that, for the majority of those who expressed unhappiness, the feelings were simply that the moderators violated rules to mess with people and not everyone likes that fact.

This thread invited feedback, which suggests that post factum reflections were percolating already pre-catalyst.

Moros has the best point, though. It needs to blow over and the fallout needs to move wherever the emotional winds blow it.

[thesummerqueen]

I think there have been legitimate gripes voiced here, and many people were unhappy with this prank without going into histrionics.

Yes sir. But if I may, and I'm not trying to belabor the point with this - there were many who questioned exactly what you said without getting involved in the drama and they should know that, as I already told a few people, it was very bad timing but not bad timing because of poor judgment. Rather, poor timing because of outside happenstance.

It happened that we had a blow up because of sock accounts before and as all this was being planned - perhaps we should have changed our strategy, but we liked the ideas. This wasn't a plan because we feel mods and admins are above the rules, but because on a day like April Fool's the rules are bent or broken in the name of comedy and pranks. We had to, as stated, lay some groundwork for it to be pulled off even somewhat successfully, and I think really if prior problems hadn't gotten in the way, even those people who raised that legitimate question would have laughed it off.

Pranks are *meant* to mess with people, but no one was messing with forum members on a personal level in the slightest. The socks were created to cause very general April Fool's mayhem. And for the most part, once people got the joke, there was chagrin and laughter. I hate that the louder voices overtook those.

[Epimethean]

Fair enough. Some found the humor, some didn't, others had meltdowns. It seemed an unfortunate set of circumstances overall.

[Autumnlicious]

NOTE: I had this typed out 5 or so mins after Epi posted what I quoted. L0L git.

the feelings were simply that the moderators violated rules to mess with people and not everyone likes that fact.

An interesting and pertinent note.

When you stop and think about it, by fundamentally changing the environment, like in the context of an April Fools, is it still the same forum and obliged to the same functional rules as the forum (i.e. this) from whence it was spawned?

Take for a case example of 'Christian Forums' -- we put Xtian labels, etc all over the place to make everyone out to be a Christfan. By doing that, we directly changed how everyone was perceived. In essence, we made everyone (albeit temporarily) appear to be not who they truly are.

Is that not the very base definition of deceit?

You may have appreciated and given tacit approval to previous April Fools, despite the deception they endemically entailed, despite the changes to the very core of AF.org to twist it to reach that "better than before" height.

Granted, we should have better primed things. We should have certainly questioned the thought of a fake poster personally attacking a moderator -- who would've known that posters here would fly to LMA's defense despite objectively provoking it?

We failed to take into account a very important bit -- the subjective. We failed to consider, what if some posters didn't give us the benefit of the doubt.

And that was a grave mistake.

In retrospect, perhaps we should've gave up the second people started taking LMA seriously, just called it quits and come clean when some people started to complain.

But we didn't. We wanted, even when things started to sour for a few, give the magic of April Fools to the rest.

Moros has the best point, though. It needs to blow over and the fallout needs to move wherever the emotional winds blow it.

We agree fully.

[Zen Badger]

I've stayed out of the arguments over the last few days because I have no desire to add fuel to the fire.

But I will say that watching people I have a great deal of affection and respect for going at each others throats like rabid ferrets makes me sad.

We all need to remind ourselves that whilst the April Fools prank may not have been the best idea, it was not meant to be malicious or hurtful.

And if this forum falls apart because of a silly stunt then it will be a great loss for all of us.

That is all.

[Rayaan]

I would also like to point out that the fact that we violated our own rules for the sake of this prank is what made it the most surprising.
No one probably expected that the staff would violate one of their own rules - and so that's what we did - which is the main 'surprise element' behind the prank. And every prank has one of those.

However, as Zen rightly said, we didn't intend to be malicious or hurtful to anyone by doing this. It was only for amusement.

[popeyespappy]

[Minimalist]

I just noted at the forum for jesusneverexisted that they are suspending operations and moving to facebook because of unrelenting spammers overwhelming the mods.

A similar fate befell Connecticut Valley Atheists so perhaps it is time to appreciate the work that the mod team does here.

[Tiberius]

Thanks Minimalist.