A RealGM Scandal, and a Conversation about Projects

[Cavsfansince84]

People have been talking about the alts since before the peaks project even started, kinda disingenuous to act like this popped up because of the result of the first vote tbh.

I can't recall anything like this when LeBron got ranked #1 in the 2020 top 100.

I'd like to see evidence posted but i cant really take the "ugh this is just because jordan lost!" takes seriously and I don't think they're really operating with honesty in mind here. Multiple people who didn't even have Jordan #1 (raises hand) felt that the activity was suspicious. Don't know about specifics and hopefully that's cleared up

Ya, I am not voting in the peaks project and I think most know I am anti MJ myths and I don't really even care what order they went in but there were red flags left and right and I sorta thought that AEnigma would step in and was sort of disappointed that pretty much anyone with an account on here was just being allowed to participate and further when it came out that some of them admitted to Ohayo scripting their posts(which is just a weird phrase to use to begin with) and showed what was actually going on. There is no reason to use the first 5 results of the current project and I don't think it should restart until rules about who can join it are firmly laid down by mods or whoever. They just made a mockery of the entire website.

[NO-KG-AI]

To be fair, you haven't seen the evidence. Only the mods have. I'm sure they did their due diligence on this.

Was that to me or the original poster? My keycard to the mod avenger tower still works. A previously banned poster wouldn’t know.

It was to you. I'm confused here - why I would I quote you if I was responding to the OP?

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt because you were so aggressively wrong. And bold.

[jjgp111292]

Just make it a 10-year+ account requirement to participate. Exemptions for newer accounts on a case-by-case basis. Limit the number of new accounts.

10 years is pretty steep. I think a reasonable post count minimum is more sensible.

[homecourtloss]

Not gonna lie, is a bit funny to me the first time a different top 1 happens we end the project prematurely with drama involved and whole accusatuons of conspiracy lol

I kinda wonder if anywhere the same drama would have happened if the voting results/ accused new voters were the standard picks for jordan at 1st

People have been talking about the alts since before the peaks project even started, kinda disingenuous to act like this popped up because of the result of the first vote tbh.

I can't recall anything like this when LeBron got ranked #1 in the 2020 top 100.

I'd like to see evidence posted but i cant really take the "ugh this is just because jordan lost!" takes seriously and I don't think they're really operating with honesty in mind here. Multiple people who didn't even have Jordan #1 (raises hand) felt that the activity was suspicious. Don't know about specifics and hopefully that's cleared up

we don't know since it has not been shared, but how many of the people who submitted "evidence" are fans of a certain player and are upset? One has already posted in this thread and there's another one who is liking post who was voicing disapproval about the project earlier when voting wasn't going a certain way since he supports that same player.

[TheGOATRises007]

Just make it a 10-year+ account requirement to participate. Exemptions for newer accounts on a case-by-case basis. Limit the number of new accounts.

we should go even further than that – make sure if Jordan is involved in the project at all, make sure he's number one, and then the rest of the discussion can take place without people getting upset.

LeBron wins the general top 100 in 2020. First time Jordan isn't 1st. Project goes on normally.

LeBron wins it again in 2023. Jordan falls to 3rd. Project goes on normally.

Like, what are we even talking about here? You're making points that are completely invalid.

This isn't the only time Jordan lost on here and those prior projects went on normally.

Your posts in this thread are mocking the OP and it's disrespectful. You're better than that.

[Special_Puppy]

Did we ever figure out what happened to grainmaster200 aka Kola aka OhayoKD’s best friend who’s computer was broken for 6 months straight so OhayoKD posted their ballots for them

[sp6r=underrated]

Did we ever figure out what happened to grainmaster200 aka Kola aka OhayoKD’s best friend who’s computer was broken for 6 months straight so OhayoKD posted their ballots for them

Grainmaster200 got married to Erin my HS girlfriend in Canada who I totally banged.

[sp6r=underrated]

They create an account with a name or favorite player they don’t care at all about so they can pretend to be unbiased while they bad faith argue.

You mean this isn't true:

About You: I like durant.

memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=266953

[Tim Lehrbach]

1. Tim argues that the value of these projects is in "the experience of learning and broadening one's understanding can still remain authentic and enriching"; the the projects "deepen debates and educate all who participate". But isn't participation in these projects at risk if they're seen as compromised? And won't there be less to learn if fewer people participate?

2. I've seen people here take pride in the fact that the PC board is held up elsewhere on the internet as a respected venue for basketball discussion. Not everyone cares about that, and I'm not sure I care about that, but I know that the mods do. Will the PC board continue to be respected if it's seen as a place where this kind of stuff can happen with no consequence?

3. With all due respect, what's the point of starting this thread and halting the peaks project if something isn't going to be done? Why shine the light on this situation, and point at certain people, only to then look the other way? It feels like the toothpaste is already out of the tube.

I will conclude by saying that I do agree that it could be beneficial if the evidence that triggered all of this were shared.

Fair replies, one and all. I suppose I would characterize my position less as "look the other way" than "the board will be OK" with or without pressing the big red launch button. But you raise good points:

1. You're right. The attraction to this board lies largely in the appeal of its projects, which lose their luster to new faces and may burn out regular contributors if their integrity is shot. Moving forward with projects or attempting to remedy compromised ones requires some action and safeguards.

2. From my days on the early mod team and continuing into observations as a "retiree," I tend to favor light over heavy moderation, but only as a style. How the mods -- and regulars, too -- handle this will, of course, be a function of what message they want to send and culture they want to engender here. As I said before, I am not against a strong response. I just also think the board will survive this and has endured a lot of challenging posters over the years. This is a setback and not an existential crisis, IMO.

3. Yes, while Doctor MJ invites discussion and publicizes the thought process occurring about the situation, what is unsaid is important, too: there must already be a determination that projects are not to be continued or allowed with this level of manipulation. I would counsel that we give this discussion a chance to run its course and expect further action will follow.

[70sFan]

Not gonna lie, is a bit funny to me the first time a different top 1 happens we end the project prematurely with drama involved and whole accusatuons of conspiracy lol

I kinda wonder if anywhere the same drama would have happened if the voting results/ accused new voters were the standard picks for jordan at 1st

People have been talking about the alts since before the peaks project even started, kinda disingenuous to act like this popped up because of the result of the first vote tbh.

I can't recall anything like this when LeBron got ranked #1 in the 2020 top 100.

I'd like to see evidence posted but i cant really take the "ugh this is just because jordan lost!" takes seriously and I don't think they're really operating with honesty in mind here. Multiple people who didn't even have Jordan #1 (raises hand) felt that the activity was suspicious. Don't know about specifics and hopefully that's cleared up

we don't know since it has not been shared, but how many of the people who submitted "evidence" are fans of a certain player and are upset? One has already posted in this thread and there's another one who is liking post who was voicing disapproval about the project earlier when voting wasn't going a certain way since he supports that same player.

I mean, what do you exactly doubt?

The Discord server exists, I used to be there because OhayoKD invited me a long time ago. I didn't engage much and I left a few months ago, because for once, I don't have the time for Discord activity and secondly, it's a place where people are taught to become storytellers, which doesn't interest me at al.

The "conspiracy" is also true, at least to the degree that people created accounts to participate in the project and that the Discord is heavily against Jordan. I don't know which ones are legit human beings and which not, I suspect at least most of them are real. They might just agree with OhayoKD that Jordan doesn't deserve top place and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Another true thing is that OhayoKD had a "mission" to destroy "Jordan fraud" and create new narrative in basketball world. That's her words, paraphrased of course. I mean, that's her choice - I always found that delusional, but I don't think this alone is worth banning.

I don't know everything, because I just didn't care enough. I don't know if the alts thing is real, it very well may be. I don't know if the recruitment thing was only to find people who are willing to push Jordan from the top (which by itself isn't worth banning, although I am not sure if it's ethically correct to manipulate results that way) or if it has more manipulation process involved. I know that many people in that Discord channel are much younger than me (and I am not that old at 27), age by itself isn't an argument but younger people are easier to manipulate. Don't know if that happened though, so please do not quote me on that.

I actually like how the project went after 3rd thread. With Jordan and James in, it became a really good place to discuss someone else. I haven't voted, but I participated and it gave me a very pleasant time in the tough moment of my life. I don't know what to do with the project, I don't have any advices for Doc. He's the mod here and I trust him. I just hope that we will continue (or restart?) the project at some point.


I also want to add something in the end. I don't know what evidences mods have and I don't have a clear picture because I left the Discord (which I rarely read) before the project started, but I don't think AEnigma participated in this fraud. I know he's on the Discord and at least he used to be very active there, but I have never seen him inviting new people and asking them for joining RealGM. I have many disagreements with AEnigma throughout our history here, but he's a valuable poster and I don't think he did anything wrong to influence the outcome of the project. I could be mistaken though, so it's just my opinion.

[NO-KG-AI]

I’m all for protecting people who provided evidence, and the culprits don’t deserve to speak their side, but I almost wish the evidence would get posted because it’s truly embarassing. It’s the smallest dick energy, most sniveling twerpy stuff. OhayoKD has no shame, so he wouldn’t be embarrassed, but coming off weak and angry that even his own minions are like “why do you even care so much to orchestrate all this for a small message board.” The way he speaks about everyone he disagrees with is borderline insane.

100% lock we’ll see him soon, and have already in this thread. I told him a few times he absolutely can’t contain himself. He’s so angry at some of us he can’t not expose his personality and bad habits. He does not have the discipline to come back and stay under the radar.

[One_and_Done]

A lot of ideas are getting conflated here.

The first is something that everyone broadly agrees with. There should be a non-trivial threshold to participate in projects (e.g. 150 posts). That is fine, and I called for something like this myself. It was obviously farcical that certain accounts were allowed to participate in recent projects, and I complained about Kola particularly as being obviously a sock for someone whose posts had no merit.

However, there are other issues being thrown around that I don’t agree with. For one thing, this seems to be getting used as an avenue for posters with a particular variety of views to demand we stop the “disrespect” on this board. We should be very careful that “disrespect” isn’t conflated with “their views are offensive to me”. I heard a few posters complain that “good quality posters left because they were sad”. If posters can’t handle views that are contrary to their own, then that’s on them. The views that older fans have about Mikan are just as offensive to me and other modernists, as the views I hold about Mikan are to them. The goal of a forum should not be to protect the established clique, but to promote respectful discourse, and an intelligent exchange of ideas.

I said many times, to deaf ears, that the conduct of Enigma in the RPOY project was completely inappropriate. Not because they held views different to my own, but because they were incredibly rude and abrasive. I didn’t want them banned, because I believe in free speech, but if people are going to expect civility from me, I’m going to demand the same standard for others. However, what is offensive is often in the eye of the beholder.

[Tim Lehrbach]

You asked "What's the best way to re-build a social internet culture on a site in the mid-2020s?" Perhaps this is too bluntly put, but: throw out the bad apples. They were banned before; ban them again. They were banned for a reason -- If they come back as alts, ban the alts. Both of them are capable of making insightful, constructive, thoughtful contributions to the board. But on numerous occasions, even before ruining the past two PC Projects, both chose not to. When basic decency isn't enforced, and when the mods don't give actual punishments (e.g. suspensions/bans), the bullies realize that nothing's stopping their behavior -- and the victims just decide to leave the forum. I've personally been far less active on this board than I used to, specifically because I don't enjoy discussions with these two. I'm not alone -- the loss of Squared2020 might be the single biggest loss to this forum's quality in years, and it was a direct result of their behavior. There's plenty of others.

So in the future, if someone is being so rude that anyone is considering leaving a project or this forum due to the rudeness, I would suggest the Mods take a more active role in stopping the behavior. Even temporary suspensions can be effective ways of setting boundaries for people who otherwise aren't willing of treating others with respect. We have (or perhaps used to have) a genuine community of people willing to learn and listen to each other, while providing some of the most in-depth basketball discussions on the internet. When indecent people show up, I think the Mods should enforce the rules of decency -- otherwise we'll lose this community.

Well put. I'll just confess that I remain unconvinced heavy moderating is the only way of achieving a respectful, constructive culture, but it is one way. Another, complementary approach is hinted at below: setting standards for elevated participation like voting in projects. The part that somewhat depresses is that any avenue of building prosocial culture entails far more work than it takes to damage it. The mods and esteemed regulars here have put it a lot of work over many years to build something special, and it must be exhausting to constantly defend it against an onslaught of negative and disingenuous activity. This too points towards taking a heavier hand, I suppose.

For large-scale projects, I second the idea of having a (low but non-zero) threshold for posters. Having a requirement for a few hundred posts should help reduce sock puppets... or at least make it more annoying for OhayoKD to make alts/sock puppet accounts. I'm not sure the right number -- even 100 posts would be a serious imposition on conspiracies, while still being fairly accessible to relatively new members, although I see others have suggested even higher thresholds. This would have the secondary benefit of preventing further tampering/scripting by the 10 sock puppet accounts in the current project if it continues, in the case those accounts don't get banned.

This is gaining steam as an option. I endorse it too -- it not only protects against malfeasance but also lends cachet to the projects and may motivate posters to work harder to earn their place among voting panels. Post thresholds and even some judgment on the part of the project runner are appropriate means for ensuring quality and integrity.

For small scale projects, I think we had some great discussions with the Greatest Primes project and the Greatest Defenders at each Position project. I could imagine an update to either of those, or a Greatest Offensive Players at each Position project, or even a Greatest Teams project. If we did go the route of having fewer large-scale projects (not sure if that's right or not, but you listed it as an option)... there are some genuinely great smaller scale projects that are waiting in the wings.

This is overlooked but important. The big projects are the headliners, but smaller or more fine-grained projects add a ton of value both by casting a light on the finer points of basketball analysis and by informing better evaluations within the big projects. I have sometimes felt there is a slight imbalance here in the direction of taking on big projects that crowds out some of this less sexy, but equally fruitful work.

[70sFan]

A lot of ideas are getting conflated here.

The first is something that everyone broadly agrees with. There should be a non-trivial threshold to participate in projects (e.g. 150 posts). That is fine, and I called for something like this myself. It was obviously farcical that certain accounts were allowed to participate in recent projects, and I complained about Kola particularly as being obviously a sock for someone whose posts had no merit.

However, there are other issues being thrown around that I don’t agree with. For one thing, this seems to be getting used as an avenue for posters with a particular variety of views to demand we stop the “disrespect” on this board. We should be very careful that “disrespect” isn’t conflated with “their views are offensive to me”. I heard a few posters complain that “good quality posters left because they were sad”. If posters can’t handle views that are contrary to their own, then that’s on them. The views that older fans have about Mikan are just as offensive to me and other modernists, as the views I hold about Mikan are to them. The goal of a forum should not be to protect the established clique, but to promote respectful discourse, and an intelligent exchange of ideas.

I said many times, to deaf ears, that the conduct of Enigma in the RPOY project was completely inappropriate. Not because they held views different to my own, but because they were incredibly rude and abrasive. I didn’t want them banned, because I believe in free speech, but if people are going to expect civility from me, I’m going to demand the same standard for others. However, what is offensive is often in the eye of the beholder.

I can't say for people who left, but I doubt the reason why they left is because someone disagreed with their opinions about basketball.

We disagree heavily in basically every thread but I'd never think to leave this place because of that. I also think we keep everything within civil framework, even if the discussions are often heated. If not, then apologies for you - it is just basketball after all.

[Tim Lehrbach]

A lot of ideas are getting conflated here.

The first is something that everyone broadly agrees with. There should be a non-trivial threshold to participate in projects (e.g. 150 posts). That is fine, and I called for something like this myself. It was obviously farcical that certain accounts were allowed to participate in recent projects, and I complained about Kola particularly as being obviously a sock for someone whose posts had no merit.

However, there are other issues being thrown around that I don’t agree with. For one thing, this seems to be getting used as an avenue for posters with a particular variety of views to demand we stop the “disrespect” on this board. We should be very careful that “disrespect” isn’t conflated with “their views are offensive to me”. I heard a few posters complain that “good quality posters left because they were sad”. If posters can’t handle views that are contrary to their own, then that’s on them. The views that older fans have about Mikan are just as offensive to me and other modernists, as the views I hold about Mikan are to them. The goal of a forum should not be to protect the established clique, but to promote respectful discourse, and an intelligent exchange of ideas.

I said many times, to deaf ears, that the conduct of Enigma in the RPOY project was completely inappropriate. Not because they held views different to my own, but because they were incredibly rude and abrasive. I didn’t want them banned, because I believe in free speech, but if people are going to expect civility from me, I’m going to demand the same standard for others. However, what is offensive is often in the eye of the beholder.

I don't believe ideas are being conflated. Rather, I think some carry expectations for "decency" and "respect" ("civility," etc.) that maybe you or I do not. I have said I am a light-handed moderator by nature. I am also not that prone to retreat or retort when someone is unkind to me -- though we all have our limits. But the moderator team is looking out for everybody, and that will include many who demand greater politeness or gentler approaches to disagreement. The right modulation for the whole forum may require some adjustment on my part, or yours, or anybody's. It's not an affront to free speech, it's just fitting in.

[NO-KG-AI]

These people are obsessed. It would take an absurd post limit to keep them out. They’ll post nonsense for years with multiple accounts in prep for things like this. It’ll be hard to keep them out.

As for over moderating, people who are obviously pbp’s and just downright nasty to the point of driving away traffic should be dealt with swiftly. This group of moderators here have never attempted to steer discussion in a direction they want(aside from it being civil.)

Pretending people left because everyone disagrees with them is either straight up stupidity or ignorance. Again, the people telling us we’re leaving because we’re mad that people disagree us is insane. If you think this board was in lock step or singing kumbaya and agreeing for over 2 decades, it’s because you’re still new here. Don’t speak for the people that formed pillars of this community for decades before you were even involved.

[jalengreen]

Yeah I do think there are posts here taking this as a chance to complain about things that aren't particularly relevant. No idea of their involvement here but AE was a valuable poster and to what extent they were or were not complicit in project collusion doesn't change that. Not sure how the "era relativity vs not" debate is relevant here either, pretty sure AE/Ohayo/the alt accounts are era relativists though I could be mistaken

[NO-KG-AI]

Yeah I do think there are posts here taking this as a chance to complain about things that aren't particularly relevant. No idea of their involvement here but AE was a valuable poster and to what extent they were or were not complicit in project collusion doesn't change that. Not sure how the "era relativity vs not" debate is relevant here either, pretty sure AE/Ohayo/the alt accounts are era relativists though I could be mistaken

His participation in project collusion and instructing people how to better use fake profiles and returns is pretty relevant. Especially since he was already aggressively douchey and was more than fine with his buddy and the sock accounts attempts to push out people from the board by making them miserable here.

They were bad posters that used a lot of words. Nothing was lost.

[babyjax13]

I am still going to add that having a list created by the broad PC community, and having one created by a core group of 'experts' would make for an interesting comparison and conversation, and would alleviate some concerns about integrity, in addition to what has been suggested here.

[One_and_Done]

These people are obsessed. It would take an absurd post limit to keep them out. They’ll post nonsense for years with multiple accounts in prep for things like this. It’ll be hard to keep them out.

As for over moderating, people who are obviously pbp’s and just downright nasty to the point of driving away traffic should be dealt with swiftly. This group of moderators here have never attempted to steer discussion in a direction they want(aside from it being civil.)

Pretending people left because everyone disagrees with them is either straight up stupidity or ignorance. Again, the people telling us we’re leaving because we’re mad that people disagree us is insane. If you think this board was in lock step or singing kumbaya and agreeing for over 2 decades, it’s because you’re still new here. Don’t speak for the people that formed pillars of this community for decades before you were even involved.

When I was removed from the top 100 project I was advised that the decision was motivated in part by a veteran poster leaving because my views on older players like Mikan upset them, and that they had to 'take action' before more posters left. That pretty much convinced me that mods running projects was a bad idea, particularly when I contrast that to the more open and inclusive discussion in the 2 projects run by Enigma. Despite often being wildly unprofessional and abrasive, the project runner lacking mod powers seemed to lead to a better discussion. If the projects are continued, I would push strongly for a non-mod project runner.

There may be a variety of views on this forum among veterans, but if you are an outsider who isn't here to make friends, and who doesn't apologise profusely for daring to disagree, then my experience is that your views are not welcome here. My position is that if you are so upset by someone else's views on basketball that you quit a project then that's on you.