Riverman, you posted on AG at a higher rate than almost anyone and I know you recognize its value as an open science paradise frequented by some of the most informed and reasonable people in the population genomics space. If you want into the Discord server, just email me.
As for the invectives directed at me and my associates on AG by some of the ignoramuses on this forum, I'm just embarrassed for you.
1.) Charges of AG being too strict:
AG was special because of the academic-style decorum it observed and enforced. It was supposed to be a highbrow space for scientific inquiry and discussion, not a playground for ethnocentrists and nationalists. If we let anybody run roughshod over the TOS, it would have completely defeated the purpose of the forum. By the way, even Davidski was banned on AG several times. The mods didn't play! So much for unabashed Davidski worship!
2.) Charges of bias:
I spent years on anthrofora as the most vociferous anti-Nordicist, pro-Mediterranean celebrant in the world. I've earned my bona fides, so the butthurt ghouls speaking ill of me or AG don't have a leg to stand on. The completely banal recognition of minor Levantine ancestry in certain Southern Europeans doesn't make a person a "Levantinist." It means they live in reality. I wonder how many people in here deny the minor North African ancestry in Spaniards and Portuguese, too. I don't even want to know.
As far as being a Davidski acolyte goes, you might as well accuse me of being a David Reich-ballhugger, Nick Patterson worshipper, Iosif Lazaridis disciple. That's how silly you sound. I like these guys because I respect them. I've engaged with Davidski on matters anthropological since before this forum existed. We've had both moments of agreement and disagreement over the years; he's a good egg and one of the best open scientists I've ever met. There's a reason Nick Patterson has engaged with Davidski on his blog and not with any of you; there's a reason his method has been cited in a recent aDNA paper as inspiring a methodology used therein. And AG has been cited, too. AG is frequented mostly by people who follow the preponderance of evidence, and the nature of an open science community ensures disagreement with poorly argued conclusions or methodological decisions made by certain academics in the field; it also includes a lot of praise and result replication. And if I thought the evidence pointed to PIE coming from the Near East, I'd be delighted. I care about what's true, not what I want to believe. And if David Reich has an smoking gun in Southern Arc to change my mind, that would be most welcome. This is a lesson in character many of you could stand to learn.
One way or another the community will survive. For those too blind or stupid to understand the value of a forum like that, that's entirely your loss.