|
Jimong5 posted:I only came here because I made an observation in the QCS thread and CommieGIR "suggested" I post in here. There are some aspects of D&D I find appealing, like I would sometimes rather argue rightward than leftward, or the extended effortpost nature this forum should be about. I'm perfectly willing to accept that D&D is not the serious politics forum though, a position that has been seemingly reinforced by the regulars, the mod staff, and the admin staff in this thread. I mean come on, you're complaining that people have feedback you don't agree with in the feedback thread. If we want D&D to be a hugbox let's all just admit it and move on. Giving feedback is obviously fine, the reason there's pushback from mods and D&D regulars is that the feedback from CSPAM regulars has been taking the form of "why can't D&D be more like CSPAM". So my question is, what's the point? CSPAM already exists. Why do you want a second forum for shitposting that is, for the most part, unmoderated?
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
fool of sound posted:Maybe I'm just approaching burnout but I no longer care to keep my positions on what feedback I think is useful private. Do you think the thread has improved since you started doing that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 19:58
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:Maybe I'm just approaching burnout but I no longer care to keep my positions on what feedback I think is useful private. The problem isn't whether it's private or not, the problem is that you think feedback which doesn't come from people you're already in agreement with is not useful. This alone should completely disqualify you from moderation, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:02
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Giving feedback is obviously fine, the reason there's pushback from mods and D&D regulars is that the feedback from CSPAM regulars has been taking the form of "why can't D&D be more like CSPAM". So my question is, what's the point? CSPAM already exists. Why do you want a second forum for shitposting that is, for the most part, unmoderated? Then you don't actually want feedback from anyone that dislikes how D&D is run because CSPAM is right there? So, that should be the official position then? Because it seems like the mod/admin staff is trying really hard to avoid just admitting that's the official position.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:The problem isn't whether it's private or not, the problem is that you think feedback which doesn't come from people you're already in agreement with is not useful. This alone should completely disqualify you from moderation, honestly. Bad news: no mod anywhere is a transcendent being of pure logos that is uncolored by opinions, experiences, and feelings.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:06
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:the feedback from CSPAM regulars has been taking the form of "why can't D&D be more like CSPAM" ... for the most part, unmoderated? It would help your feedback be more substantial if you were to support this with evidence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:08
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:Bad news: no mod anywhere is a transcendent being of pure logos that is uncolored by opinions, experiences, and feelings. not since dr eldarion stepped down, anyway
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:08
|
|
|
Jimong5 posted:Then you don't actually want feedback from anyone that dislikes how D&D is run because CSPAM is right there? So, that should be the official position then? Because it seems like the mod/admin staff is trying really hard to avoid just admitting that's the official position. I think it depends what you mean by "like CSPAM". If it means "the leftist forum" I don't think mods have said anything that indicates that they don't want leftist thought on this forum (whether they've acted in a way that they don't is an open question for sure) If it means "casual shitposting or aggro posting is fine", according to what they've said, yeah if you're looking for that this isn't the forum. Again, this is just by what FOS has said in this thread and not so much their actions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:09
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:Bad news: no mod anywhere is a transcendent being of pure logos that is uncolored by opinions, experiences, and feelings. There's a difference between having biases and being completely driven by them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:09
|
|
|
Jimong5 posted:Then you don't actually want feedback from anyone that dislikes how D&D is run because CSPAM is right there? So, that should be the official position then? Because it seems like the mod/admin staff is trying really hard to avoid just admitting that's the official position. I think it depends on the feedback, right? Calls for lax moderation and a higher tolerance for shitposting are probably not going to be agreed to. After all, if "merge D&D and CSPAM" is overwhelmingly viewed as a dumb idea, I'm not sure why "make D&D indistinguishable from CSPAM" shouldn't be treated as equally silly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:10
|
|
|
Jimong5 posted:
As far as I know the rule regarding shitposting in here has always been that you might not get punished if the mods think your post was funny, but you are taking your your ability to post for the next few hours into your own hands--so your zinger better be worth it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:11
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Okay but the criticisms you mention usually take the form of "how do you explain this, liberals Because I want to understand, just like I do with conservatives, how we can all inhabit the same shared reality, all agree on some common set of facts, and come to widely varying conclusions. Asking someone to explain their support for x, when the action/outcome of x is detrimental to the advancement of, say, radical climate policy isn't some smug attempt to try and own someone - and that presumption does indeed seem to go against the rule of "assume posting in good faith." If I ask someone "how can you say you support x, but defend y when it clearly stands in opposition of x," it's because I'm trying to understand the thinking that leads to someone's political leanings and ultimately empathize with them. I will freely admit that I'm not always the nicest person in these exchanges, either - I get frustrated and aggravated, will often go back to my cave to sulk, and then come back and post some inflammatory (if not brutally honest about my feelings) take that gets me whacked - and they're probably mostly "good shoots" by mods/iks. (eta: the only probe i'll ever complain about is the 30 days i ate because someone else tried to dox discendo vox) Lib and let die fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Oct 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:11
|
|
" or some variation of it, rather than any genuine effort on your part (the royal "you", not you specifically), which gets tedious and exhausting to deal with and inevitably results in flame wars.
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I think it depends on the feedback, right? Calls for lax moderation and a higher tolerance for shitposting are probably not going to be agreed to. After all, if "merge D&D and CSPAM" is overwhelmingly viewed as a dumb idea, I'm not sure why "make D&D indistinguishable from CSPAM" shouldn't be treated as equally silly. Having leftwing opinions and wanting to actually engage others with different ideologies isn't poo poo posting. Don't misrepresent others please.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:13
|
|
|
Aegis posted:As far as I know the rule regarding shitposting in here has always been that you might not get punished if the mods think your post was funny, but you are taking your your ability to post for the next few hours into your own hands--so your zinger better be worth it. This seems like a rule that invites bias.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:13
|
|
|
thatfatkid posted:Having leftwing opinions and wanting to actually engage others with different ideologies isn't poo poo posting. Don't misrepresent others please. There has definitely been opinions that the good faith rules don't make sense, or that D&D requires you to write long-form essays dripping in decorum to not get probed (which isn't remotely true in my experience). That's less about "i want to post leftist opinions" and more about "I reject the idea of thoughtful, respectful discussion".
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:16
|
|
|
I think it's unhelpful (and, frankly, counterproductive) to the discussion to characterize feedback like thismawarannahr posted:Pasting from the thread in QCS: into "be more like cspam lol"
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:17
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:I think it's unhelpful to the discussion to characterize feedback like this It's very unhelpful, and reveals that some are more interested in owning their posting enemies than providing and/or responding to honest and sincere feedback.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:18
|
|
|
Yeah shame that was the only piece of feedback in the entire thread, you got us!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:20
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:You have 15 posts outside of this thread in D&D over the last 7 years, and none at all in the last year and a half. I'm not going to kick you or others out over this but tbh I'm only really interested in hearing from people who have participated in D&D alongside at least most of the current moderation team. I thought the current ruleset was specifically about hearing from people who don't post here but lurk?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:21
|
|
|
I think moderation issues aside it would be cool if people were just less aggro across the board. I understand politics especially right now are hosed but were just posting in the internet it should be low stakes. I think its fine to have posting enemies and dislike people but that should never translate into animosity that manifests into real life poo poo. We have 2 different politics forums for 2 different kinds of posting and I think that too is fine but spending the better half of a year manifesting IRL anxiety problems or whatever people are doing is not healthy. Ban the outright hateful people posting awful poo poo but in general just be more hands off let people get heated and work it out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:22
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:People who prefer CSPAM to D&D, but still want to post here: what do you think D&D can do to incorporate the things you like about CSPAM while still maintaining its own identity as a distinct subforum? What should the differences between D&D and CSPAM be? The main one that comes to mind is that D&D seems to think that posts that are dismissive/insulting towards the opinions of other posts warrant moderator action, but in a way that is inconsistent. You can be extremely condescending, as long as you do it with enough words - good examples might be evilweasil or Discendo Vox (or even myself sometimes). "You're an idiot" or a short sarcastic response would get you punished but "Your way of thinking is foolish and stupid (x 10 words)" probably wouldn't. A liberal coming into a C-SPAM thread and being directly angry/insulting is very unlikely to get probated. The only time that people usually get probated is in situations like Kim Bong Chill or How Are U when nearly every single post is just solely attempting to mock people without any serious responses to anything anyone said. Sometimes moderators mess up and probate someone for other reasons, but this usually results in many other C-SPAM posters getting mad at the probation (even if they also disliked the poster who it was targeted towards). Like a while back Jaxyon posted in the succ zone, and IIRC a few posters wanted them probated, but even more directly opposed that (I obviously agree with the latter - Jaxyon was clearly posting earnestly, which IMO should almost never warrant moderator action). IMO, moderator action for stuff like this should be more "conservatively reactive." There shouldn't be moderator action for someone insulting another poster (unless it's done in a way that is bigoted or something); there should only be action if back and forth insults, absent any actual content, continue for a long time (like at least more than a page). A lot of probations seem to be intended to pre-empt such a situation, and this discourages engagement. I could probably get away with posting in USNews without getting probated, but I'd have to be careful in a way I don't have to worry about in C-SPAM. I couldn't freely react to stuff, since it would be perceived as me attempting to antagonize other posters. For example, if someone posts some news about the Biden administration being lovely in succ zone, it's essentially treated in the same way as someone posting something about the Trump administration being lovely in USNews - just as something for other people to comment on and maybe make jokes about. But if the exact same thing is posted in USNews, it's perceived as someone trying to antagonize other posters (and maybe this is even actually true sometimes, but moderator punishments shouldn't rely on attempting to read posters' minds like that). A lot of moderator action is predicated on an understanding that posters are already aware of the Thread Consensus (and should therefore realize that impolitely conflicting with it will rile people up, thus making them guilty of trolling). If any moderators actually read this post, I hope they actually seriously think about that for a moment, because I think it's the cause of many issues. The best analogy I can think of is to think about how a Republican would be treated if they posted in USNews. Probably similarly to how many liberals would be treated for posting in succ zone - a lot of people would just call them dumb and wrong, but they'd probably only get a moderator response if they veered into directly bigoted territory. But if it's some outspoken leftist, the response is different - instead of "you're dumb and wrong" it's "you're an rear end in a top hat making GBS threads up the thread." I think part of this is that, if a Republican pops up, thread "regulars" feel more comfortable in rhetorically shutting them down. They've probably done it many times before with conservative family members or coworkers. But the "anti-Democratic Party leftist" is more difficult to deal with; they usually can't point out anything wrong with our reasoning, and instead just feel like our perspective is unreasonable (or intended to rile people up). Since most of us had fairly mainstream liberal/Democratic views in the past, we're more comfortable directly attacking those views (for the same reason your average USNews poster might feel comfortable shutting down right-wingers - often because they grew up among them or used to be one themselves). C-SPAM has also been guilty of this in the past - notably with R. Guyovich, who I think received a very strong reaction because he was negative towards Bernie at a time when there was a pro-Bernie consensus (but most people didn't really know how to response to what he said, aside from being real mad about it). I remember thinking "this guy is just trying to piss people off" and thinking he should be probated - I imagine this is the same sort of reaction many USNews posters have. Son of Thunderbeast posted:Consider that a lot of these posters are people that used to be D&D posters (even regulars) and who have been driven out of the forum, either forcefully due to bad moderation, or who have voluntarily elected to stop participating in the threads because of bad moderation. Many of these people would still like to participate but the continuing bad policies and moderation actions, as well as the intractable refusal to seriously engage with any of the more pointed and direct criticisms, mean that their opinions get outright dismissed as trolling or just opinions that you don't want to care about because they're now considered outsiders and result in posts like this one that I'm responding to. I think there's also a sort of cascading effect with this. A big part of why I stopped posting in D&D (mostly anyways; I still post maybe like once or twice a week) is that so many other people who share the same perspective left and I don't personally enjoy the negative attention of going against the clear majority opinion in a thread. I used to enjoy posting in the threads that had a decent balance of people (the 2020 primary/election threads were pretty good examples of this - the whole reason the second "polls" election thread was created was because the original thread had a significant population of leftists in it and some people wanted "the election thread, but for USNews posters").
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:22
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Yeah shame that was the only piece of feedback in the entire thread, you got us! "Us?" I'm criticizing a single poster's sequence of unhelpfully vague posts. Edit: Also, the person whose posts I'm criticizing has an opinion of what "the only piece of feedback" is - was this meant to be directed towards them? Ruzihm fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Oct 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:22
|
|
|
I'm going to try and address what I feel like is the main D&D userbase objections to any kind of change: D&D Isn't Ideological And Therefore Doesn't Need To Change Gonna take a sec to address this because an example that disproves another point also disproves this point. D&D Is For Politeness Unlike Those Rowdy CSPAM Boyz And Therefore Doesn't Need To Change I think Fancy Pelosi destroys both of these points out of the sky. "Well, yeah, they were trolling, but they didn't break the rules." Yeah, this doesn't work as an argument where, as soon as they debuted their gimmick in QCS, it got slammed. If QCS, complete with its QCS Whitenoise Crew and the like, has no patience for Fancy Pelosi, it is very strange that D&D does. A lot of the reasoning behind what is and isn't against D&D rules seems post-hoc: If you were probated, you were a rule-breaker, and if you weren't, ipso facto you weren't. People are assholes because they were forum banned, therefore, the people who aren't forum banned aren't assholes. That's bad logic. It's why I don't love Jeffrey of YOSPOS's insistence that he'll only act if he feels the probations are bad, because context is needed. D&D's problems are like jazz - it's the probations you don't hear. You guys aren't polite! I am a mainline protestant from the midwest, I know what enforced politeness looks like, and D&D doesn't meet its standards. Just because you aren't saying "gently caress" doesn't mean you're being respectful! D&D Is For Effortposts And Therefore Doesn't Need To Change I've seen only one or two posters demand D&D have less effortposts. Most people who want to post in D&D versus CSPAM want to precisely because effortposts will be less awkward here. Also, sorry, not every D&D regular is doing effortposts or even (huge emphasis here) putting in as much effort as the CSPAM outsiders. The problem isn't people doing effortposts, it's sneaking in some lovely dig at an epileptic poster as you're doing a long spiel about epilepsy which, honestly, unless you're a doctor or a sufferer yourself I'm only so interested in. CSPAM Just Wants D&D To Turn Into CSPAM Which Is Why They're Complaining Here And Therefore Nothing Needs To Change This logic seems to defeat itself. People from CSPAM are clearly in here complaining because part of them wants to post here. There doesn't need to be a CSPAM 2. There needs to be a serious politics forum and a joke politics forum, and what we get instead is an organic politics forum with plenty of warts and then a very forced, over policed, unnatural politics forum at least for American politics. I Don't Want To Argue With People And Therefore Nothing Needs To Change So many different outlets on the internet provide this service. You can just go to r/pol. You can go to Twitter. On this site, you can go to Ask/Tell or what have you. There was a D&D chat thread that happened for awhile, I have no idea what happened to it. If you want a safe space, your own personal echo chamber, I don't care if you have a thread to do that. You can make it your own Succ Zone even and complain about MSDOSKapital or the like. Some of you guys really went to town in the Blow Thread, clearly you're not allergic to rudeness, you just are afraid others will be better at it than you. I can relate! It's why I don't post in FYAD, I'm just not that committed to being rude. But I don't think that thread needs to be US based threads like Media Analysis or USNews or what have you. You have to allow some space for people to argue with you or you really are, in fact, trying to turn D&D into CSPAM. And judging by how much so many of you guys cry about ramps not coming fast enough and how the mods are clearly biased towards CSPAM posters by allowing them to even exist in your forum, that seems precisely what you want: You want a CSPAM 4 U. Cool, but encode that, IMO. It'll save all of us a lot of time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:25
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:I think it's unhelpful (and, frankly, counterproductive) to the discussion to characterize feedback like this That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying that runs counter to Jeffrey's post about what D&D is and also what FOS posted. It's not strictly "be more like C-SPAM" but it's "move in a direction that's against what D&D is supposed to be" (that happens to be one of many things that would make D&D more like C-SPAM).
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:29
|
|
|
In my ideal Actually Debate forum, replies would be forbidden. You would not be able to reply to a thread, and the quote bbcode would not work. All conversations would have to be like 1830s pamphlet wars, just posting an entirely new thread introducing the person you are taking down and then picking apart their argument over 20,000 words.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:31
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:In my ideal Actually Debate forum, replies would be forbidden. You would not be able to reply to a thread, and the quote bbcode would not work. All conversations would have to be like 1830s pamphlet wars, just posting an entirely new thread introducing the person you are taking down and then picking apart their argument over 20,000 words. That sounds pretty wildly unenjoyable to me. Maybe we could set up a new Debate forum for folks who would like to post like that, and change this one into Current Events and just keep it a nice, polite, relaxed place to chat about current events.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:35
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:D&D has a mission statement Is there supposed to be something different from the status quo here? I'm honestly asking, because as far as I can tell this has always been the mission statement of D&D, which has been an utter failure and led us to here. Treating this board as an ideologically neutral space for debate and discussion is insane and its the source of most of the problems here. This is a left-liberal current events board, and that's fine. There are a lot of left-liberals here and they deserve a space to discuss current events within their own ideological framework. CSPAM is the same thing but for a leftist framework. All you have to do to fix this board is enforce a liberal ideology and make USPOL an explicitly pro Democratic party thread. You don't even need hard rules and harsh enforcement to do this. Just have a consistent forum culture and, most importantly, be upfront about its ideology leanings. This gets suggested in every feedback thread and it never gets taken seriously. I think the reason for this is because End of History thinking still prevails (in general, not just talking about this board) so people prefer to believe that they do not subscribe to an ideology but rather arrived at their beliefs through rational analysis. Thus, we have to continue this charade of pretending that this is a debate forum where everyone just happened to rationally come to left-liberal conclusions and that supporting the Democrats is not so much a personal choice as it is simply the smartest possible move.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:36
|
|
|
is pepsi ok posted:Is there supposed to be something different from the status quo here? I'm honestly asking, because as far as I can tell this has always been the mission statement of D&D, which has been an utter failure and led us to here. Has anyone ever been probed for simply being "anti Democratic party" I'm not sure where this urban legend or whatever comes from.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:38
|
|
|
I honestly don't see why D&D has to be explicitly liberal. Every regional thread and a bunch of topical threads do fine accommodating multiple voices (well, left of center-left), are we seriously going to have to redefine the forum because of a US exceptionalism argument? Literally in CanPol the last probe was in May for someone seriously posting about whether residential schools were really all that big a deal, and definitely there was discussions about the value of electoralism, M-L and communist party support, and it could be discussed productively. What CanPol doesn't have is weird aggro posters who insist that anything less than their personal brand of leftism is explicit support of rape, colonialism, and everything bad that has happened with the world ever. (well, we had one but he's long since forum banned) enki42 fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Oct 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:39
|
|
|
How are u posted:That sounds pretty wildly unenjoyable to me. Maybe we could set up a new Debate forum for folks who would like to post like that, and change this one into Current Events and just keep it a nice, polite, relaxed place to chat about current events. I don't think anybody would like it, but there's not enough weird poo poo on the internet anymore. Anyway yeah I think probably people should just be honest that this isn't likely to turn into a place for effort posts in the near future & as time goes on more of that stuff will be in cspam. If you're happy with that then I'm happy with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:40
|
|
|
enki42 posted:I honestly don't see why D&D has to be explicitly liberal. Every regional thread and a bunch of topical threads does fine accommodating multiple voices (well, left of center-left), are we seriously going to have to redefine the forum because of a US exceptionalism argument? Posters around the globe agree: the US is hosed, and fucks everything up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:40
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:You have been probated one time ever in D&D that I can tell, by exmarx, and I just scrolled through your post history here and it's all completely uncontroversial USPol/Trump/Right Wing media white noise and some QUILTBAG posting up until Benghazi 2 got banned, and you haven't participated in D&D basically at all since then. I'm pretty sure it's not what you're getting at here but I've seen stuff that kind of reads the same way to me in a couple other posts from both you and CG so I just want to be clear - when I personally object to the way moderation in this forum works I'm really not talking about probes or bans at all; you can't post for a while, who cares? It's more about the effect it has on discussion when so many potential viewpoints start to read as forbidden from the thread because a mod has declared something extremely vague to be off limits and then enforced it in a haphazard fashion. This comes from my view of a very narrow slice of D&D and I certainly don't mean to undermine arguments that hateful comments about rape aren't punished harshly enough or whatever, I just don't have experience with the places where that's apparently been an issue. I do think forum and thread bans look like a failed policy but if your hands are tied there, they're tied.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:40
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:I don't think anybody would like it, but there's not enough weird poo poo on the internet anymore. Anyway yeah I think probably people should just be honest that this isn't likely to turn into a place for effort posts in the near future & as time goes on more of that stuff will be in cspam. If you're happy with that then I'm happy with it. I will be 100% genuinely and sincerely happy if all the folks who come in and say stuff like "cspam is great, it's the best place for posting, its way better than dnd, i love posting there" just....keep posting there. You have a great place to post and you love it, great! Let different spaces be different spaces.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:42
|
|
|
The idea that certain viewpoints are somehow banned or automatically probated is so stupid and false. People can argue their views without issue, the problem is being a fuckhead with no self awareness.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:42
|
|
|
is pepsi ok posted:All you have to do to fix this board is enforce a liberal ideology and make USPOL an explicitly pro Democratic party thread. You don't even need hard rules and harsh enforcement to do this. Just have a consistent forum culture and, most importantly, be upfront about its ideology leanings. This is because it's not true, it's an oft-repeated lie. I am a swing state NoJoe who is thoroughly pessimistic about electorialism, the overwhelming majority of US posters in D&D range from "dissatisfied with the Democratic Party" to "hostile towards the Democratic Party". What actually happens is "sometimes people express pleasant surprise or optimism about things Democrats do" or "people admit to voting for Democrats" or "some people still argue that voting is an effective means of producing change" and they are permitted to do so
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:43
|
|
|
well done
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:44
|
|
|
enki42 posted:That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying that runs counter to Jeffrey's post about what D&D is and also what FOS posted. It's not strictly "be more like C-SPAM" but it's "move in a direction that's against what D&D is supposed to be" (that happens to be one of many things that would make D&D more like C-SPAM). I don't agree that "maybe dont require acting like all posts are made in good faith" is against Jeffrey's post, but reducing it to "make it more like cspam" is no more helpful to a serious discussion than an obviously unhelpful reduction to "make it more like pyf".
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:45
|
|
|
enki42 posted:I honestly don't see why D&D has to be explicitly liberal. Every regional thread and a bunch of topical threads does fine accommodating multiple voices (well, left of center-left), are we seriously going to have to redefine the forum because of a US exceptionalism argument? Because ultimately serious debate has to get to the bottom of why people believe what they do. There is a difference in belief between two posters and even if we accept beforehand that their views are both alike in dignity, the difference comes from various assumptions and short cuts in reasoning and being misinformed or just confused or just miscommunication. You can't have a serious debate where these things aren't on the table to be discussed. So you have to be okay with either friction or homogeny. Or you could just not dig too deep into things and keep discussion light. If you refuse to accept any of these options then the thread will whip back and forth between them. There are a lot of people here who, if you made them choose, they'd choose homogeny and I think that's just fine. The moderators insist on not deciding that they're going to have a space with none of the above, despite the fact that they have never been able to accomplish this, ever. The non-uspol threads get by because they are willing to make a loving decision, even if only subconsciously.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:45
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:Because ultimately serious debate has to get to the bottom of why people believe what they do. There is a difference in belief between two posters and even if we accept beforehand that their views are both alike in dignity, the difference comes from various assumptions and short cuts in reasoning and being misinformed or just confused or just miscommunication. You can't have a serious debate where these things aren't on the table to be discussed. So you have to be okay with either friction or homogeny. Or you could just not dig too deep into things and keep discussion light. If you refuse to accept any of these options then the thread will whip back and forth between them. There are a lot of people here who, if you made them choose, they'd choose homogeny and I think that's just fine. The moderators insist on not deciding that they're going to have a space with none of the above, despite the fact that they have never been able to accomplish this, ever. The non-uspol threads get by because they are willing to make a loving decision, even if only on the surface. The news thread is not the place for you to debate the finer points of each posters belief and they are not required to engage with you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:The news thread is not the place for you to debate the finer points of each posters belief and they are not required to engage with you. I think it's completely reasonable to say that this is not the place for debate, but you can see from jeffrey's conclusions, posted above, that he wants to double down on this being a place for serious effortful politics posting. This is going to happen with, what, zero adversarial engagement between posters? You want a place with less friction. Like I said, that's fine. But that is contrary to what has been posted as the direction of D&D, by the owner of this site, just a page earlier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2021 20:49
|
|