|
A poo poo show of an election is coming are you planning on more mods for it?
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 12:18 |
|
|
on the other hand, the rule number probes are the funniest thing about d&d right now and i await the day they are quietly edited so that future people think ive been probed for threatening to hunt and eat someone
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:30
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I think that's totally fair, for the record, and I promise I won't complain if I'm probated You really need to provide some evidence or stop trying to spread this blatant lie. And I'm really not sure what point you think you were making by posting me saying the same thing in two different forums other than your desperate attempt to stir up some cross-forum drama.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
Twincityhacker posted:2. For the love of everything good and holy, ban the topic of generic electorism. If you want to bring it up in the specific context of, say, voting stratigically or not in the House Speaker debate seems reasonable but the endless *days* of rehashing "voting doesn't matter" loving sucks and is boring as hell. Corollary - minute by minute emoting at congressional votes, hearings etc. should be punishable as low content and uninteresting. You see a bunch of new posts on the bookmarks page then you have to wade through pages of worthless posts that say nothing before you can get to the good poo poo. Wait till it's over, think about it a little, and post your analysis. World Famous W posted:on the other hand, the rule number probes are the funniest thing about d&d right now and i await the day they are quietly edited so that future people think ive been probed for threatening to hunt and eat someone Someone else brought up that the numbers change -- it might be possible to just hash rule versions and post the first 7 characters of the hash of the rulers thread at that moment in time along with the rule number. This way you can know it changed; actually preserving the content of each rule thread update is left as an exercise for the reader. mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 17:38 on Nov 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:34
|
|
|
gurragadon posted:You should leave this feedback thread open permanently and maybe close it every once in a while if it goes off topic. Private messaging a moderator is not a substitute. Many people want to give their feedback in a public forum so others can add on to their feedback and so they know that their feedback is at least being seen by someone. Leaving the thread open through the week is an improvement because many people don't even use the forums on the weekend though. Private messaging is also a premium feature and feedback should not be reserved for only premium users. This is a good idea, with the caveat that everyone that posts in it, if they're complaining about a kind of posting, has to post at least three examples of the kinds of posts they're complaining about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:37
|
|
|
I don't know how to articulate this and I admit its a vibes/tummy feel thing but it does feel there like there are posters who just want to post how right they are when it comes to their takes. We went through it in USCE where we had to do another iteration of the Democrats don't to anything/Dems are just harm reduction/ect. Then when people say well, I don't believe that here is are the differences, it doesn't really matter because my take is more important than the information. With 2024 coming up, I am not sure if we want to constantly have that fight over and over again. This isn't a DEMS GOOD/DEMS BAD thing, if the Democratic Party does something bad say it post in in the thread. Suprisingly, I found the I/P stuff in regards to Biden well thought out and talked through, even if the posters didn't agree with each other. My only concern is that we are going to get into personal attacks from 2020, where it became about the righteousness of the poster to prove that if you vote for (Dem/Socialist/Vermin Supreme) you must not care about suffering of others. Again, the standard on the forums is suppose to be: 1) Is this interesting/funny/add to the conversation. 2) Is it new. My only concrete solution to offer is to start off probes at 12 hours instead of 6?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:39
|
|
|
I don't actually mind the fastposting as long as it's around an event that's temporally interesting, like say Kevin McCarthy being pantsed on live TV and then later on the sisyphean struggle to find people who liked Jim Jordan. By and large I have no major issue with the way D&D is moderated, but I will admit that I tend to avoid USPol and so am unlikely to see the electoralism debate that has heated a few tempers in this thread. Is the state of reports really as bad as some have suggested, as in the mod team being unable to handle the sheer volume? If so then hiring more Oh I guess I wish fuctifino's probation had been shorter if you want some negative feedback, but I guess he knew the risk of posting what he did so he was willing to bite that bullet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
just to be clear, uspol is in cccc and usce is here. yall banished us, stop trying to take the name back!
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:44
|
|
|
Stringent posted:Well, that seems like an action item that could be acted upon? Which part? More mods I definitely agree is something that could be acted on, ditto for better TZ coverage, though it's ultimately a Koos decision so as I mentioned I'll defer to them. But if the hope is that we can have enough coverage to be calling balls and strikes in the moment, I don't think there's a reasonable number of mods that can make that a reality. It's also just not a reliable way to understand what is and isn't acceptable, because if you're catching up on a thread later there are all sorts of reasons why a specific rulebreaking post might not have a "User was put on probation for this post" tag. Twincityhacker posted:1. Please don't use the numbers of the rule broken in the rap sheet. I know it takes longer to type out "posting about posters" than Rule $ but it makes the rap sheet clearer to understand. I did enjoy this even before being a mod because I found it hilarious to have posts get hit with comically staid probe reasons like "You have violated article 7 section b subsection 2." Koos did make this request of the D&D mods last night though, so that should be stopping. Baronash fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Nov 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:just to be clear, uspol is in cccc and usce is here. yall banished us, stop trying to take the name back! This might explain why I stopped following it. I have no object permanence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:It genuinely seems to me as though you set out to make that point, yes. My intuition was not informed by other posters' reactions (you will notice that, in fact, I probed other posters for accusing you of trolling), but rather what I felt was the most reasonable interpretation given all of the context I had. You have stated in the past that you hold strategic voting in contempt, and during the course of a discussion about the utility of voting you came in and reversed that position, using common arguments of your opponents (with on-the-nose wording), in a way that demonstrates their hypocrisy, and does not really make much sense if taken at face value. Koos you have repeatedly demonstrated an inability to tell the difference between "bad faith" posting and sincerely held heterodox beliefs. Here you have confused someone actually willing to stick around and defend their positions as a "pattern of dishonest trolling". I'm not sure what you can do about that, since bad faith posting is a problem, as demonstrated by how long people have been allowed to get away with just asking questions in the Palestine thread. But your bad shoots are a problem and something has gotta be figured out to make them happen less often I will say in this specific case that banning someone from the whole forum because you didn't like their genuine feedback in the thread for people to post their feedback, is bad. You should rescind the probation and certainly the forum ban immediately.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:57
|
|
|
Baronash posted:But if the hope is that we can have enough coverage to be calling balls and strikes in the moment, I don't think there's a reasonable number of mods that can make that a reality. It's also just not a reliable way to understand what is and isn't acceptable, because if you're catching up on a thread later there are all sorts of reasons why a specific rulebreaking post might not have a "User was put on probation for this post" tag. That is the hope, because if you're catching up on a thread later there's all kinds of rules that have kind of materialized in the last 5-10 pages that you might have missed. I understand it's a burden, but to that end, what's a reasonable number of mods?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 17:58
|
|
|
Only read the first few pages because this thread is moving fast, but I'm just here to agree with the people who believe the rules enforcement here is far too arbitrary. I mostly lurk and have been strongly discouraged from posting because there seem to be a set of mod favorites who regularly derail threads with bullshit, and then the people who respond to them eat a bunch of probes. Call it trolling or bad faith or simple stupidity, whatever you want, but it makes participating in the forum entirely not worth it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 18:00
|
|
|
Papercut posted:Only read the first few pages because this thread is moving fast, but I'm just here to agree with the people who believe the rules enforcement here is far too arbitrary. I mostly lurk and have been strongly discouraged from posting because there seem to be a set of mod favorites who regularly derail threads with bullshit, and then the people who respond to them eat a bunch of probes. Call it trolling or bad faith or simple stupidity, whatever you want, but it makes participating in the forum entirely not worth it. Well going back on my earlier point, now I think about it in the UKMT we do have people who post once and give the impression they're scared of doing so. Some of that is just the fear of stepping into a thread where everyone knows each other to some extent. But if people also fear a probation that's another matter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 18:06
|
|
|
Stringent posted:That is the hope, because if you're catching up on a thread later there's all kinds of rules that have kind of materialized in the last 5-10 pages that you might have missed. I understand it's a burden, but to that end, what's a reasonable number of mods? I don't really agree about the frequency, but poorly communicated thread rules (or forum-wide rules that are highlighted in specific threads) that boil down to "didn't you see my proclamation on page 352 that we will be judging the use of argument Y harshly? It's all clearly explained in this other thread's OP." are annoying and we need to get better about making sure people have a reasonable chance to see those. My thought (haven't run it by anyone else yet) on this is that thread rules (including things like unreliable sources, well-trodden arguments, etc.) should be kept in the OP and updated, and the thread title would get edited with [OP Updated Nov 7]. If you're participating in the thread and the title gets updated, mods could consider that sufficient opportunity for posters to make themselves aware of current rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 18:17
|
|
|
D&D is accomplishing the opposite of what it's intending to in my case, after seeing how, if you Mad Libs'd (pun unintended) the Russian/Israeli special military operations, you'll get the exact opposite responses from a particular set. The most galling one is "stop using the politically loaded term genocide to browbeat and shame people" vs "voting for Biden is condoning genocide," which shows a complete lack of ideological or moral coherence, unless the ideology is supposed to solely consist of a "NO, gently caress YOU It makes me think that, while left-wing positions are usually more ethical than right-wing positions, left-wing people are not, and politically engaging with others is pointless because "both sides are the same," full of bitter nihilists consumed by grievance politics who get off on manipulating and provoking strangers on the internet because they feel otherwise incapable of influencing society. There is a middle ground between naively believing in the invisible hand of the marketplace of ideas, and intentionally trying to corrupt, degrade, and dismantle it. The moderation, by clinging to some techbro belief in the former, has encouraged the latter. For some constructive advice, I think the thresholds should be lower to thread-ban people. What are the chances that someone who gets probed for a blatantly bad-faith SYQ-mining post is suddenly going to start constructively participating in the discussion after their 12-24 hour probe is done? Edit: I'll be more constructive and provide an example, from the Ukraine thread, with actual just asking questions at the end: The Top G posted:Hmmm, this doesn’t sound very democratic … 20 posts later, all centered around the OP: The Top G posted:I didn’t make any of these claims, please refrain from appealing to the strawman fallacy. This poster should be thread-banned in addition to the probe they received. Quixzlizx fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Nov 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 18:20
|
|
|
the_steve posted:You really need to provide some evidence or stop trying to spread this blatant lie. Ah, so I am required to provide evidence for my claims, but you're allowed to claim anything you want without any evidence whatsoever? the_steve posted:And I'm really not sure what point you think you were making by posting me saying the same thing in two different forums other than your desperate attempt to stir up some cross-forum drama. I don't care what subforum the quoted post is from, and I didn't check until after I posted it here. I literally clicked on your post history, and one of the top five posts at the time mentioned D&D, so out of curiosity I clicked through and read it, and lo-and-behold it was some dumb poo poo about how the denizens of this subforum "bray about" those who disagree with them and want them probated and banned. So it seemed topical enough to quote it in this thread. My question, again: if you despise this subforum so much, why continue to post here? Not just post, but also actively participate in these feedback threads where your feedback virtually always is some variation of complaining about how everyone is so fragile that they cannot stand reading differing viewpoints and how the mods are biased? Note that I'm not telling you to leave or anything, merely wondering what your motives are, considering, again, that you used to be the epitome of the exact type of moderation that you are now complaining about. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
As long as this forum is a content farm for the other one, D&D will remain dysfunctional. All of the problems in this forum stem from that conflict, no amount of ridiculously obtuse legalistic rule policies will solve what is the obvious issue: everyone is trying to get the guys from the forum they hate in trouble. That cuts both ways, it's just that it all happens here. Until mods are willing to restrict and enforce rules against cross posting, which they never will be, the major traffic threads in this forum will continue to be useless for discussion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 18:45
|
|
|
the_steve posted:You really need to provide some evidence or stop trying to spread this blatant lie. the_steve posted:The off-site DnD discords have been repeatedly confirmed, usually in relation to someone in CSPAM getting doxxed or otherwise targeted for harassment. I feel this is a two way street on evidence. To bring this more to the D&D feedback level I think more enforcement on baseless claims in general would help, making points without any sort of evidence or backing leads to pointless circular arguments.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 18:54
|
|
|
Ohtori Akio posted:good evening. i hear there is an issue with d&d regulars feeling they lack an outlet to flame c-spam. we now have a dedicated thread for d&d regulars to flame c-spam in, and in which c-spam regulars will not flame you back - under penalty of discipline. i hope this addresses the concerns. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4046728 as a fellow d&d regular i must say that is one good thread friend. thank you for posting it.  as for feedback i have nothing negative to bring up. im just your typical lurker. RadiRoot fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Nov 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:I feel this is a two way street on evidence. To bring this more to the D&D feedback level I think more enforcement on baseless claims in general would help, making points without any sort of evidence or backing leads to pointless circular arguments. Nix Panicus posted:Its worth noting that the D&D discord did have a goon mock channel that became so toxic it had to be shut down, and also the D&D discord plotted to remove mods they didnt like. Koos Group posted:I must reiterate that I would like feedback to be about current issues and not old drama. Your turn. I'm dropping this conversation since I'm probably already on the verge of catching a probe for keeping it going anyways, and I really shouldn't have anything to prove to a repeat liar to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 19:12
|
|
|
zoux posted:As long as this forum is a content farm for the other one, D&D will remain dysfunctional. All of the problems in this forum stem from that conflict, no amount of ridiculously obtuse legalistic rule policies will solve what is the obvious issue: everyone is trying to get the guys from the forum they hate in trouble. That cuts both ways, it's just that it all happens here. Until mods are willing to restrict and enforce rules against cross posting, which they never will be, the major traffic threads in this forum will continue to be useless for discussion. This take is kind of over the top, but it's kinda scary how deeply rooted this is. I don't hold an identity as a DnD poster, and it seems kinda weird that there even would or should be one. I think part of the problem is that there exists the idea of the "DnD poster" who tacitly likes every post in this forum and thinks it is above mockery, which is false. It really feels like there are posters who are really into the us vs them mentality (see the new thread spun from the discussion) and it's just super dumb to even buy into it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 19:20
|
|
|
Eason the Fifth posted:imo forum wars or spite threads or whatever are the dumbest poo poo that only ever end in Helldump garbage and get a lot of people probed and banned. the catch 22 is that Forum Wars are indeed the dumbest poo poo ever to hear anyone complain about, but they mean that there are a handful of posters invested in said dumbest poo poo to an escaped mental patient level, so they leap in to The Bad Forum They Can't Shut Up About where they actually do do the things that zoux is talking about and just generally act like the conversational equivalent of a skidmark, so I end up complaining about it, which makes me part of the dumbshit problem to begin with on the plus side this ebbs and flows as an issue and only rarely gets up to the high peaks that used to be this forum's day to day and made poo poo possible like "you literally can't discuss venezuela, it's impossible", usually only when specific subjects come up that syq them up and bring in a safari, which was probably what went on with the original electoralism thing and probably occurs every subsequent time
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 19:20
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:This take is kind of over the top, but it's kinda scary how deeply rooted this is. I don't hold an identity as a DnD poster, and it seems kinda weird that there even would or should be one. I think part of the problem is that there exists the idea of the "DnD poster" who tacitly likes every post in this forum and thinks it is above mockery, which is false. It really feels like there are posters who are really into the us vs them mentality (see the new thread spun from the discussion) and it's just super dumb to even buy into it. Yeah D&D is not a subforum that people live their entire life in, we don't have/need threads for games or assorted other poo poo really and I think that is for the best. It's like identifying as a capital G Gamer it just feels very offputting. Especially as many of our threads are islands to themselves like the various region/country threads that don't have much crossover with anything else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
Stringent posted:I have some actual feedback to ask about! Yes, that sounds like a good idea. Will make a post about it in the mod forum if I remember. Anyway, that post was made while I was asleep but I've been probing fewer posts than normal in this thread due to the relaxed rules. Sometimes posting about posters can actually be relevant here because poster credibility is a factor due to these being personal opinions. But I also would like to avoid getting deep into grudges and whatnot. koolkal posted:2. Requiring an assumption of "good faith posting" is dumb, some people are just there to troll and everyone knows it. I don't mean instances where people have dumb opinions they truly believe but instead the ones where they're clearly playing stupid I've considered changing the assumption of good faith rule so that someone is not punished if the post about which they assumed bad faith is punished. So making the accusation is a gamble. However, this still essentially means that people will be reporting in the middle of the thread where everyone else has to read it instead of interesting material, going against the spirit of the forum. Stringent posted:3. Requiring mods to understand what "good faith posting" is versus trolling without posting examples is, "dumb". I do wonder about whether the trolling rule should be changed in its wording. Firstly because posting falsely or pretentiously seems to be a part of the definition most of the time, rather than simply with the intent to upset, and also because of the perennial difficulty in distinguishing between a message meant to be inflammatory vs. one that simply is inflammatory due to their beliefs. I might look at some sociological studies of trolling, as well as do some trolling myself, to help figure out what would be best. Blue Footed Booby posted:Sufficiently advanced lack of self awareness is indistinguishable from bad faith. The difference is whether they're lying to themselves and working from that premise, or just directly lying to others. I feel like sometimes people get overly fixated on whether a post is sincere rather than whether it's poo poo. If it's impossible to tell whether a person is bullshitting, or if they really do radically change their positions day to day with no reflection, or are just literally incapable of communicating through in any form besides hyperbole and sarcasm, the conclusion is still the same: it's a bad post. Hyperbole and sarcasm are both against the rules under imprecision, insinuation and hostility. Though this may be one of those we need to enforce more. Blue Footed Booby posted:The electoralism debate is a great example of this: sincere or not, it's not just the same arguments every time, but pretty much entirely the same people. It's never novel or interesting except to newcomers and actively disrupts other conversations because you have to scroll past so much boring crap that people just check out of the thread for a while. The last iteration in USCE went on for nineteen pages before a mod shut it down. It could have been stopped after two without losing any actual positions. I don't care whether the posters are being sincere. That is, indeed, why good faith is not the only rule, and we have others regarding material that is simply not interesting. Bar Ran Dun posted:A poo poo show of an election is coming are you planning on more mods for it? We would like more mods, but finding those who are willing and able is difficult. I'm strongly considering including mod nominations (public or private messaged) in the next feedback thread. Mooseontheloose posted:My only concrete solution to offer is to start off probes at 12 hours instead of 6? That is an interesting idea. I'll think about it, and ask the mods if I remember to. Gripweed posted:Koos you have repeatedly demonstrated an inability to tell the difference between "bad faith" posting and sincerely held heterodox beliefs. Here you have confused someone actually willing to stick around and defend their positions as a "pattern of dishonest trolling". I'm not sure what you can do about that, since bad faith posting is a problem, as demonstrated by how long people have been allowed to get away with just asking questions in the Palestine thread. But your bad shoots are a problem and something has gotta be figured out to make them happen less often I always attempt to give the benefit of the doubt for sincere but unusual or unpopular beliefs. It's why I included that clause in the rule about trolling. I did not ban out of dislike for his feedback (you may notice there has been feedback that is much more unkind to me than his, and I did not do anything about it because I want all feedback, positive or negative), but because I truly believe he was being insincere then and did it again in this thread while talking about it. I would encourage anyone who is curious or skeptical about this to look at his last two probations and the general conversation that was going on in the thread at the time. Baronash posted:I don't really agree about the frequency, but poorly communicated thread rules (or forum-wide rules that are highlighted in specific threads) that boil down to "didn't you see my proclamation on page 352 that we will be judging the use of argument Y harshly? It's all clearly explained in this other thread's OP." are annoying and we need to get better about making sure people have a reasonable chance to see those. I agree and will try to abide by that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 19:39
|
|
|
Koos iirc you buried a comment about ramping probations in one of your longer posts, something about a ramp cap? I think that's a bad idea, there should be no cap on ramps. Unless you intend to suddenly jump to a forum ban or something. Otherwise you're just giving 3 day probes to the same people over and over with no real resolution.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
I support the forum bans and encourage more use of them for repeat offenders. This particular poster had the habit of making threads unreadable for pages and pages every time they posted. I think anyone who consistently shits up threads and has a pages-long rap sheet for it should be considered for a forum ban. In general it feels like moderation is doing OK, but a bit slow at times. As other posters have mentioned there are common topics (e.g. electoralism) that should be shut down quickly if it’s clear nothing interesting is coming from them. If not, I end up disengaging from the forum for a few days and just skip past like 20 pages hoping the thread has moved on. I’m probably missing some quality posts by doing that but it’s just too much of a slog reading the same posters with the same opinions to be worth reading.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:Koos iirc you buried a comment about ramping probations in one of your longer posts, something about a ramp cap? I think that's a bad idea, there should be no cap on ramps. Unless you intend to suddenly jump to a forum ban or something. Otherwise you're just giving 3 day probes to the same people over and over with no real resolution. 3 day is a soft cap (mods can always go beyond it according to their judgement) and reaching that point does indeed indicate there should be discussion of a forumban. The three day time is based on a best practice mods have found in general, which is that probations around there are effective at discouraging behaviors without being significant events that create drama or imply animosity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 20:16
|
|
|
Give all D&D posters the ability to probe each other for 6 hours. If you really don't like someone you can probe them and they can probe you back! This will improve the discourse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
Eason the Fifth posted:Give all D&D posters the ability to probe each other for 6 hours. If you really don't like someone you can probe them and they can probe you back! This will improve the discourse. Sure, but you can't probe someone if you've been probed, wild west dueling style.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
I think it would hilarious if everyone had the ability to say probe someone for six hours but only once a month so that it used well or some such thing. Or just possibly dumb.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 20:41
|
|
|
Eason the Fifth posted:Give all D&D posters the ability to probe each other for 6 hours. If you really don't like someone you can probe them and they can probe you back! This will improve the discourse. The only solution to a bad poster with a probe is a good poster with a probe 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 21:06
|
|
|
Gucci Loafers posted:I think it would hilarious if everyone had the ability to say probe someone for six hours but only once a month so that it used well or some such thing. What made SA enjoyable (for me, anyway) way back in the day was that it didn't take itself seriously. We're coming up on Lowtax's Suicide Anniversary Party here in a couple days so I don't want to write a wacky hagiography of the guy or anything, but one thing he did understand even 25 years ago was the absurdity and self-seriousness of Posters On The Internet. We've grown up since then but we've also become the people we used to make fun of. Robert's Rules of Order and the arbitrary enforcement of Forum Rule 2.II.A.C.3.b. in the P/I thread or whatever doesn't mean a goddamn thing except to make people angry in what is left of our community. I'm not saying that D&D should be a second C-SPAM or a new LF, but for gently caress's sake, maybe mods and IKs shouldn't alienate people. Enforce a few important rules (no CP, no gore, no galloping racism) but otherwise let people post what they want to be funny and dumb. lovely mods and admins like Ozma IceQueen and McCaine killed SA's readership, and nobody seems to have learned that lesson.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
I just want to chime in to say that, by and large, you guys do a pretty great job of keeping this place from becoming a YT/Yahoo comments section or whatever it is Reddit is doing. I've caught my fair share of probes and some have been bullshit but the mods mostly keep this place in some semblance of order (for no pay) that makes 95% of it readable and mostly worth my time. That can't be easy to pull off, especially on a volunteer basis. I guess if I were to suggest something, it might be to back off a little bit on posts that stray outside the specific thread topic unless they're causing a massive derail and digging too deep. The shape of the 2024 election, Israel v Palestine, Biden's poll numbers, and Trump's legal issues are as much USCE as most things I can think of and often warrant discussion there even though "there's a thread for that". I suppose the solution is to post in a way that ties it directly to USCE but that's a nebulous and vague bar, really, if we're being honest. I got probed for posting LARGE BOLD HEADLINES from US news sources that, yeah, have their own threads but, at the same time, seem relevant to USCE. And vice versa, now that I think about it. Unless USCE is just "current events UNLESS they have a dedicated thread", in which case OK, but sometimes it's hard to compartmentalize this kind of talk. Often, it's really difficult to talk about one topic without interjecting another since everything is connected and affects or informs the other thing. For example: How do we talk about the GOP primaries without mentioning Trump being in court or the state of the US economy without mentioning healthcare costs or inflation even if there might be a better place to talk about those things? How do we speak on a mass shooting without taking it to a gun control thread if we're specifically talking about the different politicians who are or are not addressing it? The entire world seems to be coming off the rails and even a topic as narrow and as dedicated as "climate change" informs discussion on everything; from wars in the middle east to elections and several other thread topics I can see just on page one. All the pieces matter and all that. You're doing a good job though so keep up the good work
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
Eason the Fifth posted:
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:On one hand, you're right that part of the reason this site worked was it mocked the self-seriousness of other parts of the internet, but it's not the only reason. Lowtax also recognized that every other site was filled with stupid low-effort garbage, and went out of his way to insist that you do not post unless what you have to say is funny, informative, or interesting. I don't know about robert's rules of order, but on the one forum set aside to focus on the "informative" part of that, it seems pretty appropriate to have stricter rules to me. I don't like the the attitude of treating forums conflict as super serious and wish everyone would chill the gently caress out but I think it's cool to have a variety of places with a variety of expectations here. I just wanted to say good morning, Jeff. Hope your nap was swell. Have a good day.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 21:24
|
|
|
I think the US politics thread has electoralism derails because people don't get probed for posting about posters as reliably if they call the posters they're posting about "the liberals" (that might also work with "the leftists" but nobody does that)
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 21:24
|
|
|
Eason the Fifth posted:What made SA enjoyable (for me, anyway) way back in the day was that it didn't take itself seriously. That’s never been D&D though. It’s always been serious and aggressive. My first posts almost two decades ago were as a just graduated engineer on the topic of reactor types and nuclear proliferation in Iran. We got into it pretty seriously, quoting nuclear reactor engineering texts and IAEA reports back and forth. Cefte was of course correct and I was incorrect. But the tone here even decades ago was gently caress you, you are wrong, followed by serious in-depth technical dissociation. It’s quite far from that. Rhetorical hostility was replaced by actual hostility especially after the Bernie / Hillary primary. But this very much was always place where folks would angrily argue about everything especially religion, philosophy and politics. Along with relatively strict posting rules that changed focus over time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
in a politics forum people who level cap their Seriousness can end up the most insufferable and discussion-annihilating of all, and it's not the primary issue you have to deal with in that kind of environment anyway. the main thing you gotta balance is if a place like this can stay legitimately informative in some way, especially for individual subject or nation threads and when dealing with current events. the issue of how to balance the seriousness vs. funny/chill/casual lever (looking back at the audience, etc) is way below that in importance and the major reason why you gotta kick people out isn't because they aren't Serious Politics Posters but because they drown threads that you used to be able to go into and get something useful out of it rather than some weird interforum or posting as praxis drama that someone can't let alone
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 12:18 |
|
|
James Garfield posted:I think the US politics thread has electoralism derails because people don't get probed for posting about posters as reliably if they call the posters they're posting about "the liberals" (that might also work with "the leftists" but nobody does that) Electoralism derails mainly happen because a lot of Twitter people whose opinions carry some sort of weight/follower count enjoy votescolding as a tactic or it otherwise comes up in discussion in relation to something else. "Sure, you can vote third party, but that just proves you hate LGBT people and are fine with them being hunted for sport to maintain your moral superiority", which inevitably prompts further discussion and subsequently arguments about the personal character of our various posting enemies on either side of the issue. That said, I do agree it needs it's containment thread brought back and enforced, because it is a well beaten horse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2023 21:47
|
|