|
I'm still reading everything. Every word in this thread I will read. If you have a specific question for me or what me to comment on something, be sure to let me know.OwlFancier posted:I like D&D and have no complaints about it. Stuff like this I appreciate the hell out of too honestly. If you are reading this and think D&D is fine and fun and working, I need to hear from you too.
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
fool of sound posted:If people have nominations for D&D mods, I'd be interested in hearing them. Paineframe, Helsing, and I were all nominated in a prior state of D&D thread so it's only fair we hear suggestions. Pick
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:07
|
|
|
I think step 1 would be to promote GJB and Herstory, see if you can find 1-2 outsider mods to step in to help, and then get 5-7 more IKs. 6 mods (2 outsiders), and like 9ish IKs would make things much, much better. Use the IK position to trial more mods eventually. Dapper_Swindler is a good poster too, he'd probably be a good mod! Seven Hundred Bee fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:11
|
|
|
Kchama posted:Why don't IKs get reports? GJB and HS are both very good IKs but it feels like they miss a lot of stuff simply because they don't get reports and the mods have to do all of the work anyways, so the IKs aren't really doing as much good as they could be. This is a good point also. If you have to rely on pms to reach out to IKs or rely on the IKs looking into things on their own it seems like a missed opportunity. Responding to reports may be more reactionary but with the density of threads in DND it seems like something that would have very little downside (and make it easier for IKs to learn the ropes in case they get moved up to mod status at some point).
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:16
|
|
|
The opposite should be done with both GJB and Herstory. They are consistently arbitrary and petty in their probations, and have been consistently called out as such even though the team here desperately doesn't want to have any kind of conversation about it. MP in particular has gone on numerous probation tantrums over such callouts. Going further, the practice of mods screeching for any criticism to be taken to QCS is something I feel that needs to be done away with completely and I'd like for Athanatos's input on that. Oh Snapple! fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:18
|
|
|
Kchama posted:Why don't IKs get reports? GJB and HS are both very good IKs but it feels like they miss a lot of stuff simply because they don't get reports and the mods have to do all of the work anyways, so the IKs aren't really doing as much good as they could be. The IK assignment varies wildly between forums. Some places it's random and you just do fun stuff with your buttons for a while. Other forums, like D&D, they are just Jr Mods who read what they can and respond to flare ups. They are not meant to be the end all be all of moderation in a place and should just be a small extension of a mods eyes. I think more Mods is the solution. It's just generally Mods read the entire forums and IKs read a thread. No reason we can have Thread Mods in crazy busy places.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:20
|
|
|
Maybe have at least one mod who is sympathetic to people to the left of Reagan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:21
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:The opposite should be done with both GJB and Herstory. They are consistently arbitrary and petty in their probations, and have been consistently called out as such even though the team here desperately doesn't want to have any kind of conversation about it. MP in particular has gone on numerous probation tantrums over such callouts. Let's not do this here. I'd prefer this to be general ideas, not an attack on posters and mods. If you want to chat about that my PMs are open. quote:Going further, the practice of mods screeching for any criticism to be taken to QCS is something I feel that needs to be done away with completely and I'd like for Athanatos's input on that. There is a big issue with people taking over threads with what they feel are injustices and derailing entire threads with vendettas. Things like that are best handled in their own space.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:24
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:The opposite should be done with both GJB and Herstory. They are consistently arbitrary and petty in their probations, and have been consistently called out as such even though the team here desperately doesn't want to have any kind of conversation about it. The same can be said of another ik who regularly only probes people that go against one thread's group think. Everything is subjective if you feel you are being punished GJB has been good in USPOL and is open to talking and discussing, he has been a great IK since he was put in place. And herstory has shown that she is willing to talk with people, but not put up with the bullshit accusations that result when someone does get probed and a dogpile tries to make a thread into a personal referendum and qcs thread about every single mod and ik action. The fact that there is one thread that routinely tries to make every mod action into a something that needs to be dogpiled on and attacked because a shitposting or actually knowingly false statement is punished is an actual issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:25
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:The opposite should be done with both GJB and Herstory. They are consistently arbitrary and petty in their probations, and have been consistently called out as such even though the team here desperately doesn't want to have any kind of conversation about it. it's extremely funny that you're very mad at two of the people that go the most out of their way to engage with y'all and have conversations and whose politics are roughly 99% identical to yours, except for not being gigantic assholes all the time
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:26
|
|
|
Going to quote this then start running probations:quote:This is NOT a thread for going after other posters. This is NOT the thread to report on other people. If it is your opinion a specific poster is ruining the entirety of D&D, send me a private message and we can discuss that aspect of your issue. A little addition to this, if you have comments on a mod, they should probably be shared in PM. This is not a thread to judge and jury the mod team.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:26
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:Let's not do this here. I'd prefer this to be general ideas, not an attack on posters and mods. If you want to chat about that my PMs are open. I've had what I feel are two extremely unproductive PM conversations with you and I do not believe that will change with a third. I'm also curious as to why this criticism of moderating in particular was somehow judged as over the line in a thread which ostensibly includes the matter as a subject. Athanatos posted:
You are just as aware as I am why people do their level best to avoid QCS.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:30
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:Let's not do this here. I'd prefer this to be general ideas, not an attack on posters and mods. If you want to chat about that my PMs are open. If you don't want negative opinions or rebuttals of potential mod nominations in this thread, then you should clamp down on mod nominations as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:35
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:I want to second the extreme toxicity of the General Election thread and its moderation. I have been probated there half a dozen times...and nowhere else. Want to third this, because honestly my only real issue with D&D most weeks is whatever is going on in the GE thread that leads to these extremely personal vendetta flame wars that bleed over into the USPOL thread sometimes and have people flipping out and misrepresenting positions almost as a rule instead of talking about politics and things that are actually happening or actually being said in the thread. Like there's a very noticeable difference between the tone of the GE thread versus just about all the other ones. There's definitely some arguments and disagreements that crop up by nature of it being a debate sub-forum, but it's not just this constant default of posters taking everything extremely personally and seemingly treating the insult and the slam on other posters as the end goal of posting, which they bring with them to every thread regardless of the rules or general topic of the thread. I don't know longer probations for people that continue to make their weird personal beefs and insults the centerpiece of their posting habits would probably be a huge start towards improving the general tone of the forum. It's kind of impossible to have meaningful conversations when the mere act of a specific poster posting or mentioning one of the forbidden names with a certain group is an automatic straight show into a massive derail and flame war and Godwin's law being invoked multiple times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:40
|
|
|
Gros Tarla posted:I think the war on Agreed. Part of it is that people really come here for two reasons: either to discuss issues and get informed/provide their expertise; or to scream at the void over how awful people on the other side of the issue are. The latter then gets to be a serious problem as it contributes to an overall angry and toxic atmosphere, and then as people get riled up it moves from “people outside of this forum who have the opposite view from mine” to “people inside of this forum who differ slightly on tactics or policies” and we get wonderful screaming matches about who the real succlibs are, and whether being executed is too good for them. Some of that can be handled by being clear about intentions on threads and the purpose of the thread. We have a lot of venting/being angry about the right-wing threads that work fine because they’re clear about the target and that we’re all there to scream. It’s when the thread gets murky in target or purpose that it gets bad. The Political Cartoons thread is a great example - it’s generally fine when everyone is screaming about the low quality of bad cartoonists for their viewpoint or lack of skill, but when a nominally left cartoonist decides to make a hot take on Dems Are Actually The Real Problem then the thread gets unreadable for a day. Likewise, from the opposite perspective that works well - the Politiwonks thread is generally very good because it’s not there for venting about Trump’s positions, so it tends to be calmer. I want to be clear here that I don’t think that people getting on line to scream and vent their anger and anxieties is inherently bad. It can be a great release, and it can help a bunch to scream about your worries and have someone respond with agreement and encouragement. I used to mod a sub-forum that was basically an area for ranting, and it was a fun place where people bonded over mutual antagonisms - but more importantly, it kept the rest of the sub-forums on that site free of that anger. Instead, there are two problems I see here. One is the same as what everyone else said: without more good IKs and mods, you can’t keep the threads on point and eventually the toxicity runs high. But the other is that general purpose threads that don’t declare whether they’re for discuss or screaming get real real lovely because the two different audiences - not libs and lefties, but discussers and screamers - mix and get abrasive. It makes US Pol unreadable when people come in just to scream for a while, and it’s a subcurrent to why no one likes the GE thread - because it claims to be a “discussion” thread but it’s actually run as a “scream at the Biden supporters” thread. skeleton warrior fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:41
|
|
in this forum, while mostly justified especially when it comes to politics, is also being waged among posters. I don't see how this can't turn into a poo poo slinging contest when poo poo slinging is sort of the point or motivation behind a lot of poster's actions. It's sort of compounded when people are being accused of being racists or nazis way too loving fast, then the poo poo slinging becomes justified in their mind.
|
Son of Thunderbeast posted:If you don't want negative opinions or rebuttals of potential mod nominations in this thread, then you should clamp down on mod nominations as well. You are right. I do not want this thread to be about specific Mods and users. I am not interested in hearing about that in this thread. I've said as such in the OP. If you think someone stands out, PM me. PMing me does not guarantee they are made someone mod, it just puts them on my radar.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
I know you said no quoting but I would like to echo what I said in the other thread sort of in response to the general theme of sweeping changes being suggested. As I said I don't dislike DnD, maybe because I don't read USPOL related stuff as a matter of course, but I would suggest that UKMT and the other few threads I post in like the police abolition thread and the libertarian thread, they seem to more or less work fine? And to the degree that they don't I don't think mod intervention would really help. I am quite strongly opposed to any attempt to either bring in or promote mods and have them inflict some personal idea of moderation on the forum or generally the idea that the point of moderation is to enforce the moderator's preferred posting style or environment. I think that whole attitude is invariably destined to make a bunch of people unhappy and unnecessarily disrupt the userbase of a forum. I have never known a forum to be improved by a new mod showing up and deciding they need to "shake up" the place. I also think that if a thread's posters are unhappy with the thread then the only real way to deal with that is to talk to them, which I think you can and should do in the thread and try to see what solution works best. Perhaps that means splitting the thread up into multiple threads or perhaps it means removing problem posters from that thread, but I think you will get better results if you allow the thread regulars to take the lead on what they want doing and tailor the solution to the thread. As the forum only has a finite number of recurring threads, for the most part, and I assume only a smaller subset of them are "problem" threads, I don't think this should be an unworkable process? I just don't at all see how bringing in or appointing moderators based on their lack of interest in the forum would be helpful because I think that problems are better resolved among people who actually give a poo poo about the subject matter. I also think that trying to enforce Correct Posting from the top isn't going to either work, or make anyone happy unless they agree with the mod's views already. I strongly believe that moderation is best when it facilitates and executes consensus among posters rather than being some sort of leader or decision maker for the forum. And I think that the fact that most of the threads I read have minimal moderation in them is part of why they are pleasant to read, they are largely self regulating because while people might have an argument it doesn't need to end with moderator involvement. I really find that most arguments are self resolving after a while or everyone else gets tired and the thread moves on. Basically I don't think forums are a problem for moderators to solve, but rather that moderators are holders of the executive functions of the forum and that the exercise of those functions should always be at the direction of the community, ideally specifically the people who would be affected, so on a thread by thread basis where possible. Absenting obvious things like forum wide rules against racism etc. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 23:47 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:42
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:because it’s supposed to be a “discussion” thread but it’s actually run as a “scream at the Biden supporters” thread. It's run as a quarantine zone for negativity toward Biden. To take this away from your specific comment, because I don't really mean it to be, that thread never should have existed and people should have just had to loving deal with having to discuss him in other threads, but at this point it has a natural end date of a few weeks from now so what is there even to really do. To that end I'd like to propose that such a "quarantine" thread never, ever loving happen again. Particularly, the siloing off all discussion of a major party candidate. I repeat myself but this never should have happened. Oh Snapple! fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:47
|
|
|
Kale posted:Want to third this, because honestly my only real issue with D&D most weeks is whatever is going on in the GE thread that leads to these extremely personal vendetta flame wars that bleed over into the USPOL thread sometimes and have people flipping out and misrepresenting positions almost as a rule instead of talking about politics and things that are actually happening or actually being said in the thread. Like there's a very noticeable difference between the tone of the GE thread versus just about all the other ones. There's definitely some arguments and disagreements that crop up by nature of it being a debate sub-forum, but it's not just this constant default of posters taking everything extremely personally and seemingly treating the insult and the slam on other posters as the end goal of posting, which they bring with them to every thread regardless of the rules or general topic of the thread. Are arguments that bleed over into other spaces a common thing? Is it people going after people on a NEW TOPIC in a new thread, or is it trying to have the same argument...just in a different thread?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:48
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:I'm still reading everything. Every word in this thread I will read. If you have a specific question for me or what me to comment on something, be sure to let me know. I think D&D is imperfect but mostly good? Even if I don't always like the way a discussion is going I can usually always learn something from it, even if that thing is just how to better phrase and argument or engage people in a way that is constructive and productive - which is good for me because I can tend towards being abrasive in my own posting. There are a lot of smart people that post here and a pretty good cross section of perspectives and experiences. IMO part of the problem is that people (myself included) can feel entitled to being part of each and every discussion just because we feel like that's part and parcel of being a "serious" politics person as well as the fact that the current media landscape encourages  as the default bare minimum of engagement. That's not something that I think more mods or IKs can completely rectify - it requires a lot more...community building, for lack of a better term and proactive thought about the intent and impact of what we expect from the discourse in any given thread. If D&D is meant to be a space for political education as well as discussion then we need to figure out what that looks like. I've floated the idea of a book of the month thread, and there are now threads for Abolition, Mutual Aid, etc and other subjects that are intended to be spaces for people to learn and grow (even if they get sidetracked sometimes), so maybe that's an idea to pursue as far as structure and intent. I do agree that more clarity around why certain probes get levied would be helpful, but the few times I've been probed I've had no problem figuring out what I did wrong and the one time I did the IK was pretty gracious in answering my questions. Overall though I'm happy with D&D as it is and can't really think of any glaring omissions is how it operates that C-SPAM or other space can't make up for.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:51
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I also think that if a thread's posters are unhappy with the thread then the only real way to deal with that is to talk to them, which I think you can and should do in the thread and try to see what solution works best. Perhaps that means splitting the thread up into multiple threads or perhaps it means removing problem posters from that thread, but I think you will get better results if you allow the thread regulars to take the lead on what they want doing and tailor the solution to the thread. As the forum only has a finite number of recurring threads, for the most part, and I assume only a smaller subset of them are "problem" threads, I don't think this should be an unworkable process? When I add someone as a new IK or Mod, one of the first things I tell them is the best weapon you have is your voice. The ability to go in and calm things down with a post I think very highly of. It's also why I think thread IKs are important. People who read the thread and are part of it. They know what the thread needs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:51
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:Are arguments that bleed over into other spaces a common thing? It happens when the posters in the quarantine thread run out of people to argue against and decide to take their show on the road, if we’re being honest. Or when there’s an “event” thread for live posting (the debate). It’s typically people trying to cause derails on unrelated topics by taking things out of context or trying to get into a meta conversation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
I think that discussion of the opposition candidate/party and the ruling candidate/party should be allowed in the thread about that country's politics. It just seems absurd to ban discussion or criticism of such a major part of politics even if a majority of the thread regulars disagree with the critique. edit: And the critiquing of both should be allowed, one shouldn't be punished for critiquing a political party on an issue that another political party is worse at or for which you personally don't know the solution to the problems raised in the critique. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Oct 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
I pretty much just lurk the USPol thread with just one or two posts, like, a month (if that) in there. Slowing down the posting rate did generally improve the quality of the posting. However, I also noticed around the same time that people started getting probated for God-knows-what-reason. I'd even look at the rap sheet and not really have any idea what lead to something. A few times, other posters would ask what was up and it never was answered. I feel like over the past few years that general anxiety has risen and lead to people lashing out even if a post had a different context. It was also a bigger deal overnight in the USPol thread so I'd usually just skip posts that were happening in the wee hours. I totally understand why everybody is upset and I don't really have anything to recommend because of it. This is just my ... input, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
Mat Cauthon posted:If D&D is meant to be a space for political education as well as discussion then we need to figure out what that looks like. I've floated the idea of a book of the month thread, and there are now threads for Abolition, Mutual Aid, etc and other subjects that are intended to be spaces for people to learn and grow (even if they get sidetracked sometimes), so maybe that's an idea to pursue as far as structure and intent. I think this goes along with building a community mentioned earlier. Was there something that held you back from making a Book of the Month thread? To everyone else, do you feel like you can make a thread in D&D and have it work? Mat Cauthon posted:I do agree that more clarity around why certain probes get levied would be helpful, but the few times I've been probed I've had no problem figuring out what I did wrong and the one time I did the IK was pretty gracious in answering my questions. This is another thing I've pushed for. I think for the most part all the mods are open to having a discussion on why you were probed. If not, I KNOW the admin team is. If anyone eats a probation and needs clarity, feel free to send me a message and I will chat it over with you. In the end, the answer may still be "no," but I'll be open and honest with you on stuff and I know the whole Admin team feels the same way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2020 23:57
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I think that discussion of the opposition candidate/party and the ruling candidate/party should be allowed in the thread about that country's politics. Said discussion and criticism was banned from USPOL not because it was something the majority of regulars disagreed with, but because it wasn't posted with the aim of having a debate about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:00
|
|
|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:I feel like over the past few years that general anxiety has risen and lead to people lashing out even if a post had a different context. It was also a bigger deal overnight in the USPol thread so I'd usually just skip posts that were happening in the wee hours. I totally understand why everybody is upset and I don't really have anything to recommend because of it. This is just my ... input, I guess. i agree with you on this. the major reason d&d sucks to read is that many people treat it as a venting space where they can yell and bang the walls about how terrible politics are. this is not always really great to read, like when someone posts a tweet featuring something bad and then there's a few dozen predictable responses that follow expressing some high level of frustration. i don't think it's possible to change this level of posting really since it's a valid use of a social space, but a lot of d&d threads then just become an aggregation of tweets and other embeds you can pick up as you scroll through the void hollering and circular discussion at speed the smaller single topic threads are often pretty good, and it would be nice if people posted in them more, but where the bulk of the activity is - and what it appears most people want to participate in - are the general purpose current event megathreads, which rapidly go to hell when there's no current events happening in the last few hours and posters start to turn on each other Mr. Fall Down Terror fucked around with this message at 00:03 on Oct 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:01
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:Are arguments that bleed over into other spaces a common thing? Typically it's a specific few toxic people, not a group or anything just a few specific people that decide that the need to go into uspol or the polliwonks thread and start threadshitting in order to derail and disrupt what is being said. There's no reason for it, it's literally because they want to mess up a thread and make it into massive derail because they cannot post in good faith. Those specific posters aren't doing it for ideologic reasons they literally come in and post things that aren't relevant to the current discussion or actively false information in order to just be assholes. In polliwonks it's typically one person that consistently comes in to be a massive rear end constantly and derail a thread dedicated to polling and the current things going on for the election. Typically it's to just come in with a hot take of nothing matters because liberals will gently caress everything up so vote ______ because then we can really win gently caress libs
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
My main concern lately has been with readability, something the slow mode has been helping with, but needs to be on a per-thread basis and should be increased to 20 minutes or even 30 minutes. I do not think it is possible to separate a serious post from a post meant to own their posting enemies. None of the mods or IKs are any good at discerning that imo and I don't think anyone ever will. We might as well live with it and rely on the slow posting to act as a risk/reward to reduce sniping. Long term, I really want something like the old D&D rules to come back. Probate all low effort posts, good punctuation, citing sources when necessary or upon request, that sort of thing. I miss those long effort posts replying to other long effort posts. Yes, it means having to argue with someone who's good at arguing for a position you don't like, but I often found it more insightful. I think something like this would end up being a natural result of slow posting anyway, but I wanted to make it clear what I want to see out of D&D.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:05
|
|
|
One thing I've observed in the past here that could definitely use clamping down on is how quick some posters are to argue past someone or argue with strawmen rather than the points being discussed. eg, "oh you like Biden, you must support kids in cages and rape apologia" and "oh ho ho, you're not voting for Biden so therefore you must be actually be a Proud Boy infiltrating our ranks." In my opinion, the only thing that will actually make a difference for this poo poo will be to have more moderating eyes on posts to help drive people back to the actual discussion and encourage engagement with the points made in the actual posts vs imagined beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:06
|
|
|
Mostly I think the biggest problem I see on the regular is that people are used to arguing and don't handle subtle disagreements well. Because of this you often see folks arguing past each other. I don't know how you really deal with this, it's more of a personality quirk among extremely online political nerds than a forums problem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:06
|
|
|
Long before I was a mod I wanted D&D to encourage people to make more threads about smaller, more specific topics. Threads don't need to sustain a conversation indefinitely to be valuable, and specific threads almost always have much higher quality conversation than the D&D megathreads. If people have ideas for how to encourage focused discussion threads, I'm all ears.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:07
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:You are right. I do not want this thread to be about specific Mods and users. I am not interested in hearing about that in this thread. I've said as such in the OP. I'm being genuine when I ask this: Why have a feedback thread when you're going to funnel Certain Kinds Of Feedback into the black abyss of PMs? I do have feedback to give; however, you've already directed that the discussion is only acceptable under specific circumstances. Keep in mind, I do agree with your assessment that this shouldn't be a call out thread and to avoid having people get railroaded, the caveat being is that maybe the D&D moderators should be a permissible topic on the discussion of D&D? Maybe?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:09
|
|
|
This is more of a Twitter issue than directly on D&D, but it does happen here: The number of NoJoe types who unironically embody the dril tweet about "no difference between good things and bad things" w/r/t those who choose to vote, even for something that they publicly admit that they know is an imperfect alternative, and that the idea that they do vote for the imperfect thing means that they think it's great in every way is kind of shocking. I got into it with someone this evening on Twitter who literally said that because I called them out on the fact that I believe that voting for an imperfect option is better than literally the apocalyptic one, they called me a fool and said I'd be complicit in the deaths of millions anyway (vis a vis climate change) and that I'm a loving moron for having optimism for any reason, and they tried to say that I was arguing they love Trump which I literally never was, that sort of hing. Again, this was on Twitter, it's nowhere near as frequent here, but it DOES happen, and I'm pretty sure I typically see good moderation on that front, but it does still happen, and that sort of tribalism aggro stuff really really turns me off and dissuades me from even reading D&D, let alone actually posing here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:16
|
|
|
I basically never post but I enjoy reading the discussions and news in the USPol thread. I usually find it fun and informative.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:19
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:My main concern lately has been with readability, something the slow mode has been helping with, but needs to be on a per-thread basis and should be increased to 20 minutes or even 30 minutes. I was formulating a post among much those same lines. I used to really enjoy D&D for the intellectual challenge of keeping up with it. My own skills at argumentation were enormously improved by trying to contribute to the the serious debates going on here. People who wanted to make flippant or ideological posts were encouraged to  . It's almost quaint that "cheerleading" (making low-effort posts with no original content) in D&D was probatable. It seems like that's all it is now. Current D&D is functionally equivalent to the old GBS.Old GBS was cool and fun to post in, but I sure miss the old D&D.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:20
|
|
|
I've said this elsewhere but I'd like to post it here as well. I highly dislike the posting of tweets as a standalone post in threads like USPol. Posting a tweet as a source for a claim you're making, or as a jumping off point for something you want to say is fine. Posting a tweet or several tweets as the sole content of a post is worthless and annoying. If you think a tweet is worth talking about, you must have something to say about it yourself? If you don't think it's worth talking about, why post it? USPol in particular is supposed to be a discussion thread, correct me if I'm wrong, so if you have a point of discussion that's great. Posting someone else's thought by itself is not really discussion, in my opinion. Posting the equivalent of a headline is definitely not discussion. There was a thread dedicated to just posting "news" (mostly in the form of bare tweets) but it died months ago. I think that's partly because nobody actually wants to just read a twitter feed in a different webpage, and partly because there's only so much discussion to be had from posting a bare tweet. I'm sure part of it came from the merging of the Trump thread where it was mostly posting Trump tweets. Maybe if Trump gets voted out, the thread will go back to actually discussing US Politics and these kinds of things will dry up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:22
|
|
|
Honestly the only thing I really think needs to be done to fix D&D is harsher crackdowns on people who are fairly obviously just trying to start poo poo. Someone who busts into every conversation with the same inflammatory remarks or someone who unironically accuses someone of being a Nazi because they have issues with the Democratic Party or whatever. There is a difference between trying to start poo poo and calling out things someone says, but there's a real problem with people taking something someone said and taking it off to another zone so they can properly be angry at them. D&D is already high temper enough without people whose obvious goal is to piss people off or start trouble.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:This is more of a Twitter issue than directly on D&D, but it does happen here: That happens a lot here too. Fortunately it's contained to the GE thread for the most part, but that containment itself has proven imperfect, not to mention problematic, as it has given such behaviors and mindsets a place to thrive and become normalized (since anyone who challenges them is piled on and they either give up or are probated) and leak out to the other threads. As you probably noticed, the goal of such people is not to debate and discuss, but to own the other side. That's why their tone is always hostile and the claims they make engineered to be inflammatory. Slow News Day fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Oct 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
I enjoy DnD as a source of informed opinion and expertise. At its best, it's a place that encourages and rewards effort and sources more than the rest of the forums. DnD is, and to a much greater degree, was, a place where people who had personal, actual knowledge of specialized subjects could weigh in. We used to have a lot more lawyers, clinicians, scientists and political campaigners around here. A lot of those people have been run out of the subforum because they were, bluntly, insufficiently leftist (for an incredibly insular, ignorant definition of leftism). People who come to DnD threads to share their expertise are immediately exhausted or attacked. It's going to be very, very hard to get these people back. The subforum is now viewed as a joke or a containment zone by other parts of the forum, in much the same way that the GE thread tries to function as a containment zone in DnD. In both cases, containment doesn't work- it leads to the normalization of a group that defines themselves in opposition to the rest of the space, and seek to attack outsiders. This doesn't mean that there can't be different parts of the forum with different standards, but it does mean that if there's a set of posters or behaviors for whom "containment" is appealing, the answer isn't containment. It's correction, or removal. Beyond the general shittery there's a slate of users with horrible reputations across the entire forums, who are given way more slack in DnD than anywhere else. There's no benefit in keeping them around. Right now, rules (like the ramp, like supporting claims, like effort requiring matching effort) go unenforced, and this has consequences. Users draw on deeply held moral absolutes ("participating in elections is a waste"). False beliefs that defend those absolutes are normalized until they go unchallenged ("if they gain power, the Democrats will do nothing different"). Discussion of facts or information that even might fail to support those absolutes or false beliefs is an invitation for attack and diversion, and sometimes, probation. Moderation based on those false beliefs is weaponized ("here you come again, didn't you learn last time, gtfo"). The acceptable worldview becomes narrower. It's difficult to anyone who has been participating in this discourse to recognize how far outside the bounds of normal conduct it is elsewhere. Effort becomes more of a "waste". There's a lot of passing expressions of depression back and forth like an unsavory potluck dinner. In this environment, it's very easy to derail a conversation by saying, e.g., "all US politicians should be arrested for war crimes", or "both political parties are just the same". This immediately makes the other thread participants either a) drop everything and respond, or b) just sort of accept and reinforce this nonsense. If three people do it in tandem, they can destroy any thread they want- and a particularly depressed audience is more likely to start absorbing and imitating that pattern of behavior. The quasi-leftism I referenced above is really an articulation of this dynamic happening dozens of times, in almost every thread. People have "learned" the worthlessness of discussion outside of these diversions. Moderation can play a role in disrupting this feedback loop. Enforcement of the rules as written, with explicit citation to the rules, will go further than any specific rule changes. Conversely, changing the rules will do nothing if the rules aren't enforced. For this to work, it's clear more mods, and specifically mods that are comfortable with and enthusiastic about neutral moderation, are necessary. Moderators are going to have to be selected at least in part from people who are not presently active in DnD. They will also need to be able to commit to not weighing in with their personal positions on subjects of intense disagreement. Even setting actual bias aside, it's too easy for bad actors to use moderator posts and opinions as fuel to drive attacks on the people enforcing the rules. The new IKs can probably speak to this. Continuous, clear enforcement of existing rules can turn this around. It's going to take a while to recover what DnD is capable of. But I know we can Build Back Better. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Oct 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2020 00:25
|
|
