|
Pasting from the thread in QCS:quote:
This is a pointless rule because it is constantly broken and practically never enforced. I have strong doubts anyone actually wants to comply by it. It is probably one of the most common types of responses to threads and posts. Posters of all types, from valued members of this subforum who have stickied threads here to phoneposters in the peanut gallery, do this all the time in their own ways and with their own BBcode eccentricities. The "ample reason to do so" clause isn't really useful, either -- I don't think it's possible to explain how frequently this happens unless we have a community of people who have perfect theory of mind on a platform with a lot of different nationalities and backgrounds. It's not something to infer by whatever subforum you use most; people use different subforums for different kinds of things: information seeking, emotional support, intellectual and emotional validation, venting about their lives and what shapes them, and so on. There is a general program for this particular subforum that is supposed to guide the way people use it, but in practice the forum serves these kinds of needs that can be personal, sensitive, and possibly even incomprehensible among different groups of posters. It sounds like a good rule to have and I understand why it's there, but it seems to go against the state of things as they are and as they always have been. I don't think anyone wants it enforced, but do speak up if you do! EDIT: I am amending my post to request that insinuations (or explicit accusations) of pathology, calling people crazy or insane, etc, as numerous posters below have done, be proscribed as they already are. If you need to say posters you don’t like are crazy, you don’t understand what “crazy” means and you’re punching down on people who actually have mental illness by trivializing it as a slur for your posting enemies. Look after your own mental health and leave others be without medicalizing your disagreements. quote:Do not use slurs, even ironically or towards awful people. Those awful people will probably never read your posts, but members of vulnerable groups on the forums will. This covers words like “moron” and “idiot,” too. People here have, supposedly, read some history and should know better. It’s probably more important to get that under control before coming down on people who write “democrat.” mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Oct 23, 2021 |
#
¿
Oct 23, 2021 01:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 20:16 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I really really don't understand some people's burning desire to kill USPol Fair enough, but how does the post your favorite band names thread comport with the stated mission of this subforum? Does that even qualify as discussion? Would it be possible to make up epic band names for democrats without getting a probation? How about if one of the suggested names for the epic Republican band was Let’s Go Brandon? I don’t think you could get away with it. It’s weird that those dunking sessions are never considered derailing. That’s why people have this bizarre idea that it’s a hugbox.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 21:08
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:100%. Why do you think this? You can trivially check to see if what you say is true and you’d find you’re making poo poo up. What reason is there to take you seriously when you do that? Is it contributing to this thread at all?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 21:17
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Are you asserting that you can't say critical things about Democrats in USNews or D&D in general? Or just saying that those people do read D&D, they've just reached a wildly inaccurate conclusion about it somehow? You’re asserting that the people complaining don’t read USNews at all and don’t understand it because of that. It’s not helpful. Why are you repeating your correction and why would someone take your correction seriously when it’s been established you don’t read things? The instinct to correct wrongthink is not helpful to a thread soliciting feedback, IMO, and it’s emblematic of the problems of this subforum.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 21:26
|
|
|
Somewhat unrelated but going off the word cloud — I think sentiment analysis is largely bullshit, but it would be cool to see statistics on post length and word choice split by user agent, if that’s technically possible (probably not without database access; but if things are the same as when radium banned someone because they used WebTV, that data is probably recorded ). I’m not certain but I suspect there would be differences in posting style , frequency, and so on among mobile and desktop posters. (My hunch is that mobile promotes more posts, more aggression, more Twitter and filler content.)
mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 23:08 on Oct 27, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 23:01
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:there's also ardennes who, at current count, hasn't posted in dnd in like 3 months, which is par for the course for him lol A mod should aspire to be quiet, calm, and sincere. That sounds good!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I think we should all get the satisfaction of knowing who is reporting people. Here’s some insight, speaking sincerely: It either makes the forum slightly better or it reinforces the idea that the rules-based forum order is applied selectively. It takes no time to do and it’s advised in the forum rules. Besides that it mollifies butthurt from bullshit probations (which is something that ticks people off however long they are) and acts as a stress relief valve whether anything happens or not. It’s better than responding to the worst posts in anger — this is why it says in the rules to report a post and move on rather than respond with coarse language. Everyone here is deeply weird enough and cares enough to be posting in a thread about forum moderation so it’s surprising that people are surprised. If you don’t like reading reports, why would you agree to be a moderator? Is there anything else to be done?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 03:19
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:Yeah "smooth brain" is an actual medical condition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lissencephaly Thanks for the info about the hug box, I didn’t connect the dots. I’ll avoid using the term.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 03:31
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Here’s a proposed D&D rule: you can’t say lmao or lol unless you are actually, physically laughing. This will be enforced via mandatory computer/phone camera monitoring, which will be done by AI. If you post lmao while the AI determines you are Mad, Actually, it’s an automated ban+30. 100% behind this.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 16:19
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:I wrote this in a mod discussion the other day and while it's a social-media-wide phenomenon, SA definitely isn't escaping its effects. I disagree with your view that this is not a community and if someone spent several hours a day at their favorite restaurant, it would be a much more unusual thing than someone spending many hours every day here. You’re setting up a caricatured idea of the forums being a place to hate women but that’s not what the vast, vast majority of people here use the forum for. I don’t know anywhere else on the World Wide Web where people have been coming daily for 20+ years. Do you think an online community is a possibility at all, for any sort of web forum, discussion platform, or social media? What would you call this group if not a community? I mean I’ve been a regular at a restaurant before but that usually entailed going on 2-3 times a week for an hour or so, and that didn’t last more than a couple of years. I’m more strongly attached to the Something Awful community than most things in my life simply because of having to move around a lot. I know more about the personal lives of people here than I know about most of by good friends IRL. Do you guys get invited to days-long discussions at your fave restaurants about how they should be run? I get that it can be tiring to moderate this community but I don’t understand why you’d agree to do this for a community you don’t believe is real and which you appear at best to be indifferent to, if not resentful toward. It’s ok for people to care about things they spend hours a day on. At the risk of outing myself as a weirdo who cares about things, I feel love for this place and the people here. I wouldn’t come back if I hated it. I’ve found more genuine understanding here than anywhere else in my life. mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Oct 28, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 17:00
|
|
|
Flying-PCP posted:Those people wrote more or less complete thoughts at least, not a thought-fragment like 'bill is dead' I don’t get why thought fragments shouldn’t be allowed because you don’t think they contribute anything. It’s a thread where people post unfunny band names (the bottom of the web forum barrel, together with chats about tipping and list your pet peeves). It’s fine if not every single thing has a message you can discern. mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Oct 28, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 18:24
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Because there are a lot of people who don't post frequently in USNews and don't follow the nitty-gritty of the discussions in it, and instead just skim the thread once or twice a day for important highlights of the day and some associated commentary (hence the thread name, USNews). Thanks, I disagree that it matters and the extent to what “grossly misleading” and “dumbass interpretation” are but I get a better sense of one explanation that isn’t entirely based on social dynamics.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 19:24
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:IIRC the other reason "doom posting" was made actionable was because of its negative mental health effects on posters. If this is the case, it’s kind of a weird thing and should at the very least be supported by evidence. There’s evidence that what people here might characterize as “doomism” is a healthy response that can lead to positive action. I’ve posted several other examples here before. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0074708 quote:Qualifications such as “global warming hysteria” and “energy policy schizophrenia” put forward by some climate change skeptics, usually outside the academic arena, may suggest that people who seriously worry about the environment suffer from psychological imbalance. The present study aimed to refute this thesis. While habitual worrying in general is strongly associated with psychopathological symptoms, in a survey a near-zero correlation was found between habitual ecological worrying and pathological worry. Instead, habitual ecological worrying was associated with pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors, and with a personality structure characterized by imagination and an appreciation for new ideas. The study had sufficient statistical power and measures were valid and reliable. The results confirm that those who habitually worry about the ecology are not only lacking in any psychopathology, but demonstrate a constructive and adaptive response to a serious problem. In the public domain, these findings may contribute to a more rational and less emotional debate on climate change and to the prevention of stigmatization of people who are genuinely concerned about our habitat and are prepared to do something about it (“habitual worriers are not crazy”). In the academic arena this study may contribute to environmental psychology (“habitual worrying is part of a green identity”), as well as to the literature on worry and anxiety (“habitual worrying can be a constructive response”). Seems like a half-baked policy by people who aren’t qualified to deal with strangers’ mental health online.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 21:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 20:16 |
|
|
Sorry to go off topic but it seems a fast way to do this — I’m procrastinating too much. May I have a two-week probation, please? Thanks. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2021 23:17
|
|