|
World Famous W posted:my feedback is anyone who says this should be laughed at Why not elaborate on why?
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2022 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
Majorian posted:See, to me it reads as one group of posters bringing up very valid points that challenge other posters' assumptions and declared values, and being told that actually no, they can't make those challenges outside of a quarantine thread. In other words, being discouraged from debating an issue. But if so many people want to discuss it, as you said, surely there would be no problem getting an active thread going. Is the January 6th thread a containment thread? I don't think the people participating in it see it in that way. Why would a thread about leftism and democrats be any different?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2022 20:19
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:That's just not true though, I disagree with the disreputabledog on everything he says but he typically tries to make a current or fresh point. I'm fine with people posting about new ways the Dems suck or some poo poo bill they did or didn't pass what is stifling to discussion is people wanting to relitigate 2008 dem majority didn't pass enough or trump is all Hilarious fault endlessly etc. This is why I feel the stale argument rule is good because otherwise news/events threada get bogged down in the same stupid slapfights. I mean it's fair to say that the Dems are *still* hurting lefties for no reason, however I have yet to hear a good reason as to why separating this issue into a thread would be containment. Other issues, like Jan 6, Gun Control, Immigration, SCOTUS are all still unsettled debates, they all have their threads, and nobody deems them to be containment. Why would the state of the dems be any different? Majorian mentioned it would end up with people on one side of the debate being alone there. Is it because people don't want to be challenged? Or is it because most people don't want to interact with the other side of that debate for some reason? Or is it because most people simply don't care? Whichever it is, does it really justify letting it take over the main thread over and over? World Famous W posted:it's kinda funny that there are posters saying 'there are posters who just want to yell at others for not agreeing with em' and immediately follow that by complaining about their political beliefs Fair enough!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2022 20:39
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:To be clear, you seem to be advocating for viewpoint oriented discrimination in the main thread for talking about current events because somehow when something you disagree with is posted there you are 'forced' to interact with it and it 'takes over' so as long and as there's another thread somewhere you don't have to read it's justified to do this. I'm advocating for a thread where that debate can be structured a bit. Many people here have mentioned how important that issue is, how harmful it is to a lot of people to ignore it, and how many people were looking forward to discussing it. The current approach of bringing it back to USCE clearly leaves everyone unsatisfied: on the one hand, people that don't want to discuss it get mad it keeps getting brought up, and the people that want to discuss it are mad that people are ignoring it. And it all usually devolves into a screaming match and a whole bunch of people getting probed, on both sides of the question. Nobody wins, except those that enjoy thread making GBS threads, because that's what it always ends up turning into. And I'm not blaming one side or the other here. It's just bad faith, snarky bullshit all around. I just don't understand why putting that question into its own thread would be containment, or viewpoint oriented discrimination. The reason that question remains unsettled is that nothing on that topic has been productive within USCE, or USPOL. What's wrong with trying something else? Now, you mention that other topics are going dark. I get you, but there's a finite amount of people posting, a finite amount of time to post and an infinite amount of topics to discuss. It seems normal that thread activity would fluctuate over time with all the poo poo going on. Hell, even USCE has been fairly quiet lately. I don't think it invalidates the creation of threads, unless one is really obsessing over something and needs a constant flow of posts on that specific topic to exist at any given time for them to consume, but that would probably be fairly unhealthy. Gros Tarla fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Jul 31, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2022 21:00
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The thing is, it doesn't usually "take over" the main thread (ie: USCE) that often, at least in my experience. What does take over the thread is posters who don't want to engage on the topic being discussed, complaining bitterly about the topic being discussed - even if it falls squarely under the umbrella of a US Current Events thread, even if it's germane to debate and discussion, and even when it's pretty clearly not settled. I agree, it almost always devolves into threadshitting. Although I don't see either side being worse than the other, it's just 100% poo poo on all fronts. I just skip all that poo poo personally. And god drat, sometimes it does take over, pages after pages. Sometimes I load up SA, think something big happened because there's 900+ new posts but nope. Just two assholes talking past each other making GBS threads up the whole thread, and actual Current Events getting lost in their midst. And most of the time, that fight started around that topic. I still fail to understand how structuring that discussion better (ie: a thread around the topic) wouldn't be the best option. It is, as you mentioned, a big issue. At least, it could not be worse than the current situation. And I personally would be much more inclined to read about it in its own space, where context is more readily accessible, than as a passing thought in a thread that moves so fast. And also, without all the whining and posting vendettas, hopefully.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2022 22:10
|
|