|
Greetings. It's time for this quarter's feedback thread. Here you are encouraged to tell us your thoughts on how D&D is going. As always, you can give feedback by posting in the thread, PMing me, or you may post in the thread anonymously by PMing me the post and I'll make it for you. D&D rules will be relaxed here somewhat, since we're talking about the forums rather than educational subjects, so citations will be less valuable than normal, and personal opinions will be more valuable. All I ask is that you continue to present your ideas with honesty as you would in normal D&D, and that you don't spam the thread, by which I mean posting the same thing repeatedly to increase its exposure at the expense of other posters. Unfortunately, you must refrain from posting here if you're forumbanned, and refrain from giving feedback about threads in which you're threadbanned. You can however PM me if you think it's been long enough and you'd like to appeal either one.
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 02:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
This forum is a joyless stick-in-the-mud, and I like it that way. It's nice to have someplace on SA where I can go to read about an issue without the need to skim through pages of shitposting and empty quotes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 06:03
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:This forum is a joyless stick-in-the-mud, and I like it that way. It's nice to have someplace on SA where I can go to read about an issue without the need to skim through pages of shitposting and empty quotes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 11:11
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:This forum is a joyless stick-in-the-mud, and I like it that way. It's nice to have someplace on SA where I can go to read about an issue without the need to skim through pages of shitposting and empty quotes. I came here to basically post this. I enjoy having a space to be more serious and really think about my and others posts and when I disagree can generally expect a response more than "ur dumb turn off your monitor". As much as I like to white noise poo poo post in other forums. But at the same time I feel like sometimes the moderation is a bit heavy handed. If we're at a 10, I think we can crank it back to an 8 safely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 11:16
|
|
|
I'll kramer some war thread business in here, to have it all contained. Unfortunately, the timing of this feedback thread catches me at a busier period IRL, so I'll be brief and unlikely debating the feedback raised particularly thoroughly, if at all. I will, however, read it all before implementing the rules update for the war thread – which is not going to happen at least until April, to keep expectations clear. So, the historical context, give or take a few posts. Not crucial to read, just if anyone is really curious. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4014579&userid=197848&perpage=40&pagenumber=19#post530328037 https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4014579&userid=197848&perpage=40&pagenumber=19#post530329667 https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4014579&userid=197848&perpage=40&pagenumber=19#post530332932 https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4014579&userid=197848&perpage=40&pagenumber=19#post530334156 https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4014579&userid=197848&perpage=40&pagenumber=19#post530334375 Also, some posts in the late ChatGPT thread, where we broached the subject of using videos to make your arguments. So, in order: 1. Walls of text These are a chore to engage, since when you just drop a long quote bare, it can unclear what exactly you're trying to say. Additionally, under the D&D rules, you're expected fully to consume the posts you're replying to, and there is a limit on where replying to a post becomes onerous. For wholly original thought, I don't think that most people are really at a risk of breaching it, but for content not originating on SA it realistically should be a few minutes per post at most. 2. Long videos Same as the above basically, but then there's an extra wrinkle of people doing “look at what my YouTuber did” and “debate my YouTuber” posts, which aren't really adding anything to any conversation framed specifically like that. 3. One off links/tweets offloaded in the thread I think this is nuanced, in that for breaking news this is the pragmatic posting style. Overall, however, I've found over the course of the first year of the thread that quite often people will not ever click into the sources and check the finer details of whatever they're posting about. The blame on this one is mine to take, as I supported and contributed to that manner of posting for quite a while. It therefore is on me to see the problem mitigated. The proposed rules change for the U/R thread, attacking all 3 of these, would come as a blanket rule against dropping links, videos, and walls of text without at least some commentary. For breaking news, it will be fine to just “holy poo poo this is massive” – I just want to discourage the CTRL+C, CTRL+V posting style. Furthermore, not as a rule, but more of as a style guide for the thread, I will also ask of posters to focus on making their own arguments. What this means for bolding vs quotes of walls of text conversation is that I am firmly against posting the wall as is, and bolding the more requisite parts, and that I would like quotes usage to become more articulated, e.g., when you're relaying some precise language or figures, or something else not really practical for being summarized. For everything else, I would like posters' own words to become the load-bearing form factor for delivering one's arguments to the thread. Lastly, I would also like to receive some public feedback on the thread rules that are seen as obsolete, reductive, or otherwise unnecessary. I will respect your time and say that if your feedback about potential removals from rules is not more specific than “remove them all”, I won't dwell on it any much. Edit: “a few minutes per post” for in-line stuff, that is. This is not in any way a limit on using longer works as your reference material. cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 15:40 on Mar 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 15:31
|
|
|
I'm generally happy with how D&D stands. My one petty wish is that folks in the Ukraine thread would talk about tanks and planes a lot less. I get that it's technically relevant, but sometimes it feels like half of the goddamn posts are about them
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 15:53
|
|
|
I mostly lurk, but D&D is my primary location of "mostly lurking" and has been since whenever my regdate says. I like the fairly nuanced approach to discussing issues and the fact that there are posters who know the subject matter. Koos's reign of terror has been pretty good for lowering the temperature and cutting out some of the more predictable back and forth screaming matches, so I am in favor of continuing that broad style of moderation. Cinci managed to keep the D&D war thread at peace pretty well even when two others on the forums were exploding, so major kudos there. I think the proposed changes for that thread are also good ones and frankly, I think they'd be worth pushing forum-wide. The wall of text rule I could go either way on, but I think that at the very least, any salient points of a big article should be highlighted, and some explanation of why it's worth reading is a fair thing to ask.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 15:59
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:I'll kramer some war thread business in here, to have it all contained. Unfortunately, the timing of this feedback thread catches me at a busier period IRL, so I'll be brief and unlikely debating the feedback raised particularly thoroughly, if at all. I will, however, read it all before implementing the rules update for the war thread – which is not going to happen at least until April, to keep expectations clear. BTW you were totally right about the ChatGPT thread and it deserved to get gassed. I completely though you were being too harsh, stifling discussion, etc, and I was annoyed when I saw that it was gassed. Then... I went back and read the last several pages of discussion that led to it being gassed. Turns out that sometimes, at least, the mods are actually right and may have a better big picture view of when a thread is about to turn into poo poo. Nothing really to add other than that, u were right
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 16:08
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I've stepped into a more background role as an admin and mostly won't be involved in day-to-day D&D moderation stuff. Koos is still overseeing D&D mods, if you have questions he's your first stop. If that doesn't resolve issues, you're always welcome to PM myself or another admin.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 17:34
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:I'll kramer some war thread business in here, to have it all contained. Unfortunately, the timing of this feedback thread catches me at a busier period IRL, so I'll be brief and unlikely debating the feedback raised particularly thoroughly, if at all. I will, however, read it all before implementing the rules update for the war thread – which is not going to happen at least until April, to keep expectations clear. That sounds like a good change. I was considering something similar for D&D as a whole. We already have the "explain sources you cite" guideline but I thought about making it "make your own points, using sources and links only to support them." Linking editorials and Youtube essays is simply not valuable, and being able to use them in an argument yourself demonstrates you understand them. The problem is, as you say, news articles spark discussion by themselves, so I might want to make an exception for them or figure out a way to conceptualize this idea without them being included.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 17:48
|
|
|
Timmy Age 6 posted:I mostly lurk, but D&D is my primary location of "mostly lurking" and has been since whenever my regdate says. I like the fairly nuanced approach to discussing issues and the fact that there are posters who know the subject matter. Koos's reign of terror has been pretty good for lowering the temperature and cutting out some of the more predictable back and forth screaming matches, so I am in favor of continuing that broad style of moderation. Thank you. The D&D rules are formulated not just with posters in mind but also with readers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
To be honest, there are threads in D&D that I see as more "debatey" where the point is to sit and consume the arguments, and ones where I see as more "discussy" where there's things changing and happening at a fast pace and I come here to get news. I think in the latter, I don't really care if poster x gives their opinion on some CNN piece because I came here for the CNN piece, not the poster. Goons manage to be a much better news aggregator than the actual news aggregators, it turns out. I agree that a summary of what a big article or video is about is important though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 17:57
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:2. Long videos I understand where you're coming from, and it would be nice if every post was made with the intent of sharpening one's own debating skills, but on a very basic level, I view the thread as a hub for noteworthy news articles and expert analysis. If that's being commented on by posters with relevant experience, it's a bonus, but I don't want to see that as a pre-condition for posting. I'm worried you're putting me in a dilemma where we can no longer post links to things other people might find equally interesting, without also having to formulate some commentary of my own, that may well fall short of being insightful due to my own lack of expertise and/or editorial summarizing skills. I might achieve something presentable, if I take the time to sum up my thoughts, mull over them, type them out, edit and re-edit, etc. It might also produce some unreadable mess, or just simply be pointless and uninformative. If you expect commentary or arguments from everyone, no matter how little they know of the subject matter, that's not necessarily likely to raise the quality of the debate overall. I absolutely wouldn't want to miss something significant that some poster read or heard, but didn't link because they didn't also have the time for high-effort personal commentary.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 18:15
|
|
|
KillHour posted:To be honest, there are threads in D&D that I see as more "debatey" where the point is to sit and consume the arguments, and ones where I see as more "discussy" where there's things changing and happening at a fast pace and I come here to get news. I think in the latter, I don't really care if poster x gives their opinion on some CNN piece because I came here for the CNN piece, not the poster. Goons manage to be a much better news aggregator than the actual news aggregators, it turns out. This reminds me of another thing I wanted to propose. While moderation is context-dependent, e.g., the war thread and the US CE thread are two fairly different vibes, under D&D ruleset we distinguish regional threads as having specific privileges. Meaning that you can lightly flame your “neighbours” and otherwise behave more akin to tailgating, rather than making sure that your cuffs and collar are properly starched before posting. This is an occasional source of confusion for posters, usually in two flavours, in my experience. The first would be where people mistake a regional thread as “chat with posters from the region” instead of “chat about the region”. The latter does necessitate the former, to be practical, but the former in itself can occasionally veer towards ruminating over interforum drama, which is not appreciated. The second would be where people expect probations to drop over someone telling them to gently caress off in, e.g., the Canada thread, and as a team we, the D&D mods, don't offer any guarantees of justice for that. These are bants-on posting zones by design, much like the D&D chat thread. Consequently, my proposal would be to clarify the rules with “such as regional threads where some amount of non-serious posting is accepted.” replaced by “such as regional threads where some amount of non-serious posting is accepted, apart from cross-forum drama.”. Also, to rename the regional threads consistently, e.g., Germany regional - title text, California regional - title text, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
Another question to discuss (but this should really be all from my side) is whether if we would like to pin the D&D chat thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
Hannibal Rex posted:I understand where you're coming from, and it would be nice if every post was made with the intent of sharpening one's own debating skills, but on a very basic level, I view the thread as a hub for noteworthy news articles and expert analysis. If that's being commented on by posters with relevant experience, it's a bonus, but I don't want to see that as a pre-condition for posting. I'm hoping Cinci isn't expecting a think-tank essay, but just a synopsis so people know what the topic of the article is going to be. As an example for the post/article he linked to in his OP, something like: "Despite Putin's tightening grip over Russia's bureaucracy, economy, and civil society, it appears he's still reluctant to employ all the measures necessary to put the country on a total war footing. He's simultaneously attempting to intimidate and demoralize the West with his perceived resolve to do whatever's necessary to defeat Ukraine, while employing a more 'boil the frog' strategy on his own population by incrementally escalating mobilization/repression/economic policies only when required to achieve specific objectives." Please let me know if I'm way off-base on this expectation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 18:36
|
|
|
This is probably outside the scope of this thread, but A/T has two tags - one for the theme and one for whether it's an ask thread or tell thread. Should we have something similar to distinguish debate-focused, casual/conversational, and news threads?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
Hannibal Rex posted:I understand where you're coming from, and it would be nice if every post was made with the intent of sharpening one's own debating skills, but on a very basic level, I view the thread as a hub for noteworthy news articles and expert analysis. If that's being commented on by posters with relevant experience, it's a bonus, but I don't want to see that as a pre-condition for posting. Commentary would not necessarily the accurate framing of expectation, and perhaps at an unclear timeline as well. As I see myself as a major culprit of why we're having this situation, I envision the roll-out as a gradual, multi-month thing. The end goal of which is that every link/article/video posted in the thread is presented so that it is reasonably obvious 1) what is it about, 2) why did you find interesting/worth sharing, 3) who is it for, and 4) what does it have to do with the current affairs of the war. This sounds a bit, but really what I'm asking for is a basic sentence or two, instead of mechanistic copy-pasting. As non-final example, consider this: a future poster posted:Here's a piece summarizing Ukraine's strategic planning for the upcoming counter-offensive. Interesting to see numbers given to their reserves, up to 60k being kitted out with predominantly western gear. https://www.economist.com/europe/2023/03/06/ukraine-is-building-up-its-forces-for-an-offensive edit: Quixzlizx posted:I'm hoping Cinci isn't expecting a think-tank essay, but just a synopsis so people know what the topic of the article is going to be. A bit overdoing it even, this is like twice-thrice longer than what I'd have the gall to ask of people under the threat of sanctions. Up to an SMS message worth of text to briefly clarify the purpose of sharing this or that is what I'm aiming at. cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Mar 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
KillHour posted:To be honest, there are threads in D&D that I see as more "debatey" where the point is to sit and consume the arguments, and ones where I see as more "discussy" where there's things changing and happening at a fast pace and I come here to get news. I think in the latter, I don't really care if poster x gives their opinion on some CNN piece because I came here for the CNN piece, not the poster. Goons manage to be a much better news aggregator than the actual news aggregators, it turns out. Yeah, I think this is very true. "Fite me" vs. TVIVing an ongoing news story, like the U/R thread, are completely different types of threads with different goals, for both participants and readers, so I think they need different approaches to moderation. What's trolling and baiting in one context may be perfectly acceptable and even expected in the other.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 19:11
|
|
|
I've stopped participating in D&D because the moderation has become increasingly difficult to understand, and it is not clear what will catch a probe and what won't. Someone being cross but not disagreeing with anyone will get a pass and others in disagreement with even a smidge of attitude gets harshly punished. Someone will get probed days after a post was made, or chain probed. Thread bans still exist and suck as well. Either someone is worth banning completely or not at all. I've been a D&D user for twenty years and you guys have made it a sterile soulless shell of what it once was. I understand the desire to not have interforum wars, and I agree, but there needs to be a some tolerance for non drive by poo poo posting. If someone is discussing with even the most basic effort but also being a dick, that should be fine. Some of the best discussions on this site have come from two complete assholes going at each other for twenty pages. Maybe the above applies to USCE or What used to be USpol but something has been lost along the way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 19:19
|
|
|
I think what's been lost is a fuckton of smart left leaning posters who got sick of being punished constantly. It's happened over years and not necessarily the fault of Koos and his team.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 19:32
|
|
|
So something I’ve brought up over the years I’ll bring up again. Strict restrictions to a topic aren’t always a good thing because it’s on the margins between topics that new ideas happen. Unfortunately sometimes strict restrictions to the thread topic are also the only thing that keeps some threads topics readable. A good example where the strict moderation style has worked and worked well is the Ukraine thread. That topic in general is a poo poo show on the forums and that thread has remained readable and informative even as some folks from diverse sides have actively tried to disrupt it. But not every topic benefits from that style. Where topics do not benefit I think threads run into a tension between subject matter experts and other folks. There are some rough categories of how that plays outs. 1. The most common is the subject naive conversations interacting with the subject matter experts. 2. The interaction between domains looking at other domains, different ways of thinking looking at each other. 3. The interaction of the subject specific topic within a broader analysis that is at odds with the subject specific conclusions. 4. Folks that want specific lines of subject matter experts thought to not happen at all, ie. intentional disruption of the conversation. I think that all four happen in conversations here. 1,4 drive subject matter experts nuts. But the problem is so do 2 and 3. Differentiation between which is happening can also be problematic. Strict moderation can then become a cudgel in discussions and it’s one that has driven many folks away from D&D. As all of the different things categories are happening (1,2,3,4 ) at the same time they get conflated. And both real anger and performative anger (often coming from 4) are probably showing up in your reports and driving y’all nuts. So that’s what I see is the problem. The strict approach is something that has to has happen on some topics. On other topics it plays into discussions in a way that in unhealthy for the forum, because of inherent underlying tensions that are just naturally present in many topics. I don’t know how to solve this. I also think it’s a larger cultural dynamic occurring. It’s also being exacerbated in the larger culture from all side intentionally.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:If someone is discussing with even the most basic effort but also being a dick, that should be fine. This, it’s okay if we get angry with each other. That happens anytime folks really truly care about a topic. Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Some of the best discussions on this site have come from two complete assholes going at each other for twenty pages. And some of those exact interactions have made it out into the larger culture in very serious ways. It’s not just that it’s some of the most interesting content.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 19:41
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I understand the desire to not have interforum wars, and I agree, but there needs to be a some tolerance for non drive by poo poo posting. If someone is discussing with even the most basic effort but also being a dick, that should be fine. Some of the best discussions on this site have come from two complete assholes going at each other for twenty pages. The end product of the interforum brigading was that 90% of the drive by posting was exasperating poo poo. I also like when people are being a dick while arguing well — but that's not what you got. The ratios were really poor specifically because of the incentives involved. i would have appreciated it if the slapfight threads and valve release stuff could have worked to give that kind of environment a space to do that kind of poo poo at all, but every time they got tried it was ... well, it was something
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 19:57
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:The end goal of which is that every link/article/video posted in the thread is presented so that it is reasonably obvious 1) what is it about, 2) why did you find interesting/worth sharing, 3) who is it for, and 4) what does it have to do with the current affairs of the war. Yeah, that sounds reasonable. I've made a bunch of posts with links to various articles or videos across the different Ukraine threads that probably fall short of these goals, but this gives me some structure for the future.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 20:14
|
|
|
Kavros posted:The end product of the interforum brigading was that 90% of the drive by posting was exasperating poo poo. I also like when people are being a dick while arguing well — but that's not what you got. The ratios were really poor specifically because of the incentives involved. Some of the driveby shitposters could go night and day into intelligent and reasoned posts when challenged, but that just showed that they could do better and chose not to. Well, that and the recurring thing where the reasoned argument didn't look much like the initial lol zinger and this actually got called out and challenged.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I've been a D&D user for twenty years and you guys have made it a sterile soulless shell of what it once was. I greatly resent the debate-club style application and enforcement of rules that ignore any and all context. It's what people used to mock D&D for, and Koos and his team have ironically turned it into a reality. Or maybe it was cynically done on purpose. Harold Fjord posted:I think what's been lost is a fuckton of smart left leaning posters who got sick of being punished constantly. It's happened over years and not necessarily the fault of Koos and his team. It's also possible that the smart left leaning posters got sick of those who merely cosplay as leftists constantly making GBS threads on them for not being pure enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
D&D's US politics threads and general-subject threads are probably the best they've been in a decade. People are actually having an enjoyable time having interesting and informative friendly discussions, instead of endlessly miserable shouting matches with people who made up some spicy fiction and belt out weird-rear end accusations at anyone who asks for evidence.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 22:00
|
|
|
Hannibal Rex posted:I understand where you're coming from, and it would be nice if every post was made with the intent of sharpening one's own debating skills, but on a very basic level, I view the thread as a hub for noteworthy news articles and expert analysis. If that's being commented on by posters with relevant experience, it's a bonus, but I don't want to see that as a pre-condition for posting. As I said, I recognize that there are some links that are good in and of themselves, which don't require significant addition from a poster. The issue is that, there are also links where that is not the case, because as Cinci said there is some expectation in D&D that everyone follow all the arguments that are made in a thread recently before posting there. If you are having someone else make an argument for you, and that argument is an hour long video of an unhealthy man talking, then you are putting an onerous burden on the thread. Perhaps the useful distinction here would be news or information (such as a scientific paper's abstract) vs. editorials or other opinion pieces. Kavros posted:The end product of the interforum brigading was that 90% of the drive by posting was exasperating poo poo. I also like when people are being a dick while arguing well — but that's not what you got. The ratios were really poor specifically because of the incentives involved. Being a dick while arguing well is, at least, not punished as harshly. An unwritten D&D rule (or implied rule, since it's also an unwritten rule of SA in general) is that you can get away with more if you're posting better. Note that "arguing well" does not mean being on the correct side of the debate, but presenting your argument in a way that's interesting, rigorous, creative, or funny. Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I greatly resent the debate-club style application and enforcement of rules that ignore any and all context. It's what people used to mock D&D for, and Koos and his team have ironically turned it into a reality. Or maybe it was cynically done on purpose. I did do it on purpose, as a joke. Main Paineframe posted:D&D's US politics threads and general-subject threads are probably the best they've been in a decade. People are actually having an enjoyable time having interesting and informative friendly discussions, instead of endlessly miserable shouting matches with people who made up some spicy fiction and belt out weird-rear end accusations at anyone who asks for evidence. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 22:16
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I've stopped participating in D&D because the moderation has become increasingly difficult to understand, and it is not clear what will catch a probe and what won't. Someone being cross but not disagreeing with anyone will get a pass and others in disagreement with even a smidge of attitude gets harshly punished. There will always be a bias where posters who hold the thread majority opinion will be treated with leniency, and posters who hold a minority opinion will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. It is unreasonable to expect fair enforcement given human psychology, the nature of SA forums moderation & the post reporting system, where the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 22:46
|
|
|
It would be great to reference some observable examples of that happening, because there is a repeated pattern of some posters who love to be giant assholes to others with insults and getting probated for it als announcing in every other post about how they are being silenced for their dissenting opinions and they feel unwelcome
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 23:02
|
|
|
Yeah, the problem is opinions that can't be backed up with any observable facts, not their ideological basis. Most conservatives have disappeared, for example, because few could do more than spout Fox News talking points. When challenged, they stopped posting. If you spout an opinion based on some weird blog that is based on fantasy and hyperbole, you're not going to get a lot of respect here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 23:09
|
|
|
Somaen posted:It would be great to reference some observable examples of that happening, because there is a repeated pattern of some posters who love to be giant assholes to others with insults and getting probated for it als announcing in every other post about how they are being silenced for their dissenting opinions and they feel unwelcome Pretty obvious example: if you read USPol, it is loaded with low content rants and posts about how Republicans, rich people, corporations are evil, and so on. The rants aren't really made against any particular thing someone has said, are often loaded with exaggerations and falsehoods, etc. No one enforces the forum rules here because huge numbers of posters in USPol use the thread as an outlet to vent about how much they hate The Bad Men. HOWEVER: If you were to direct a similar style of post towards a thread consensus opinion, belief, sacred cow, etc. you would be met with swift justice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 23:13
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Pretty obvious example: if you read USPol, it is loaded with low content rants and posts about how Republicans, rich people, corporations are evil, and so on. The rants aren't really made against any particular thing someone has said, are often loaded with exaggerations and falsehoods, etc. No one enforces the forum rules here because huge numbers of posters in USPol use the thread as an outlet to vent about how much they hate The Bad Men. That's why I specifically don't contribute to the USCE thread. It's mainly a honeypot for bad posting. I follow it because there's some useful news there every page or two, but it's mostly unreadable dreck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 23:16
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Pretty obvious example: if you read USPol, it is loaded with low content rants and posts about how Republicans, rich people, corporations are evil, and so on. The rants aren't really made against any particular thing someone has said, are often loaded with exaggerations and falsehoods, etc. No one enforces the forum rules here because huge numbers of posters in USPol use the thread as an outlet to vent about how much they hate The Bad Men. I assume you mean USCE, and not the USPol thread in CCCC. Either way, that's likely due to how enforcement works with regard to reports. If those posts were reported, they would be dealt with, but I assume because the vast majority of posters have politics from centrist to far left, they aren't. You are welcome to report them yourself, and you can have me personally take a look at them by notifying me when you did so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 23:24
|
|
|
Yes, agreed. It is a consequence of the majority opinions in the thread and the nature of SA forums moderation and the post reporting system. Personally I’m not a fan of the post reporting system. I don’t like what it has done to SA and choose not to use it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2023 23:30
|
|
|
This whole conversation happens every time there is a feedback thread but there is never any examples shown, makes it hard to believe/have any real change.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 00:31
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I think D&D is way better especially compared to '18 and '22. I guess SA is still a comedy forum but it's cool to have a place to have somewhat serious conversations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 00:48
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:There will always be a bias where posters who hold the thread majority opinion will be treated with leniency, and posters who hold a minority opinion will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. As one of the few right-leaning posters here, I feel this problem is better than I ever remember it being. Obviously you shouldn’t go out of your way to poke the beehive, but I feel like I have leeway to make unpopular points without waiting for the other shoe to drop. Mod activism seems to be at an all time low, and I want to say I appreciate that. I honestly think leftists used to have a makeshift alliance with liberals here when there was a stronger right wing or libertarian presence, and now that everyone else left, they’ve become the minority. It’s not perfect, but nowhere near as bad as it used to be. One suggestion, especially for threads where mods/IKs participate, there should be a clear “I’m wearing my mod hat” delineation from regular posts. Honestly I feel like bolding those posts would be helpful as well, since they’d call attention to a single “move on from this topic” post if someone’s kinda skimming a busy thread. The other suggestion is probably USCE-specific, but people tend to take a developing incident and fill in the unknowns in a way that supports their own worldview. At best this doesn’t set the table for a real discussion, and at worst it’s just a mix of wish fulfillment and fan fiction. I’d love to see that kind of knee-jerk speculation curtailed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 00:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
socialsecurity posted:This whole conversation happens every time there is a feedback thread but there is never any examples shown, makes it hard to believe/have any real change. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4020995&userid=155796 https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4020995&userid=220511 https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4020995&userid=101945 https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4020995&userid=115386 https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4020995&userid=41629 https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4020995&userid=125208 edit: Not trying to sic the mods on these posters. This kind of posting is what the people want. Who am I and/or the mods to be at odds with that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2023 00:53
|
|