How Can The Forum Be Better? Your Thoughts? (1 Viewer)

[Sparky Polastri]

Feels rather simple, if your comment is directed at a person then punishment is X. If it's directed at topic play on. Been on many different places before coming here that use this approach with relative success. Don't need to reinvent the wheel. I'll also say that while the PSF is gone, there are plenty of threads here in the FFA (thinking specifically about my readings of the COVID thread) where this would rather easy to apply as well. Trying to hack out posts rather than dealing with the poster seems like a rather large self inflicted wound/problem.

It is not simple. This is incorrect and will never happen. The problem is that politics has become mostly Marxian/identitarian these days. In other words, it is necessary to discuss the person rather than just the proposal. It was started long ago with the phrase "the personal is the political" in the seventies. It was a Marxian/feminist argument about power/dispossession. It has come to dominate all of politics.

There is no discussing the political divorced from the personal anymore. It is either identity or motive that needs addressing. I hope that helps. If you don't understand this, then I don't know what I can do for you. I understand what you're saying. It isn't possible. There is a dialectic going on that hinges on the personalization of policy debates. Personal identity is inherent in almost all of it.

Sorry. If you think it's impossible to have a discussion on a message board about a topic and keep from making comments personal to the posters you are discussing it with, you're part of the problem. Please spare me this "if you can't understand that, I can't help you nonsense" too. I understand there are some who aren't capable. That was proven in that other forum loud and clear. That does NOT mean its impossible. It means a few other things in my opinion (much more about the poster than the ask).

 

[massraider]

Feels rather simple, if your comment is directed at a person then punishment is X. If it's directed at topic play on. Been on many different places before coming here that use this approach with relative success. Don't need to reinvent the wheel. I'll also say that while the PSF is gone, there are plenty of threads here in the FFA (thinking specifically about my readings of the COVID thread) where this would rather easy to apply as well. Trying to hack out posts rather than dealing with the poster seems like a rather large self inflicted wound/problem.

It is not simple. This is incorrect and will never happen. The problem is that politics has become mostly Marxian/identitarian these days. In other words, it is necessary to discuss the person rather than just the proposal. It was started long ago with the phrase "the personal is the political" in the seventies. It was a Marxian/feminist argument about power/dispossession. It has come to dominate all of politics.

There is no discussing the political divorced from the personal anymore. It is either identity or motive that needs addressing. I hope that helps. If you don't understand this, then I don't know what I can do for you. I understand what you're saying. It isn't possible. There is a dialectic going on that hinges on the personalization of policy debates. Personal identity is inherent in almost all of it.

Sorry. If you think it's impossible to have a discussion on a message board about a topic and keep from making comments personal to the posters you are discussing it with, you're part of the problem. Please spare me this "if you can't understand that, I can't help you nonsense" too. I understand there are some who aren't capable. That was proven in that other forum loud and clear. That does NOT mean its impossible. It means a few other things in my opinion (much more about the poster than the ask).

I'm sorry, maybe I missed it, what was your previous handle on these boards?

 

[Sparky Polastri]

Feels rather simple, if your comment is directed at a person then punishment is X. If it's directed at topic play on. Been on many different places before coming here that use this approach with relative success. Don't need to reinvent the wheel. I'll also say that while the PSF is gone, there are plenty of threads here in the FFA (thinking specifically about my readings of the COVID thread) where this would rather easy to apply as well. Trying to hack out posts rather than dealing with the poster seems like a rather large self inflicted wound/problem.

It is not simple. This is incorrect and will never happen. The problem is that politics has become mostly Marxian/identitarian these days. In other words, it is necessary to discuss the person rather than just the proposal. It was started long ago with the phrase "the personal is the political" in the seventies. It was a Marxian/feminist argument about power/dispossession. It has come to dominate all of politics.

There is no discussing the political divorced from the personal anymore. It is either identity or motive that needs addressing. I hope that helps. If you don't understand this, then I don't know what I can do for you. I understand what you're saying. It isn't possible. There is a dialectic going on that hinges on the personalization of policy debates. Personal identity is inherent in almost all of it.

Sorry. If you think it's impossible to have a discussion on a message board about a topic and keep from making comments personal to the posters you are discussing it with, you're part of the problem. Please spare me this "if you can't understand that, I can't help you nonsense" too. I understand there are some who aren't capable. That was proven in that other forum loud and clear. That does NOT mean its impossible. It means a few other things in my opinion (much more about the poster than the ask).

I'm sorry, maybe I missed it, what was your previous handle on these boards?

I've lurked around this board for 4-5 years...would occasionally use my dad's account, but he left, so I created my own.

 

[rockaction]

Sorry. If you think it's impossible to have a discussion on a message board about a topic and keep from making comments personal to the posters you are discussing it with, you're part of the problem.

Perhaps we have an issue with definitions. I am not talking about calling the other poster an epithet or insulting them. I'm talking about assessing another poster's body of work as predictive, their belonging to a particular group, etc.

Please spare me this "if you can't understand that, I can't help you nonsense" too. I understand there are some who aren't capable. That was proven in that other forum loud and clear.

Probably a poor choice of words on my part. I posted later for people to Google what I meant and should have deleted the "help you" part. In my defense, you had a lot of people in the past that were too lazy to look up the arguments that pertained to what the speaker was speaking about and they would barge in undeterred. When called out, they would demand links and then not read them, or read them and come back with their original intuition about the politics of said link without having read the article/study/etc. Or they would attack the source. It was sometimes an exercise in bad faith.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

TOPIC: Healthcare in America

Person A: Quality healthcare should be available to all and not dependent on what you can afford. <-- On topic
Person B: If we take capitalism out of the equation, innovation is going to suffer greatly <-- On topic

Person C: Of course you think quality healthcare should be available to all. That's what all the hippies think <-- On person
Person D: I can't believe you have no grasp of how capitalism work. Guess I shouldn't be surprised knowing your other posts around here <--- On person

These aren't difficult motives to discern. And these are exactly the different kinds of posts I've been reading in that political forum.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Some of you are trying to parse this too closely when it can't be done.

 

[rockaction]

TOPIC: Healthcare in America

Person A: Quality healthcare should be available to all and not dependent on what you can afford. <-- On topic
Person B: If we take capitalism out of the equation, innovation is going to suffer greatly <-- On topic

Person C: Of course you think quality healthcare should be available to all. That's what all the hippies think <-- On person
Person D: I can't believe you have no grasp of how capitalism work. Guess I shouldn't be surprised knowing your other posts around here <--- On person

These aren't difficult motives to discern. And these are exactly the different kinds of posts I've been reading in that political forum.

Yeah, you had plenty of personal comments like those. You also had posters that would argue in bad faith, constantly repeat a line of argument or start the same topic over and over, make an utterly predictable whataboutism or tu quoque comment, call people racist/sexist/homo and transphobic for arguing certain positions, etc. You can say that better policing would end that, but I'm not so sure. I think a good deal of people tried very hard to not to get personal but invariably got hot under the collar.

And there were lots of reasons for it. Politics has never been a dry policy debate where personal insults weren't leveled. It goes back at least to 1800 and beyond. Jefferson on Adams: "a hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, not the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.” Adams about Hamilton: "When Perfidy and Treachery, Imbecility, Ignorance Fanaticism and Fury Surrounded Us; all, Puppets danced upon the Wires of a ******* Bratt of a Scotch Pedlar."

It's the nature of the beast.

 

[Battersbox]

Feels rather simple, if your comment is directed at a person then punishment is X. If it's directed at topic play on. Been on many different places before coming here that use this approach with relative success. Don't need to reinvent the wheel. I'll also say that while the PSF is gone, there are plenty of threads here in the FFA (thinking specifically about my readings of the COVID thread) where this would rather easy to apply as well. Trying to hack out posts rather than dealing with the poster seems like a rather large self inflicted wound/problem.

It is not simple. This is incorrect and will never happen. The problem is that politics has become mostly Marxian/identitarian these days. In other words, it is necessary to discuss the person rather than just the proposal. It was started long ago with the phrase "the personal is the political" in the seventies. It was a Marxian/feminist argument about power/dispossession. It has come to dominate all of politics.

There is no discussing the political divorced from the personal anymore. It is either identity or motive that needs addressing. I hope that helps. If you don't understand this, then I don't know what I can do for you. I understand what you're saying. It isn't possible. There is a dialectic going on that hinges on the personalization of policy debates. Personal identity is inherent in almost all of it.

Sorry. If you think it's impossible to have a discussion on a message board about a topic and keep from making comments personal to the posters you are discussing it with, you're part of the problem. Please spare me this "if you can't understand that, I can't help you nonsense" too. I understand there are some who aren't capable. That was proven in that other forum loud and clear. That does NOT mean its impossible. It means a few other things in my opinion (much more about the poster than the ask).

I'm sorry, maybe I missed it, what was your previous handle on these boards?

What is your dentist's name?

'Crentist'

 

[skol asylum]

This will be unpopular and I already know it’s not going to happen but since you asked…I think you should bring the political forum back.

I know all the reasons why not already. Here are the reasons why: because we’re currently in the most tumultuous political era since the Civil War with an election coming up. We are more divided in this nation than at any point in our lifetimes. Despite all its problems and acrimony, your political forum was one of the rare places in our society where people on all sides could, at times, engage in civilized discussion and debate. And that’s a rare thing. Since you’ve shut it down I’ve looked for a replacement. I didn’t want a forum filled with people who agreed with me because what is the point? But I also didn’t want a forum filled with those who always disagreed with me. I wanted somewhere where both sides are reasonably heard. I have been unable to find such a place. Believe me I’ve tried. Also, every forum I’ve found has been far far uglier than here in terms of how people are treated, and the names they call each other. I don’t want that either.

Anyhow I think that at its best your political forum provided an important service. And I miss it. I fully get that it was too much moderation for you, too much work, too many complaints, bad for business. I can’t blame you at all for shutting it down. Perhaps an alternative might be to return it but charge a monthly fee? I’d pay it. I think others might though I don’t know. Just an idea. Anyway, you did ask so I thought I would offer my opinion on this subject one last time. And now I’m done.

The Huddle went through a similar life cycle with political discussion. They created a political sub forum to try get politics out of their free for all forum. The difference was it was sort of created on the down low and put behind a password. Political folks shared the password amongst themselves. The forum was then not really monitored with the understanding that users would have to police themselves and they would keep politics out of the free for all forum. It sort of worked for a while but users inevitably didn't like to be stuck behind a password protected forum and wanted to talk politics in the open free for all forum. Mass bannings started happening. The Huddle largely turned into a ghost town.

I think a password protected political forum could work here. Users would have to agree to police themselves, be civil and keep the personal attacks at a minimum. Have thicker skin and don't be reporting every tiny perceived slight. Moderators wouldn't have to deal with it (except in extreme cases of things like say personal threats, etc which should NEVER be ok). The forum would not be open to the general public. You are invited or whatever mechanism is decided upon. I'd also be ok in kicking in a small yearly fee if that's what it took.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

TOPIC: Healthcare in America

Person A: Quality healthcare should be available to all and not dependent on what you can afford. <-- On topic
Person B: If we take capitalism out of the equation, innovation is going to suffer greatly <-- On topic

Person C: Of course you think quality healthcare should be available to all. That's what all the hippies think <-- On person
Person D: I can't believe you have no grasp of how capitalism work. Guess I shouldn't be surprised knowing your other posts around here <--- On person

These aren't difficult motives to discern. And these are exactly the different kinds of posts I've been reading in that political forum.

Yeah, you had plenty of personal comments like those. You also had posters that would argue in bad faith, constantly repeat a line of argument or start the same topic over and over, make an utterly predictable whataboutism or tu quoque comment, call people racist/sexist/homo and transphobic for arguing certain positions, etc. You can say that better policing would end that, but I'm not so sure. I think a good deal of people tried very hard to not to get personal but invariably got hot under the collar.

And there were lots of reasons for it. Politics has never been a dry policy debate where personal insults weren't leveled. It goes back at least to 1800 and beyond. Jefferson on Adams: "a hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, not the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.” Adams about Hamilton: "When Perfidy and Treachery, Imbecility, Ignorance Fanaticism and Fury Surrounded Us; all, Puppets danced upon the Wires of a ******* Bratt of a Scotch Pedlar."

It's the nature of the beast.

From what I've read the Venn Diagram between those making the personal comments and those behaving is you describe is pretty much a circle. It's tough to police the behavior you describe because of it's subjectiveness. It's not tough to police the behavior I described. It's objective. Start with objective standards and you take care of 95% of it. Will that solution everything? Of course not, but it cleans up most of it and with very little effort. I can't imagine trying to go through threads and remove content at post level. That seems like a complete waste of time.

 

[supermike80]

Been perusing your Political Forum off and on for the last couple weeks. The only way I'd ever even consider opening it back up is if two things happen:

1. The parties both are able to present actual policy proposals we could discuss/compare/contrast.
2. A stringent rule here of keeping comments on the topic and not the poster.

I don't see #1 happening anytime soon and there seems like an unwillingness to do #2, so it should probably stay closed for good.

And no laughing face emojis.

This for sure. I used one myself (I thought carefully) laughing at myself a while back and it wound up offending. They are tricky at best.

Sorry...I just HAD to do it.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Some of you are trying to parse this too closely when it can't be done.

Or more to the point, "Can't be done by this forum".

I'm sure it's possible with more capable moderators and more skilled leaders. And I'm sure there are excellent forums and places out there to discuss politics in a perfect world. I just know I gave it my best effort and couldn't provide that place. And we won't be trying again anytime soon.

 

[Joe Bryant]

And back to the original post and question, ideas on how the forum could be better understanding the yoga pants / politics / etc are not in play.

I think we could help ourselves a lot by welcoming and inviting new posters better. This is such a veteran group, I know it limits us on new people as this can be a tough place to navigate for a new person that isn't a super strong forceful personality.

 

[Van Dyman]

And back to the original post and question, ideas on how the forum could be better understanding the yoga pants / politics / etc are not in play.

I think we could help ourselves a lot by welcoming and inviting new posters better. This is such a veteran group, I know it limits us on new people as this can be a tough place to navigate for a new person that isn't a super strong forceful personality.

You could pin a noob thread for people to introduce themselves and get a bunch of "welcome" messages from the regulars. Just an idea.

 

[Don Quixote]

I think we could help ourselves a lot by welcoming and inviting new posters better. This is such a veteran group, I know it limits us on new people as this can be a tough place to navigate for a new person that isn't a super strong forceful personality.

If someone posts “Bump Finley” is there a way for the board to autocorrect it to something like “Hey - You may be new here. Welcome! You may have posted your thread in the wrong forum. Please consider the Shark Pool for general NFL talk or the Assistant Coach forum for advice related to your fantasy team. I look forward to all of our future interactions!”

 

[IvanKaramazov]

And back to the original post and question, ideas on how the forum could be better understanding the yoga pants / politics / etc are not in play.

I think we could help ourselves a lot by welcoming and inviting new posters better. This is such a veteran group, I know it limits us on new people as this can be a tough place to navigate for a new person that isn't a super strong forceful personality.

You could pin a noob thread for people to introduce themselves and get a bunch of "welcome" messages from the regulars. Just an idea.

This is a really good idea.

 

[Van Dyman]

I think we could help ourselves a lot by welcoming and inviting new posters better. This is such a veteran group, I know it limits us on new people as this can be a tough place to navigate for a new person that isn't a super strong forceful personality.

If someone posts “Bump Finley” is there a way for the board to autocorrect it to something like “Hey - You may be new here. Welcome! You may have posted your thread in the wrong forum. Please consider the Shark Pool for general NFL talk or the Assistant Coach forum for advice related to your fantasy team. I look forward to all of our future interactions!”

Yeah. Running tired old inside jokes on new people has kinda rubbed me the wrong way for a while.

 

[Psychopav]

I think we could help ourselves a lot by welcoming and inviting new posters better. This is such a veteran group, I know it limits us on new people as this can be a tough place to navigate for a new person that isn't a super strong forceful personality.

If someone posts “Bump Finley” is there a way for the board to autocorrect it to something like “Hey - You may be new here. Welcome! You may have posted your thread in the wrong forum. Please consider the Shark Pool for general NFL talk or the Assistant Coach forum for advice related to your fantasy team. I look forward to all of our future interactions!”

Yeah. Running tired old inside jokes on new people has kinda rubbed me the wrong way for a while.

You should PM Shuke about that.

 

[Psychopav]

I have not been a very helpful contributor in this thread.

In my defense, I'm still salty about the Test Forum.