First 2018 Advisor Town Hall

[Green Arrow]

Happy 2018, tPF! Let's start the year off right with a town hall. This one will be a little different than past town halls, however, in that we actually have an issue we want some input on first and then the floor will be open to questions/comments/concerns. As always, concerns about specific moderators or specific moderator actions should be directed to the moderators themselves via PM or reports. We try to keep advisor town halls specifically devoted to issues advisors actually have some say in, which does include general moderation.

Now, on to business. There will be an attached poll on this subject. With the exception of the month of December (what with the holidays and all), we have been faithful to member requests that we hold a town hall once a month. We have no problem continuing to do them once a month, if the majority of tPF would like to continue doing them once a month. We would like to know where the membership stands on that, however. The alternative to monthly town halls is to only hold town halls when a member requests one and can get a majority of membership voting in the affirmative on a poll.

What do you all think? Let us know in the comments and please vote in the poll!

What other comments/questions/concerns do you have?

[stjames1_53]

Crepitus is a poor example of an advisor. He needs to be replaced. Period.

[resister]

Crepitus is a poor example of an advisor. He needs to be replaced. Period.
Hear ye, hear ye.

[Common]

Cmon guys lets keep this constructive and not personal :)

[Tricia]

How active are things in the advisor room? I notice several advisors don't post here any more, or at least haven't been. It's got to be tough to actively try to rebuild the forum when some of the advisors have left...

[resister]

How active are things in the advisor room? I notice several advisors don't post here any more, or at least haven't been. It's got to be tough to actively try to rebuild the forum when some of the advisors have left...
If minimal activity requirements are not filled, pass the position to an active member in good standing.

[Green Arrow]

How active are things in the advisor room? I notice several advisors don't post here any more, or at least haven't been. It's got to be tough to actively try to rebuild the forum when some of the advisors have left...

I’d say it’s pretty active. We slowed a bit during the holidays of course.

[Green Arrow]

Crepitus is a poor example of an advisor. He needs to be replaced. Period.

Take that up with the moderators. This needs to stay civil and not get bogged down in personal stuff.

[stjames1_53]

Cmon guys lets keep this constructive and not personal :)
Common this is not personal. You have my word on it.
I'm no choice, but even waltky would be an excellent choice for forum advisor. He's as neutral as they come.

[stjames1_53]

Take that up with the moderators. This needs to stay civil and not get bogged down in personal stuff.

please read post #9. It is not personal. We need people of neutral persuasion for these positions.

[Bethere]

Happy 2018, tPF! Let's start the year off right with a town hall. This one will be a little different than past town halls, however, in that we actually have an issue we want some input on first and then the floor will be open to questions/comments/concerns. As always, concerns about specific moderators or specific moderator actions should be directed to the moderators themselves via PM or reports. We try to keep advisor town halls specifically devoted to issues advisors actually have some say in, which does include general moderation.

Now, on to business. There will be an attached poll on this subject. With the exception of the month of December (what with the holidays and all), we have been faithful to member requests that we hold a town hall once a month. We have no problem continuing to do them once a month, if the majority of tPF would like to continue doing them once a month. We would like to know where the membership stands on that, however. The alternative to monthly town halls is to only hold town halls when a member requests one and can get a majority of membership voting in the affirmative on a poll.

What do you all think? Let us know in the comments and please vote in the poll!

What other comments/questions/concerns do you have?

I am good with the present schedule and I appreciate how the usage of fake member named town halls to ridicule other members and seed dissention was shot down.

Town halls can and should be a positive thing. Good work.

[Bethere]

Crepitus is a poor example of an advisor. He needs to be replaced. Period.

We weren't enthusiastic about Common being named either. But we left him alone, as you should have done with Crepitus.

I'm not wild about Common flooding the forum with threads, but I think he has moderated his other behavior noticeably. If you had an open mind you'd be able to say the same about my friend Crepitus.

Adding both at the same time was an attempt at balance.

[Tricia]

We weren't enthusiastic about Common being named either. But we left him alone, as you should have done with Crepitus.

I'm not wild about Common flooding the forum with threads, but I think he has moderated his other behavior noticeably. If you had an open mind you'd be able to say the same about my friend Crepitus.

Adding both at the same time was an attempt at balance.
Common is not "flooding the forum with threads", he is actually doing part of his job description as an advisor and adding new topics for discussion. This is very much appreciated by those of us that want to see the forum succeed. If you don't like it, you are welcome to stick him on your ignore list.

[Tricia]

I’d say it’s pretty active. We slowed a bit during the holidays of course.

Thats great to hear. I'm looking forward to seeing what you guys come up with to make the forum an even better place. You are a good team and I have faith that you can help us over this little "hump" we are experiencing.

[Bethere]

Common is not "flooding the forum with threads", he is actually doing part of his job description as an advisor and adding new topics for discussion. This is very much appreciated by those of us that want to see the forum succeed. If you don't like it, you are welcome to stick him on your ignore list.

I am fine with Common, as I said. But when you have 15 of the 20 threads on the first page of the happenings forum you have bumped other people's hard work into oblivion.

Do I think that is why he is doing it? No. And at the moment he is doing well.

Putting him on ignore is not what I want, and it wouldn't restore any of the bumped threads.

If you were to ask him he would have to grudgingly admit that Bethere has treated him far far better than his fellow conservatives have treated Crepitus.

[Hal Jordan]

This is not about "this member" or "that member". This is about making the forum better. Let's stick to that. Leave concerns about specific members to reports or PMs to mods.

[Crepitus]

I am fine with Common, as I said. But when you have 15 of the 20 threads on the first page of the happenings forum you have bumped other people's hard work into oblivion.

Do I think that is why he is doing it? No. And at the moment he is doing well.

Putting him on ignore is not what I want, and it wouldn't restore all of the bumped threads.

Just a suggestion: when I feel a thread I have started moved to the bottom too quickly for others to have had a chance to participate fully I find something I can add to the information and give it and little bump.

Just as an FYI I do not believe common is flooding the forum and especially not deliberately bumping threads.

That's just not him. He don't like your thread he's gonna tell you about it, not hide from it.

Trust me on this one, lol.

[waltky]

possum thinks Granny would be a good moderator...

... although she's liable to be heavy-handed...

... onna lib'rals.

[resister]

Just a suggestion: when I feel a thread I have started moved to the bottom too quickly for others to have had a chance to participate fully I find something I can add to the information and give it and little bump.

Just as an FYI I do not believe common is flooding the forum and especially not deliberately bumping threads.

That's just not him. He don't like your thread he's gonna tell you about it, not hide from it.

Trust me on this one, lol.
I wish we still had Rep, I would Rep this. This post has made me proud of you Crepitus I hope that Common sees this

Right on Crep, speak the Truth

[Common]

The key is civility we are in an exasperating political period in america, its not only this forum that is passionate in believing one side or the other is destroying america.

We do not have to hate or insult each other every time we disagree with what someone posts.
Theres no purpose or benefit to anyone that considers someone that thinks differently than they do politically as the enemy. Wouldnt it be better for everyone to interact in threads in a more civil manner showing common decency too each other, I think it would.

It kind of sucks to come here everyday and argue and bicker with others that are here with you, everyday.

It would be alot more enjoyable for everyone if we just stopped trying to rip each others throat out over every thread.

[Common]

To all my conservative friends I ask give this a thought. I admire crepitus' voracity, he knows before he posts hes going to have 6 people jumping on him, yet he does it day after day.

He sticks up for others that he politically agrees with, DONT WE ALL :)

Crepitus is a good guy hes compassionate and hes one of the first ones to respond to posts of members that are in distress in real life with a kind word that means something to me. Do he and I always agree ? politically never, other stuff most all the time.

[Cletus]

Cmon guys lets keep this constructive and not personal :)

It was a constructive suggestion.

[Cletus]

To all my conservative friends I ask give this a thought. I admire crepitus' voracity, he knows before he posts hes going to have 6 people jumping on him, yet he does it day after day.

Yeah, but it would be nice if at least one of those threads contained a shred of honesty instead of just bullshit. It is one thing to post an item that is politically biased. It is something else completely to post something that is blatantly and demonstrably false or is just intended to insult.

I don't really care whether he remains an "advisor" or not. They are about as useful as teats on a boar hog, anyway. If it gives someone's life meaning to be one, have at it.

[Cletus]

I don't see why anyone is knocking Common. As far as I can tell, he is the only one of the advisors who is even really attempting to fulfill the role in the specified manner. He has a mandate to post X number of new topics a day. Her is doing so and he is not posting stupid images or obviously false stories to make his quota. He is posting stories that sure, may slant toward his own political preferences, but this is a political board.

He is making a good faith effort and seems to be the only one doing so.

[Safety]

To all my conservative friends I ask give this a thought. I admire crepitus' voracity, he knows before he posts hes going to have 6 people jumping on him, yet he does it day after day.

He sticks up for others that he politically agrees with, DONT WE ALL :)

Crepitus is a good guy hes compassionate and hes one of the first ones to respond to posts of members that are in distress in real life with a kind word that means something to me. Do he and I always agree ? politically never, other stuff most all the time.

The bolded part is one of the main problems as to why tPF is where it is today. I can hold my own when that happens, along with a select few, but it does get tiring having that happen just because there are a group of people here that doesn’t like to hear opposing opinions.

[stjames1_53]

this is a futile gesture.................

[Bethere]

I don't see why anyone is knocking Common. As far as I can tell, he is the only one of the advisors who is even really attempting to fulfill the role in the specified manner. He has a mandate to post X number of new topics a day. Her is doing so and he is not posting stupid images or obviously false stories to make his quota. He is posting stories that sure, may slant toward his own political preferences, but this is a political board.

He is making a good faith effort and seems to be the only one doing so.

No one is. I merely asked that Crepitus be offered the same courtesy.

[Cletus]

The bolded part is one of the main problems as to why tPF is where it is today. I can hold my own when that happens, along with a select few, but it does get tiring having that happen just because there are a group of people here that doesn’t like to hear opposing opinions.

It is not opposing opinions that are the problem. It is blatant dishonesty.

[Cletus]

No one is. I merely asked that Crepitus be offered the same courtesy.

He hasn't earned it.

[Bethere]

this is a futile gesture.................

Indeed.

[Kacper]

Oh good grief. This our side, their side stuff is perhaps one of the problems of this site (and the country as a whole). If you do not like what someone has posted as threads, start your own instead of complaining about their side. If I were under some obligation to post X number of articles a day, I would be inclined to do it all at once as well just to be done with it. I personally have been looking for articles to post here that interest me that might spur discussions but the ones I find I don't think anybody else would be interested in based on the atmosphere at the site.

As for the question in the OP, I personally don't care, but suspect that if it becomes a "Only upon request" that will create more political gripes between the our side/their side's

[Common]

The bolded part is one of the main problems as to why tPF is where it is today. I can hold my own when that happens, along with a select few, but it does get tiring having that happen just because there are a group of people here that doesn’t like to hear opposing opinions.
This is my last post in this thread, safety I agree with you and this isnt something new here, its happened before and It needs to stop for everyones benefit.
I said in another post that theres no purpose or benefit to attacking each other personally over political differences.

We all really need to just CHILL and stop trying to decapitate and castrate everyone that posts something we dont like. Im all for spanking them with facts thats what a political board is for.

We all need to get more honest about whats right and wrong about both the left and the right. We all know when the left does something dead wrong and we know when the right does. Theres absolutely no shame in telling someone YOURE RIGHT!!!! its assinine to just ramble trying to create something to make them wrong

[The Xl]

Dogpiling isn't new here nor is it exclusive to either side. It is annoying though.

[Tahuyaman]

Oh good grief. This our side, their side stuff is perhaps one of the problems of this site (and the country as a whole). If you do not like what someone has posted as threads, start your own instead of complaining about their side. If I were under some obligation to post X number of articles a day, I would be inclined to do it all at once as well just to be done with it. I personally have been looking for articles to post here that interest me that might spur discussions but the ones I find I don't think anybody else would be interested in based on the atmosphere at the site.

As for the question in the OP, I personally don't care, but suspect that if it becomes a "Only upon request" that will create more political gripes between the our side/their side's

This forum is a microcosm of what's going on nationally. Too many people are deeply dug-in with their political views and can't face disagreement without taking it personally. Then they don't have the ability to address the disagreement based on the facts or substance surrounding the issues. People are progressively being guided by emotions instead of logical thought.


I think a town hall should be conducted every three months. Monthly is too much.

[hanger4]

Dogpiling isn't new here nor is it exclusive to either side. It is annoying though.Nor is it exclusive to this forum. It's a fact of every forum I've been a member of and every forum I am a member of.

[hanger4]

This forum is a microcosm of what's going on nationally. Too many people are deeply dug-in with their political views and can't face disagreement without taking it personally. Then they don't have the ability to address the disagreement based on the facts or substance surrounding the issues. People are progressively being guided by emotions instead of logical thought. I think a town hall should be conducted every three months. Monthly is too much.Agreed, me thinks quarterly would be fine.

[Tahuyaman]

Moderators and advisors come and go. There is a problem when known trolls are selected for these positions. I'm sure that quality posters have been asked to take on one of those positions but turned down the offer.

Admin should take a closer look at the forum leaders who seem to be consistently involved in a lot of the bickering. But then they can't force good people to take those positions.

[Chris]

(1) On townhalls, I voted don't care. Why should we? We have townhall after townhall with all sorts of suggestions for improving the forum and its moderation, some negative, some positive, whatever, but we never get any feedback on any of it. So what's the point?

(2) Somewhere someone said Advisors should be neutral. I disagree. They can be liberal, conservative or libertarian; anarchist, socialist or statist, Rep or Dem or Independent; or whatever. That should not matter. What should is that they start threads and contribute to discussion in a sincere way and not play games. --And for that they need to be around. --Replace as needed.

(3) A request for moderation: Could you please rewrite the rules so they align with what you moderate for? Moderation should refer to the rule violated. 80%, perhaps more, of moderation is for talking about other members, back and forth, even bickering. OK, fine, please add those to the rules. It's odd to be moderated for behavior not in the rules. --Note, this is a constructive suggestion for improvment that ought by next town hall to get some feedback. This is what I mean by (1) above.

[Tahuyaman]

(1) On townhalls, I voted don't care. Why should we? We have townhall after townhall with all sorts of suggestions for improving the forum and its moderation, some negative, some positive, whatever, but we never get any feedback on any of it. So what's the point?

(2) Somewhere someone said Advisors should be neutral. I disagree. They can be liberal, conservative or libertarian; anarchist, socialist or statist, Rep or Dem or Independent; or whatever. That should not matter. What should is that they start threads and contribute to discussion in a sincere way and not play games. --And for that they need to be around. --Replace as needed.

(3) A request for moderation: Could you please rewrite the rules so they align with what you moderate for? Moderation should refer to the rule violated. 80%, perhaps more, of moderation is for talking about other members, back and forth, even bickering. OK, fine, please add those to the rules. It's odd to be moderated for behavior not in the rules. --Note, this is a constructive suggestion for improvment that ought by next town hall to get some feedback. This is what I mean by (1) above.


On your first point, I agree that the lack of feedback from the town hall makes it nearly worthless. Generally they conclude a town hall by thanking people for participating and saying that they have a lot of things to consider. No one knows what those things are or how they are addressed.


On your second point, they don't need to be neutral. They need to be objective and even handed. Plus they need to people who don't troll others or create troll type threads.


On your third, there does seem to be occasions where an infraction is given where no apparent rule violation has occurred. Just as one should not create rules they are unwilling to enforce, one shouldn't enforce rules which do not exist.

[Chris]

On your first point, I agree that the lack of feedback from the town hall makes it nearly worthless. Generally they conclude a town hall by thanking people for participating and saying that they have a lot of things to consider. No one knows what those things are or how they are addressed.


On your second point, they don't need to be neutral. They need to be objective and even handed. Plus they need to people who don't troll others or create troll type threads.


On your third, there does seem to be occasions where an infraction is given where no apparent rule violation has occurred. Just as one should not create rules they are unwilling to enforce, one shouldn't enforce rules which do not exist.


To clarify point one, even such feedback as that's a dumb idea would be something, though I'd expect some explanation, a sentence or two.

On two, agree except the objective part, they can take sides, argue a certain side, even subjectively, they just need to engage in discussion--and, right, not troll.

Three, agree, and that's supposed to be handle by reporting the mod action to them and objecting with the expectation of getting an explanation back.

[Dr. Who]

Oh good grief. This our side, their side stuff is perhaps one of the problems of this site (and the country as a whole). If you do not like what someone has posted as threads, start your own instead of complaining about their side. If I were under some obligation to post X number of articles a day, I would be inclined to do it all at once as well just to be done with it. I personally have been looking for articles to post here that interest me that might spur discussions but the ones I find I don't think anybody else would be interested in based on the atmosphere at the site.

As for the question in the OP, I personally don't care, but suspect that if it becomes a "Only upon request" that will create more political gripes between the our side/their side's
I totally agree. As an Advisor I am even more restrained than a regular member, so once the more neutral topics have been posted during the day when I am working, what's left once I get home, I don't feel comfortable posting or they don't interest me in the least or if they do, they are unlikely to interest anyone else.

[Tahuyaman]

To clarify point one, even such feedback as that's a dumb idea would be something, though I'd expect some explanation, a sentence or two.

On two, agree except the objective part, they can take sides, argue a certain side, even subjectively, they just need to engage in discussion--and, right, not troll.

Three, agree, and that's supposed to be handle by reporting the mod action to them and objecting with the expectation of getting an explanation back.

Obviously I agree.

[resister]

To clarify point one, even such feedback as that's a dumb idea would be something, though I'd expect some explanation, a sentence or two.

On two, agree except the objective part, they can take sides, argue a certain side, even subjectively, they just need to engage in discussion--and, right, not troll.

Three, agree, and that's supposed to be handle by reporting the mod action to them and objecting with the expectation of getting an explanation back.
Hmnn, wonder why participation lags...must be the partisanship :rollseyes:

[Dr. Who]

Hmnn, wonder why participation lags...must be the partisanship :rollseyes:
The forum has always had partisanship. It's the lack of reasonable discussion. If 99% of what you encounter is just hateful comments, it get's boring pretty quickly.

[Tahuyaman]

It won't be long before a mod chimes in and says.......Thanks to all for participating in good faith. We have a lot to discuss.


Okee....

[resister]

The forum has always had partisanship. It's the lack of reasonable discussion. If 99% of what you encounter is just hateful comments, it get's boring pretty quickly.
Ironic given who thanked that post. You point out a part of the reason(S)

[Dr. Who]

Ironic given who thanked that post. You point out a part of the reason(S)
Hey, I've been accused of posting a wall of words and TBH I do that so that I don't say anything too directly, lest someone think that I'm a troll for having a differing opinion or daring to contradict the dogpile.

[Tahuyaman]

Personally, I have no confidence that the leadership of this forum will take anything said by the membership seriously.

[Tahuyaman]

Hey, I've been accused of posting a wall of words and TBH I do that so that I don't say anything too directly, lest someone think that I'm a troll for having a differing opinion or daring to contradict the dogpile.

Actually, I think you are one of the only liberals here who are willing to engage in a substantive discission.....sometimes.

[resister]

Hey, I've been accused of posting a wall of words and TBH I do that so that I don't say anything too directly, lest someone think that I'm a troll for having a differing opinion or daring to contradict the dogpile.
Classic strawman, neither here not there. Not an apple or an orange.

[Tahuyaman]

Personally, I have no confidence that the leadership of this forum will take anything said by the membership seriously.


I stand by that comment.

[Dr. Who]

Actually, I think you are one of the only liberals here who are willing to engage in a substantive discission.....sometimes.
It's not easy to have to answer 20 odd responses because you are the only liberal willing to join the discussion and not react to some rather provocative responses. It is sometimes rather exhausting.

[Dr. Who]

Classic strawman, neither here not there. Not an apple or an orange.
Sometimes the truth is just the truth and not a strawman. I can't say that the forum is all that enjoyable for me anymore. Some days there is absolutely nothing that interests me at all and part of that is the attitudes. I think of things that I might respond, but can't be bothered to get embroiled in the nastiness.

[resister]

Sometimes the truth is just the truth and not a strawman. I can't say that the forum is all that enjoyable for me anymore. Some days there is absolutely nothing that interests me at all and part of that is the attitudes. I think of things that I might respond, but can't be bothered to get embroiled in the nastiness.
Tell me about it, neither one of us is innocent. You can either insult someone in one sentence or 20, still insulting.

[Kalkin]

I can't vote. There's no option for "never".

[Bethere]

Tell me about it, neither one of us is innocent. You can either insult someone in one sentence or 20, still insulting.

She's innocent. She really is the most thoughtful poster on this forum with the possible exception of Docthehun.

[resister]

She's innocent, she really is.
Just like you.22199

[Kalkin]

She's innocent. She really is the most thoughtful poster on this forum with the possible exception of Docthehun.
I'm thoughtful. You just don't like my thoughts.

[Bethere]

I'm thoughtful. You just don't like my thoughts.

You and I are square. You don't have to agree with me on anything to be so.

[silvereyes]

Just a suggestion: when I feel a thread I have started moved to the bottom too quickly for others to have had a chance to participate fully I find something I can add to the information and give it and little bump.

Just as an FYI I do not believe common is flooding the forum and especially not deliberately bumping threads.

That's just not him. He don't like your thread he's gonna tell you about it, not hide from it.

Trust me on this one, lol.

Very true. All of it.

[silvereyes]

This is my last post in this thread, safety I agree with you and this isnt something new here, its happened before and It needs to stop for everyones benefit.
I said in another post that theres no purpose or benefit to attacking each other personally over political differences.

We all really need to just CHILL and stop trying to decapitate and castrate everyone that posts something we dont like. Im all for spanking them with facts thats what a political board is for.

We all need to get more honest about whats right and wrong about both the left and the right. We all know when the left does something dead wrong and we know when the right does. Theres absolutely no shame in telling someone YOURE RIGHT!!!! its assinine to just ramble trying to create something to make them wrong

*kerthunk*
Silver fainted from the shock of agreeing.

:)

[silvereyes]

You and I are square. You don't have to agree with me on anything to be so.

Roflol.... Hes anything but square.

(Joking!!!)

[resister]

Roflol.... Hes anything but square.

(Joking!!!)
Just his ploy (joking!!!) :)

[Chris]

Hey, I've been accused of posting a wall of words and TBH I do that so that I don't say anything too directly, lest someone think that I'm a troll for having a differing opinion or daring to contradict the dogpile.



If we're not supposed to talk about other members here, why are you doing that, talking about what you think you do?

[Chris]

Since that point the thread devolved into talking about members.

Hint: I think advisors are supposed to step in and steer discussion back to the topic.


In general, over the last few THs it has been suggested generally and specifically that moderators need to communicate more. I would suggest that, if that means more work, even slow as things are around here, then add more mods.

[Tahuyaman]

Since that point the thread devolved into talking about members.

Hint: I think advisors are supposed to step in and steer discussion back to the topic.


In general, over the last few THs it has been suggested generally and specifically that moderators need to communicate more. I would suggest that, if that means more work, even slow as things are around here, then add more mods.


Right. In the past the Town Hall is concluded by someone thanking all of those who participated and saying "we have a lot of things to discuss". Then nothing.

[Chris]

Right. In the past the Town Hall is concluded by someone thanking all of those who participated and saying "we have a lot of things to discuss". Then nothing.

The plan was to change that:


...Welcome to the 1st Advisor Town Hall.

We'll follow this protocol: Report on what we've done and then open the floor to member feedback and input on that and the forum generally, which we will then work on and report on next Town Hall....

@ 1st Advisor Town Hall (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/89387-1st-Advisor-Town-Hall)

[Tahuyaman]

I gues we'll have to wait and see.

[Bethere]

22202

[Cletus]

Suggestion... Instead of these silly assed "thread bans", which do more to kill threads than the people supposedly disrupting them, impose a 12 or 24 hour ban from the thread and allow the person banned to reenter the tread after the time has passed. That gives enough time for the poster accused of being disruptive to calm down and contribute to the thread again instead of jut being kept out of the discussion.

Thread bans should only be used for the most egregious offenses or for a continuing pattern of offenses (in that thread) and not just because somebody got their panties in a wad and reported what someone else said as "offensive". This is not Kindergarten.

Another thing... If someone does report another poster, that information, including the name of the person doing the reporting and what specifically was reported, should be given to the person reported. If someone wants to report someone else, he should be willing to acknowledge and justify his actions. This anonymous snitch way of doing things makes it too easy for someone to report someone just to get him out of a thread. The mods just kind of nod their heads and push the kill switch. It is easier that way. That way they don't have to take responsibility for their decisions.

[MisterVeritis]

We weren't enthusiastic about Common being named either. But we left him alone, as you should have done with Crepitus.

I'm not wild about Common flooding the forum with threads, but I think he has moderated his other behavior noticeably. If you had an open mind you'd be able to say the same about my friend Crepitus.

Adding both at the same time was an attempt at balance.
I like Common's threads. It is one reason I continue to come here.

[MisterVeritis]

To clarify point one, even such feedback as that's a dumb idea would be something, though I'd expect some explanation, a sentence or two.

I proposed that someone be responsible for growing the board. I was uniformly laughed at. But, it appears my suggestion was acted upon.

No one thought to thank me.

I once heard a story, a true story, about a man who gave a seven-figure contribution to a do-gooder group. No one in that organization asked him how he would like to be thanked. That is how it is here.

[MisterVeritis]

I totally agree. As an Advisor I am even more restrained than a regular member, so once the more neutral topics have been posted during the day when I am working, what's left once I get home, I don't feel comfortable posting or they don't interest me in the least or if they do, they are unlikely to interest anyone else.
We are on the opposite side of every issue. I suggest you post topics that you are passionate about. I am the only one I know that likes to eat oatmeal. Don't post oatmeal.

[MisterVeritis]

Hey, I've been accused of posting a wall of words and TBH I do that so that I don't say anything too directly, lest someone think that I'm a troll for having a differing opinion or daring to contradict the dogpile.
Use more white space. :grin:
Summarize. Make your own points. I will engage. Isn't that the point?

[MisterVeritis]

Suggestion... Instead of these silly assed "thread bans", which do more to kill threads than the people supposedly disrupting them, impose a 12 or 24 hour ban from the thread and allow the person banned to reenter the tread after the time has passed. That gives enough time for the poster accused of being disruptive to calm down and contribute to the thread again instead of just being kept out of the discussion.
This is an excellent suggestion.

[resister]

We weren't enthusiastic about Common being named either. But we left him alone, as you should have done with Crepitus.

I'm not wild about Common flooding the forum with threads, but I think he has moderated his other behavior noticeably. If you had an open mind you'd be able to say the same about my friend Crepitus.

Adding both at the same time was an attempt at balance.
Has Common ever posted 3 threads in TWO MINUTES?
Bob the Slob has

[Dr. Who]

Use more white space. :grin:
Summarize. Make your own points. I will engage. Isn't that the point?
Yeah. I could use more white space, but often there isn't a great place to separate my thoughts. :undecided:

Most of what I post is all my own points, which is why some people harass me for links, but it depends on the topic. I can summarize, but then it lacks nuance and comes across as aggressive or arrogant. I'm trying to encourage discussion, not just reaction.

[Common]

Yeah. I could use more white space, but often there isn't a great place to separate my thoughts. :undecided:

Most of what I post is all my own points, which is why some people harass me for links, but it depends on the topic. I can summarize, but then it lacks nuance and comes across as aggressive or arrogant. I'm trying to encourage discussion, not just reaction.

Youre too smart for most of us Doc, I love to watch you and chris go at it, I stay the hell out of it because I can never figure out what you two are talking about but I read it :)

[Dr. Who]

It is not opposing opinions that are the problem. It is blatant dishonesty.

This whole business of lies vs truth is highly subjective. For instance, where you choose to believe the political spin doctors because you are a Trump supporter, others choose to believe the cynical political naysayers because they are not Trump supporters. It's not like there is a great deal of objective evidence to work from unless Trump has tweeted something.

Most of what is posted is opinion and from a statistical perspective, either side may be right half of the time. If Trump is being investigated for any number of things, since the content of the investigation is not available, no one can claim that they have truth on their side. All they have is opinion and no basis for accusing others of lying.

People see things through their own unique perspectives. You can challenge their perceptions, but calling them blatantly dishonest assumes that they are deliberately trying to lie. How would they benefit from those supposed lies? They don't get paid to post and they aren't signing up membership to a political party. They have no reason to lie. They might be wrong, but they are not lying.

[Common]

This whole business of lies vs truth is highly subjective. For instance, where you choose to believe the political spin doctors because you are a Trump supporter, others choose to believe the cynical political naysayers because they are not Trump supporters. It's not like there is a great deal of objective evidence to work from unless Trump has tweeted something.

Most of what is posted is opinion and from a statistical perspective, either side may be right half of the time. If Trump is being investigated for any number of things, since the content of the investigation is not available, no one can claim that they have truth on their side. All they have is opinion and no basis for accusing others of lying.

People see things through their own unique perspectives. You can challenge their perceptions, but calling them blatantly dishonest assumes that they are deliberately trying to lie. How would they benefit from those supposed lies? They don't get paid to post, they aren't signing up membership to a political party. They have no reason to lie. They might be wrong, but they are not lying.
I think what cletus is referring too is basically the media that has been proven to be doing alot of lieing about trump. Then members post that here as truth and they defend it, and thats taken as dishonest, both the left and right here are guilty of never admitting much of the time when theyve been proven wrong and that makes for the appearance of dishonesty.

[Dr. Who]

Youre too smart for most of us Doc, I love to watch you and chris go at it, I stay the hell out of it because I can never figure out what you two are talking about but I read it :)
Thanks, but you hold your own very well indeed. We just have different areas of interest.

[Cletus]

This whole business of lies vs truth is highly subjective.

Truth is never subjective.


People see things through their own unique perspectives. You can challenge their perceptions, but calling them blatantly dishonest assumes that they are deliberately trying to lie.

That is because most of the time, they are. When a statement has been demonstrated to be false, and someone continues to try to pass it off as fact, unless they are too stupid to understand the difference (which is possible regarding the particular "advisor" in question), that person is being dishonest.


How would they benefit from those supposed lies? They don't get paid to post, they aren't signing up membership to a political party. They have no reason to lie. They might be wrong, but they are not lying.

Nonsense.

[Dr. Who]

I think what cletus is referring too is basically the media that has been proven to be doing alot of lieing about trump. Then members post that here as truth and they defend it, and thats taken as dishonest, both the left and right here are guilty of never admitting much of the time when theyve been proven wrong and that makes for the appearance of dishonesty.
On occasion, it is proven to be untrue but more often than not all that cut and dried and it's a battle of news sources. I really have a problem with calling people liars because it impugns their character. If I don't believe someone's assertion, I'd rather say something like 'color me sceptical' or 'I'm unconvinced'.

[Chris]

I proposed that someone be responsible for growing the board. I was uniformly laughed at. But, it appears my suggestion was acted upon.

No one thought to thank me.

I once heard a story, a true story, about a man who gave a seven-figure contribution to a do-gooder group. No one in that organization asked him how he would like to be thanked. That is how it is here.


Indeed, more communication between mods and members would do everyone good.

[Chris]

Youre too smart for most of us Doc, I love to watch you and chris go at it, I stay the hell out of it because I can never figure out what you two are talking about but I read it :)

Except, in fact, we don't go at it. Who will post opinion A, I will address her opinion A and counter with opinion B, and then Who will quote me and reply with opinion C having nothing whatsoever to do with either her opinio A or my opinion B. It may look like a discussion but isn't. As of late I have pushed her back to A and B and she gets irritated.

Perhaps she's French because French rhetoric has that roundabout style and opposed to the more straightforward British and American style.

(Please, I am talking about posting style and not her personally. Unlike her who when she gets irritated attacks personally.)

((And as I post this I wonder again why a town hall keeps drifting into talking about members.))

[Chris]

Truth is never subjective.



That is because most of the time, they are. When a statement has been demonstrated to be false, and someone continues to try to pass it off as fact, unless they are too stupid to understand the difference (which is possible regarding the particular "advisor" in question), that person is being dishonest.



Nonsense.



Truth is never subjective.

Not to one who adheres to the classical liberal ideology.

For one who adheres to counter-Enlightenment ideology, from Rousseau, Hegel...on to post-modern ideology, truth is entirely subjective, allows for contradiction, does not exist. Understand that and you will understand the posts of many a "thoughtful" liberal member here. --The question then becomes how do you argue with such views?

[Chris]

Truth is never subjective.



That is because most of the time, they are. When a statement has been demonstrated to be false, and someone continues to try to pass it off as fact, unless they are too stupid to understand the difference (which is possible regarding the particular "advisor" in question), that person is being dishonest.



Nonsense.



Truth is never subjective.

Not to one who adheres to the classical liberal ideology.

For one who adheres to counter-Enlightenment ideology, from Rousseau, Hegel...on to post-modern ideology, truth is entirely subjective, allows for contradiction, does not exist. Understand that and you will understand the posts of many a "thoughtful" liberal member here. --The question then becomes how do you argue with such views?

[Dr. Who]

Truth is never subjective.



That is because most of the time, they are. When a statement has been demonstrated to be false, and someone continues to try to pass it off as fact, unless they are too stupid to understand the difference (which is possible regarding the particular "advisor" in question), that person is being dishonest.



Nonsense.

OK, since we are generally discussing how to improve the forum and cut down on the sort of things that either alienate the membership or scare off new members, how we treat each other while we disagree is the difference between a hostile wasteland of fighting and bickering and someplace where people join discussions.

When threads simply devolve into a mutual insult society, what we attract is trolls, because anyone who actually wants to have a conversation wouldn't join the forum unless they were paid.

The tenor of our threads of late is laying bait for trolls. If we as members don't want to attract trolls, then we shouldn't create a troll-attractive environment. That may mean considering your words when you respond, so that you are not promoting hostile responses and thus exciting the lurking trolls seeking a new hunting ground.

Trolls will be deliberately dishonest just to instigate fights because that is their purpose. They pick a side and go out of their way to irritate and aggravate others, especially those who don't routinely rise to the bait. They post offensive memes and dog members across threads, needling them relentlessly and derailing threads until they are ultimately banned, but by then they have damaged the forum.

It's up to all of us to create the forum that we want. The Mods cannot create it for us. We are all responsible for our contributions.

[Tricia]

I would like to take a second to offer a few words about our mods. They aren't perfect, I'm not trying to say that, but they are offering a service to this forum FREE OF CHARGE. I was a moderator here and lasted less than two months. The stress was absolutely more than I could handle coupled with the normal stresses of my every day life. I can't think of anyone, anyone at all, who would actually want to moderate this board the way it currently is. People hardly want to post here any more for gosh sakes. But still these four do it, and don't bitch about what an absolute thankless job it is. I personally would have jumped ship a long time ago if I were any one of them. All they get is griping and complaining. There are things that could be done differently moderation wise that would probably help the board, we all have our opinions on that. I just think that we should offer our opinions in a little more of a constructive manner, without the unnecessary personal attacks.

[Dr. Who]

Except, in fact, we don't go at it. Who will post opinion A, I will address her opinion A and counter with opinion B, and then Who will quote me and reply with opinion C having nothing whatsoever to do with either her opinio A or my opinion B. It may look like a discussion but isn't. As of late I have pushed her back to A and B and she gets irritated.

Perhaps she's French because French rhetoric has that roundabout style and opposed to the more straightforward British and American style.

(Please, I am talking about posting style and not her personally. Unlike her who when she gets irritated attacks personally.)

((And as I post this I wonder again why a town hall keeps drifting into talking about members.))

No. It's just that you seem to generally misunderstand or misconstrue what I am saying and when I try a different way of explaining, you invariably conclude it is an alternate opinion. It's all related, but we are incapable of communicating with any clarity. FYI you make plenty of personal remarks. You just don't recognize them as such and then wonder why I become irritated. I can only conclude that you are from Mars and I am from Venus and there is a fundamental language barrier.

[Green Arrow]

Except, in fact, we don't go at it. Who will post opinion A, I will address her opinion A and counter with opinion B, and then Who will quote me and reply with opinion C having nothing whatsoever to do with either her opinio A or my opinion B. It may look like a discussion but isn't. As of late I have pushed her back to A and B and she gets irritated.

Perhaps she's French because French rhetoric has that roundabout style and opposed to the more straightforward British and American style.

(Please, I am talking about posting style and not her personally. Unlike her who when she gets irritated attacks personally.)

((And as I post this I wonder again why a town hall keeps drifting into talking about members.))

Because people refuse to quit. You certainly didn’t have to make this post.

[Green Arrow]

Except, in fact, we don't go at it. Who will post opinion A, I will address her opinion A and counter with opinion B, and then Who will quote me and reply with opinion C having nothing whatsoever to do with either her opinio A or my opinion B. It may look like a discussion but isn't. As of late I have pushed her back to A and B and she gets irritated.

Perhaps she's French because French rhetoric has that roundabout style and opposed to the more straightforward British and American style.

(Please, I am talking about posting style and not her personally. Unlike her who when she gets irritated attacks personally.)

((And as I post this I wonder again why a town hall keeps drifting into talking about members.))

Because people refuse to quit. You certainly didn’t have to make this post.

[Bethere]

We are on the opposite side of every issue. I suggest you post topics that you are passionate about. I am the only one I know that likes to eat oatmeal. Don't post oatmeal.

I like hot oatmeal with milk and sugar.

[Bethere]

Use more white space. :grin:
Summarize. Make your own points. I will engage. Isn't that the point?

Yeah, no more than 2 sentences before hitting return an extra time.

[Safety]

I would like to see the advisors, mods, and ADMIN talk and work on defining off-topic trolling and how to moderate it equally across the board. As well as explaining how one member is threadbanned for talking about a member after a warning was issued, but two additional members engaged in the same act are not (yea, I’m pretty sure it was reported). At the moment, the current metric isn’t close to passing the sniff test.

Thanks.

[Chris]

I would like to take a second to offer a few words about our mods. They aren't perfect, I'm not trying to say that, but they are offering a service to this forum FREE OF CHARGE. I was a moderator here and lasted less than two months. The stress was absolutely more than I could handle coupled with the normal stresses of my every day life. I can't think of anyone, anyone at all, who would actually want to moderate this board the way it currently is. People hardly want to post here any more for gosh sakes. But still these four do it, and don't bitch about what an absolute thankless job it is. I personally would have jumped ship a long time ago if I were any one of them. All they get is griping and complaining. There are things that could be done differently moderation wise that would probably help the board, we all have our opinions on that. I just think that we should offer our opinions in a little more of a constructive manner, without the unnecessary personal attacks.

Same here, I appreciate what the mods do voluntarily and just try to offer suggestions to their process so things improve. Those suggestions may be good or bad all things considered. My only complain is that for many THs now no suggestion has had any feedback.

[Tricia]

Same here, I appreciate what the mods do voluntarily and just try to offer suggestions to their process so things improve. Those suggestions may be good or bad all things considered. My only complain is that for many THs now no suggestion has had any feedback.
Understood. Hopefully we can get the mods to chime in at some point to let us know where they stand on some of these hot button moderation issues. Unfortunately, no matter what they say, they are going to get attacked so they are damned if they do, damned if they don't.

[Chris]

No. It's just that you seem to generally misunderstand or misconstrue what I am saying and when I try a different way of explaining, you invariably conclude it is an alternate opinion. It's all related, but we are incapable of communicating with any clarity. FYI you make plenty of personal remarks. You just don't recognize them as such and then wonder why I become irritated. I can only conclude that you are from Mars and I am from Venus and there is a fundamental language barrier.

BS, Who, if I did misconstrue your words then it is in your interested to reply and address the misunderstanding. I recall very few cases where you have done that.

No, I'm not talking about alternative opinions, that would be great. I'm talking about replying to someone in a post that has nothing whatsoever to what you quote. --If it's related it's up to you to relate it.

No, I do not make personal remarks. I might point out the source of your opinion is Marxist and you take that political comment personally--I can't help that. You do get personal, quite often.


Note that we are discussing this because you took it upon yourself to talk about others and yourself in a Town Hall where we're not supposed to do that.

[Chris]

Because people refuse to quit. You certainly didn’t have to make this post.

I do need to because Advisors are not doing their job and reporting it so mods start TBing those who refuse to quit talking about other members and, worse, about themselves.

Not controlling the TH is just as bad as members never getting any feedback on their suggestions and criticisms.

[Chris]

Because people refuse to quit. You certainly didn’t have to make this post.

I do need to because Advisors are not doing their job and reporting it so mods start TBing those who refuse to quit talking about other members and, worse, about themselves.

Not controlling the TH is just as bad as members never getting any feedback on their suggestions and criticisms.

[Chris]

Understood. Hopefully we can get the mods to chime in at some point to let us know where they stand on some of these hot button moderation issues. Unfortunately, no matter what they say, they are going to get attacked so they are damned if they do, damned if they don't.

The attacks should be ignored.

Mods needn't respond in a Town Hall, they can go off, discuss, and make announcements later.

[MisterVeritis]

I like hot oatmeal with milk and sugar.
Group hug?

[Chris]

I would like to see the advisors, mods, and ADMIN talk and work on defining off-topic trolling and how to moderate it equally across the board. As well as explaining how one member is threadbanned for talking about a member after a warning was issued, but two additional members engaged in the same act are not (yea, I’m pretty sure it was reported). At the moment, the current metric isn’t close to passing the sniff test.

Thanks.


I would expect that the one who trolled or otherwise instigated the back and forth, the talking about members, to receive the heavier penalty. I would also expect members' history of such behavior to be considered. At least, moderation, as far back as I can remember, has done that.

[Chris]

I would like to see the advisors, mods, and ADMIN talk and work on defining off-topic trolling and how to moderate it equally across the board. As well as explaining how one member is threadbanned for talking about a member after a warning was issued, but two additional members engaged in the same act are not (yea, I’m pretty sure it was reported). At the moment, the current metric isn’t close to passing the sniff test.

Thanks.


I would expect that the one who trolled or otherwise instigated the back and forth, the talking about members, to receive the heavier penalty. I would also expect members' history of such behavior to be considered. At least, moderation, as far back as I can remember, has done that.

[MisterVeritis]

Yeah, no more than 2 sentences before hitting return an extra time.
Or possibly three sentences. But not twenty.

[Bethere]

Group hug?

22208

[Green Arrow]

I do need to because Advisors are not doing their job and reporting it so mods start TBing those who refuse to quit talking about other members and, worse, about themselves.

Not controlling the TH is just as bad as members never getting any feedback on their suggestions and criticisms.

Oh, we’re not? How do you know what is and is not being reported?

[Chris]

Oh, we’re not? How do you know what is and is not being reported?

It's not being stopped.

Perhaps that's another suggestion for improvement, let the mods run Town Halls.

[Cletus]

I would like to take a second to offer a few words about our mods. They aren't perfect, I'm not trying to say that, but they are offering a service to this forum FREE OF CHARGE.

It isn't like they are guarding the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. They hardly do anything, and when they do, they generally fuck it up.

[Tahuyaman]

The attacks should be ignored.

Mods needn't respond in a Town Hall, they can go off, discuss, and make announcements later. Moderators should respond in town hall meetings. Generally the purpose of a town hall meeting is to get the authorities to respond to questions or concerns in a public setting.

[Chris]

Moderators should respond in town hall meetings. Generally the purpose of a town hall meeting is to get the authorities to respond to questions or concerns in a public setting.

That's true, in a real TH. Maybe some things could be responded to immediately. Explanation of rules and practices are possible. As long as it doesn't end up a long argument. --Other things could be responded to as we'll take it under advisement and will get back later. Some things do require discussion.

[Tahuyaman]

That's true, in a real TH. Maybe some things could be responded to immediately. Explanation of rules and practices are possible. As long as it doesn't end up a long argument. --Other things could be responded to as we'll take it under advisement and will get back later. Some things do require discussion.

Most often those discussions should happen in public.

[Chris]

Most often those discussions should happen in public.

Some are, shall we say, executive decisions. I'm fine with those as long as they are communicated. Consider the copyright rule, admin and mods have to look at the legal issues and comply. THere's no need to discuss, just announce it. Other things could be open to discussion.

[Tahuyaman]

Some are, shall we say, executive decisions. I'm fine with those as long as they are communicated. Consider the copyright rule, admin and mods have to look at the legal issues and comply. THere's no need to discuss, just announce it. Other things could be open to discussion.

The only time a discussion should be held in private is if and when it is about a specific named individual. All others can happen in the light of day.

[Green Arrow]

It's not being stopped.

Perhaps that's another suggestion for improvement, let the mods run Town Halls.

I requested it stop twice and a mod warning was issued. It’s being stopped, just not fast enough to your liking. That hardly justifies making the (offensive) assumption that we are doing nothing.

[Chris]

I requested it stop twice and a mod warning was issued. It’s being stopped, just not fast enough to your liking. That hardly justifies making the (offensive) assumption that we are doing nothing.

And so you make a personal issue of it? Criminy. Let me report that...

[Chris]

The only time a discussion should be held in private is if and when it is about a specific named individual. All others can happen in the light of day.

Even among four mods a discussion can go on forever. Adding 20 members to it will go on forever and a day.

My boss, even his, and his, will come ask my opinion on things in the company, but then go off an make decisions. The forum is not a democracy but a business.

In general, I agree, there should be as much communication as possible, but still understand meeting behind closed doors.



Naturally, on this, on any matter here, my opinion on it is not more valuable than yours, so who knows what they'll decide on more open discussion.

[Tahuyaman]

I believe in being open.

[Tricia]

It isn't like they are guarding the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. They hardly do anything, and when they do, they generally fuck it up.

Off topic but my father was a guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier during Vietnam. Isn't that cool??

[Chris]

Off topic but my father was a guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier during Vietnam. Isn't that cool??

You should be a mod!

[Tricia]

You should be a mod!

huh? Why?

[Chris]

huh? Why?

You dad was a guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.

[Bethere]

22209

[Dr. Who]

BS, Who, if I did misconstrue your words then it is in your interested to reply and address the misunderstanding. I recall very few cases where you have done that.

No, I'm not talking about alternative opinions, that would be great. I'm talking about replying to someone in a post that has nothing whatsoever to what you quote. --If it's related it's up to you to relate it.

No, I do not make personal remarks. I might point out the source of your opinion is Marxist and you take that political comment personally--I can't help that. You do get personal, quite often.


Note that we are discussing this because you took it upon yourself to talk about others and yourself in a Town Hall where we're not supposed to do that.
You chose to bring me up in conversation with Common. I said nothing about you in my response to him. I responded to your comment because you couldn't resist the impulse to denigrate me.

My comments about my perceptions of the problems on the forum and my own likes and dislikes were very general and given that I am also a member, also have a right to express myself in these town halls as much as any other member. Other than my response to you, I referenced no other member of this forum.

[Common]

FIGHT NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! folks

[resister]

22209
22210

[Cletus]

Off topic but my father was a guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier during Vietnam. Isn't that cool??

Tomb Guards deserve an immense amount of respect. It is hard duty, requiring great discipline and dedication.

[Dr. Who]

FIGHT NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! folks
I was as nice as possible in the circumstances. :smiley:

[jimmyz]

Tomb Guards deserve an immense amount of respect. It is hard duty, requiring great discipline and dedication.

Duty in all weather 365 days a year. Go to 1:03 if you want to skip The Sentinels Creed at the beginning. I advise not skipping it as it is an ideal you don't hear or see carried out in everyday America. Those men standing guard make me proud.


https://youtu.be/MaiDIeYlgTM

[Kacper]

Duty in all weather 365 days a year. Go to 1:03 if you want to skip The Sentinels Creed at the beginning. I advise not skipping it as it is an idea you don't hear or see carried out in everyday America. Those men standing guard make me proud.


https://youtu.be/MaiDIeYlgTM
I saw the first black female doing the tomb of the unknowns thing. As a white dude it didn't really mean much to me that she was the first black female other than I knew I was seeing someone breaking a barrier.

I guess not to be off-topic, we should have someone guard this thread against off-topic whores like me

[Tricia]

One really cool thing is that he now has lifetime access to the tomb "quarters" where those on duty live and practice. I'm planning a trip with him very soon, if he is up to it, to show my kids around Arlington.

[Chris]

You chose to bring me up in conversation with Common. I said nothing about you in my response to him. I responded to your comment because you couldn't resist the impulse to denigrate me.

My comments about my perceptions of the problems on the forum and my own likes and dislikes were very general and given that I am also a member, also have a right to express myself in these town halls as much as any other member. Other than my response to you, I referenced no other member of this forum.


False, I did not bring you up.

I said nothing about you, only your rhetorical style of posting. That's not you. It's probably cultural.

I did not denigrate you. Why do you make these things up? Anyone can go back and see what I posted. It was not a personal denigration.

No one said you couldn't express your opinions. Though I do think talking about yourself should be excluded same as talking about other members. It's off-topic after all.

[Chris]

FIGHT NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! folks

All I did is comment on Who's rhetorical style. She's making it personal. I have no interest in fighting.

[resister]

False, I did not bring you up.

I said nothing about you, only your rhetorical style of posting. That's not you. It's probably cultural.

I did not denigrate you. Why do you make these things up? Anyone can go back and see what I posted. It was not a personal denigration.

No one said you couldn't express your opinions. Though I do think talking about yourself should be excluded same as talking about other members. It's off-topic after all.

Dr Who has gone on record saying "No constrictors are native to the United States" so...

[Chris]

Dr Who has gone on record saying "No constrictors are native to the United States" so...

Coluber constrictor anthicus, but we slither off topic. :P

[resister]

3 threads in two minutes, that must be a record Bob the Slob .....

[Dr. Who]

False, I did not bring you up.

I said nothing about you, only your rhetorical style of posting. That's not you. It's probably cultural.

I did not denigrate you. Why do you make these things up? Anyone can go back and see what I posted. It was not a personal denigration.

No one said you couldn't express your opinions. Though I do think talking about yourself should be excluded same as talking about other members. It's off-topic after all.
False. Period. Your words:

Except, in fact, we don't go at it. Who will post opinion A, I will address her opinion A and counter with opinion B, and then Who will quote me and reply with opinion C having nothing whatsoever to do with either her opinio A or my opinion B. It may look like a discussion but isn't. As of late I have pushed her back to A and B and she gets irritated.

Perhaps she's French because French rhetoric has that roundabout style and opposed to the more straightforward British and American style.

(Please, I am talking about posting style and not her personally. Unlike her who when she gets irritated attacks personally.)

((And as I post this I wonder again why a town hall keeps drifting into talking about members.))

[Chris]

False. Period. Your words:

What you cited as an example is me talking about what you post, how you post, your rhetorical style. Like I said, anyone can read that post and see the words "Who will post opinion A, I will address her opinion A and counter with opinion B, and then Who will quote me and reply "--that's talking about your posting.

That's quite different than the following example of rudely talking about another person, that is "Unlike her who when she gets irritated attacks personally":


Not to be rude, but you are sometimes rather insensitive i.e. if it doesn't bother you, it shouldn't bother others. Certainly, a number of times you actually admitted you didn't notice that a post was racist when everyone else did, so I don't think that you are the best arbiter of issues that don't really find a home in your frame of reference.

Or should we return to your call out against me using Latin, of all silly things.

[Hal Jordan]

Thank you for your input. I will make sure that replies do come back from the discussions generated by this TH.

This thread is now closed.

[Adelaide]

Responses to the town hall, per member requests...

First one:

(1) On townhalls, I voted don't care. Why should we? We have townhall after townhall with all sorts of suggestions for improving the forum and its moderation, some negative, some positive, whatever, but we never get any feedback on any of it. So what's the point?

(2) Somewhere someone said Advisors should be neutral. I disagree. They can be liberal, conservative or libertarian; anarchist, socialist or statist, Rep or Dem or Independent; or whatever. That should not matter. What should is that they start threads and contribute to discussion in a sincere way and not play games. --And for that, they need to be around. --Replace as needed.

(3) A request for moderation: Could you please rewrite the rules so they align with what you moderate for? Moderation should refer to the rule violated. 80%, perhaps more, of moderation is for talking about other members, back and forth, even bickering. OK, fine, please add those to the rules. It's odd to be moderated for behavior not in the rules. --Note, this is a constructive suggestion for improvement that ought by next town hall to get some feedback. This is what I mean by (1) above.

With regards to your third point, majority of those posts talking about members, "back and forth" or bickering is off-topic posting or flat-out insults. Posting in bad faith would also apply.

Second one:

I would like to see the advisors, mods, and @ADMIN (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1) talk and work on defining off-topic trolling and how to moderate it equally across the board. As well as explaining how one member is threadbanned for talking about a member after a warning was issued, but two additional members engaged in the same act are not (yea, I’m pretty sure it was reported). At the moment, the current metric isn’t close to passing the sniff test.

Thanks.

We go through the best we can to thread ban individuals who violate the warning but it is hard to go through 40 plus pages and find every example, and no it is not reported with any consistency, and after we give out the first couple thread bans people may begin to post off-topic again but it doesn't get reported and we don't go back and check. Maybe we should check, but that would be laborious.

Third one:

Suggestion... Instead of these silly assed "thread bans", which do more to kill threads than the people supposedly disrupting them, impose a 12 or 24-hourban from the thread and allow the person banned to reenter the tread after the time has passed. That gives enough time for the poster accused of being disruptive to calm down and contribute to the thread again instead of jut being kept out of the discussion.

Thread bans should only be used for the most egregious offenses or for a continuing pattern of offenses (in that thread) and not just because somebody got their panties in a wad and reported what someone else said as "offensive". This is not Kindergarten.

Another thing... If someone does report another poster, that information, including the name of the person doing the reporting and what specifically was reported, should be given to the person reported. If someone wants to report someone else, he should be willing to acknowledge and justify his actions. This anonymous snitch way of doing things makes it too easy for someone to report someone just to get him out of a thread. The mods just kind of nod their heads and push the kill switch. It is easier that way. That way they don't have to take responsibility for their decisions.

Technology does not really allow for temporary thread bans, and plenty of people earn the inability to continue being an asshole.

And no, we are not posting who reports who or what. The confidentiality of those reports helps ensure that members do not feel like they can't file a report without facing backlash. Sure, some abuse the ability to report a post but the moderation team is usually pretty good at sussing out bullshit.


Fourth one:

Moderators should respond in town hall meetings. Generally, the purpose of a town hall meeting is to get the authorities to respond to questions or concerns in a public setting.
Our policy has always been to only have one or two mods, max, involved in town hall threads or general complaint threads because the rules are like laws we all interpret differently and we try to avoid providing inconsistent information. Most moderators, myself included, hesitate to answer questions in a town hall because the four of us are on equal footing and should really discuss issues before posting about them, as well as getting input from ADMIN. Additionally, we are not on trial which is what would happen in most threads that discuss moderation to any degree. There are always a handful of members that just want to beat us over the head repeatedly for no particular reason other than enjoying it.


From the moderation team. Questions/concerns can be directed to any of us or ADMIN if desired, but this was approved before being posted.