First 2018 Advisor Town Hall

[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.