Locked: The politics rule is getting out of hand

D-Roc wrote: ↑

Jun 1st, 2012 12:04 pm

This type of "zero tolerence" for political / political-ish type threads is what is needed. May be heavy handed, but when they gave an inch, members took a mile. This is the only way to to clean up OT.

+1

Couldn't agree more.

How is this thread not considered political: stop-borrowing-private-banks-12-year-ol ... t-1184160/

If you are going to enforce a rule, enforce it CONSISTENTLY.

DearSummer wrote: ↑

Jun 2nd, 2012 8:18 pm

How is this thread not considered political: stop-borrowing-private-banks-12-year-ol ... t-1184160/

If you are going to enforce a rule, enforce it CONSISTENTLY.

I scrolled through the thread and didn't see any references to things like the Liberals, NDP, Conservatives or people like Harper, McGuinty, Hudak, Ford etc.

Therefore I can understand how that thread could be viewed as not political.

I understand and agree that it'll be a process for all users to understand exactly where the new line is (myself included) but the end goal seems to be a better and more efficient OT thanks to these new rules so far.

As a result thanks clicked to every post by a mod in this thread.

The usual suspect(s) are already being rude and bickering in the thread so it won't be long before it is closed.

Ojam wrote: ↑

Jun 2nd, 2012 9:14 pm

The usual suspect(s) are already being rude and bickering in the thread so it won't be long before it is closed.

I was going to say that when I first say DS' post but refrained...LOL!!!

NG wrote: ↑

Jun 2nd, 2012 8:50 pm

I scrolled through the thread and didn't see any references to things like the Liberals, NDP, Conservatives or people like Harper, McGuinty, Hudak, Ford etc.

Therefore I can understand how that thread could be viewed as not political.

I understand and agree that it'll be a process for all users to understand exactly where the new line is (myself included) but the end goal seems to be a better and more efficient OT thanks to these new rules so far.

As a result thanks clicked to every post by a mod in this thread.

I agree, it's still a bit of a confusing period because it's hard to tell where the line is. For example, the thread DearSummer linked - it's debating whether capitalism is evil, basically. That's an economic issue, but it also very often becomes a political one. Is it OK to say that capitalism is evil if nobody mentions the government bailing out capitalists with public money? What about unions, can we talk about unions as long as we don't talk about whether the government should intervene in strike situations? Or public transport, can we talk about whether or not Toronto should build more subways as long as we don't mention what the Mayor and various councillors want to do? If you want to be strict about it, politics is in everything because at some point somebody has used pretty much any issue to score political points. I guess to be really topical, the hot thread right now about the sad situation at the Eaton Centre - if that becomes a discussion about gun control or whether we should be tougher on violent criminals (both of which are totally relevant to the topic), is that allowed?

Syne wrote: ↑

Jun 1st, 2012 5:26 pm

Let's take the sub-forum idea off the backburner then. Zero tolerance is not a "wait and see" philosophy. People want to talk about current events, and current events are always (atleast somewhat) political in nature.

Yep - and sometimes they can be important issues that affect many Canadians. Hushing this type of discussion is essentially RFD taking a political stance.

NG wrote: ↑

Jun 2nd, 2012 12:07 am

I really don't understand the problem. Surely there are other sites out there to discuss Canadian politics?

The problem is, many other websites with large diverse groups of users also ban political discussions.


Why not implement the groups feature where users who wish to opt-in to political discussions can go into their User-CP, click "groups" and join a political group? That way it isolates it from users who don't wish to see political discussions.

ssbtech wrote: ↑

Jun 2nd, 2012 9:46 pm

Yep - and sometimes they can be important issues that affect many Canadians. Hushing this type of discussion is essentially RFD taking a political stance.




The problem is, many other websites with large diverse groups of users also ban political discussions.


Why not implement the groups feature where users who wish to opt-in to political discussions can go into their User-CP, click "groups" and join a political group? That way it isolates it from users who don't wish to see political discussions.

RFD mods are taking away politics all together because certain users have derailed every single thread that's been created recently...Banning the users won't accomplish anything because others will just replace them....Certain users haven't even posted in off-topic since Politics was taken out of the forum and they were known trolls....It's easy to ban a topic then to read pages on top of pages of threads and marking individuals...

ssbtech wrote: ↑

Jun 2nd, 2012 9:46 pm

The problem is, many other websites with large diverse groups of users also ban political discussions.

I've been open in my dissent for the banning on profanity/non-porn sexuality on this site because the RFD/YPG policy exists as an anomaly on the internet compared to other successful sites.

However what you say about politics is true which is why I understand and agree with RFD/YPG's decision here.

There's a reason why political discussion is banned on the vast majority of internet sites.

It's very labour intensive to mods and adds little or no value to the site itself.

That's why you stick the political discussions in a group that requires the user to join, knowing full well that things might get heated.

Rude/harassing members can simply be banned from the group without being banned from the rest of the site.

Stiffling political discussion doesn't help anyone.

ssbtech wrote: ↑

Jun 3rd, 2012 2:11 am

That's why you stick the political discussions in a group that requires the user to join, knowing full well that things might get heated.

Rude/harassing members can simply be banned from the group without being banned from the rest of the site.

Stiffling political discussion doesn't help anyone.

I dunno, I think you could make a pretty strong case that stifling political discussion - on this site at least - doesn't really harm anyone.

Those folks who yearn for daily political discussion in their lives still have countless venues available to them elsewhere on the internet - RFD doesn't have to be everything to everybody.

Very few people are going to abandon RFD simply because they can't engage in political discussion on the site IMO - and of those very few that might, I suspect the site would only benefit by their departure and I seriously doubt they'd be missed.

NG wrote: ↑

Jun 2nd, 2012 11:59 pm

the RFD/YPG policy exists as an anomaly on the internet compared to other successful sites.

Which " successful sites " are you alluding to exactly ?

NG wrote: ↑

Jun 2nd, 2012 11:59 pm

I've been open in

my dissent for the banning on profanitynon-porn sexuality on this site because

And in terms of your " dissent for the banning on profanity " ...what is the ' downside ' of banning profanity on this site in your view ?

poedua wrote: ↑

Jun 3rd, 2012 8:57 am

Which " successful sites " are you alluding to exactly ?



And in terms of your " dissent for the banning on profanity " ...what is the ' downside ' of banning profanity on this site in your view ?

Podeua haven't you figured out I couldn't care less what you think?

If oranr is wondering your questions I'll be happy to answer but I'll be damned if I'll be questioned by the likes of you.

If people really think that the lack of profanity is an issue that's sad - There are thousands of words in the English language, If you can't properly express your view or message without a profanity maybe you have a bigger problem then you think.....

And seriously, this site is owned by YPC - they can run it as they see fit, one or two users complaining on here really doesn't matter ....I'm sure this site's traffic is still really high and I'm sure the majority that come here get what they need out of the site (FINDING DEALS IT'S MAIN PURPOSE)

poedua wrote: ↑

Jun 3rd, 2012 8:45 am

I dunno, I think you could make a pretty strong case that stifling political discussion - on this site at least - doesn't really harm anyone.

Those folks who yearn for daily political discussion in their lives still have countless venues available to them elsewhere on the internet - RFD doesn't have to be everything to everybody.

Very few people are going to abandon RFD simply because they can't engage in political discussion on the site IMO - and of those very few that might, I suspect the site would only benefit by their departure and I seriously doubt they'd be missed.

I've been saying this for a long time, I'll never understand why being able to express and talk politics on a site based on DEALS is so important to some people....If you really need to express your views go to city hall when they have it open to the public, go to town hall meetings, email your MP's.....

I bet most users have never done any of the above.

That would be more effective/productive then sitting behind a computer screen on a DEALS site complaining about how you think Ford is an idiot.....Or better yet, start your own blog.....