Predicting demise of threads - New OT e-sport

[Syne]

It seems like every thread in OT these days that is even the slightest bit controversial (not necessarily political or religious) isn't complete without an animated .gif of Geordi La Forge executing a barrel roll underneath some shuttlebay doors.

Just thought I'd point out that if you keep locking everything controversial, then half the threads are going to be filled with people predicting that thread's demise.. After a while, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and threadcrapping occurs simply because it's easier than investing time towards thoughtful discussion. While irritating, it's tough to blame them. Why would anyone take the time to make a thread constructive, when they don't know whether they are going to hit the 'reply' button after putting 20 minutes into a post, just to find the thread locked? It's easier just to post a silly one-liner.

Take the Pride thread for example. Not religious. Not political. Controversial, yes. There was some back n' forth and some different opinions, but the thread was pretty respectful all things considered. Yet, it was arbitrarily locked without explanation. You might also notice 4 posts on the first page trying to steer the thread into a ditch before it even gets off the ground. That's not a constructive attitude. People shouldn't be conditioned to derail threads because Mods are too lock-happy to even give discussion a chance. You're shooting yourselves in the foot here. It's only going to snowball, and the level of discussion in OT is only going to get more like a chatroom, which is what you're trying to avoid, right?

Perhaps I misunderstood when you said political discussion wasn't allowed. Did you actually mean to say controversial discussion isn't allowed? Like debating hot topics aren't allowed? Some clarification is needed here.

It seems to me that if you want thoughtful and intelligent discussion in OT, you need to leave room for topics that incite passionate opinions from people. If not political and religious, than so be it.. but you have to leave the rest alone, if only to keep the pilot light burning.

[Sauerkraut]

It has nothing to do with the "new" OT. Pride discussions bring out the worst in RFD.

I remember the thread from 2 years ago that was locked and deleted. It was pure vitriolic hate. There is a core number of regular posters in OT that cannot and/or will not have a civil discussion. The mods do not want to take the time to weed out individual posts, so locking the thread is much easier.

and continuing to whine about it will not change anything @ RFD. Find another forum

[45ED]

It has nothing to do with the "new" OT. Pride discussions bring out the worst in RFD.

I remember the thread from 2 years ago that was locked and deleted. It was pure vitriolic hate. There is a core number of regular posters in OT that cannot and/or will not have a civil discussion. The mods do not want to take the time to weed out individual posts, so locking the thread is much easier.

and continuing to whine about it will not change anything @ RFD. Find another forum

+1 000

[poedua]

Perhaps I misunderstood when you said political discussion wasn't allowed.

Did you actually mean to say controversial discussion isn't allowed? Like debating hot topics aren't allowed?

Some clarification is needed here.

I would appear to be a rather straightforward & dead simple matter to clarify IMO.

As we all know, political and religious thread aren't allowed

Beyond that, any " hot / controversial " thread topics themselves should be allowed - so long as the content / theme of the thread topic itself doesn't contravene any forum rules.

However, as so often happens with " hot / controversial / visceral " thread topics ( i.e pride discussions ), the discussion within the thread seems to eventually degenerate ( i.e " bring out the worst in RFD " ) into exchanges between members such that - at least in the opinion of the mods - represent blatant violations of the rules, has simply turned into gratuitous bicker fests, has run it's course etc.. etc. - all of which - can result in threads getting locked.

It's that simple.

you need to leave room for topics that incite passionate opinions from people.

Actually, there's TONS of " room " in OT for those types of topics and for such " passionate opinions " now.

Both the topic threads being posted and the " passionate opinions " being expressed simply have to adhere to forum rules.

It's as simple as that ...it ain't rocket science.

[jerrysiz]

It has nothing to do with the "new" OT. Pride discussions bring out the worst in RFD.

I remember the thread from 2 years ago that was locked and deleted. It was pure vitriolic hate. There is a core number of regular posters in OT that cannot and/or will not have a civil discussion. The mods do not want to take the time to weed out individual posts, so locking the thread is much easier.

and continuing to whine about it will not change anything @ RFD. Find another forum

Yep. So the question becomes: Why are these users still here? For all the talk about not tolerating racism/homophobia/personal attacks/stereotyping, the users who continue to post these kinds of things seem to be facing absolutely no real concequences.

I didn't see the pride thread before it was closed, but I see one of the users whose post was removed has a still-existing post in the thread calling gays "deviants", so if that is acceptable, I can only imagine the nature of what was removed. And the users that posted these things? Maybe they got a few infractions, but I guess hateful comments discriminating against a group of people doesn't rate even a temp ban.

So, is this how it works now? You post hateful comments or personal attacks, you get some infractions. You post more of the same, you might get banned for a few days. You return and continue to post yet more of the same, you get banned for a few more days. Repeat ad infinitum. It seems you get an infinite number of second chances, so the message is, if you're willing to take an RFD holiday every once in a while, there's really no need to change your behaviour. If the mods aren't given the power to do more than give these users time-out after time-out, what authority do they really have, and what incentive do rule-breakers really have to change?

I agree, Pride threads (and certain other topics) always degenerate in to "pure vitriolic hate", but that's because there's just so much tolerance of those who continue to spout that pure vitrolic hate. Have some real concequences for those who cannot or will not speak civilly, and the mods won't have to lock those threads. I know more users= more revenue, but I cant imagine that RFD and YPG would want to keep these users around at the expense of being associated with these kinds of posts. Perma ban the users who have repeatedly shown they cannot (or will not) follow the rules, and let the rest of us get on with discussing things like adults.

[JK400]

Yep. So the question becomes: Why are these users still here?

SEO.

Ever notice how high this place hits on google?

[jerrysiz]

SEO.

Ever notice how high this place hits on google?

That's kind of my point. Attracting traffic is great, when you're talking about deals or other useful subjects that will increase RFD's recognition online...but do they really want to be returned as one of the results when someone googles "gays are deviants" or something similarly offensive? Users that continually post these kinds of things can only be hurting them from this angle.

You'd think that, even if they didn't care that letting these users repeatedly flout the rules creates an environment where the mods are helpless to really do anything and the discussion forums suffer for the rest of us as a result, that they would still want these users perma banned for the more practical reason of not wanting to be publicly associated with their views. I can't see how retaining this small group of serial rule-breakers as members is helping them more than what these users do here is hurting them, on a number of levels.

[EmperorOfCanada]

It is not so simple to keep people away as you are making it out to be.

[Manatus]

The mods successfully got rid of "wallet safe" etc. comments that did nothing to add to a thread, so why not "ibtl" and similar? If people think a thread should be locked, that's what the report function is for. Users who post nothing but to predict that a thread should be locked, should be treated like spammers and given some time outs.

[Syne]

That's kind of my point. Attracting traffic is great, when you're talking about deals or other useful subjects that will increase RFD's recognition online...but do they really want to be returned as one of the results when someone googles "gays are deviants" or something similarly offensive? Users that continually post these kinds of things can only be hurting them from this angle.

You'd think that, even if they didn't care that letting these users repeatedly flout the rules creates an environment where the mods are helpless to really do anything and the discussion forums suffer for the rest of us as a result, that they would still want these users perma banned for the more practical reason of not wanting to be publicly associated with their views. I can't see how retaining this small group of serial rule-breakers as members is helping them more than what these users do here is hurting them, on a number of levels.

RFD debates bring in a lot of traffic in their own right.

Look at my Canada Goose thread that got attention from the Toronto Sun. If RFD was just about deals, it would only bring in a fraction of the traffic it does now. At the risk of sounding arrogant, a lot of the ad revenue generated comes from content writers (like me) who post things that whether positive or negative, people come to read.

[ishfish]

I agree Syne it is irritating when threads that are contraversial are locked. Sometimes I think "Is there a point in getting involved in this thread if it is only going to be locked soon."

Question: What does it take to keep a contraversial thread open?

Maybe those threads bring out the worst in some people - but maybe they also bring out the best.

So how do we live with differences in OT?
To me it is to interact for the purpose of exploring differences rather than trying to change someone to my beliefs. Challenging belief systems is appropriate if done in a dispassionate myth/science/experience way - versus attacking the user or using potty mouth. Hate exists - I do not want every thread that highlights this to be closed.

Some members are fantastic at self/other exploration. They are just open to it.
Others seem more cautious, but will explore it in an environment of respect. They easily put their defenses up - maybe because of past experiences with members or maybe it is a reflection of how they were brought up. Not everyone was raised in a healthy environement.
Then there are those other characters...-their purpose in a thread is just to antagonize. The more they are interacted with the more they escalate. It is just where they are at in life - so ignore or report.

So someone says homosexuals are devients. A lot of people think this. I'd rather that we have the opportunity to discuss the reality and history of that view than to have it deleted. We did once and it was a good discussion.

We all know that inevitably that someone will pop into the thread and use the f-word (not that one, the other f-word) - they get ignored/reported and the intelligent discussion carries on. It should not be a big deal. Members need to deal with them without hysteria. And older members need to help out the newbies with this, they often make the mistake of arguing with the pointless-antagonizers.
There will always be immature trouble makers in OT, unless they are abusive to another member I just accept them as part of our community.

As EofC say it isn't easy to keep some people away. Maybe that is not that bad - I like differences. So how do we exist in OT? I hope it is not by locking contraversial threads.

[AcidBomber]

I wish Syne could see all the deleted posts before most threads are locked.
Personally I remove all the derailing posts (ie: "ibtl", "low content") right after OP get posted (and usually the posters receive a nice warning/infraction).

Lets look at the Pride thread in your example, thread started off OK, but later on half a dozen posts were deleted with most of it being on the last page.
The deleted posts contained stuff like "butt sex festivals", "sodomites", "shameless" etc, and overall hate.
Then you get posters on the last page thats clearly trying to bait heated replies.

I dont know about you, but these arent the type of replies I would like to see continuing. So it wasnt just "arbitrarily locked".
If the thread wasnt locked, we'll see a thread here in C&S complaining why the Pride thread was allowed to continue while others are not, blah blah.

Whatever we do, there will always be unhappy people. So in the end, you cant please everyone.

[Tijuana]

I wish Syne could see all the deleted posts before most threads are locked.
Personally I remove all the derailing posts (ie: "ibtl", "low content") right after OP get posted (and usually the posters receive a nice warning/infraction).

Lets look at the Pride thread in your example, thread started off OK, but later on half a dozen posts were deleted with most of it being on the last page.
The deleted posts contained stuff like "butt sex festivals", "sodomites", "shameless" etc, and overall hate.
Then you get posters on the last page thats clearly trying to bait heated replies.

I dont know about you, but these arent the type of replies I would like to see continuing. So it wasnt just "arbitrarily locked".
If the thread wasnt locked, we'll see a thread here in C&S complaining why the Pride thread was allowed to continue while others are not, blah blah.

Whatever we do, there will always be unhappy people. So in the end, you cant please everyone.

So why not temporarily ban them? Would that not be grounds for a temp ban? If I can get banned because you don't know how to follow a thread, I would assume you'd ban someone for making hateful comments in respect to homosexuals...

[AcidBomber]

So why not temporarily ban them? Would that not be grounds for a temp ban? If I can get banned because you don't know how to follow a thread, I would assume you'd ban someone for making hateful comments in respect to homosexuals...

lol seriously? Im not going to start with you again on your grudge. You really need to move on.
Or if you wish, PM me and i'll forward you my PMs from last year to remind you of my explanation in case you deleted them.

And FYI the posters in question did receive the appropriate infraction (not from me). No temp ban as the context was not a direct attack (unless they went over their allowed points).

[ishfish]

AcidBomber,

Thanks for your response.
I gather that the thread was not locked due to the topic but rather due to the mix of the members posting at that time. So if the majority of the posters were on topic debating but not engaging the antagonists or being vulgar/abusive - there is hope that the thread would stay open. That helps.

We all know that there will be posters who will bait...so if one is motivated to keep the thread open as there were good interactions - is it best to ignore them or best to report? I ask because I don't know if reporting abuse helps the thread to stay open or if it encourages it to be closed. Maybe there is not clear cut answer for this - case by case?

Being a moderator must be like working as a traffic cop + customer complaint handler - bad news and "can't give no satisfaction." Well, hopefully not that bad.

Thanks.