Mod Sponsored Community Poll - Your Input is Requested

[JSt0rm]

omg some links... well that settles everything.

Jedi believe what you want. I dont care.

 

[JSt0rm]

No society can sustain under anarchy. No business would desire to be presented by what that brings.
You are gravely mistaken, and thankfully, in the minority.

That is done by Rage3D, but in combination with far stricter moderation than here -- as cybrsage is all too well aware, .

I dont know how I'm in the minority now but ok.

there are limits here. I get infractions for excessive cursing and I rope it in a bit.

You cant moderate someone thinking the world is 10000 years old.

Lets block this forum like the love fest forum is.

 

[Infohawk]

We probably attract hundreds of idiots from google searching things and finding our politics forum.

I doubt it. Googling "politics forum" this site doesn't even show up on the first 10 pages of results. Why would someone just land here? Most people seem to start here because they have a tech job or hobby. And the hobby part of tech is really dying out IMO. I asked earlier why the mods care about this at this time. (Predictably I was ignored.) I wouldn't be surprised if page hits are down. My hunch would be it would be because of natural decline in the interest of tech forums and because many frequent posters have been banned (see my sig). The alternative is they want to see people complain less but I'm sure people have been bitching about these forums since the beginning.

Such obviously excessive ill-behaviour should not be tolerated. Continuing to give it a pass only instructs impunity and thereby encourages further disruption.

So specifically, do you think dmcowen should be gotten rid of once and for all like you said cybersage should be?

 

[JSt0rm]

I was thinking more focused searches would find our forum. But you may be right. I cant think of a good example. Maybe cybersage would enlighten us as to how he found us?

 

[Infohawk]

I was thinking more focused searches would find our forum. But you may be right. I cant think of a good example. Maybe cybersage would enlighten us as to how he found us?

I just think a lot of morons would be happy posting on yahoo news or whatever. I could be wrong but I just don't think that many people stumble here to talk about politics. There are dedicated places for it if you want something in a forum format as opposed to yahoo news chaos.

As for new posters (like the one you mentioned) I would imagine many of them are previously-banned posters. Some of them probably hear about the forums through friends though. But looking around we have a ton of really old accounts and a few new ones and like I said I suspect many of the new ones have the same people behind the keyboard.

 

[JSt0rm]

i guess I assume there are insane people who actively search the internet for places to spew their horrible beliefs.

 

[Pulsar]

The change in L&R has been refreshing - people have to be respectful, and the level of discourse has raised dramatically. I have to admit a somewhat perverse pleasure in watching certain people get their butts repeatedly kicked because they really are that immature and can't seem control themselves on the boards.

We have an off-topic here for people who want to be jackasses. There's no need for it in P&N, and it would be an improvement if the exact thing you see in this thread by about 10 posters was stopped.

However, those same posters who continue to derail, bitch, act intentionally obtuse, or simply are complete batcrap crazy are the ones who post 50% of the posts in the forum. Much like in this thread. There won't be nearly as much traffic without them. I could deal with that though.

 

[Infohawk]

The change in L&R has been refreshing

What changes did they make?

There's no question that if some of the proposed changes are made here, that there would be a huge drop in posters. I think management wants P&N generating as much hits as possible. In my opinion, the best way to do that is to unban some of the people in my sig.

Although part of me wants them to set up some impossibly strict procedural system and see it crumble within weeks of instituting it. (In other words some men just like to watch the world burn.)

 

[cybrsage]

You can get binary to the point that profanity isnt allowed or it is but when you begin to moderate what viewpoints are tolerable or what level of attack on a person and their views is tolerable there is no more black and white.

Exactly, when you allow some (but not all) personal attacks, the human viewpoint bias starts to become involved. You will have a mod who loved Bush (for example) giving infractions to those who denigrate him and will have a mod who loves Obama give infractions for those who denigrate him...and in both cases they will not give infractions for the viewpoint they agree with.

 

[cybrsage]

That is done by Rage3D, but in combination with far stricter moderation than here -- as cybrsage is all too well aware, .

I hope they ban people who continuously use logical fallacies. That would mean you would be gone the moment you mention me.

Bringing up decades old info because you were done dweeb I owned on that forum decades ago gets old quick....and makes you look like a dork.

 

[cybrsage]

I was thinking more focused searches would find our forum. But you may be right. I cant think of a good example. Maybe cybersage would enlighten us as to how he found us?

I like debating with other techies - I have found techies to be more intelligent than the average forum dweller (all in all). Heck, most of the insults techies come up with are more creative too.

So I went cruizing the techie forums of places I went to read their frontpage news to find a good forum to post in. I also like the forums where I am in the minority more than I like the majority. Being in the majority is good for a spell, but having most people agree with you is not enlightening. Opposing viewpoints are better for learning from. This forum is certainly left leaning, so it fit.

I have also recently started reading them for a bit before signing up (if possible) to see if they ban members who are not in the majority of views. Many forums do that. I also look for members who are immune to the rules while the same rules are applied to most others...those places can only cause trouble in the end.

 

[manimal]

I wonder how many current AT peeps would go back to P&N if things were more civil?


I know I would.


This thread is a perfect example of trolling derailing the original intent. Glad you guys got it back on topic.


Have you guys also noticed that option 1 is gaining steam?

 

[Pens1566]

Option 3. Vast majority of problems with this forum are caused by very few bat-shit insane regulars. Hammer them and things will get much better without making the place a ghost town.

Everyone knows the posters I'm talking about.

 

[heymrdj]

90% of the time some brave soul actually tries to explain it but the problem is they BELIEVE something to be true so its true no matter what.

You seem so blind you can't actually see yourself.

YOU believe YOUR facts to be true to the point you will listen to no one else.

YOU spew YOUR BELIEFS into this forum. Just because other people believe in them, most of which i do as well, doesn't make them factually true. Nor does a scientist's backing of them making true, as mentioned in my first post, it's simply IMPOSSIBLE to prove alot of these things as true, we all have FAITHS. Another way to spin it, look at the THEORY of global warming. It's not proven either way without a shadow of a doubt yet. Therefore I say we should all unanimously laugh and scorn ANY scientist working on the case because they are ALL CURRENTLY WRONG.

Your indesire to allow yourself to realise you're believing in a FAITH drives you to bigotry of anything that is viewed as a faith.

Et al there's no reason to laugh and scorn at those of a particular faith. What you said could just as easily be pointed at gays because their issues are scientifically proven. Under your view I should be bigoted towards them, and I should laugh and scorn at any of them that are identifiable.

 

[cybrsage]

Most science is based on faith based beliefs...which are called assumptions in science. For example, we assume the way gravity currently works is the way it has worked since it first stabilized at the beginning of time. We assume the weak force is the same, etc.

Assumptions are needed, since we have no way of saying if they are true or false (and unless we learn time travel, we never will know). Without making some assumptions, we cannot move on.

We just have to remember that assumptions are 100% faith based beliefs...we believe the to be true without any proof of it. They may sound logical and proper...but we have no way of knowing.

 

[JSt0rm]

You seem so blind you can't actually see yourself.

YOU believe YOUR facts to be true to the point you will listen to no one else.

YOU spew YOUR BELIEFS into this forum. Just because other people believe in them, most of which i do as well, doesn't make them factually true. Nor does a scientist's backing of them making true, as mentioned in my first post, it's simply IMPOSSIBLE to prove alot of these things as true, we all have FAITHS. Another way to spin it, look at the THEORY of global warming. It's not proven either way without a shadow of a doubt yet. Therefore I say we should all unanimously laugh and scorn ANY scientist working on the case because they are ALL CURRENTLY WRONG.

Your indesire to allow yourself to realise you're believing in a FAITH drives you to bigotry of anything that is viewed as a faith.

Et al there's no reason to laugh and scorn at those of a particular faith. What you said could just as easily be pointed at gays because their issues are scientifically proven. Under your view I should be bigoted towards them, and I should laugh and scorn at any of them that are identifiable.

ok buddy.

Why are you even talking about this in here?

You dont see the difference between religion and science?

here educate yourself

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

 

[heymrdj]

ok buddy.

Why are you even talking about this in here?

You dont see the difference between religion and science?

here educate yourself

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Please stop posting the same drivel, it has no bearing in the conversation. This is politics and news. News bares very much into science. Science is supported by a faith. (be your faith in atheism, scientology, christianity, islam, flying spaghetti monsters whatever). If you believe in nothing but science, then your still placing a faith in the assumptions needed for science to function.

All I'm saying is no matter the bearing from which ideas are formulated in P&N, it's going to involve some sort of faith and/or religion. No one needs to be "laughed and scorned" in here for disagreement. That kind of condescending attitude is unecessary and is not conducive to a discussion atmosphere that, again IMHO, P&N is supposed to be.

 

[Pens1566]

Someone needs to learn what "faith" means.

 

[Perknose]

One statistic leaps out at me here. As of the first 166 posts, fully 72 of them were made by but 3 posters;

dmcowen674 -- 31 posts
cybrsage --22posts
JSt0rm --19 posts

That's right, more than 43% of all the posts in this thread were made by the above three gentlemen alone.

Read them, these 72 posts, and I believe you will conclude as I have that their collective noise to signal ratio is unacceptably unproductive and non-contributory to any rational, measured discourse.

This has long been a problem in P&N.

Posting more non-contributory "noise" than substance in P&N, for whatever reason, is a pestilence that should be confronted and eradicated.

 

[Infohawk]

That kind of condescending attitude is unecessary and is not conducive to a discussion atmosphere that, again IMHO, P&N is supposed to be.

My understanding that P&N is "supposed to be" a sewage system so that other areas are not derailed by P&N. I don't think it was every supposed to be a formal debating club. Even if that would be nice, I don't think there is the manpower to turn it into that.

 

[cybrsage]

That would really depend on what you consider noise and what is signal. From your post, it appears noise is posting and signal is not posting. Which means the best poster, using that as a guide, is one who never posts...which defeats the purpose of being a poster.

 

[JSt0rm]

One statistic leaps out at me here. As of the first 166 posts, fully 72 of them were made by but 3 posters;

dmcowen674 -- 31 posts
cybrsage --22posts
JSt0rm --19 posts

That's right, more than 43% of all the posts in this thread were made by the above three gentlemen alone.

Read them, these 72 posts, and I believe you will conclude as I have that their collective noise to signal ratio is unacceptably unproductive and non-contributory to any rational, measured discourse.

This has long been a problem in P&N.

Posting more non-contributory "noise" than substance in P&N, for whatever reason, is a pestilence that should be confronted and eradicated.

oh ok I didnt realize all my posts here were just "noise" I'll stop.

 

[Pens1566]

One statistic leaps out at me here. As of the first 166 posts, fully 72 of them were made by but 3 posters;

dmcowen674 -- 31 posts
cybrsage --22posts
JSt0rm --19 posts

That's right, more than 43% of all the posts in this thread were made by the above three gentlemen alone.

Read them, these 72 posts, and I believe you will conclude as I have that their collective noise to signal ratio is unacceptably unproductive and non-contributory to any rational, measured discourse.

This has long been a problem in P&N.

Posting more non-contributory "noise" than substance in P&N, for whatever reason, is a pestilence that should be confronted and eradicated.

Kind of the point I was trying to make earlier. Along with others that just can't grasp the fundamentals of rational debate.

 

[Perknose]

What I said:

Read them, these 72 posts, and I believe you will conclude as I have that their collective noise to signal ratio is unacceptably unproductive and non-contributory to any rational, measured discourse.

Your either bone stupid, or more likely, intentionally dishonest twisting of what I said:

From your post, it appears noise is posting and signal is not posting.

Followed by your BS and dishonest conclusion based on your equally dishonest summation of what I said:

Which means the best poster, using that as a guide, is one who never posts...which defeats the purpose of being a poster.

^^^ Folks, this is a simple but telling example of cybrsage's intellectually dishonest manner of discourse in P&N.

It it his Modus operandi there. It is trolling, plain and simple . . . dishonest, non-contributory noise.

Posting in this intellectually dishonest manner should be eradicated from P&N, or more honest discourse will never stand a chance.

You have to weed your garden or the weeds will overwhelm your crop.

 

[heymrdj]

Someone needs to learn what "faith" means.

Dictionary.com says:

faith

   /feɪθ/ Show Spelled[feyth] Show IPA
noun 1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.

2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.

3. belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.

4. belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.

5. a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith



















javascript:;Again all i'm saying is I believe just about everything discussed in P&N revolves around the unstable human element and that nothing can be taken as cold hard fact. Be that economics, psychology, religion, and the origin of the universe, it's all faith in a theory and/or hypothesis.

I've said my piece here, I gave my opinion as to what I thought P&N needed help with. But I see the old hangups will die hard. (You don't have an opinion obviously if you don't believe in a certain set of theorys). Until P&N rids itself of obstinate children that can't have a mature discussion (because that's all it will ever be, discussion. There's no armchair saving of the world here, no fact, no absolutes, just discussion of theorys) then this section will continue to be a sesspool ruled over by a couple of trolls that rotate positions every few months.