Re-Opened: The P&N Improvement Association -- Please Read & Contribute

[Charles Kozierok]

Even if you define objective rules, there cannot be objective enforcement. By definition. It is always a judgment call.

I've run communities with objective rules, and they still involve a lot of people complaining about bias in terms of deciding when and how those rules are broken.

In the end, you have no choice but to trust in the integrity of those in charge. Having the whole place be a cesspool because nobody is willing to volunteer to deal with the complaints means we all lose.

 

[Brainonska511]

The rules should be broad and nonspecific. Define them as no trolling and try to stay on topic. To put things into specifics would be to invite trolls back to basically walk the line - still be disruptive without crossing the line. P&N doesn't need more trolls and the trash needs to be taken out.

 

[fskimospy]

Even if you define objective rules, there cannot be objective enforcement. By definition. It is always a judgment call.

I've run communities with objective rules, and they still involve a lot of people complaining about bias in terms of deciding when and how those rules are broken.

In the end, you have no choice but to trust in the integrity of those in charge. Having the whole place be a cesspool because nobody is willing to volunteer to deal with the complaints means we all lose.

There cannot be objective rules for something like this. Period.

What is an insult? What is trolling? What is off topic? All subjective.

To think that there could ever be objective rules is naive.

 

[Greenman]

It should be the same rules as the tech forums. No insults what so ever. The simple reality is that anyone who can't debate an issue without resorting to personal attacks or hurling profanity, isn't mature enough to be part of the discussion. Get that straightened out, and 90% of the problems are gone.
Name calling isn't discussion, it doesn't make a point, it's never changed anyone's mind, it's simply having a tantrum because someone disagrees with you. I wouldn't even address anything else at this point, just institute that one rule and enforce it. The children will leave, and the adults will be able to actually discuss politics and news.

 

[Bowfinger]

It should be the same rules as the tech forums. No insults what so ever. The simple reality is that anyone who can't debate an issue without resorting to personal attacks or hurling profanity, isn't mature enough to be part of the discussion. Get that straightened out, and 90% of the problems are gone.
Name calling isn't discussion, it doesn't make a point, it's never changed anyone's mind, it's simply having a tantrum because someone disagrees with you. I wouldn't even address anything else at this point, just institute that one rule and enforce it. The children will leave, and the adults will be able to actually discuss politics and news.

With all due respect, we tried that rule for a few months, the children did NOT leave, the quality of discussion was roughly unchanged (some differences in opinion on that), and the most obvious effects were overloaded moderators and certain congenital misfits abused the rule to harass people they didn't agree with. At the end of the experiment, a majority of P&N members voted to abandon that rule.

Yes, there are some people here who engage in continual, gratuitous name-calling with little or too often no provocation. (Presumably this is because they have nothing useful to offer.) In most cases, however, such insults are a response to truly disruptive behaviors like trolling and intellectual dishonesty. Sometimes it's perfectly reasonable to call a troll a troll. Reduce the other disruptive behaviors and we'll see insults and name-calling drop off on their own.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

We need fewer, more general, rules with stronger, more judicious, enforcement.

Here's why I say this:

I have a coligue that grades everything as a multiple choice test; I grade based on essays only. She's afraid that they will question her judgment, and tell her that her qualitative judgment is wrong; but not a day goes by that another student doesn't show up at her office door to argue about this or that multiple choice question. I, on the other hand, never hear anyone argue with "you did not provide enough detail" or "you did not throughly explain why you drew the conclusions that you did"; But I do hear "how can I do better".

And I think that's what we want: to help encourage and lead folks that want to do better; and put a boot to the ass of those that give zero shits about thinking about their ideas.

Membership at (site name) is open to all reasonable, decent and intelligent posters. I will not censor people based on their political views, but those interested in the site should know that it is specifically geared towards those who avoid political extremes, and who want to discuss issues with other smart, rational people. I will not tolerate people who post inflammatory nonsense just to get a rise out of others ("trolls"), those who demonstrate an unwillingness to be intellectually honest in their dealings, nor those who are just obviously not up to the reasonable standards of smart discussion.

I vote we replace hierarchies of disagreement and any other rules with this.

There's no such thing as objective in social situations, we should have generally aplicable guidelines that allow for ass-hats to be thrown outside the gates but still give us the freedom to call dumb-asses on their shit.

So I suggest we vote for the following:

ATP&N will not censor people based on their political views, but those interested in this portion of the site is geared towards those who want to discuss issues with other smart, rational people; and are able to cite credible sources if they present radical claims. ATP&N does not tolerate people who post inflammatory nonsense, those who demonstrate an unwillingness to be intellectually honest on a regular basis, nor those who seem incapable of meeting the minimum standards set by our focus on reasoned discussion.

alternatively I suggest we vote for the following:

There's no such thing as objective in social situations, much less politics; but ATP&N doesn't put up with people that post stupid shit with no credible source. The mods will throw intellectually dishonest/trolling ass-hats out of P&N. Regular posters are encouraged to use credible sources to call people out on their shit.

One more idea:

If a participant in a thread has her or his name bolded regularly by numerous different participants in that thread, then that person may be exiled from the thread by the mods; with further edits/posts being subject to mod-sanctions

 

[Charles Kozierok]

If a participant in a thread has her or his name bolded regularly by numerous different participants in that thread, then that person may be exiled from the thread by the mods; with further edits/posts being subject to mod-sanctions

Not with you on that. It encourages dogpiling, intimidation and groupthink.

With all due respect, we tried that rule for a few months, the children did NOT leave, the quality of discussion was roughly unchanged (some differences in opinion on that), and the most obvious effects were overloaded moderators and certain congenital misfits abused the rule to harass people they didn't agree with. At the end of the experiment, a majority of P&N members voted to abandon that rule.

My guess is that this happened due to poor enforcement and excessive latitude given to troublemakers.

Sometimes an idea can work with minor adjustments. There's no reason to throw it out entirely without making a full attempt to make it work. Because what we have right now certainly isn't.

 

[dank69]

Haven't had a chance to read through this thread yet but want to make my opinion clear.

Even when you treat insults in a binary manner, there is still room for subjective interpretation. I will make my case for this but if we accept this opinion as true, then surely we must accept that attempting to introduce a new analog scale will be even worse.

So let me make my case, and you can pick it apart. It is simple really. Binary system, no insults allowed. Suppose I'm having a lighthearted "debate" with someone I normally get along with just fine. During the course of some banter we get into a little sarcasm and one of us jokingly says something like "You only believe that because your mother is a whore." Now, anyone with two brain cells to rub together that has been following the conversation and knows even a little bit about the two posters knows the comment is purely in jest and there was zero vitriol behind it. Everyone has a good belly laugh and moves on.

But no, there is a binary no insults rule and the one who made the comment (okay, it might have been me) must be infracted. The forum dies a little. Comedy potential is suppressed because someone can't handle being called an idiot on an anonymous forum.

Now there will be some that chime in to say that crude humor is never funny for whatever pompous "reasons" or "justifications." To that I say, fuck you if you think you get to be the sole judge of what is or is not funny.

Okay, so now is the time when someone rehashes the idea that only the person being insulted is allowed to report the post. Well, don't forget, we tried that and it was a resounding failure. It resulted in a majority vote to allow all insults rather than keeping the rule because it is too easy to post stupid shit that deserves to be insulted just because you know you can piss people off with impunity. Once again, I respond to that idea with a resounding "fuck that noise."

EDIT: I'd like to add that this place will never be a forum for good debate. It is impossible unless a team of highly trained debate mods are acquired. So if you think removing insults will get you your utopia, well you have a better chance of removing every last gun from the general population.

 

[dank69]

I think that's been a long-standing premise around here that's worth revisiting.

People can get worked up over almost any topic. We're all familiar with techie "holy wars" like Apple versus PC, MS versus Linux, Intel versus AMD (well, not the last one quite so much any more).

Why given open consent to allowing more flaming and arguing about P&N than elsewhere?

We already have an "anything goes" forum -- Off Topic. Why not let the people more interested in flaming than discussion go there?

Lol I get infracted for shit in OT that would never earn an infraction in P&N. Maybe you should post a little more in OT before you voice your opinion on it.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

During the course of some banter we get into a little sarcasm and one of us jokingly says something like "You only believe that because your mother is a whore." Now, anyone with two brain cells to rub together that has been following the conversation and knows even a little bit about the two posters knows the comment is purely in jest and there was zero vitriol behind it. Everyone has a good belly laugh and moves on.

That's why most people aren't suggesting a "zero tolerance policy" but rather allowing the moderators to use their discretion.

EDIT: I'd like to add that this place will never be a forum for good debate. It is impossible unless a team of highly trained debate mods are acquired. So if you think removing insults will get you your utopia, well you have a better chance of removing every last gun from the general population.

And I'll respond to this by saying you are wrong, which I know from personal experience. You don't need a "team of highly trained debate mods". All you need is a general set of rules requiring reasonable behavior, and a set of moderators willing to remove the deliberate troublemakers and people too stupid to conduct an argument, and gently course-correct threads when they start to get too heated.

It's done all the time on other forums.

Lol I get infracted for shit in OT that would never earn an infraction in P&N. Maybe you should post a little more in OT before you voice your opinion on it.

Then that place makes as little sense as this one, because I see all sorts of truly disgusting behavior there.

 

[randomrogue]

I am not sure how you could possibly deal with this without a full time moderator. You have mentally ill people here who frequently post the most insane drivel. This sparks trolling. You have right and left wing zealots who by their very nature get everyone into a frenzy. Even the most innocent person can cause a firestorm by simply uttering the words "gun", "abortion", "evolution", "Obama", "Bush", "religion", "France", or "taxes". I'm sure there are others but you get my point.

You either have a paid and mature adult moderator who can put people on timeout for a few hours to steer the thread away from chaos, permanently ban the mentally ill and extremists, or partially accept it.

 

[dmcowen674]

The P&N Improvement Association -- Please Read & Contribute

The problem is not the posters.

The problem is the Mods.

Get better Mods for P&N, goodbye problems.

 

[Greenman]

With all due respect, we tried that rule for a few months, the children did NOT leave, the quality of discussion was roughly unchanged (some differences in opinion on that), and the most obvious effects were overloaded moderators and certain congenital misfits abused the rule to harass people they didn't agree with. At the end of the experiment, a majority of P&N members voted to abandon that rule.

Yes, there are some people here who engage in continual, gratuitous name-calling with little or too often no provocation. (Presumably this is because they have nothing useful to offer.) In most cases, however, such insults are a response to truly disruptive behaviors like trolling and intellectual dishonesty. Sometimes it's perfectly reasonable to call a troll a troll. Reduce the other disruptive behaviors and we'll see insults and name-calling drop off on their own.

You know what's interesting? I never noticed when that rule was tried, and I was here every day. I didn't keep up with the rule changes because they became far too convoluted. We need a few simple, well enforced rules, we need a reasonably fair minded mod. We don't need a set of standards to cover every possible situation. When you need a flow chart to track your rules, the system has already failed.
Every other section has clear rules that are enforced, why are we so terrified of not being able to call each other names?

We don't need to reinvent the wheel, we don't need a long list of convoluted rules covering every aspect of whats written here, we simply need the membership to be civil. Right now many aren't, there is no respect here, and that's the entire problem in my opinion.

 

[Incorruptible]

The problem is that there's no way to define this objectively. I mean, I doubt there are few people who would be sorry if Incorruptible fell off the face of the planet, but how do you draft objective rules that prohibit what he does? Can we have laws against flat out being stupid?

To some extent, those people have to be tolerated, just ignored. A much bigger problem is the inability to start a discussion on any subject without it immediately being derailed with off-topic comments, flaming and flame-baiting.

I mean, I'd love to see a rule requiring anyone who makes a statement to back it up and to respond to counter-arguments. But it's not really enforceable.

And how is this acceptable?

One of the problems is double standards and consistency.
Look at whenever I start a thread and its the same people who constantly derail it with no intention of engaging in a debate. One of these same guys made a comment about my mother and I haven't seen anything happen to him yet if I made the same comment I would get a ban/infraction. I get infractions for derailing yet the same people who come into my threads with the intent to derail have nothing

There are too many hacks who will use personal insults against those they disagree with. These hacks will usually a thread that is just a copy and paste and use it as a way to attack others, they aren't looking for discussion.

And what is everyones problem with me? If you look around its usually other people who are insulting me and telling me to kill myself. I sometimes use insults when people attack me and when people attack the Constitution and freedom. The problem is too many people just want to claim their side is right and dont want a real discussion. Just look at phokus, techs, ausm, crackrabbit

The insults rule should be changed, the problem is too many people resort to insults when proven wrong or their views are challenged. Either dont allow insults and punish those who break the rule or allow insults and be consistent with it.

1. There haven't BEEN any rules in P&N for the last several months.
2. If people respond the way they do to Incorruptible, it's because he's a brain-dead shit-stirrer incapable of conducting a rational conversation.
3. You call people trolls yourself all the time.

Whats the problem? I talk about issues which are important such as radical Islam, some people dont like this and attack me and derail, how about they just ignore the thread thereby helping to give less attention to it and the people that want to discuss can come in? It seems there is way too much PC from some on this forum, you can make comments about Christians and generally you wont get attacked for it but you say anything about radical Islam and your an Islamophobe.

 

[jackstar7]

I'd be for a rule that puts it on posters to use the report button rather than posting in threads they determine to be unproductive/trolling.

Everyone posting in a thread just to call an OP a troll is only feeding the troll rather than making it clear that it needs to be dealt with.

A rule ought to be "Use the Report Button instead of posting in a troll thread." If you think "Don't Feed the Troll" is productive... then you're just misguided. Just stop posting in those threads and they will die. And/Or they will become repositories of the least productive members and effectively become a ban list for the mods.

 

[monovillage]

1. There haven't BEEN any rules in P&N for the last several months.
2. If people respond the way they do to Incorruptible, it's because he's a brain-dead shit-stirrer incapable of conducting a rational conversation.
3. You call people trolls yourself all the time.

Actually there ARE rules in place in these forums.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2227538
It's just that they are being extremely selectively enforced. You did notice that cybrsage was "vacationed" for 2 months over a post that wouldn't have made a moderator blink if it had been authored by anyone else. You'll also see egregious violations of the rules by left of center "favored" posters all the time, rules that if they were broken by other posters would result in punishments. The fact is that in this forum there are favored posters, favored points of view and favored enforcement of the rules.

The biggest problem with the earlier change in the rules by IDON'TCARE was that suddenly the rules were being equally enforced and the privileged members of the forum and their favored friends were getting the infractions they deserved and they hated it. They always felt and still feel that they should be above the laws and rules that the little people have to obey and in my opinion their political point of view is a causative factor.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Haven't had a chance to read through this thread yet but want to make my opinion clear.

Even when you treat insults in a binary manner, there is still room for subjective interpretation. I will make my case for this but if we accept this opinion as true, then surely we must accept that attempting to introduce a new analog scale will be even worse.

So let me make my case, and you can pick it apart. It is simple really. Binary system, no insults allowed. Suppose I'm having a lighthearted "debate" with someone I normally get along with just fine. During the course of some banter we get into a little sarcasm and one of us jokingly says something like "You only believe that because your mother is a whore." Now, anyone with two brain cells to rub together that has been following the conversation and knows even a little bit about the two posters knows the comment is purely in jest and there was zero vitriol behind it. Everyone has a good belly laugh and moves on.

But no, there is a binary no insults rule and the one who made the comment (okay, it might have been me) must be infracted. The forum dies a little. Comedy potential is suppressed because someone can't handle being called an idiot on an anonymous forum.

Now there will be some that chime in to say that crude humor is never funny for whatever pompous "reasons" or "justifications." To that I say, fuck you if you think you get to be the sole judge of what is or is not funny.

Okay, so now is the time when someone rehashes the idea that only the person being insulted is allowed to report the post. Well, don't forget, we tried that and it was a resounding failure. It resulted in a majority vote to allow all insults rather than keeping the rule because it is too easy to post stupid shit that deserves to be insulted just because you know you can piss people off with impunity. Once again, I respond to that idea with a resounding "fuck that noise."

EDIT: I'd like to add that this place will never be a forum for good debate. It is impossible unless a team of highly trained debate mods are acquired. So if you think removing insults will get you your utopia, well you have a better chance of removing every last gun from the general population.

That is an easy fix, participants in insulting banter must report it to the mods if they feel an insult is over the line and not bystanders. A rule which I think we have already.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I am not sure how you could possibly deal with this without a full time moderator. You have mentally ill people here who frequently post the most insane drivel. This sparks trolling. You have right and left wing zealots who by their very nature get everyone into a frenzy. Even the most innocent person can cause a firestorm by simply uttering the words "gun", "abortion", "evolution", "Obama", "Bush", "religion", "France", or "taxes". I'm sure there are others but you get my point.

You need a couple of moderators, they don't need to be full-time or paid.

We don't need to reinvent the wheel, we don't need a long list of convoluted rules covering every aspect of whats written here, we simply need the membership to be civil. Right now many aren't, there is no respect here, and that's the entire problem in my opinion.

Exactly.

Actually there ARE rules in place in these forums.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2227538

You know as well as everyone else that those rules have not been enforced in months. The last time Idontcare even posted in P&N was July. So an old thread of his doesn't mean anything.

It's just that they are being extremely selectively enforced. You did notice that cybrsage was "vacationed" for 2 months over a post that wouldn't have made a moderator blink if it had been authored by anyone else.

Selective enforcement is what happens when a place is not being properly run. This place has not been properly run for six months.

As for cybrsage, he should have been banned ages ago.

You'll also see egregious violations of the rules by left of center "favored" posters all the time, rules that if they were broken by other posters would result in punishments.

Sorry, not buying it. I see at least as much bad behavior from right-leaners as I do left-leaners.

Regardless, arguing about the past is pointless. We need to move forward.

That is an easy fix, participants in insulting banter must report it to the mods if they feel an insult is over the line and not bystanders. A rule which I think we have already.

If two people want to engage in "friendly abuse" that doesn't mean anything to anyone else, the correct tool for the job is the private messaging system. The rest of us don't need to deal with it.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Actually there ARE rules in place in these forums.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2227538
It's just that they are being extremely selectively enforced. You did notice that cybrsage was "vacationed" for 2 months over a post that wouldn't have made a moderator blink if it had been authored by anyone else. You'll also see egregious violations of the rules by left of center "favored" posters all the time, rules that if they were broken by other posters would result in punishments. The fact is that in this forum there are favored posters, favored points of view and favored enforcement of the rules.

The biggest problem with the earlier change in the rules by IDON'TCARE was that suddenly the rules were being equally enforced and the privileged members of the forum and their favored friends were getting the infractions they deserved and they hated it. They always felt and still feel that they should be above the laws and rules that the little people have to obey and in my opinion their political point of view is a causative factor.

You're a fine one to pontificate. Barracks lawyer type who claims not to have gone over the line while breaking the spirit as much as he can. You need hard and fast rules to skirt. Let the rules remain vague and you in a quandary.

 

[WHAMPOM]

You know, I was trying to think about what set of rules would make sense here, when I thought to myself.. do we really need to reinvent the wheel?

Can't we just apply the same rules here that we apply to the technical forums?

NO. Just apply these simple rules.

#1. ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

#2. If you're thin-skinned or of a delicate mental nature do not read or post here.

#3. Accurate comments on asinine posts are not to be reported as insults to the mods.

#4. Do not link to articles that you did not read or support the opposite of your opinion.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

So basically you want the same cesspool we have now?

Not interested.

 

[CrackRabbit]

And how is this acceptable?

One of the problems is double standards and consistency.
Look at whenever I start a thread and its the same people who constantly derail it with no intention of engaging in a debate. One of these same guys made a comment about my mother and I haven't seen anything happen to him yet if I made the same comment I would get a ban/infraction. I get infractions for derailing yet the same people who come into my threads with the intent to derail have nothing

There are too many hacks who will use personal insults against those they disagree with. These hacks will usually a thread that is just a copy and paste and use it as a way to attack others, they aren't looking for discussion.

And what is everyones problem with me? If you look around its usually other people who are insulting me and telling me to kill myself. I sometimes use insults when people attack me and when people attack the Constitution and freedom. The problem is too many people just want to claim their side is right and dont want a real discussion. Just look at phokus, techs, ausm, crackrabbit

The insults rule should be changed, the problem is too many people resort to insults when proven wrong or their views are challenged. Either dont allow insults and punish those who break the rule or allow insults and be consistent with it.



Whats the problem? I talk about issues which are important such as radical Islam, some people dont like this and attack me and derail, how about they just ignore the thread thereby helping to give less attention to it and the people that want to discuss can come in? It seems there is way too much PC from some on this forum, you can make comments about Christians and generally you wont get attacked for it but you say anything about radical Islam and your an Islamophobe.

There isn't a point to discussing anything with you due to your extreme intellectual dishonesty, lack of English skills, use of sources which are laughable at best and are almost never truthful, and your well proven Islamophobia.
Frankly I think it is sad that the moderators have let you and a few others drag this forum down to a level where there is nothing better to do in it except make sure that you are known as a troll.

I know that I am breaking the rules every time that I post something in your threads, and I've been infracted and warned for it.
I don't care.
Your brand of intellectual dishonesty and hate are something that shouldn't be allowed to flourish here and I will do my damnedest to make sure it doesn't, even if the end result is my own banishment.

Edit: I highly encourage everyone, including the moderators to go back and look at Incorruptible's posting history, even just the threads he has started. I feel that should be enough for most reasonable people to agree with my assessment.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Whats the problem?

The problem is that you don't post subjects with an honest intent to discuss them. You don't support your arguments with original thought. And you don't respond to others' arguments with sensible counter-arguments. You deliberately choose inflammatory subject matter and then solely post boilerplate right-wing talking points.

I don't think you do this on purpose. I just think you're really stupid. Like... really, truly, honestly stupid. Over 4,000 posts, and I can't think of a single one where I thought to myself "hey, that's a good point".

Sorry to be blunt, but if we're going to have an honest discussion about the place, there's no point in sugar-coating. You post a ton, but contribute nothing of value to the forum because you are incapable of original thought. Arguing with you is like arguing with a billboard. If you disappeared tomorrow, this place would lose nothing and gain a much higher S/N ratio.

 

[dank69]

Originally Posted by dank69

Haven't had a chance to read through this thread yet but want to make my opinion clear.

Even when you treat insults in a binary manner, there is still room for subjective interpretation. I will make my case for this but if we accept this opinion as true, then surely we must accept that attempting to introduce a new analog scale will be even worse.

So let me make my case, and you can pick it apart. It is simple really. Binary system, no insults allowed. Suppose I'm having a lighthearted "debate" with someone I normally get along with just fine. During the course of some banter we get into a little sarcasm and one of us jokingly says something like "You only believe that because your mother is a whore." Now, anyone with two brain cells to rub together that has been following the conversation and knows even a little bit about the two posters knows the comment is purely in jest and there was zero vitriol behind it. Everyone has a good belly laugh and moves on.

But no, there is a binary no insults rule and the one who made the comment (okay, it might have been me) must be infracted. The forum dies a little. Comedy potential is suppressed because someone can't handle being called an idiot on an anonymous forum.

Now there will be some that chime in to say that crude humor is never funny for whatever pompous "reasons" or "justifications." To that I say, fuck you if you think you get to be the sole judge of what is or is not funny.

Okay, so now is the time when someone rehashes the idea that only the person being insulted is allowed to report the post. Well, don't forget, we tried that and it was a resounding failure. It resulted in a majority vote to allow all insults rather than keeping the rule because it is too easy to post stupid shit that deserves to be insulted just because you know you can piss people off with impunity. Once again, I respond to that idea with a resounding "fuck that noise."

EDIT: I'd like to add that this place will never be a forum for good debate. It is impossible unless a team of highly trained debate mods are acquired. So if you think removing insults will get you your utopia, well you have a better chance of removing every last gun from the general population.

That is an easy fix, participants in insulting banter must report it to the mods if they feel an insult is over the line and not bystanders. A rule which I think we have already.

So did you not finish reading my post?


Posted from Anandtech.com App for Android and then fixed on a PC

 

[boomerang]

Based upon the posters so far and the frequency with which they posted in this thread, as is the norm, a minority are trying to control the majority. I won't go into the psychology behind those that so fervently try to control others because that could be construed as trolling.

What I will say is what I have said before. When the minority are continually whining and making the life of the mods a living hell, there are two options. Acquiesce to them and attempt to force the majority to follow the rules as dictated by the minority or tell the minority to get screwed and put on their big boy pants.

As was said, this is not a Democracy so the latter can be done.

It's important to understand that the minority that are whining, moaning and complaining are never going to be happy until everyone thinks like they do and agrees with them. The goalposts will continually be moving. In other words make whatever rules you want - the problem is not going away.

Get rid of this sub-forum. The next four years are going to be a living hell for the moderators here. Get rid of it and crack down hard on political posters in OT. That is the final solution.