I really don't believe it would... Some posts are meant to troll, while others mean to discuss ideas and issues... The "troll" posts stand out..
Would you agree with me on that?
\as for the Mods - they're doing the best they can...
\\what more anyone expects from them; you dear forum members expect too much..
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I don't have solutions. But I will add my voice to those who thing that something needs to be done.
I have always been leery of ATP&N because of the level of discourse, but I have the recollection that there at least used to be some adequate conversation at times. Now? Now it just seems pointless. Threads are obvious troll/crap threads, and you know exactly who is going to be posting and what they are going to say in each.
Personally, I only feel like posting in threads that revolve around healthcare reform, and only then to make factual corrections. Yet even then it seems like people are unwilling to take a moment from their petty bickering to face a cogent discussion. I haven't wanted to keep my ACA thread up to date because frankly (and unfortunately) it just seems more and more like my fellow posters don't deserve my hard work and knowledge.
Like I said, I don't have answers, but I would support change in he hopes that things get better.
That would be very interesting, but it seems as though it would make moderation an enormous pain.
I was thinking maybe the OP could moderate his own experimental thread. He or she could simply state if a post by somebody was not acceptable and say why. Naturally, the OP would not be able to enforce his opinion, but others would agree or disagree with him on it. I am especially interested to see how folk would react to something I would challenge, like Democrats are worthless and everybody knows it since that is an unsubstantiated claim no mater the truth of it. One might say, for example, because Chicago is controlled by Democrats and Chicago is a mess. This would open the post to rebuttal with alternate reasons as to why Chicago might be a mess, or that is isn't a mess at all, etc. This would be a discussion based on reasons and logic, no matter how faulty. But it would at least be about the veracity of postulates instead of name calling etc.
Who has stated they want NO moderation? I see everyone supporting moderation, with differences of opinion in two areas: insults vs. other disruptive behaviors like trolling, dishonesty, and disinformation, and detailed rules vs. moderator judgement.I think there are quite a few who frequent this forum use it as a place where they can take out their aggressions without having to worry about the repercussions of doing so in the real world. Where else can you treat someone like dirt and torment others?
This is why they don't want the forum moderated.
The background check is instituted at a national level. But it only applies to certain types of sales.
Some states have closed this loophole with state laws, while others have not. The loophole itself is clear in the law.
Bull fucking shit you dirty lying shit bag.
Name said gunshow loophole.
You fucking lying sack.
Another example of behavior that needs to end immediately and permanently.
Comment:
Response:
You say that as if that type of behavior is new. It isn't. It has been happening here long before you came along. I'm just reminding you that you are relatively new here and it's kind of arrogant to attempt to change something to fit your definition of "better" as a newcomer.Respectfully, I'd rather not. I think that right now there is so much bad behavior around here that I think cherry-picking name-calling is counter-productive. You can find it pretty easily if you really want to. I really only highlighted it as an example of how bad things are getting here, for the sake of those who think action isn't needed.
You say that as if that type of behavior is new. It isn't. It has been happening here long before you came along. I'm just reminding you that you are relatively new here and it's kind of arrogant to attempt to change something to fit your definition of "better" as a newcomer.
I think the only thing that would accomplish is to derail such threads and turn them into a semantics debate. The original thread topic would be lost very quickly in that scenario I'd think.
There's an easier way to conduct that experiment, which has already been suggested.
Create a subforum where the proposed rules are to be implemented. Leave the existing P&N as is. Allow the rules in the subforum to be adjusted based on experience. And in the end, let the people decide -- through their participation -- whether they prefer the free-for-all, the moderated forum, or both.
I think there are quite a few who frequent this forum use it as a place where they can take out their aggressions without having to worry about the repercussions of doing so in the real world.
Where else can you treat someone like dirt and torment others?
This is why they don't want the forum moderated.
This coming from the worst anonymous offender![]()
It will be nice to see your posting required to be truthful as well as stop your irrelevant/derailing posting.
Warning: Trolling, inter-member squabbling, and endless personal attacks will NOT be tolerated in this thread.
It will be nice to see your posting required to be truthful as well as stop your irrelevant/derailing posting.
I post links and articles, you post lies under being an anonymous asshole.
I post my real name and address, you post shit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I ask sactoking why you have so much pessimism or have so much disappointment in forum moderators who fail to recognize your self evident genius on your signature issue of heath care? Even if I almost 99% agree with you in those huge hearth care reforms.
When what you do now will make the future difference in the end.
Or to put it another way, today's totally radical idea gradually gains acceptance, becomes tomorrow's gradually accepted reform, and then thereafter becomes conservative hide bound doctrine when it too becomes outmoded.
I don't post on this forum to become popular, when I will settle to be proved right in the end. For the impatient like me, the pace of change is way too slow, but still I have seen miracles happen in my lifetime.
Guns are just another of the many palliatives for self hate, a delusional feeling we have some control over our fate, that we can protect ourselves as adults from what happened to us as children. But the damage is already done and guns can't save us from the feelings we have repressed.