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

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
Other tech forums don't even have a P&N (unless you subscribe), its more peaceful and this way you don't even know who's an asshole and who isnt :)
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
22,236
6,431
136
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 would indeed agree with you about the troll posts, not about the mods. If the job is too difficult, time consuming, or simply a pain in the ass, it's easy enough to stop doing it. There are any number of people that would be happy to join the team, and donate their spare time to the forum.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
 
Last edited:

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,736
6,759
126
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.
 
Jan 25, 2011
17,076
9,554
146
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.

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.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
1
0
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.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
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.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
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.
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.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
1
0
Another example of behavior that needs to end immediately and permanently.

Comment:
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.

Response:

Bull fucking shit you dirty lying shit bag.

Name said gunshow loophole.

You fucking lying sack.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
1
0
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.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,344
32,959
136
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.
 
Last edited:

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
1
0
What hasn't been happening around here lately is consistent enforcement of consistent rules. Given that, I think picking out certain posts for punishment just makes things worse, unless they are exceptionally bad (like deeply personal comments about someone's family or whatnot).
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
22,236
6,431
136
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.

How do you know the guy wasn't a lurker for eight years before joining? Join date and post count are absolutely meaningless to the discussion.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,736
6,759
126
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.

The point of temporarily allowing the creation of such experimental threads would be, as I think of it, primarily to go through just such possibilities in order to educate ourselves regarding whether we can adapt to different forum concepts effectively or whether we would like to post more permanently under such rules. The actual issues brought forward by the OP would be secondary, a medium for the test.

In this thread, for example, people have, I think, brought many of their own assumptions, one being that put downs are too subjective to moderate. I do not buy this assumption. I think put downs are perfectly obvious and destructive although not as destructive as if the bully types who are habituated to using them on more refined people are, without consequence, allowed to resort to them.

This was an area, for example, where I disagreed with IDC regarding the notion that educating oneself via a graph of effective vs impaired discourse, the acknowledgment of what is absurd low class behavior and what isn't, is as far as we can go in preventing bad behavior. We learned in kindergarten it's bad behavior to insult other people. But the fact is that people who hurt, hurt others and no amount of social statement that they are hurting others and showing their coarseness and true condition does the slightest bit of good because their true condition is the very thing they most deny and most want to unload on others.

I refer to this as the existential reality of the impotence of rage, the tremendous emotional feeling of need and yet the total hopelessness of getting any real satisfaction by getting even.

I would suggest that a substitute for calling others names and putting them down by reference is to establish the proper reference form, My Dear Sir, or somewhat more awkward but less gender orientated, My Dear Fellow Human Being, Madam or Sir, etc. Forcing people to use respectful language could even become a habit with survival potential. We have known for thousands of years that 'a soft answer turneth away wrath'.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,736
6,759
126
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.

Everything we are discussing is basically theoretical. I don't know if my suggestion would find any takers. I don't know, either, how long or if ever any of the improvements I would like to see would occur, namely 1. no put downs and 2. no statements as factual without argument for that factualness, the willing recognition that what one is stating is opinion fortified by the reasons you feel the opinion to have some value, a door, in other words, by which others can enter into a discussion of your reasoning via an introduction to theirs.

I made my suggestion because I think it has the potential to allow individuals to think about what forum rules they would like to see and make some tests as to how they might play ought. It allows for greater experimental variety, greater personal involvement and greater flexibility over a likely slow evolving single, even if modifiable, format. Again, this is all theoretical as I see it.

I would also like to see what kinds of ideas people have, especially my conservative brothers. Maybe if they could create threads with rules that they think would suite them they wouldn't really like them in the end.

I am, however, very cognizant of what I consider a fact, that conservatives feel discriminated against. I refer to this as the wounded animal thingi and I hate it when I think animals are suffering. You can yank teeth or use Novocaine, but for the most efficacious form of recovery a sense of personal safety is nice to have. I like the idea, therefore, that they should speak openly of the things that bother them, real or not, and that they should be given room to experiment with rules that satisfy them.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
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 :rolleyes:
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,736
6,759
126
"Bull fucking shit you dirty lying shit bag.

Name said gunshow loophole.

You fucking lying sack."

Somebody threatened this person's ego beliefs. He responded as many people do who believe they are under threat. He was confronted with what he considers a dangerous lie, that if believed by a voting majority would take from him his personal safety. His answer was on an emotional level completely honest and exactly how he feels. In reality, he is insane. These two facts are difficult to resolve. Mad men lash out but it is by their actions that we know them to be mad. We can treat none who are insane for insanity until they let us know their condition. But we have an obligation, I think, to the person to whom this tirade was directed, to protect him or her if he or she feels intimidated. The world demands that we control ourselves, but in psychotherapy it is very necessary to come out with our madness. We are likely all on different levels as to what we can handle.

Personally, the above post doesn't bother me because I already know this is how 'gun nuts' feel and what they will say to me if I attack the validity of their religion. 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. Of course, the 'gun nut' will not welcome my view of his condition, but he will hear his real truth, most likely, nowhere else. For these and similar reasons I react to these kinds of vicious outbursts as opportunities, not sins.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally Posted by dmcowen674
This coming from the worst anonymous offender :rolleyes:

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.

This is my one warning to both of you, but especially dmcowen who started this, to cease attacking other posters in this thread.

Stop now.

Perknose
Forum Director
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
7,647
2,921
136
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

I think you misunderstood me: I'm not posting on that topic to "be popular", I'm posting to try to help people. But when I try to help people and they ignore me it becomes very disheartening and I question why I am bothering to take my time and effort.

I also don't really blame the moderators, even though it may seem like I was. Moderators can't do everything, and they really can only operate as the rules allow (I don't have any perceived notions of "favoritism"). The community rules, as fostered by the posters, have made P&N the environment it is. I'd like to see it more, how should I say, intellectually honest, but rules will never fully force that to occur, the people have to want to change.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
1
0
Moonbeam may not swear or scream a lot, but IMO is one of the biggest problem posters on this board.

Flaming generally starts with flamebait, and Moonbeam's constant amateur psychoanalysis is a major impetus for people getting angry and threads going off the rails. There's no way this individual can back up his "diagnoses", and no real way anyone can respond to them other than by getting pissed off.

His constant attempts to portray half the country as being mentally ill are likewise counterproductive and inflammatory.

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.

Personally, I'd rather be sweared at than listen to that.

Any effort to deal with the problems in this place must be holistic and address the causes, not just the symptoms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.