Would you like to see P&N become more civilized? Poll inside . . .

[Don Vito Corleone]

Inspired by this thread:

Several of us, on both sides of the political spectrum, are thoroughly sick of the mean-spirited flamewars that have been consuming P&N. Our proposal is that the mods would create a stickied thread, in which only mods could post, that would document the nastiest personally insulting posts (accompanied by mod comments, if they feel that's appropriate). We had talked about rotating them out once a week, but obviously that would be up to the mods.

If the mods don't want to monitor all the posts themselves for candidates, we could obviously notify them when someone is way out of bounds.

The idea is basically to create an asshole list, to single out users who are just cluttering P&N with pointless trolling. I think we all value the ATPN community, and are hoping to make it a more civilized community for debate and discussion.

So what do you all think of this idea? I am welcome to suggestions for alternatives or improvements as well.

 

[Gaard]

This thread shouldn't only be for embarrassment purposes only. It should be something like a 3 strikes thing. Otherwise what good will it do. Sure, some might feel a little embarrassed to get on it, but others would try like hell to be put on the list...kinda like a badge of honor. IOW, there should be consequences for being listed. How severe those consequences would be...I don't really know.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Gaard
This thread shouldn't only be for embarrassment purposes only. It should be something like a 3 strikes thing. Otherwise what good will it do. Sure, some might feel a little embarrassed to get on it, but others would try like hell to be put on the list...kinda like a badge of honor. IOW, there should be consequences for being listed. How severe those consequences would be...I don't really know.

Interesting point - I like the idea of a three-strikes rule.

 

[alchemize]

I would like to include "calling out" as an offense.

And generalizations "i.e. Necons, Libs, you lefties, you righties, you fundies, you godless commies"

 

[Infohawk]

What is the name of this movement? "Bi-partisan Committee on Anti-trolling" "P&Ners Against Trolls (PAT)" "Anti troll and flamation league"?

I think this is a good start. If enough people support this, we can get to the hard stuff like defining what a troll is.

 

[conjur]

Stop
The
Flamebaiting
Union

 

[Kadarin]

On the other hand, the idea of being able in OT to tell people to "take it to P&N" is somewhat appealing. That way, you can always point someone to the cesspool...

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: alchemize
I would like to include "calling out" as an offense.

And generalizations "i.e. Necons, Libs, you lefties, you righties, you fundies, you godless commies"

What does "calling out" entail?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: alchemize
I would like to include "calling out" as an offense.

And generalizations "i.e. Necons, Libs, you lefties, you righties, you fundies, you godless commies"

What is calling out?

I think you need to distinguish between some of your generalizations. In my book, some of them are okay and some of them are bad. For example, "you fundies, you godless commies" are bad, but "neocons, libs, even those horrible Democrats or republicans is fair game. I think we can insult anyone not on the board (except family of those on the board, but religion, parties, of those on the board as long as the word "you" isn't used are okay.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: conjur
Stop
The
Flamebaiting
Union

I like it. A nasty post could be followed up with "You have been reported. STFU."

 

[heartsurgeon]

i thought there already were mods perfectly capable of locking threads and banning posters.
now you want authority to "notify them when someone is way out of bounds" and label them a troll. i believe you can post in the forums "issues" thread. you are now proposing something akin to the thought police.

seeing as how liberals vastly outnumber conservatives....i can already see the unavoidable outcome of such an arrangement....

it's called censorship and suppression of speech. in the opinion of a conservative, nearly every thread started by liberals appears as flame bait or trolling. to a liberal, such a thread appears to be a rallying point for other liberals to pile on and profess their hatred for Bush.

one man's free speech is another man's trolling.

this is like calling for Rush Limbaugh or Fox news to be banned.

that may be what you want, but that's unamerican.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
i thought there already were mods perfectly capable of locking threads and banning posters.
now you want authority to "notify them when someone is way out of bounds" and label them a troll. i believe you can post in the forums "issues" thread. you are now proposing something akin to the thought police.

seeing as how liberals vastly outnumber conservatives....i can already see the unavoidable outcome of such an arrangement....

it's called censorship and suppression of speech. in the opinion of a conservative, nearly every thread started by liberals appears as flame bait or trolling. to a liberal, such a thread appears to be a rallying point for other liberals to pile on and profess their hatred for Bush.

one man's free speech is another man's trolling.

this is like calling for Rush Limbaugh or Fox news to be banned.

that may be what you want, but that's unamerican.

I like that idea!!

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
i thought there already were mods perfectly capable of locking threads and banning posters.
now you want authority to "notify them when someone is way out of bounds" and label them a troll. i believe you can post in the forums "issues" thread. you are now proposing something akin to the thought police.

seeing as how liberals vastly outnumber conservatives....i can already see the unavoidable outcome of such an arrangement....

it's called censorship and suppression of speech. in the opinion of a conservative, nearly every thread started by liberals appears as flame bait or trolling. to a liberal, such a thread appears to be a rallying point for other liberals to pile on and profess their hatred for Bush.

one man's free speech is another man's trolling.

this is like calling for Rush Limbaugh or Fox news to be banned.

that may be what you want, but that's unamerican.

Gee, why does heartsurgeon have reservations about this?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I think I know what you're after, Infohawk, and I know one thing I object to is posts that categorically speak negatively about "libs," "fundies," or the like. Here's an example, from my old friend Passions:

The citizens duty of a liberal is to whine and complain about the govt that provides their freedom and liberties. They have no sense of gratitude, but only sense of selfishness. They are also pacifist babies who live off freeloading and welfare.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: conjur
Stop
The
Flamebaiting
Union

I like it. A nasty post could be followed up with "You have been reported. STFU."

I will never join a Union. Sorry.


CkG

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
i thought there already were mods perfectly capable of locking threads and banning posters.
now you want authority to "notify them when someone is way out of bounds" and label them a troll. i believe you can post in the forums "issues" thread. you are now proposing something akin to the thought police.

seeing as how liberals vastly outnumber conservatives....i can already see the unavoidable outcome of such an arrangement....

it's called censorship and suppression of speech. in the opinion of a conservative, nearly every thread started by liberals appears as flame bait or trolling. to a liberal, such a thread appears to be a rallying point for other liberals to pile on and profess their hatred for Bush.

one man's free speech is another man's trolling.

this is like calling for Rush Limbaugh or Fox news to be banned.

that may be what you want, but that's unamerican.

Interestingly, the plan was originally conceived by shinerburke, who would kick my ass if I called him a liberal.

I wouldn't agree with your blanket assertion that every thread created by a conservative looks like flamebait to a liberal, and vice versa. I don't think people consider my posts flamebait, regardless of their political orientation.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
What is the name of this movement? "Bi-partisan Committee on Anti-trolling" "P&Ners Against Trolls (PAT)" "Anti troll and flamation league"?

I think this is a good start. If enough people support this, we can get to the hard stuff like defining what a troll is.

Gnarly Anandtechers Against Retarded Discourse

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
i thought there already were mods perfectly capable of locking threads and banning posters.
now you want authority to "notify them when someone is way out of bounds" and label them a troll. i believe you can post in the forums "issues" thread. you are now proposing something akin to the thought police.

seeing as how liberals vastly outnumber conservatives....i can already see the unavoidable outcome of such an arrangement....

it's called censorship and suppression of speech. in the opinion of a conservative, nearly every thread started by liberals appears as flame bait or trolling. to a liberal, such a thread appears to be a rallying point for other liberals to pile on and profess their hatred for Bush.

one man's free speech is another man's trolling.

this is like calling for Rush Limbaugh or Fox news to be banned.

that may be what you want, but that's unamerican.

Gee, why does heartsurgeon have reservations about this?

Because he would have to:

Stop.
Posting.

 

[alchemize]

Gee, why does heartsurgeon have reservations about this?

Actually, Heartsurgeon need not have any reservations about this, because under these rules, he'd be fine. HS talks a nasty game about Kerry, talks a great game about bush, but generally doesn't call people names or insult them directly. If you banned HS under these rules, you'd also have to ban dave (hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....HS fall on the sword?)

re: question about calling out. Examples would be what Dave does every day with his "CAD, hannity, and Co." or me saying something nasty about moonbeam even though I'm not replying to him.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Don_Vito
I think I know what you're after, Infohawk, and I know one thing I object to is posts that categorically speak negatively about "libs," "fundies," or the like. Here's an example, from my old friend Passions:

The citizens duty of a liberal is to whine and complain about the govt that provides their freedom and liberties. They have no sense of gratitude, but only sense of selfishness. They are also pacifist babies who live off freeloading and welfare.

Annoying as it is, I don't think you can end that and still keep a non-biased forum. That would just be too general a rule.

 

[Ozoned]

There is so much to defining trolling.



A well thought out post to some could be seen as a troll to others.

For instance I see the tone in this one:

Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

pointed out, in the attack in this post.

HS, it strikes me that your entire style of writing is intended to engender partisan anger, and ergo, to start fights. Don't you think it would be more productive to post your thoughts and opinions free from this nasty, provocative tone, if you are sincerely interested in sparking discussion?

You Sir, have over reached your own rhetoric.


JMHO

 

[Insane3D]

I would love to see something happen to raise the level of discussion in these forums, but I wonder if it will ever happen. In the early days of P&N, we went through this same exact thing, and had a stickied thread with some comments from the mods, but in the end, it just went back to normal, and the attacks got worse than ever.

You have some good ideas Don, I just wonder how well it will work.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Annoying as it is, I don't think you can end that and still keep a non-biased forum. That would just be too general a rule.

You may be right, but I think you'd agree that is a nonproductive post intended to start a fight (or perhaps you wouldn't; I dunno). Admittedly there is a slippery slope associated with any restriction on speech, and maybe Passions' kind of post should be tolerated for the greater good. I just have a hard time seeing the point of posts like this.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
There is so much to defining trolling.



A well thought out post to some could be seen as a troll to others.

For instance I see the tone in this one:

Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

pointed out, in the attack in this post.

HS, it strikes me that your entire style of writing is intended to engender partisan anger, and ergo, to start fights. Don't you think it would be more productive to post your thoughts and opinions free from this nasty, provocative tone, if you are sincerely interested in sparking discussion?

You Sir, have over reached your own rhetoric.


JMHO

How in the world do you consider that 2nd statement to be an attack?

There's a difference between an attack and constructive criticism. It's really fairly obvious, too.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
There is so much to defining trolling.



A well thought out post to some could be seen as a troll to others.

For instance I see the tone in this one:

Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

pointed out, in the attack in this post.

HS, it strikes me that your entire style of writing is intended to engender partisan anger, and ergo, to start fights. Don't you think it would be more productive to post your thoughts and opinions free from this nasty, provocative tone, if you are sincerely interested in sparking discussion?

You Sir, have over reached your own rhetoric.


JMHO

Ok, I can't hold it in any longer. Ozoned, your posts are the worst constructed posts on this board and, even though I try like hell, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THEM!