Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 05:41:05


Post by: Peregrine


From this thread: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/745058.page

 motyak wrote:
This is pushing way too hard into a US Politics territory. Reef it back to talking about the +ves and -ves of net neutrality, not which party is doing what, or how entrenched the sides are, etc. That kind of chat will see this locked up right away and warnings issued.

What I want to see: Posts like the one Galas has right above mine

What I don't want to see: Most of the rest of the page above that.


What this really translates to is "don't discuss the subject at all". The positives and negatives of net neutrality is a dead question, it's blatantly obvious to anyone who looks at the question even superficially that net neutrality is a good policy for 99.99999999% of the world and only a tiny handful of the ultra-rich benefit in any way from removing it. The only interesting part of the subject is which party is doing what on the issue, what their motives are, how opposition to them should/could go post-repeal, etc. Take away the US politics element and you have a thread that is effectively "hay guys, water is wet, discuss".

And this is hardly the first time that this has happened. It's a ridiculous constraint on discussion that turns any thread involving the US into a choice between moderators threatening bans over half the comments in the thread, or a pointless series of "water is wet" or "my thoughts and prayers" posts that nobody wants to read. Is this really a constructive alternative to allowing US politics as a subject, and just accepting the fact that anyone who participates in a US politics thread does so voluntarily and doesn't deserve any sympathy if they get a slightly hostile post or two directed at them?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 07:05:30


Post by: sebster


It seems to be creating a situation where multiple threads on off-topic are developing into crypto-US politics threads. Right now there's by my count there's three threads that by my count have naturally had US politics raised as part of the conversation;
Net Neutrality repeal in USA
Movie Mogul accusation and the dark side of Hollywood
What to do with North Korea...

I'm not sure how any of those subjects can be discussed while avoiding US politics. And there are plenty of other threads on dakka that could naturally move in to US politics.

It seems to me that the old system at the very least used to keep all political discussion limited to a single thread, whereas now it's going to come up fairly often in many off topic threads.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 08:47:44


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


I'm just confused why it's just US Politics. What's so special about US Politics I can't talk about that, that doesn't apply to the nationalities of other Dakka posters?

If you're going to ban politics, ban everyones, right?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 10:04:10


Post by: NinthMusketeer


AdmiralHalsey wrote:
I'm just confused why it's just US Politics. What's so special about US Politics I can't talk about that, that doesn't apply to the nationalities of other Dakka posters?

If you're going to ban politics, ban everyones, right?
The toxicity. Us politics involves more name-calling and outright delusion than any other country and that naturally bleeds into the thread as well. You can imagine how insults & fact denial leads to a lot of irritation, and in turn to violations of rule #1.

Now I'm not arguing for or against such a thread, just providing reasoning.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 16:33:32


Post by: Ouze


It's always been my viewpoint has always been that the OT should be shut entirely. It historically has eaten up site and moderation resources, I have to imagine has contributed to moderators burnout, and delivers sweet feth-all to the Dakka mission of being the best wargaming website out there. You guys split the difference with geek media, but deciding to keep a subforum open as a shunt to keep toxic posters in, hoping they won't metastasize to the rest of the forum... well, you guys would know better than I how it actually works but it seems like avoiding the problem.

However, if it's going to be open, it might be time to re-consider the US politics ban. If you look at the recent sex abuse thread, that's a p[erfect example of a thread that was pseudo-political in nature. It was obviously created with a partisan intent, to use as a beatstick against a historically left-wing population. However, it unexpectedly expanded into a larger issue that covered both parties and the weird thing is that while it got very, very US political at times it seems to never have gotten as vitriolic and, well, stupid as these threads almost always get. At points when it got heated you actually saw some self-policing, and not of the "this is hurting my team so I want this thread closed" type.

Maybe it's because a lot of the people who tended to ruin those threads have gotten OT bans since then, maybe it's because some just stopped using the site, and maybe it's because the people using it are more mature and the election is over.

Maybe it will go exactly the same as it was before, and the ban will have to be put back in place after a week or two.

It might be worth finding out. Of course, it's easy for me to say that since I don't have to spend all my time in there deleting posts and issuing warnings


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 17:04:03


Post by: Dreadclaw69


To piggy back off Ouze's point what does an off-topic, politics heavy board add to a site on war gaming?

Outside of YMDC and complaints about Space Marine releases in the FW thread this area of the site seems to be an significant burden on the Moderation Team. Yes, I know that on occasion I contributed to that burden.

If we look at the traffic across the site based on the messages in each area;
- 40K Gen Disc; 1,067,184
- OT; 923,704
- News & Rumors; 917,839
- P&M Blogs; 663,584
- P&M; 594,770
- P&M Showcase; 184,653
- P&M Tutorials; 21,912

The OT area of Dakka has more traffic than the P&M Blogs, Showcase, and Tutorials combined (917,839 v 870,149), and were it not for the ban on US political discussions the disparity would be even more pronounced. In a site dedicated to painting and playing with tiny army men the second most popular area is off-topic discussion (the most popular hosts a 45 page discussion on whether or not Codex Space Marines is the worst).

The question for the community and Moderation team is what value does the OT area add to the site, and what affect does that have on the character of the community?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 17:12:05


Post by: NinthMusketeer


I would guess that people like Dakka's OT section exactly because it's policed and relatively civil/rational amidst a sea of internet toxicity. It adds to the community, but in a non-wargaming way. The question is if that's worth dealing with when it doesn't directly contribute to wargaming discussion at all.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 17:17:03


Post by: Galas


DakkaDakka should follow Verizon example. Do you want to be able to discuss US politics on dakkadakka? Pay a 2$/month fee and you are good to go.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 17:21:51


Post by: Dreadclaw69


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I would guess that people like Dakka's OT section exactly because it's policed and relatively civil/rational amidst a sea of internet toxicity. It adds to the community, but in a non-wargaming way. The question is if that's worth dealing with when it doesn't directly contribute to wargaming discussion at all.

I think that the moderators would probably beg to differ on that assessment.

Surely if you want to discuss politics there are better, more relevant sites to do so other than a war game site. I would understand it more if we were a historical war game focused site and we were discussing period politics, social trends, etc. but we are not.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 17:41:10


Post by: NinthMusketeer


I'm just trying to provide reasoning for why people use the OT so much.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 21:11:52


Post by: Peregrine


 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Surely if you want to discuss politics there are better, more relevant sites to do so other than a war game site. I would understand it more if we were a historical war game focused site and we were discussing period politics, social trends, etc. but we are not.


It doesn't matter if you think there are better sites, the people having the conversation clearly want to have it. Just look at the frequency of "this is totally not a US politics thread" conversations going on, with just enough of a flimsy pretense of not being about US politics to avoid getting banned. And at the threads like the one I linked in the OP, where it's a subject where the entire constructive discussion revolves around US politics but a certain moderator is deleting anything besides banal "HAY GUYS I LIKE THE INTERNET" posts.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 21:50:15


Post by: NinthMusketeer


It's different when the discussion is US politics as pertaining to a certain issue than when it's US politics in general.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 22:53:47


Post by: Ouze


See what I mean about it being in different environment then previously? Disagreements, but it's already going better than that time that people banned from the OT got a thread about the OT locked in Nuts & Bolts


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 22:58:53


Post by: Dreadclaw69


 Peregrine wrote:
It doesn't matter if you think there are better sites, the people having the conversation clearly want to have it. Just look at the frequency of "this is totally not a US politics thread" conversations going on, with just enough of a flimsy pretense of not being about US politics to avoid getting banned. And at the threads like the one I linked in the OP, where it's a subject where the entire constructive discussion revolves around US politics but a certain moderator is deleting anything besides banal "HAY GUYS I LIKE THE INTERNET" posts.

There are better sites to debate politics than on a war game site. That should not be a controversial statement.

I'm not disputing that people want to have the discussion. I'm disputing whether a war games site is the best place to do it, what value it adds to the experience of the site, and whether or not the is a sufficient cost/benefit to the Moderators and Admin to have those discussions here.

Clearly the rule banning US political discussions was put in for a reason, and that reason was that they were so divisive to the community, and required so much time and energy for the volunteer Moderators to deal. As a community the Moderation team had given us plenty of warnings before the ban was put in place. Has your ability to enjoy the war game aspect of this site, or hobby, been compromised by a ban on political discussion?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 23:37:10


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
AdmiralHalsey wrote:
I'm just confused why it's just US Politics. What's so special about US Politics I can't talk about that, that doesn't apply to the nationalities of other Dakka posters?

If you're going to ban politics, ban everyones, right?
The toxicity. Us politics involves more name-calling and outright delusion than any other country and that naturally bleeds into the thread as well. You can imagine how insults & fact denial leads to a lot of irritation, and in turn to violations of rule #1.

Now I'm not arguing for or against such a thread, just providing reasoning.


Um.

Not to state the blindingly obvious, but could't we just ban toxic posts and name calling, regardless of whose politics they're involving?
Or is that behaviour totally okay, as long as it doesn't involve American elected officals?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 23:39:45


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Ouze wrote:
See what I mean about it being in different environment then previously? Disagreements, but it's already going better than that time that people banned from the OT got a thread about the OT locked in Nuts & Bolts
I say this with all seriousness; people have had more practice now. Certainly I used to be much worse at remaining calm while engaging with a viewpoint I find infuriating. Maybe it's just that so many are now so jaded to the crap that has plagued this decade.

At any rate, maybe there could be a specific mod for the off topic forum so that other mods don't have to deal with it. I nominate Ouze because the irony amuses me on a truly deep level (sarcasm).


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/23 23:40:24


Post by: Dreadclaw69


AdmiralHalsey wrote:
Um.

Not to state the blindingly obvious, but could't we just ban toxic posts and name calling, regardless of whose politics they're involving?
Or is that behaviour totally okay, as long as it doesn't involve American elected officals?

It is not ok, and is contrary to the Dakka guidelines. That being said many of the US political threads which have gone off the rails seem to reach critical mass of negative posts very quickly, and require an inordinate amount of time to quarantine, investigate, and clean up.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/24 00:46:00


Post by: greatbigtree


I say the US should be annexed BY Canada, like some kind of inverse Fallout thing in which instead of the world going to hell, the world enters a new golden age.

Then you wouldn't have US politics to consider, but instead the relatively tame Canadian Politics to simply observe. Given that we have 3 major parties, and an additional 3 minor parties, we generally are more accepting of others' views, even if we don't agree with them.

So rather than fixing Dakka, we should just fix the US. Boom. Problem solved. Apply to your governing bodies to be assimilated into the Great Dominion of Canada.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/24 02:12:52


Post by: sebster


 Ouze wrote:
However, if it's going to be open, it might be time to re-consider the US politics ban. If you look at the recent sex abuse thread, that's a p[erfect example of a thread that was pseudo-political in nature. It was obviously created with a partisan intent, to use as a beatstick against a historically left-wing population. However, it unexpectedly expanded into a larger issue that covered both parties and the weird thing is that while it got very, very US political at times it seems to never have gotten as vitriolic and, well, stupid as these threads almost always get. At points when it got heated you actually saw some self-policing, and not of the "this is hurting my team so I want this thread closed" type.


I've said it a lot of times before, but the problems in the politics threads came from a very specific handful of posters. They weren't the only ones who said rude words, and often they weren't the only who got suspensions.

These were the posters that showed a kind of aggressive, obtuse ignorance. They'd make big claims, which were either dubious or straight up false, and when other posters responded they would reply by repeating their claim, changing the subject, or doing anything to actually reply to the argument made against them. Often this would just be drive bys, They all belonged to the extremes of both the right and left, but at the same time most weren't that ideological, it was more a partisan thing.

They weren't always around in off topic, but when they did appear it was was when the politics was particularly ugly. There was a lot of them through 2016, particularly by October/November.

Its why I've said that banning people for rude words and harsh posts was never going to solve the problem, it was punishing the people responding to the real instigators.

WHat was needed all along was a focus on penalising the people who put up bad arguments and refused to respond in anything approaching good faith, and who posted partisan drive bys, not on penalising the people who got frustrated dealing with that crap.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm just trying to provide reasoning for why people use the OT so much.


I can't speak for other posters, but I came to dakka because I wanted a place to talk about 40k. When I moved back to WHFB, I moved to the WHFB part of the board. Then when I moved back in to Epic... well there's better sites for that game as its a more niche market.

But that whole time I've always enjoyed talking about a lot of other issues, particularly US politics. So I split my posts between the gaming sections and off topic. Over time as I stopped going to the gaming sections, I was still a part of the dakka community, and was more interested in talking politics here than elsewhere. I don't know how much this applies to other posters, but its my experience.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/25 21:08:56


Post by: Kilkrazy


The special thing about US political threads is that DakkaDakka members have pretty much demonstrated through empirical evidance that many of you are unable to follow the forum rules when discussing US politics. This is logical given the extreme polarisation of the US political landscape at the moment.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/26 03:00:02


Post by: Ouze


This was undeniable a year ago.

What I question is whether it's still true now.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/26 03:40:44


Post by: Alpharius


I'd bet that it is - partly because, as KK mentioned, the political landscape in the USA, and partly because...of the people who will be involved in these threads again.

Still, it is worth considering, especially if we just kick the offending parties completely out of the OT Forum if they can't behave.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/26 03:58:41


Post by: Polonius


I don't really have a dog in the fight, as I self selected out of the OT a long time ago. It's one of the nicer places to discuss politics on the internet, but that's such a painfully low threshold it hurts.

Modern US Politics is basically trolling, on a national scale. I'm not sure you can have a civil conversation about it, and certainly not when provocateurs have free reign.

My (non-existent) vote would be to shut it down, but really, it's existence or non-existence doesn't affect me, so feel free to disregard me.

For what it's worth, I really only discuss politics with people that can articulate to me a time in which they've change their position on a policy, and why they did so. Otherwise, we're just shouting propaganda at each other.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/26 15:01:20


Post by: kronk


 Alpharius wrote:


Still, it is worth considering, especially if we just kick the offending parties completely out of the OT Forum if they can't behave.


So much winning, Charlie Sheen would OD from it...


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/26 17:57:24


Post by: Future War Cultist


If US politics remains a forbidden topic of discussion then in the interest of fairness you should probably go ahead and ban all political discussions period. This is primarily a wargaming site after all.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/26 21:58:42


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Future War Cultist wrote:
If US politics remains a forbidden topic of discussion then in the interest of fairness you should probably go ahead and ban all political discussions period. This is primarily a wargaming site after all.
Just because one kid in the kindergarten can't play nice doesn't mean you have to takes the toys away from the all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Galas wrote:
DakkaDakka should follow Verizon example. Do you want to be able to discuss US politics on dakkadakka? Pay a 2$/month fee and you are good to go.
Ya know, I have been on other forums with off topic forums that are only accessible to paying members.

You aren't paying for access to the OT forum, it's just only contributing members do have access to it.

I actually kind of like the idea because it keeps the poo slinging behind somewhat closed doors, so randoms don't stumble in and think "geeze, wargamers are all d-bags".


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 01:30:16


Post by: insaniak


The idea of having OT for DCMs only was discussed on the mod board a while back, but given that part of the point of having the OT board is to give the masses somewhere to vent without polluting the gaming-related parts of the board, restricting it to paying members somewhat defeats the point.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 01:54:14


Post by: Hollow


Don't see an issue myself. I believe in free speech and a persons right to say anything anywhere. Easy enough to ignore a post or person if you don't like it.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 02:38:59


Post by: timetowaste85


I also feel that if you feel the need to kill political discussions about one country, in fairness you should kill discussion about the other ones.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 03:56:56


Post by: insaniak


If political discussion involving any other country generated the same levels of silliness, that would be a fair point.

It doesn't, so there is no problem. There is little to be gained by extending the ban to cover disussion that isn't actually causing drama.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 08:59:31


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 timetowaste85 wrote:
I also feel that if you feel the need to kill political discussions about one country, in fairness you should kill discussion about the other ones.
It has nothing to do with politics being a taboo subject, it has to do with people not being able to play nice when discussing US politics specifically.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 10:18:42


Post by: Future War Cultist


I'm in agreement with timetowaste85. Hell, I said it first.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 10:35:45


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Future War Cultist wrote:
I'm in agreement with timetowaste85. Hell, I said it first.
But why? There's nothing wrong with political discussion. There's a problem with 1 specific thread always going off the rails. I don't see the logic in shutting down other threads that aren't going off the rails (at least not as frequently).


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 11:59:29


Post by: usernamesareannoying


i come here for hobby related content hoping to put the dog pile of crap that is the world out of my head for a few minutes.
i'd actually like to see it taken a step further and get rid of any non hobby related talk or at least figure out a way to mute threads.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 12:06:04


Post by: insaniak


 usernamesareannoying wrote:
i come here for hobby related content hoping to put the dog pile of crap that is the world out of my head for a few minutes.
i'd actually like to see it taken a step further and get rid of any non hobby related talk or at least figure out a way to mute threads.


You can just not read the off topic section...


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 12:16:59


Post by: Ouze


 usernamesareannoying wrote:
i come here for hobby related content hoping to put the dog pile of crap that is the world out of my head for a few minutes.
i'd actually like to see it taken a step further and get rid of any non hobby related talk or at least figure out a way to mute threads.


Real talk: what would you use as your personal google if that happened?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 14:38:14


Post by: usernamesareannoying


hey listen, its not my fault they wont rename the place usernamesareannoying dakka dakka...

that also reminds me that i need to change my oil, thanks ouze...


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 14:41:59


Post by: Cothonian


Every US politics thread I looked at (prior to the ban) was insult after vulgar insult directed at me, my preferred candidates, and my preferred party/alignment.

If you are even remotely conservative OT is a hostile place to be.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 17:31:32


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Cothonian wrote:
Every US politics thread I looked at (prior to the ban) was insult after vulgar insult directed at me, my preferred candidates, and my preferred party/alignment.

If you are even remotely conservative OT is a hostile place to be.
This is a great example of why US politics is banned; statements like this demonize one side while exonerating the other, it provokes negative response. The only difference between this and trolling is the speaker (presumably) believes the statement at hand.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 19:36:20


Post by: sirlynchmob


 greatbigtree wrote:
I say the US should be annexed BY Canada, like some kind of inverse Fallout thing in which instead of the world going to hell, the world enters a new golden age.

Then you wouldn't have US politics to consider, but instead the relatively tame Canadian Politics to simply observe. Given that we have 3 major parties, and an additional 3 minor parties, we generally are more accepting of others' views, even if we don't agree with them.

So rather than fixing Dakka, we should just fix the US. Boom. Problem solved. Apply to your governing bodies to be assimilated into the Great Dominion of Canada.



No, we don't need that kind of negativity up here.

Maybe just take californina in on a trial basis after they vote to leave



It has been a year on the ban for politics though, maybe give it another go?

new topic "US politics: why does trump support the pedophile moore and why does the party of "family values" support either of them?"

Oh nvm, I see the ban staying for another 3 years, deservedly so, or until after trumps indictment and/or impeachment. I'm sure that would make for a polite topic to have a conversation about




Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/27 22:54:49


Post by: LordofHats


Is there a ban? I don't see one here. There's a new US politics by proxy thread every other day, and that's not counting all the US politics cliches that get dragged into non-US politics threads and suddenly they're about US politics. It's not as bad as it was right after the ban was put in place, but it's still kind of hilarious to talk about a ban when people talk about US politics as long as everyone pretends they're not.

I said it before; the problem is and never has been the topic but a small handful of users who flame bait those topics. Many of them seem to be gone now cause I haven't seen certain parties in months. Any improvement in discussion likely owes more to their absence than any improvement in maturity. But some of them are still around, doing the same things they've always done. At least one still throws up US politics threads and manages to derail them as badly as they derailed the old mega threads.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 05:01:20


Post by: whembly


Why is there a desire to talk politics on a primarily wargaming website?

I think this sites offers some unique attributes that's hard to find on the 'Net.

Think about it...

We're all primarily a member of this site due to our hobby.

We are also aware that this site draws from all over the world, with unique backgrounds and perspectives.

The leads to some really interesting conversations on various topics... including the OT/Politics forums.

You really can't get that on "YourPolitics.com" forums.

So now, we're in a weird place where on some sincere topics, we're having to "tip-toe" around the subject of valid US political conversation.

But, then again, we're guest on this site where yak & mods contribute their time to be good stewards of this community. The least we can do is abide by their rules.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 05:50:00


Post by: sebster


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
It's different when the discussion is US politics as pertaining to a certain issue than when it's US politics in general.


That's a really good point and I agree.

Could dakka have stumbled in to a way to make US political conversation about actual policies and issues?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 whembly wrote:
Why is there a desire to talk politics on a primarily wargaming website?

I think this sites offers some unique attributes that's hard to find on the 'Net.


Yeah, I can't speak for why dakka is as it is, but my experience is there's a core of posters with some interesting pinions on US politics that I enjoy reading. I don't agree with all of them, and they don't often impact my opinion, but I feel I generally get a bit of insight in to how other people see various issues. Whether other places give a similar experience I don't know, this is the place where I've found it.

Of course, there's also lots of other people who also have opinions about US politics, and some of them are pretty deliberately disruptive and seem intentionally so. And that's the problem. Because if you take just the long time dakka politics posters and look at the number of times they had knock down fights with each other that required mod action, well it happened but it's no more common than similar issues in the wargaming boards. What made US politics bad was the churn of new, short stay posters who made some ridiculous claims, engaged in dishonest, hostile debate, and then burned out, with warnings and bans splashed out to lots of posters.

Control those posters and I think US politics could be reasonably debated.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 06:47:54


Post by: techsoldaten


I work in US politics.

Dakka is where I go to not have to deal with US Politics.

Keep the ban. It's a good thing.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 08:48:01


Post by: Ouze


I work in IT, and I don't wan't to read threads from people asking for help with their computer or some tech issue. I've never felt like the need to extrapolate that out to a forum-wide rule, and just don't click on those threads instead.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 09:47:04


Post by: nfe


 Ouze wrote:
I work in IT, and I don't wan't to read threads from people asking for help with their computer or some tech issue. I've never felt like the need to extrapolate that out to a forum-wide rule, and just don't click on those threads instead.




I tend to avoid threads on forums related to my work but it'd be fairly silly for me to think that no one should be allowed to talk about archaeology or ancient religion - especially since they're often controversial, engaging, and fun for other people to get wired into!

There are plenty valid arguments for keeping a ban on as volatile a topic as US politics, but when it's restricted to one subsection of a substatial forum, 'this is where I come to get away from the world' is not one of them.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 10:17:18


Post by: sebster


 Ouze wrote:
I work in IT, and I don't wan't to read threads from people asking for help with their computer or some tech issue. I've never felt like the need to extrapolate that out to a forum-wide rule, and just don't click on those threads instead.




I work as an accountant in government. I never have to worry about that invading any forum anywhere because no-one discusses that for one second unless they're being directly paid to do so.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 11:24:42


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


As an engineer I'm sad there's not more topics on Dakka about engineering for me to get sick of it enough to not want to read threads about it


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 11:36:19


Post by: djones520


My take, I've been a member of Dakka for something like 12 years now.

Look at my friends list, you'll see I've got folks on there who I frequently disagree with, but I have come to respect in that time. I'm a man in my thirties, been all over the world, seen a lot of things, done a lot of things. I found a community I like, with some people that I respect as being honest, thoughtful, and respectful.

There is only so much war gaming that I can discuss though, especially after 20 years of it. So there is another part of Dakka that keeps me coming here more often. So in regards to Ouze's thoughts on shutting OT down, I'm definitely against that. Anyone can look at my posting stats to see where I spend the vast majority of my time. Other war gaming forums that don't offer that, I just don't bother with anymore.

As for politics, well... it drives traffic. It drives clicks. If the mods don't want to deal with it, ask to see if someone else would?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 11:49:18


Post by: Hollow


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Cothonian wrote:
Every US politics thread I looked at (prior to the ban) was insult after vulgar insult directed at me, my preferred candidates, and my preferred party/alignment.

If you are even remotely conservative OT is a hostile place to be.
This is a great example of why US politics is banned; statements like this demonize one side while exonerating the other, it provokes negative response. The only difference between this and trolling is the speaker (presumably) believes the statement at hand.


Yeah... good point. People are so blinkered and victimised that they can't take a step back and be objective. It's like team sports and people on both sides of the political spectrum have taken it to a disgusting new level (although that is a false equivalency, considering the GOP have literally opened their big tent to Nazi's, White supremists and child molestors.. where-as the left have just become super annoying)

However, I stand by what I said and think the ban should be lifted... perhaps we could have an 'Ice-box forum' where all bets are off, anything can be discussed, people can flame, be mean ,and not be beholden to any rules. US politics could be discussed there.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 12:10:26


Post by: Future War Cultist


And I still say that if the US politics ban isn’t lifted, we should consider closing down the others. I just don’t think it’s fair to exclude one nationality whilst allowing the others to carry on.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 12:21:56


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


 Hollow wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Cothonian wrote:
Every US politics thread I looked at (prior to the ban) was insult after vulgar insult directed at me, my preferred candidates, and my preferred party/alignment.

If you are even remotely conservative OT is a hostile place to be.
This is a great example of why US politics is banned; statements like this demonize one side while exonerating the other, it provokes negative response. The only difference between this and trolling is the speaker (presumably) believes the statement at hand.


Yeah... good point. People are so blinkered and victimised that they can't take a step back and be objective. It's like team sports and people on both sides of the political spectrum have taken it to a disgusting new level (although that is a false equivalency, considering the GOP have literally opened their big tent to Nazi's, White supremists and child molestors.. where-as the left have just become super annoying)

However, I stand by what I said and think the ban should be lifted... perhaps we could have an 'Ice-box forum' where all bets are off, anything can be discussed, people can flame, be mean ,and not be beholden to any rules. US politics could be discussed there.


Is that a post about US Politics in a thread discussing that US politics are banned, primarily because of such wide sweeping offensive statements as contained in your post?

The irony is thick here


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 12:34:36


Post by: Peregrine


 LordofHats wrote:
Is there a ban? I don't see one here. There's a new US politics by proxy thread every other day, and that's not counting all the US politics cliches that get dragged into non-US politics threads and suddenly they're about US politics. It's not as bad as it was right after the ban was put in place, but it's still kind of hilarious to talk about a ban when people talk about US politics as long as everyone pretends they're not.


On the other hand there's the post/thread I linked in the OP, where the discussion was shut down with threats of bans for anyone who came too close to US politics. I suspect the answer is that the US politics in all but name threads only exist because they don't attract attention, at any point the thread could be locked and/or full of red text and disappearing posters. And that's kind of the point I was making, the ban is clearly both ineffective and counterproductive and turns a lot of threads into an exercise in seeing how long you can carry on a conversation before the red text appears.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 12:45:39


Post by: kronk


 Alpharius wrote:

Still, it is worth considering, especially if we just kick the offending parties completely out of the OT Forum if they can't behave.


I responded to this post in a silly way, earlier. However, if the MODs agree and have the stones to carry it out, not only could civil discussion of US politics return to the off-topic area, but baskets of deplorables, binders full of women, and poor little snowflakes could be removed!

It's win-win, really. Or win-win-GTFO.

Either way, I like it!


 Hollow wrote:
perhaps we could have an 'Ice-box forum' where all bets are off, anything can be discussed, people can flame, be mean ,and not be beholden to any rules. US politics could be discussed there.


I've gotta a...





Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 13:57:03


Post by: Cothonian


 Hollow wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Cothonian wrote:
Every US politics thread I looked at (prior to the ban) was insult after vulgar insult directed at me, my preferred candidates, and my preferred party/alignment.

If you are even remotely conservative OT is a hostile place to be.
This is a great example of why US politics is banned; statements like this demonize one side while exonerating the other, it provokes negative response. The only difference between this and trolling is the speaker (presumably) believes the statement at hand.


Yeah... good point. People are so blinkered and victimised that they can't take a step back and be objective. It's like team sports and people on both sides of the political spectrum have taken it to a disgusting new level (although that is a false equivalency, considering the GOP have literally opened their big tent to Nazi's, White supremists and child molestors.. where-as the left have just become super annoying)

However, I stand by what I said and think the ban should be lifted... perhaps we could have an 'Ice-box forum' where all bets are off, anything can be discussed, people can flame, be mean ,and not be beholden to any rules. US politics could be discussed there.


Hey look! A wild generalization and false stereotype being used as an insult! Doesn't this count as an insult, and should be enough to warrant moderator action? The comment there serves no purpose other than to throw an insult. It doesn't justify or go against an argument, it is literally just an insult. I mean seriously, how does this not prompt moderator action?

As such, I am quite happy with the removal of US politics from the OT. Seriously though, does that not count as a flat out insult? Isn't that against forum rules? Honestly asking, as I've seen harder core insults than that go unpunished.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 14:08:08


Post by: Ouze


 Hollow wrote:
However, I stand by what I said and think the ban should be lifted... perhaps we could have an 'Ice-box forum' where all bets are off, anything can be discussed, people can flame, be mean ,and not be beholden to any rules. US politics could be discussed there.


I can't imagine the mods would ever go for that. You also need to consider that such a forum, were it to go forward, would immediately contain so much noise vs signal, there would be no value in it. Part of the appealing aspect is that you can engage in these topics with people you know, and respect even if you disagree with them, while also having the support of knowing that mods will step in if things get too out of hand. If you remove the latter, you functionally wind up with youtube comments.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
And I still say that if the US politics ban isn’t lifted, we should consider closing down the others. I just don’t think it’s fair to exclude one nationality whilst allowing the others to carry on.


It seems vastly less fair to shut down the well-behaved UK politics thread just because a handful of people in a different country can't control themselves. If you have a blunt knife and a sharp knife, it's better to fix the blunt knife by sharpening it than deciding to blunt the sharp one.





Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 14:28:59


Post by: Elemental


 Future War Cultist wrote:
And I still say that if the US politics ban isn’t lifted, we should consider closing down the others. I just don’t think it’s fair to exclude one nationality whilst allowing the others to carry on.


I look at it like this--the discrimination isn't against "Americans", it's about "people who can't have a discussion without being dreadful". One would be hard to justify, the other is completely fair.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 14:29:54


Post by: djones520


 Elemental wrote:
 Future War Cultist wrote:
And I still say that if the US politics ban isn’t lifted, we should consider closing down the others. I just don’t think it’s fair to exclude one nationality whilst allowing the others to carry on.


I look at it like this--the discrimination isn't against "Americans", it's about "people who can't have a discussion without being dreadful". One would be hard to justify, the other is completely fair.


So it really comes down to making everyone who can discuss it civilly pay for the actions of those who can't.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 14:36:31


Post by: Peregrine


 Elemental wrote:
I look at it like this--the discrimination isn't against "Americans", it's about "people who can't have a discussion without being dreadful". One would be hard to justify, the other is completely fair.


Except the group in the second category is being defined as "Americans", not specific people who have been unable to have a discussion. It's just presumed that Americans can't behave, regardless of who the Americans involved happen to be. And, as has been pointed out, it's a bad assumption to make. The problem is not Americans or US politics, it's specific people who do not argue in good faith. The pattern happened over and over again: one person showed up to post the same blatant partisan cheerleading they posted the previous week as if the thorough rebuttal they received never happened, dropped a drive-by copy/paste job from their favorite fringe website, made dishonest and easily disproved arguments, etc, in very polite words, and then when people inevitably got frustrated with dealing with that specific person and slipped in a or two the moderators showed up and started putting red text everywhere. But rather than deal with the instigators of the problem the moderators jumped on the people who maybe crossed the line a bit in yelling at them, and the cycle inevitably continued again the following week.

Take away those specific people and there's no reason that US politics can't be discussed just like any other country's politics. It may get a bit hostile from time to time, but not to the point of being a problem.

(And no, those specific people are not just my political opponents. There are people from the OT politics threads that I disagree with on pretty much every topic, but post constructively and aren't guilty of that behavior.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ouze wrote:
I can't imagine the mods would ever go for that. You also need to consider that such a forum, were it to go forward, would immediately contain so much noise vs signal, there would be no value in it. Part of the appealing aspect is that you can engage in these topics with people you know, and respect even if you disagree with them, while also having the support of knowing that mods will step in if things get too out of hand. If you remove the latter, you functionally wind up with youtube comments.


It's obviously a bad idea in the most literal form of "hands off", but there's some truth to the concept. Drop the standards of moderation a bit, to allow heated debate and an occasional or but not blatant spam or hate speech or whatever, and the section can be mostly left to handle itself. Anyone who posts in a debate on politics/religion/etc should know that they might get yelled at a bit, and implicitly accepts the chance of it happening.

One of my favorite forums that I used to be a member of had a rule that was the exact opposite of dakka's moderation policy: profanity was accepted, but stupid, hateful, and/or dishonest people were not. If you had a history of, say, posting economic arguments without supporting facts and ignoring the people who requested evidence for your claims and/or provided evidence to disprove them then you'd end up banned. If you told the first person " you" in the course of posting the evidence to disprove their argument then nothing happened. The result was interesting and constructive debate, even if it had more profanity than dakka accepts, because the right people were removed (whether by being driven off by the members or by outright ban). Dakka's biggest problem is that it gets this completely backwards. It's ok to lie and evade and generally drag the quality of debate down into the sewer as long as you don't use any bad words, but the moment you say to someone you get the red text.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 14:46:20


Post by: Hollow


 Cothonian wrote:
 Hollow wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Cothonian wrote:
Every US politics thread I looked at (prior to the ban) was insult after vulgar insult directed at me, my preferred candidates, and my preferred party/alignment.

If you are even remotely conservative OT is a hostile place to be.
This is a great example of why US politics is banned; statements like this demonize one side while exonerating the other, it provokes negative response. The only difference between this and trolling is the speaker (presumably) believes the statement at hand.


Yeah... good point. People are so blinkered and victimised that they can't take a step back and be objective. It's like team sports and people on both sides of the political spectrum have taken it to a disgusting new level (although that is a false equivalency, considering the GOP have literally opened their big tent to Nazi's, White supremists and child molestors.. where-as the left have just become super annoying)

However, I stand by what I said and think the ban should be lifted... perhaps we could have an 'Ice-box forum' where all bets are off, anything can be discussed, people can flame, be mean ,and not be beholden to any rules. US politics could be discussed there.


Hey look! A wild generalization and false stereotype being used as an insult! Doesn't this count as an insult, and should be enough to warrant moderator action? The comment there serves no purpose other than to throw an insult. It doesn't justify or go against an argument, it is literally just an insult. I mean seriously, how does this not prompt moderator action?

As such, I am quite happy with the removal of US politics from the OT. Seriously though, does that not count as a flat out insult? Isn't that against forum rules? Honestly asking, as I've seen harder core insults than that go unpunished.



Yeah... I see the point in the ban now. I certainly didn't aim to insult. When it has gotten to the point that a literal statement of fact can be considered "a terrible insult" then perhaps its a topic best left banned.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 14:51:37


Post by: Verviedi


May I suggest a "The Drops" forum just for the sort of discussion such as US Politics, and funnel all of the people who'd like to get figuratively covered in into it?

For irony, you can make OP the sole mod of it.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 15:08:22


Post by: Talizvar


A US politics ban is a temporary symptom being addressed: we tend to go a bit crazy when seeing "unfair" conditions.
The culture and environment we all work and play in can overshadow almost all topics.

- Some primary distribution centers are in the USA and so some hobby stuff has to cross the border (to Canada) and there is much discussion of tariffs = hobby politics.
- Some of us have a left and right view in rules and gets into lively discussions of RAI or RAW.
- We have a fair number of military members here so USA policy in the world has a HUGE impact on them.
- We have a fair number of LGBDT folks (and some in the military) which again, are affected by the various opinions and policies of the USA leaders.

We all come here for our hobby.
Some need the distraction more than others... desperately perhaps.
We are a support group of sorts for gamers and that includes a bit more than just the playing pieces and rules.

Yes, political discussions are hard.
They can be necessary since any collection of people will have a form of politics, it is pretty much inescapable.
We might as well have the tools in place to moderate well and try to stick to facts (not alternative truths) and maybe a dash of empathy.

I think it had been said a few times, now more than ever the discussion of US politics IS critical.
So many elements are being changed or attacked that have a lasting affect on the freedoms of the USA people.

At the very least, as a Canadian, I can get a better feel of what is going on in the USA than what is said in the news and allows me to better appreciate their situation.
Thanks.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 17:23:39


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


 sebster wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
I work in IT, and I don't wan't to read threads from people asking for help with their computer or some tech issue. I've never felt like the need to extrapolate that out to a forum-wide rule, and just don't click on those threads instead.




I work as an accountant in government. I never have to worry about that invading any forum anywhere because no-one discusses that for one second unless they're being directly paid to do so.


My wife works in a closely related field, and there's tons to talk about. From corruption to misappropriation, meetings about meeting to documents about documents, elected officials causing friction with employees to stodgy lifers preventing much-needed modernization, the whole thing plays out like a Douglas Adams take on a Kafka novel, or Idiocracy as a crime story.

Stop underselling your thrilling work life!


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 17:42:15


Post by: NinthMusketeer


AdmiralHalsey wrote:
 Hollow wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Cothonian wrote:
Every US politics thread I looked at (prior to the ban) was insult after vulgar insult directed at me, my preferred candidates, and my preferred party/alignment.

If you are even remotely conservative OT is a hostile place to be.
This is a great example of why US politics is banned; statements like this demonize one side while exonerating the other, it provokes negative response. The only difference between this and trolling is the speaker (presumably) believes the statement at hand.


Yeah... good point. People are so blinkered and victimised that they can't take a step back and be objective. It's like team sports and people on both sides of the political spectrum have taken it to a disgusting new level (although that is a false equivalency, considering the GOP have literally opened their big tent to Nazi's, White supremists and child molestors.. where-as the left have just become super annoying)

However, I stand by what I said and think the ban should be lifted... perhaps we could have an 'Ice-box forum' where all bets are off, anything can be discussed, people can flame, be mean ,and not be beholden to any rules. US politics could be discussed there.


Is that a post about US Politics in a thread discussing that US politics are banned, primarily because of such wide sweeping offensive statements as contained in your post?

The irony is thick here
Indeed. The subsequent posts between them show it too. But then again it did end with a certain degree of civility.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 18:38:22


Post by: Elemental


 Peregrine wrote:
 Elemental wrote:
I look at it like this--the discrimination isn't against "Americans", it's about "people who can't have a discussion without being dreadful". One would be hard to justify, the other is completely fair.


Except the group in the second category is being defined as "Americans", not specific people who have been unable to have a discussion. It's just presumed that Americans can't behave, regardless of who the Americans involved happen to be. And, as has been pointed out, it's a bad assumption to make. The problem is not Americans or US politics, it's specific people who do not argue in good faith.


....who appeared in disproportionate numbers in one thread in particular, to talk about one subject in particular.

Maybe it was less "bad faith" and more "this subject brings out the crazy". I don't know, it all looked like a bunch of angry people getting angry at other angry people.

 Talizvar wrote:
I think it had been said a few times, now more than ever the discussion of US politics IS critical.
So many elements are being changed or attacked that have a lasting affect on the freedoms of the USA people.


If actual discussion of any sort had been going on there, I'd agree with you.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 18:49:36


Post by: Cothonian


 Hollow wrote:
 Cothonian wrote:
 Hollow wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Cothonian wrote:
Every US politics thread I looked at (prior to the ban) was insult after vulgar insult directed at me, my preferred candidates, and my preferred party/alignment.

If you are even remotely conservative OT is a hostile place to be.
This is a great example of why US politics is banned; statements like this demonize one side while exonerating the other, it provokes negative response. The only difference between this and trolling is the speaker (presumably) believes the statement at hand.


Yeah... good point. People are so blinkered and victimised that they can't take a step back and be objective. It's like team sports and people on both sides of the political spectrum have taken it to a disgusting new level (although that is a false equivalency, considering the GOP have literally opened their big tent to Nazi's, White supremists and child molestors.. where-as the left have just become super annoying)

However, I stand by what I said and think the ban should be lifted... perhaps we could have an 'Ice-box forum' where all bets are off, anything can be discussed, people can flame, be mean ,and not be beholden to any rules. US politics could be discussed there.


Hey look! A wild generalization and false stereotype being used as an insult! Doesn't this count as an insult, and should be enough to warrant moderator action? The comment there serves no purpose other than to throw an insult. It doesn't justify or go against an argument, it is literally just an insult. I mean seriously, how does this not prompt moderator action?

As such, I am quite happy with the removal of US politics from the OT. Seriously though, does that not count as a flat out insult? Isn't that against forum rules? Honestly asking, as I've seen harder core insults than that go unpunished.



Yeah... I see the point in the ban now. I certainly didn't aim to insult. When it has gotten to the point that a literal statement of fact can be considered "a terrible insult" then perhaps its a topic best left banned.


You don't think that calling someone else's party a shelter for nazis, white supremacists, and child molester's was an insult? Then when someone calls you out on it, you come back with a snide comment.

Had you removed that section of your text, you would in fact have had a strictly objective argument. I am sure you knew that though.

Therein lies the problem. "Sweeping, generalized statements." I remember so many times in the US political election threads seeing the quote "Trump supporters are all idiots" or "Conservative voters represent the lesser educated voting population." Those are not arguments, those are insults.

Statement's such as "I do not agree with Trump's border policy as it would cost us billions" or "Hillary's open borders policy would better stimulate job growth through diversity" on the other hand are arguments, as they specify a policy and present an argument.

About a third of the political talk threads were composed of ridiculous sweeping statements, without purpose beyond venting hatred for the opposing party. I am perfectly fine with US politics being banned here. I'm tired of being called a racist and a nazi for not agreeing with certain groups. Again, calling people names isn't an argument.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 19:16:56


Post by: Manchu


From my perspective, the existing ban makes sense.

As a preliminary matter, I sympathize with the idea that we should moderate discussions rather than banning them. I think that is correct. It's our job, after all. The countervailing argument, however, is that we are unpaid workers. We pitch in because we value participating in the discussions here.

I won't speak for the entire staff but I personally find close to zero value in discussing (IRL) politics on a miniatures wargaming forum.* So I have almost no interest in moderating such discussions, especially considering the particularly harsh backlash from users who receive warnings in politics threads. Simply put, the cost far outweighs the benefit.

And sure I will concede that is a selfish analysis. But I don't mind being selfish considering there are innumerable other venues for discussing politics, including ones explicitly set up for that reason. It is a wide, wide internet. That content is on topic somewhere else. It's off topic here. At the same time, I recognize that folks want to discuss their opinions with people they know. In many cases, users have been posting on here for years. I know I have often wondered, what [insert username] thinks about [insert issue] while listening to the news. I get that there is value in hosting content not related to miniatures wargaming. That's one reason why we don't jettison the OT sub-forum altogether.

But it comes back to the cost/benefit analysis. Some posters ITT have objected to the uneven application of this ban. But it is only uneven if you consider it from a purely conceptual viewpoint. If you're wondering why we don't stamp down every single instance of political or pseudo-political posting, it is (as someone else ITT pointed out) simply because that instance has not (yet) required more cost (paid for by the staff) than it will (from the staff point of view) yield benefit.

While moderating rather than banning is my golden rule, it doesn't apply so strictly to off-topic content.

*This was not always the case. You can see from my post history that I used to regularly participate in political discussions on Dakka Dakka. To be frank, I don't think there is a lot of good faith argument going on there; more like battles of attrition.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 19:44:05


Post by: DarkTraveler777


 Manchu wrote:
As a preliminary matter, I sympathize with the idea that we should moderate discussions rather than banning them. I think that is correct. It's our job, after all. The countervailing argument, however, is that we are unpaid workers. We pitch in because we value participating in the discussions here.

I won't speak for the entire staff but I personally find close to zero value in discussing (IRL) politics on a miniatures wargaming forum.* So I have almost no interest in moderating such discussions, especially considering the particularly harsh backlash from users who receive warnings in politics threads. Simply put, the cost far outweighs the benefit.


That is a fair position. Too much work for unpaid volunteers to properly handle is a recipe for disaster.


 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

If we look at the traffic across the site based on the messages in each area;
- 40K Gen Disc; 1,067,184
- OT; 923,704
- News & Rumors; 917,839
- P&M Blogs; 663,584
- P&M; 594,770
- P&M Showcase; 184,653
- P&M Tutorials; 21,912

The OT area of Dakka has more traffic than the P&M Blogs, Showcase, and Tutorials combined (917,839 v 870,149), and were it not for the ban on US political discussions the disparity would be even more pronounced. In a site dedicated to painting and playing with tiny army men the second most popular area is off-topic discussion (the most popular hosts a 45 page discussion on whether or not Codex Space Marines is the worst).

The question for the community and Moderation team is what value does the OT area add to the site, and what affect does that have on the character of the community?


I made bold and red the first of Dreadclaw69's two-part question that got me thinking about the value of the OT forum. Isn't all that traffic valuable to Dakka (Yakface) in terms of Ad revenue and page views? I admittedly know jack-all about that aspect of running a website, but doesn't the traffic the OT generates justify in some sense the "effort" required to moderate it? Perhaps not in the eyes of the volunteers who have to do the dirty work, but to Yakface, and the bottom line of operating DakkaDakka surely those clicks aren't valueless like they are being presented in this thread? Talks of closing OT down entirely seem disastrous for Dakka's traffic if I am understanding the numbers above, so why not pay someone a small stipend each month to jump in the OT forum and police it?




Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 19:58:24


Post by: Talizvar


Well, Dakka Dakka does describe itself as:

"DakkaDakka is a large, independent wargaming community that features discussion, tutorials and images for many games."

So it could really push the "stay on topic" as-in keep at least a tenuous link to some game.
I can sympathize with trying to moderate anything with the big no-no's of "polite" conversation: sex, politics and religion.
Clear rules enforced makes those bogus "squashing our rights to free speech" pretty easy: as users we do not have the right to reach out and try to hurt others.

I would say our only religion is plastic crack and politics is largely play style: Fluff, Competitive, WAAC and sex well.... I think that all depends on how well socialized each of us are.

Well, it is nice to see politics discussion in general but name calling can and should shut it down fast.

Thanks.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 20:58:16


Post by: Verviedi


Free speech is irrelevant in this case - Dakka is a private organisation and does not have to ensure free speech for its users.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 21:30:25


Post by: d-usa


The same snark and disregard for respectable conversation still comes to the surface in other threads that include any amount of US politics. Nothing has changed to justify bringing it back, unless we are willing to hand out bans.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 22:26:37


Post by: DarkTraveler777


 d-usa wrote:
The same snark and disregard for respectable conversation still comes to the surface in other threads that include any amount of US politics.


I don't necessarily agree with this, snark and rudeness are present throughout Dakka regardless of topic. It has been discussed before, some may agree with me and others will surely disagree, but the "culture" of Dakka from my perspective is fairly acerbic whether the discussion centers around paint jobs, new models or gun control. I am not pointing fingers as I am guilty of this as well, but I don't think it is accurate to say that snark is isolated only to US political discussions. Dakka has a reputation for being a pretty jerky place for a reason, after all.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 22:47:19


Post by: d-usa


 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
The same snark and disregard for respectable conversation still comes to the surface in other threads that include any amount of US politics.


I don't necessarily agree with this, snark and rudeness are present throughout Dakka regardless of topic. It has been discussed before, some may agree with me and others will surely disagree, but the "culture" of Dakka from my perspective is fairly acerbic whether the discussion centers around paint jobs, new models or gun control. I am not pointing fingers as I am guilty of this as well, but I don't think it is accurate to say that snark is isolated only to US political discussions. Dakka has a reputation for being a pretty jerky place for a reason, after all.



It's not isolated, which is why I think it serves as a good indicator for the viability of lifting the ban. The US Politics Threads have always been the Spinal Tap of OT topics, and they have always gone to 11. So if the threads that are non-political manage to still hit a 10 if a political aspect is discussed, then I think it is pretty certain that any "pure" political thread would see the same people hit 11 without any delay.

Non-political threads have gotten warnings for Rule 1 violations once people talk about the valid political aspects that are involved in these particular topics, including multiple ones this month I believe. So what makes us think we are going to do better in a politics thread?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 23:06:20


Post by: whembly


 d-usa wrote:
 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
The same snark and disregard for respectable conversation still comes to the surface in other threads that include any amount of US politics.


I don't necessarily agree with this, snark and rudeness are present throughout Dakka regardless of topic. It has been discussed before, some may agree with me and others will surely disagree, but the "culture" of Dakka from my perspective is fairly acerbic whether the discussion centers around paint jobs, new models or gun control. I am not pointing fingers as I am guilty of this as well, but I don't think it is accurate to say that snark is isolated only to US political discussions. Dakka has a reputation for being a pretty jerky place for a reason, after all.



It's not isolated, which is why I think it serves as a good indicator for the viability of lifting the ban. The US Politics Threads have always been the Spinal Tap of OT topics, and they have always gone to 11. So if the threads that are non-political manage to still hit a 10 if a political aspect is discussed, then I think it is pretty certain that any "pure" political thread would see the same people hit 11 without any delay.

Non-political threads have gotten warnings for Rule 1 violations once people talk about the valid political aspects that are involved in these particular topics, including multiple ones this month I believe. So what makes us think we are going to do better in a politics thread?

Maybe folks will self-moderate better since we *know* a topic ban can happen.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 23:29:52


Post by: d-usa


We haven’t since the ban was implemented, so why would we start now?

Nothing has happened to think it would be different, and we have gotten red text since then because it hasn’t been different.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 23:33:40


Post by: whembly


 d-usa wrote:
We haven’t since the ban was implemented, so why would we start now?

Nothing has happened to think it would be different, and we have gotten red text since then because it hasn’t been different.

Weren't most of those red text due to folks bringing up banned topics rather than breaking forum rules?

It seems to me that the unruliness we've seen during the heated-elections season seem to have died down quite a bit.

EDIT: fixed a swear word that bypassed the filter...


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 23:34:19


Post by: motyak


 whembly wrote:
Maybe folks will self-moderate better since we *know* a topic ban can happen.


No chance, as can be seen by the multiple closings of the big US Politics threads for times before being allowed to be brought back, the temp-locks of those threads, as well as the behaviour in the not-quite-US Politic threads that d-usa pointed out. As soon as the ban was lifted and the US Politics thread got recreated, it'd be a warzone again in a week. I know that seems pessimistic, but it's balanced against the evidence of the behaviour of the OT over years, keeping in mind these were mostly years that the US Political landscape wasn't as aggressively divided as it is nowadays.

As a user I enjoyed seeing the odd interesting post in those threads when they were active. Sadly, as a mod, for every interesting post that actually brought up anything new/worthwhile we had multiple posts that needed to be redacted, warned, threads pulled up with red text, PMs sent, bans applied because of, heads slammed into desks, users barely skirting the rules for as long as they could before finally slipping up, etc. It's just not worth the headaches sadly. Also, full disclosure, as a mod, I do from time to time bring up with some other mods the idea of lifting the ban. Even though I'm one of the mods most active in the OT, so lumped with a lot of work when those threads go off. That maybe it has been long enough, that people have learned, cooled off, matured as posters, etc. But then an almost-US-Pols topic flares up, posters revert to their former selves, and the whole thing needs to be Old Yeller'd out the back. Then I am reminded why it is better left banned.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/28 23:51:12


Post by: whembly


Fair enough moyak.

As someone who's been baned multiple times as things got heated, I'll certainly own up to my part. And I know that's gotta be the least appealing aspect of being a moderator... there's only so much bandwidth you and your crew should exert in keep things sane. So, for what its worth, much apologies....

If in the event in the future, that such topic would be allowed, I'd be willing to be put under a dakka's "Sword of Damocles™" where the next time a bane worthy event occurs, permanently nuke my access to the OT subforum.

I can't help but to step back and chuckle at this... case in point: Me and the OP (Peregrine) doesn't see eye-to-eye politically, but man he's a joy to converse on the hobby side, especially his vigorous defense over Forgeworld inclusions to the game.

We are so much more than our politics... sometime, we need to be reminded to maintain perspective that while we all enjoy talking about our hobby... we're also people who are shaped by our upbringings and different backgrounds. Which can lead into interesting non-hobby conversations...


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 00:49:27


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Cothonian wrote:
You don't think that calling someone else's party a shelter for nazis, white supremacists, and child molester's was an insult? Then when someone calls you out on it, you come back with a snide comment.

Had you removed that section of your text, you would in fact have had a strictly objective argument. I am sure you knew that though.

Therein lies the problem. "Sweeping, generalized statements." I remember so many times in the US political election threads seeing the quote "Trump supporters are all idiots" or "Conservative voters represent the lesser educated voting population." Those are not arguments, those are insults.

Statement's such as "I do not agree with Trump's border policy as it would cost us billions" or "Hillary's open borders policy would better stimulate job growth through diversity" on the other hand are arguments, as they specify a policy and present an argument.

About a third of the political talk threads were composed of ridiculous sweeping statements, without purpose beyond venting hatred for the opposing party. I am perfectly fine with US politics being banned here. I'm tired of being called a racist and a nazi for not agreeing with certain groups. Again, calling people names isn't an argument.
He did make a sweeping unjustified statement that could easily be seen as insulting. So I see why you are annoyed by that, and I believe your feelings are valid. But re-read your original statement; you opened with a sweeping unjustified statement that could easily be seen as insulting. However valid your feelings may be you are still getting angry at someone for treating you the same way you treated them. This is the very feedback loop of toxicity that caused the ban in the first place.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 08:02:19


Post by: LordofHats


It's not a sweeping unjustified statement though, which is just part of the problem. Calling party X and shelter for "negative group y" isn't a sweeping generalized statement, but one couched in a specific criticism of a given element of behavior. It's the difference between calling an opinion stupid and calling the person expressing it stupid. One is an insult, the other isn't but hey just call it a "snide comment" and dodge an actual discussion about the opinion.

The reality is that there are too many people with knowledge of what goes on but a marked lack of mature introspection. Thus begins the pointless brick wall back and forth where the offended completely ignores the actual point to cry about their hurt feelings, which when it comes to the party being accused of being a shelter for nazis, white supremacists, and child molesters is just hilarious because it's the same party that rants about participation trophies and hurt feelings not being important.

And that's just the comedy of it all. US Politics the OT thread became a massive satire of US politic, so glaringly lacking in intellectual maturity on the part of many of the participants that the very idea it could ever be productive was laughable. People complained about drive by postings and "snide comments" but the level of discourse from the beginning was so run down that drive by postings and snide comments were really all that there was to any of it.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 08:23:24


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 LordofHats wrote:
It's not a sweeping unjustified statement though, which is just part of the problem. Calling party X and shelter for "negative group y" isn't a sweeping generalized statement, but one couched in a specific criticism of a given element of behavior. It's the difference between calling an opinion stupid and calling the person expressing it stupid. One is an insult, the other isn't but hey just call it a "snide comment" and dodge an actual discussion about the opinion.

The reality is that there are too many people with knowledge of what goes on but a marked lack of mature introspection. Thus begins the pointless brick wall back and forth where the offended completely ignores the actual point to cry about their hurt feelings, which when it comes to the party being accused of being a shelter for nazis, white supremacists, and child molesters is just hilarious because it's the same party that rants about participation trophies and hurt feelings not being important.
I could see his statement as a reasonable one were it rephrased, but it seemed pretty clear to me that he was calling out the whole GOP as welcoming the indicated groups. Even taken in a way that's technically true the statement is rather disingenuous.


And that's just the comedy of it all. US Politics the OT thread became a massive satire of US politic, so glaringly lacking in intellectual maturity on the part of many of the participants that the very idea it could ever be productive was laughable. People complained about drive by postings and "snide comments" but the level of discourse from the beginning was so run down that drive by postings and snide comments were really all that there was to any of it.
US politics has become a parody of US politics.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 10:29:39


Post by: Future War Cultist


 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
The same snark and disregard for respectable conversation still comes to the surface in other threads that include any amount of US politics.


I don't necessarily agree with this, snark and rudeness are present throughout Dakka regardless of topic. It has been discussed before, some may agree with me and others will surely disagree, but the "culture" of Dakka from my perspective is fairly acerbic whether the discussion centers around paint jobs, new models or gun control. I am not pointing fingers as I am guilty of this as well, but I don't think it is accurate to say that snark is isolated only to US political discussions. Dakka has a reputation for being a pretty jerky place for a reason, after all.



I have to agree. In the short time I’ve been here I’ve had to put 46 people on my ignore list, including 4 members of staff. No other site I’ve ever frequented has come close to that. And most of it is political OT related. You have to ask yourself, is it worth having politics discussed here? Is there not enough bile spewing out of the wargame threads without adding political bile on top of that?

I mean for fairness, if you have to keep politics on the site then lift the ban on US politics, but if you won’t lift the US ban then think about banning it all. And I’m favouring the latter.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 10:40:16


Post by: Peregrine


And this is just demonstrating my point: a discussion about whether US politics should be banned or not turns into an argument over who said what about which party. US politics is not going to go anywhere. The real choice we have is between discussing US politics and having the discussion occasionally interrupted, often when it's a perfectly reasonable conversation, by a moderator until the next US politics thread, or just accepting the inevitable and removing the ban.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 10:54:00


Post by: LordofHats


I could see his statement as a reasonable one were it rephrased, but it seemed pretty clear to me that he was calling out the whole GOP as welcoming the indicated groups. Even taken in a way that's technically true the statement is rather disingenuous.


An unpleasant statement is not the same as a disingenuous one. You can’t have a meaningful discussion of politics while banning people from voicing statements that are unpleasant and if someone chooses to take any criticism as a personal insult then they should probably stay far away from anything remotely political.

US politics has become a parody of US politics.


Just because politicians and pundits act like 12 year olds doesn’t mean posters here should act like toddlers but that’s what US politics became here. Bickering toddlers repeating the latest sound byte like a bunch of monkeys. The dumbing down of politics to the lowest common denominator didn’t need to be the reality but that’s what it became.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 13:58:38


Post by: Talizvar


I suspect in the scheme of things it will matter little.

All other threads all seem to come to a logical close when any of the following is met:

- Someone is compared to Hitler.
- The last 3 posts devolve to "You hurt my feelings and I hurt you back!"
- We start talking about random things away from topic (obvious lack of interest in the thread).
- When the thread is more of a "click-bait" item and a MOD patiently waits about a page to see if it can manage to be on topic and polite.
- A re-opening of a thread about one that was closed with much prejudice... oh, wait...

We can always talk the politics of trying to keep a thread alive as long as possible.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 14:45:31


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


This thread if nothing else has proved to me that we're better off with the US politics discussion staying banned.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 15:38:52


Post by: nels1031


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
This thread if nothing else has proved to me that we're better off with the US politics discussion staying banned.


Its better(so far) than the last N+B thread about the US politics ban.

Progress!

Also, keep the ban.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 18:35:50


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Talizvar wrote:
I suspect in the scheme of things it will matter little.

All other threads all seem to come to a logical close when any of the following is met:

- Someone is compared to Hitler.
- The last 3 posts devolve to "You hurt my feelings and I hurt you back!"
- We start talking about random things away from topic (obvious lack of interest in the thread).
- When the thread is more of a "click-bait" item and a MOD patiently waits about a page to see if it can manage to be on topic and polite.
- A re-opening of a thread about one that was closed with much prejudice... oh, wait...

We can always talk the politics of trying to keep a thread alive as long as possible.
Your hitleroid post hurt my feelings and you are dumb for posting it, why don't you cure your meanness using one weird trick and re open the US politics thread!

Am I doing it right?


 LordofHats wrote:
I could see his statement as a reasonable one were it rephrased, but it seemed pretty clear to me that he was calling out the whole GOP as welcoming the indicated groups. Even taken in a way that's technically true the statement is rather disingenuous.


An unpleasant statement is not the same as a disingenuous one. You can’t have a meaningful discussion of politics while banning people from voicing statements that are unpleasant and if someone chooses to take any criticism as a personal insult then they should probably stay far away from anything remotely political.
I understand that, I just get a different meaning from the phrasing of the respective statement than you do. At any rate such is somewhat tangential to my original point and the topic at hand, so perhaps we can agree to disagree?

US politics has become a parody of US politics.


Just because politicians and pundits act like 12 year olds doesn’t mean posters here should act like toddlers but that’s what US politics became here. Bickering toddlers repeating the latest sound byte like a bunch of monkeys. The dumbing down of politics to the lowest common denominator didn’t need to be the reality but that’s what it became.
I should have been more clear; I meant to give a tongue-in-cheek explanation as to why, not excuse the behavior.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/29 21:03:06


Post by: Gordon Shumway


I don't know if this is possible, but I was wondering if dakka mods can ban caustic posters from specific threads or if the granularity of the system only allows bans from subforums? Might be a solution as a mod might be more willing to hand out the ban if it has a more limited impact and can allow the discussion to move forward.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 00:29:28


Post by: Ouze


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
This thread if nothing else has proved to me that we're better off with the US politics discussion staying banned.


How so? It's been polite discussion, and some disagreement, but there hasn't been any heat, or warnings, or anything like that.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 00:53:24


Post by: LordofHats


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I should have been more clear; I meant to give a tongue-in-cheek explanation as to why, not excuse the behavior.


No I understood you. It just agitates me personally. Years ago the quality of poster in that topic area feels like it was a tad higher, but as the politics itself became more bitter and childish, there was an ever increasing influx of, frankly, dumb posters completely lacking in original thought or critical thinking. At times it almost felt like people were reciting verbatim Huffington Post and Fox News lines that had long ago become tired and worn out. They'd drag any topic into the mud of righteous indignation, goal posts, straw men, and semantical nonsense and then bemoan how everyone was being "snide" to them. What did they expect?

Engage discourse like a bratty child, avoid meaningful discussion at all costs, and all that's really left is snide comments mocking the hilarity of childish behavior narcissistically demanding to be taken seriously. And I just don't think that's changed. I still see the same nonsense in other topics continuing. Even if US politics was formally unbanned, it would just go back to being soft banned in a matter of time. So why bother? I still think the mods need to be more strict in enforcing the ban than they are.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 06:15:37


Post by: sebster


 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
My wife works in a closely related field, and there's tons to talk about. From corruption to misappropriation, meetings about meeting to documents about documents, elected officials causing friction with employees to stodgy lifers preventing much-needed modernization, the whole thing plays out like a Douglas Adams take on a Kafka novel, or Idiocracy as a crime story.

Stop underselling your thrilling work life!


Good point. I think I'll start a thread on how introducing a second budget review only served to increase the length of time in which agencies are processing new budgets, and has actually interupted any real strategic review, the exact opposite of what was intended.

I only hope a topic that contraversial doesn't get banned. Hope everyone can stay polite.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Manchu wrote:
From my perspective, the existing ban makes sense.


Thankyou for your perspective. It was enlightening and helps me understand the current ban.

I have to admit I never really thought of mod disinterest in US political debate playing a factor, both in moderation of those threads and the eventual ban on the subject.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 06:34:50


Post by: BigWaaagh


As someone who would enjoy tilting, at full tilt, when a bone of personal contention sprung up on the good old US Politics board, I can honestly say I don't miss it. I did for a while, but not so much anymore. Please don't misunderstand. I enjoy discussing politics, world news as it relates to my country, etc...but not here. Firstly, I've always found such conversations to be very dynamic and infinitely better suited for face-to-face exchanges that don't lose anything...or add anything...in the translation and that's important. Messaging just isn't the same or as effective, on a lot of levels. Also, for every interesting tete-a-tete I'd get involved in or watch, or for any time I'd be fortunate enough to pick up a perspective I'd not seen before, there was always the deluge of monotonous old ruts and predictability resurfacing on an overly regular basis to swallow otherwise interesting banter into the Sarlacc pit of "not this again".

Feth it.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 06:35:41


Post by: sebster


 whembly wrote:
Maybe folks will self-moderate better since we *know* a topic ban can happen.


The problem is a lot of people would be motivated by the opposite and happy to shut the conversation down. It would be possible to avoid those negative actors, but unless they were actively moderated eventually people would take the bait, no matter how much they tried to be on their best behaviour.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 16:29:55


Post by: Alpharius


 Gordon Shumway wrote:
I don't know if this is possible, but I was wondering if dakka mods can ban caustic posters from specific threads or if the granularity of the system only allows bans from subforums? Might be a solution as a mod might be more willing to hand out the ban if it has a more limited impact and can allow the discussion to move forward.


We don't have that level of detail here, such as it is.

However, we CAN ban someone from the OT Forum entirely.

It *might* be worth lifting the ban and then if/when a user crosses the line in a US Politics thread, they're out of the OT Forum for good.

Worth thinking about...

Maybe something to trial in 2018.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 16:34:14


Post by: Ouze


I think the OT bans already in place are a substantial part of why it's looking better over the last 6 months.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 16:46:15


Post by: Prestor Jon


 Peregrine wrote:
From this thread: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/745058.page

 motyak wrote:
This is pushing way too hard into a US Politics territory. Reef it back to talking about the +ves and -ves of net neutrality, not which party is doing what, or how entrenched the sides are, etc. That kind of chat will see this locked up right away and warnings issued.

What I want to see: Posts like the one Galas has right above mine

What I don't want to see: Most of the rest of the page above that.


What this really translates to is "don't discuss the subject at all". The positives and negatives of net neutrality is a dead question, it's blatantly obvious to anyone who looks at the question even superficially that net neutrality is a good policy for 99.99999999% of the world and only a tiny handful of the ultra-rich benefit in any way from removing it. The only interesting part of the subject is which party is doing what on the issue, what their motives are, how opposition to them should/could go post-repeal, etc. Take away the US politics element and you have a thread that is effectively "hay guys, water is wet, discuss".


This showcases ample reason for the US politics ban. If the reason behind starting the NN thread is to affirm that there is only 1 valid acceptable opinion to have on NN and to then move on to which US political party is right and which is wrong on the issue then the thread really isn't about NN at all. It's about staking out a position, dismissing any counter argument to the position, ascribing the right and wrong viewpoints to the appropriate political parties and then dogpiling on the party in the wrong in a thread that is intended to be an echo chamber for the "right" viewpoint. Once the thread becomes a succession of posts about how Party X is bad, should feel bad and anyone who supports Party X should feel bad it will inevitably lead to a dakkaite posting that he/she is member of Party X and he/she doesn't agree that he/she is part of the problem in fact it's Party Y that's the problem or Party Y and Party X are both equally to blame for the problems, which of course leads to personal attacks, warnings and thread lock.

If the point of the NN thread is to argue Party politics and not to discuss telecommunications regulation in the US, how ISPs currently fit under telcom regulations and how ISPs could/should be regulated as telcom entities then it isn't really a NN thread it's just a partisan bickering thread hidden under a veneer of NN in the beginning.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Alpharius wrote:
 Gordon Shumway wrote:
I don't know if this is possible, but I was wondering if dakka mods can ban caustic posters from specific threads or if the granularity of the system only allows bans from subforums? Might be a solution as a mod might be more willing to hand out the ban if it has a more limited impact and can allow the discussion to move forward.


We don't have that level of detail here, such as it is.

However, we CAN ban someone from the OT Forum entirely.

It *might* be worth lifting the ban and then if/when a user crosses the line in a US Politics thread, they're out of the OT Forum for good.

Worth thinking about...

Maybe something to trial in 2018.


Cool, just in time for the campaign season for 2020.





Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 16:51:58


Post by: Elemental


 Cothonian wrote:

You don't think that calling someone else's party a shelter for nazis, white supremacists, and child molester's was an insult? Then when someone calls you out on it, you come back with a snide comment.

Had you removed that section of your text, you would in fact have had a strictly objective argument. I am sure you knew that though.

Therein lies the problem. "Sweeping, generalized statements." I remember so many times in the US political election threads seeing the quote "Trump supporters are all idiots" or "Conservative voters represent the lesser educated voting population." Those are not arguments, those are insults.

Statement's such as "I do not agree with Trump's border policy as it would cost us billions" or "Hillary's open borders policy would better stimulate job growth through diversity" on the other hand are arguments, as they specify a policy and present an argument.

About a third of the political talk threads were composed of ridiculous sweeping statements, without purpose beyond venting hatred for the opposing party. I am perfectly fine with US politics being banned here. I'm tired of being called a racist and a nazi for not agreeing with certain groups. Again, calling people names isn't an argument.


That does highlight the problem quite neatly--like everybody else on the internet except actual trolls, I think that snark, hyperbole, glib dismissals, clever catchphrases and broad stereotyping are bad.....

....except when I do it.

After all, I'm right! And since I'm obviously right, nobody could possibly disagree with me in good faith. So when I use those posting habits, I'm just fighting fire with fire, or it's forgivable because I'm just responding to obvious provocation by someone who's being wilfully ignorant or arguing in bad faith (and probably stupid, to boot). And that's how threads turn into girlyellingatyak.jpg Because it's okay when I do it.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/11/30 16:54:28


Post by: BrookM


 kronk wrote:
and poor little snowflakes could be removed!
You have my vote. YOU HAVE ALL MY VOTES. Make this happen please.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 01:50:14


Post by: sebster


I think everyone would agree that a new thread on the Republican tax bill would get shut down, and the person who started probably warned. But how is that different to the net neutrality bill that is now in its fourth page? Both are partisan bills supported by the majority party and opposed by the minority party? Is it possible to have a thread on the tax bill that only looks at the policy and impact of the tax changes?

To be clear, I'm not actually arguing for a thread on the tax bill*, I'm just wondering if we could get some kind of clarity about where 'this can be discussed in terms of policy' ends and 'this is too political' begins.

I mean, the Mueller investigation would be too political, and North Korea is okay, those are easy ones. But where's the dividing line? I appears net neutrality is close to the line, but can we get more clarity than that - is there any way of articulating exactly where the line is?






*Even with the best intent by everyone to stick to the issues, there's no way that thread would get to a second page before someone said something to get it shut down. And there's a fair chance that comment would come from me.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 07:53:59


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 sebster wrote:
I think everyone would agree that a new thread on the Republican tax bill would get shut down, and the person who started probably warned. But how is that different to the net neutrality bill that is now in its fourth page? Both are partisan bills supported by the majority party and opposed by the minority party? Is it possible to have a thread on the tax bill that only looks at the policy and impact of the tax changes?

To be clear, I'm not actually arguing for a thread on the tax bill*, I'm just wondering if we could get some kind of clarity about where 'this can be discussed in terms of policy' ends and 'this is too political' begins.

I mean, the Mueller investigation would be too political, and North Korea is okay, those are easy ones. But where's the dividing line? I appears net neutrality is close to the line, but can we get more clarity than that - is there any way of articulating exactly where the line is?






*Even with the best intent by everyone to stick to the issues, there's no way that thread would get to a second page before someone said something to get it shut down. And there's a fair chance that comment would come from me.
At the end of the day, it's up to whether or not the mods can be arsed enforcing it, they're not getting paid so they'll just enforce it as they feel like it.

As I think I mentioned earlier, it's not that politics is some sort of special taboo subject that has caused it to be banned, it's that people can't play nice. If a thread goes off on a political tangent I don't think the mods give a crap until that political tangent starts breaking rule #1 and then the political ban gives a nice easy way to curbstomp the conversation instead of having to try and bring it back on track then having it go off the rails again 5 minutes and 2 pages of text later.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ouze wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
This thread if nothing else has proved to me that we're better off with the US politics discussion staying banned.


How so? It's been polite discussion, and some disagreement, but there hasn't been any heat, or warnings, or anything like that.
Because people can't even agree on what an acceptable discourse would look like.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 15:07:36


Post by: Easy E


I for one am jealous to see the UK politics thread chugging along, and knowing that my countrymen in the US are not stiff upper lipped enough to keep talking about politics in a way that allows the thread to stay open. SAD!

Even though I loved the US Politics Thread, and frequently participated in it; I fully support it not returning. This is a site dedicated to common pursuits and community. The US Politics thread is too divisive for a "community-building" site.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 16:59:37


Post by: Dr. Mills


Personally there shouldn't be any political talk on a board not focused for it.

End of. The just my way pence.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 17:47:02


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 sebster wrote:
I think everyone would agree that a new thread on the Republican tax bill would get shut down, and the person who started probably warned. But how is that different to the net neutrality bill that is now in its fourth page? Both are partisan bills supported by the majority party and opposed by the minority party? Is it possible to have a thread on the tax bill that only looks at the policy and impact of the tax changes?

To be clear, I'm not actually arguing for a thread on the tax bill*, I'm just wondering if we could get some kind of clarity about where 'this can be discussed in terms of policy' ends and 'this is too political' begins.

I mean, the Mueller investigation would be too political, and North Korea is okay, those are easy ones. But where's the dividing line? I appears net neutrality is close to the line, but can we get more clarity than that - is there any way of articulating exactly where the line is?






*Even with the best intent by everyone to stick to the issues, there's no way that thread would get to a second page before someone said something to get it shut down. And there's a fair chance that comment would come from me.
This raises an interesting idea; no generic US politics thread, but ones devoted to specific issues. When confined to a certain sub-topic rather than the free range of all US politics things have been (and are)much more civil.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 18:43:55


Post by: Gordon Shumway


So instead of one thread that degenerates to yelling matches, circular arguments, and tribalism before getting locked or back on track, the solution is multiple threads that do that? I doubt that will be likely.

I think the theoretical reason as to why the net neutrality thread wasn't locked was because it would have ramifications well beyond the US or US politics. Which, if given a minute's consideration, doesn't hold water considering how pretty much every major US political issue goes well beyond the US or US politics given the position of the US and how interconnected the world is today. The practical reason was because the mods found the discussion interesting and it didn't immediately devolve into something they had to take action on.

The thing I miss most about the thread isnt the advocacy or prostheletizing of a certain position or party (largely a fruitless endeavor on an Internet forum), but the political machination discussions that came up now and again. Essentially, it was like discussing a game, one that is real and actually matters. I think the reason it got so many responses and so heated, is because we here are all gamers at heart, and that's basically what politics is for an outside observer, a game. Just with the biggest stakes of any game ever made. In that sense, it's a wonder it was as civil as it was.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 20:00:30


Post by: Frazzled


 Alpharius wrote:
 Gordon Shumway wrote:
I don't know if this is possible, but I was wondering if dakka mods can ban caustic posters from specific threads or if the granularity of the system only allows bans from subforums? Might be a solution as a mod might be more willing to hand out the ban if it has a more limited impact and can allow the discussion to move forward.


We don't have that level of detail here, such as it is.

However, we CAN ban someone from the OT Forum entirely.

It *might* be worth lifting the ban and then if/when a user crosses the line in a US Politics thread, they're out of the OT Forum for good.

Worth thinking about...

Maybe something to trial in 2018.


I would think twice about that, just applying the excellent mantra of "if it aint broke don't fix it." While discussing politics can be fun for awhile, eventually someone says something snarky (usually by page two) and its waving a red flag at a bull for some members (I do not exclude myself here).

Personally I avoid political discussions whenever I can keep myself from getting involved. Typically it becomes one or two posters vs. a plethora of them and the insults start pretty quickly (go on Slate, or a gun board and try it). Dakka is better in that there is a wider range, but even here it can keep itself together for more than a few pages when politics come up (again I am not excluding myself here). I think the only one I've found thats moderately ok is IHE, but thats focused on higher ed and still gets snarky (even though posts have to be first approved before they are posted).

This still leaves open many actual policy discussions, which should be more interesting, and we've seen those here.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 20:07:57


Post by: Alpharius


I've thought *MANY* times about it.

I'm 100% for that version.

The OT isn't the 'point' of this place, and if you can't behave in the OT (and I mean the general and not the specific 'you' there!), you won't be posting in the OT, at all.

Maybe.

You know, if we go with that in 2018.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 20:08:30


Post by: insaniak


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
This raises an interesting idea; no generic US politics thread, but ones devoted to specific issues. When confined to a certain sub-topic rather than the free range of all US politics things have been (and are)much more civil.

Not really. The reason we had a single US politics thread in the first place was to confine the silliness to a single thread rather than having it take over OT, as it was doing previously.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 20:31:46


Post by: d-usa


Yeah, it was to solve the problem with having a first page filled with threads that involve US politics. A generic Page 1 could have: Special Election in Alabama, Al Franken Ethics Investigation, Tillerson, Flynn, Trump Tweet Of The Day, US & UK relations, Tax Reform, Government Shutdown, Immigratiom, CHIP. That’s just the political topics that are in public conversations this week without thinking about it too hard.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 20:32:19


Post by: Luciferian


I don't know if I have faith that a civil and productive conversation would develop in the absence of the ban. Under the forum rules it is very easy to bait others with passive-aggressive comments or otherwise indirect or implied insults, and the person who responds directly to such baiting is usually the one who gets in trouble. That's easy enough to do in any topic, but US politics comes already supplied with generalizations and tribalistic notions that are designed from the ground up to shut down critical inquiry and divide everything into neat, black and white terms. The nation as a whole can't handle actual political discourse at this point in time, so I don't see how the OT board will be able to.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 20:52:33


Post by: Gordon Shumway


I get that, and I am as susceptible to that as anyone (and the mods have been clear and responsive to my sundry faults) but even with those restrictions, I would rather allow the debate to go forward without me. My personal opinions, while important to me, don't amount to a hill of beans in the larger context that others should still be allowed to discuss what they want to discuss in a forum and with people they feel they want to discuss it with. I can still read what others have to say. My only point was I was thinking some moderators, out of an abundance of caution, were reluctant to ban if it meant the poster couldn't discuss other non political ideas in the ot forum.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 21:39:01


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 d-usa wrote:
Yeah, it was to solve the problem with having a first page filled with threads that involve US politics. A generic Page 1 could have: Special Election in Alabama, Al Franken Ethics Investigation, Tillerson, Flynn, Trump Tweet Of The Day, US & UK relations, Tax Reform, Government Shutdown, Immigratiom, CHIP. That’s just the political topics that are in public conversations this week without thinking about it too hard.
I think we all know that the number topics it COULD be split into are not at all the same as what would actually happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 insaniak wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
This raises an interesting idea; no generic US politics thread, but ones devoted to specific issues. When confined to a certain sub-topic rather than the free range of all US politics things have been (and are)much more civil.

Not really. The reason we had a single US politics thread in the first place was to confine the silliness to a single thread rather than having it take over OT, as it was doing previously.
My theory is that the silliness was amplified when put into a single thread, a feedback loop that seems to be avoided when things are split among 2-3 topics of particular relevance currently. Simply put, confining things caused more toxicity than it prevented. Obviously not the only factor at hand, though.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 21:49:16


Post by: Gordon Shumway


How does your theory hold up when looking pre central politics USA thread? In other words, I think it was put in place for a reason. One thing I have learned about this place is that it is slow to respond, by design. Sort of like US politics.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 22:01:19


Post by: d-usa


I wonder how many people were around pre-megathread?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 22:20:54


Post by: Gordon Shumway


 d-usa wrote:
I wonder how many people were around pre-megathread?


Do you think it would matter? Why?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 22:23:49


Post by: NinthMusketeer


I think the situation is much different now as opposed to even just a year ago. I should have phrased it as 'I think the silliness of the past year was amplified by being in a single thread'. The way I put it above is admittedly misleading as to what I actually meant.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 22:33:10


Post by: Gordon Shumway


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I think the situation is much different now as opposed to even just a year ago. I should have phrased it as 'I think the silliness of the past year was amplified by being in a single thread'. The way I put it above is admittedly misleading as to what I actually meant.

Well now it will pretty obviously anti-Trump, I would guess. So yeah. But what do you want out of it, if it were to be reinstated? An echo chamber does you or no one else any favors. Unless you just want another forum to vent, but why? Use a pillow.

Oh god, now I'm sounding like my mom.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 23:03:34


Post by: d-usa


 Gordon Shumway wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
I wonder how many people were around pre-megathread?


Do you think it would matter? Why?


One of the arguments is that having a single thread amplified the noise vs having individual threads dedicated to each political subtopic, as well as the argument that we might not end up with a page full of subtopics. I was around for both the many-topics approach and the megathread approach, and I didn’t see a difference in the amount of toxicity, but I did see a difference in having one thread vs 10 threads. So I was just wondering how many people were around who remember the pre-megathread times.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 23:13:46


Post by: Gordon Shumway


Ah, I see. It was the magnification effefct...in effect. Thanks for that, I hadn't thought about it that way. But I don't think a diffusion system would work today.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/01 23:20:23


Post by: DarkTraveler777


 d-usa wrote:
 Gordon Shumway wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
I wonder how many people were around pre-megathread?


Do you think it would matter? Why?


One of the arguments is that having a single thread amplified the noise vs having individual threads dedicated to each political subtopic, as well as the argument that we might not end up with a page full of subtopics. I was around for both the many-topics approach and the megathread approach, and I didn’t see a difference in the amount of toxicity, but I did see a difference in having one thread vs 10 threads. So I was just wondering how many people were around who remember the pre-megathread times.


I remember the multiple topic days. I will say, one thing I liked about that arrangement was that I could avoid a topic easily if it didn't interest me, and engage in topics that did interest me more easily.

With the megathread you often had multiple discussions going on at once, so it was harder to stay on point, harder to keep up with a conversation if the thread had jumped a few pages and moved on to a new topic, and harder to avoid topics I wanted to avoid because they were all being discussed in one location.

Regarding toxicity, though, I didn't notice a change in either direction once the megathread was created. The only difference seemed to be knowing that the megathread was going to be rough, because there were so many heated topics being discussed. With individual sub-topics that wasn't always a guarantee.

It did seem like the US Politics thread was a self-fulfilling prophecy. It was created to keep all the "toxicity" in one area, and it was repeatedly stated as such, so much so I think that may have informed participants' behaviors in the thread. When regular users and mods all agree that a particular thread is for mudslinging, then that is what it becomes. A dirty fething mess.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 01:27:33


Post by: Ouze


 Gordon Shumway wrote:
So instead of one thread that degenerates to yelling matches, circular arguments, and tribalism before getting locked or back on track, the solution is multiple threads that do that? I doubt that will be likely.


Actually, if there wasn't a mega thread, then the active closing of interesting topics might serve to encourage self-moderation, or barring that, could help identify repeat offenders for a (ideally) more liberal hand with OT bans for repeat miscreants.

Alternately, someone could pony up and make their own OT with blackjack and hookers. DakkaOT.com is available, after all.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 01:52:28


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Gordon Shumway wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I think the situation is much different now as opposed to even just a year ago. I should have phrased it as 'I think the silliness of the past year was amplified by being in a single thread'. The way I put it above is admittedly misleading as to what I actually meant.

Well now it will pretty obviously anti-Trump, I would guess. So yeah. But what do you want out of it, if it were to be reinstated? An echo chamber does you or no one else any favors. Unless you just want another forum to vent, but why? Use a pillow.

Oh god, now I'm sounding like my mom.
Okaaay, I'll just back away slowly then. Not sure where 'splitting US politics into multiple threads' became 'you just want an echo chamber to cry about Trump' but I can assure you that sentiment is entirely of your own invention.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 03:12:23


Post by: Gordon Shumway


Hah, it wasn't meant that way, just a question couched in a bit of self deprecation.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 04:53:21


Post by: insaniak


 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
When regular users and mods all agree that a particular thread is for mudslinging,...


Except that wasn't 'agreed' at all.

There's a distinction between 'keep the discussion in one place to contain the nonsense' and 'this place is for nonsense'...


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 16:27:16


Post by: Polonius


Let's also not ignore the reality that it's not just dicusssion of American politics that are nasty: American politics has become toxic. You have hyperpartisanship coupled with a widespread rejection of basic facts. I am not sure what there really is to discuss. You can't discuss policy, because the response to any argument is "your experts/facts/studies are wrong."

Why bother?



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 16:49:46


Post by: Peregrine


Prestor Jon wrote:
If the reason behind starting the NN thread is to affirm that there is only 1 valid acceptable opinion to have on NN and to then move on to which US political party is right and which is wrong on the issue then the thread really isn't about NN at all. It's about staking out a position, dismissing any counter argument to the position, ascribing the right and wrong viewpoints to the appropriate political parties and then dogpiling on the party in the wrong in a thread that is intended to be an echo chamber for the "right" viewpoint.


That's not true at all. The fact that removing net neutrality is a bad thing is indisputable. There is no plausible argument that anyone, other than a tiny number of wealthy executives and investment bankers, benefits from paying more for internet service just so the wealthy elite can get a bigger paycheck. The average person pays more and gets nothing in return. But that doesn't mean that there is no discussion to be had, or no room for alternate opinions. There is plenty to discuss: how best to oppose the repeal, how we got into a situation where such an obviously terrible policy is being taken seriously, etc. And there are valid opinions on multiple sides of those questions, even if every reasonable person agrees that net neutrality is a good thing. In fact, removing these questions is exactly the thing that creates an echo chamber. When you remove the politics of the situation all you're left with is a bunch of people saying "HAY GUYS I LIKE THE INTERNET DO YOU LIKE IT TOO?" until they finally get bored and the thread ends.

Once the thread becomes a succession of posts about how Party X is bad, should feel bad and anyone who supports Party X should feel bad it will inevitably lead to a dakkaite posting that he/she is member of Party X and he/she doesn't agree that he/she is part of the problem in fact it's Party Y that's the problem or Party Y and Party X are both equally to blame for the problems, which of course leads to personal attacks, warnings and thread lock.


This is only true if the person in question has no argument for their position besides a desire to have their team not get blamed for something. If Party X is genuinely not part of the problem then they should be able to provide a compelling argument for why they aren't, not just outrage. The issue is when moderation is based on superficial politeness instead of honesty or facts or anything like that, you get people posting blatant cheerleading for their team with nothing more than "I don't want my team to be wrong" to support it. Ban those people instead of the people who say too often and you get a much better discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Gordon Shumway wrote:
An echo chamber does you or no one else any favors.


Except that:

1) It doesn't have to be an echo chamber. In fact, it almost certainly wouldn't be an echo chamber, because echo chambers are boring and don't tend to stay active. There are people with a broad range of political views on this site, even in an era when we can all agree that Trump is The Worst Ever. And I don't know about you, but I'm going to have faith that there are people to the right of the democrats who are capable of having a constructive discussion without immediately getting removed and creating an anti-republican echo chamber.

2) The discussion is happening whether you have a politics ban or not. Like I said in the OP, US politics discussion happens, period. The question here is not whether or not people will talk about US politics, it's how the situation will be handled. Is it best to allow US politics discussion openly, preferably in a thread/forum section/whatever where people who are not interested can avoid it? Or is it better to have a ban where thread after thread turns into a farce where we ignore the ban until the red text appears, and then make thinly-veiled political comments until a moderator locks it with a "you aren't fooling anyone, stop" message? One of these is the clear winner.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Alpharius wrote:
We don't have that level of detail here, such as it is.

However, we CAN ban someone from the OT Forum entirely.

It *might* be worth lifting the ban and then if/when a user crosses the line in a US Politics thread, they're out of the OT Forum for good.

Worth thinking about...

Maybe something to trial in 2018.


That's a starting point, but it needs to be accompanied by a change in policy away from the idea that being impolite is worse than lying/spamming clickbait articles/etc and generally trashing a thread. Enforcing stricter moderation doesn't deal with the problem at the root of why the politics threads end up being such a trainwreck. It just means that the people who post utter without using any bad words will dominate the thread, while the people opposing them will get banned one by one for getting frustrated and saying one too many times.

(And TBH, this is a problem site-wide, among other problems with the moderators, but the general issue is not really appropriate for this thread.)


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 19:06:07


Post by: insaniak


The job of the moderators is to keep the forum civil and on-topic. Not to enforce your personal standards of morality, or to fact-check posted content.

If you can't find a way to deal with a stranger on the internet posting an argument you disagree with without getting angry about it, that's not a problem with the moderators, it's a problem with your anger management abilities.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 19:43:19


Post by: Luciferian


Sorry Peregrine, but you're kind of showcasing why a discussion of U.S. politics won't really go anywhere worthwhile. You descry people who post empty cheerleading for their team, and in the same post presume your own team to be correct by default several times without actually providing any kind of argument. That's the problem - nearly everyone with an opinion on the topic has already chosen sides and assumed an air of infallibility before the discussion even starts. Proper discourse isn't one person deciding for everyone else what the correct stance is and setting boundaries for which viewpoints are acceptable. That's just policing the ideological borders to make sure everyone's on one side or another for the sake of tribalism.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 21:04:12


Post by: timetowaste85


I have no issue with political threads going. What I have issue with is “sorry America, everyone else can talk their politics, but you can’t”. What’s fair for one is fair for all. The current ban on US politics while allowing everyone else is quite frankly a load of BS.

I can’t believe I’m on the same side as peregrine here.


*Fixed a fine example of autocorrect.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 22:12:27


Post by: insaniak


 timetowaste85 wrote:
What’s fair for one is fair for all.

Indeed it is. So when other national politics threads start generating similar levels of nonsense to the US version, they will receive the same treatment it did.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 22:23:50


Post by: Steve steveson


The UK thread has got close to being closed a few times, but it has been reined back in. Whilst I would be interested in knowing the views of some US posters about various topics unfortunately the last few threads did degrade in to name calling and abuse. Unfortunately this seems to be the way with US politics across the internet at the moment. I can’t see this changing any time soon, and any US politics thread will turn toxic. I would love to give my reasoning, but that itself will probably stray too far in to US politics.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 22:41:15


Post by: timetowaste85


 insaniak wrote:
 timetowaste85 wrote:
What’s fair for one is fair for all.

Indeed it is. So when other national politics threads start generating similar levels of nonsense to the US version, they will receive the same treatment it did.


So go troll other political threads; got it!

Yes, that is indeed sarcasm, but there is truth to it: it wasn’t just US posters who ruined it. Posters from all over added vitriol. Everyone screwed it up, but it’s only affecting one group of countrymen. Hence my distaste for the judgement.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 23:02:08


Post by: Future War Cultist


 timetowaste85 wrote:
I have no issue with political threads going. What I have issue with is “sorry America, everyone else can talk their politics, but you can’t”. What’s fair for one is fair for all. The current ban on US politics while allowing everyone else is quite frankly a load of BS.

I can’t believe I’m on the same side as peregrine here.


*Fixed a fine example of autocorrect.


My sentiments exactly. It really isn’t fair to let everyone else have their political thread except for the Americans. However for the record, I’ve also come to the conclusion that most political threads are ultimately pointless. No one will be changing anyone’s mind as we’re all too entrenched in our beliefs, myself included It’s mostly about passive aggressive digs and petty point scoring. I wouldn’t miss them if they were all swept away.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/02 23:16:03


Post by: insaniak


 timetowaste85 wrote:

Yes, that is indeed sarcasm, but there is truth to it: it wasn’t just US posters who ruined it. Posters from all over added vitriol. Everyone screwed it up, but it’s only affecting one group of countrymen. Hence my distaste for the judgement.

You can view it however you want, but at the end of the day the topic is the problem, not the nationality of the posters.

Banning political discussion for the rest of the world because posters are seemingly incapable of discussing US politics specifically would be pretty much the exact opposite of 'fair'...


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 03:23:41


Post by: Ouze


I'm truthfully more than a little surprised by how many posters are espousing the idea that threads that are going well should be locked just for the sake of parity because a different topic, with different participants largely, generated too much vitriol. Some pretty classic dog in the manger action.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 05:56:24


Post by: nels1031


 insaniak wrote:

You can view it however you want, but at the end of the day the topic is the problem, not the nationality of the posters.


/thread ?



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 09:28:28


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Ouze wrote:
I'm truthfully more than a little surprised by how many posters are espousing the idea that threads that are going well should be locked just for the sake of parity because a different topic, with different participants largely, generated too much vitriol. Some pretty classic dog in the manger action.

I was thinking the same thing, then I noticed it's only the same 2 posters championing the idea multiple times throughout the thread.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 12:34:06


Post by: Future War Cultist


Reading backwards through the thread I just saw Alpharius's suggestion. That's probably the best way to go. Actually, you might want to try that with the UK politics thread too, as that's on its last legs as well for pretty much the same reasons (albeit not quite as extreme).


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 12:50:53


Post by: General Annoyance


I think the Mods in the thread have nailed why the ban should stay; moderating people who can't be civil towards each other on threads that are not relevant to the purpose of the site, all under voluntary work, is not something they need to be wasting their time on, nor is it something that we should be even asking them to do.

I haven't yet been in the UK politics thread, mainly because I've not been in the UK long enough to accustom to the political scene. If it's anything like what US politics was though, god help you all who post there.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 13:10:29


Post by: Peregrine


 insaniak wrote:
The job of the moderators is to keep the forum civil and on-topic. Not to enforce your personal standards of morality, or to fact-check posted content.


Then, honestly, the problem here is that the moderators don't understand what their job is. The point of moderators is to enforce quality posting overall, not just superficial politeness where it's ok to lie and evade and generally trash the discussion as long as you don't use any bad words as you do it.

If you can't find a way to deal with a stranger on the internet posting an argument you disagree with without getting angry about it, that's not a problem with the moderators, it's a problem with your anger management abilities.


Again, it's not about mere disagreement. There are plenty of people I disagree with that I don't get angry at. The actual problem is that you have a "conversation" that goes like this:

Troll: TRUMP IS HITLER.
Reasonable Person: Of course he's bad, but that's a bit exaggerated.
T: NO I MEAN HE IS LITERALLY HITLER. NAZI OCCULT RITUALS MADE HIM IMMORTAL.
RP: Uh, what? None of that is true. {long explanation of why it's all absurd}
T: NO TRUMP IS HITLER. READ WWW.INFOWARS.COM/TRUMPISHITLER
RP: Infowars is not a credible source.
T: YOUR ALL JUST BIASED BOTH SIDES ARE BAD READ MY TRUMPHITLER BLOG.
RP: Oh FFS you're an idiot.
Moderator: BANNED FOR RULE #1. THREAD LOCKED.

A week passes, a new thread happens.

Troll: TRUMP IS LITERALLY HITLER.

Now, obviously something like Trump literally being Hitler with a bad spray tan is going to be absurd enough that nobody is going to pay any attention to it, but it gets infuriating when people are doing with tax policy/health care/etc. In those cases the lies are plausible enough to convince people, so the choice is between refuting the lies and clickbait garbage and risking the red text, or abandoning the thread and leaving the discussion to the people posting clickbait garbage. It directly encourages having garbage threads because nobody is willing to touch them, and do you really want your forum to be a sewer of lies?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Luciferian wrote:
You descry people who post empty cheerleading for their team, and in the same post presume your own team to be correct by default several times without actually providing any kind of argument.


Uh, no, I didn't presume that at all. I don't have a team in US politics, as no major party represents my political opinions. The closest I have is grudgingly supporting the least-bad option in the hope that things move in the direction I want and eventually reach the point where one or more major parties aligns with my beliefs. And if you want to call the democrats "my team" because they're the closest to my positions, well, I've criticized them plenty of times in the past.

Proper discourse isn't one person deciding for everyone else what the correct stance is and setting boundaries for which viewpoints are acceptable. That's just policing the ideological borders to make sure everyone's on one side or another for the sake of tribalism.


Of course proper discourse involves setting boundaries for which viewpoints are acceptable. If someone comes in here making an argument that Hitler had the right idea and advocating genocide against the lesser races I don't think anyone would complain when they are banned. If someone repeatedly spams threads about how 1+1=3 because they read an infowars post about it I don't think anyone is going to complain about getting rid of that spam. Garbage needs to be removed so that reasonable people can have a conversation without it degenerating into clickbait spam and blatant dishonesty by people with no interest in participating legitimately.

And, before you assume, no, I'm not excluding my political opponents here. There are plenty of people that I disagree with very strongly on various political issues but acknowledge that they make constructive posts and are entitled to participate in the discussion.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 13:23:59


Post by: General Annoyance


 Peregrine wrote:
Then, honestly, the problem here is that the moderators don't understand what their job is. The point of moderators is to enforce quality posting overall, not just superficial politeness where it's ok to lie and evade and generally trash the discussion as long as you don't use any bad words as you do it.


A moderator's job is to enforce whatever ground rules have been laid down. As far as we know, there is no rule they or we have to abide by saying that we can't post something that is false/clickbait/infuriating, but we know that they do have to enforce Rule 1 and 2 - be polite, and stay on topic.

It directly encourages having garbage threads because nobody is willing to touch them, and do you really want your forum to be a sewer of lies?


If you're suggesting that the forums in general are a sewer of lies because of the way moderators go about their business, then I believe the thread title needs an upgrade to "Moderation conduct on this site is absurd and needs to be changed".


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 13:33:08


Post by: Kanluwen


 General Annoyance wrote:

A moderator's job is to enforce whatever ground rules have been laid down. As far as we know, there is no rule they or we have to abide by saying that we can't post something that is false/clickbait/infuriating, but we know that they do have to enforce Rule 1 and 2 - be polite, and stay on topic.

Pulled directly from the DakkaDakka rules:
Rule 3: No Spam
While Spam may be a tasty meat product (yum!) on the Internet "spam" refers to invasive, unsolicited information. There are many versions of spam such as: posting advertisements for unrelated web pages or services, making multiple posts to increase your post count or to generally be 'cute', making posts full of jibberish or emoticons, etc. Whatever its form, "spam" is always inappropriate and is a violation of Rule 2 and certainly Rule 1.


I can see what Peregrine is saying while not directly agreeing with him that the moderators are at fault. I definitely agree that certain posters should have had their privileges to post in the politics threads revoked, even if I might have been one of them.

In the long run though? I'm fine with not seeing US politics getting its own dedicated thread back, but I think that the topic shouldn't be forbidden when it relates to an issue at hand such as Net Neutrality. It's important to recognize the potentially political nature of a topic or political motivations relating to the reasoning for the decisions that are being discussed.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 13:38:06


Post by: Peregrine


 General Annoyance wrote:
A moderator's job is to enforce whatever ground rules have been laid down. As far as we know, there is no rule they or we have to abide by saying that we can't post something that is false/clickbait/infuriating, but we know that they do have to enforce Rule 1 and 2 - be polite, and stay on topic.


Then the rules need to be changed. I said it before in this thread, but I'll say it again: some of the best political discussion I've read was on a forum with a moderation policy that openly encouraged people to be rude to trolls and idiots and would ban people for posting arguments without supporting them when challenged. Sure, it had a few more s than dakka (and no swear filter), but the people who continually drag politics threads into the sewers were weeded out and what was left was the people capable of having a constructive discussion. The same is true in general. Dakka puts way too much emphasis on superficial politeness instead of things like honesty or value to the discussion.

If you're suggesting that the forums in general are a sewer of lies because of the way moderators go about their business, then I believe the thread title needs an upgrade to "Moderation conduct on this site is absurd and needs to be changed".


I'm suggesting that it's how a hypothetical politics thread with super-strict moderation on superficial politeness and no moderation on lying/clickbait/etc would go. Obviously the 40k new releases thread is not going to be a sewer of lies because of this policy.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 13:45:08


Post by: Ketara


 Peregrine wrote:

Then, honestly, the problem here is that the moderators don't understand what their job is.

When you purchase the Dakka domain, I am sure that you will no doubt take great pleasure in defining the exact job descriptions of your unpaid volunteers.

Until then, I'm afraid you'll simply have to grit your teeth, square your shoulders, and endure the terrible burden of hardship that is the approved moderation style of the current site owners.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 13:51:28


Post by: General Annoyance


 Kanluwen wrote:

Pulled directly from the DakkaDakka rules:
Rule 3: No Spam
While Spam may be a tasty meat product (yum!) on the Internet "spam" refers to invasive, unsolicited information. There are many versions of spam such as: posting advertisements for unrelated web pages or services, making multiple posts to increase your post count or to generally be 'cute', making posts full of jibberish or emoticons, etc. Whatever its form, "spam" is always inappropriate and is a violation of Rule 2 and certainly Rule 1.


This is correct, however I don't think that rule matches with the kind of post that Peregrine is talking about; those posts don't fall under spam even if they're false/provocative because they're still classed as contributing to the topic (if they're on topic of course). Even if they're adding "clickbait" links it would be hard to class them as advertising if it's not explicitly said, or if the content is pertaining to the discussion.

I should say that I'm not advocating the Mods to turn a blind eye to that kind of behaviour. Having an argument with someone who refuses to listen to your point is incredibly frustrating, and it usually throws whatever good discussion was being had at the time, and high profile trolls (such as a particular one I and Peregrine conflicted with a lot) are better off not being on the site at all. That being said, saying that the Mods don't know what their role is is a little off to me - trolls and obnoxious posters eventually run into the moderators' gunsights and are dealt with, and I'd say that the Mods here do their job pretty well, especially considering that they do it all out of goodwill.

I can see what Peregrine is saying while not directly agreeing with him that the moderators are at fault. I definitely agree that certain posters should have had their privileges to post in the politics threads revoked, even if I might have been one of them.

In the long run though? I'm fine with not seeing US politics getting its own dedicated thread back, but I think that the topic shouldn't be forbidden when it relates to an issue at hand such as Net Neutrality. It's important to recognize the potentially political nature of a topic or political motivations relating to the reasoning for the decisions that are being discussed.


I think I'm in agreement with that point (wowzers); I think the problem will come when those threads are used as a return to a discussion that would have been seen in the US politics thread, which has happened a lot. However, if the power to revoke access to the OT for certain users is used, then I think it will pan out well.

 Peregrine wrote:


Then the rules need to be changed. I said it before in this thread, but I'll say it again: some of the best political discussion I've read was on a forum with a moderation policy that openly encouraged people to be rude to trolls and idiots and would ban people for posting arguments without supporting them when challenged. Sure, it had a few more s than dakka (and no swear filter), but the people who continually drag politics threads into the sewers were weeded out and what was left was the people capable of having a constructive discussion. The same is true in general. Dakka puts way too much emphasis on superficial politeness instead of things like honesty or value to the discussion.


Perhaps this is true, but I would say that Dakka's rules were likely not engineered to be effective with political discussion. I'm not sure if you're referring to a Forum that is for wargaming, or if it was made for political discussion, but I would ask why you wouldn't use that forum if it's objectively better than here for that line of chat.

I'm suggesting that it's how a hypothetical politics thread with super-strict moderation on superficial politeness and no moderation on lying/clickbait/etc would go. Obviously the 40k new releases thread is not going to be a sewer of lies because of this policy.


Considering that politics is part of an extended sub forum that was granted to us (and isn't the focus of the site) I would personally argue that such matters are not of importance to the Mods. But I do accept your point that it's detrimental to the discussion.

As said before though, it'll be a hard job convincing unpaid Mods that they should put their time and effort into this when they can just blanket ban and focus on something more important for the site.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 14:06:38


Post by: Peregrine


 General Annoyance wrote:
That being said, saying that the Mods don't know what their role is is a little off to me - people like that eventually run into the Moderators' gunsights and are dealt with.


Except the US politics threads rather convincingly demonstrated that they didn't. People like that were allowed to continue posting, and if they did end up banned it was for other things.

Perhaps this is true, but I would say that Dakka's rules were likely not engineered to be effective with political discussion. I'm not sure if you're referring to a Forum that is for wargaming, or if it was made for political discussion, but I would ask why you wouldn't use that forum if it's objectively better than here for that line of chat.


I don't use it because it doesn't really exist anymore, it died years ago. But it was a gaming/scifi/etc forum that had an extensive OT section.

And no, obviously political discussion isn't the priority, but the same problem happens elsewhere, if less frequently. For example, over and over again people will imply various insulting things about casual/competitive players, but as long as they don't use any bad words as they do it nothing happens. But if you're a little too hostile in responding to the person who called you a TFG (without using the term explicitly), well, you're risking the red text.

As said before though, it'll be a hard job convincing unpaid Mods that they should put their time and effort into this when they can just blanket ban and focus on something more important for the site.


Again, my point from the beginning of this thread is that a blanket ban doesn't work. Despite the ban we keep having US politics threads in all but name, and threads (like the net neutrality one) that become a farce of trying to pretend that a subject which is 100% US politics is about something entirely different. I'm pretty sure this requires more moderator attention than just accepting that there will be a US politics thread and ignoring all the complaints about rule #1 violations.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 14:32:48


Post by: General Annoyance


 Peregrine wrote:
Except the US politics threads rather convincingly demonstrated that they didn't. People like that were allowed to continue posting, and if they did end up banned it was for other things.


This could be a point to be used in changing Dakka enforcement since punishments may not be harsh enough, but if those people got temp bans or restrictions for their posting, then the Mods have done exactly what they've been asked to do.

And no, obviously political discussion isn't the priority, but the same problem happens elsewhere, if less frequently. For example, over and over again people will imply various insulting things about casual/competitive players, but as long as they don't use any bad words as they do it nothing happens. But if you're a little too hostile in responding to the person who called you a TFG (without using the term explicitly), well, you're risking the red text.


A good example of the grey area when it comes to politeness - a lot of people will imply things in their posts, but it's hard to shut down those people if they're not explicitly saying something that violates the rules, since you could be wrong and have subsequently banned/suspended someone who did not deserve punishment. I don't really know how one could fix this; you sorta risk alienating people whichever direction the line is drawn.

Again, my point from the beginning of this thread is that a blanket ban doesn't work. Despite the ban we keep having US politics threads in all but name, and threads (like the net neutrality one) that become a farce of trying to pretend that a subject which is 100% US politics is about something entirely different. I'm pretty sure this requires more moderator attention than just accepting that there will be a US politics thread and ignoring all the complaints about rule #1 violations.


I think the key difference there is that Net Neutrality can affect everyone who uses the internet, not just Americans. You can argue that American politics are some of the most influential in the world, but Net Neutrality is more clear cut in my mind, and likely in the minds of the Mods, hence the lack of ban.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/03 19:12:37


Post by: insaniak


 Peregrine wrote:

And no, obviously political discussion isn't the priority, but the same problem happens elsewhere, if less frequently. For example, over and over again people will imply various insulting things about casual/competitive players, but as long as they don't use any bad words as they do it nothing happens.

Ah... so the problem is actually that you've forgotten that the vast majority of site moderation goes on in private, rather than with big red text in a thread.

We do attempt to guide posters who frequently cause issues into a more productive direction, and where that doesn't work have shown dedicated trolls the door in the past.


But if you're a little too hostile in responding to the person who called you a TFG (without using the term explicitly), well, you're risking the red text.

Indeed you are. And that policy isn't going anywhere.

The appropriate response to behaviour that you see as unacceptable is to alert the mods and let them deal with it, not to fight fire with fire and wind up with the US politics thread.






Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Peregrine wrote:
Dakka puts way too much emphasis on superficial politeness instead of things like honesty or value to the discussion.

We have this crazy idea that kids getting sworn at because some crusty grognard felt that their posts didn't add sufficient 'value' to the discussion isn't particularly conducive to strong community building.

People are going to say stupid things. In the vast majority of cases, being rude to them isn't going to make them suddenly realise that they are saying stupid things. It's just going to ramp up the hostility, and then you wind up with a forum populated by a few die-hards who enjoy that level of nonsense in their discussions, and nobody else.

That's not the sort of forum that Dakka's owners have any interest in creating.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/04 14:11:33


Post by: kronk


 Peregrine wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
The job of the moderators is to keep the forum civil and on-topic. Not to enforce your personal standards of morality, or to fact-check posted content.


Then, honestly, the problem here is that the moderators don't understand what their job is.


Hahahahaha!

Yeah, Alpharius and Lorek! Do your fething jobs, losers!

You tell them, Peregrine!

What a goddam joke of a post...


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/04 14:23:50


Post by: Talizvar


 insaniak wrote:
People are going to say stupid things. In the vast majority of cases, being rude to them isn't going to make them suddenly realise that they are saying stupid things. It's just going to ramp up the hostility, and then you wind up with a forum populated by a few die-hards who enjoy that level of nonsense in their discussions, and nobody else.
That's not the sort of forum that Dakka's owners have any interest in creating.
This.

In the end, this is a board that has owners that like to see a certain level of discussion and have rules/guidelines they want followed.
The MODs are to simply follow that.
This board has been quite good in my view but people would be mistaken that it runs on altruism: in order to survive it has to follow it's business plan.

I suppose like with any town there is a bar that feels like a lawless place, I suppose the OT catch-all is our "hive of scum and villainy" that needs to be raided by the police on occasion.
I figure OT survives on the indulgence of the MODs, it would be easy to state the case that it is more trouble than it is worth.
Some believe it is a means to blow off steam and explore topics outside the hobby with those we know here.
The US ban will not be the last ban I am sure.
I figure anything to manage OT is important or it could be shut-down completely if too difficult to police.

<edit> Maybe make the OP a MOD and have them moderate OT for a year or so?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/04 14:31:01


Post by: kronk


 Talizvar wrote:

<edit> Maybe make the OP a MOD and have them moderate OT for a year or so?


The back and forth on the previous page just demonstrated that the OPs vision for how this site should be run does not align with how Yackface wants this site to be run.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/04 15:37:48


Post by: Talizvar


 kronk wrote:
 Talizvar wrote:
<edit> Maybe make the OP a MOD and have them moderate OT for a year or so?
The back and forth on the previous page just demonstrated that the OPs vision for how this site should be run does not align with how Yackface wants this site to be run.
But then he can be enlightened on what it is like to work for a "higher power".
I do not always agree with my boss: I will tell him my opinion and my reasoning but always have to end it with "but I will do as you direct.".
That is the only way you can be trusted to act on someone else's behalf.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 02:08:10


Post by: sebster


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
This raises an interesting idea; no generic US politics thread, but ones devoted to specific issues. When confined to a certain sub-topic rather than the free range of all US politics things have been (and are)much more civil.


The civility is because we're a year from mid-terms and three years from presidential elections. When there's elections on the most partisan, most aggressive and typically worst informed posters sign up to the board, and that's when things get ugly.

In the past there's been election campaigns where there were threads for lots of different political issues and events. A lot of those threads ended up as ugly as the single politics thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
I remember the multiple topic days. I will say, one thing I liked about that arrangement was that I could avoid a topic easily if it didn't interest me, and engage in topics that did interest me more easily.

With the megathread you often had multiple discussions going on at once, so it was harder to stay on point, harder to keep up with a conversation if the thread had jumped a few pages and moved on to a new topic, and harder to avoid topics I wanted to avoid because they were all being discussed in one location.


The issue I found with the megathread is it moved so much faster, often there'd be a half dozen or more pages posted in between visits to dakka. Most people don't go and read threads from where they finished off, most seem to just start reading from the current page. I think this is because time spent reading is time they could spend giving their own opinions

The problem with this is many conversations just kind of got lost. And with many posters this wasn't an accident, they were happy to just stop responding when they were getting pinned down on a specific point, only to come back a while later repeating the original claim they couldn't back up.
And of course, it also meant lots more drive by posts.

When there were different topics for different parts of the debate then those things still happened, but they weren't as common. It was certainly a lot more obvious in a smaller, slower moving thread when someone had a pattern of dropping a debate when they couldn't respond, only to come back with their original claim a little while later.

The flip side is that during US political seasons we'd often see 9 of the first 10 threads about political issues. So I understand why the change was made.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 05:22:18


Post by: Ashiraya


 kronk wrote:


Hahahahaha!

Yeah, Alpharius and Lorek! Do your fething jobs, losers!

You tell them, Peregrine!

What a goddam joke of a post...


There is no need to be a dick about it.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 06:31:22


Post by: LordofHats


 kronk wrote:
 Talizvar wrote:

<edit> Maybe make the OP a MOD and have them moderate OT for a year or so?


The back and forth on the previous page just demonstrated that the OPs vision for how this site should be run does not align with how Yackface wants this site to be run.



honestly anyone who spend more than an occasional glance at the US politics mega thread should never be a mod. Big flag that we are too committed to something to carry the necessary impartiality.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 11:31:26


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Ashiraya wrote:
 kronk wrote:


Hahahahaha!

Yeah, Alpharius and Lorek! Do your fething jobs, losers!

You tell them, Peregrine!

What a goddam joke of a post...


There is no need to be a dick about it.
The amusing thing is that Peri is the one championing the idea that the mods should enforce some nebulous concept of quality rather than politeness, so bluntly pointing out it's a joke to tell the mods they don't know their own job is appropriate.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 12:54:06


Post by: kronk


 Ashiraya wrote:
 kronk wrote:


Hahahahaha!

Yeah, Alpharius and Lorek! Do your fething jobs, losers!

You tell them, Peregrine!

What a goddam joke of a post...


There is no need to be a dick about it.


The line at Alpharius and Lorek is a joke and they know it.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 14:30:23


Post by: Ashiraya


 kronk wrote:
 Ashiraya wrote:
 kronk wrote:


Hahahahaha!

Yeah, Alpharius and Lorek! Do your fething jobs, losers!

You tell them, Peregrine!

What a goddam joke of a post...


There is no need to be a dick about it.


The line at Alpharius and Lorek is a joke and they know it.


I am aware.

I don't really have a dog in this fight as I am not American and never posted that much in the thread when it was up, but I can see Peregrine's point even though I only partially agree; I think both a modicum of politeness and constructive posting should be the enforced standard.

In an ideal world, that is. Lack of time on the moderators' hands are of course a concern. As mentioned I never used that thread very much so it's not a core topic for me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:

The amusing thing is that Peri is the one championing the idea that the mods should enforce some nebulous concept of quality rather than politeness, so bluntly pointing out it's a joke to tell the mods they don't know their own job is appropriate.



If Peregrine is so bad, then don't stoop to his level maybe?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 18:38:26


Post by: Genestealer Jesse


I don't come into the forum a lot, usually I just lurk and steal other peoples army lists. I have to say that in US politics it's almost impossible for people to treat each other with respect right now. It really is toxic and it doesn't seem to matter who's spouting off (left/right/whatever) they cannot, not, be a jerk bout it. That said I am against any restriction on speech in any forum. This is the whole point of an off topic forum area. THAT SAID, please be aware that many sites like Dakka get infiltrated by people who have no common interest whatsoever and are simply here to troll actual users. If you notice someone is ONLY posting negative scurrilous things in the OT forum with no other activity maybe they should be politely shown the exit. Just my 2 cents. Thank you.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 19:34:50


Post by: feeder


I enjoyed talking (well, reading, mostly) politics on this forum because there is usually a common ground among posters (plastic army mens) that is lacking on other forums. It helps humanize people who have views that are otherwise alien to me. There's a chap posting about wild conspiracy against his homeland and making ominous statements about the future direction. I was ready to dismiss him as a dangerous loon. Imagine my surprise to find him giving very good modelling advice in the tutorial thread! Ok, he's now a real person, just with a totally different set of values from me.

The problem with US politics in the Dakka OT is the trolls.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 20:36:14


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Ashiraya wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

The amusing thing is that Peri is the one championing the idea that the mods should enforce some nebulous concept of quality rather than politeness, so bluntly pointing out it's a joke to tell the mods they don't know their own job is appropriate.



If Peregrine is so bad, then don't stoop to his level maybe?
Well...

1. I never said Peri was bad, maybe you're projecting a bit there?

2. You don't see the further irony that you yourself chose to point out someone was being unkind in a way that was itself rather impolite? Like, you could have said "wasn't very friendly", no, you chose the wording "be a dick about it". What was that you said about stooping to levels?

Come on, I can't be the only one who finds this hilarious, Peri says he wants mods to worry less about being impolite, another poster bluntly tells him that one of his points is a joke, then you choose an unfriendly wording to tell that poster they're being unfriendly?

At the end of the day this thread just shows me why we can't have a US politics thread without it being horrible. Not that people have been particularly horrible in this thread, but it shows why a thread like US politics is always going to be horrible. Firstly people can't agree on what acceptable discourse would look like to begin with, secondly people choose either intentionally or accidentally snarky/unfriendly/impolite/inflammatory wordings to make a point (I guess because they feel simply expressing the point without the snark wouldn't have the necessary impact).


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 20:46:52


Post by: Ashiraya


AllSeeingSkink wrote:


If Peregrine is so bad, then don't stoop to his level maybe?
Well...

1. I never said Peri was bad, maybe you're projecting a bit there?


Apologies, I should have specified that that was directed at Kronk.





Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 20:52:40


Post by: Gordon Shumway


At then end of the day, it boils down to would we accept or want a Disney version of political discourse? I say no. Our politics have always been vitriolic, vile and crass. That is sort of the way the system works. Putting an artificial system in place, which I totally understand, to limit that sort of defeats the purpose. In other words, as much as I like the people here, and as much as I would want to agree/disagree with them about issues that actually matter, the structure of the boards doesn't really allow for it. That said, PM the person you want to discuss issues with. They aren't regulated, as far as I know, unless the mods are directly drawn to the issue. A "PM me" button would actually work well for this. Wait, there's a button for that. I dislike it, but that's the system.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/05 22:42:10


Post by: d-usa


You don’t have to “accept” a Disney version of politics. But people should be able to talk politics at a Disney level without name calling and vitriol if they want to. It’s not part of politics, some people just see politics that way.

If people could keep it friendly, they should be able to have that thread. And people who think politics is based on vitriol and name calling can stay the heck out of it. But we know that they won’t, and then the heat will rise, and even more people will slip and cross that line.

So it’s best to keep it gone.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/06 11:04:36


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Gordon Shumway wrote:
At then end of the day, it boils down to would we accept or want a Disney version of political discourse? I say no. Our politics have always been vitriolic, vile and crass. That is sort of the way the system works. Putting an artificial system in place, which I totally understand, to limit that sort of defeats the purpose.
Just because US politics are vitriolic, vile and crass doesn't mean a discussion of them has to be. People both get too emotional and either intentionally or otherwise don't express their points in a polite and respectful way.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/06 22:49:29


Post by: Elemental


 feeder wrote:
The problem with US politics in the Dakka OT is the trolls.


And as we all know, the trolls are the ones who disagree with me.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
At then end of the day, it boils down to would we accept or want a Disney version of political discourse? I say no. Our politics have always been vitriolic, vile and crass. That is sort of the way the system works.


Real political discussion can be heated and irrational, but what we saw here was far worse. It was more like a ritualised combat, where insults are slung, no opinions are changed and it's just a way for everyone to get their fix of righteous indignation at how unutterably stupid the other side is.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/06 23:39:55


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 Elemental wrote:
....it's just a way for everyone to get their fix of righteous indignation at how unutterably stupid the other side is.
That's one of the better descriptions I've heard.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/07 18:24:18


Post by: DarkTraveler777


 insaniak wrote:
 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
When regular users and mods all agree that a particular thread is for mudslinging,...


Except that wasn't 'agreed' at all.

There's a distinction between 'keep the discussion in one place to contain the nonsense' and 'this place is for nonsense'...


Is there? To me acknowledging that one thread, or one forum, is the dumping ground to "contain the nonsense" is a tacit agreement that nonsense is tolerated in those places. Sorry that is how I see it, and I think a lot of other members saw it that way too. I don't have the energy to sift through hundreds of posts to demonstrate where such statements were made, but let's agree to disagree on this.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/07 22:01:17


Post by: Jin


 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

Is there? To me acknowledging that one thread, or one forum, is the dumping ground to "contain the nonsense" is a tacit agreement that nonsense is tolerated in those places. Sorry that is how I see it, and I think a lot of other members saw it that way too. I don't have the energy to sift through hundreds of posts to demonstrate where such statements were made, but let's agree to disagree on this.



I suppose a way to look at the Megathread is like this:

I have a house that people are allowed to walk around in. Sometimes, it's rainy/muddy outside and anyone walking into the house will track in water/mud. Knowing that this occurs on occasion despite peoples' best intentions, I designate one room in the house for people to walk in with their shoes/coats on and have people leave those things in that room so that any mud/rainwater that is tracked in will be limited to that room.

There is a sort of implicit notion that people won't get that room as muddy/wet as possible just because it's there to contain any mud/rain that may occur.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/07 23:48:25


Post by: Manchu


That's very well said, Jin.

Another thing to keep in mind is, the megathread was for containing [discussion of US politics] not [rude behavior]. The conflation is understandable but incorrect all the same.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/08 01:54:20


Post by: sebster


 Jin wrote:
I have a house that people are allowed to walk around in. Sometimes, it's rainy/muddy outside and anyone walking into the house will track in water/mud. Knowing that this occurs on occasion despite peoples' best intentions, I designate one room in the house for people to walk in with their shoes/coats on and have people leave those things in that room so that any mud/rainwater that is tracked in will be limited to that room.

There is a sort of implicit notion that people won't get that room as muddy/wet as possible just because it's there to contain any mud/rain that may occur.


To extend your metaphor, though, consider someone's behaviour when they go in to that room. There's dried mud on floor, on the furniture, and even on the lower parts of the wall. A person won't consciously think to take their boots off with less care, but they're likely to do so on a subconscious level. And if you are next in line behind that person, and you see them acting carelessly and making more of a mess than they should, you're likely to follow suit and also be more sloppy as well. And if you're sloppy as well, imagine what the guy after you thinks?

Now I'm not saying the problems with debating US politics was due to that single thread, I don't believe that was the case. But I've probably read a lot more US politics threads than anyone else, and I think there were a lot of feedback mechanisms in place, where negative behaviour caused negative behaviour, back and forth, and frequently that pattern only ended when one or more people in the feedback were banned or chose to leave.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/08 08:32:54


Post by: djones520


 sebster wrote:
 Jin wrote:
I have a house that people are allowed to walk around in. Sometimes, it's rainy/muddy outside and anyone walking into the house will track in water/mud. Knowing that this occurs on occasion despite peoples' best intentions, I designate one room in the house for people to walk in with their shoes/coats on and have people leave those things in that room so that any mud/rainwater that is tracked in will be limited to that room.

There is a sort of implicit notion that people won't get that room as muddy/wet as possible just because it's there to contain any mud/rain that may occur.


To extend your metaphor, though, consider someone's behaviour when they go in to that room. There's dried mud on floor, on the furniture, and even on the lower parts of the wall. A person won't consciously think to take their boots off with less care, but they're likely to do so on a subconscious level. And if you are next in line behind that person, and you see them acting carelessly and making more of a mess than they should, you're likely to follow suit and also be more sloppy as well. And if you're sloppy as well, imagine what the guy after you thinks?

Now I'm not saying the problems with debating US politics was due to that single thread, I don't believe that was the case. But I've probably read a lot more US politics threads than anyone else, and I think there were a lot of feedback mechanisms in place, where negative behaviour caused negative behaviour, back and forth, and frequently that pattern only ended when one or more people in the feedback were banned or chose to leave.


I've been involved in political forums for 16ish years now, used to be a lot more heavily then I do now, as I just find it exhausting lately, but in my experience of moderating a few of them (some with a couple hundred posters, some with thousands), banning doesn't seem to do much. You remove one foul element, but there is no shortage of them out there. People just seem to gravitate to the extreme on this topic for some reason. About 12 years ago I was actually targeted by an elaborate hoax, where a poster faked his death, went to the extent of even having his family involved with it, and it was blamed on me causing him a heart attack because I gave him a temp suspension for his negative behavior (This was all on Military.com's forums, which they seem to have wisely disposed of). That same mod job even led to members forming a "cult" to try find and harass family members of moderators they took issue with. Honestly, I was glad to be done with that place...

The internet is just a venue for some sick fething people, and politics is just a flame that they're drawn to. Honestly, I've felt that what we see here has been pretty tame, which I feel is mostly because the primary purpose of this forum doesn't seem to attract the more hardcore psycho's out there.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/08 09:26:21


Post by: LordofHats


 djones520 wrote:
About 12 years ago I was actually targeted by an elaborate hoax, where a poster faked his death, went to the extent of even having his family involved with it, and it was blamed on me causing him a heart attack because I gave him a temp suspension for his negative behavior (This was all on Military.com's forums, which they seem to have wisely disposed of).


I've got some pretty crazy internet stories and you just beat every single one of them... holy gak


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/08 09:43:08


Post by: djones520


 LordofHats wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
About 12 years ago I was actually targeted by an elaborate hoax, where a poster faked his death, went to the extent of even having his family involved with it, and it was blamed on me causing him a heart attack because I gave him a temp suspension for his negative behavior (This was all on Military.com's forums, which they seem to have wisely disposed of).


I've got some pretty crazy internet stories and you just beat every single one of them... holy gak


I've been to some corners of the internet that make this place look like a subsidiary of the Lollipop Guild.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/08 14:10:02


Post by: Talizvar


You know, present conditions of US politics is pretty absurd as it stands.
Digging a bit into my "feelings" I think I would be happy not discussing US politics ever again... until it can get to something more "normal" at least as much as things in the US can get.
We got enough of our own issues and really need our fearless leader to man-up a bit, he at least is a heck of a contrast anyway.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/08 21:26:34


Post by: Kilkrazy


Should change name of thread to

"Why the US Politics is absurd and needs to go."


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/08 22:04:24


Post by: Iron_Captain


I like OT. I think it really adds something to the site to be able to chat about a variety of subjects with fellow wargamers from across the world.
But I also understand if the mods want to ban topics that come up often and consistently get heated and toxic. They are just people after all, and moderating such threads probably takes up a lot of time, and yakface can't just recruit infinite mods to take care of it.
So not being able to discuss certain subjects is a valid sacrifice for keeping open OT, I feel.
I do feel that maybe it would be handy to make a sticky in OT to explain the rule. I imagine it could be confusing for people who are new to the site or do not frequent OT.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 02:04:24


Post by: trexmeyer


I have an idea. Why not lower moderation standards for specifically the OT? Keep things that are blatantly NSFW out, keep the censor on, but people that cry over someone else calling them an idiot across the internet can either get over it, ignore the troll, or not take part.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 02:09:24


Post by: d-usa


 trexmeyer wrote:
I have an idea. Why not lower moderation standards for specifically the OT? Keep things that are blatantly NSFW out, keep the censor on, but people that cry over someone else calling them an idiot across the internet can either get over it, ignore the troll, or not take part.



Or people who want to call people idiots can go to a forum where that's allowed, rather than changing the rules here.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 02:17:47


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 trexmeyer wrote:
I have an idea. Why not lower moderation standards for specifically the OT? Keep things that are blatantly NSFW out, keep the censor on, but people that cry over someone else calling them an idiot across the internet can either get over it, ignore the troll, or not take part.

It's less about individuals crying over being called an idiot and more about how dakka wants to present itself to the world.

At the end of the day, IMO, I think this forum wants to remain a friendly forum.

Less a place for gak slinging and more a place for friends to get together and have a chat, primarily about toy soldiers but occasionally about other stuff.

In my observations when I was living in the US when friends or colleagues who have different political views get together they tend to self-censor on political topics so that they can actually remain friends or colleagues

Since Dakka is a forum full of randoms, if it wants to remain a friendly place it needs rules as people aren't likely to self-censor.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 02:20:38


Post by: trexmeyer


 d-usa wrote:
 trexmeyer wrote:
I have an idea. Why not lower moderation standards for specifically the OT? Keep things that are blatantly NSFW out, keep the censor on, but people that cry over someone else calling them an idiot across the internet can either get over it, ignore the troll, or not take part.



Or people who want to call people idiots can go to a forum where that's allowed, rather than changing the rules here.


Or simply permaban for something of that nature. But a big problem with the US politics threads and the OT in general is how bent out of shape people routinely get and how strict the mods are over nonsense. That and the fact US politics seem excessively religious/anti religious. At least in the past here.

I don't think discussing politics is a worthwhile use of time to begin with, let alone on the internet, but if you're going to do so, do you really have to cry when someone isn't nice to you?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 02:35:59


Post by: d-usa


If people can't talk politics without name calling, then the problem isn't with the people complaining about the name calling.

And since people can't follow Forum rules when it comes to certain topics, then those topics just get banned.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 02:44:07


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 trexmeyer wrote:
do you really have to cry when someone isn't nice to you?
On the flip side, do you really have to cry when the mods tell you to be nice?


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 03:00:52


Post by: trexmeyer


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
 trexmeyer wrote:
do you really have to cry when someone isn't nice to you?
On the flip side, do you really have to cry when the mods tell you to be nice?


Not sure how I'm crying, but if that's how you want to view it. Cheers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 d-usa wrote:
If people can't talk politics without name calling, then the problem isn't with the people complaining about the name calling.

And since people can't follow Forum rules when it comes to certain topics, then those topics just get banned.


Honestly, I've seen you insult people and then complain about being insulted. So you don't really have room to talk.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 03:03:26


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 trexmeyer wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
 trexmeyer wrote:
do you really have to cry when someone isn't nice to you?
On the flip side, do you really have to cry when the mods tell you to be nice?


Not sure how I'm crying, but if that's how you want to view it. Cheers.
I was talking in the generic "you" the same way you were talking about generic "you" people crying as I underlined (unless you specifically were talking about d-usa crying, in which case my apologies).


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 03:03:26


Post by: d-usa


But I've not asked the mods to let me insult people, which is the actual argument you are making.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 03:07:40


Post by: trexmeyer


 d-usa wrote:
But I've not asked the mods to let me insult people, which is the actual argument you are making.



No, I'm not. Thanks for assuming. I'm simply pointing out that instead of protecting people's feelings in political threads could mods could ignore the more minor stuff instead of getting involved every time someone gets a bit pissy.



Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 03:10:23


Post by: d-usa


They are not getting involved because someone gets a bit pissy.

They get involved because someone is breaking the rules they agreed to.

Simple stuff.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 03:16:30


Post by: trexmeyer


 d-usa wrote:
They are not getting involved because someone gets a bit pissy.

They get involved because someone is breaking the rules they agreed to.

Simple stuff.


Rules that can be interpreted in various ways. You're going to have a certain degree of rudeness come up in many debates.

But I also didn't stick around the OT long enough to see if got really hairy in the political threads. Maybe it did.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 03:25:26


Post by: Gordon Shumway


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
 trexmeyer wrote:
I have an idea. Why not lower moderation standards for specifically the OT? Keep things that are blatantly NSFW out, keep the censor on, but people that cry over someone else calling them an idiot across the internet can either get over it, ignore the troll, or not take part.

It's less about individuals crying over being called an idiot and more about how dakka wants to present itself to the world.

At the end of the day, IMO, I think this forum wants to remain a friendly forum.

Less a place for gak slinging and more a place for friends to get together and have a chat, primarily about toy soldiers but occasionally about other stuff.

In my observations when I was living in the US when friends or colleagues who have different political views get together they tend to self-censor on political topics so that they can actually remain friends or colleagues

Since Dakka is a forum full of randoms, if it wants to remain a friendly place it needs rules as people aren't likely to self-censor.


This is an interesting point. What are people's impressions of dakka in the larger sense? To me, it seems to be full of people who really like to rag on the very thing it was set up to discuss and gets its name from (GW). On the other hand, the political discourse has been much more tame than pretty much every other board where I have contributed. What are others' perceptions? I guess that might be getting into off topic to this discussion though.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 06:46:46


Post by: djones520


Yeah, in terms of the perception, I've never once spoken to someone about Dakka, and had the OT forum come up.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 06:59:56


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 djones520 wrote:
Yeah, in terms of the perception, I've never once spoken to someone about Dakka, and had the OT forum come up.
So out of how many times have you spoken to someone about Dakka? Because I've simply never once spoken to someone about Dakka

IMO Dakka does have a bit of a reputation of being anti-GW, but honestly it's less anti-GW than my local gaming store For the most part the anti-GW stuff seems reasonable to me, most of the time it comes up because someone asked specifically for an opinion on something then some people get unhappy when other people express their honest anti-GW opinion about it.

I mostly feel OT brings down the level of Dakka's discourse. While I find OT interesting and sometimes enjoy flipping through it, I think it does make Dakka a less friendly place on a whole.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 07:05:38


Post by: djones520


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
Yeah, in terms of the perception, I've never once spoken to someone about Dakka, and had the OT forum come up.
So out of how many times have you spoken to someone about Dakka? Because I've simply never once spoken to someone about Dakka

IMO Dakka does have a bit of a reputation of being anti-GW, but honestly it's less anti-GW than my local gaming store For the most part the anti-GW stuff seems reasonable to me, most of the time it comes up because someone asked specifically for an opinion on something then some people get unhappy when other people express their honest anti-GW opinion about it.

I mostly feel OT brings down the level of Dakka's discourse. While I find OT interesting and sometimes enjoy flipping through it, I think it does make Dakka a less friendly place on a whole.


Well, I've been a member here for about 12 years, it's come up a time or two with various folks in gaming stores and the like. Dakka is one of the better known wargaming forums out there.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 07:13:46


Post by: Gordon Shumway


I was more referring to it in the sense of an online presence. I don't know if my significant other even knows it exits, even though I spend nearly as much time with you as her. For example, I split my time between here and B&C. From the people's perspective over there, just in general, this place seems like a cesspool. I don't agree, and based on the number of people I see in both places, I think most take it with a grain of salt, but the perception is there that dakka is a bit more scumpondish. I really don't think it was the OT boards they refer to. I could give an example from the front page as to how it is different. Look at Subtlediscords thread here vs. there. I won't follow it here. I will there. I'm not sure what the discrepancy is. Maybe they are more into modeling there? There are a lot of posters there that view themselves as hobbiests or artists that post there, and if they have the time, might include a post here. Krautscientist is another one. It's sort of a shame really. Again, I don't think it has anything to do do with OT. They aren't turned off by it, I don't think they even know it exists. It's the whole tone or tenor here. I genuinely love this place, but it sort of seems like a bad relationship at times. I realize that sounds really lame, and I should just stop typing and step away from the computer. I don't really know how else to express it. At times my dakka guys are my support; At times I want to kill them. But they are my family. Welcome to holiday meals.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 07:49:30


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


I haven't spent time at B&C, not in recent years at least, not since I stopped collecting my Space Wolves a long time ago. But B&C is a 40k forum centred on Space Marines. Dakka is much more a general wargaming forum centred on 40k.

So Dakka you have a whole heap of people who don't like or did like but now don't like 40k... but they hang around because Dakka covers a lot more discussion related to things that aren't 40k. B&C you aren't likely to be hanging around the forum in the first place unless you're a a specific passion for 40k and probably even more specifically Space Marines.

Because of that you're naturally going to get a bit less herd mentality on Dakka than you will on B&C.

I know when my interest in Space Marines and 40k waned I stopped going to B&C but I didn't stop visiting Dakka.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 08:37:11


Post by: Gordon Shumway


They opened it up a bit in the last few months, but that's interesting. I never had an interest in space marines, just chaos. And the two artists I mentioned up above weren't space marines either.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 11:40:42


Post by: Ketara


I've signed up to a few other forums in the past. My experience is that Dakka is certainly rougher than what used to be the most popular forum before Dakka (Warseer), but it's infinitely more mature/polite than BOLS ever was, and Heresy online was a literal cesspool of 13 year olds practising swearwords for the first time. Frothers on the flip side is a more mature audience, but is much rougher than Dakka

You tend to find that the smaller forums (B&C, Second Sphere, etc) have a much friendlier easygoing crowd as a rule of thumb, but they also tend to have a much narrower focus, and a much smaller userbase.

I suppose it really comes down to what you're after in a forum. At the end of the day, Dakka has the largest userbase and the widest variety of topics and discussion relating to the hobby, but it does absolutely insist on a veneer of civility. Whilst that gives a lot of room for snark and attitude to operate in (which some people might find offputting), it ensures that the discussion never descends too far into obscenities or downright offensiveness before being grabbed by the collar and slung out into the night. Naturally, some people do the 'Muh freedom of speech' schpiel because they're not allowed to be complete tools to other users, and others still dislike the fact that we don't crack down on every passive-aggressive comment. I personally find that Dakka strikes about the right balance between the two extremes though.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 12:01:57


Post by: Future War Cultist


This place is certainly rougher than 40k online. They were my first hobby site and their tolerance of snark and abuse is zero. Maybe it’s spoiled me a little.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 13:14:26


Post by: trexmeyer


Maybe compared to other GW fan sites it is a little rougher, but in comparison to forums in general Dakka is insanely tame. I have heard people discuss Dakka IRL but I believe it was just about the the trade forum. I only ever visit Dakka and Reddit anymore though.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 13:28:20


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 trexmeyer wrote:
I have an idea. Why not lower moderation standards for specifically the OT? Keep things that are blatantly NSFW out, keep the censor on, but people that cry over someone else calling them an idiot across the internet can either get over it, ignore the troll, or not take part.

Having read through the thread about August Ames in the OT forum I think it gives a harsh reminder why we should do our best to avoid attacking others on the internet and why it's a good thing that we have rules about it.

That was of course an extreme case, but you never know what someone might be going through IRL only to come on a toy soldier forum and then also be called an idiot by some random person they haven't even met.


Why the US politics ban is absurd and needs to go: @ 2017/12/09 19:15:08


Post by: Alpharius


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
 trexmeyer wrote:
I have an idea. Why not lower moderation standards for specifically the OT? Keep things that are blatantly NSFW out, keep the censor on, but people that cry over someone else calling them an idiot across the internet can either get over it, ignore the troll, or not take part.

It's less about individuals crying over being called an idiot and more about how dakka wants to present itself to the world.

At the end of the day, IMO, I think this forum wants to remain a friendly forum.

Less a place for gak slinging and more a place for friends to get together and have a chat, primarily about toy soldiers but occasionally about other stuff.

In my observations when I was living in the US when friends or colleagues who have different political views get together they tend to self-censor on political topics so that they can actually remain friends or colleagues

Since Dakka is a forum full of randoms, if it wants to remain a friendly place it needs rules as people aren't likely to self-censor.


This sums it up nicely - thanks!

And since there doesn't seem to be much more to add to the topic, and this thread itself seems top be having problems with Rule #1...

...I think we're done here.

Until next time!