Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 whembly wrote:
I've been here a long time...and I've never seen a hot OT forum discussion spill over to the other forums really. Hell, me and Peregrine/Ouze/dusa would butt heads in OT, but then have cordial conversations about the hobby in the hobby subforums or PMs.

It wasn't that the specific discussion would spill over, it's that the attitude resulting from it would do so. And yes, we saw it many times. The most common fallout was just general sniping, but that still leads to less cordial discussion overall. The more extreme cases led to silliness like 'This guy disagreed with me on politics, so now I'm going to go and report every post he made elsewhere on the forums...', or people 'following' other posters around specifically to disagree with them.


And to be clear, that wasn't the justification for killing politics discussion, just a contributing factor. The bigger issue was the continual drain on moderator time resulting from that discussion within the OT forum.

 insaniak wrote:

 whembly wrote:
I've been here a long time...and I've never seen a hot OT forum discussion spill over to the other forums really. Hell, me and Peregrine/Ouze/dusa would butt heads in OT, but then have cordial conversations about the hobby in the hobby subforums or PMs.

It wasn't that the specific discussion would spill over, it's that the attitude resulting from it would do so. And yes, we saw it many times. The most common fallout was just general sniping, but that still leads to less cordial discussion overall. The more extreme cases led to silliness like 'This guy disagreed with me on politics, so now I'm going to go and report every post he made elsewhere on the forums...', or people 'following' other posters around specifically to disagree with them.


And to be clear, that wasn't the justification for killing politics discussion, just a contributing factor. The bigger issue was the continual drain on moderator time resulting from that discussion within the OT forum.

Understood.

Thanks for explaining.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Dakka doesn't have a long history of discussion about the use of pine cones for auto-erotic purposes, but it does have a long history of pretty decent political debate, which went downhill and collapsed. As an example, I'd called for the Muslim population of the UK to be put in concentration campsback during the time period I first joined Dakka I would've been perma-banned faster than you could say "specific>general". From my perspective, what changed was an unwillingness or inability of the moderators to stop people dragging down threads with insane arguments, many times blatantly using the heckler's veto to shut down discussions they didn't want people having. Instead of permabanning repeat offenders, the mods axed politics as a subject.

In the last 5 years, Dakka has a record of political topics devolving into jackassery 95% of the time, +/- 10%. Yes, 105% is within the realm of possible due to the severity / trickle down effect.

Whereas there have been no instances of the discussion of auto-eroticism involving nature’s love-bristle devolving. We are indeed doing so right now in a civilized manner. Which kind of goes to show why if this topic can be discussed with civility, and is inappropriate for this site, that a topic that generates actual hate between users should be left elsewhere.

PS: If you’re looking for some stimulating coniferous fanfic (generic you, not specific) I know a guy that knows a guy that knows a tree that writes stuff that will spark your timber, if you catch my drift. Send me a PM.

Any one ever thought that it might be a good idea to have some sort of system similar to what they do in parliaments, but this would require probably a few moderators. If some one says some thing offensive or seemingly trying to cause an argument instead of a civil polite discussion, they could have the opportunity by a moderator to say they Withdraw there statement, and unless they type that they withdraw what they said, they get banned from the politics section for X amount of time?

Lol just a suggestion. Not a conspiracy

Edit - Not that i care, because i believe the admins are correct that politics should not be allowed. But i just thought i should make this suggestion, i don't care what happens.

I should whip you with a pine bough. Gettin’ my freak on

Why is it so hard to accept the people running the site do not want to allow politics? Their house, their rules. They could give any reason and it would be a valid one because they are running it and honestly at this point I would not even be surprised if they banned discussing the ban because some people are just being a pain about it.

Maybe a six-month hiatus on discussing the ban? That way we can all save up our best material for a semi-annual cluster-coning? I call the Coulter Pine cones. Google them. They’re mine.

I love this.

"We banned politics so it wouldn't cause problems!"

*politics still causing problems"

"It's working!"

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
This thread is not for discussion of moderation policies, it is for the site management to state the policy regarding this section.

Where then?

In the nuts and blocked Departement?

Nuts and Bolts would be a valid place.

The point is that sticky type threads placed by the moderation team to explain rules and policies need to be kept clear so that the rules and policies can be easily referred to by users.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
I love this.

"We banned politics so it wouldn't cause problems!"

*politics still causing problems"

"It's working!"

As we know, quantity and severity are meaningless.

Not Online!!! wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Where though? Inside dakka? What that helps when it damages whole dakka community then though? It wouldn't be just left in that area but damage community outside that unmoderated area.

A read both suggestions, B that is not a fact

Not fact based on what? We have actual evidence of it happening. What evidence you have AGAINST it?

Actual in practice evidence>theoryhammering.

Minimalist moderating isn't viable either. You need to stamp down on the offensive behaviour. That's not minimalist moderation. It's actually what there was. Which was still not enough.

Have you actual evidence, please enlighten me then, if not then i stand by my point.
Because you saying it happened is neither valuable for statistics nor correct in a perspective of the philosophy of running a Forum.

Evidence is that it already has happened showing it can happen.

Have YOU got any evidence it will not happen period? What happened? Did humanity in the between get their genes rewritten? That's neccessary to ensure it's 100% sure to NOT happen again when it already happened.

Please. Show your evidence that shows it's 100% sure to not happen what already happened. I'm waiting. Not holding my breath though as I'll be waiting infinitely so would be dead.

I will say that because of the politics discussion, I have lost all respect for certain posters. I would likely not give them any sort of a benefit of the doubt that they are posting in good faith somewhere else.

Well, if we want to keep things simple, the mods just do a ritual that if someone gets out of control in the politics section or lets political arguments spill over into other sections of the forum, Kairos Fateweaver sticks the Staff of Change through your monitor and turns you into a Chaos Spawn.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Why is it so hard to accept the people running the site do not want to allow politics? Their house, their rules. They could give any reason and it would be a valid one because they are running it and honestly at this point I would not even be surprised if they banned discussing the ban because some people are just being a pain about it.

Because, when someone is doing a poor job of running a site, they get feedback on it. The fact that they want to do something one way does not mean that they are immune to criticism. In fact, there is an entire section of the forum for providing feedback and suggesting that the people running the site change their rules for their house.

If you wanna talk politics, why not go to a place to talk politics?
Why is it so hard to just accept it, move on and just get your fix somewhere else.
I personally and happy, politics infect everything now and I want a place where it doesn't and this place is among the closest.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
If you wanna talk politics, why not go to a place to talk politics?
Why is it so hard to just accept it, move on and just get your fix somewhere else.
I personally and happy, politics infect everything now and I want a place where it doesn't and this place is among the closest.

Yes politics infects every thing, that's why its hard not to talk about it, and being that this website is a place where we all share similar interests, its interesting to hear others dakka users opinions related to politics. Most of us i would say dont want to open up another website and start discussing stuff where you don't really know any thing about the population that is participating in the discussion. Its just nice to discuss among fellow wargamers, and for some one like my self, i like to stick to one website, and its kind of hard to talk in-depth about alot of issues with no politics. But this is just my opinion and thoughts. No offense to any one. But i do agree it should not be allowed based on what admins have said ( causes to much ill feeling between users ).

It's time to drop the politics arguments and move on, people. The policy is not changing.

What about referring to 40k's politics?

Like i mean, can you start talking about fascist space marines and homophobic policy's that one may interpret in 40k? And then continue with theory's of this or that regarding ones own perceived perspective of politics in 40k.

Or was that some of the most dumbest gak i have ever said on this website?

The ban on politics and religion applies to the OT section. Topics that are relevant to 40K are fine for the appropriate 40K sections, provided they stay civil and on-topic (ie: away from modern-day, real-world politics).

 insaniak wrote:
The ban on politics and religion applies to the OT section. Topics that are relevant to 40K are fine for the appropriate 40K sections, provided they stay civil and on-topic (ie: away from modern-day, real-world politics).

Yeah. cool.

Thanks.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
If you wanna talk politics, why not go to a place to talk politics?
Why is it so hard to just accept it, move on and just get your fix somewhere else.
I personally and happy, politics infect everything now and I want a place where it doesn't and this place is among the closest.

Interestingly, a similar argument was made in another forum I'm a member of regarding posting guidelines that the staff were considering.

Someone saying pretty much that kicked off the biggest flame war in the history of the site and the staff could not bring it under control short of shutting the forums down.

So, always be careful telling people you disagree with to GTFO and respect rule 1. Because otherwise it could be you that leaves.

Edited by RiTides

While it is definitely a more civilised place now, I do have to admit I miss the old OT. It is honestly kinda boring now.

Anyways, there were very valid reasons for shutting it down, and I don't think lifting the ban would be a good idea unless the mods feel like putting in overtime again or decide to turn OT into a total wasteland.

I know this is ridiculous.

Like its not a place to "go wild", its very limited.

Edit - Also sucks when users can pm you with religious stuff, yet cant discuss it more broadly in the open in the "wild" offtopic section.

Alas, some subjects must be bred in captivity.

That last thing we need is our own Horus Heresy... and I do not regret that joke.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
That last thing we need is our own Horus Heresy... and I do not regret that joke.

These are extreme predictions and i don't think realistic in the sense of having a few threads with a few heated discussions easily moderated by some willing volunteers.

I know, just saying it would be bad if it did happen.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
I know, just saying it would be bad if it did happen.

Lol yeah it would be pretty damn nasty.

"Easily moderated by some willing volunteers?"
Who are these willing volunteers, exactly? Because from what I've seen, the existing Mods are not exactly jumping at the idea.

 Dark Apostle 666 wrote:
"Easily moderated by some willing volunteers?"
Who are these willing volunteers, exactly? Because from what I've seen, the existing Mods are not exactly jumping at the idea.

Indeed, they are busy enough as is.