He.geminicross wrote:I think she means political/controversial.
Season 2013 - Site suggestions
- caseyotis
- Member
- Posts: 680
- Joined: October 25th, 2012, 7:53 pm
- Division: C
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Season 2013 - Site suggestions
Well, I posted some in the spoiler in the post before my last post. xP Like gemini said, a lot of the "mature" issues are more controversial, although not all of them fall under the "mature" category. Some, like I said, can be very easy to talk about, like Pets and Recipes.starpug wrote:Care to elaborate a little more what these "Mature Discussion" threads would be about?caseyotis wrote:I was thinking of a "Mature Discussions" subsubforum to be added under the General Chat, like "Posting Games" and "The Polling Place". The Newsgathering thread could be the basis, like the Current Events thread in the forum that I mentioned in my last post. We don't have to though, and I'm sure we could have marked threads with certain discussable topics.
I just think it's worth a test run, because I know that there are plenty of members mature enough to discuss such topics with the rest of us, and I think it would enrich us and help us better understand those who we're posting with that we don't formally know.
No offense to anyone, but this site doesn't have a very good history of "debate" threads working out very well. I think we have a very nice community here where we can exchange ideas freely (or as freely as we are allowed to by our teams because god forbid we help the enemy) and I would be a little worried about wrecking that.
Well, I haven't been here for a year yet, so I guess I haven't experienced any of this. ._. I think that as long as the rules are followed, we can still exchange ideas in a friendly-debate sort of environment. In the aforementioned forum I was talking about, there are two moderators that only moderate (for lack of a better word) the debate subforum. They keep things in check, and I'm not saying that we should do this, but if it's too much additional stress for the mods/admins to handle, then it's an option, right? I don't think it should necessarily "wreck" the free exchange of ideas here.
Thank you.Cedavis6 wrote:He.geminicross wrote:I think she means political/controversial.
@gemini; you could have used they if you were unsure if I was a male or a female. But it's okay - lots of people get confused, and my name doesn't help at all.
http://scioly.org/wiki/index.php/User:Caseyotis
Welcome, welcome
Welcome, welcome
“Goodbye,” said the fox.
“And now here is my secret, a very simple secret:
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly;
what is essential is invisible to the
eye.”
Le Petit Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
“And now here is my secret, a very simple secret:
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly;
what is essential is invisible to the
eye.”
Le Petit Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
- caseyotis
- Member
- Posts: 680
- Joined: October 25th, 2012, 7:53 pm
- Division: C
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Season 2013 - Site suggestions
By forums, do you mean threads? I don't know - I personally think it should be separated, but it doesn't really matter. I just don't want to start a discussion thread in there.Cedavis6 wrote:I think all that stuff can best be induvidual forums in general chat. No subforum needed.
http://scioly.org/wiki/index.php/User:Caseyotis
Welcome, welcome
Welcome, welcome
“Goodbye,” said the fox.
“And now here is my secret, a very simple secret:
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly;
what is essential is invisible to the
eye.”
Le Petit Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
“And now here is my secret, a very simple secret:
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly;
what is essential is invisible to the
eye.”
Le Petit Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
-
- Member
- Posts: 72
- Joined: March 27th, 2012, 2:22 pm
- Division: Grad
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Season 2013 - Site suggestions
Yes, threads.caseyotis wrote:By forums, do you mean threads? I don't know - I personally think it should be separated, but it doesn't really matter. I just don't want to start a discussion thread in there.Cedavis6 wrote:I think all that stuff can best be induvidual forums in general chat. No subforum needed.
- geminicross
- Member
- Posts: 128
- Joined: July 9th, 2011, 9:34 am
- Division: C
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
-
- Admin Emeritus
- Posts: 932
- Joined: April 5th, 2008, 6:51 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: ME
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Season 2013 - Site suggestions
Well, of the ideas in that spoiler. One is already out right explicitly outlawed in the rules because on the old forum all it caused was constant fighting. Two really aren't appropriate for the type of people who come around these boards. This leaves one thread out of those four suggestions that isn't automatically disqualified.caseyotis wrote:Well, I posted some in the spoiler in the post before my last post. xP Like gemini said, a lot of the "mature" issues are more controversial, although not all of them fall under the "mature" category. Some, like I said, can be very easy to talk about, like Pets and Recipes.starpug wrote:Care to elaborate a little more what these "Mature Discussion" threads would be about?caseyotis wrote:I was thinking of a "Mature Discussions" subsubforum to be added under the General Chat, like "Posting Games" and "The Polling Place". The Newsgathering thread could be the basis, like the Current Events thread in the forum that I mentioned in my last post. We don't have to though, and I'm sure we could have marked threads with certain discussable topics.
I just think it's worth a test run, because I know that there are plenty of members mature enough to discuss such topics with the rest of us, and I think it would enrich us and help us better understand those who we're posting with that we don't formally know.
No offense to anyone, but this site doesn't have a very good history of "debate" threads working out very well. I think we have a very nice community here where we can exchange ideas freely (or as freely as we are allowed to by our teams because god forbid we help the enemy) and I would be a little worried about wrecking that.
Well, I haven't been here for a year yet, so I guess I haven't experienced any of this. ._. I think that as long as the rules are followed, we can still exchange ideas in a friendly-debate sort of environment. In the aforementioned forum I was talking about, there are two moderators that only moderate (for lack of a better word) the debate subforum. They keep things in check, and I'm not saying that we should do this, but if it's too much additional stress for the mods/admins to handle, then it's an option, right? I don't think it should necessarily "wreck" the free exchange of ideas here.
When this debate was brought up last night I went over and checked out the politics thread to refresh my memory of what was going on there and how it went. I was greeted with A LOT of bickering, there were points there where if one person hadn't handled things with as much civility, the whole thread would have quickly devolved into name calling, ad hominem, and other low down debate tactics. of my count after going through about 1/3 of the pages in the thread, admins actually issued two warnings to keep the debate civil.
You are partially correct, when you have these types of debate threads on the internet, they have to be heavily moderated. Even then, online newspapers and websites with comment sections have been increasingly going towards linking the ability to make comments with facebook so as to eliminate complete anonymity. People complain about the fact that spambots post things are we don't get rid of it fast enough. If we can't do that fast enough for you people, how well do you think we'll be able to fully police a discussion sub-forum? Adding more staff is not the answer to that question either.
Even if we managed to overcome/disregard all these obstacles and go ahead and do this subforum anyway. You can make as many rules as you want and you can display them everywhere in the subforum and no matter how well it's moderated and the mods and admins make sure everyone stay civil, I guarantee you that SOMEONE is going to get banned/post restricted because of the subforum. There is nothing any of us can do about it, it would happen, and it would continue to happen as long as the suggested subforum was open. Once someone has been banned/punished sometimes they shape up and sometimes they think they're being singled out or something like that and things just get worse. I really see no point in creating a subforum that is going to encourage (albeit unintentionally) people to do things that get them banned/punished by the staff.
Let's be clear, no one is attacking you caseyotis. It's an innovative idea, that on most any other forum would probably be a good addition. We just don't think it is a fit on scioly.org. Free exchange of ideas is cool and everything and we all realize the importance debate plays in the development of new ideas. We just don't think the trouble is worth while, especially when you can go almost anywhere else on the internet and get exactly the same discussions that you want us to have on scioly.org.
Here's a link to the Religion thread for reference if you want to take the time to see how bad it was http://scioly.org/obbarchive/read.php?TID=2570&page=1
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - Mark Twain
- PacificGoldenPlover
- Exalted Member
- Posts: 519
- Joined: April 10th, 2011, 6:51 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: CA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 4 times
Re: Season 2013 - Site suggestions
I have to say, after thinking about it, I (reluctantly) agree with starpug, that a politics thread might not be the best idea for the scioly.org forums.
To a certain extent, people should not really discuss a subject unless they have knowledge in it. It would be kind of silly otherwise. But most of us probably have had little, if any knowledge of politics. that's not to say we do not have strongly held views, but the essential ingredient missing is knowledge of the other side; the argument the other side makes. What I've noticed often is that younger people, especially middle schoolers, tend to live in the echo chamber; I know I did when I was that age, and since most middle schoolers rarely follow politics, they don't have a platform from which to meaningfully debate. Then the debate can descend into many things, talking points, stereotyping, ad hominem, or worse, all of which take the place of knowledgeable debate.
Now, of course there are exceptions. Plenty of adults when discussing politics behave like children, and there are some high schoolers and occasionally middle-schoolers who have the knowledge to meaningfully debate. However creating a forum for politics invites everyone into the fray, whether or not they have the knowledge or skills to debate such a complex subject as politics.
On another note, admins, have you considered creating a minimum post limit before someone can post links? It could be very low; perhaps as low as one post, so that some of the spambots get weeded out? Just an idea I saw on some other forums that I thought could be useful here.
To a certain extent, people should not really discuss a subject unless they have knowledge in it. It would be kind of silly otherwise. But most of us probably have had little, if any knowledge of politics. that's not to say we do not have strongly held views, but the essential ingredient missing is knowledge of the other side; the argument the other side makes. What I've noticed often is that younger people, especially middle schoolers, tend to live in the echo chamber; I know I did when I was that age, and since most middle schoolers rarely follow politics, they don't have a platform from which to meaningfully debate. Then the debate can descend into many things, talking points, stereotyping, ad hominem, or worse, all of which take the place of knowledgeable debate.
Now, of course there are exceptions. Plenty of adults when discussing politics behave like children, and there are some high schoolers and occasionally middle-schoolers who have the knowledge to meaningfully debate. However creating a forum for politics invites everyone into the fray, whether or not they have the knowledge or skills to debate such a complex subject as politics.
On another note, admins, have you considered creating a minimum post limit before someone can post links? It could be very low; perhaps as low as one post, so that some of the spambots get weeded out? Just an idea I saw on some other forums that I thought could be useful here.
Life List: n. A list of bird species definitively seen by a birdwatcher.
PacificGoldenPlover's Life List : 319
Most recent lifer: Red-throated Loon
2014 (Mira Loma/Troy/Regionals/States/Nationals)
Dynamic Planet (2/2/1/1/1)
Designer Genes (1/4/1/13 (???)/13 (figures)
Water Quality (1/1/3/1/3)
PacificGoldenPlover's Life List : 319
Most recent lifer: Red-throated Loon
2014 (Mira Loma/Troy/Regionals/States/Nationals)
Dynamic Planet (2/2/1/1/1)
Designer Genes (1/4/1/13 (???)/13 (figures)
Water Quality (1/1/3/1/3)
- geminicross
- Member
- Posts: 128
- Joined: July 9th, 2011, 9:34 am
- Division: C
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Season 2013 - Site suggestions
Yeah, though I personally would love to express my liberal viewpoints on a thread
I can see how it could end up basically becoming a "less than mature" discussion on topics like gay marriage, welfare, abortion, VRA, Affirmative Action, and the like.
The last thing we need is someone taking an issue to far and it getting personal. Which is when the flaming starts...
I can see how it could end up basically becoming a "less than mature" discussion on topics like gay marriage, welfare, abortion, VRA, Affirmative Action, and the like.
The last thing we need is someone taking an issue to far and it getting personal. Which is when the flaming starts...
-
- Member
- Posts: 265
- Joined: May 25th, 2013, 6:25 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: IN
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Season 2013 - Site suggestions
I think there should be an emoticon for a facepalm (sorry if this was brought up before-I just searched the thread for 'facepalm' and didn't come up with anything...)
Kinda like this:
Or this:
EDIT: maybe 'facepalm' isn't the right word. It would convey this but in a more severe sense I guess.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q= ... 6883051235
Kinda like this:
Or this:
EDIT: maybe 'facepalm' isn't the right word. It would convey this but in a more severe sense I guess.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q= ... 6883051235
Last edited by Crazy Puny Man on July 31st, 2013, 6:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests