Tacky and desperate.

Science Chic wrote:

Raees wrote:

I think we'd have a lot more enlightening, interesting, diverse conversations with a bigger more active group of posters if people would stick to picking apart issues and providing their opinion on events, and actions and statements by our representatives rather than picking on each other here.

Personally, I don't think an online forum where people can be anonymous lends itself to the sort of discussions you wish for. I also think those sorts of discussions are boring to read. If I want intelligent political discussions, I'll wait for in-person give and takes with real people with real identities. The anonymous lax moderation scenario lends itself to trolls popping in and derailing any meaningful discussions. I also think many on here like to put people in pre-defined boxes and go from there.

I could be wrong. I frequently am.

I've checked out other forums and I think it can happen. (Did you see my last post in the The Stupid Things You Do Online (and How to Fix Them) thread about an analysis of Internet discussion groups with anonymous users finding that "the tone of online discussions was positive or neutral 85% of the time"?) I have a hunch that this forum, and the political portion of this site in particular, just has a hurdle to push through of people who became familiar with how things were run elsewhere in this community, and unprofessional treatment by some of those who run it, that cause them to post the way they do now based on previous expectations/habit, compounded with an exciting realization that they won't get suspended or banned just for posting "baiting and insulting" remarks here. If you go to brand new forums in communities that didn't have online forums before, you get vastly differing spectrum of behaviors and they aren't all automatically negative. The personal-ness of posts, and familiarity of many regulars here with each other definitely do make it more fun as straight-up, issues-only posts would be dry and boring, but there's a line between being personal and questioning, and being judgmental and mean. Trolls can be dealt with, both by the members themselves and by the moderators, and the Ignore/Foe function serves its purpose very well for that - if they realize that they don't get the attention they want, and their efforts to disrupt a forum won't work, they move on to easier pickings.

Putting people in pre-defined boxes is simple human nature, prevalent everywhere, because it's easier. It takes patience, effort, curiosity, and a willingness to listen and remain open-minded to find out that that new person you are talking to is unique and believes a blended spectrum of things due to their life experiences and that's a whole lot harder to do (but more fun if you accept the challenge!).

Science Chic wrote: Hey, it's not like the being offensive is wanted or encouraged; if you have any ideas on how to improve it without turning it into a heavily moderated site, I'm all ears. I think we'd have a lot more enlightening, interesting, diverse conversations with a bigger more active group of posters if people would stick to picking apart issues and providing their opinion on events, and actions and statements by our representatives rather than picking on each other here.

Nobody that matters wrote: It was a joke, but thanks for being so serious about it.

Heisenberg wrote:

Science Chic wrote: Hey, it's not like the being offensive is wanted or encouraged; if you have any ideas on how to improve it without turning it into a heavily moderated site, I'm all ears. I think we'd have a lot more enlightening, interesting, diverse conversations with a bigger more active group of posters if people would stick to picking apart issues and providing their opinion on events, and actions and statements by our representatives rather than picking on each other here.

I agree 100%. But you know SC, it's just like going to a party where one guy takes a dump in the punch bowl. I've tried over the years to have civil constructive debates in the courthouse (kinda like what is allowed in an actual courthouse) but have been told by both sides that it's just not possible. It is possible for me, but I've accepted this atmosphere of name calling and blanket generalizations. Don't ask me why I stick around... I can't explain that any other way than Einstien's definition of insanity.

You must notice that we rarely ever get any new voices in here right? I mean, how many members do you have total and how many those are willing to jump into the mudpit? The Ring is a great idea but comments worthy of the ring stay here for the most part. You don't have to have a heavily moderated site, but you could easliy have one little section for people who want to discuss the issues and the mudslingers could get flushed with one click of your mouse. JMO.

Democracy4Sale wrote:

Nobody that matters wrote: It was a joke, but thanks for being so serious about it.

Yes... I know it was supposed to be a joke... But like all of your usual attempts at "humor", it wasn't humor, it was snark...And I responded appropriately.

CinnamonGirl wrote:

Heisenberg wrote:

Science Chic wrote: Hey, it's not like the being offensive is wanted or encouraged; if you have any ideas on how to improve it without turning it into a heavily moderated site, I'm all ears. I think we'd have a lot more enlightening, interesting, diverse conversations with a bigger more active group of posters if people would stick to picking apart issues and providing their opinion on events, and actions and statements by our representatives rather than picking on each other here.

I agree 100%. But you know SC, it's just like going to a party where one guy takes a dump in the punch bowl. I've tried over the years to have civil constructive debates in the courthouse (kinda like what is allowed in an actual courthouse) but have been told by both sides that it's just not possible. It is possible for me, but I've accepted this atmosphere of name calling and blanket generalizations. Don't ask me why I stick around... I can't explain that any other way than Einstien's definition of insanity.

You must notice that we rarely ever get any new voices in here right? I mean, how many members do you have total and how many those are willing to jump into the mudpit? The Ring is a great idea but comments worthy of the ring stay here for the most part. You don't have to have a heavily moderated site, but you could easliy have one little section for people who want to discuss the issues and the mudslingers could get flushed with one click of your mouse. JMO.

Easy way to fix it... Only respond to posts that appeal to you and don't respond on the ones you feel are not going to discuss.