JMC wrote: How about a forum for heavily moderated political discussion. No name calling , no stupid personal attacks , kind of an anti -ring? Serious only and a different level?
Sounds fine, I would use both. Sounds like the courthouse, but lots of topics are ignored there by the same people that are complaining. I started a few serious topics in the courthouse and most died after 5 posts so I gave up. I guess people are attracted to the controversy and go to the ring. WTF? oops
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
I am wondering which leftist guerrilla decided to request the moderated board. The problem with a moderated board is simple, the moderation is always slanted toward to the filtering individual(s). Rarely does it work.
If you want to have structured debates, decide on the topic, use basic debate rules, then assign a certain number of participants and assign three judges. Otherwise, the left will always call the right trolls when they push a topic hard and it gets heated. In most of the hotly contested debates on this and other 285 forums, it's typically the leftist guerrillas who push the buttons of the right by name calling or making insults.
I am wondering which leftist guerrilla decided to request the moderated board. The problem with a moderated board is simple, the moderation is always slanted toward to the filtering individual(s). Rarely does it work.
See this is why we don't use the word moderation or moderators. Let's go back to one of our first posts.
All forums need moderation, it is just how you do it. We will NEVER be like some other sites that make decisions on content. (not talking only about the ones in the area)
It is about moving posts to where they belong to make it easier to read. We will NOT BE judging posts or delete, edit etc. Extra moderation would be moving them to another thread within the ring. Keep in mind it does take alot of time on our part to move things around. And it would make our job easier if we are sure that everyone understands where things go but it is our job to ORGANIZE and protect our site and members from harm, nothing more.
We have made a commitment over and over and kept it.
This is a community-based website and the forums on this site are provided for the enjoyment of all members. We respect the opinions of all members and have not and will not censor posts based on content.
Residenttroll wrote: If you want to have structured debates, decide on the topic, use basic debate rules, then assign a certain number of participants and assign three judges. Otherwise, the left will always call the right trolls when they push a topic hard and it gets heated. In most of the hotly contested debates on this and other 285 forums, it's typically the leftist guerrillas who push the buttons of the right by name calling or making insults.
You seriously see this forum that way? You think it's mostly the lefties that name call and make insults? Really?
I'd volunteer to moderate, but nobody would like it.
Any posts addressing the poster rather than the idea would be moved to the ring.
Any misspelling of proper nouns in order to convey a negative impression or insult would be moved to the ring.
Simple dismissals of topics as irrelevant or 'outrage of the day' would be moved to the ring.
IDs would be IP checked - one ID per person. Aliases would be outted and moved to the ring.
Any generic references to 'the left' or 'the right' would be removed as irrelevant.
Looking at most of the political threads, I realize that means it would be a blank forum.
That's why I don't moderate any forums. I'm not moderate.
"Whatever you are, be a good one." ~ Abraham Lincoln
The whole idea of moderation is what caused most of us to leave Pinecam.
Yes we get out of hand many times, and yes it gets unruly, but it truly is a lot of fun this way and I would hate to see it change. After all, we all love our neighbors, don't we?
