Originally Posted by Hyde
Oh boy.
Do I have to explain to you why this belongs in this thread, or are you going to figure it out after reading the main post again?
NUDGE NUDGE WINK WINK
We'll see, at this point I think only Ele can be sure. I have no idea what he means when he says "structural". There is more than one way to interpret his statement and I am sceptical as to whether he has ambitions to get some of the forum's programmers involved but he has surprised me before.
Good morning sweet princess
I just meant 'fundamental' issues that have to do with the very basic make-up of the board.
How would anonymous posting 'take care of bullshitters', Hyde?
And Gorman, less rules are better, OK - but what rules/guidelines do you think we should have instead?
Same question goes to everyone - what do we like/dislike about the current guidelines + what new ones would you like to see considered?
How would anonymous posting 'take care of bullshitters', Hyde?
And Gorman, less rules are better, OK - but what rules/guidelines do you think we should have instead?
Same question goes to everyone - what do we like/dislike about the current guidelines + what new ones would you like to see considered?
Last edited by Ele; Mar 25, 2015 at 12:45 AM.
Originally Posted by Ele
I just meant 'fundamental' issues that have to do with the very basic make-up of the board.
How would anonymous posting 'take care of bullshitters', Hyde?
And Gorman, less rules are better, OK - but what rules/guidelines do you think we should have instead?
Same question goes to everyone - what do we like/dislike about the current guidelines + what new ones would you like to see considered?
Well see, I personally like to argue with particular people more regardless of the validity of their views. I will always oppose those people regardless of the logic I am presented with. However, if I don't know who I'm arguing with, discussion will be facilitated better than "god boredpayne you fucking suck, here's a whole bunch of bullshit which probably isn't true but contradicts what you're saying" which discussion always seems to become.
It wouldn't be terribly hard to implement.
Hoss.
Originally Posted by Hyde
Well see, I personally like to argue with particular people more regardless of the validity of their views. I will always oppose those people regardless of the logic I am presented with. However, if I don't know who I'm arguing with, discussion will be facilitated better than "god boredpayne you fucking suck, here's a whole bunch of bullshit which probably isn't true but contradicts what you're saying" which discussion always seems to become.
It wouldn't be terribly hard to implement.
Pls no anon-posting. At this point it's not even toribash forum anymore...
A big part of this sub is the people who post in it, anon posting will totally ruin it.
Originally Posted by Ele
And Gorman, less rules are better, OK - but what rules/guidelines do you think we should have instead?
I don't think any sub forum specific rules are necessary. So long as there is a topic then a discussion can happen - so maybe "All threads need a topic for users to discuss". Beyond that, nothing else is necessary.
Originally Posted by Zelda
Lets not focus on telling Hanz0 he is wrong please, this thread is for problems with the discussion forum in particular, if you have a problem with Hanz0 which you think is worth addressing properly try writing a complaint in the appropriate sub-forum.
Who's Hanz0 lol.
Originally Posted by Zelda
Often unmoderated discussions cease to be discussions after a while.
-----
Oh yeah, and personal digs are problematic because they can dissuade people from returning to the board. We just want people to be nice to each other.
Unmoderated discussions work fine. Moderators usually only close threads. How can a closed thread be considered a good discussion?
I don't think that's true about personal digs, and insults/flaming is already banned in global and site rules.
Originally Posted by hanz0
2. I think you misread my point there. I don't expect people to understand everything about a subject, just the really really really really fundamental basics, before they start asserting opinions. So in a thread about evolution I'd hope that the people discussing know (or try to find out), say, that acquired traits aren't heritable, what a theory is in science, that sort of thing. Nor am I advocating the shaming of questions - if the people in my sig-threads had asked for clarification and been willing to listen to the answers then those threads would have gone a different direction entirely. The first thread I actually did try to correct peoples' misconceptions for a while, and I don't even think I was that harsh about it. I tried, Gorman. I really tried.
I know you tried mate, but this isn't the kind of thing where you be nice once then you get a license to not be nice, you know?
You can't require people to change their opinion when presented with facts, or to acknowledge their ignorance. They believe themselves to be as right (or more so) than they believe you to be.
Originally Posted by hanz0
4. Again one of the more pure debate-only points. Though I do think there are threads that peter out because everyone (not just one person) ends up saying the same thing over and over, a better solution for gendisc would be for someone - whether mod or just a good poster - to attempt to guide the discussion towards a different facet of the topic.
Sure, but it's pretty rare for people to actually say the same things over and over again - and even if they do, is it really a problem? Other people can still post regardless. At the moment threads are often closed because someone thinks that 2 posters are going in circles, when in reality they are clarifying some points, and there are other posters posting normally in the thread too. If a thread /really/ peters out then people stop posting - which actually does happen. The assumption that the only way threads will die is if they are locked is very wrong.
People are free to necropost in this sub already (ignoring that 75% of the threads are locked for one reason or another). So if you just lock less threads then discussion can continue if people have actual interest.
Originally Posted by hanz0
Moderator actions:
A bla bla whatever.
B and C See my point 4. There's almost always different facets of a topic to discuss. Threads with real discussion topics should really only be closed if the discussion has gotten so toxic as to prevent legitimate discussion (and in those cases, it should be made clear that people wanting to continue a legitimate discussion are free to recreate the thread). Possibly also threads where bad discussion ("I HAVE AN OPINION AND YOU CAN'T DISAGREE WITH IT", "i too think racism/sexism/genocide is bad" circlejerks, OP doesn't want people to disagree [can't find the thread I'm thinking of here, will find it eventually because it was really weird and deserves to be remembered] etc. come to mind) has progressed to the point where it'd be easier to simply recreate the thread. In terms of the dress thread, the thread had already been closed and the OP had asked for information on the science behind it.
If people aren't required to read all posts then recreating threads isn't necessary. I know the thread you are talking about, and honestly I don't think it's that big of a problem. It was funny, but even if someone has an attitude like that you can still have a discussion with other users.
I guess I should note that I'm extremely against deleting posts. Edit the post and put a mod message, don't stealth infract.
Originally Posted by Hyde
Oh boy.
Do I have to explain to you why this belongs in this thread, or are you going to figure it out after reading the main post again?
NUDGE NUDGE WINK WINK
If we didn't have moderators no one would be saying "I don't think that belongs in this thread" ;)
I've been through a lot of accounts but to be fair I've been permabanned less than 10 times. Mostly they just get banned for a few days or months. I think the fact that my main is unbanned shows that the bans were invalid, right?
And you're one to talk! I seem to remember you using ILLEGAL alts when a certain moderator was in charge of discussion huh. Actually I'm pretty sure everyone who's been posting here more than a few years and posts regularly has alts. Maybe not bp tho (hanz0 pls confirm).
Last edited by ImmortalPig; Mar 25, 2015 at 11:29 AM.
<Faint> the rules have been stated quite clearly 3 times now from high staff
The problem is that discussions in written form are tedious and not very effective compared to discussions that can be done in real time via chat or similar things.
Remember the last interesting conversation you had and remember how much ground you covered in a matter of minutes. Now compare that to the average thread in discussion.
The only effective way to attract people to the discussion board would be knowledge that they couldn't acquire more easily elsewhere. http://historum.com/ is an excellent example of a discussion based forum that works very well because it's a gather of experts who exchange information about certain subjects.
That's not the case for the discussion board here. I don't see it happen either. Toribash related discussion happen everywhere all over the forums. The replay board is (presumably, I wouldn't know since I don't check it at all) filled with people discussing replay related problems.
As long as the discussion board does not have a defined purpose it has no purpose at all, so it does not work very effectively. As of now it's just the playground for a handful of active people who do not manage to produce particularly interesting content.
That playground could potentially be more interesting if it would be in an environment that isn't filled with 12 year old virgins who are obsessed with dolls.
what it boils down to is that there is nothing much you can do.
The only way to increase activity is by admitting more activity through lack of moderation. That's a rather sad attempt but if it's your only option go for it.
Alternatively you could just ask an admin to delete the board.
edit: One of the reasons why the content you active people produce is not interesting is the terrible way you format your posts. It isn't even fun to read your stuff if more than half of it is quotes, goddamnit.
Remember the last interesting conversation you had and remember how much ground you covered in a matter of minutes. Now compare that to the average thread in discussion.
The only effective way to attract people to the discussion board would be knowledge that they couldn't acquire more easily elsewhere. http://historum.com/ is an excellent example of a discussion based forum that works very well because it's a gather of experts who exchange information about certain subjects.
That's not the case for the discussion board here. I don't see it happen either. Toribash related discussion happen everywhere all over the forums. The replay board is (presumably, I wouldn't know since I don't check it at all) filled with people discussing replay related problems.
As long as the discussion board does not have a defined purpose it has no purpose at all, so it does not work very effectively. As of now it's just the playground for a handful of active people who do not manage to produce particularly interesting content.
That playground could potentially be more interesting if it would be in an environment that isn't filled with 12 year old virgins who are obsessed with dolls.
what it boils down to is that there is nothing much you can do.
The only way to increase activity is by admitting more activity through lack of moderation. That's a rather sad attempt but if it's your only option go for it.
Alternatively you could just ask an admin to delete the board.
edit: One of the reasons why the content you active people produce is not interesting is the terrible way you format your posts. It isn't even fun to read your stuff if more than half of it is quotes, goddamnit.
Last edited by Redundant; Mar 29, 2015 at 09:26 PM.
