Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Tiara on April 13, 2004, 05:33:08 pm
-
[RANT]
Why not? We have topics about cocks, wangs, tallywhackers, etc (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,22894.0.html), Girl scout cookies (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,22313.0.html) and AIDS bombs (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,22881.0.html) for crying out loud.
Now a thread with political CARTOONS (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,22894.0.html) gets locked. And I stress the cartoon part. Really, nobody is forced into those threads and they can still be locked if need be. It seems to me like you guys should either have some policy about ALL topics that are not for on this board or just moderate in a normal manner cause this is just getting a bit weird.
Just my 2 cents. If you, the admins, disagree, just lock this damned thread but it's just a bit annoying to see all kinds of nonsense topics sprout everywhere while a more intelligent political conversation is denied. I know they sometimes get a bit overheated but that's politics for ya. You can always lock it then.
Bleh... :blah:
[/RANT]
-
Time of the month?
*runs*
-
an0n? hush.
Tiara, point well taken... I can't and won't speak for the other admins but this does merit some consideration :nod:
-
No, not that time :p :D
Yet...
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Point well taken... I can't and won't speak for the other admins but this does merit some consideration :nod:
THANK YOU!
:D
Sorry, but I just luv' being right.
-
The axe weilding maniac has a point.
Edit:
I'm a mod on my university's discussion board. On there, we run into all kinds of issues pertaining to people's posts not only violating board regulations but also university regulations as a whole. The problem with political threads is that people can sometimes convey a reasonable argument using unreasonable terms which can seem to be xenophobic, racist, aetc.
The other main problem is that electronic communication often leads to misinterpretation of the speakers meaning. You can't see thier body language, thier facial expressions, or hear thier tone of voice.
I think the combination of both of them in a very multicultural board such as HLP is asking for trouble, but good admins can handle these things. Just ease off the lock button guys, and everyone else remember to be careful HOW you say things. :)
-
buh-DUM. ;)
-
[color=66ff00]Generally I see it this way: Sandwich likes to keep us updated on his view of what goes on in Isreal. It's important to him.
I don't take part in that kind of discussion so I rarely see where it goes.
As for the cartoons, as I said I was more concerned about the anti american sentiment than the actual cartoons themselves. I may not like america but I don't have to run around screaming about it at every chance I get ad nauseam. Politics is ok provided it's sensibly discussed. The cartoons were obviously inflammatory and the thread title belied the tone in which they were posted.
I don't really take part in either religious or political threads because I see circular arguments (best description I can think of) the only time I step in is when someone reports a grievance or when the thread degenerates into petty bickering.
I considered locking the syny-whatsit *goes to find dictonary* thread but it's more dumb humour than anything else and is entertaining rather than offensive. If you have a genuine problem with it then say so and we'll try to accomodate you as best as is possible. Silly threads I have few problems with, they generally dissapear fairly quickly at any rate.
It's hard to find a balance or to please everyone but I tend to allow for things that are amusing or entertaining and lock threads that are inclined to make people unhappy.
[/color]
-
I suggest either opening a politics forum which is auto-pruned every 10 days, or directing people to NW where I can thin the herd until everyone agrees with me and all those who refuse to are banned. That way you'd have a valid reason for nuking politico threads and you could say things like "It's not our fault you pissed off an0n" when they started whining.
Simple.
-
[q]The cartoons were obviously inflammatory[/q]
Political commentary is not inflammatory, it's called free speech within a free society Maeg, be careful not to blur the line between the two.
-
Originally posted by vyper
[q]The cartoons were obviously inflammatory[/q]
Political commentary is not inflammatory, it's called free speech within a free society Maeg, be careful not to blur the line between the two.
Firstly: No, it's satire.
Secondly: Stop trying to start ANOTHER political debate.
-
[color=66ff00]This forum does not hold with american doctrine, it is international and thus a far more sensible approach must be taken.
Free speech is all good and well but what you see as 'just an opinion' others may take great offense to.
[/color]
-
Translation: "Shut the **** up. We'll do as we please!"
-
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]Generally I see it this way: Sandwich likes to keep us updated on his view of what goes on in Isreal. It's important to him.
I don't take part in that kind of discussion so I rarely see where it goes.
As for the cartoons, as I said I was more concerned about the anti american sentiment than the actual cartoons themselves. I may not like america but I don't have to run around screaming about it at every chance I get ad nauseam. Politics is ok provided it's sensibly discussed. The cartoons were obviously inflammatory and the thread title belied the tone in which they were posted.
I don't really take part in either religious or political threads because I see circular arguments (best description I can think of) the only time I step in is when someone reports a grievance or when the thread degenerates into petty bickering.
I considered locking the syny-whatsit *goes to find dictonary* thread but it's more dumb humour than anything else and is entertaining rather than offensive. If you have a genuine problem with it then say so and we'll try to accomodate you as best as is possible. Silly threads I have few problems with, they generally dissapear fairly quickly at any rate.
It's hard to find a balance or to please everyone but I tend to allow for things that are amusing or entertaining and lock threads that are inclined to make people unhappy.
[/color]
My view on this is when a thread is clearly intended for amusement (like the cartoon one), that anyone who doesn't see that and comes in just to make trouble should be kicked in the sack. Hard. They're ruining it for most people.
Again, you're not forced into those threads.
I mean, you should ban the people who irrationally argue with people in such thread. Not locking the entire thread depriving everyone else of a good discussion. I can undersatand it when you lock a thread when it gets out of hand and I'm all for that. But also look at who was irrational and point that out. And if they continue to display their inability to have a proper discussion, simply ban them (temporarily at first ofcourse).
The problem does not lie with the topics, it lies with the ones who post in it in an irrational manner.
All points of view can be discussed in a rational manner. If one is uncapable of doing so, that person should be taken down. Not the thread itself or even the entire possibility of discussing a particular topic.
-
[q]Free speech is all good and well but what you see as 'just an opinion' others may take great offense to.[/q]
Let's call off the next UK election, someone might get offended that a party calls for us to pull out of europe. :wtf:
-
I certainly won't.
-
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]
Free speech is all good and well but what you see as 'just an opinion' others may take great offense to.
[/color]
Those people don't deserve to be on this board. They can't argue in a rational manner and tend to pick a fight and cause the thread to be locked. Deal with them seperately.
I'm more then willing to moderate political topics if you guys don't wanna you know. *wink wink* *hint hint* :p :D :p
-
[color=66ff00]That I agree with, I have a tendancy to stop things before they start I must say. Some have accused me of over reacting and perhaps they are correct but caution is in my nature.
I'd rather be cautious and close something that could evoke strong responses from many (something an anti american thread generally does) than let it slide and watch people who come here with an interest in freespace be put off by something unrelated.
This site is primarily devoted to Freespace and gaming afterall and I moderate with that in mind.
[/color]
-
Well, the problem is here is keeping everyone happy. The British sense of humour is just fine with this kind of thing, for example, after all, watch a few episodes of Spitting Image and these cartoons are nothing.
However, there is a possibility that the cartoon thread would explode into a massive flamefest about Iraq/Israel/USA, an awful lot of them seem to do that these days :(
So while I can very much laugh at the humour, and am glad Mik pointed these out, I just think Maeg was trying to head off another one of what Carl describes as those threads.
I suppose in hindsight it might have been better to post something like 'Play nice or I lock the thread, just to let you know ;)' but then, hindsight is always clearest. :)
-
Make me the HLP Intelligence Admin and I'll do some......'cleaning'.
You'll never need to worry about the mental hygiene of the members again.
-
:shaking:
And who would pay for keeping our mental health if you were in charge then?
-
I'll go ahead and put in my 2 cents, my general opinion is more in line with Maeg's than this may seem but that's not my point. While I have no problem with a strict moderation over the political threads on this board, (so long as it is done without bias) that stands only so long as it is uniform. What I think is at issue here is the thread that was locked was not actually a political thread so much as one for posting our favorite satire (ROFLMAO to the Nascar one, by the way, since I can't say it in the thread where it came up) and which can generally be interpreted to be less serious and, well, quite frankly hateful, than some of the political threads that have gone on here for days. So I guess my point is, I would like to see the moderation either take a consistant stand on the politics, period, or to see moderation in general act more to stomp out the inflamatory posting behavior. By either standard, though, Mikhael's thread should have earned nothing more than a title change.
-
Excuse me, but the cartoon--and the site I liked--were not "anti-american". The were critical of American policies and critical of people critical of those policies. In point of fact, the cartoons had a pretty good mix of conservative and liberal, democrat and republican, pro-war and anti-war, etc.
If it was the TITLE of the thread you objected to, perhaps you should read some of the other threads. I was directly quoted Liberator, who implied that any satire or political commentary critical of America or its government and policies was "utter hatred of the USA". It was, point of fact, satire.
Perhaps a little discussion, or maybe a sense of humor, is in order here.
If not, just tell me to shut the hell up.
-
It's not aimed at you Mik, it's just that there are too many people around who want to take things personally. I thought the pictures were brilliant, well, the ones I understood, being British and all, some of the political aspects pass me by :(
But it would just take one post by someone saying something about US's policies in Iraq or something, and then someone else will reply and before you know it, a perfectly innocent thread becomes a Political flamewar.
I don't think Maeg was closing the thread because of what you posted, more because of what was doomed to follow from less mature members. As for the title, well, I know what inverted commas mean ;)
-
Actually, Flipside, you're incorrect:
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]
As for the cartoons, as I said I was more concerned about the anti american sentiment than the actual cartoons themselves. I may not like america but I don't have to run around screaming about it at every chance I get ad nauseam. Politics is ok provided it's sensibly discussed. The cartoons were obviously inflammatory and the thread title belied the tone in which they were posted.
[/color]
Of course, if Maeg had looked beyond a few cartoons, he'd have seen stuff that wasn't "inflammatory". The title which "belied the tone in which they were posted", I should point out was in quotes to make it obvious to pretty much anyone familiar with the english language that it was intended as either sarcasm, humor, satire or possibly all three.
For the love of Joe, can anyone who has EVER read anything I've written believe for a moment that I would espouse "utter hatred for the USA"?
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Of course, if Maeg had looked beyond a few cartoons, he'd have seen stuff that wasn't "inflammatory". The title which "belied the tone in which they were posted", I should point out was in quotes to make it obvious to pretty much anyone familiar with the english language that it was intended as either sarcasm, humor, satire or possibly all three.
For the love of Joe, can anyone who has EVER read anything I've written believe for a moment that I would espouse "utter hatred for the USA"?
I wasn't going to say anything, but all one has to do to see that the thread cannot have been 100% serious was to look at your location, and that's not giving any provisions to the fact that you are a long-standing member of this community who's voiced opinions in the past in a relatively inoffensive manner. I also found Maeg's particular interpretation singularly odd. It's especially odd seeing as how the thread that "inspired" that title (which I would guess was Anon's "BSE: Another reason to hate America" thread) was never locked down to begin with. Granted, that thread got off the political bandwagon with some n00b jokes and died, but the point still stands. The Fajulla thread wasn't ever closed either, and it got pretty nasty before it died off. This one actually had a chance to lighten the air I thought, but I can see how it could get misinterpreted. The standard isn't being held straight nonetheless.
-
wrong button, ignore this
-
last i checked mik was american
-
[color=66ff00]Hmmm, I seem to have stepped in quite a quagmire here, I locked the thread because I saw how the fajulla thread and an0n's anti american thread went.
I took them as examples of how things tend to go. Unlike moderators I've encountered on other forums I'm not of the opinion that my decision is final, I'm often wrong as a matter of fact and in this case I think that the best option is to as has been suggested rename the thread and open it again.
[/color]
-
Aw c'mon people, its 2 freaking pages over the course of maybe 3-4 hours. Why do you do this to me?
*sigh*
*starts reading*
-
If you put the posts-per-page up, it'll only be one page.
And I'd like to point out that if I had Admin powers, there'd be no religious or political debates. Simply because people are smart enough to know that if they try that **** with me: BAM! They're gone.
So, if I were to be accidentally granted full admin powers.......
-
Still on about the admin thing An0n? You already have NW, isn't that enough? :p
-
It would be if NW actually had a purpose and more than 5 active members.
Besides, NW is relatively tard-free because no-one with, shall we say 'contrary' political and operational ideologies is stupid enough to rear their deformed head.
So I've got no-one to *****slap around.....except for kasperl.
-
As for the cartoons, as I said I was more concerned about the anti american sentiment than the actual cartoons themselves.
This bugs me, cause when its anti-palestinian, or anti-french people usually accept it, and no admins own it.
Why is anti-american messages considered worse then the above? And if so, is this double standard elsewhere in the forums?
I mean no harm by this post, but like the first post exclaims. You must have a direct rule making it wrong all around, and not just pick and choose which topics to lock because you feel its not right.
Being an admin is not about emotion, its about making sure rules are followed, period.
-
I'm really starting to get sick of political topics here on HLP. I'm about ready to start closing every one that pops up.
Better yet, I'll just throw them all into one thread.
And no, we are not opening up a politics forum or anything of the sort.
-
Can I at least get banning powers?
-
[color=66ff00]Now here's a fact:
Shrike; the buck stops there. :nod:
[/color]
-
I always knew he had a thing for horses, but deer too?
-
Originally posted by Shrike
I'm really starting to get sick of political topics here on HLP. I'm about ready to start closing every one that pops up.
Better yet, I'll just throw them all into one thread.
And no, we are not opening up a politics forum or anything of the sort.
Care to make a list of topics Shrike doesn't want posted so the rest of us don't have to put up with YOUR moody ass, Shrike? Should we avoid discussion of religion? How about discussion of 3d modelling programs (that borders on religious wars).
You really, truly, honestly don't have to read any topic after you realized its a topic you don't like. You could always, I dunno, wait for a complaint.
But hey, its your toybox. You can do whatever the hell you want with your toys. Just be so kind as to tell the rest of us ahead of time so we don't accidentally step on your toes.
-
The Laws of Wonderland
[list=1]- No religion
- No politics
- No ATI/Radeon debates
- No Linux/MS debates
- No making statements which have little or no basis in fact
- No posting pictures of Shrike having sex with any kind of animal
- No references to Maeglamor's "Lucky Charms"
- No warez
- No porn
- No refering to Thunder as 'Kalfireth'
There ya go. A comprehensive set of rules for HLP.
-
1) No religion - EXCELLENT - that means everyone is atheist - finally rationalism
2) get real
3) lick it n00b
4) see 3
5) you should follow this one, libby should definantly - and every theist (yes THEIST) has violated this
6) .........
7) ......
8) ok
9) atleast not here
10) agreed
-
Wouldn't 5) cause some backwards-compatability issues?
-
explain
-
He means we'd have to cull just about every post ever made.
-
thanks an0n, at least someone got it ;)
-
Will they hypocrisy never end?
-
you know I still think we should have a polotics/religon subforum
but no, no, we can't have that
-
Seems to me like the problem isn't so much the topics of the discussions as how the discussions are carried out. Politics and religion related topics can obviously get pretty heated. So if people can't discuss things in a civil manner, and none of the mods want to deal with it, it does seem like it's better to lock them as they come.
If people can't debate in a civil manner. Personally I rarely read those threads since they usually grow pages a day and do have a habit of degenerating into flames...
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Care to make a list of topics Shrike doesn't want posted so the rest of us don't have to put up with YOUR moody ass, Shrike? Should we avoid discussion of religion? How about discussion of 3d modelling programs (that borders on religious wars).
You really, truly, honestly don't have to read any topic after you realized its a topic you don't like. You could always, I dunno, wait for a complaint.
But hey, its your toybox. You can do whatever the hell you want with your toys. Just be so kind as to tell the rest of us ahead of time so we don't accidentally step on your toes.
I have already said this. It is not political debates per se. It is the fact that they have become, in many cases little more than excuses for members to rant about how much they hate side X/Y/Z. Actually today's first page isn't bad, probably because there hasn't been any interesting soundbites in a couple days, but every time there's something political in the news, the monkeys come out and the **** starts flying. Seriously, if you have something interesting and informative to say, say it. But how many of those debates are actually bringing up new viewpoints as compared to the same old opinions brought up in the last dozen threads. It goes around and around and nothing comes of it. I barely need to open a politics thread to know what's going to be inside and what opinions will be displayed.
Come on guys, a lot of times those threads bring out everyone's worst side. If you're going to discuss something as inflamatory as politics, at least have the decency to tone things down and act mature. Maybe read your post over first before you hit submit.
-
Bush is makeing a speach right now, expect some flak.
-
Aiiie...... There goes the neighborhood.
Again. This week.
-
Not really.
All he's said was "We've found the Iraqi's to be very sneaky" and "He had undeclared, long-range missiles. He was a danger and we dealt with him". Basically he spent a valuable hour of all our lives trying to make people forget about all the WMD-Uproar.
Someone needs to do a timeline of how **** keeps 'realigning' the past.
-
Originally posted by Shrike
I have already said this. It is not political debates per se. It is the fact that they have become, in many cases little more than excuses for members to rant about how much they hate side X/Y/Z. Actually today's first page isn't bad, probably because there hasn't been any interesting soundbites in a couple days, but every time there's something political in the news, the monkeys come out and the **** starts flying. Seriously, if you have something interesting and informative to say, say it. But how many of those debates are actually bringing up new viewpoints as compared to the same old opinions brought up in the last dozen threads. It goes around and around and nothing comes of it. I barely need to open a politics thread to know what's going to be inside and what opinions will be displayed.
Come on guys, a lot of times those threads bring out everyone's worst side. If you're going to discuss something as inflamatory as politics, at least have the decency to tone things down and act mature. Maybe read your post over first before you hit submit.
You know, if you go read my posts, I do try my best to keep level headed and I do usually read my own posts before I hit submit. Some of us do our best to keep the conversation sane and rational. All you have to do is look at any thread where, say, Sandwich and I have discussed religion or science.
Hell, consider how long--and how well self-policed--that long-assed religion thread was from a while back. Many of us who absolutely love to discuss politics and religion do our best to keep the threads we're enjoying on an even keel. Yeah, you'll always get some lackwit bungling in talking about how atheists will burn, republicans kill babies or whatnot. The truly dedicated, usually warn them to tone it down.
These threads do SOME good, after all. I know I've had my opinions changed during the course of some of these threads. And everyone eventually learns something (except for the truly hardheaded) because it takes more than a little bit of research to make a cogent argument for or against a given position--especially when you're presented with new data. I know I've learned more about Israel and its politics from HLP than I ever did from either the news or from my so-called 'education'.
Further, think of the lurkers, for the love of Joe! Whilst the truly hardheaded and loudmouthed might not have their opinions changed, there are hundreds of lurkers whose opinions might be. Better yet, they might be tempted to open their mouths and join in.
I guess what I'm saying boils down to the problem not being the threads and their subjects, but the conduct of some--ONLY SOME--of the individuals therein. So don't sanction the rest of us for those members' stupidity. Lay the wrath upon the deserving and leave the rest of us to enjoying ourselves in spirited debate.
Oh, and if you're going to close a thread that hasn't yet descended into madness, have the decency to drop the thread starter a PM and let him/her know why. Its just good manners.
-
For the love of God: No-one cares!
-
Jesus care
-
No, Jesus thinks he's a dick.
It says so in the Bible, somewhere near the end.
-
Personally most politics threads are either 4 pages long or locked before I get round to reading them so I cant be bothered reading most of them.
Although I think political threads are inevitable on an internation forum of opinionated young people. You can only talk about computer games for so long...
Originally posted by vyper
I'm a mod on my university's discussion board.
On a less political note, which University? (me being at Glasgow)...
-
personally I find most political threads and religous one very amusing. I just laugh and laugh because usually it reveals HLP member's inner child. :D
-
Originally posted by beatspete
Personally most politics threads are either 4 pages long or locked before I get round to reading them so I cant be bothered reading most of them.
Although I think political threads are inevitable on an internation forum of opinionated young people. You can only talk about computer games for so long...
On a less political note, which University? (me being at Glasgow)...
Caleadonian Polytechnic ( :p ) is it not?
-
Alright, I agree with mik and Tiara. Its been said, so I'm not going to bother writing it up in different language. As I see it, politics/sociology is a very fundamental part of life. Regardless of where you are, who you're with or what you're doing, politics is important and worth discussing. If everyone had that attittude, the world would be a better place (or worse maybe, who knows?).
So, let us rant and rave all we want. For the most part, we keep it civil. And no one is forced in to the threads. While I may have said things in the past that have sounded "inflamitory" that mostly coming from the dissent=slander crowd. If I say America is the world's greatest terrorist state, and I do a half decent job of backing it up, that 'aint slander. Same thing goes for the other side.
-
Originally posted by an0n
For the love of God: No-one cares!
[color=66ff00]Repeat that enough times and you might just believe it an0n.
[/color]
-
Originally posted by Rictor
Alright, I agree with mik and Tiara.
But... but... but... that means mik and I agree... :shaking:
If I say America is the world's greatest terrorist state, and I do a half decent job of backing it up, that 'aint slander. Same thing goes for the other side. [/B]
*buzz*
If you simply state 'America is a terrorist state' you deserve a public nut kicking. No matter how much you back it up. Try to bring it in a more civilized manner instead if insulting people. (Even though you don't insult me with this it does insult many others here)
Try something like; "America is also to blame, not just the obvious terrorist states. Perhaps even more then them. [insert reasoning here]"
It basically means the same but tends to be perceived in a less hostile way. :)
-
"belches"
Oups, sorry, had nothing interesting to say.
Oh, yes: I love An0n's first post in that thread, I would have made the same :D
-
Originally posted by Tiara
But... but... but... that means mik and I agree... :shaking:
*buzz*
If you simply state 'America is a terrorist state' you deserve a public nut kicking. No matter how much you back it up. Try to bring it in a more civilized manner instead if insulting people. (Even though you don't insult me with this it does insult many others here)
Try something like; "America is also to blame, not just the obvious terrorist states. Perhaps even more then them. [insert reasoning here]"
It basically means the same but tends to be perceived in a less hostile way. :)
I was under the impression that the petty complaints of people who want only to see their country's name untarnished no matter the reality should be ignored. Doesn't matter who it insults, if its true (true being defined as having ample evidence to support it) then I can say what I like. I try to make statements in nice, happy face language, but sometimes I just can't bear it.
If, for example, Liberator stated that Iran is a terrorist state, no one would bat an eyelash. Despite the fact that Country X (whichever one you want to put in) has done more "bad stuff" than Iran, people hold Country X is such high regard that they can't bear even to hear is talked of in such a manner. Thats a double standard and its BS.
Arghh, here we go.
edit: Go ahead, say that Serbia commited genocide. I'll get pissed, not because of the manner in which you said it, but becuase its not true. I'll get pissed, but its your right to say it. Its not slander, its simply a differing opinion. No one should hold their country above criticism.
-
Wrong. This is a community. You can't say justever the hell you want. Some people think they can. That is the cause of the thread lockage. Try to be more civil about the message you try to convey.
And if you get pissed off that easily there is no place for you in a proper political debate. Period.
-
Morality discussion... excelent... so why is it politics are diferent from moral?
*run*
-
Originally posted by Ghostavo
Morality discussion... excelent... so why is it politics are diferent from moral?
*run*
Political discussion: A discussion relating to or dealing with the structure or affairs of government, politics, or the state.
Morality discussion: A discussion about the relation of conformity or nonconformity to the moral standard or rule; quality of an intention, a character, an action, a principle, or a sentiment, when tried by the standard of right.
:D