EPTUS Politics Feedback Thread - Page 19
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On October 14 2016 02:32 IgnE wrote: the problem is that sometimes it just moves way too fast and there are pages of trash to sift through. if i see 300 new posts and i run into a whole page where the only posters are plansix opining and nettles posting trump videos then i get the urge to just skip all 300 and assume i didnt miss anything. I assume that you're not referring to Plansix's quality contributions to the thread such as this one, right? On October 14 2016 05:02 Plansix wrote: That it wasn’t a defamation case against the New York Times? | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18016 Posts
On October 14 2016 05:05 xDaunt wrote: I assume that you're not referring to Plansix's quality contributions to the thread such as this one, right? Or, if you want the double whammy of one-liner spam AND vague personal attack, look no further: On October 14 2016 04:35 xDaunt wrote: Clearly you're not cut out for being an attorney if that's the best that you can up with. Let's face it, there are quite a few people on both sides of the fence that should reread the OP, and your holier than thou attitude would only work if your posting style matched it. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On October 14 2016 05:31 Acrofales wrote: Or, if you want the double whammy of one-liner spam AND vague personal attack, look no further: Let's face it, there are quite a few people on both sides of the fence that should reread the OP, and your holier than thou attitude would only work if your posting style matched it. Hunts made a comically idiotic | ||
|
farvacola
United States18830 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18016 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21718 Posts
On October 14 2016 22:56 farvacola wrote: This awful rape discussion taking place in the thread is embarrassing and should be put to a stop. Unsurprising given the topic but it is an achievement that the thread has found a discussion that brings out worse stuff then the racist discussion. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23256 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18830 Posts
| ||
Falling
Canada11360 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
RealityIsKing is like the latest trial balloon to see if this is still the case. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28675 Posts
On October 14 2016 02:32 IgnE wrote: the problem is that sometimes it just moves way too fast and there are pages of trash to sift through. if i see 300 new posts and i run into a whole page where the only posters are plansix opining and nettles posting trump videos then i get the urge to just skip all 300 and assume i didnt miss anything. This really is a lot of the issue. I do sometimes read posts and go 'aw that's out of line' and then I go 'oh but it literally happened 22 pages ago and people actually moved on 19 pages ago, no point in drawing attention to it'. Anyway, I try to moderate through participation rather than moderation. I don't ban people from either side of the aisle, but I've tried to call out leftists for 'posting transgressions' whenever I've seen it and whenever I've been sufficiently up to date on the thread. Further, I echo xDaunt's statement that people are likely to get back what they put in - and thus, I'm not really that offended by someone shitposting with shitposters. I feel like when I write long, fairly detailed and comprehensive posts, they're appreciated by posters from both sides of the aisle, and I also appreciate the long, fairly detailed and comprehensive posts by other sides of the aisle. At the same time however, I'm inclined to think that if someone is consistently facing what they perceive as a barrage of shitposts, their own posting habits might not be all that stellar. You might only give back to people what they give to you - but that emotion probably goes both ways. So imo, the real issue is when one poster makes long comprehensive posts and all they get is a deflective one-liner arguing a tangential point. This is why ErectedZenith (the previous poster I thought was so bad/frequently posting that he had to go to preserve the thread) was banned. It's very possible (or even highly probable, to be honest) that my inherent bias makes me incapable of seeing it when it doesn't target 'my' opinions, but it's just.. As long as people aren't actually trolling, imo, it's not that common for one part of a discussion to be 'much worse' than the other part. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
You need not look any further than conspiracy theorists who post 2 hour videos and 30-page essays chock-full of ridiculous assertions to see that often, length is bad and being concise is a virtue. Sometimes the entire purpose of that is simply to flood the airwaves with far more stuff than any adequately busy person would have a chance to address, and that doesn't make for very good discussion either - just people taking the position that they were already predisposed to support beforehand. Let's just say that I'm rarely in the mood to read a research project's worth of material just to respond to one person who I believe has some faulty judgment (and honestly, it rarely takes all that much reading to see if someone has a fundamentally questionable approach to an issue). Bundle that with unpleasantries that may include being a complete prick to talk to, a tendency to strawman out the wazoo, or constantly deflecting the topic, and it makes for a discussion I really prefer simply to walk away from. Judging by the rarity of people actually starting a back-and-forth over long and highly-cited (although not necessarily well-cited) posts, I am quite sure that that is not a rare position. At the same time, I don't like to look to the banhammer as a means to solve my problems. As xDaunt quite eloquently put it, I'm happy enough to resolve the matter on my own in a manner of my choosing, and I'll give a tit-for-tat response to people based on how they treat me. It would really cause more trouble than it would resolve if moderation went past the rather hands-off job of steering the discussion away from stupid and banning the few obvious true outliers, into the more questionable territory of controlling the flow of the discussion in general with more substantial bans. The nature of the topic leads to this kind of aggressive posting by default, and I don't think that's going away. As far as the "bias" and shitposting issue goes - I don't think it's a bad idea to occasionally bring the question of whether someone really crossed the line into here. It's been called backseat moderating, but I think it's simply a query as to what is and isn't (and should and shouldn't be) within the threshold of acceptable posting. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28675 Posts
Basically short posts very frequently end up starting arguments, because if you post a twitter-length statement, you're likely to either not have said anything of substance, or said something so devoid of nuance that it's easy to frame a counter-argument. And then we either get lots of posts without substance (bad) or lots of posts arguing easily framed counter-arguments. And seeing how many posters suffer from 'this might have been said already, but it wasn't said by me' syndrome - hard to avoid in message boards, that then leads to 200 posts per hour. If people instead spent 5 minutes rather than 30 seconds on their initial post, added some nuance, made it a bit harder to misconstrue (deliberately or not) the post, we'd get a slower-moving thread. I don't think we need more dissertations, but we do need less one-liners. (Not advocating any imposed rule in this regard though; sometimes one-liners are totally fine). Anyway, twitter doesn't work for political arguments- that should be one of the main lessons from this entire campaign. It's mostly just a way of showcasing your allegiance, and that is not what we need. That said, gish gallops are even worse, debunking an argument takes longer than presenting one, there's gotta be a healthy balance somewhere.  | ||
|
farvacola
United States18830 Posts
| ||
|
zeo
Serbia6296 Posts
On October 18 2016 03:17 zeo wrote: Scum, just pure scum. Really a testament to how far political parties are willing to fall, no way this is not coming up in the next debate. User was warned for this post In what fucking universe did this post deserve a warning? People post youtube videos without any text all the fucking time in the thread. Not to mention people should have already seen this video by now. This is low even for the double standards already rampant with the moderation in that thread. I'm sure spamming John Oliver and daily show videos is the pinnacle of posting. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
| ||
