|
Hello,
I know it is stating the obvious, but political threads on teamliquid usually suck hard, to the point of debasing the entire website.
Because of the nature of politics on the internet in general, these threads have a low chance of maintaining any degree of quality. So whenever someone starts trolling it really has a worse effect than normal. Same with any kind of crappy post, really.
It would be nice if there was something done about this. It's been going on for a few years. I think discussion was more decent when Mensrea among others were there to keep things on track.
Perhaps moderators could be more strict in these threads, temp banning anyone who deviates from TL's posting rules. Perhaps all political threads should simply be closed. Or a political forum could be made with political forum bans. Perhaps the wrongdoers will read my post here and change their ways.
|
a separate forum would be nice, it sucks combining discussions on serious topics in the same forum as general youtube idiocy and what-not.
kind of like how they put israel down right in the middle of a bunch of arab states, it just won't jive.
it's far from the original purpose of this website however, so i'm thinking the staff will have little sympathy.
|
I thought that high quality of discussion was nearly equally desired in all forums of TL. :O
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On October 28 2007 15:13 Servolisk wrote:
I thought that high quality of discussion was nearly equally desired in all forums of TL. :O
lol sc2 forum
|
United States12240 Posts
Even the SC2 forum is better than General. The General forum's thread quality has been declining steadily for a long time now. I think I can sum up General in 6 topics:
- TV show discussion (fine)
- Youtube link (dumb, usually because there's no introduction behind it other than "watch this")
- Flash game (dumb, and usually all copycat games like Tower Defense v1,000,000)
- Poll (dumb, usually about drugs or sex)
- Rig this online poll (okay I guess, considering it's somewhat of a TL specialty, as long as it doesn't get too out of hand and the poll isn't too ridiculous like "Vote for my feet in the Myspace Best Feet Competition")
- Serious, high-quality discussion threads (good)
So as you can see, if you take out the serious discussion threads by creating a separate forum, General will devolve into a cesspool of retarded threads featuring links to Youtube polls about drugs and sex in TV shows that the OP wants you to rig that you have to play Flash games to get to. We can't have that.
|
I think what we should have is stricter rules: I'll be honest, I sometimes post pointless replies, but I think in general, there should be a "no-post thread" list, etc. or tougher moderation, I hate to see general becoming what it is now. 
|
Braavos36390 Posts
On October 29 2007 02:25 Excalibur_Z wrote:
Even the SC2 forum is better than General. The General forum's thread quality has been declining steadily for a long time now. I think I can sum up General in 6 topics:
- TV show discussion (fine)
- Youtube link (dumb, usually because there's no introduction behind it other than "watch this")
- Flash game (dumb, and usually all copycat games like Tower Defense v1,000,000)
- Poll (dumb, usually about drugs or sex)
- Rig this online poll (okay I guess, considering it's somewhat of a TL specialty, as long as it doesn't get too out of hand and the poll isn't too ridiculous like "Vote for my feet in the Myspace Best Feet Competition")
- Serious, high-quality discussion threads (good)
So as you can see, if you take out the serious discussion threads by creating a separate forum, General will devolve into a cesspool of retarded threads featuring links to Youtube polls about drugs and sex in TV shows that the OP wants you to rig that you have to play Flash games to get to. We can't have that.
I'm pretty sure the SC2 forum is the worst in terms of quality we have on this site.
|
There is absolutely no way the general forum, even at is worst, is worse than the SC2 forum. Not even close.
|
MURICA15980 Posts
Those threads explode pretty fast and I pretty much hate reading through 95% of those posts.
|
|
|
Just ignore the threads or find some real political forum on the internet somewhere else.
|
Canada7170 Posts
Religious threads are just as bad imo.
|
MURICA15980 Posts
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
General Forum has always been a marked step below everything else on this site, until SC2 forum just kinda blew it away and set all sorts of new records in terms of shitty posting.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
In all seriousness though, with out the looseness of General, the rest of the forums would become too overbearing.
Every good forum needs an id dump.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
i love religion/homosexual threads on all msg boards because usually around page 6-7 i try to throw in some completely fabricated and outlandish statement about richard dawkins admitting to homosexuality and how i dont believe that homosexuals actually exist. Can we just treat them as hw threads from now on because really there is no point to them.
|
|
|
On October 29 2007 11:40 GrandInquisitor wrote:
General Forum has always been a marked step below everything else on this site, until SC2 forum just kinda blew it away and set all sorts of new records in terms of shitty posting.
Are you forgetting General was home to the "$500,000,000.00 but you get kicked in the balls 3" thread?
Seriously though, I don't think the general forum is relatively bad. Most "general" type of forums on the internet are 1000x worse, if that is saying anything. Atleast afaik... I'm not aware of a lot of high quality discussion on the internet that isn't specifically for people who excel in some group, such as BW for TL.
Every once in a while there are threads that I like (right now the Beijing thread).
|
is awesome32278 Posts
Oh come on the $500,000,000 thread was fun 
|
Braavos36390 Posts
yeah the $500 billion vs kick in the balls thread was fine
i think you're just being a bit too uptight
|
$500 billion thread was dumb lol
but it's ok to have a forum for dumb, fun stuff. it just sucks that the people who go to general for dumb/fun stuff also come and shit on serious threads.
|
general kicks ass its the only forum i read
and there are very good threads in there from time to time that i participate in and make serious posts，and also a bunch of funny random shit (YEAH BABY YOU CAN DO IT!!)
if you think general is going to be all serious then you're missing the point of general entirely
making fun of idiots is half of the reason why general is fun in the first place
|
However, as bad as general might be, nothing will ever come close to sc2 
|
On October 29 2007 13:55 Hot_Bid wrote:
yeah the $500 billion vs kick in the balls thread was fine
i think you're just being a bit too uptight
To clarify, I was just joking about the thread ;o
|
On October 29 2007 14:05 lil.sis wrote:
making fun of idiots is half of the reason why general is fun in the first place
I object to this, as you may remember from the Iran thread. Whether or not the guy you were trolling was dumb/making dumb posts it can really ruin the entire thread, as has happened in many political threads here.
And in that specific thread I think if you and others had bothered to be patient with him you could of convinced him to fix his inaccuracies. Doesn't that sound like more fun? edit: hang on, looking for proper emoticon to end this question with...
|
nah lol i'd rather mock him
i mean look at his post...
On October 28 2007 10:39 Dr.Kill-Joy wrote:All i gotta say is dont fuck with Russia. They have "The Father Of All Bombs". YEs thats wuts its called. Also its envirormental safe  This guy is taking the side of Iran, so that he may have the opportunity to fuck up USA.
come on... YEs thats wuts its called?
i'm supposed to take this guy seriously?
plus if you look back a few posts i made a few points and proposed solutions to the problem and stuff
it's not like i just sit there and troll people
they ask for it
|
you have to learn to filter out all the stupid shit and focus on what's important to you
the thread is still going
|
Yeah, now that you've crushed Dr.Kill-Joy's esteem so much he no longer posts. How does that make you feel?
|
|
|
it's better to ignore people like kill-joy
when a veteran addresses him it sets an example that people should derail threads to make fun of the resident retards. but if everyone ignored them, people would learn that if you don't post intelligently and in an informed manner, you will just be ignored.
there's fun threads and then there's serious threads, people should align their goals to the appropriate threads.
|
Someone should make a general thread where no one is allowed to type and only record mp3s and discuss a typical topic via speaker/mic. Could be interesting.
|
General forum is awesome guys.... lighten up. It's the only fun forum here, others are way too serious.
Politic threads are fine imo, just as long as mods take out idiots when they get out of line (and they usually do.)
|
United States12240 Posts
On October 29 2007 02:42 Hot_Bid wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2007 02:25 Excalibur_Z wrote:
Even the SC2 forum is better than General. The General forum's thread quality has been declining steadily for a long time now. I think I can sum up General in 6 topics:
- TV show discussion (fine)
- Youtube link (dumb, usually because there's no introduction behind it other than "watch this")
- Flash game (dumb, and usually all copycat games like Tower Defense v1,000,000)
- Poll (dumb, usually about drugs or sex)
- Rig this online poll (okay I guess, considering it's somewhat of a TL specialty, as long as it doesn't get too out of hand and the poll isn't too ridiculous like "Vote for my feet in the Myspace Best Feet Competition")
- Serious, high-quality discussion threads (good)
So as you can see, if you take out the serious discussion threads by creating a separate forum, General will devolve into a cesspool of retarded threads featuring links to Youtube polls about drugs and sex in TV shows that the OP wants you to rig that you have to play Flash games to get to. We can't have that. I'm pretty sure the SC2 forum is the worst in terms of quality we have on this site.
Maybe you're right. To be fair, I don't read all the threads in the SC2 forum, usually just the Q&A and SC2.com update threads. General forum topics are a little more transparent in their quality, as I see "Rate your parents!" as the top thread at the moment, and it's easier to see what that thread will be about than a "Submit your questions here!" SC2 thread that may have devolved into something retarded a few pages down the line. Correct me if I'm wrong.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
On October 29 2007 14:41 lil.sis wrote:
good
keeps the trash out
|
The political/religous/hw threads are the main ones that I read. They are good because I get to see what other people ~my age think about these things (which coincidentally affect my future more than starcraft). Even if they aren't the highest quality, at least I can better understand other people's points of view. Also the hw threads give me something to think about.
I don't read TV threads, ever.
|
MURICA15980 Posts
Yeah wtf the kick in the balls thread was brilliant.
To be honest, I used to really enjoy the politics/religion threads in here when I was younger. As I grew older, however, I realized I could satisfy my craving for intellectual stimulation in other ways without having to deal with the immature bullshit often found on the internet. It is so easy to sound all smart and all knowing on the internet with you really don't know jack but if the discussion was in real life, it would be clear who was the superior voice. I just get so tired of the internet dodging and lack of respect.
|
It's ironic that you're discussing political threads, and then suggesting anti-freedom of speech 
I think the political threads here are good, especially for us who don't live in the US and don't know as much about the scene there, I often learn things I wouldn't otherwise hear about.
|
Think of it as freedom not to listen to others speech if you like!
|
On October 30 2007 02:06 thedeadhaji wrote:
who the hell gave you that picture of me anyway
|
I use to enjoy the political threads, but I think as this site has grown, and more people are here to give input the threads do not stay on track and there are 30 sub-points going on. I will see a thread a few pages deep for the first time and I really wont know where to contribute because there seems to be multiple conversations involved. I think people should be putting more effort into staying on track, and thread creators should be putting more effort in narrowing down the nature of the discussion.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
On October 30 2007 10:26 lil.sis wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2007 02:06 thedeadhaji wrote:On October 29 2007 14:41 lil.sis wrote:
good
keeps the trash out who the hell gave you that picture of me anyway
you yourself put it on TL gallery~~~~ (I wouldn't use a pic unless it was public)
|
Canada5062 Posts
On October 30 2007 22:18 TeCh)PsylO wrote:
I use to enjoy the political threads, but I think as this site has grown, and more people are here to give input the threads do not stay on track and there are 30 sub-points going on. I will see a thread a few pages deep for the first time and I really wont know where to contribute because there seems to be multiple conversations involved. I think people should be putting more effort into staying on track, and thread creators should be putting more effort in narrowing down the nature of the discussion.
This is a good point. I will have to reflect on this.
|
I feel the same way as psylo. I often see a good thread but I missed the start of it and it is now too long and complicated to fairly reply to (too many different conversations to read, then respond to). It would be nice if threads could stay more focused. I know lots of forum software comes with features to "split" threads, but this is not very helpful as it is just a lot of work. But it does point out that this is an issue many people have with forums.
The only thing I can think of right now is to give the guy who starts the thread some optional (stated clearly in the OP if he chooses to have them) moderation abilities, like he could type into a box what his rules for the thread are, and then he is allowed to ban people from the thread or edit posts (clearly marked of course) if he feels people have broken the rules he set forth originally. When he's making the thread he could just check off [x] I will moderate this thread. Instructions for users (Warning: You may only use moderation if people violate your specific instructions, so type them carefully.): [ instructions box]. Then in the OP it will say Attencion: This thread has special instructions and will be moderated by its creator. Please read them carefully before posting: [ ...]
This would at least let people who really care to start a really good thread, plus save moderators some work hopefully.
|
Self-moderated threads would be really nice. But it might be hard to code, so perhaps we could treat not paying attention to the OP track and points could be treated in the same way as shitty posts are treated by mods.
It would probably lessen moderators work load if we actually could mod our own thread, but I suspect they wouldn't want to share the power and prestige with us.
|
Canada9720 Posts
i think self-moderation of threads is a bad idea. opening a dicussion on a particular subject doesn't correlate to the thread-starter being knowledgeable enough in the subject to discern veiled-garbage from a good contribution to the discussion. in addition, being a thread-starter does not preclude someone from having a pre-formed opinion on the issue, which could potentially affect the moderation of the thread. of course, moderators on this site particpate in discussions all the time and offer their opinions, and even argue to defend their opinion or point out flaws in another member's arguements, however, the moderators on this site are also chosen partly for their ability to maintain an objective view of a given discussion, even while participating. i don't think clicking the 'new thread' button grants that ability
|
I agree with Psylo. I tend to stick away from the political threads these days. Even if you do manage to stay on tract, the discussions often degenerate to petty name calling and attacks on one's character or intellectual ability (somewhat warranted however when some folk are outrageously wrong).
It's impossible to have a civilised discussion without one side making it personal.
Perhaps it is an accurate reflection on the modern day political arena?
|
On October 28 2007 14:47 Servolisk wrote:
Hello,
I know it is stating the obvious, but political threads on teamliquid usually suck hard, to the point of debasing the entire website.
Because of the nature of politics on the internet in general, these threads have a low chance of maintaining any degree of quality. So whenever someone starts trolling it really has a worse effect than normal. Same with any kind of crappy post, really.
It would be nice if there was something done about this. It's been going on for a few years. I think discussion was more decent when Mensrea among others were there to keep things on track.
Perhaps moderators could be more strict in these threads, temp banning anyone who deviates from TL's posting rules. Perhaps all political threads should simply be closed. Or a political forum could be made with political forum bans. Perhaps the wrongdoers will read my post here and change their ways.
Its because most people are uninformed sheep of the media (also see: Colbert's supporters)
|
Self moderation of threads would be interesting, but self moderation of our own posts is the only thing that really matters. Often times deciding on what is a matter of debate, is essential to having an effective debate, but we should be deciding these things openly rather than through the mask of sub points, and ultimatly moving on to the original issue.
|
On October 31 2007 09:18 CTStalker wrote:
i think self-moderation of threads is a bad idea. opening a dicussion on a particular subject doesn't correlate to the thread-starter being knowledgeable enough in the subject to discern veiled-garbage from a good contribution to the discussion. in addition, being a thread-starter does not preclude someone from having a pre-formed opinion on the issue, which could potentially affect the moderation of the thread. of course, moderators on this site particpate in discussions all the time and offer their opinions, and even argue to defend their opinion or point out flaws in another member's arguements, however, the moderators on this site are also chosen partly for their ability to maintain an objective view of a given discussion, even while participating. i don't think clicking the 'new thread' button grants that ability
I still think self-moderation could work. What I was thinking was that in such a case, eventually someone better will "remake" the discussion, and people will flock to it. And if a topic maker ruins his topics regularly, people will realize this. There would be a competition for making a good thread on an issue, and we would all benefit from this. Furthermore, as in my example I think there would have to be strict guidelines for people that choose to moderate their own topics (much stricter than what mods can do) precisely because they might tend to let their pre-formed opinion dominate too much. They could be required to promise to only moderate to enforce their specific rules that they told people (see my original post), and it would be easy to see if people fail to live up to this (and have their privledges to create self-moderated threads suspended). It should be added responsibility for those who choose to accept it, not just free ability to do whatever they want in a thread they created. Done in the way I mentioned originally, I believe this is possible. It doesn't have to be the way you are fearing.
When I suggested self-moderation threads, I tried to do it in a way that would discourage precisely what you're fearing--bad thread makers abusing the ability. I imagined instead, fed-up people who shy away from starting good threads because they can't keep it on track. People who are willing to work on a specific thread, if given the ability, like maybe psylo or servolisk. I would love to see a thread run by them. You could limit the privledge to people who specifically request it and have shown care in making threads, or to people who have thousands of posts, if that is what it will take to prevent its abuse.
And if you do let more people potentially use it, and they create bad threads by their poor use of the feature, they will only be doing something they would have been doing already: making bad threads, which we can still ignore and shut down all the same as we do to current bad threads. But at the same time, by having such a feature, don't we make good threads even more possible?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/1897/sistrashmancopyvh8.jpg)
