New Off Topic Forums

[Compromise 1]

Maybe if people get too crazy about the politics thing and start flaming, you could just ban them from the politics forum.  Thats if they are usually a friendly person on Simtropolis.  I think it would be good, if it worked, but if it didn't it could be a serious mistake.

Unfortunatley don't think it is possible to ban people from individuel forums unless it is a private forums but that would be difficult.

 

If . . . and I do mean if . . . we have future discussions of this nature, it would have be based on the rule that we discuss the issues and not each other.

 

For instance, if Curly thinks X is a good idea and Moe thinks Y is a good idea, they could discuss the various merits of X versus Y.   But Curly can't call Moe a bleepity-bleep because Moe doesn't agree.

Some people can have this kind of discussion, at least for a short period of time.  Others can't resist throwing darts at people who believe differently.

 

The political viewpoints of the moderators shouldn't be an issue.  Either the participants are discussing the issues or they aren't.  Name calling, baiting, and other forms of flaming aren't allowed no matter what the moderator thinks of the point of view of the person who wrote the post.

 

At any rate, the admin staff isn't going to stop counting trixies to deal with this right now.  I agree it's an interesting idea, though.   Perhaps not practical, but interesting.

 

Yes I think SkiGeek has highlighted a inportant point, it is possible to have a discussion with a high amount of differing opinions if the members involved are resonabley mature. Unfortunatley quite a few are not which is a shame but thats just reality.

[hym 358]

Date: 12/8/2005 1:47:03 PM Author: Compromise

Maybe if people get too crazy about the politics thing and start flaming, you could just ban them from the politics forum.  Thats if they are usually a friendly person on Simtropolis.  I think it would be good, if it worked, but if it didn't it could be a serious mistake.

Unfortunatley don't think it is possible to ban people from individuel forums unless it is a private forums but that would be difficult.

If . . . and I do mean if . . . we have future discussions of this nature, it would have be based on the rule that we discuss the issues and not each other.

For instance, if Curly thinks X is a good idea and Moe thinks Y is a good idea, they could discuss the various merits of X versus Y.  But Curly can't call Moe a bleepity-bleep because Moe doesn't agree.

Some people can have this kind of discussion, at least for a short period of time.  Others can't resist throwing darts at people who believe differently.

The political viewpoints of the moderators shouldn't be an issue.  Either the participants are discussing the issues or they aren't.  Name calling, baiting, and other forms of flaming aren't allowed no matter what the moderator thinks of the point of view of the person who wrote the post.

At any rate, the admin staff isn't going to stop counting trixies to deal with this right now.  I agree it's an interesting idea, though.  Perhaps not practical, but interesting.

Yes I think SkiGeek has highlighted a inportant point, it is possible to have a discussion with a high amount of differing opinions if the members involved are resonabley mature. Unfortunatley quite a few are not which is a shame but thats just reality.

quote>

I think that both SkiGeek and Compromise have hit the nail squarely on the head.  It would be interesting but I think that in the end it would prove to be a bigger pain than was wanted.

[Micah 16]

Date: 12/8/2005 4:00:37 AM Author: SkiGeek

Date: 12/7/2005 9:10:21 PM Author: vidioman

. .  I dont think ST should have an anything-goes forum (think of the children!) but politics should be fine as long as we dont get people bashing eachother because of it. . . .

quote>

If . . . and I do mean if . . . we have future discussions of this nature, it would have be based on the rule that we discuss the issues and not each other.

For instance, if Curly thinks X is a good idea and Moe thinks Y is a good idea, they could discuss the various merits of X versus Y.  But Curly can't call Moe a bleepity-bleep because Moe doesn't agree.

Some people can have this kind of discussion, at least for a short period of time.  Others can't resist throwing darts at people who believe differently.

The political viewpoints of the moderators shouldn't be an issue.  Either the participants are discussing the issues or they aren't.  Name calling, baiting, and other forms of flaming aren't allowed no matter what the moderator thinks of the point of view of the person who wrote the post.

At any rate, the admin staff isn't going to stop counting trixies to deal with this right now.  I agree it's an interesting idea, though.  Perhaps not practical, but interesting.

quote>

There you go... that's what the Political forum should be about...

[Voar Tok 4]

Date: 12/8/2005 1:47:03 PM Author: Compromise

Maybe if people get too crazy about the politics thing and start flaming, you could just ban them from the politics forum.  Thats if they are usually a friendly person on Simtropolis.  I think it would be good, if it worked, but if it didn't it could be a serious mistake.

Unfortunatley don't think it is possible to ban people from individuel forums unless it is a private forums but that would be difficult.

If . . . and I do mean if . . . we have future discussions of this nature, it would have be based on the rule that we discuss the issues and not each other.

For instance, if Curly thinks X is a good idea and Moe thinks Y is a good idea, they could discuss the various merits of X versus Y.  But Curly can't call Moe a bleepity-bleep because Moe doesn't agree.

Some people can have this kind of discussion, at least for a short period of time.  Others can't resist throwing darts at people who believe differently.

The political viewpoints of the moderators shouldn't be an issue.  Either the participants are discussing the issues or they aren't.  Name calling, baiting, and other forms of flaming aren't allowed no matter what the moderator thinks of the point of view of the person who wrote the post.

At any rate, the admin staff isn't going to stop counting trixies to deal with this right now.  I agree it's an interesting idea, though.  Perhaps not practical, but interesting.

Yes I think SkiGeek has highlighted a inportant point, it is possible to have a discussion with a high amount of differing opinions if the members involved are resonabley mature. Unfortunatley quite a few are not which is a shame but thats just reality.

quote>

I personally agree with that Compromise.  For all the members that were here back in May, do you remember what transpired over the controversial lots that SimGoober was making at the time.  I frankly believe that enough of the members aren't mature enough for a political off-topic forum.

 

There was a website that I used to go to that had an off-topic section called

[your_adress_here 11]

I agree with Voar Tok.

I don't really care about a politics section though, as I don't understand most of it...

[nealos101 20]

In my personal opinion some people go over the top when it grinds to polotics, releigion and beleifs... Ive expressed them on here for about a breif moment, before moving on...

What Ive seen across the world going on would probably happen here on this very site, should you bring polotics into dicussion... Too much flaming and too much of the 'active' responses against other members.

 

Scrap this idea I say, becuase no good will come of it, and polotics are best left in the hands of people that do care what you are talking about... When you are talking nonsence... I mean polotics...

 

Nealos101

[ephorex_77 0]

IMO, a new layout for the off-topic forums is quite a good idea. I doubt there would be any point in splitting it up into minute shades of grey (for example hobbies, hobbies for girl, boys, dogs, organisms in between etc.), but perhaps the admins would consider a forum for more mature debates.

As Jasoncw said, some of the comments and posts on the forum are but small talk, usually just an obligatory comment or friendly posts with no great depth to them. I personally think that this community has developed sufficiently in terms of maturity and of numbers to warrant a more ... for want of a better word, 'in-depth' section of the forums that deals with frank exchange of ideas and debates on world issues and current affairs (with or without politics) as opposed to mere superficialities one normally sees in some sections of ST.

 

As skigeek pointed out, the trouble usually starts after people start bashing the person, and not the issue at hand. That is normally when the mods step in and the offending post(s) or even thread is destroyed. In an exchange of idea(s), people discuss the merits and demerits of the idea without resorting to flaming/bashing/insulting the person expousing the contrary opinion. If people stick by that simple rule, no matter the disparity of opinion being exhibited by the participants, there should be no problems, as people will only resort to pointing out the falsities of that issue.

 

Of course, the afore-mentioned only works under the assumption that the participants are sufficiently well-disciplined when it comes to following those rules. That's exactly what the mods are for.

 

In summing up, I really hope that ST treat this matter with considerable thought as it would bring a whole level of depth of thought and view to the ST forums instead of merely glossy superficialities. Perhaps a trial could be considered?? For example, one month trial period where the staff monitor the feasibility and general conduct of the forum??

 

 

[DuskTrooper 314]

Yeah, sounds good. Except..you would need certain credentials to enter certain forums, such as a political and religions discussion forum. Such credentials would include seniority, known maturity, etc. This would prevent flaming by n00bs,a nd knaves.

[sloppet 3]

So looks like I will have new place to spam

lol, just jokin'