[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

I don't always go into great detail with my contributions in this section, but I always try to make sure that they are adding something to the discussion even if it's just a couple of sentences. It's just there are times when I am willing to put my two cents into a discussion but I don't have the time to write more than a few words. I don't think "well thought-out posts" should be a requirement, but perhaps a clamping down on what is considered a constructive or a non-constructive post is necessary?

Yeah I agree with this. But then there is the issue of..people considering their own posts to be constructive, no matter what, So people would still be kicking off. This is the issue we are currently having actually.

People are going to kick off no matter what really aren't they. So yeah, **** this idea of attempting to sort stuff, as it won;t work at all

[Ashsleigh]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yeah I agree with this. But then there is the issue of..people considering their own posts to be constructive, no matter what, So people would still be kicking off. This is the issue we are currently having actually.

People are going to kick off no matter what really aren't they. So yeah, **** this idea of attempting to sort stuff, as it won;t work at all

I think you should definitely leave it open for discussion. It all seems pretty fair to me, and there's no denying that a lot of discussions lately have only resulted in a battle of words between two parties, this past month especially. The fact of the matter is that something quite clearly needs to be done about all the sniping etc., so you were right to bring it to everybody's attention.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yeah I agree with this. But then there is the issue of..people considering their own posts to be constructive, no matter what, So people would still be kicking off. This is the issue we are currently having actually.

People are going to kick off no matter what really aren't they. So yeah, **** this idea of attempting to sort stuff, as it won;t work at all

Kudos for you trying Vicky,maybe it would be better if people didn't snipe in their responses as that will always get peoples backs up,I've been in here and just one person sniping can derail a thread and make it nasty,so maybe an instant days ban (or two) might work,I don't envy your job tbh. Crack that whip Vicky

[thesheriff443]

A bit off topic but a serious question, is Josy ok as she as not been posting.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

A bit off topic but a serious question, is Josy ok as she as not been posting.

She's fine, just busy I think

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

She's fine, just busy I think

That's ok then, thanks.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

A bit off topic but a serious question, is Josy ok as she as not been posting.

She was on recently but not for long. Shes taking a break from the forum. I think thats a good plan tbh, will probably end up doing the same if this crap continues as its draining and I cannot really be arsed at all

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

She was on recently but not for long. Shes taking a break from the forum. I think thats a good plan tbh, will probably end up doing the same if this crap continues as its draining and I cannot really be arsed at all

I don't blame you Vicky, life is hard enough with out the constant conflict on here.

[Tom4784]

I don't think minimum word counts would be the way to go, some people can succinctly explain their points in a few sentences and make just as much sense as someone who writes an essay.

I think it's just something you judge on a case by case basis, you can tell a good post from a bad one.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I don't think minimum word counts would be the way to go, some people can succinctly explain their points in a few sentences and make just as much sense as someone who writes an essay.

I think it's just something you judge on a case by case basis, you can tell a good post from a bad one.

Yup, again, its all about context.

Again, this is why set rules do not really work. And yes, its generally very easy to tell regardless of word count if something is meant to be baity or not

How would everyone feel about a separate forum for actual debates. Where mention of current politics and such are basically, banned. So you could have a discussion about, maybe abortion rights, without it turning into a tory v labour thing? Its something I have brought up before (after it was suggested to me by PM) and I think this would help matters a lot as people sick top death of all the politics stuff could just go there

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yup, again, its all about context.

Again, this is why set rules do not really work. And yes, its generally very easy to tell regardless of word count if something is meant to be baity or not

How would everyone feel about a separate forum for actual debates. Where mention of current politics and such are basically, banned. So you could have a discussion about, maybe abortion rights, without it turning into a tory v labour thing? Its something I have brought up before (after it was suggested to me by PM) and I think this would help matters a lot as people sick top death of all the politics stuff could just go there

A News and Politics section, and a separate Serious Debates section might work... maybe.. idk

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Withano

A News and Politics section, and a separate Serious Debates section might work... maybe.. idk

Or maybe keep news and debates as it is, and add a politics subforum which will be affectionately known as a ****ing mess

[bots]

Anything that better defines an understandable, even handed approach is fine by me.

This being the serious debates section, I don't think its unreasonable to make considered and thought provoking posts rather than generalised snipes.

[Christmas Dynasnow]

I disagree and don't really think it needs changing and never get the whole vexation with SD or all the dire warnings

I don't want huge posts and polite. ' yes you have an interesting point there Hugo but I must take issue with point 3 if I may be so bold '

F that

Get your points made in a few lines and grow a thicker skin imo

[Vicky.]

OK you know what, I may totally abandon this attempt to sort stuff out. As yes, context really is important and set rules do not really work. Ugh. I really don't know what to do here tbh

[bots]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

OK you know what, I may totally abandon this attempt to sort stuff out. As yes, context really is important and set rules do not really work. Ugh. I really don't know what to do here tbh

whisky works for me

[Marches]

considering the demographic of this forum and where everyone leans politically in general nothing i have to say will have much impact and as such i prob won't gauge upon much political discussion here

i agree with the sentiment of the op but like political debates on forums ALWAYS end up messy. Its just how things are. People are very passionate about this kind of stuff. Theres a lot of subjectivity that gets perceived as objectivity and it can frustrate some people when they see an opinion they deem to be objectively wrong. you'll just never be able to tame discussions like this. Ive been on various forums and it always ends the same way.

[Tom4784]

When we clamp down on posts like that we get accused of censorship

[Vicky.]

What I meant by addressing the OP was basically about this 'whataboutery' stuff. Like, going into a thread about Corbyn doing something and just posting 'but May is ridiculous' or 'what about Rees Mogg, he voted against gay marriage' when it has nothing at all to do with the thread and is not actually addressing whatever the OP is about, if this makes sense?

[Christmas Dynasnow]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

What I meant by addressing the OP was basically about this 'whataboutery' stuff. Like, going into a thread about Corbyn doing something and just posting 'but May is ridiculous' or 'what about Rees Mogg, he voted against gay marriage' when it has nothing at all to do with the thread and is not actually addressing whatever the OP is about, if this makes sense?

But that happens on QT and in the commons!

[Marches]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

What I meant by addressing the OP was basically about this 'whataboutery' stuff. Like, going into a thread about Corbyn doing something and just posting 'but May is ridiculous' or 'what about Rees Mogg, he voted against gay marriage' when it has nothing at all to do with the thread and is not actually addressing whatever the OP is about, if this makes sense?

you could always warn/infract but then people yell 'censorship'

as long as its within reason id doubt anyone but the person trying to deter from whatever is being discussed would have an issue

[Yuki Maru Hoshi]

If moderating to the letter is going to be too difficult (which it sounds like it will be), I think stick to public warnings and thread locks.

When you're deleting threads and posts for simple rule breaks like being off-topic, you're leaving things open to interpretation.

I think just a simple warning to tell people that that is not considered on-topic and to get back to the OP's post will suffice. The people who would be annoyed would be satisfied to see this public warning posted and well--if the thread crashes... then thread lock.

The OP should have the most control I think. They should be able to say, this is the discussion I want to have--within these parameters... I don't want to discuss XYZ, I want to discuss this issue and the merits/non-merits of it. This creates an equal environment since people who are right-leaning can have as many threads as they'd like about conservative topics and so can left-leaning folk with social justice topics... everyone is happy, as long as they keep to the OP.

[jet]

I hit I Agree as I think Vicky's OP is a good step forward. I haven't read all the comments yet though, but basically I'm just for even - handedness and fairness all round really.

[Ammi]

....hmmm, I’m not sure about the discussions having to be ‘more thought out with reasons given’ type thing...because sometimes a simple question could apply to the discussion...or a simple short statement, which would stare a view...also its 13+yrs forum age, so
maybe younger members might want to take part in discussions, but don’t feel yet, that they could give reasons...they might just think..’oh, I think that’s wrong’, but not really have gathered thoughts enough to post to expand on that...more an instinctive opinion they have...?...anyways, making too stead fast rules of post content, may achieve an opposite of putting of as well...it also could feel a little exclusive, maybe..

[Ammi]

...I actually like that some people might say...oh he’s rubbish or whatever and that’s that of that...and then others expand more and expand the debates...it makes for a great mix, I think...because we all are individuals, not only in our thoughts but how we convey them in type as well..