Mod Sponsored Community Poll - Your Input is Requested

[JEDIYoda]

We do not sanction posts which have had the actionable contents removed prior to our arrival on the scene as it were.

If folks start abusing this caveat then of course the moderaters will alter our position on this. But it has not been much of a problem to date.

I was under the impression that once something is posted, if the offending party changes it that the mods have access to a copy of the original post...perhaps I am wrong....

nah..me be wrong....damn it`s getting cold in here.....lol

 

[Idontcare]

Just saying, I would report it, and not comment it as to draw attention. Perhaps it could be sanctioned to allow making (not posting) a screen shot of the post just for the sake of having the proof if the mod needs it. Just don't go posting the screen shot, or quoting it or what have you. Let the trolls have their moments, they'll get toasted in the mod corner soon enough.

If you report a post then there is no need to "quote for future", the automated report-post feature in VB actually captures a snapshot of the post at the time of its reporting.

The "as reported" post cannot be altered, even if the post in the forum is edited by the member at a later timestamp.

I was under the impression that once something is posted, if the offending party changes it that the mods have access to a copy of the original post...perhaps I am wrong....

nah..me be wrong....damn it`s getting cold in here.....lol

Oh we do, we can access every revision level that a post has underwent. Edit it 7 times an each edit is logged by timestamp and is fully reviewable.

It is just that as a matter of practice, we want people to better themselves and part of that process is to afford them the opportunity to make amends by cleaning up after themselves. The reward for that is the mods are going to give you a pass for commendable behavior in cleaning up after yourself (so long as it is being done for the right reasons, baiting by insulting and then editing will be unacceptable obviously).

 

[DominionSeraph]

What is the community's take on threads which are started with seemingly little-to-no discussion by the OP?

Example: Thank Obama for the Ever Increasing Prices

Counter-Example: Interesting article on the first months of Obama's presidency.

In the example above there is very little provided in the way of opening discussion on the link and stated topic of the thread itself; whereas the counter-example provides plenty of opening dialogue IMO and makes clear the context within which the OP intends the thread's discussion to focus on.

Administrator Idontcare

The former has a conservatard linking to conservatard site, which should be moderated against. Propaganda is annoying to deal with because to fully expose what it is and show the vacuum in which it resides you have to go through the trouble of spelling out the misrepresented system in its entirety. Why should the onus be on the educated liberal to teach all the way from elementary school to college? If conservatives were held to at least a high-school level it would make things much easier.

OP discussion isn't necessary -- a bare link can be interesting if it's open -- but that's a closed-minded article with an OP who is completely in line with it. He questions no element of it so he defines no specific answer. It's obvious that there will be no quality interaction with the OP so to give a quality response you have to switch over to "for posterity" and "textbook" modes. That's a ton of work and, without an educated audience to appreciate it, it's just not worth it.

 

[waggy]

The former has a conservatard linking to conservatard site, which should be moderated against. .

quite frankly this is the type of bullshit that should get you banned. but for some reason it is encouraged.

 

[dank69]

quite frankly this is the type of bullshit that should get you banned. but for some reason it is encouraged.

I wonder what the ratio of 'libtard' to 'conservatard' use is on this site.
EDIT: Huh, 111:9. Imagine that. Yet here we have an individual getting upset when someone uses the conservatard label.

 

[waggy]

I wonder what the ratio of 'libtard' to 'conservatard' use is on this site.
EDIT: Huh, 111:9. Imagine that. Yet here we have an individual getting upset when someone uses the conservatard label.

who care's what the ratio. what im talking about if you missed it..is that he is saying that one end of the spectrum should be moderated against.

i don't give a crap about someone calling someone else a libtard or convesvarterd or whatever. Trying to stifle someone from talking because you don't agree with what they have to say should not be allowed.

if the board starts it against one direction then whats the point of the forum?

edit; i really didn't think it was that complicated..shrug

 

[dank69]

who care's what the ratio. what im talking about if you missed it..is that he is saying that one end of the spectrum should be moderated against.

i don't give a crap about someone calling someone else a libtard or convesvarterd or whatever. Trying to stifle someone from talking because you don't agree with what they have to say should not be allowed.

if the board starts it against one direction then whats the point of the forum?

edit; i really didn't think it was that complicated..shrug

I took it for granted that that part was facetious.

 

[Infohawk]

On the topic of personal attacks and bigotry:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=32934112&postcount=27

What is the forum rules on something like this? There is no cursing but a member is personally being labeled a thief because of (at best!) his religion and at worst his assumed ethnic background. It's one thing to say "israelis are thieves" it's quite another to call a specific poster a thief because of his religion / ethnic background.

 

[Abwx]

What infohawk?...Crying fool ?..

You are as pitifull as your bunch of usual hate spreaders...

 

[JEDIYoda]

What infohawk?...Crying fool ?..

You are as pitifull as your bunch of usual hate spreaders...

actually IMO Infohawk is correct! You cross the line in your personal attacks...all too often.

You honestly don`t think that calling me a Thief because I have a flat in Tel Aviv and was joking about selling it is okay? Am I a thief - NO!

Yet because I am a Jew you are calling me a Thief.....

Just because I am pro Israel and Pro Jew doesn`t mean you have right to call me a thief or any other slanderous names or for that matter put down what character I have.......or am I missing something?

You have crossed that line before...

And now you come here and attack Infohawk as being pitfull and you call us both a bunch of hate spreaders.....hmmmm...

Just because I honestly believe we should be vigilant and not let our guard down does not mean I am spreading hate....

Your issue is that we don`t agree with you......plain and simple.

I`m out..we can let a mod or the mods jump into this....

BTW we are taking about this thread -- http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2223324&page=3

 

[Infohawk]

What infohawk?...Crying fool ?..

You are as pitifull as your bunch of usual hate spreaders...

Nice move adding even more insults to your rap sheet in a thread that is supposed to be about elevating P&N out of the mud.

 

[DominionSeraph]

who care's what the ratio. what im talking about if you missed it..is that he is saying that one end of the spectrum should be moderated against.

It ain't a spectrum. "Liberal" and "conservative" describe completely different belief-forming methods. "Believing something because mommy and daddy told you it was true and being too stupid to question it," != "Learned and reasoned belief based upon the totality of the available evidence."

“Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.”
― Thomas Paine

Conservatives start with the absence of reason so there's nowhere to go with them.

 

[SparkyJJO]

It ain't a spectrum. "Liberal" and "conservative" describe completely different belief-forming methods. "Believing something because mommy and daddy told you it was true and being too stupid to question it," != "Learned and reasoned belief based upon the totality of the available evidence."

“Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason is like giving medicine to the dead.”
― Thomas Paine

Conservatives start with the absence of reason so there's nowhere to go with them.

Of course you do realize that some people on the opposite side of the spectrum may think the exact same thing only with the word "conservatives" exchanged for "liberals." Yes, spectrum, because quite frankly, anyone making a statement like the one you just made (with either side being the target) is the one being without reason and entirely closed-minded.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Of course you do realize that some people on the opposite side of the spectrum may think the exact same thing only with the word "conservatives" exchanged for "liberals."

Of what relevance are the thoughts of those who fail to compensate for the natural tendency to use logical fallacies?

This is non-reversible. If I think that NASA can reach orbit using rockets and think you're stupid for thinking you can reach it with just your fart-power, and you think you can reach orbit with your farts and think I'm stupid for thinking NASA can reach it with rockets... we're not on equal footing there.

(and boy was that unnecessarily convoluted. Why the hell didn't I use 1+1=2 vs =3?)

 

[SparkyJJO]

Of what relevance are the thoughts of those who fail to compensate for the natural tendency to use logical fallacies?

This is non-reversible.

You know, sometimes I have wondered the same thing since you seem to use them fairly often. But I try to overlook it on occasion.

 

[DominionSeraph]

You know, sometimes I have wondered the same thing since you seem to use them fairly often.

Rhetorical shortcuts. Nobody here can engage me to a degree where I'd have to stop using them and actually break out the full arguments.
Nobody here is worthy of my best effort so I don't give it.

 

[Idontcare]

On the topic of personal attacks and bigotry:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=32934112&postcount=27

What is the forum rules on something like this? There is no cursing but a member is personally being labeled a thief because of (at best!) his religion and at worst his assumed ethnic background. It's one thing to say "israelis are thieves" it's quite another to call a specific poster a thief because of his religion / ethnic background.

The global forum rules clearly state that personal attacks and flaming are not acceptable.

1) No trolling, flaming or personally attacking members. Deftly attacking ideas and backing up arguments with facts is acceptable and encouraged. Attacking other members personally and purposefully causing trouble with no motive other than to upset the crowd is not allowed.

We want to give all our members as much freedom as possible while maintaining an environment that encourages productive discussion. It is our desire to encourage our members to share their knowledge and experiences in order to benefit the rest of the community, while also providing a place for people to come and just hang out.

We also intend to encourage respect and responsibility among members in order to maintain order and civility. Our social forums will have a relaxed atmosphere, but other forums will be expected to remain on-topic and posts should be helpful, relevant and professional.

We ask for respect and common decency towards your fellow forum members.

That said, this rule has not been consistently or widely upheld in P&N for some time now and that is what we are in the beginning stages of discussing - what degree of enforcement of the global rules does this community desire?

There is another community poll going up shortly which will give the moderators a better sense of what this community holds as the top-priority for near-term improvement by the moderators.

Personal attacks is on that list.

 

[Mursilis]

The global forum rules clearly state that personal attacks and flaming are not acceptable.


That said, this rule has not been consistently or widely upheld in P&N for some time now and that is what we are in the beginning stages of discussing - what degree of enforcement of the global rules does this community desire?

With a freakin' hammer, and without mercy. Intelligent discussion is possible here, but so frequently drowned out by the trolling.

 

[Abwx]

actually IMO Infohawk is correct! You cross the line in your personal attacks...all too often.

You honestly don`t think that calling me a Thief because I have a flat in Tel Aviv and was joking about selling it is okay? Am I a thief - NO!

Yet because I am a Jew you are calling me a Thief.....

Just because I am pro Israel and Pro Jew doesn`t mean you have right to call me a thief or any other slanderous names or for that matter put down what character I have.......or am I missing something?


BTW we are taking about this thread -- http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2223324&page=3

I criticized you for your support and endorsment of zionism..

I did add that the creators of zionism are not semitic jews...

Of course you did , as usually , jump on the waggon
of deffamation by pulling things out of context.

Anyway , you have as signature the quotes of a banned
guy that was advocating mass murder of ME non israelis people..

And you re still crying fool ?...

 

[JEDIYoda]

I criticized you for your support and endorsment of zionism..

I did add that the creators of zionism are not semitic jews...

Of course you did , as usually , jump on the waggon
of deffamation by pulling things out of context.

Anyway , you have as signature the quotes of a banned
guy that was advocating mass murder of ME non israelis people..

And you re still crying fool ?...

Try as you may you cannot explain away the personal attacks!
An attack is still an attack regardless the context.
The mere lumping me as a theif and using my name was an attack. - You were wrong!
You cannot find one post where I stated or put into words that all Muslims should be killed. Do I have problems with people putting a gun and firing into a young girls.......you bet you! Those are low life people.

Yet there was an article and I cannot presently find it that described how in the United States it would appear that they were adapting to our culture and going out of their way to make sure their former way of life does not interfere in them being good citizens of America. But -- we still need to be vigilant to make sure that all that we hold true and dear is not slowly taken away.

Had you left well enough alone and said all Jews are thiefs.
That would have sufficed because you did not mention anybody name.

No use crying because I am a Jew...yet I would have called you out and said -- all jews?? you see.....
On second thought you probably don`t see...

Thats your opinion so be it.

Down through history people who we don`t agree especially important historical figures sometimes say things that are correct and factual. I draw the line and will never call for the extermination of a group of race of people.

What is wrong with my sig??

JohnOfSheffield -- That said, Palestine will exist when they understand that Israel exists, it's that blatantly simple! -- there are many people on these forums who would agree with what this sig says!

 

[cybrsage]

Of what relevance are the thoughts of those who fail to compensate for the natural tendency to use logical fallacies?

This is non-reversible. If I think that NASA can reach orbit using rockets and think you're stupid for thinking you can reach it with just your fart-power, and you think you can reach orbit with your farts and think I'm stupid for thinking NASA can reach it with rockets... we're not on equal footing there.

(and boy was that unnecessarily convoluted. Why the hell didn't I use 1+1=2 vs =3?)

You have obviously never been near Sparky after he eats at Taco Bel...

 

[woolfe9999]

Psst. Anyone ever heard of the concepts of self-censorship, self-moderation, and garden variety self-restraint? We'd all be much better off if people practiced it more consistently around here.

 

[SandEagle]

all of this can be resolved peacefully my making me a moderator.

 

[DominionSeraph]

With a freakin' hammer, and without mercy. Intelligent discussion is possible here, but so frequently drowned out by the trolling.

The problem is that there's no method to hold shills and idiots to Truth. They will come in and disrupt with an avalanche of stupidity. Keeping them dead-ended in personal attacks is actually preferable to having them torture logic, with more tortured logic to support their ignoring of valid logic.
They can effortlessly spout stupidity while, on the other side, it takes effort to try to chase stupidity down. If they cannot be held to direct, logical replies you can never run them to ground. If you can't run them to ground there's no point in chasing them. With no point to a logical chase the board will do exactly what it has done: Self-select for stupidity as no smart person is going to put effort into trying to corral randomness.

If the mods will not hold posters to being caught by evidence/logic this board will never be anything but a cesspool.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Nice move adding even more insults to your rap sheet in a thread that is supposed to be about elevating P&N out of the mud.

Really, I think that types of comments like these should be relegated to PM with the poster in question or a moderator.

What use is there in basically attacking another poster in public? Do you expect them to just stand by the side and not do anything? I think that it's mostly in human behavior to defend oneself and this usually causes a massive off-topic derail pissing match between the two people.

I think that personal attacks like "You are a dumb troll" should be relegated to PMs or conversations with moderators. However, saying that "Democrats or Republicans are dumb" may be mindless and incendiary to some degree, but at least it isn't a direct personal attack against a poster and is less likely to cause a pissing match to make the thread go off-topic.