Flame Wars

[Rich]

What might be acceptible here in troll land may not be seen as professional in other sections.

Since you only ever post here in the non Access forums you must be one of the trolls.........

 

[Fifty2One]

It may appear that this profile belongs to a troll, which is why I only post with it in the watercooler. I would not want someone to click on a useful reply in another forum to see if they can find other helpful posts and find all sorts of posts that they might find offensive.
Some people do not take sparring as well as others, and some people have different standards of what is offensive and what is not. I find using slurs in reference to a persons nationality, religion or race particularly offensive and others do not. SOmething offensive view on the professional side of forums may not be good for 'business'.
However if there are no ground rules on the forums and no consistent enforcement then just about anything goes, and seemingly does.

Since you only ever post here in the non Access forums you must be one of the trolls.........

 

[Rich]

Some people do not take sparring as well as others, and some people have different standards of what is offensive and what is not.

Exactly, pity you don't apply that process more often

 

[Banana]

Where and when?

What about this very thread?

It may be 'somebody else's fault' but surely we know from the grammar school that adults never really cared who started the fight - they just want the fight to stop. Everyone is equally guilty here. Returning the punches is just as much of the problem as throwing the first punch.

Yes, except both forums have the same name. I would assume you and some other posters on this thread would not enter the Political and General Discussion...Uncensored forum. On the other hand if I entered the Political and General Discussion...Censored forum I would moderate what I say if deletion or moderator editing is to be avoided.

I'm sorry but I still fail to see the logic here. As I've already pointed out, spills does occur and that would be just more work for the moderators. Humans are an emotive lot- they want to get the last word and whatnots. I don't imagine that anyone has never been tempted to scathe the other and look good in own eyes. Enacting a wall won't stop the hurling over the wall. It's no different from those silly sections in restaurants - non smokers on one side, smokers on the other side, yet the smoke perpetuate the whole room. We're either a smoking establishment or not at all. Whichever we may be, is entirely up to Jon and those he delegated.

Even then, that completely miss the point. The point here is there is no reason or need to resort to cheap shots to make points, but it would be quite challenging to have a intelligent discussion if the thread get flooded with non sequiturs, irrelevant generalizations, and small-minded nitpicking. This is the real reason why I don't participate in most of WC threads and many other posters do likewise. When a thread does actually raise to the level, I do and I suspect the same group of poster does so. So in a way, the wall is already there but it certainly isn't going to stop somebody from rising to the bait or getting offended. Even worse, it's not going stop anybody from prolonging the drivel and clogging up the 'View the New Posts', crowding out more interesting threads or even technical threads for which the forums was presumably created - to help others.

Sometime I can't but help wonder what new people coming to the forums may think of the watercooler when they first visit and what effects it would have on the forums as whole. Seem to me we would want to attract more bright people with talents and potential to help others and not put up an open invitation for even more trolls and driving away talented people or even novices looking for help. But that's just my imagination and that's entirely up to Jon to decide how he wants to run the forums.

 

[Rich]

What about this very thread?

It may be 'somebody else's fault' but surely we know from the grammar school that adults never really cared who started the fight - they just want the fight to stop. Everyone is equally guilty here. Returning the punches is just as much of the problem as throwing the first punch.



I'm sorry but I still fail to see the logic here. As I've already pointed out, spills does occur and that would be just more work for the moderators. Humans are an emotive lot- they want to get the last word and whatnots. I don't imagine that anyone has never been tempted to scathe the other and look good in own eyes. Enacting a wall won't stop the hurling over the wall. It's no different from those silly sections in restaurants - non smokers on one side, smokers on the other side, yet the smoke perpetuate the whole room. We're either a smoking establishment or not at all. Whichever we may be, is entirely up to Jon and those he delegated.

Even then, that completely miss the point. The point here is there is no reason or need to resort to cheap shots to make points, but it would be quite challenging to have a intelligent discussion if the thread get flooded with non sequiturs, irrelevant generalizations, and small-minded nitpicking. This is the real reason why I don't participate in most of WC threads and many other posters do likewise. When a thread does actually raise to the level, I do and I suspect the same group of poster does so. So in a way, the wall is already there but it certainly isn't going to stop somebody from rising to the bait or getting offended. Even worse, it's not going stop anybody from prolonging the drivel and clogging up the 'View the New Posts', crowding out more interesting threads or even technical threads for which the forums was presumably created - to help others.

Sometime I can't but help wonder what new people coming to the forums may think of the watercooler when they first visit and what effects it would have on the forums as whole. Seem to me we would want to attract more bright people with talents and potential to help others and not put up an open invitation for even more trolls and driving away talented people or even novices looking for help. But that's just my imagination and that's entirely up to Jon to decide how he wants to run the forums.

This section's been here for years and members have come and gone for years, your point is?

 

[Brianwarnock]

I don't really follow this business of clogging up "view new posts", I find it very easy to skip past threads and/or forums that I am not interested in, and you could always pretend that you are on UA and just look at the index to see if forums that you are interested in have new posts.

Brian

 

[ColinEssex]

When I first started here in 1999, there was an unwritten code. No chat about sex, religion or slagging off other people. It was self regulating.

Why not try that again? I'm willing.

Col

 

[Rich]

When I first started here in 1999, there was an unwritten code. No chat about sex, religion or slagging off other people. It was self regulating.

Why not try that again? I'm willing.

Col

Not sure I like the no chat about sex part

 

[Steve R.]

I don't see the point. There's already Watercooler and then there's Politic and Current Events. Having one more forum for what those two forums already is full to brim?

Agree with Banana.

 

[Fifty2One]

I have no problem following guidelines as long as they are respected by everyone. It needs to be written and the moderators have to apply the rules and follow the rules theirselves.

When I first started here in 1999, there was an unwritten code. No chat about sex, religion or slagging off other people. It was self regulating.

Why not try that again? I'm willing.

Col

 

[Rich]

There's already a huge list of patronising rules for posting on the forum in the general section, in fact there's so many it's a wonder how so many newbies manage to post anything at all here

 

[Rabbie]

There's already a huge list of patronising rules for posting on the forum in the general section, in fact there's so many it's a wonder how so many newbies manage to post anything at all here

They are not actually rules. Just suggestions

 

[Mike375]

What about this very thread?

Example of where it has spilled into the Access forums.

Sometime I can't but help wonder what new people coming to the forums may think of the watercooler when they first visit and what effects it would have on the forums as whole. Seem to me we would want to attract more bright people with talents and potential to help others and not put up an open invitation for even more trolls and driving away talented people or even novices looking for help. But that's just my imagination and that's entirely up to Jon to decide how he wants to run the forums.

Well having Political and General Censored and Political and General Uncensored shows the forum is flexible and caters for all views.

If there is a Political and General Censored then your needs are taken care of. Also saves the moderator time.

And surely you are not suggesting that you or others who want a moderated forum would venture into the uncensored forum?

 

[Mike375]

Originally Posted by Banana
I don't see the point. There's already Watercooler and then there's Politic and Current Events. Having one more forum for what those two forums already is full to brim?

I suggested combining Watercooler and Political with one censored and the other uncensored.

No change in number of forums.

And if there is a thread in "censored" that is deemed to offend those who get offended it is moved to uncensored. So no more threads on "why was my thread deleted" etc.

If the vast majority agree with you and others who think cnesorship of a form is the way to go then the uncensored forum will die. Then if the subject comes up in the future you can say "we tried that before etc" and that would save a long thread like this one.

 

[ColinEssex]

This is just getting silly.

There will always be things said that are acceptable in one country and deemed "offensive" in another.

If we all follow the original self-policed rules of 10 years ago (no sex, religion or politics) then we should pull ourselves back.

The mods however, if they do delete any post or thread - MUST notify as to why they have done it. In fact, instead of deleting a thread just lock it and have the last posting as the explanation.

At the moment, many things are deleted and the poster has no idea what is wrong so will continue to make these errors. Plus anyway, it it only polite and etiquette to notify.

I don't mind being "told off" but I need a bloody good reason.

That's my 2p worth - do what the hell you like.
But make sure everyone knows the rules and it is an even playing field and not biased towards the Yanks. This is a British site after all.

Col

 

[ajetrumpet]

i'm completely at a loss...

WHY IS DELETING A THREAD A NO-NO? i just don't get it!

 

[Vassago]

Colin, are you seriously willing to not talk politics at all?

 

[ChrisO]

Adam, there is no reason to shout; we’re not blind.

Deleting a thread or a post is not a no-no, deleting without a stated reason should be.

In order to have some resemblance of transparency I think it should be a rule for all.
If not it could become a rule for us but just a suggestion for them and that can lead to disharmony.

 

[ColinEssex]

Adam, there is no reason to shout; we’re not blind.

Deleting a thread or a post is not a no-no, deleting without a stated reason should be.

In order to have some resemblance of transparency I think it should be a rule for all.
If not it could become a rule for us but just a suggestion for them and that can lead to disharmony.

Thank you Chris.

I'm afraid Adam is just being difficult because he feels it's clever to be obtuse, especially when I make (what I thought) was a reasonable comment.
You only have to see his comment in his header to see his hatred for Rich and I.

Vass, we could keep the politics bit, but it would be in danger of becoming personal as opposed to generic politics.

Incidentally, if a thread is locked with a reason then everyone can see why. If it is deleted, then nobody, not even the "culprit" has no idea why because the mods never give reasons. I believe that is normal though in a dictatorship, and being as these forums have now become that, I suppose we'd better get used to it.

Col

 

[Rich]

Adam, there is no reason to shout;

He's gone deaf through constantly blowing his own trumpet