More tolerance, maybe?

DeVore

This is actually the sort of feedback I like to see. I mean, I dont agree with the OP but its put in a reasonable and mature fashion. Some of the responses have been a little "shrill", this is a serious topic not only for Boards but for society... when do we decide something is beyond acceptible? What do we do with transgressors? What sort of rules do we want applied to us and how do we agree those rules?

Personally I think there is a good balance struck right now. I understand the OP thinks it might be better to allow discussion to happen, but in my view I dont think we need to allow derogatory slurs to be thrown around in order to allow debate to occur.

I would love to see a real-world version of Feedback where we could complain about the laws of the land ...

DeV.

Anti

Boston wrote:

Small point, but it was called swap.avi

Jesus H christ !

Do you ever keep your trap shut? It was called scat.avi, there is swap.avi too and eels.wmv.... But i was on about scat.avi

Gordon

Binomate wrote:

Already a member. But I'm not looking for a place that I can be racist. It's more like wanting to see racists post their shit, and then get jumped on by the masses instead of getting banned for it. Less political correctness.

Build it and they will come! I propose you call your new forum www.racists-posthereandthengetjumpedonbythemassesinsteadofgettingbannedforit.com

That's your best bet, good luck with your venture.

6th

Domain is already taken.

Boston

DeVore; There's a fundamental problem with perception. People aren't actually engaging in discussion about the topic, but rather the OP wants cart blanc to say whatever he wants without being called on it. Intolerant attitudes are tolerated on boards.ie however their not protected like on other forums. Here everyone is free to say you're wrong. Abusive or badly thought out arguments are almost worse then intolerant ones. **** like "Knackers are scum" really doesn't contribute much in the way of anything.

Anti wrote:

Jesus H christ !

Do you ever keep your trap shut? It was called scat.avi, there is swap.avi too and eel.avi....

GuanYin

DeVore wrote:

This is actually the sort of feedback I like to see. I mean, I dont agree with the OP but its put in a reasonable and mature fashion. Some of the responses have been a little "shrill", this is a serious topic not only for Boards but for society... when do we decide something is beyond acceptible? What do we do with transgressors? What sort of rules do we want applied to us and how do we agree those rules?

I'm deadly serious about the stormfront forum. We actually talked about this one night over beers iirc and you half thought about it.

They come here anyway, why not localise them and see how they do when they have to make their points rationaly and not under their own biased moderation. Of course, the same has to be said for the posters that jump down their throats without thinking.

Maybe it will be a pointless exercise, but if we manage to reach just one person with reasoned, rational discussion and make them think about their views, then the forum is worthwhile.

Boston

psi wrote:

I'm deadly serious about the stormfront forum. We actually talked about this one night over beers iirc and you half thought about it.

They come here anyway, why not localise them and see how they do when they have to make their points rationaly and not under their own biased moderation. Of course, the same has to be said for the posters that jump down their throats without thinking.

Maybe it will be a pointless exercise, but if we manage to reach just one person with reasoned, rational discussion and make them think about their views, then the forum is worthwhile.

I think I would stop posting on boards if that idea went through. I agree with the point you're making and it might even work, but I've read StormFront, and its by far to most depressing, unsettling, and disturbing thing I've ever come accross on the net. In the back of my head I know these people exist, but you get through the day be segmenting and ignoring that ****e. Having a forum on boards where the level of pure hate, and lets be honest, evil, is allowed to gain an audience, would just be too far to ignore.

WindSock

Boards is my daily haven from the real world of thoughtless scumbags.

hullaballoo

DeVore wrote:

I would love to see a real-world version of Feedback where we could complain about the laws of the land ...

DeV.

Slightly off-topic; but would Legal Discussion and Politics fit the bill there?

OT: This boils down to the way people perceive different forums on this site. I've always thought that people think of AH as being in the pub with a few mates. As such, they think they can effectively say all the same things they would to their mates.

However, as the bar is open to everyone, and they aren't all your mates, then you have to watch what you say to them. You have to watch what you say even where your not addressing anyone in particular, because here, everyone can hear you. Unfortunately, you even have to watch what you say about people who aren't here now - but might come down for a pint later - because what you've said is available for playback for anyone who wants to listen.

You're in a pub with some mates, a lot of people you don't know, and a potentially infinite number of people who will be down later. Everyone knows your name. Everyone is tuned in to what you're saying. You cannot expect that your racial slurs will be acceptable to anyone except those you know. So what do you do?

On the other hand, it's not such a great idea to get overly-PC either. As such, I think the balance lies in the humour of what you're saying. Just as long as people can come to terms with the fact that things always sound funnier in your head.

WindSock

Boston wrote:

Where all the moderators are Gay, Jewish and Black.

And Women!

GuanYin

Boston wrote:

I think I would stop posting on boards if that idea went through. I agree with the point you're making and it might even work, but I've read StormFront, and its by far to most depressing, unsettling, and disturbing thing I've ever come accross on the net.

Well in fairness, I'm not suggesting we have an actual stormfront forum as per their website. That would be pointless. The reason that forum is so bad is that it's run for biggots, by biggots. Dissenting voices don't get a debate, they get a flamed, abused and threathened.

But what if they did return with debate? Would it be the same site? No, I don't think so. Psychology 101, but in order to make any hate-group successful, you have to eliminate dissenting outside influence. If we create something that encourages dissenting outside influence, then we're immediately doing someone, somewhere some good.

We get stormfront threads here all the time, usually they come in fits and starts and last as long as amp is amused by them. You'd be very surprised how few posts by boards users are glib and pointless or flaming.

In the back of my head I know these people exist, but you get through the day be segmenting and ignoring that ****e. Having a forum on boards where the level of pure hate, and lets be honest, evil, is allowed to gain an audience, would just be too far to ignore.

Thats fair enough for you. Other people aren't so lucky. I pretty much can't ignore them. I've received hate mail and death threats from them when my image and details were available in the public domain in Ireland. But its not just the organisations, it's among the people themselves. Ignorance and intolerance breed on fear and there are alot of people in Ireland who are irrationally threathened by foreigners.

The best way to combat fear is through education. Bring it open for debate, let people see informed debate and discussion, let them form an opinion based on all available information.

Sticking your head in the sand won't stop you being eaten by a wolf.

Boston

Ok, but I don't see how thats much different then current procedure on the humanities or politics forums. As for sticking my head in the sand, maybe, but personally it's better then banging my head against a brick wall, try that one as well. These people exist, they always will, I've no desire to go looking for them.

GuanYin

Boston wrote:

Ok, but I don't see how thats much different then current procedure on the humanities or politics forums. As for sticking my head in the sand, maybe, but personally it's better then banging my head against a brick wall, try that one as well. These people exist, they always will, I've no desire to go looking for them.

I think the problem at the moment is as I described it. The threads last as long as the mods are amused.

Levelling the playing field where these people aren't immediately perceived as the enemy by all would be a good start.

Personally I think if done right such a forum could be worthwhile.

Binomate

To be honest, this idea was only semi clear in my head and I was a little bit distracted when I was starting this thread so my original post was kind of hazy and lacked definition, but I think psi gave a good idea of what I was trying to get at. He said it a lot better than I ever could.

Chucky the tree

psi wrote:

I'm deadly serious about the stormfront forum. We actually talked about this one night over beers iirc and you half thought about it.

They come here anyway, why not localise them and see how they do when they have to make their points rationaly and not under their own biased moderation. Of course, the same has to be said for the posters that jump down their throats without thinking.

Maybe it will be a pointless exercise, but if we manage to reach just one person with reasoned, rational discussion and make them think about their views, then the forum is worthwhile.

This idea gets my full support anyway.

Boston wrote:

I think I would stop posting on boards if that idea went through. .

Boston

Chucky the tree wrote:

This idea gets my full support anyway.

Ah yes, perdictable. Lol FLAMO. LMAO and so on. Never saw that coming. Just who exactly are you? I mean should I know you?

Chucky the tree

Boston wrote:

Ah yes, perdictable. Lol FLAMO. LMAO and so on. Never saw that coming. Just who exactly are you? I mean should I know you?

that sums you up perfectly.

flogen

psi wrote:

I think the problem at the moment is as I described it. The threads last as long as the mods are amused.

Levelling the playing field where these people aren't immediately perceived as the enemy by all would be a good start.

Personally I think if done right such a forum could be worthwhile.

That's fair enough, but I don't think a new forum is needed for this - the mods of fora like Politics and Humanities seem, for the most part, even-handed enough to not tolerate baseless abuse and attacks no matter who they're coming from and if they aren't then that's the issue that needs to be resolved - a new forum isn't the answer.

One other point - I appreciate your aims in this idea, but you're not going to "rehabilitate" Stormfronters. They come here to spread their ideas and ultimately give up because of the lack of support and amount of reasoned and educated responses. They don't change their own minds, no matter what you say, they just go back to their holes and say "boards.ie is fully of pinko liberal fags". Giving people like them their own little space to test out their theories in the real world won't show them the error of their ways, all the forum would be is repetitive entertainment for people who like to see the ignorant being shown up for what they are.

GuanYin

flogen wrote:

That's fair enough, but I don't think a new forum is needed for this - the mods of fora like Politics and Humanities seem, for the most part, even-handed enough to not tolerate baseless abuse and attacks no matter who they're coming from and if they aren't then that's the issue that needs to be resolved - a new forum isn't the answer.

They may be. They may not want the change though, both forums work well as is. I also think that moderation may need to be firm but more flexible than normal forums. In any case, this wasn't my idea. It was one DeVore brought up, albeit tongue in cheek at the time.

One other point - I appreciate your aims in this idea, but you're not going to "rehabilitate" Stormfronters. They come here to spread their ideas and ultimately give up because of the lack of support and amount of reasoned and educated responses. They don't change their own minds, no matter what you say, they just go back to their holes and say "boards.ie is fully of pinko liberal fags". Giving people like them their own little space to test out their theories in the real world won't show them the error of their ways, all the forum would be is repetitive entertainment for people who like to see the ignorant being shown up for what they are.

Did I say anything about rehabilitating Stormfronters? I believe that is an invention of your own. I believe I specifically cited ignorance and intolerance in the general population that can be addressed by offering balanced debate and both sides of the story.

flogen

psi wrote:

They may be. They may not want the change though, both forums work well as is.

'they' as in the moderators of the boards.ie [whatever] forum?

I also think that moderation may need to be firm but more flexible than normal forums.

I think it already is, certainly when you compare Humanities to the likes of AH - Politics rarely gets too many very "controversial" threads, but it's even rarer to see the mods come down hard in these situations, except to clean out personal abuse and trolling etc.

In any case, this wasn't my idea. It was one DeVore brought up, albeit tongue in cheek at the time.

And you brought it up in this thread, albeit tongue in cheek at the time (at least that's how I read this sentence.)

Did I say anything about rehabilitating Stormfronters? I believe that is an invention of your own.

In fairness, you didn't, that was an invention of my own which I probably conjured up whilst trying to figure out the point to your proposal.

You said earlier:

They come here anyway, why not localise them and see how they do when they have to make their points rationaly and not under their own biased moderation. Of course, the same has to be said for the posters that jump down their throats without thinking.

And as far as I'm concerned the various fora that already exist provide that service as it is. They're free to make their points rationally without biased moderation and posters that jump down their throats without thinking are dealt with accordingly.

You then said:

Maybe it will be a pointless exercise, but if we manage to reach just one person with reasoned, rational discussion and make them think about their views, then the forum is worthwhile.

Which again is something that can be (and probably is already) achieved through the existing fora.

I believe I specifically cited ignorance and intolerance in the general population that can be addressed by offering balanced debate and both sides of the story.

You did and there's nothing in the moderation of any boards.ie forum that doesn't already offer that. If there is the moderators should be set straight, regardless of their own wishes to maintain the status quo.

Sid Deuce

Why does no one stand up For Paris?

If I were on Ah and said "Damn that begging Romnian bitch on the bridges she needs shot"

i'd be banned. Like the Hitler bloke.

But ask for Paris Hilton to Die a slow death or be shot in the head.... It be all good!

Why so? Is it cos i black?

GuanYin

I did bring it up here, because it was, after all, on topic.

As for whether or not it is needed as a separate forum, the bat signal in the mod forum goes haywire everytime we geta few stormfront posters here. It's plainly obvious they are barely tolerated.

While the forums you suggest are, I agree, aptly catagorised for such topics of debate, the fact remains that people with such ideas are not welcome. I have often engaged in these debates and while as I have said, the boards.ie posters take them seriously, I do feel that there is still that boards element of use the forum rules to beat them over the head rather than actually tackling the issues.

I wouldn't suggest a forum should be named stormfront, that send out far too bad an image for boards.

But for topics such as abortion, racism, travellers etc etc the idea of a "Controversial Issues: forum set up to provide a more welcoming environment for those with non-mainstream views is not without merit. In many ways I see it as an opportunity for those with socially unaccepted beliefs and views to enter into debate without long sections of threads being devoted as to whether or not they're racist etc etc and focus on the issue at hand.

flogen

psi wrote:

I did bring it up here, because it was, after all, on topic.

Fair enough, it's an on-topic point - I'm just asking if it's a valid one too.

As for whether or not it is needed as a separate forum, the bat signal in the mod forum goes haywire everytime we geta few stormfront posters here. It's plainly obvious they are barely tolerated.

That can be true, and there are probably a number of reasons for this - partly because the might mods have a very passionate opposition to what they're saying, but also, more constructively, because they may feel a) there's a tendency for Stormfronters to travel in packs and debate in a non-constructive fashion and b) there's a tendency for some people to respond aggressively to their comments and spark a flame-war.

While the forums you suggest are, I agree, aptly catagorised for such topics of debate, the fact remains that people with such ideas are not welcome. I have often engaged in these debates and while as I have said, the boards.ie posters take them seriously, I do feel that there is still that boards element of use the forum rules to beat them over the head rather than actually tackling the issues.

Without any specific examples in my mind I'm going to say that, more than likely, there are plenty of times where a mod impedes a debate out of personal bias or is harder on someone because they disagree with them or just don't like them. That said, setting up a new forum with a view to solving this problem would involve gathering moderators that didn't do this. My view is that we should skip the first point (making the new forum) and focus on whatever problem may exist with the existing moderation.

But for topics such as abortion, racism, travellers etc etc the idea of a "Controversial Issues: forum set up to provide a more welcoming environment for those with non-mainstream views is not without merit. In many ways I see it as an opportunity for those with socially unaccepted beliefs and views to enter into debate without long sections of threads being devoted as to whether or not they're racist etc etc and focus on the issue at hand.

OK - I do have some issues with this, however (besides my opinion that the service is already provided)

Firstly I have issue with treating certain issues or opinions differently than others just because they're deemed controversial by some. It only adds to their toxicity if the site has different rules for discussions on race, abortion etc. than on more tame issues. I also think it would only enhance people's opinion that they may be thinking in an "improper" fashion when they have to go to a certain forum to give their opinions - I'd prefer it if divisions were not created that encourage anything to be seen as taboo or off limits in normal areas of discussion.

Secondly I think it's a self-defeating concept to try and encourage debate and education by separating a certain class of topic into a new forum. People will need to seek out the 'controversial opinions' forum in order to read them, where I think the regular readership of AH and Politics etc. allows for far greater passive education.

Thirdly, any thread discussing race issues is likely to result in someone being called racist or "from the PC brigade", the problem is when these comments, which are insults in their own right, are allowed to be thrown around without justification or qualification. They should be stamped on in any forum.

Fourthly I think it would be to the detriment of other fora, as people who feel the topic to be "controversial" won't take it to Politics or Humanities anymore.

And finally if someone thinks a certain way but is afraid to state their point of view publicly (in a suitable forum like Politics) then they'll get no sympathy from me and shouldn't be catered for more than anyone else - such an attitude reeks of "this is what I think but I can't justify it". Same applies for anyone who won't post their opinion because they think it's unpopular.

GuanYin

Nicely reasoned, but if we applied your thinking to the site, exactly how many separate forums would we have? Two, Three? Why not just have categories and do away with separate forums?

Ok, thats an extreme counter, but the point is valid, I learned long ago when arguing the same case you are, you'd be surprised how forums you think would wither will thrive and act symbioticly with other fora, whereas forum you expect to thrive will be a ghost town.

I certainly think that forums like Islam and Paranormal and Dreams are fora that counter the points you are making.

flogen

psi wrote:

Nicely reasoned, but if we applied your thinking to the site, exactly how many separate forums would we have? Two, Three? Why not just have categories and do away with separate forums?

Ok, thats an extreme counter, but the point is valid, I learned long ago when arguing the same case you are, you'd be surprised how forums you think would wither will thrive and act symbioticly with other fora, whereas forum you expect to thrive will be a ghost town.

New fora, as niché or obscure as they may often seem, are generally created for a reason, though. I'm not arguing that we no longer need to break topics down at all, just not in this case.

If controversial issues couldn't not be discussed somewhere already, or if they were overwhelming a particular forum then it might be different. The only justification for the creation of this forum is that the issues cannot be discussed properly as it is, which I don't think is true.

Also, it's one thing to break an overarching classification down into smaller, more specific components. But to break down a classification into the seriousness of its individual topics just seems to be asking for a more confusing and complex state of affairs. When does a topic or opinion become controversial anyway, and who sets the bar? Any kind of definition on controversial, serious, sensitive, taboo, etc. are all subjective.

I certainly think that forums like Islam and Paranormal and Dreams are fora that counter the points you are making.

All of them?

CuLT

As a side note, SomethingAwful gets away with murder essentially because it is a "satire" site, which under US law basically makes everything fair game as far as I can tell.

I'm sure there's a similar equivalent over here, but boards.ie doesn't count as a satire site, despite what a large number of Feedback's cat-posting subcommunity may lead you to believe.

nesf

Binomate wrote:

Take a look at After Hours as an example. Every time there is a topic about the travelling community or eastern Europeans, there's always someone who gets banned for racism or complaining about a certain group of people because they don't like that group of people for what ever reason. We have something similar for those extra spirited debates that result in flame wars, where people can continue the threads or take up the issue in the thunderdrome.

Generally someone gets themselves banned but usually in my experience it’s for personal insults and flaming rather than anything that is downright racist (few people actually cross that line to the point of getting banned for it, we don’t automatically ban people for “racism” we ban them for racists posts that advocate violence against certain groups etc).

The thing is, any of the other AH mods will tell you this, but as soon as a Traveller, eastern European or similar thread appears we have a headache. We’ve got to babysit the thing until it gets locked or interest in the topic dwindles after the usual suspects have given their usual opinions. What I don’t think a lot of people appreciate is how bad these threads can get and how quickly they can turn nasty if they aren’t watched.

I know what you are talking about in that, I find people with extreme racist viewpoints getting trolled amusing enough but the problem is that the person doing it has to be both patient and intelligent and know exactly what they are doing. These are not qualities that the vast majority of AH responders to these threads either have or bother to apply. Most people just “react” and type up a quick reply, they don’t give it a whole lot of thought. They don’t have to, it is AH after all. If you combine this kind of posting with people posting extremely insulting/controversial/whatever material and you don’t get a clever “piss taking” you get a stream of abuse directed at the original poster (which, if they are a troll, is exactly what they want to happen). The biggest problem is that too many users take everything they read seriously (as in, they believe that the person who posted it believes it).

The short version of it is that allowing these more extreme posts in AH will just end up with more people getting banned (because of abuse etc) than if we just remove these extreme posts at the beginning. Again, not a lot of people appreciate that a lot of what we remove from these threads are (intentionally or not) pure flamebait.


We don’t automatically stamp down on racism, it is tolerated to a limited extent so long as it isn’t systematic (some users only ever seem to post things with “racist undertones” and that’s a little on the subversive side to be encouraged) or encouraging violence etc. We don’t ban and/or delete everything that isn’t perfectly PC. All we really expect is for people to remain civil with one another and not incite other people into breaking the rules (see: flamebait above). There are boundaries, but they are there to keep the conversation from descending into flaming, insulting and general abuse, not to necessarily restrict people’s freedom of speech.

WhiteWashMan

Binomate wrote:

I'm sure I'm not the only one, but I'd like to see boards take up a more tolerant attitude in moderation towards threads that may be considered offensive to a particular group of people, or if not a change of moderating policy, create a forum where such threads could be moved to and continued with some kind of age limit restriction. Now I'm not trying to play the "OMG WE HAVE RIGHTS TO FREE SPEECH" card here, but it would be nice for boards to allow some of the more extreme side of things through. Some of them I find, are quite interesting or entertaining.

Take a look at After Hours as an example. Every time there is a topic about the travelling community or eastern Europeans, there's always someone who gets banned for racism or complaining about a certain group of people because they don't like that group of people for what ever reason. We have something similar for those extra spirited debates that result in flame wars, where people can continue the threads or take up the issue in the thunderdrome.


What do you think?

there is tolerance of discussion. theres tolerance of meandering inane posting. theres tolerance of stupid opinions, and stupidity in people in general. theres tolerance of all types of people, and all types of topics. theres tolerance of debate and intelligent discussion (the rare times it occurs), and there is lots of tolerance towards many things.

there is no tolerance on personal abuse. if you want a more extreme side to things, i suggest you make a request on the forums forum, or you visit another site.

and id be disappointed if i found out that anyone had ever been banned on AH for giving an opinion. there have been plenty of people banned for being derogatory and insulting though.

dont mix the two up.

Marksie

I think a lot of it comes down to pure common sense. It is obvious if a poster is just causing trouble or not.

A good example of moderating I saw in PI. The poster had been initially banned. But had been in contact with the Mod in question, was allowed to rewrite the post and then was unbanned. Obviously it was the way it had been written not the thought behind it.

Karl Hungus

WhiteWashMan wrote:

and id be disappointed if i found out that anyone had ever been banned on AH for giving an opinion.

But isn't 'Racism' specifically against the rules outlined in the AH charter, so if that opinion happens to be racist, then surely, people will be banned for it?