Gender equality and Men's rights discussion megathread - READ FIRST POST

tbh

The Corinthian wrote: »

I already explained why, so you can either address that response or accept it.

Ok, I reject it out of hand. You say:

"Secondly Humanities is about abstract debate. The majority of the topics are discussed as a form of intellectual exercise, nothing more. I would hope that discussions on men's rights would go further than this - because this is what is sadly lacking in the area."

You can't tell me that if you started a thread about mens rights in Humanities that it would get locked or moved because it's not abstract enough? Have you tried to start a thread there? If not, why not?

Don't confuse criticism with insult. None of us are above that.

I'll take you at your word there, but several of your more recent posts could be taken either way. I'd respectfully ask you to consider your language when you post. I don't think any of the mods of this forum have a problem with constructive criticism.

The Corinthian

tbh wrote: »

You can't tell me that if you started a thread about mens rights in Humanities that it would get locked or moved because it's not abstract enough? Have you tried to start a thread there? If not, why not?

Humanities is a broad forum that has over the years evolved into an intellectual and largely abstract debating shop on various topics. As such most anything can go there. and many debate for the sake of it (including myself) without caring one way or another.

Indeed, by your logic, tGC could be closed down and serviced by other forums, including humanities. However, when the interest in a specific area becomes popular enough, then it warrants it's own space.

In suggesting that men's rights could be happily serviced by humanities, you're effectively saying that they are not important enough - at least the kind of men's rights discussions, you seem to oppose are not.

I'll take you at your word there, but several of your more recent posts could be taken either way. I'd respectfully ask you to consider your language when you post. I don't think any of the mods of this forum have a problem with constructive criticism.

I think anyone who knows me or has seen my posts knows that I always consider my language. Criticism can offend if strong enough, which while regrettable can be unavoidable if warranted.

And the first few pages of this thread (where I kept out of it) pretty much warranted such strong criticism.

CDfm

tbh wrote: »

You can't tell me that if you started a thread about mens rights in Humanities that it would get locked or moved because it's not abstract enough? Have you tried to start a thread there? If not, why not?

I did and DeVore showed up and posted and its still open

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055932168&page=2

LostinBlanch

tbh wrote: »

I can understand why you would think that, but from our part, it's not the case. We want what's best for the forum, within certain criteria.

I can see that, but it's the certain criteria that seem to be causing the problem.

tbh wrote: »

that is a valid point, but it was the decision of all the mods together to do this, and really the amount of people complaining about the decision are about a quarter of the people who were complaining about the way the forum was before, which is why we felt we had to do something.

Well it's not a good look to have all this infighting in public and I think is more likely to drive more users away, and once they go it's hard to get them back. Unintended consequences and all that.

In my own reading of the situation, certain users are convinced for their own reasons that there are elements who don't want any debate on mens rights issues, or seek to deliberately restrict debate. So actions such as closing threads etc lead to accusations of censorship, and looking at it from their pov they may have a point.

Now the mods are saying that they got many more private complaints about the forum the way it was, and are walking a tightrope, trying to please those former users who complained have left for their own reasons, and those who will complain about threads being closed, censorship etc etc. A heavier modding style leading to bannings will leave mods open to further accusations of censorship and generally leave a bad taste in the mouth.

So from the mods pov it's a lose lose situation, so my question is why not just cut your losses and let it set up as it's own forum?

tbh wrote: »

the only thing that's under review here is how we deal with "men vs women" soapboxing. It doesn't apply to anything else, so unless thats what you're referring to as "fun", we're ok

Ehh no I can think of a load of things that are more "fun". :P

Anyway, I've said all I want to say on this now, so good luck with it, whatever you choose!

tbh

LostinBlanch wrote: »

So from the mods pov it's a lose lose situation, so my question is why not just cut your losses and let it set up as it's own forum?

just to address this point - If anyone wants to start up a mens rights forum, they won't get more support from anyone than the mods of this forum. It would suit us down the ground, to be frank, and I'm pretty sure I speak for everyone when I say we'd do anything we could to make it happen. I'm not sure if there's an impression that we want to stop this from happening - we don't. But if it doesn't happen, we want to try to come to a situation that suits the majority.

Kooli

tbh wrote: »

just to address this point - If anyone wants to start up a mens rights forum, they won't get more support from anyone than the mods of this forum. It would suit us down the ground, to be frank, and I'm pretty sure I speak for everyone when I say we'd do anything we could to make it happen. I'm not sure if there's an impression that we want to stop this from happening - we don't. But if it doesn't happen, we want to try to come to a situation that suits the majority.

I don't really get the idea of a 'men's rights' forum.

Does that mean that what was happening on this forum (the parts that people were complaining about and that made some people stop posting) will just be allowed to continue as before, but in another forum? And discussion of men's rights on this forum will be stopped or moved to that forum?

Cos if that's the case, I don't really see how that has done anything to solve the problem. It just means that, as before, those of us who are interested in the issues, have to put up with angry soapboxing and agenda-pushing at every turn if we want to discuss it.

It will also be tricky when a thread in tGC does have a genuine link to men's rights issues, and can't naturally develop into such a discussion without such a move.

But actually I do see the benefit of keeping the men's rights discussion out of threads where it doesn't belong...

So in conclusion, I'm undecided!

Maguined

Kooli wrote: »

Cos if that's the case, I don't really see how that has done anything to solve the problem. It just means that, as before, those of us who are interested in the issues, have to put up with angry soapboxing and agenda-pushing at every turn if we want to discuss it.

As long as the posts are on topic and not personally abusive then you can't really complain if someone is agenda pushing or soapboxing can you?

r3nu4l

Maguined wrote: »

As long as the posts are on topic and not personally abusive then you can't really complain if someone is agenda pushing or soapboxing can you?

Well if it's just a rehash of previous posts and adding nothing further then yes, you can complain. You can also complain if a poster repeatedly refuses to engage with other users who have challenged them and simply restates their position without adding anything further. However, in fairness to some of the MR posters here, even some of those who have soapboxed in the past, when they weren't soapboxing they were making some good points.

Sometimes fervour is not your friend because all it does is make you spam a thread with the same rubbish over and over again and that does nobody on the thread any favours, even if it is on-topic.

r3nu4l

Maguined wrote: »

Well yeah i say Mods as a collective because I am not trying to pick any anyone in particular

That's cool because we really did act like some sort of Borg colelctive in making this decision and are actively discussing the decision amongst ourselves even now

Do the mods consider and want mens rights and gender issues to be part of TGC ?

If it's done properly without threadspoiling and hijacking? Yes.

tbh wrote: »

I'll put my cards on the table and say that if the debates could be restricted to specific threads then I wouldn't have a problem with it.
As we've said, unfortunately this hasn't been the case. We've tried to implement one solutions to this issue, perhaps we need to revisit it.

Sums it up perfectly.

tbh wrote: »

that is a valid point, but it was the decision of all the mods together to do this, and really the amount of people complaining about the decision are about a quarter of the people who were complaining about the way the forum was before, which is why we felt we had to do something.

Yup, this is how it went down.

r3nu4l

The Corinthian wrote: »

Don't confuse criticism with insult. None of us are above that.

In fairness TC, your 'criticisms' do verge on the insulting at times and I think you know that. You're NOT stupid! If you really don't mean to be insulting then take note of the fact that some people think you are being and modify your tone and language accordingly (so as not to offend our poor delicate sensitivities).

The Corinthian

r3nu4l wrote: »

If it's done properly without threadspoiling and hijacking? Yes.

Sorry, I don't buy it. Neither do others it seems.

Many of the threads that were closed were not subject to threadspoiling and hijacking. This has been repeatedly pointed out.

The impression I get is that the mods would like to see men's rights issues here so long as they don't touch on taboo subjects like gender comparisons. It's ok as long as we're good little boys and don't discuss the elephant in the middle of the room.

That's not going to work.

The Corinthian

r3nu4l wrote: »

In fairness TC, your 'criticisms' do verge on the insulting at times and I think you know that. You're NOT stupid! If you really don't mean to be insulting then take note of the fact that some people think you are being and modify your tone and language accordingly (so as not to offend our poor delicate sensitivities).

I judge my language to be perfectly appropriate and deliberate. If some see valid criticism as insult, it is really up to them to explain why rather than define insult as "some people think" it is.

tbh

The Corinthian wrote: »

It's ok as long as we're good little boys and don't discuss the elephant in the middle of the room.

.

that's bull**** and it's completely unfair to the mods and to the users who've had their threads strangled by exactly the type of thing we're talking about. we have the best intentions of the forum at heart here, and I'm getting sick of you implying that we're discussing what we're discussing because of a lack of skill, effort or moral fibre on our parts.

Maguined

r3nu4l wrote: »

Well if it's just a rehash of previous posts and adding nothing further then yes, you can complain. You can also complain if a poster repeatedly refuses to engage with other users who have challenged them and simply restates their position without adding anything further. However, in fairness to some of the MR posters here, even some of those who have soapboxed in the past, when they weren't soapboxing they were making some good points.

Sometimes fervour is not your friend because all it does is make you spam a thread with the same rubbish over and over again and that does nobody on the thread any favours, even if it is on-topic.

Yes but that is the case with every thread, the point is that if someone is doing this people will spot it for what it is and hence lose interest in that person points as they are not being backed up, I don't think threads should go down the route of a formalised debate like in school, its an internet forum, moderate the glaringly obvious stuff of direct abuse, profanity all that jazz and leave people create enough rope to hang themselves with if they just repeat the same rhetoric over and over.

People will start ignoring posters who repeat the same crap over and over and just continue the topic with hose who are posting genuine counter points and continuing the discussion, basically i don't need a mod to point out to me when someone is being silly and repeating the same old garbage, i can figure that one out for myself and listen to the points made by more contributing rationale posters.

The Corinthian

tbh wrote: »

that's bull**** and it's completely unfair to the mods and to the users who've had their threads strangled by exactly the type of thing we're talking about.

Threads that were strangled like these?

"Mutual dependency" and maintenance after separating
"Plan to grant legal rights to cohabiting couples criticised"
Discrimination against Men

There was even a mega thread on Men's Rights before it got shut down in favour of this officially approved version.

Nope, none of those were strangled by anyone other than the moderator who locked them.

we have the best intentions of the forum at heart here, and I'm getting sick of you implying that we're discussing what we're discussing because of a lack of skill, effort or moral fibre on our parts.

I've actually not made any guess as to the intentions of the moderators. I can only speculate that you don't want the hassle that would come with open men's rights threads, but that's simply speculation.

One thing is certain though, what version of men's rights discussions the moderators want, for whatever reason, is not what I or many others want.

Kooli

Maguined wrote: »

Yes but that is the case with every thread, the point is that if someone is doing this people will spot it for what it is and hence lose interest in that person points as they are not being backed up, I don't think threads should go down the route of a formalised debate like in school, its an internet forum, moderate the glaringly obvious stuff of direct abuse, profanity all that jazz and leave people create enough rope to hang themselves with if they just repeat the same rhetoric over and over.

People will start ignoring posters who repeat the same crap over and over and just continue the topic with hose who are posting genuine counter points and continuing the discussion, basically i don't need a mod to point out to me when someone is being silly and repeating the same old garbage, i can figure that one out for myself and listen to the points made by more contributing rationale posters.

Can't you see even from the example of this very thread that these posters who continue to post the same thing over and over again, and continue to ask people to back up every little thing they say are very hard to ignore, and make it very hard for a thread to move beyond their nitpicking and soapboxing?
I don't need a mod to point it out to me when this is happening, but I do need a mod to stop it.

Kooli

The Corinthian wrote: »

One thing is certain though, what version of men's rights discussions the moderators want, for whatever reason, is not what I or many others want.

Another thing is for certain. The version they want is what I and many others do want.

r3nu4l

The Corinthian wrote: »

I judge my language to be perfectly appropriate and deliberate. If some see valid criticism as insult, it is really up to them to explain why rather than define insult as "some people think" it is.

As mods it's how we judge it that matters and as you say it's deliberate behaviour then any further inciteful language from you will result in a ban.

Now I suggest once more and for the final time that you choose your words carefully. However I suspect that you might just martyr yourself just to get a Helpdesk thread going. That's just 'speculation' on my part though.

tbh

One thing is certain though, what version of men's rights discussions you want, for whatever reason, is not what I or many others want.

that's fine, you've stated your opinion. You've told us you want a new forum, you've told us you think we are afraid to allow mens rights threads because we don't want to upset the "pc crowd", or because they are taboo, you've told us you don't have confidence in us, you've told us you think our decision is ridiculous and that we're dumbing down the forum.

we get it.

As to your accusations as to why we are making this (or any decision) - I reject them.
You've told us you don't think it's a problem. That's not your call to make.
23 people have posted on this thread. Of those, 4 are mods or ex mods.

of the 19 that are remaining, 12 people spoke on rights issues, and 7 spoke on whether the thread was a good idea or not.

of those seven, the corinthian, maguined, donfers and lostinblanch could be said to have a negative opinion of the thread, herbal deity and k9 aren't thrilled about the thread but accept theres a problem, and kooli thinks it's a good idea. If we lose four posters because of this decision, then fair enough. I think the loss would be outweighed by the general lifting of the mood of the forum in general. That's not a threat or a dismissal - I'd rather you were all posting in the forum.
But if you don't accept what the forum is, rather than what you think it should be, then personally I'm not going to lose any sleep over that.

donfers

Kooli wrote: »

Can't you see even from the example of this very thread that these posters who continue to post the same thing over and over again, and continue to ask people to back up every little thing they say are very hard to ignore, and make it very hard for a thread to move beyond their nitpicking and soapboxing?
I don't need a mod to point it out to me when this is happening, but I do need a mod to stop it.

In its current state I have said goodbye to this forum but presume I can still post in this thread discussing its future development

Anyway I resent the above post which basically says "mods, please remove the posts of those I disagree with and who won't just go away, how dare they continue to argue their case"

That flies in the face of the very essence of what debate/discussion should be.

I hope this isn't the kind of one-eyed ideology that is pandered to.

I also resent the implication that the posters debating the need for a greater exposure of mens' rights issues in this thread (including me) were the ones who dragged threads off topic or copied and pasted across multiple threads or laid into womens lib. If the mods wish to point who the guilty parties are then please go ahead but if debate is being stifled simply because certain people don't like what they're reading then that's just wrong.

Kooli, you mentioned in an earlier post that your views were "dismissed", care to elaborate how that happened. As far as I can see you can post and post and post on how you want the gentlemens club to be run and how you feel issues should be discussed etc etc.

I think if one were truly to be dismissed it would mean you have been banned which I don't think you have been. If I, as a man, went into TLL and told them how I feel they should run their forum, or how they should discuss issues relating to women's lib and what tone to use and maybe not to make comparisons with men, perhaps my views would be welcomed and published like yours are here or perhaps I'd be infracted faster than a 70 year old priest on the clearasil &hormones forum. The point is you can debate away to your hearts content in here but don't say your views are dismissed just because other posters question or counter your view.

Surely discussion forums shouldn't be about everyone agreeing with each other and patting each other on the back, in a self-satisfied Stepford wives kind of way. Neither should things get out of control or become outright abusive. I understand that the mods don't want mens rights issues to clog up the entire forum and that is a perfectly reasonable position to adopt but at the same time there is a very urgent need for these topics to be discussed without fear of the hammer coming down or some delicate pc sensibility being offended

Maguined

Kooli wrote: »

Can't you see even from the example of this very thread that these posters who continue to post the same thing over and over again, and continue to ask people to back up every little thing they say are very hard to ignore, and make it very hard for a thread to move beyond their nitpicking and soapboxing?
I don't need a mod to point it out to me when this is happening, but I do need a mod to stop it.

I see this thread as completely positive, I see nothing negative about it in the slightest, to me this is debate, it may be heated because people feel strongly about it but i would always choose to have a heated debate or conversation with someone that was heated because it had real meaning to me rather than have a debate that everyone just agreed in the interests of politeness.

If i wanted to have a conversation where everyone just agrees with me i would talk to myself, i come here for interesting debates, the back and forth, its only by questioning the opinions of others and having them question mine that i really learn new and interesting thoughts.

I like it when people disagree with me, it makes for a far more interesting discussion and i view that as a positive thing rather than just dismiss other peoples opinions as "soap boxing".

r3nu4l

donfers wrote: »

Anyway I resent the above post which basically says "mods, please remove the posts of those I disagree with and who won't just go away, how dare they continue to argue their case"

That flies in the face of the very essence of what debate/discussion should be.

I hopw this isn't the kind of one-eyed ideology that is pandered to.

God no! We are very happy with this debate, whether we agree with some opinions or not! Personally, I like the fact that it's drawn so much discussion.

I also resent the implication that the posters debating the need for a greater exposure of mens' rights issues in this thread (including me) were the ones who dragged threads off topic or copied and pasted across multiple threads or laid into womens lib. If the mods wish to point who the guilty parties are then please go ahead

No need for naming those individuals to be honest.

but if debate is being stifled simply because certain people don't like what they're reading then that's just wrong.

Good job that's not what has been happening so

Surely discussion forums shouldn't be about everyone agreeing with each other and patting each other on the back, in a self-satisfied Stepford wives kind of way.

And this thread proves that it's not a back-slapping fest

Neither should things get out of control or become outright abusive. I understand that the mods don't want mens rights issues to clog up the entire forum and that is a perfectly reasonable position to adopt

Now it looks like we are in some agreement!!! I'm shocked That's exactly what we've been saying for ages now.

but at the same time there is a very urgent need for these topics to be discussed without fear of the hammer coming down or some delicate pc sensibility being offended

I really don't know where this perception of 'pc sensibility being offended' came from? Honestly! Our sole reason for coming down so hard on this type of discussion have been the very minor few who just can't control themselves. Yes, certain of you have suffered as well, as has the topic of men's rights in general but until those few can sort themselves out or we have this discussion we are having now and come to a conclusion (we are reaching a conclusion slowly but surely) then this is how it is. We're getting there.

tbh

donfers wrote: »

In its current state I have said goodbye to this forum but presume I can still post in this thread discussing its future development

Anyway I resent the above post which basically says "mods, please remove the posts of those I disagree with and who won't just go away, how dare they continue to argue their case"

That flies in the face of the very essence of what debate/discussion should be.

I hope this isn't the kind of one-eyed ideology that is pandered to.

I also resent the implication that the posters debating the need for a greater exposure of mens' rights issues in this thread (including me) were the ones who dragged threads off topic or copied and pasted across multiple threads or laid into womens lib. If the mods wish to point who the guilty parties are then please go ahead but if debate is being stifled simply because certain people don't like what they're reading then that's just wrong.

Kooli, you mentioned in an earlier post that your views were "dismissed", care to elaborate how that happened. As far as I can see you can post and post and post on how you want the gentlemens club to be run and how you feel issues should be discussed etc etc.

I think if one were truly to be dismissed it would mean you have been banned which I don't think you have been. If I, as a man, went into TLL and told them how I feel they should run their forum, or how they should discuss issues relating to women's lib and what tone to use and maybe not to make comparisons with men, perhaps my views would be welcomed and published like yours are here or perhaps I'd be infracted faster than a 70 year old priest on the clearasil &hormones forum. The point is you can debate away to your hearts content in here but don't say your views are dismissed just because other posters question or counter your view.

Surely discussion forums shouldn't be about everyone agreeing with each other and patting each other on the back, in a self-satisfied Stepford wives kind of way. Neither should things get out of control or become outright abusive. I understand that the mods don't want mens rights issues to clog up the entire forum and that is a perfectly reasonable position to adopt but at the same time there is a very urgent need for these topics to be discussed without fear of the hammer coming down or some delicate pc sensibility being offended

I'll be honest with you donfers, I take the suggestion that we're trying to cut down on this because we don't agree with the views being expressed as insulting in the extreme. Every day as a mod I have to defend the ability of people to express opinions I find ridiculous, and I'm sick of people questioning my ability or motivation to do it. If you think that's what this is about, you couldn't be more wrong

Kooli

I really don't get why people still insist that this is about differences of opinion?? I really just don't get it!

Donfers I'm not sure what context I said I was being 'dismissed', so if you point me to when I said it I will explain. It definitely was not what you seem to have interpreted it as, so I'd be glad to clarify.

Maguined, I have no problem with this thread, because we are talking about what the thread was about. The point I was making that if someone was dragging it off topic, or soapboxing (which is not the case on this thread) it is in fact very hard to ignore them as you suggested, and perhaps everyone ignoring them isn't actually the best solution?

I would be just as annoyed if the people who were causing the problems or doing all the things that have been mentioned in this thread shared my opinion. I would still want them stopped! It has NOTHING to do with a difference of opinion. And actually I often agree with The Corinthian on his views. So if someone else says its about wanting to 'censor' a difference of opinion, then I don't know what else to say!! You will choose to believe what you want to believe no matter what I say!

donfers

tbh wrote: »

I'll be honest with you donfers, I take the suggestion that we're trying to cut down on this because we don't agree with the views being expressed as insulting in the extreme. Every day as a mod I have to defend the ability of people to express opinions I find ridiculous, and I'm sick of people questioning my ability or motivation to do it. If you think that's what this is about, you couldn't be more wrong

I think perhaps that's what it is about for some of the people complaining but I don't include the mods in that. I wouldn't question their integrity and appreciate the work they do.

I also believe that people have every right to complain but surely surely surely the best solution is always to argue these things out rather than shut down/remove/delete etc.

For me, the debate is important and should be allowed to take place. (And yes, I take the point that men's rights issues should not overflood the whole forum)

The Corinthian

tbh wrote: »

But if you don't accept what the forum is, rather than what you think it should be, then personally I'm not going to lose any sleep over that.

I accept what this forum is, which is why I have pushed for a separate forum.

Beyond that, I can't say anything else as my right of reply is subject to a ban if someone finds it insulting. So that's that.

hobochris

Kooli wrote: »

Can't you see even from the example of this very thread that these posters who continue to post the same thing over and over again, and continue to ask people to back up every little thing they say are very hard to ignore, and make it very hard for a thread to move beyond their nitpicking and soapboxing?
I don't need a mod to point it out to me when this is happening, but I do need a mod to stop it.

What you speak of here is subjective, to weather the poster in question is claiming fact or expressing opinion.

If they are claiming something as fact then IMO other posters have every right to challenge them to provide a source, before crediting such a a statement.

Opinions on the other hand can be freely expressed without question providing they conform to the charter.

I'm probably just stating the obviously here, but on a mine field topic like this it probably needs to be stated.

r3nu4l

The Corinthian wrote: »

I accept what this forum is, which is why I have pushed for a separate forum.

Beyond that, I can't say anything else as my right of reply is subject to a ban if someone finds it insulting. So that's that.

I'm not asking you to censor yourself, just be a little less antagonistic in your approach, I'm sure you can manage that! Don't play the victim card. I don't want to ban you, so I'm not looking for an excuse, nor do I have an itchy finger. If I had I would have done so earlier in a power-hungry manner rather than warn you.

Anyway, my head hurts, I've had a busy day as well as nipping in here to post many quick replies and I probably won't be online tonight or if I am I'll be sorting out other stuff on boards, rather than posting here. No harm in taking a break from this discussion either. Good luck lads and ladies, talk tomorrow, unless this suddenly reaches a conclusion tonight

tbh

Our other suggestion in the mods forum was to be a lit more visible on a thread we felt was going down the road of....you know, but now I can foresee a situation where a mod tells a user he's taking a thread off topic and the rest of that thread constitutes an argument between mod and user as to what is an isn't off topic

CDfm

tbh wrote: »

Our other suggestion in the mods forum was to be a lit more visible on a thread we felt was going down the road of....you know, but now I can foresee a situation where a mod tells a user he's taking a thread off topic and the rest of that thread constitutes an argument between mod and user as to what is an isn't off topic

you cant ref a match you are playing in, can you ?

Otis Driftwood

tbh wrote: »

what is an isn't off topic

Thats the bones of the matter IMO,one mans meat and all that.

For what its worth as a user and a mod,I would like to think that this thread will prove to be constructive,no matter what the outcome and that users will know when they are de-railing or posting off topic.Just read through this thread,it has well argued and constructive feedback from all parties so its not as if the anyone is some lame ass troll,the regular users of tGC are obviously an intelligent,well informed and *cough* passionate *cough* bunch.:)

Id hate to see it go by the waste side after it was fought for for so long to get up and running but Id also hate to see it get bogged down going round in circles trotting over the same ground over and over again.

Maguined

tbh wrote: »

Our other suggestion in the mods forum was to be a lit more visible on a thread we felt was going down the road of....you know, but now I can foresee a situation where a mod tells a user he's taking a thread off topic and the rest of that thread constitutes an argument between mod and user as to what is an isn't off topic

Is that not expressly against the entire site rules? I thought mods decisions had to be resolved by pm to the mod and if you were not happy there then complain in the chain and it was never to be expressed in the thread itself so that scenario would never come into existence as there are already the means to curtail it?

This thread is a bit of an exception as the creation of this thread has sparked the mod decision for such and the future ethos and application of TGC as a whole going forward regarding mens rights so questioning a mods decision is part of the topic but in other threads it will not be so if a poster questioned a mods decision in some thread it should be immediately deleted i thought?

Bottle_of_Smoke

Haven't been in this forum much recently but I think this megathread idea is bonkers if you can't start other threads.

I mean what if one person is talking about paternal rights and someone else wants to discuss an employment discrimination? Do you have to wait until that topic come's around again?

If the other threads are getting out of hand could you not just get an extra one or two posters to be moderators. not like they have to be paid or anything

Maguined

Kooli wrote: »

Maguined, I have no problem with this thread, because we are talking about what the thread was about. The point I was making that if someone was dragging it off topic, or soapboxing (which is not the case on this thread) it is in fact very hard to ignore them as you suggested, and perhaps everyone ignoring them isn't actually the best solution?

Maybe we are just different then, i find it very easy to ignore peoples posts that i feel are not worth my time responding to and in the very same thread i will discuss the topic with those people that are posting valuable points (valuable imho anyway).

Maybe ignoring them is not the best solution but i definitely feel it is a better solution than ramming every single mes rights thread into one place as that as we both agree that is not good for the topics themselves and does not prevent the problem, just hinders the good genuine discussion of those topics.

My personal preference would be to undo this megathread and the mods not be afraid to lash out beatings with the modstick if they feel a post if off topic and dragging something into a mens right issue, if joe soap starts a thread about testicular cancer and does not mention any gender war in his original post and i post up ranting and raving about womens breast cancer funding i think it would be perfectly acceptable for the mods to delete my posts content and replace it with a warning telling me this thread was not started for that and if i want i can create my own thread. There would be nothing stopping me starting a thread and then just ranting and raving about the gender issue and in that thread it would be on topic so no one should be annoyed by it at all.

Kooli

Maguined wrote: »

My personal preference would be to undo this megathread and the mods not be afraid to lash out beatings with the modstick if they feel a post if off topic and dragging something into a mens right issue, if joe soap starts a thread about testicular cancer and does not mention any gender war in his original post and i post up ranting and raving about womens breast cancer funding i think it would be perfectly acceptable for the mods to delete my posts content and replace it with a warning telling me this thread was not started for that and if i want i can create my own thread. There would be nothing stopping me starting a thread and then just ranting and raving about the gender issue and in that thread it would be on topic so no one should be annoyed by it at all.

Hear hear.

Dr Galen

Kooli wrote: »

Hear hear.

and I'll add a hear hear to yours

K-9

Kooli wrote: »

It was more that all threads were being derailed in similar ways, so that numerous threads on numerous different topics (some which started about men's rights, some which started about something totally different) were covering the same ground, and having the same points made by the same people over and over again, despite regular warnings. Offensive? No. Irritating? Very.

Sums it up for me.

I thought one of the mods had said mens rights issues could be discussed, as long as every single bloody one of them didn't become a men vs. women rights one. That to me is perfectly fine.

LostinBlanch

tbh wrote: »

of those seven, the corinthian, maguined, donfers and lostinblanch could be said to have a negative opinion of the thread, herbal deity and k9 aren't thrilled about the thread but accept theres a problem, and kooli thinks it's a good idea.

Tbh I wasn't going to post in this thread anymore as I felt i had said everything I had to say on the topic but you have successfully dragged me back in. I haven't misrepresented you, and I'd appreciate it if you did me the same courtesy. A closer reading of my posts should show that I'm more against the idea of throwing everything into one megathread for reasons previously stated. Hence the idea of a forum or subforum.

tbh wrote: »

If we lose four posters because of this decision, then fair enough. I think the loss would be outweighed by the general lifting of the mood of the forum in general.

That's extremely harsh apart from the fact that I don't feel my posting in this forum brings the mood of this forum down. I'm not interested in soapboxing and if I had any indication that that's what people thought I was doing I'd stop. As it is I have had no other communications or pms from any mod about any posts of mine on here, so I resent the implication that I am one of those responsible for hijacking threads and driving others away.

The mere fact that someone disagrees with the methodology used in this case is no reason to state that in general the forum would be better off without them. Now maybe that's not what you intended to say, or maybe that came out differently than you meant, but that's what I read it as.

K-9

Maguined wrote: »

My personal preference would be to undo this megathread and the mods not be afraid to lash out beatings with the modstick if they feel a post if off topic and dragging something into a mens right issue, if joe soap starts a thread about testicular cancer and does not mention any gender war in his original post and i post up ranting and raving about womens breast cancer funding i think it would be perfectly acceptable for the mods to delete my posts content and replace it with a warning telling me this thread was not started for that and if i want i can create my own thread. There would be nothing stopping me starting a thread and then just ranting and raving about the gender issue and in that thread it would be on topic so no one should be annoyed by it at all.

That would be by take on it too, so, Hear, Hear.

Dr Galen

LostinBlanch wrote: »

Tbh I wasn't going to post in this thread anymore as I felt i had said everything I had to say on the topic but you have successfully dragged me back in. I haven't misrepresented you, and I'd appreciate it if you did me the same courtesy. A closer reading of my posts should show that I'm more against the idea of throwing everything into one megathread for reasons previously stated. Hence the idea of a forum or subforum.



That's extremely harsh apart from the fact that I don't feel my posting in this forum brings the mood of this forum down. I'm not interested in soapboxing and if I had any indication that that's what people thought I was doing I'd stop. As it is I have had no other communications or pms from any mod about any posts of mine on here, so I resent the implication that I am one of those responsible for hijacking threads and driving others away.

The mere fact that someone disagrees with the methodology used in this case is no reason to state that in general the forum would be better off without them. Now maybe that's not what you intended to say, or maybe that came out differently than you meant, but that's what I read it as.

I really don't think tbh meant it like that.

tbh

LostinBlanch wrote: »

Tbh I wasn't going to post in this thread anymore as I felt i had said everything I had to say on the topic but you have successfully dragged me back in. I haven't misrepresented you, and I'd appreciate it if you did me the same courtesy. A closer reading of my posts should show that I'm more against the idea of throwing everything into one megathread for reasons previously stated. Hence the idea of a forum or subforum.



That's extremely harsh apart from the fact that I don't feel my posting in this forum brings the mood of this forum down. I'm not interested in soapboxing and if I had any indication that that's what people thought I was doing I'd stop. As it is I have had no other communications or pms from any mod about any posts of mine on here, so I resent the implication that I am one of those responsible for hijacking threads and driving others away.

The mere fact that someone disagrees with the methodology used in this case is no reason to state that in general the forum would be better off without them. Now maybe that's not what you intended to say, or maybe that came out differently than you meant, but that's what I read it as.

yeah sorry LIB - I didn't mean it like that. What I did was do a quick run through of the people who'd posted in this thread and tried to tot up the number who thought the megathread was a good idea, and those who thought it was a bad idea - wasn't meant to be anything more than that. I also didn't mean to imply that the forum was better off without you, I was just saying that the worst case scenario was some of the people who thought the thread was a bad idea wouldn't post here again, and I did also say that I'd prefer if that didn't happen.

anyway. We've had a discussion on the mods forum and we have come round to the idea that there is a place on the forum for this type of discussion, but it has to be much more strictly regulated. I'm hoping that won't mean loads of bans, but I imagine it'll mean more mod "direction" until we all get the hang of it.
We want to strike the balance between making sure the rule sticks and not going mad with bans or infractions, so we're going to have a think about how to draw up the new rules and hopefully should be able to amend the charter before monday.
in the meantime, we'll leave this thread open for any final comments or suggestions.

LostinBlanch

tbh wrote: »

yeah sorry LIB - I didn't mean it like that. What I did was do a quick run through of the people who'd posted in this thread and tried to tot up the number who thought the megathread was a good idea, and those who thought it was a bad idea - wasn't meant to be anything more than that. I also didn't mean to imply that the forum was better off without you, I was just saying that the worst case scenario was some of the people who thought the thread was a bad idea wouldn't post here again, and I did also say that I'd prefer if that didn't happen.

Fair enough, with something like this it's easy for people to get the wrong end of the stick.

tbh wrote: »

anyway. We've had a discussion on the mods forum and we have come round to the idea that there is a place on the forum for this type of discussion, but it has to be much more strictly regulated. I'm hoping that won't mean loads of bans, but I imagine it'll mean more mod "direction" until we all get the hang of it.
We want to strike the balance between making sure the rule sticks and not going mad with bans or infractions, so we're going to have a think about how to draw up the new rules and hopefully should be able to amend the charter before monday.
in the meantime, we'll leave this thread open for any final comments or suggestions.

OK well good luck with it, I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

Maguined

tbh wrote: »

We've had a discussion on the mods forum and we have come round to the idea that there is a place on the forum for this type of discussion, but it has to be much more strictly regulated. I'm hoping that won't mean loads of bans, but I imagine it'll mean more mod "direction" until we all get the hang of it.
We want to strike the balance between making sure the rule sticks and not going mad with bans or infractions, so we're going to have a think about how to draw up the new rules and hopefully should be able to amend the charter before monday.
in the meantime, we'll leave this thread open for any final comments or suggestions.

This is good news to me, I would second BOS's suggestion that taking on another mod might not be a bad idea, not because I think the current mods can't do the job but more because they had no real desire or interest to mod these topics up to now so making The Corinthian a mod who is passionate yet well balanced on these topics would be a good idea in my opinion, my only fear would be if he got the job his desire to try and maintain objective impartiality as a mod got in the way of his passionate position on the topics.

Also I hope none of the mode took any of my criticism as personal or negative at all, I am just throwing out my concept of how I would like things run if I was emperor of the world and apart from my differing stance on this topic I am perfectly happy on the modding and strong emphasis on poster freedom of speech on TGC.

tbh

Maguined wrote: »

Also I hope none of the mode took any of my criticism as personal or negative at all, I am just throwing out my concept of how I would like things run if I was emperor of the world and apart from my differing stance on this topic I am perfectly happy on the modding and strong emphasis on poster freedom of speech on TGC.

I'm pretty sure I can talk for all of us when say - don't worry about that at all - no offense was taken and nothing was meant or taken personally

Gran Hermano

I would not expect to visit the Hunting forum and see posts/threads restricted in case they offended the anti-bloodsports group. I would not visit the Cycling forum and expect my opinions on cyclists refusing to use cycle lanes shared. I would not visit the Vegan forum and suggest a nice dinner centered around a joint of meat. Yet I really feel that as of late this forum has found itself pandering to the beliefs and opinions of certain ladies.

I was a big fan of this forum upon it's rebranding as the Gentleman's forum, now I can't help wonder what it's purpose is.

tbh

Gran Hermano wrote: »

I would not expect to visit the Hunting forum and see posts/threads restricted in case they offended the anti-bloodsports group. I would not visit the Cycling forum and expect my opinions on cyclists refusing to use cycle lanes shared. I would not visit the Vegan forum and suggest a nice dinner centered around a joint of meat. Yet I really feel that as of late this forum has found itself pandering to the beliefs and opinions of certain ladies.
.

Which ladies are you talking about?

CDfm

Just a few questions.

When the forum was concieved anonymous posting for mens issues as opposed to mens rights activism was a big thing. Has it been used much at all? Is it worth having ?

Does it not have search and display implications for the whole forum? Or if a subforum was there could it be an optional extra.

We do get some posts where guys come on with an issue -so will they still be there or will they go to PI or will that be at the mods discretion.

I have always thought that the gung-ho mens rights threads can get in the way of this kind of poster. When you think of it, a guy posting on a personal situation already knows he is a bad place and that kind of guy doesn't need any reminding of it.

I also wonder how the media campaigning gender issues might be handled as they are fairly cyclical the way they come up and while they may be old hat on the forum to some people they will be new - which probably mean some repetition. So their are frequently posted issues too that are generic .

This is probably a bit rhetorical and may come out in the wash but I thought it best to raise it anyway.

Otis Driftwood

Gran Hermano wrote: »

I would not expect to visit the Hunting forum and see posts/threads restricted in case they offended the anti-bloodsports group. I would not visit the Cycling forum and expect my opinions on cyclists refusing to use cycle lanes shared. I would not visit the Vegan forum and suggest a nice dinner centered around a joint of meat. Yet I really feel that as of late this forum has found itself pandering to the beliefs and opinions of certain ladies.

I was a big fan of this forum upon it's rebranding as the Gentleman's forum, now I can't help wonder what it's purpose is.

Conversely I wouldnt want to visit the hunting forum to read threads running down anti hunting sections of society,I would not visit the cycling forum and expect to see threads running down the evils of owning a car,I would not visit the vegan forum and read threads saying that meat eaters are wrong.

See where Im going with this?

The problem as I see it has been that of alot of the topics that centred around mens issues/paternal rights or whatever have turned into slanging matchs arguing that men have it tougher than women,dont have enough protection when it comes to their rights as a parent or what ever the case may be.It is very very tiresome to read things very similar in approach trotted out constantly.

The Corinthian

There are two issues.

The first is that this forum was originally set up as a men's health forum and eventually expanded into a general men's forum. Problem with this is that it then will attract topics that are likely to be dominating or 'noisy'.

The second problem arises when the forum attempts to accommodate the 'noisy' topics, while still trying to maintain the 'friendly' atmosphere of a men's health forum. The solution here has been to limit or censor debate on those 'noisy' topics.

Unfortunately, in the case of men's rights, the idea that you can discuss them without making comparisons to women's rights (equality is hard to measure unless you compare both sides, after all) is frankly cuckoo. This does not mean that it becomes a men vs women thing - personally I have always been very careful to point out that while there may be a small minority of women (and men) who oppose men's rights, the main problem has always been mens' own apathy and the vast majority of women cannot be held accountable for being given a favourable hand in terms of rights.

This is not to say that I cannot appreciate the need to police such threads, as they do attract some overly 'passionate' (read nutjobs) individuals, from time to time. However, from what I saw of such threads, these individuals were a very small minority of those who posted, and were often reigned in by the others, whenever they came up with unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

Anyhow, for me it is the attitude here towards the second issue here that really precludes men's rights being handled correctly. Whatever about keeping things from getting out of hand, it effectively neuters discussion of men's rights and betrays an attitude towards them that you really can't come back from. Sorry, but it's a trust thing.

That's why a separate forum would be much better, moderated by those with an interest in men's rights, rather than an interest in men's health. I'm not suggesting I should do this - I'm already a moderator and don't need it - but would so so if necessary, at least to get it off the ground. I just think that a dedicated forum towards the subject might better serve it, focus those there into actually doing something offline; rather than the same old random and disparate rants and navel gazing threads on other fora.

The Corinthian

nedtheshed wrote: »

The problem as I see it has been that of alot of the topics that centred around mens issues/paternal rights or whatever have turned into slanging matchs arguing that men have it tougher than women,dont have enough protection when it comes to their rights as a parent or what ever the case may be.It is very very tiresome to read things very similar in approach trotted out constantly.

However, men do have it tougher than women, in terms of rights in the West. So I can understand why these rants take place, because we live in a society that seems to pretend that this is not the case, or worse still focuses on men as still having some sort of mythical privileged position.

Nonetheless, I also find it tiresome to read such threads repeatedly. I find it tiresome to read them because while raising awareness through them is a positive thing, it can quickly become little more than whining.

I believe that a forum dedicated to men's issues can curb this because while one can have a thread on 'how men have it harder in terms of X', after that you can say - "OK, you got that off your chest - now what are you going to do about it".