The new Politics Cafe charter

K-9

Bambi wrote: »

Yeah you keep pointing that out as if its indicative of something.

One of my last little contributions to that forum was inspired by yet another thread on the usual hysteria topic so dear to many on there. I created a mirror image of the thread just as a little experiment. One thread was locked in double time the other was allowed to run and run like Andrew Lloyd Webber had adapted it into a musical. You don't need to guess which was which.

What were the findings of this experiment?

DeadHand

It's a pity I can't go back in and read over fully my old posts in PC.

Artistry, they were.

One of my petty pleasures in life was reliving my constant, comprehensive victories over various Leftists.

On that note, in the spirit of fresh starts, I believe my ban should be rescinded and I reinstated in the new forum.

K-9

We'll start restoring posts over the weekend.

CabanSail

Post Restoration Stage I - Complete.

All threads up to 2015 have returned to view but are closed.

weisses

CabanSail wrote: »

Post Restoration Stage I - Complete.

All threads up to 2015 have returned to view but are closed.

Take a deeeeep breath .. 2015 is a tough one to go through

130Kph

Trying to be constructive, I think this relaunched forum still contains a fundamental conundrum [politics …versus…humour].

I notice already the first in-thread mod warning (1st of thousands, I imagine) is frowning at bad language. While I’m neutral on bad language, it’s not even an issue in Humanities, in ainm de (open to correction).

In café 1.0, I used to chuckle almost every day at the outlandish, theatrical political debate and madcap discussion which could only happen in the café (not the toxic stuff of course).

This new charter & approach seems like it’s going to inadvertently stamp out real life characters (and their human foibles) and make everyone behave in a strict way like at a formal business meeting. And everyone knows the type of ‘humour’ that happens in such business meetings.

I hope I’m wrong, but I imagine daily mirth is now a thing of the past.

Plenty of toxic issues have now been resolved which is excellent but the impression I get is that Café 2.0 (despite its aim for casual/relaxed debate) is going to be little more than the politics general forum plus smilies. It’s not the way I would choose to go, but it should certainly be easier to moderate …. just my 2c.

K-9

Ah no, we'd hope to keep the unique character of the cafe (I know a lot don't like it, bit like AH isn't everybody's cup of tea), but just less of the battleground it can become.

Humour is still a very important part, I'd hope we could have a funny video/pic/quotes thread and maybe an off topic chat thread to help that along too.

CabanSail

I can understand what you are saying, but it's a case of a minority ruining it for the majority.

130Kph

It looks like certain volk were getting their cherished political positions ripped to shreds on a daily basis in Cafe 1.0 and the chairman of the board! can’t afford to lose these punters custom.

Look, I understand the game here. I was on your side of the shop counter once upon a time (in a different business) but now I’m on the other side. And there is a legitimate view on both sides of this moolah divide. If I was counting the shekels, I would do the exact same thing (in probably a more crude fashion ).

I was next going to go hard-core into a speil about the volk I am alluding to - to further my point- but then I see billionaire Philip Green in Monaco on the news (which given what he's recently done has taken the wind out of my sails) so have decided....compared to players like him, this (protecting those who can't argue their own position) is small beer…

Edit: On reflection, Ignore all the above. Any malevolent party or incoherent policy can still be exposed – which was actually my only concern (i.e. that’s where the humour/calamity is anyway) and that’s what I was trying to say rather badly last night. So, yes – less of a battleground is the way to go.

riffmongous

130Kph wrote: »

It looks like certain volk were getting their cherished political positions ripped to shreds on a daily basis in Cafe 1.0 and the chairman of the board! can’t afford to lose these punters custom.

Look, I understand the game here. I was on your side of the shop counter once upon a time (in a different business) but now I’m on the other side. And there is a legitimate view on both sides of this moolah divide. If I was counting the shekels, I would do the exact same thing (in probably a more crude fashion ).

I can already see a difference of tone between various mods and category mods regarding this policy changeover. That’s not unexpected given the fine balance between mammon, volunteers and posters shooting the breeze.

I was next going to go hard-core into a speil about the volk I am alluding to - to further my point- but then I see billionaire Philip Green in Monaco on the news (which given what he's recently done has taken the wind out of my sails) so have decided....compared to players like him, this (protecting those who can't argue their own position) is small beer…

Jewish conspiracy?

130Kph

riffmongous wrote: »

Jewish conspiracy?

Afrayed knot (didn’t know he was Jewish) - It just happened to be a massive financial scandal in the news, across the water today.

Edit: post #70 now edited

Dyr

K-9 wrote: »

What were the findings of this experiment?

Nothing very shocking, just that you have a different standard for any thread about our bearded pal from belfast and his merry men.

K-9

Bambi wrote: »

Nothing very shocking, just that you have a different standard for any thread about our bearded pal from belfast and his merry men.

There are probably 3 or 4 topics that the mods need the wisdom of Solomon on, SF related stuff is one. Mods have to make judgment calls and they'll never please some on both sides of the debate, otherwise they'd be US peace envoys to N.I.

riffmongous

K-9 wrote: »

There are probably 3 or 4 topics that the mods need the wisdom of Solomon on, SF related stuff is one. Mods have to make judgment calls and they'll never please some on both sides of the debate, otherwise they'd be US peace envoys to N.I.

Would a SF megathread be a possibility? Seems like it would be a handy place to keep all the little sinnfeinwatch threads that pop up and end up going down the usual route

K-9

My fear would be it would make it worse, one big battleground and more repetition.

Besides that, and more importantly, I'm not sure why we should have a megathread on the 3rd largest party in the state, should each party not get one?

Near the end of the old forum we'd 5 or 6 SF related threads over the first 2 pages, and probably more SF stuff going on in others. Maybe they could be managed better, making sure topics stay to the relevant thread and not get dragged onto a separate one, as tends to happen on these.

Godge

I am not sure how long the revamp will last.

Already we have had terms like "right wing circle jerk" being used without any public sanction. While mod action may have been taken behind closed doors so to speak, leaving that phrase up in lights will only encourage the discussion to lower in tone.

Myrddin

Godge wrote: »

I am not sure how long the revamp will last.

Already we have had terms like "right wing circle jerk" being used without any public sanction. While mod action may have been taken behind closed doors so to speak, leaving that phrase up in lights will only encourage the discussion to lower in tone.

Did you report it?

Godge

Myrddin wrote: »

Did you report it?

Yes

Myrddin

Godge wrote: »

Yes

You reported it at ten minutes to four, and you're complaining it hasn't been actioned just over two hours later? Regardless of whatever mod actions may or may not have been taken behind the scenes, you really need to give mods some more time to handle reports.

K-9

It isn't ideal, there's better ways of responding to a post that was probably baiting any AAA or socialist posters, in a thread about Paul Murphy.

The thread moved on, an example of the cafe posters moderating the thread themselves, ideally we'll see more of that in the new forum.

Godge

Myrddin wrote: »

You reported it at ten minutes to four, and you're complaining it hasn't been actioned just over two hours later? Regardless of whatever mod actions may or may not have been taken behind the scenes, you really need to give mods some more time to handle reports.

Only took 36 minutes for me to get a PM from a mod today. The post with the "right-wing circle jerk" comment was up for two days, maybe I am the only one who thought it worth reporting. Or maybe I am the only one who finds it offensive.

K-9 wrote: »

It isn't ideal, there's better ways of responding to a post that was probably baiting any AAA or socialist posters, in a thread about Paul Murphy.

The thread moved on, an example of the cafe posters moderating the thread themselves, ideally we'll see more of that in the new forum.

The new charter says:

"Do not respond to provocation. If it’s in breach of the charter or site rules then report the post"

So if the reference to "right wing circle jerk" was not in breach of the "Vilification of groups will not be tolerated" or personal abuse, and was only responding to provocation, surely that doesn't excuse it.

I am not asking for the poster to be sanctioned or banned, I just think the post should at least have been edited to remove the reference. Maybe it is time for the Cafe to have an example list (not exhaustive) of banned phrases.

Leaving the post up there just gives the next guy a reason to use it.

tomwaterford

Godge wrote: »

Only took 36 minutes for me to get a PM from a mod today. The post with the "right-wing circle jerk" comment was up for two days, maybe I am the only one who thought it worth reporting. Or maybe I am the only one who finds it offensive.



The new charter says:

"Do not respond to provocation. If it’s in breach of the charter or site rules then report the post"

So if the reference to "right wing circle jerk" was not in breach of the "Vilification of groups will not be tolerated" or personal abuse, and was only responding to provocation, surely that doesn't excuse it.

I am not asking for the poster to be sanctioned or banned, I just think the post should at least have been edited to remove the reference. Maybe it is time for the Cafe to have an example list (not exhaustive) of banned phrases.

Leaving the post up there just gives the next guy a reason to use it.

I not know this post/thread your on about....but it is a stretch IMO to call that vilification

Not helpful/good Posting but not vilification either?

K-9

Godge wrote: »

Only took 36 minutes for me to get a PM from a mod today. The post with the "right-wing circle jerk" comment was up for two days, maybe I am the only one who thought it worth reporting. Or maybe I am the only one who finds it offensive.



The new charter says:

"Do not respond to provocation. If it’s in breach of the charter or site rules then report the post"

So if the reference to "right wing circle jerk" was not in breach of the "Vilification of groups will not be tolerated" or personal abuse, and was only responding to provocation, surely that doesn't excuse it.

I am not asking for the poster to be sanctioned or banned, I just think the post should at least have been edited to remove the reference. Maybe it is time for the Cafe to have an example list (not exhaustive) of banned phrases.

Leaving the post up there just gives the next guy a reason to use it.

It's just the initial provocative post wasn't reported by you or anybody else, both posts may deserve action, not just the reactive one.

It's something we have mentioned in the mod forum, posters who often post off topic and drag a thread elsewhere, or post something to rile or bait others.

Godge

K-9 wrote: »

It's just the initial provocative post wasn't reported by you or anybody else, both posts may deserve action, not just the reactive one.

I was going backwards in the thread to catch what I missed (many people do that), I never made it as far back as the original post so I never saw it.

Now that I have checked, it was 2 hours and 3 pages further back. It should have been reported, interestingly, both posts got thanks, so some approve of that style of debating.

K-9 wrote: »

It's something we have mentioned in the mod forum, posters who often post off topic and drag a thread elsewhere, or post something to rile or bait others.

A lot of that goes on, and some of us can be too quick to react.

"Link?" is a recent favourite of those who rile or bait, especially used repetitively over a short number of posts.

HamsterFace

And the united people thread is gone! Shame as the leader will be on Al Jazeera tomorrow

Pintman Paddy Losty

HamsterFace wrote: »

And the united people thread is gone! Shame as the leader will be on Al Jazeera tomorrow

Really? Mother of God!