Site is a graveyard - How can boards save itself? [Threadbanned users in 1st post]

The don't be a dick one on the CA charter is something that should be fleshed out a bit more.

There are a handful of posters who call posters far right, racist and nazi etc when they express views.

That is not only being insulting, but very much being a dick, this is something that we can only assume the mod of the thread thinks is okay to do.

for you this works. If boards however wants new or younger users it will not succeed without an app.

wonder could the site use a splash of colour like the student room forum, this forum looks a bit dated,

also it should probably setup discussions maybe comps to encourage people to engage

This is sounding a bit like rules lawyering. Basically saying that you want a strict set of terms/phrases that if someone breaches them then they should be banned.

There was an excellent thread on the site in the days of Vbulletin where users were giving out and demanding that certain phrases were banned. The thing was that the posters who had used that phrase (it was a feedback thread about two women who had travelled to someplace during covid travel lockdowns for some cosmetic and were giving out about having to quarantine in a hotel upon their return) were all sanctioned and forum banned etc, but the person who opened the thread DEMANDED that they were made aware of the sanctions applied, and DEMANDED updates etc on any subsequent sanctions. There was a second person in that thread who repeated the phrase during that thread about 5 times, DEMANDINGit was added to a banned list thus ensuring that anyone who hadn't seen it was made aware of it.

Eventually Shield came back with an incredibly eloquent, well reasoned and thoughtful response, saying why those demands would not be met. Which resulted in the rage quit of one poster.

Having a strict set of terms/phrases that are on a ban list just means that low level trolls will work out a way around them and when they are finally warned/sanctioned etc they go running home to mammy crying out about the big bad admins/mods/cmods, because they didn't break the rules.

IF you don't understand what acting the dick, or being a muppet is then that is entirely on you. Everyone knows what tacting the dick and being a muppet means. Pretending you don't is just insulting to everyones intelligence

if you have kids ask them if they would ever think to do this. I absolutely guarantee you they will have no idea you can do this nor would ever think to do this. All the app type things they are used to doing will not work this way.

It works for you but if boards want to stay relevant it needs an app otherwise it's a dead platform.

That's quite disingenuous. I'd wager that the most common phrase written in DRP is some variation of "Can somebody take a look at this?". It's incredibly common for a poster to have to chase up an answer.

"IF you don't understand what acting the dick, or being a muppet is then that is entirely on you. Everyone knows what acting the dick and being a muppet means. Pretending you don't is just insulting to everyones intelligence."

Well then at the risk of me being called a dick or muppet, can you please explain further.

It's far too easy and convenient to just say that 'Everyone knows'….. :)

You see that's not quite the experience that users are reporting here. No point in going into detailed particulars, but I and others have instanced warnings and bans that have resulted from posts that were neither uncivil or abusive. You may not want to believe it, but that's how things pan out. Here's one infraction message 'At this point it is simply soapboxing on thread and is causing considerable annoyance to other users'

So who decides what's 'soapboxing' and what are the criteria? Soapboxing is just a term for someone repeating a strongly held view maybe? The CA charter allows for this and I quote 'You are free to express your views in a forceful manner provided you remain civil'. So what's wrong with occasionally repeating a strongly held view and that was the situation above. As to being infracted for annoying others, surely you can see that this is quite inappropriate in a CA thread? You disagree with people in a civil way, they get annoyed and have the poster warned or banned.

Now as I've noted above, I can fully appreciate that if a CA/ Politics thread is dominated by posters with one point of view, that it can be disruptive if others disagree. That's understandable but does boards want a series of echo chambers and if it doesn't there should be a mechanism that allows for a thread to be closed and a new one started with more tolerance and/or parallel threads.

Just my two cents and suggestions. Maybe you or others have better suggestions?

Being a dick is being abusive; mupperty is trolling, misrepresenting arguments, dodging questions and basically refusing to admit your augment has failed.