Captain Ewok, This Categories Business of Moving Posts Needs to Stop

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Why can't debate take place in OT? Just because the topic is moved to OT, doesn't mean debate can't take place. I think the problem is you start a 5 page long topic, and think people are going to read the whole thing. Maybe some do. Also, when you start these "drive-bys," and some discussion does take place, the majority of the time you never return.

If people don't feel like reading through all that, they're not going to respond. I don't care where you put it. And for the most part they are about two things. Renewable energy and global warming. Simply keeping that topic in P&R isn't going to foster discussion. I think most people don't bother because you start these threads, and are never heard from again.

Maybe Ewok should start a new forum called "Steven's environmental and renewable energy discussion"

I think the big problem you have here, is people not discussing threads that you think are worth discussing. Simply keeping them in P&R isn't going to make the topic more interesting to other posters.

Geezus. Is anyone here capable of having a discussion without turning into a personal attack on me? This is the same kind of sh!t that happens in P&R which is why I avoid responding or even engaging such trolling/baiting.

Anyone who has been here long enough remembers how I used to regularly participate in the threads. Once P&R was splintered off from Off Topic, the standard became where a thread was created and a handful of yahoos would post their dismissals of the both the poster and the article in an attempt to derail, troll or bait. While this behavior still existed when it was only Off Topic, there were enough level-headed VJ'ers who would keep the conversation on track and provide honest, lively discussions on the topic. However, P&R focused a concentration of social derelicts who turned it into their playground.

Merging the forums back together means larger crowds where those troublemakers are less able to be effective in trying to troll, derail and bait.

Nice job showing an example though of the kind of behavior that I've been talking about. If you want to be taken seriously, learn how to have a discussion without making personal swipes at the OP.

ETA: And for the record - I challenge anyone to look back at the thread views and posts over the years. Many of the ones I started were some of the most popular threads. That said, I am not looking to force anyone to participate in any thread I create. I'm saying - let members decide which threads should stay on the first page by their participation and lets not let a handful of social derelicts continue to spoil the enjoyment of having lively discussions for the rest of us.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Lincolns mullet

[Karee 4,189]

Geezus. Is anyone here capable of having a discussion without turning into a personal attack on me? This is the same kind of sh!t that happens in P&R which is why I avoid responding or even engaging such trolling/baiting.

Anyone who has been here long enough remembers how I used to regularly participate in the threads. Once P&R was splintered off from Off Topic, the standard became where a thread was created and a handful of yahoos would post their dismissals of the both the poster and the article in an attempt to derail, troll or bait. While this behavior still existed when it was only Off Topic, there were enough level-headed VJ'ers who would keep the conversation on track and provide honest, lively discussions on the topic. However, P&R focused a concentration of social derelicts who turned it into their playground.

Merging the forums back together means larger crowds where those troublemakers are less able to be effective in trying to troll, derail and bait.

Nice job showing an example though of the kind of behavior that I've been talking about. If you want to be taken seriously, learn how to have a discussion without making personal swipes at the OP.

ETA: And for the record - I challenge anyone to look back at the thread views and posts over the years. Many of the ones I started were some of the most popular threads. That said, I am not looking to force anyone to participate in any thread I create. I'm saying - let members decide which threads should stay on the first page by their participation and lets not let a handful of social derelicts continue to spoil the enjoyment of having lively discussions for the rest of us.

Not sure how you consider that a personal attack. It's simply an observation I've made over time. Sorry you took it personally.

I think it's good that OT, Games, and P&R are seperate forums. If you want to watch people count backwards from 1000, then Games is for you. If you want to discuss the color of your new shoes, then OT is the place to go.

What makes you think you wont get the same responses from these "social derelicts" if you post your topic in OT? I think some people might consider "social derelicts" an attack. Hell a few in P&R would probably be proud of it. Who knows.

Anyway, I think members have decided which topics stay on the first page based on if they find the topic interesting enough to post on that topic. If they don't feel the need to comment, it falls off to the later pages. Somewhat democratic if you ask me.

[Darnell 8,478]

is it really imperative that ANY topic 'stay on the front page' , at all? I mean - come on - who gets their panties in a twist when it falls off the front page?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Not sure how you consider that a personal attack. It's simply an observation I've made over time. Sorry you took it personally.

I think it's good that OT, Games, and P&R are seperate forums. If you want to watch people count backwards from 1000, then Games is for you. If you want to discuss the color of your new shoes, then OT is the place to go.

What makes you think you wont get the same responses from these "social derelicts" if you post your topic in OT? I think some people might consider "social derelicts" an attack. Hell a few in P&R would probably be proud of it. Who knows.

Anyway, I think members have decided which topics stay on the first page based on if they find the topic interesting enough to post on that topic. If they don't feel the need to comment, it falls off to the later pages. Somewhat democratic if you ask me.

It was a personal swipe at me and you know it. You've had it in for me for awhile now - although I'm not sure what I might have said that vexed you, but that's beside the point. It's also disingenuous to suggest that all I want to to do is start threads about a specific topic and that I never participate in the discussions. I've explained my reluctance, however, in participating most of the time. Calling members who habitually post in threads to troll, derail and bait are social derelicts. They have no desire to build a rapport with other members here or if they do, they only will do so with ones they feel think like they do. This is the tribal mentality that has been perpetuated as the unintended consequence of dividing the social interactions on this website by region and then later, by topic.

Most of you probably never experienced the sense of online community that existed when Off Topic was like the Cheers pub of this site. It's too bad because there is no desire for community, but rather conformity. I don't care whether someone responds to anything I post, but I do miss the rapport that once dominated Off Topic and all the great members who have since left here because there was no more pub to socialize here anymore.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Lincolns mullet

[Darnell 8,478]

Well, you joined 1 day after me - May I nominate you for ModShip in ONLY the PR section?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

is it really imperative that ANY topic 'stay on the front page' , at all? I mean - come on - who gets their panties in a twist when it falls off the front page?

Where did you get that idea? Generally, when Off Topic was the place where VJ'ers socialized, interacted outside of the immigration discussions, the threads that were on the first page typically were the ones that were the most lively discussions. I've never suggested that it be a popularity contest or that less active threads are not important. The focus here is on building an online community where members from different walks of life, different points of view, and different beliefs, could engage one another in lively discussions. Call me an idealist, but that's what I miss from the old days and that's what I'm hoping that the Administrator would try to rebuild, because without it, we're just a discussion board that is overrun by miscreants.

Well, you joined 1 day after me - May I nominate you for ModShip in ONLY the PR section?

I've been here since May of 2006.

[Darnell 8,478]

So, do you think a complete banning of the miscreants will be useful, or no?

I've been here since May of 2006.

Whoops - sorry, my bad - the 8 and the 6 looked the same at that moment in time. dreck !

[Pooky 3,348]

Where did you get that idea? Generally, when Off Topic was the place where VJ'ers socialized, interacted outside of the immigration discussions, the threads that were on the first page typically were the ones that were the most lively discussions. I've never suggested that it be a popularity contest or that less active threads are not important. The focus here is on building an online community where members from different walks of life, different points of view, and different beliefs, could engage one another in lively discussions. Call me an idealist, but that's what I miss from the old days and that's what I'm hoping that the Administrator would try to rebuild, because without it, we're just a discussion board that is overrun by miscreants.

The problem there is the propensity of some of the more prolific and opinionated members to take their personal issues beyond the threads where they were having their disagreements. This resulted in the derailing of numerous threads by wholly unrelated animosity, such that other, less adversarial posters were driven away.

With the increasingly partisan and decidedly unpleasant atmosphere in P&R these days, I believe it would be a huge mistake to recombine Off Topic with P&R. All it would do would be to drive away those posters currently posting in Off Topic who are happier with the lighter side of life.

And I don't want to labor the point, but it certainly helps initiate a discussion if a posted article is accompanied by the poster's opinion on the salient points. Such an opinion can focus respondents' attention on the points that specifically interest the poster and give discussion a chance to start out in the right direction.

And I've been here long enough to witness the good, the bad and the ugly side of Off Topic and P&R.

Edited January 16, 2013 by Pooky

[Karee 4,189]

So, do you think a complete banning of the miscreants will be useful, or no?

Whoops - sorry, my bad - the 8 and the 6 looked the same at that moment in time. dreck !

Since we all have our pants down, and our tape measures out, I was a member here since August 2007. I asked the mods to close my previous account and I opened this one.

Edited January 16, 2013 by Karee

[Darnell 8,478]

The problem there is the propensity of some of the more prolific and opinionated members to take their personal issues beyond the threads where they were having their disagreements. This resulted in the derailing of numerous threads by wholly unrelated animosity, such that other, less adversarial posters were driven away.

With the increasingly partisan and decidedly unpleasant atmosphere in P&R these days, I believe it would be a huge mistake to recombine Off Topic with P&R. All it would do would be to drive away those posters currently posting in Off Topic who are happier with the lighter side of life.

And I don't want to labor the point, but it certainly helps initiate a discussion if a posted article is accompanied by the poster's opinion on the salient points. Such an opinion can focus respondents' attention on the points that specifically interest the poster and give discussion a chance to start out in the right direction.

And I've been here long enough to witness the good, the bad and the ugly side of Off Topic and P&R.

Ya, making Lincoln's Mullet a mod in the PR forum should do away with a lot of the stuff that you've written, above, as he'll have the opportunity to delete topics and move topics and lock topics. Then, once he's a mod in PR, he can ask his friends to return to VJ, to have decent discussions, aye? With the promise of control and deleting, his friends can return and feel safe here at VJ!

Yes? No? Maybe?

Edited January 16, 2013 by Darnell

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Yes? No? Maybe?

[Pooky 3,348]

Ya, making Lincoln's Mullet a mod in the PR forum should do away with a lot of the stuff that you've written, above, as he'll have the opportunity to delete topics and move topics and lock topics. Then, once he's a mod in PR, he can ask his friends to return to VJ, to have decent discussions, aye? With the promise of control and deleting, his friends can return and feel safe here at VJ!

Yes? No? Maybe?

Uh, that would be a no

To be a moderator, the member needs impartiality. I think LM would agree that requirement would preclude him fro consideration for the position.

[Darnell 8,478]

nah, not for what he wants, aye?

If he's a mod solely in PR, then he has the unique opportunity to build and make what he wants.

No need for his impartiality whatsoever, as he's building his own thing there, to suit his own needs and purpose.

That was, after all, the main complaint back in post #1, aye?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

nah, not for what he wants, aye?

If he's a mod solely in PR, then he has the unique opportunity to build and make what he wants.

No need for his impartiality whatsoever, as he's building his own thing there, to suit his own needs and purpose.

That was, after all, the main complaint back in post #1, aye?

I did suggest Ewok give him his own tree hugger, global warming, drum circle forum, but that didn't seem to go anywhere.

[Darnell 8,478]

I think, since he's made some valid points on all of this, that he should be made a mod and allowed to control (solely) PR sub-forum.

He wants change - and IMO, the only way to facilitate the changes he wants is to become a MOD.

Seriously !

This is not some passing fancy, aye? We've 2 to 3 years worth of documented evidence of his complaints. It's time to give him the power to institute the change he's been asking for, aye?