Topic: Request For Help From P&S Regulars/P&S Meta Thread - page 3. (Read 38493 times)

I would generally agree with these statements however I wouldn't cast it as an absolute.  I would rather look at it on a scale.  Some religious topics do not belong in this section IMO.  for example your thread that you PM'd me about was not about political implications it was an opinion poll for what is the best religion.  I did not see a lot of value in the thread being in this board, my options are delete, lock or move it.  I chose the one that didn't censor the topic, feel free to continue to discuss it!



That's not how it works dude, I don't get to create boards, I work within the system provided.  If either of us don't like it we can complain, deal with it or leave.


It appears that way because it is and the arbitrary decision is left to me.  Again not all religious topics belong in this section IMO. I don't look at this subject in terms of absolutes.  The rules are subjective I did not receive instructions on what and how to specifically mod the section.  I apply the rules the best I can based on my interpretation of the rules.  If you believe I am not interpreting the correctly after we talk about it feel free to take it to meta!

It is funny you say half the religious topics have been moved to OT.  In reality I have moved dozens of threads in the last couple of weeks and I believe 1 of them was a religion opinion poll.  In fairness it may have been a couple of religious threads moved but they were shit topics I probably should have shit canned instead of moving but meh, point being it isn't anywhere near half.

It is also worth noting that as I mentioned I feel I have been extra lenient on the religious subjects.  I won't be moving every thread on this subject to OT it does as mentioned have a lot of society and political implications, but I also don't think I will leave all them anymore and will be making decisions on what to leave and what to move.

Thanks for the PM since I have responded here I won't bother with a reply.

Once FH was appointed moderator I almost went on a tagging spree, under redundant/duplicate topic.

However I wanted to leave it to FH and some of the people who were active here while it was a steaming pile.

Religious topics should be treated the same as any other topic, which it appears they now have been. Unless a topic brings a fresh new perspective for conversation or is about a different religion it doesn't need new or multiple topics. Also not all religioous topics had anything to do with P&S, and on this board there should be a reasonable connection.

FH has been reasonable and provided a good line of communication, so I'm petty sure if you bring an example of a thread that shouldn't have been moved or if

I personally feel that religious topics should be in the politics & society section... for many people, religion is the basis for society

Religion causes many of the problems with politics & society

Religion is extremely relevant to this section

If you think differently, then create a religious subforum and move ALL the religious topics to the same place... it appears completely arbitrary that you move half of the religious topics to off-topic and leave the other half in politics & society

That is generally the line I try to take on threads.  I freely admit I may make a mistake though, and if anyone thinks I have I don't mind a PM to discuss it!  I wish I could follow in depth every thread and post but I don't have the time for that, so I have to make a decision sometimes.  The thread in question seemed to be redundant repetitive arguments but if there is genuine back and forth I will unlock it and let the debate continue.  Indecently as I mentioned if it was the OP that locked the thread I will not unlock it (unless someone can show me a forum rule that says I have too!)

I used to tag the threads I locked with a little mods note, and your suggestion is a very reasonable one so I will start tagging threads I lock with a note indicating it was me!

Honestly dude, believe it or not, I am just some average Joe schmuck, I am not pushing an agenda, hidden or open.  I really really don't give a flying fuck what content/topics are discussed (provided they're on topic for starters).  The only thing I care about is following the forum rules and a lot of those are subjective!

I am hesitant to touch these threads and for the most part have left them to be on their own because of my personal Anti-Theist views (although I will happily delete individual redundant shitposts in these threads).   As I mentioned I feel there is a tremendous amount of redundancy in the religious threads but I haven't done anything with them so I don't look like I am pushing a personal agenda.  If anything I have been overly lenient on them on purpose.

Also as I mentioned I am still trying to figure out the direction of the sub.  What is the scale of society based topics that we allow?  I could go hard line and say all topics must have a political direction.  In such a case to me one religious group killing another would then fall into an off topic category here as the debate would largely be a "our book says were right and not all people of one religion are killing people" and not political so should be moved to OT.

I haven't taken the hard line approach yet because I feel there are some interesting topics that aren't specifically political but can have some political implications on a deeper level perhaps or that impact society globally (the SpaceX Mars thread comes to mind).  I don't want to also push these threads to OT because it doesn't specifically make mention of the politics in the OP.  I think there is a bunch of interesting threads that we would lose if I went hard line.  I'd like to keep those options for threads open.

I am considering opening a thread in meta to ask for comments on the direction of the board.  See if users what specific political discussion for each thread or does something as global as religion and humanity style issues belong under the society heading and thus appropriate.

Fair points all, and one need not try very hard insight me to conspiricy theorism.  I am somewhat sensitive to efforts like JDIF since I've seen them in action.  Am familiar with Cass Sunstein's theories/tactics.  Etc.  It's not totally idle conjecture that such efforts do exist and they probably won't be going away any time soon.  In fact they will probably be mostly AI at some point if they are not already.

A friendly suggestion would be to treat threads which seem to have legitimate conversation going (e.g., paragraph or two points and counter-points with realistic quoting) differently than those which do not.  To a large degree they might be recognized on sight without a whole lot of  analysis.  At least to an adequate level of precision.  Certainly it is eyebrow raising to see the shear number of religious tinged threads, and they can be quite tedious.  (Thankfully I don't have to even open them unless I am particularly bored.)

Another suggestion would be to have it clear who, exactly, locked the thread.  Even better would be a brief description of why.

Would it surprise you to know that I get my directions on what posts and threads to moderate in the form of an anonymous briefcase dropped off at the end of my driveway with a burner phone and some Benjamin's?  I never thought much about it but the briefcase does seem to have a Wikipedia page in it every time (I use my lucky charms decoder ring to decipher the wiki page, don't know why they send me a phone).


Would it make more suspicious if I told you I locked the thread and not the OP?  You give me far to much credit to be able to figure out that an OP locked a thread because he didn't like the direction it was going.  If I have to look out for that shit bro, yall need a new mod here!  Not to mention an OP can lock a topic anytime they like AFAIK and unless I lock the thread I will not be unlocking them.

We have threads like, muslims hate christians, muslims kill christians, muslims hate muslims, christians hate christians, christians kill muslims, christians hate muslims, everyone hates muslims, everyone hates christians, everyone hates moderators, religion is poison, can we live without religion, did the christian touch you in a bad place, did the muslim touch you in a bad place, do you believe in god, why do you believe in good, did god touch you in a bad place, I'm an atheist, why do atheists hate religion, did the atheist touch you in a bad spot.

Would it also surprise and shock you to know that I have no special training to be the Mod of such a high politically valued target such as this board?

I've spent a fair bit of time purging (locking, deleting, moving threads) the shit around here, I have also spent a fair bit of time trying to figure out what to do with all the religious themed threads.  I have not moved any as of yet, I can see some political debate being involved in a lot of religious themes.  Some of them are certainly politically not relevant but I haven't moved them YET because I see they cover a wide section of society.

I didn't get any specific instructions on the exact direction of the sub, and so I am still trying to balance the line between politics and society.  Realistically you could argue anything affects society.

Honestly though man, instead of assuming stuff and thinking conspiracies you could have just dropped me a PM asking to open the thread or ask why it was locked.  I get PM's from time to time asking similar questions and I believe I have answered all of them.  I also probably would have unlocked it for you pretty quick!

Not really on topic, but kind of:

It is common for platforms to be taken over for purposes which are political in nature.  This occurs when the attacker has coordination and resources, and when the target is of high value.  This happened to Wikipedia over a decade ago, and it is now a joke to sophisticated internet users who know the history.

I would hope that the moderator (of specifically the P&S board) would be aware of instances where a particular point of view is of political value to be promoted.  When a spirited discussion is occurring (vs. a bunch of one-liner 'virtue quiz' style posts) and especially when it is starting to go against what the original author might have had in mind and the author seems to lock the thread, I would hope that the moderator would take it upon themselves to unlock it.  The goal would be to avoid having Bitcointalk fall into the same trap that Wikipedia fell victim to to the detriment of the world at large.

FWIW, my post here was 'triggered' by the 'Muslims kill Christians' thread.

Wow! A post that could have come from me. I agree completely. I would add that one should snip out the images as well.

I have seen that on some forums the quote is limited to a dozen lines or so, and at the bottom of the quote there is a ...more... type of link. Clicking this expands the quote. I have suggested several times that this is added to the forum, as it would reduce the work of the mods.

These have a noticeable effect. By increasing the noise to signal ratio, meaningful content is rapidly moved past the front page, and is lost.

Agreed


To be honest it's a really minor issue in the grand scheme of things.  I don't know of a rule that says long quotes are not allowed, although I guess one could make the argument it spam which is actually reasonable IMO.  I am certainly not at the point of deleting posts because it's got a long quote trail!  I don't think it needs anything more than people considering the reader!

It's more of an etiquette issue at the moment and I hope folks will consider the reader, if you want your post read, be nice to the reader!!!


It's such a minor issue that the simple solution is probably the best ie just be considerate of the reader!  If that doesn't work and 1 or a few users are being ridiculous about it we can look at manually intervening and escalating if absolutely necessary!

The problem is that on rare occasion it can make sense to do very long strings of quotes.

One solution may be to (programmatically) allow all users a quota of high-percentage-quoted material and when exceeded an auto-trim occurs.

Another family of solutions would incur some degree of inconvenience to the person doing blind-quoting.  The problem here is that threads of conversation tend to benefit a lot by targeted and contentually relevant quotes.  The threads which do this tend to be the ones with more high-value content in my observation (and IMHO.)

Hmm... Isn't there a way to add a "maxlength" value to quotes?
This would solve the problem quickly.

It is a little off topic but I know a guy that will let us chat about it here  

TBH the 10 word shitpost are kinda easy to spot and dump.  Granted I'm sure I miss tons of them.  It really comes down to me doing it alone.  I literally get less than 1 report a day, so anything cleaned up is done 99% by me.  I don't mind so much and I do what I can!

The ones that eat my time are the "paragraph" redundant posts.  They take much more time to read and make a determination on.  I really do want to make sure I don't get rid of a post by someone with a genuine opinion (whatever the fuck it may be!)!  I do leave a lot "just in case", I would love to dump a fuck ton more but I'm here to enforce forum rules and not my own!!

The next problem I will ask folks to start working on is the multi-posting (this is not directed at you mate!!!!).  It is starting to become a bit of an eyesore, it's a very few users so I think we can work together to get that taken care of!

May be more applicable to the meta board, but...

I wonder if in an algorithmic manner it would work to require initial posts to be lengthy, complex, and coherent.  A genuine and interested user could take the time to produce a couple of these even if he/she were limited to cell phone or whatever.

The goal would be to reduce some of the 10 word no-quote content from new users.  I've been trying for years to determine if some of these are AI bots or not and have not come to any conclusion.  One way or another the value they add seems negligible at best and the effort to police them up must be significant.

A mortal with a broom will not keep up with a bot-farm, or even vast swarms of ankle-bitter bio-bots.  Will eventually lose intterest and walk away in frustration.  Would be nice to figure out an automated way of dealing with this surface level crust.

Absolutely no need to apologize brother!  I very much appreciate anyone making an effort to make things more readable.  If we all try a little things will improve for all of us!

I kind of figure if people don't know I'm here and I'm just doing some cleaning in the background I think I will be doing my "job" correctly!

Anyways debate away pls ladies and gentlemen!

I'll admit to the same thing, just now am I learning how to quote individual things (as in, copy and pasting what someone wrote and then using the quote bbcode)

I'll make sure to fix it myself, sorry about that FH. I am happy to see this forum going in the right direction though, we've needed some moderation for a LONG LONG TIME. Thanks FH

Thanks Bill the kind words are appreciated!  I do my best, I sometimes think I'm a little lax but to be honest if anyone is here to join in actual discussion I want them to have their say and be heard.

I won't stand for the blatant shit but I feel I generally try to err on the side of caution.  People can choose to ignore posts/threads as well I don't need to just dump every post that isn't an academic masterpiece!

I pop my head into this board now and then, looking for differences of opinion, intellectual stimulation, social commentary and a few other things; I have noticed an improvement on this board since you became moderator FH. I want to let you know that you're doing a great job, and this quote initiative is certainly needed in specifically this board. If I come across any quotes that fit your criteria, I'll certainly remember this post and adjust accordingly.

I admit to being guilty of posting as much as a week of the latest recorded Islamic extremist attacks world wide, out of the 31,000+ since 9/11. It makes a point, that of the unexpectedly long list even for a week.

I'll reduce it to the last couple days activity. Or just a link.

Appreciate your work FH!

As a long-time user, here is what I try to do.

I try to be aware that 5 seconds of editing integrated across all readers is a lot more time.  So, with 5 seconds of work I can save many hours of wasted time by others.

1) Short posts, I quote in total by highlight a point I wish to respond to.

2)  Longer threads, I try to whittle down to single specific targets of conversation even when I leave in multiple quotes.  This, unfortunately, can be cumbersome.

3)  Sometimes I'll quote a previous post but remove all content.  This so that the 1% of readers who are actually interested can quickly jump to the post to which I was responding.

4)  I use the preview feature to sanity-check quoted material.

I cannot stand cell phones or tablets and use my workstation almost exclusively.  My guess is that most people cannot because they have access only to a phone and, in my limited experience, it's a true bitch to get anything done on one of those things.  I try to cut people some slack if they are so limited.  Unfortunately, it seems that there is a correlation between 'virtue exam' postings and short cell-phone-looking posts.  Oh well.  It helps understand our various societies better I suppose.