Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 9:15:38 GMT 1
I hope the Politics does go. Just an idea for those like minded folk who appear to thrive on it why not create a chat room so they can talk about what they wish to their hearts content . I like Offtopic and if it is all closed down then like Mids I am away altogether. Its not surprising how many regular and long time posters already have departed. So you hope the bits you like to go on stay, but you hope the bits you dont like to go on, go? Thats very magnanimous of you. The politics board IS like a chat room where like minded folk can chat to their hearts content. Thats what it is! You dont have to go on. You have that choice. You are correct and my choice is now not to even bother delving in ever again .I will let your group just get on with whatever you wish .Some of the content has been poisonous and repetitive but whey hey we are all different in our outlook on life .I prefer mine so I will do just as you suggest .End of |
|
|
|
Post by Stewpot on Jun 30, 2020 9:22:49 GMT 1
I make little contribution to the political threads, but still very much in favour of keeping it as is. Off topic is a great sanctuary sometimes when things on the football pitch are not going as well as they could be!
|
|
ben1987
Mental Health Support Group
Posts: 7,240
|
Post by ben1987 on Jun 30, 2020 9:28:48 GMT 1
I hope the Politics does go. Just an idea for those like minded folk who appear to thrive on it why not create a chat room so they can talk about what they wish to their hearts content . I like Offtopic and if it is all closed down then like Mids I am away altogether. Its not surprising how many regular and long time posters already have departed. So you hope the bits you like to go on stay, but you hope the bits you dont like to go on, go? Thats very magnanimous of you. The politics board IS like a chat room where like minded folk can chat to their hearts content. Thats what it is! You dont have to go on. You have that choice. This 100%. If you don’t like it then don’t go on there, free speech and freedom of choice as far as I was aware still exist. Personally I’d rather off topic was on the main board amongst all the football chat. I don’t see the need for categories. |
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Jun 30, 2020 9:33:41 GMT 1
Good to see baldies sticking together
|
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Jun 30, 2020 9:56:17 GMT 1
One of the issues in keeping it is that it's difficult to administer - Kenny and I are mostly in agreement when posts are reported, almost always, and the only times we ever disagree (which are very rare) are over the politics board. We both generally have an attitude that the nature of the board means more leeway should be given, but (possibly because I am often actively involved) occasionally we disagree where the line is.
Therein lies the other issue - I am an active poster on the politics board because, while it exists, I think it's important to challenge views I find distasteful, offensive or abhorrent.
My inclination is to bin it - the internet is cast and there is no shortage of places for an argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by detox on Jun 30, 2020 10:04:54 GMT 1
Question...if someone is banned from the polics board, does that also ban them from the footy one ?
In any event, I disagree the politics board should be closed down.. Not everyone hurls abuse, most I'd say can have a grown up debate and if you shut it, the abusers win. How is that fair ?
I've seen the infighting,and yes it's pretty bitter...but if it becomes abusive just ban the perpetrator. If you're saying you don'thave time to do this (I'm not sure)..then that's another issue isn't it.
Politics sometimes seeps it's way into the main board and you might find that seepage becomes more of a river if people can't vent their spleen in the proper place.
In the end, how many abusers are we talking about, out of how many posters ?
|
|
|
|
Post by rastrick32 on Jun 30, 2020 10:17:25 GMT 1
Good to see baldies sticking together But not in my football team |
|
|
|
Post by artysid on Jun 30, 2020 10:17:42 GMT 1
One of the issues in keeping it is that it's difficult to administer - Kenny and I are mostly in agreement when posts are reported, almost always, and the only times we ever disagree (which are very rare) are over the politics board. We both generally have an attitude that the nature of the board means more leeway should be given, but (possibly because I am often actively involved) occasionally we disagree where the line is. Therein lies the other issue - I am an active poster on the politics board because, while it exists, I think it's important to challenge views I find distasteful, offensive or abhorrent. My inclination is to bin it - the internet is cast and there is no shortage of places for an argument. You and Kenny are the administrators and I respect the difficult job you have to do. If you're both saying you you don't have the time to administer the Board then I'm 100% behind whatever decision you take, but like detox says I'm not sure the relevance of putting it to a vote if that's the case.  IMO the majority of posters are not uncivil most of the time (though we've all let our standards slip at times), though I think some posts skirt the edge of legality at times. Indeed I would say there are only a couple of posters who are regularly toxic - maybe a ban from the politics board (but not the rest of the forum) for those you find difficult to "police"? |
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Jun 30, 2020 10:46:05 GMT 1
If anyone can explain why Pritti Patel struggles so much to say "ing" at the end of a word, preferring "in", they can have my vote
|
|
|
|
Post by thongsbridge on Jun 30, 2020 10:52:42 GMT 1
Yes, close it. I don't think people should be able to express any view that I don't agree with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Jun 30, 2020 11:03:58 GMT 1
One of the issues in keeping it is that it's difficult to administer - Kenny and I are mostly in agreement when posts are reported, almost always, and the only times we ever disagree (which are very rare) are over the politics board. We both generally have an attitude that the nature of the board means more leeway should be given, but (possibly because I am often actively involved) occasionally we disagree where the line is. Therein lies the other issue - I am an active poster on the politics board because, while it exists, I think it's important to challenge views I find distasteful, offensive or abhorrent. My inclination is to bin it - the internet is cast and there is no shortage of places for an argument. You and Kenny are the administrators and I respect the difficult job you have to do. If you're both saying you you don't have the time to administer the Board then I'm 100% behind whatever decision you take, but like detox says I'm not sure the relevance of putting it to a vote if that's the case. IMO the majority of posters are not uncivil most of the time (though we've all let our standards slip at times), though I think some posts skirt the edge of legality at times. Indeed I would say there are only a couple of posters who are regularly toxic - maybe a ban from the politics board (but not the rest of the forum) for those you find difficult to "police"? For clarity, it's not that we don't have time - it's whether we should have to take the time and moreover whether the politics sub-board adds value to the forum. It's always good to review things like this now and again. |
|
Tinpot
Mental Health Support Group
I'm really tinpot
Posts: 24,084 
|
Post by Tinpot on Jun 30, 2020 12:36:28 GMT 1
There are lots of other places where you can discuss politics and current affairs, but I often find they have a tendency to become echo chambers. People tend to gravitate towards people who hold similar views, and so their own views become entrenched.
This board is different. We're not united by politics but by the football club we support - so we generally have a broader scope of opinions. For me, the forum is better for it (with the caveat that most of us sometimes let ourselves down one way or another).
Personally, I think it adds value to the board - but if other people are made to feel uncomfortable then perhaps this is a wake-up call for us to do better.
|
|
|
|
Post by kennyk2 on Jun 30, 2020 13:19:25 GMT 1
You and Kenny are the administrators and I respect the difficult job you have to do. If you're both saying you you don't have the time to administer the Board then I'm 100% behind whatever decision you take, but like detox says I'm not sure the relevance of putting it to a vote if that's the case. IMO the majority of posters are not uncivil most of the time (though we've all let our standards slip at times), though I think some posts skirt the edge of legality at times. Indeed I would say there are only a couple of posters who are regularly toxic - maybe a ban from the politics board (but not the rest of the forum) for those you find difficult to "police"? For clarity, it's not that we don't have time - it's whether we should have to take the time and moreover whether the politics sub-board adds value to the forum. It's always good to review things like this now and again. ... and more importantly, trying to apply rules that were really intended for the main board on a board that is a hotbed of disagreement where people's emotions often get the better of them. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jun 30, 2020 14:06:20 GMT 1
So you hope the bits you like to go on stay, but you hope the bits you dont like to go on, go? Thats very magnanimous of you. The politics board IS like a chat room where like minded folk can chat to their hearts content. Thats what it is! You dont have to go on. You have that choice. You are correct and my choice is now not to even bother delving in ever again .I will let your group just get on with whatever you wish .Some of the content has been poisonous and repetitive but whey hey we are all different in our outlook on life .I prefer mine so I will do just as you suggest .End of Yup. Youve got the idea. |
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Jun 30, 2020 14:26:31 GMT 1
For clarity, it's not that we don't have time - it's whether we should have to take the time and moreover whether the politics sub-board adds value to the forum. It's always good to review things like this now and again. ... and more importantly, trying to apply rules that were really intended for the main board on a board that is a hotbed of disagreement where people's emotions often get the better of them. There's a warning in the narrative before you enter the Politics site. Other than for personal abuse against another poster, I'd not bother applying any rules. We're all grown ups and if you're easily offended then leave well alone. |
|
|
|
Post by Leporid on Jun 30, 2020 14:35:41 GMT 1
If anyone can explain why Pritti Patel struggles so much to say "ing" at the end of a word, preferring "in", they can have my vote That seems to be becoming a more common pronunciation unfortunately, although it's not yet as prevalent as "ve" replacing "the." Don't children have elocution and social polish lessons these days? |
|
|
|
Post by joeyjoneslocker on Jun 30, 2020 14:52:35 GMT 1
If anyone can explain why Pritti Patel struggles so much to say "ing" at the end of a word, preferring "in", they can have my vote That seems to be becoming a more common pronunciation unfortunately, although it's not yet as prevalent as "ve" replacing "the." Don't children have elocution and social polish lessons these days? You would of thought so. At what point did ‘of’ replace ‘have‘. This infuriates me more than Town’s defending. |
|
|
|
Post by Rigodon on Jun 30, 2020 15:01:27 GMT 1
One of the issues in keeping it is that it's difficult to administer - Kenny and I are mostly in agreement when posts are reported, almost always, and the only times we ever disagree (which are very rare) are over the politics board. We both generally have an attitude that the nature of the board means more leeway should be given, but (possibly because I am often actively involved) occasionally we disagree where the line is. Therein lies the other issue - I am an active poster on the politics board because, while it exists, I think it's important to challenge views I find distasteful, offensive or abhorrent. My inclination is to bin it - the internet is cast and there is no shortage of places for an argument. Do you want / need more mods Grim? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 15:12:24 GMT 1
That seems to be becoming a more common pronunciation unfortunately, although it's not yet as prevalent as "ve" replacing "the." Don't children have elocution and social polish lessons these days? You would of thought so. At what point did ‘of’ replace ‘have‘. This infuriates me more than Town’s defending.
The, Fink, Fought and Free instead of - Think, Thought and Three does my head in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jun 30, 2020 15:12:34 GMT 1
Yes, close it. I don't think people should be able to express any view that I don't agree with. Sadly i think youve probably hit the nail on the head. |
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Jun 30, 2020 15:12:52 GMT 1
One of the issues in keeping it is that it's difficult to administer - Kenny and I are mostly in agreement when posts are reported, almost always, and the only times we ever disagree (which are very rare) are over the politics board. We both generally have an attitude that the nature of the board means more leeway should be given, but (possibly because I am often actively involved) occasionally we disagree where the line is. Therein lies the other issue - I am an active poster on the politics board because, while it exists, I think it's important to challenge views I find distasteful, offensive or abhorrent. My inclination is to bin it - the internet is cast and there is no shortage of places for an argument. Do you want / need more mods Grim? We've discussed it and at present we don't think so - it's certainly not a closed shop but we think as a pair we're generally both in agreement, modding with a relatively light touch, reaching quick decisions w rarely disagree on, whereas in the past when we had 6 or 7 of us, we felt obliged to reach a consensus which could take time etc - we want to act quickly if things fall out of line and generally speaking we seem to get it right, based on feedback. Occasionally we might get a bit of an issue (see Nick, for example) and occasionally we disagree (we regularly disagree over one particular poster) but we never fall out and when we do disagree, the posters concerned always get the benefit of the doubt, which seems fair. |
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Jun 30, 2020 15:14:40 GMT 1
Yes, close it. I don't think people should be able to express any view that I don't agree with. Sadly i think youve probably hit the nail on the head. Not sure what the inference here is, but if it's what I suspect, you're off the mark. This suggestion wasn't mine and hadn't occurred to me, but when mooted by Kenny I could see the sense in it. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jun 30, 2020 15:31:20 GMT 1
End of the day nobody has to go on there who doesnt want to, so why someone who doesnt go on there would like it shut down is a bit beyond me.
And why someone who does go there would like it banned is even more beyond me. Unless its to remove a platform for posts they choose to find distasteful, offensive and abhorrent maybe?
If the idea is to stop bitter arguing, then you might as well ban discussions about Town too!
If nothing else it keeps such discussions off the main board and Off Topic, because you can be sure they will turn up there if the politics board is shut down.
So for the good of DATM it doesnt really make sense to bin it IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by mandysidebottom20 on Jun 30, 2020 15:57:48 GMT 1
End of the day nobody has to go on there who doesnt want to, so why someone who doesnt go on there would like it shut down is a bit beyond me. And why someone who does go there would like it banned is even more beyond me. Unless its to remove a platform for posts they choose to find distasteful, offensive and abhorrent maybe? If the idea is to stop bitter arguing, then you might as well ban discussions about Town too! If nothing else it keeps such discussions off the main board and Off Topic, because you can be sure they will turn up there if the politics board is shut down. So for the good of DATM it doesnt really make sense to bin it IMO. Absolutely, it confines the 'toxic' subjects to one small area, rather like the sludge trap in the sump of an engine. It's possibly quite healthy too, insofar as the need to show restraint, tact and diplomacy imposes a certain discipline. Believe it or not, considering the content, it's a surprisingly good natured board. The knack is to not attack anybody personally, only their ideas, which by shifting a word or two can be achieved while still making a good point forcefully. Also good for honing irony, derision, sarcasm and satire. Play the ball, not the man... |
|
|
|
Post by shedds on Jun 30, 2020 18:26:03 GMT 1
ive never posted in the politics section ,not my thing really ,occasionally join in on main site ,but my main interest is on the music threads that appear in off topics ,so id like to see that kept ,only other thing i contibute to is the predictions league
|
|
Tinpot
Mental Health Support Group
I'm really tinpot
Posts: 24,084
|
Post by Tinpot on Jun 30, 2020 19:40:50 GMT 1
Sadly i think youve probably hit the nail on the head. Not sure what the inference here is, but if it's what I suspect, you're off the mark. This suggestion wasn't mine and hadn't occurred to me, but when mooted by Kenny I could see the sense in it. I took that to be a facetious/light-hearted comment. |
|
|
|
Post by kennyk2 on Jun 30, 2020 20:16:55 GMT 1
Do you want / need more mods Grim? We've discussed it and at present we don't think so - it's certainly not a closed shop but we think as a pair we're generally both in agreement, modding with a relatively light touch, reaching quick decisions w rarely disagree on, whereas in the past when we had 6 or 7 of us, we felt obliged to reach a consensus which could take time etc - we want to act quickly if things fall out of line and generally speaking we seem to get it right, based on feedback. Occasionally we might get a bit of an issue (see Nick, for example) and occasionally we disagree (we regularly disagree over one particular poster) but we never fall out and when we do disagree, the posters concerned always get the benefit of the doubt, which seems fair. Double like! With 6 admins it took an age to come to a decision for everyone to agree to something. Even with 4 was a bit of pain. With 2 we can sort it out straight away. And as G says we do not always agree on everything, and we accept it when one or other has a grievance about a particular topic. But... we never get a monk on with each other. There you are... in a nutshell... the workings of the admin team! |
|
|
|
Post by rastrick32 on Jun 30, 2020 20:35:53 GMT 1
We've discussed it and at present we don't think so - it's certainly not a closed shop but we think as a pair we're generally both in agreement, modding with a relatively light touch, reaching quick decisions w rarely disagree on, whereas in the past when we had 6 or 7 of us, we felt obliged to reach a consensus which could take time etc - we want to act quickly if things fall out of line and generally speaking we seem to get it right, based on feedback. Occasionally we might get a bit of an issue (see Nick, for example) and occasionally we disagree (we regularly disagree over one particular poster) but we never fall out and when we do disagree, the posters concerned always get the benefit of the doubt, which seems fair. Double like! With 6 admins it took an age to come to a decision for everyone to agree to something. Even with 4 was a bit of pain. With 2 we can sort it out straight away. And as G says we do not always agree on everything, and we accept it when one or other has a grievance about a particular topic. But... we never get a monk on with each other. There you are... in a nutshell... the workings of the admin team! So, why do you twice keep falling out over space hardware? |
|
ben1987
Mental Health Support Group
Posts: 7,240
|
Post by ben1987 on Jun 30, 2020 20:45:59 GMT 1
Do you want / need more mods Grim? We've discussed it and at present we don't think so - it's certainly not a closed shop but we think as a pair we're generally both in agreement, modding with a relatively light touch, reaching quick decisions w rarely disagree on, whereas in the past when we had 6 or 7 of us, we felt obliged to reach a consensus which could take time etc - we want to act quickly if things fall out of line and generally speaking we seem to get it right, based on feedback. Occasionally we might get a bit of an issue (see Nick, for example) and occasionally we disagree (we regularly disagree over one particular poster) but we never fall out and when we do disagree, the posters concerned always get the benefit of the doubt, which seems fair. Maybe have two admins to administer all of DATM except off topic and have two separate admins for off topic? Ease the burden. |
|
|
|
Post by themanfromatlantis on Jul 1, 2020 7:16:52 GMT 1
We've discussed it and at present we don't think so - it's certainly not a closed shop but we think as a pair we're generally both in agreement, modding with a relatively light touch, reaching quick decisions w rarely disagree on, whereas in the past when we had 6 or 7 of us, we felt obliged to reach a consensus which could take time etc - we want to act quickly if things fall out of line and generally speaking we seem to get it right, based on feedback. Occasionally we might get a bit of an issue (see Nick, for example) and occasionally we disagree (we regularly disagree over one particular poster) but we never fall out and when we do disagree, the posters concerned always get the benefit of the doubt, which seems fair. Maybe have two admins to administer all of DATM except off topic and have two separate admins for off topic? Ease the burden. I vote for Ted & Slapps to administer OT... It'll be like a virtual version of the old Gits... |
|
