35
   

Moderators Needed for the New Philosophy Forum Group on A2K

 
 
dyslexia
 
  4  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 03:44 pm
@mark noble,
Quote:
I figured you out instantly too.
LOL
0 Replies
 
Jebediah
 
  2  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 05:08 pm
The old forum was in general very polite. When there were heated arguments, they were usually based in the philosophical issue being discussed. Atheists vs theists, for example. People generally conformed to the standard. The thumbs down feature was tried but found to be undesirable.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 05:13 pm
@mark noble,
Quote:
I have no vanity for you to prey upon.


Not ******* much. Just bursting at the seams.

Quote:
Saying that certain statements are inherently 'circular' is not only ambiguous, but completely abstract and meaningless.


That's as circular as a ten pence coin.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 05:17 pm
@mark noble,
Quote:
It is just the CLIQUE of folk with superiority complexes and nothing left to feed their empty (real world) existences that I am partial to avoiding.


Well avoid it then. I don't mind and I doubt anybody else on A2K would give it a second thought if you did.

What's up with superiority complexes? They are healthy. It's inferiority complexes which are dangerous.
Zetherin
 
  3  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 05:49 pm
@Butrflynet,
Some people prefer more structure and authority in their online communities, Butrflynet.

Butrflynet wrote:
After you've spoken up and it persists, make use of the thumbs down on individual posts and whole threads that you do not wish to view. If there is a specific poster you don't wish to read, use the Ignore User button. Heck, if you're shy, make use of those tools even without speaking up first. There is no top down moderation system in the world that can be customized to each individual's exacting tastes the way the thumbs up/down and ignore buttons do.

The thumbs up and ignore buttons can certainly promote a better forum experience; they were even present on the old forum. But I don't know how much power they have over digressed threads, or the ridding of abusive users. With a forum that has a niche subject matter and a more stringent code of conduct, it is almost necessary there be someone who has the power to step in and be authoritative. A thread can lose focus and get out of hand incredibly fast, and relying on people to self-mediate a discussion simply will not work most of the time.

Quote:
Why do people who object to digressions, certain tones or attitudes, or certain types of posters insist on inflicting their individual sense of moderation on the rest of us?

There should be little individual sense of moderation, at least in our case. The sense of moderation, detailed by the code of conduct for the site, is upheld by a team, and if there is to be any respect for that team, there needs to be understanding and consensus among the moderators.

Quote:
Why do they ask that some moderator in the sky do the dirty work for them? Take responsibility for your own sense of decorum. Speak up, take a few split seconds to make use of the thumbs and ignore button and you'll have a moderated forum for your individual needs and tastes and we'll all be happy.

People can speak up all they want and press the ignore button indefininitely, but at the end of the day a vile, unconstructive thread may have spawned. We're in existence to beat those beasts back into oblivion from whence they came.

Again, I'm not trying to say that one moderation system is better than another, as I understand the goals of forums differ. I just want to articulate that there is value in top-down moderation systems, especially with the subject matter that our group will be based on.
HexHammer
 
  0  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 06:12 pm
@Intrepid,
Intrepid wrote:
I thought it was very clear. But, that's just me.
I'm afraid he miss his own point.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  2  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 06:15 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin wrote:
People can speak up all they want and press the ignore button indefininitely, but at the end of the day a vile, unconstructive thread may have spawned. We're in existence to beat those beasts back into oblivion from whence they came.

Philosophical question: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody's there to hear it, does it make any noise? Likewise, if an unconstructive thread has spawned and nobody's there to read it, does it make any trouble? (If everyone has the spawners on "ignore", nobody's there to read it.)
Intrepid
 
  1  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 06:18 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas. What happened? There's nobody here but you and me. Shocked
Thomas
 
  2  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 06:21 pm
@Intrepid,
Somebody appears to have replied to me. Razz
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 06:21 pm
@Intrepid,
Intrepid wrote:

Thomas. What happened? There's nobody here but you and me. Shocked
um,,,,,,
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 06:34 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:
question: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody's there to hear it, does it make any noise?

If we define "sound" (I'm going to use "sound" instead of "noise", since "noise" has other implications) as "a travelling wave that is an oscillation of pressure", then, yes, there would still be a sound emitted by the tree's fall. There is an objective world independent of our perception. Of course, if you mean by "sound" the sensation stimulated by organs, particularly the ear, then I could see you making your case. We can discuss this elsewhere Smile

Anyway, I'm not quite sure how your analogy fits here, as the threads will not diffuse as sound waves do. Moderators will always be able to "hear" everything, and they will know when one of those sorts of threads spawn. And that is trouble, yes.
Quote:
(If everyone has the spawners on "ignore", nobody's there to read it.)

If everyone is on ignore, we won't have much semblance of a community, will we? No philosophy necessary. The point is to limit the unconstructive threads, and foster a community that won't have users liberally using their ignore button.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 06:49 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:
Philosophical question: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody's there to hear it, does it make any noise?


that's just crazy cottage talk Laughing
dyslexia
 
  1  
Thu 19 Aug, 2010 06:54 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

Thomas wrote:
Philosophical question: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody's there to hear it, does it make any noise?


that's just crazy cottage talk Laughing
well yeah but Thomas is prone to wax philosophic when mop and glo is all that's needed. I say we buy that man a swiffer.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  -3  
Fri 20 Aug, 2010 07:14 am
@Zetherin,
Quote:
question: If a tree falls in the forest and nobody's there to hear it, does it make any noise?


Our philosophy is obviously at a very advanced stage when we are discussing old chestnuts of that nature. If there are no witnesses how can the tree be said to fall or even exist. Is there a forest if nobody knows about it?

How do you define an unconstructive thread Zeth?
Caroline
 
  2  
Fri 20 Aug, 2010 04:56 pm
@spendius,
On our old forum we had mods to stop abuse, trolling and flaming. There were people there as young as 13 so standards needed to be set. What I like here is it's full of adult so we should be able to moderate ourselves. The new philforum needs mods for stuff like going off topic, ranting and general stuff. I can't wait for the new philforum, when is it going to be up and running boys?

I really like it here, I'm really enjoying myself. I like that you can see your posts, new post, new topics, etc. I love flicking between the different forums. There's a lot more people here so lots more to talk about. I'know I've said this before but thanks again to Robert and Justin, you're cool.
mark noble
 
  0  
Fri 20 Aug, 2010 05:06 pm
@spendius,
Oh NO! Is that me you're referring to.
I am so deeply hurt.

Run out of gimmicks, or gullible targets?

Mark...
0 Replies
 
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Fri 20 Aug, 2010 05:07 pm
@spendius,
The same questions are asked all the time in Philosphy, its rare to have a unique one. However with the advent of the various sciences and philosophical schools, even the age of "if a tree fell" question can be approached from so many angles, combining schools of though, science, technology etc... these questions become very entertaing to the lay person who may not have become fully committed to a particular way of thinking, or a scholar who has recently opened up their philosphical ideology for modification. I cannot say all questions are as entertaining as the others, but the oldies and goodies have staying power simply because they are such deeply rooted and relevant questions.
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Fri 20 Aug, 2010 05:08 pm
@Caroline,
Caroline wrote:
There were people there as young as 13 so standards needed to be set.


won't someone please think of the children Razz
Caroline
 
  2  
Fri 20 Aug, 2010 05:12 pm
@djjd62,
Yes indeed:) That's why we weren't allowed to swear because the forum was open to young people.
mark noble
 
  -1  
Fri 20 Aug, 2010 05:13 pm
@djjd62,
Or provide a bigger butt to kiss, maybe.


Nice to see you Djj!
Mark...
 

Related Topics

Philforum Focus Group - Discussion by jgweed
PhilForum check in - Discussion by sometime sun
Top o' the Mornin' to Ya! - Question by Transcend
The new amalgamated philosophy forum. - Discussion by Soul Brother
Richard Grant - Question by Spock1111
Lily says goodbye - Question by Lily
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 09:22:32