a2k sucks

Good to see ya, Robert.

Thanks. I should really get with it, but I tried foxfire and got discouraged on the setup. Maybe I'll give Chrome a shot. Glad you understood the problem, anyway.

W00t!

Chrome rocks. Srsly.

Rob.
You're a businessman, and you, sir, have hit the nail squarely on the head.
What do you want?
What do you need?
This site, albeit fruitious, once upon a time - Long before you absorbed the philoforum, is now the rear end of nowhere.
So - are social-forums on the verge of extintion?
Or do they require modernising to fit the current landscape?

You're a decent fella, Rob, with a decent vision.... But....
Google-affiliation = No.
People don't want their dirty washing exposed to the world.
A world, where a wild rant, or vodkarised (guilty) frustrated stripping could be their legacy.

What would interest folk..?
beth telling kids they should 'fk and forget'?
Set blowing a fuse because he was debate-champ 1985, and his opinion matters?
More letty - directing folk to youtube? Most ppl can find ytube themselves.
yabber-blabber, latest crossword, finish the sentence, change the word.......?
Why did my aunt sleep with a giraffe because I was too drunk to ejaculate on pastor bob's armadillo?

Yeah - It's WELL prehistoric!
But it's all you've got.

"IGN" gaming industries, heard of? Want in? Like to turn 250,000 (50) regulars into 250,000,000 regulars?
Pm me.
This is not an 'Open' discussion.

Off to resecure my gtav No1 spot now - cya.

Thanks, Robert. What a hobby to have! (j/k).

After 14 yrs of total forum participation ...first on Abuzz a year or so after it incubated... then on here since the beginning...I find it familiar interface and ...quaint. It needs a sprucing up. Amazing how long it's lasted.

Mostly to me it's the spammers that are the worst of it. Tedious dynamic to work around, but most of us realize that the re-write needed on the interface had to be done and incoporated when the whole site gets re-written.

With the accumulative time I've spent here, I could have written a novel or two.

Hmmm...it's never too late.

Be sure you keep the ignore feature or some similar feature.

I am interested in the community building aspect of Able2Know... and I wonder if the technology can help create a community where civil discussions between people with diverse opinions are supported and good behavior is rewarded.

Currently there is a core group of people who enforce a set of opinions and work to shut out opinions they consider unacceptable. It isn't a matter of arguing their opinions. It is a matter of personal attacks and bullying until people are either marginalized, or they just leave. Many of the interesting people with unique opinions have just left.

I am not sure if this is a reasonable request... but I would like to see direct personal attacks edited out. There is nothing wrong with arguing ideas or attacking positions. But when members here are attacking other members personally for their opinions. And often personal attacks are taken from thread to thread so personal attacks have nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

I feel it would be reasonable for moderators to step in.

If we are going to to have thumbs, I think it would be good for the community for them to be public, so you could see the names of people who thumb up or down a post. The consistent line is that thumbs don't mean anything... it is just a way of collapsing posts... but that doesn't reflect the reality of how they are being used. The thumbs are being used to reward uncivil behavior, I have seen more than once a direct, even vulgar, personal attack with no merit get a high thumb rating from the in crowd.

I have no problem using the technology to read, find and respond to posts. I would like to see the technology change to better facilitate a healthy community with diverse opinions and to reward civil behavior.

On a positive note, I have enjoyed Able2know since I got here.

Ooops..make that 16 yrs in total.

I just wanted to say that I've enjoyed A2K (and Abuzz) in all of its imperfect glory over the years and I'm sure whatever changes you make will be fine in the end. It's nice to know that the system is still being supported. And thanks to the Mods whoever they are

I agree that ad homs are fallacious, but it seems that you wish you could be guilty of what you're accusing others of here. You think personal attacks are unacceptable and want them to be censored. Currently, personal attacks are subject to criticism as logical fallacies. I don't see a problem with that. One reason I'm active on this forum is because it seems to take freedom of speech seriously. Yeah, I'd like to have only mature, mutually respectful discussions and not have to deal with what people are really thinking, but...then again, maybe knowing what people are really thinking has its own value, whether it's aesthetically pleasing or not.

Who will censor the censors? Who should moderate the moderators? that would create a nightmare that has been judiciously avoided here, IMHO. You can't please everyone so why not err on the side of free speech.

Where does one draw the line about censorship and/or moderation. Less is more. Having some sort of number of volunteer moderators ...is a time-consuming activity..and is thankless series of tasks. Their time is probably better spent not having to sort through those he-said-she-said or petty squabbles..or serious squabbles. No one would want that job even if it was a paying job.

Arguing and personal attacks often occur because some or many people have agendas and ..well frankly speaking.... don't know how to debate properly or remain civil while discussing their ideas. However, that being said, having a discussion where strongly held passionate beliefs are expressed, at times, is not pretty no matter how it's presented.

Lastly, I'd say that eliminating the down-vote (only) is a viable direction to go in. There's always ignore..or better put...leave intact the ignore feature.

{Edit: absolutely against gaming sort of gaming activities here other than the typical how-to activities we have now. More and broader gaming activity would drag this site down. This is a discussion forum and there are so many dedicated gaming sites as well as FB and Twitter and other social media sites on which to do gaming stuff.}

That would be great. A2K is definitely not mobile friendly.

I don't usually find myself arguing on the side of censorship... in fact I am rather uncomfortable doing so. But there is a line that can be drawn between civil and uncivil, between constructive discussion and debate and bullying.

I have no problem with arguing. If someone wants to attack my opinion, I have no problem with that. If someone wants to say my reasoning is bogus or that I am wrong about the topic at hand, this is all good.

Part of the principle here is that this type of argument is on topic.

It is quite common now to see people being attacked in ways that have nothing to do with the topic of the thread. In a recent thread, I was accused of "beating women", out of the blue, in a discussion about artificial intelligence. This was because someone didn't like the fact that I was expressing an opinion on artificial intelligence that he didn't like, so he brought up an old personal attack from earlier threads where I disagreed with his position on a completely different topic.

I would like to see the community change, where personal attacks were discouraged (rather than rewarded), and discussion or even arguments with people who have diverse opinions were facilitated.

I do think there is small in-crowd that bullies anyone who dares to express a dissenting opinion on a number of topics. The attacks get quite personal and once a member falls afoul of the in-crowd, the attacks go from thread to thread.

This is a problem here, they have been successful at shutting down discussion and even driving people away.

I don't know the answer to this problem. But if there is a technological way to discourage this behavior and foster constructive discussion with diverse views, I would heartily support it.

Relatively speaking, there are varying differences in individual's abilities to engage in debate. There's no 'drivers education' course that any discussion forum could set up in order for someone to become a member. However, suggested changes to the TOS might be a reasonable approach. At the least, it's a worthwhile and debatable issue.


Cliques form on nearly every online forum I've seen. That is the nature of online forums as far as I've seen. I don't find it as troubling as you seem to. I see plenty of members express themselves regardless of the level of disagreement. I'll agree with you that it does, however, get unnecessarily ugly. Also, I'd love to see curtailed the ability to create sock-puppets eliminated.

Hmm...that brings up an old chestnut: charging someone a nominal $5 or even <gasp>$10 per month or every 3 months..might go a long way to fixing a few of these nasty things.

A vote up only with the ability to see who did the voting would solve a ton of problems here. Leave the vote down thumb so that people can collapse posts and threads just dont tally them. I have become a sort of fan of the ignore, though I almost never use it.

Agree, we have been able to talk about things that are hard to talk about because of all of the communication controls that exist these days, and it would suck to lose that. However A2K is too often brutal and masculine because of bad behaviour on the part of a few of the guys who post a lot here. I dont know what the answer is, but we need to have A2K appeal more to the feminine. I do think that there needs to be some kind of standardized and transparent penalty system for personal attacks. We should be able to spew all the hate we want for ideas and people in the news, but practicing aggression on other members needs to carry a penalty. Being a bad citizen is grounds to remove rights always.

I seriously doubt that any re-write of able2know is going to make it more
civil. I hope -- and trust -- that a re-write will make it easier to use and
read. Good luck!

That's not something in which I would condone or see the value in. Free speech is free speech.

Voting in public elections is anonymous for a good reason. I see the value in anonymous expression with an up-vote. That feature should remain and down-vote eliminated. that would make for a healthier online community and contribute positively towards free expression.

I agree. The amount of desire, labor, time and troubleshooting for the re-write should be acknowledged. Interfaces don't grow on trees.

At the minimum having an improved interface that is easier to navigate and has far less spammers and a change in the up-down voting would be a pleasurable activity..(again).

I think that FB has proved that recording who thumbs up works.