a2k sucks

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Ok, I get it.

But, can we have open communities for those of us who want a place for civil discussion among people with diverse opinions? In such an open community I would want blocking disabled for any thread in the community. I would want a way to police personal attacks.

Would such rules be possible for a single community?

Maybe you could be in charge of one of those communities.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Did not sound to me that there will be any here left...

That was quite disingenuous of you. As an example, the transition from Abuzz to A2K was prologue. There was quite a few people 'left' after the transition. It's what...10-12 yrs later...or is it longer?

{Edit: Oh wait, you've only been here 7 years. Put your seat-belt on. Most of us in this online community have adjusted to changes pretty well.}

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Anyone can start and be in charge of a community. It's up to the users to choose whose communities they want to be a part of so anybody is welcome to start one and give it a try.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

This is a problem with a single monolithic community but if this is a community of communities where the users can switch with a few clicks this is less of a problem, the users police the censors, and instead of there having to be a single correct amount of censorship for all each can choose the type they like and there can exist different communities that are moderated differently.

Right now, the right tone has to be struck for the whole community and invariably most people think it is not just right and could censor more or censor less.

Here's a thought, maybe let the communities select different degrees of ignore function. For instance a community could choose your new "super ignore" idea. Or the community could choose "regular old ignore". Or it could choose to have no ignore function at all.

I'd be intrigued by a community where name-calling was censored, unpopular ideas were allowed to be expressed no matter how unpopular (although people could politely voice their dissent), and there was no ignore function whatsoever.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Right now that's what I'm leaning toward, allowing communities to set all of those things the way they want and just letting users know up front that blocking etc won't work in that community.

0 Replies

I used to be a moderator in a forum where personal attacks were verboten, and people were given increasing levels of punishment (suspension) for repeat offenses. Only the worst of the worst were banned. There was no Ignore function.

It was a nightmare. Mods had to be on call around the clock, have conferences and vote on whether or not a craftily worded post constituted a rule infraction. Naturally, the members often disagreed with the mods, and practically every thread descended into bickering over whether or not somebody had broken a rule, whether or not the mods' responses were appropriate, unbiased and fair, etc, etc. Certain people became very adept at gaming the system, so to speak. Posting in a way that incited anger and insult, but without actually breaking a specific rule. I gave up and left, as did the vast majority of the membership.

The forum still exists, I think, but in skeletal form. Just sharing my experience. I agree with Ragman that if anything, we should err on the side of freedom of speech. I'm an adult and I can endure name-calling. I like it here at A2K, even though I recognize that it's not a perfect fit for everyone. Its enduring longevity, though, speaks volumes.

2 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

Anyone can start and be in charge of a community. It's up to the users to choose whose communities they want to be a part of so anybody is welcome to start one and give it a try.

that is so 2005, back when we still believed that more choice is better. People are lazy, and over scheduled, more choice usually equals more oppression in reality. The over complication of the current A2K in the attempt to offer choice is one of its great flaws.

But hey, lets go ahead and break up this public space into gated "communities", apparently each with its own admission fee, to complicate things even more.

Great idea!

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

You could start one of those communities using the rules that you felt were the most conducive to intellectual debate.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Certain people became very adept at gaming the system, so to speak. Posting in a way that incited anger and insult, but without actually breaking a specific rule.

I can see how that would be a problem.

It might be though that for any set of rules there are people who will become adept at abusing them.

It's been proven that there is no way to have a perfect electoral system in a democracy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow's_impossibility_theorem

Perhaps coming up with perfect messageboard rules is a similarly unsolvable problem.

1 Reply

@FBM,

Is that worse than what is happening now?

There was a popular member calling another member a "f***in idiot" in a rather terse post. It was unprovoked, the only reason was that someone voiced an unpopular opinion. A couple of members refer to religious members as "Holy Rollers". There was a post that was clear attempt to get the in-crowd to ostracize people expressing religious ideas. And there are running feuds that go from post to post, personal attacks and attempts to punish ideas some of which are not even very controversial in the real world.

It seems to me that if you make clear enough rules, have a well stated mission and give people options so if they don't want respectful disagreement they can go elsewhere... it will work.

If I ran a group, I would make the rules clear and then follow the letter of the law. If someone chooses to be "incited" or "insulted" with someone who is following the rules, sorry that is on them. I would make the promise that no one is personally attacked, I would never make the promise that no one feels insulted.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Perhaps coming up with perfect messageboard rules is a similarly unsolvable problem.

Which is why they turn into dictatorships. Even the current A2k with very moderate moderating acts in this fashion, we are not told when people are penalized or why , and favored people can write stuff like

Quote:

You've spent too much time blowing goats, the semen is filling up your cranium and pushing everything else out

http://able2know.org/topic/304422-1#post-6079231

And nothing happens but Pamelarosa can get roundly called for banning (and apparently was) for doing nothing other than posting news accounts that supported her argument.

That is messed up, both in lack of transparency and in a clear bias in the use of the power of the regime against members. Now I have somehow managed to avoid the knife to this point so maybe I should not be complaining according to some (especially one would suspect those who have long wanted me gone) but injustice anywhere is a problem, because I never know when they will come after me, or what the excuse will be.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

This is coldjoint. I have been suspended until Jan. 16. Apparently the truth about Islam is off limits. There is no other reason for my hiatus.

A PM from someone called twobit

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Well, we still have a reasonably active forum. That's more than I can say for them. Again, I was just reporting my experience. That near-defunct forum has/had all the qualities you just described. A clearly-stated mission and rules, attempts to run it letter-of-the-law style, etc. It just didn't work there. I'm not claiming to know that it wouldn't work here, but I don't see such a difference in membership to expect much different. The things you're taking issue with seem to me to be a simple matter of group dynamics. Let people be the people they are, I say, whether I personally like them or not. Trying to clip their wings seems to me to be a recipe for disaster. The Ignore function may have saved that other forum. Who knows?

0 Replies

looking for something else earlier, stumbled on this thread from A2k's fledgling moments in October 2002

http://able2know.org/topic/354-1

some sweet/sad memories for old-timers (Noddy arrives at A2k ... with a popgun-toting avatar Smile

)

roger was working on a shortlist of people to invite over from Abuzz

1 Reply

Speaking of heresy, I'd like a chat room and quite a few bucketfuls of grist.

1 Reply

@Miss L Toad,

We have a chat room. Or did?

0 Replies

@roger,

Quote:

Maybe so, but keep the up votes?

Yes.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

A very interesting thread.

I read the first 4 or 5 pages and then jumped to the last 4 or 5.

Quite a transition.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Did you notice that Craven announced some future changes, and we all assumed he wanted our input?

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

It's going to become more powerful, it will be a "block" feature and will not only ignore the user but prevent them from being able to see and respond to your posts.

Interestingly enough I was thinking of the very same thing. I had planned to toss it out in this thread to see what reaction it received, but now I find you're planning on adding it.

I didn't think it all the way through (and still haven't), but had a sense that it would prove problematic. I guess we'll see.

It's your site so do with it as you think best, but it seems like rather than soliciting suggestions you've pretty much made up your mind what you plan on doing. I don't imagine that a loud chorus of "don't add the block feature" will dissuade you from implementing it, any more than the loud choruses of "get rid of the thumbs down feature" persuaded you to do so.

Please don't take this as criticism (well, maybe a gentle jab Cool

).

Overall, I like the site a lot, and in particular the respect for free speech. There have always been a couple of features that I felt were not only useless but detrimental, but it's not my site.

As much as I like the idea of "free speech" in a forum, stricter regulations do encourage civility. The problem with such "moderation" is that can be very subjective and, in some forums, censorship tends to include unpopular opinions rather than simply rude and obnoxious behavior. So it's a tough balance to strike. Maybe the Block is the answer.

It will be interesting to see what you have in store and if it turns out I can't abide the changes, I'll move on. I went cold turkey for a couple of months recently and found life was still worth living.

I do appreciate that you've provided this forum for our use. I still can't figure out how you might be making any money on it, so maybe it's a labor of love.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know