Those Darned Politics Mods!!!!!

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
We're going to try Censored's directive out for a little while, and see how it effects the forum discussion. If after a while, that effect is negative, the ruling can be reversed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Negative by whose standards? That of the people who enjoy posting there or by your own standards of what you think the forums should look like? By everything I've seen you say on this subject here, it seems much more likely to be the latter. I demonstrated that your belief that the forum is overwhelmed by AC threads started by ACers is blatantly incorrect, yet you're still going through with this attempt to correct this problem that doesn't exist?

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We're going to try Censored's directive out for a little while, and see how it effects the forum discussion. If after a while, that effect is negative, the ruling can be reversed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Negative by whose standards? That of the people who enjoy posting there or by your own standards of what you think the forums should look like? By everything I've seen you say on this subject here, it seems much more likely to be the latter. I demonstrated that your belief that the forum is overwhelmed by AC threads started by ACers is blatantly incorrect, yet you're still going through with this attempt to correct this problem that doesn't exist?

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people have complained about this in the past (in atf and in politics), and in addition to that, I've recieved several pms from posters about it, several even recently since I made the post yesterday in support of this idea, so I'm going to try it out.

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting troll threads like "Somalia is AC Utopia" for the thousndth time? What a joke.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, we're in complete agreement here. There are far too many threads in the politics forum about some fringe ultra-right wing philosophy eschewed by an incredibly small percentage of the population.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? I haven't seen any threads about any ultra-right wing philosophy. And ultra-libertarian philosophy, maybe, but not ultra-right wing. Where are these threads?

And of course, consider the fact that we're on a poker forum, an activity that qualifies in many places as a victimless crime, it's no surprise at all the vastly more libertarian would be here than in most places.


[ QUOTE ]
I believe that constant discussion of this relatively uninteresting fanatical philosophy drives traffic away from the politics forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who cares what you believe? When did a moderator's job become to tell people what beliefs they are and are not allowed to express in the appropriate forums for them? Are we next going to ban all the atheist threads in SMP? After all, atheists are a small minority in this country.

[ QUOTE ]
When Censored RR and I first came into politics, Censored made a request that anarcho-capitalism be kept to one thread, but that request was largely ignored,

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course it was ignored. It was an absurd and impossible request. You'd have one thread with as many posts as the rest of the forum combined. Not only that, but it's blatant discrimination against a large group of posters.

[ QUOTE ]
There are far too many interesting things that get pushed off the page in politics because of the dozens of new AC and AC related threads started every week by the same group of core AC posters.

[/ QUOTE ]

What forums are you reading? Most of the "AC" threads here are started by non AC posters asking questions about AC. This shows that AC is much more interesting to even the non ACers in the forum than you give it credit for. Looking at the first page in politics now:

AC threads started by ACers: 1
AC threads started by nonACers: 2
Non AC threads started by ACers: 2
Non AC threads started by Non ACers: 5
Other (mod post): 2

So 3 out of 10 (not counting stickies) is a ton of AC threads? And only 1 of them started by an ACer (Nielso of course).

Let's try again but go 5 pages deep for a better sample size:

AC threads started by ACers: 4
AC threads started by nonACers: 6
Non AC threads started by ACers: 9
Non AC threads started by Non ACers: 29
Other (mod post): 3

So not counting mod threads, we've got 38 non AC threads to 10 AC threads. 21% isn't that much. Furthermore, 6 out of those 10 threads were started by nonAcers. Of the 4 started by ACers, I counted one by OJC even though I'm not really sure that that thread should have counted or that OJC is really an ACer, but since all the responders were ACers sympathizing, I went that way. Another was a post by BKholdem which wasn't really about AC, but it mentioned AC in the OP, so I went ahead and included it. The other two were by Nielso and pretty definitely AC threads.

So in the first 5 pages, we've got maybe 4 threads started by ACers about AC. How is this "dozens of new AC and AC related threads started every week by the same group of core AC posters?"

[/ QUOTE ]

We're going to try Censored's directive out for a little while, and see how it effects the forum discussion. If after a while, that effect is negative, the ruling can be reversed.

[/ QUOTE ]

....for the first time ever, I just clicked on 'Notify the Moderator' in regards to this post.

I would describe the attitude conveyed by jman's response above to be incredibly in-your-face arrogant.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
1. I can't recall ever seeing Borodog troll anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

I want to correct this. The gold star thing was definitely trolling IMO. I do not, however, think that Iron gave him a warning for this. "Knock it off" is a suggestion, not a warning. If you're warning someone for something, you need to say so outright.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We're going to try Censored's directive out for a little while, and see how it effects the forum discussion. If after a while, that effect is negative, the ruling can be reversed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Negative by whose standards? That of the people who enjoy posting there or by your own standards of what you think the forums should look like? By everything I've seen you say on this subject here, it seems much more likely to be the latter. I demonstrated that your belief that the forum is overwhelmed by AC threads started by ACers is blatantly incorrect, yet you're still going through with this attempt to correct this problem that doesn't exist?

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people have complained about this in the past (in atf and in politics), and in addition to that, I've recieved several pms from posters about it, several even recently since I made the post yesterday in support of this idea, so I'm going to try it out.

[/ QUOTE ]

And it has been shown repeatedly that those complaints are completely and totally unfounded. Most of the "AC threads" and most of the "AC hijacks" are started by non ACers. This has been demonstrated again and again, yet you're punishing us because other people are curious about or attacking our beliefs? How does that make any sense? Isn't the whole point of a politics forum to satisfy peoples' curiosity about the beliefs of others?

[Msgr. Martinez]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1. I can't recall ever seeing Borodog troll anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

I want to correct this. The gold star thing was definitely trolling IMO. I do not, however, think that Iron gave him a warning for this. "Knock it off" is a suggestion, not a warning. If you're warning someone for something, you need to say so outright.

[/ QUOTE ]

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We're going to try Censored's directive out for a little while, and see how it effects the forum discussion. If after a while, that effect is negative, the ruling can be reversed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Negative by whose standards? That of the people who enjoy posting there or by your own standards of what you think the forums should look like? By everything I've seen you say on this subject here, it seems much more likely to be the latter. I demonstrated that your belief that the forum is overwhelmed by AC threads started by ACers is blatantly incorrect, yet you're still going through with this attempt to correct this problem that doesn't exist?

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of people have complained about this in the past (in atf and in politics), and in addition to that, I've recieved several pms from posters about it, several even recently since I made the post yesterday in support of this idea, so I'm going to try it out.

[/ QUOTE ]

And it has been shown repeatedly that those complaints are completely and totally unfounded. Most of the "AC threads" and most of the "AC hijacks" are started by non ACers. This has been demonstrated again and again, yet you're punishing us because other people are curious about or attacking our beliefs? How does that make any sense? Isn't the whole point of a politics forum to satisfy peoples' curiosity about the beliefs of others?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see it as punishment, and its not like I'm banning discussion about the subject, just reorganizing how its being discussed. Truth be told, I'd prefer a separate AC forum, but Mat has made it clear that is not going to happen. In any event, I'll compromise, I'll just keep this policy active for one week till Friday, to see what happens, as an experiment. Come Friday, it can be debate as normal, and then myself and the other mods can analyze how posting was affected for possible future changes.

[By-Tor]

started off as a cool thread

[tuq]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... appear to be doing a good job. The outright trolling seems to have died down a lot over the past two weeks. Maybe it's just coincidence, but regardless, well done. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I knew this sentiment wasn't gonna last for the length of this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you need to give your opinion on every post related to a forum you don't use?

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't give my opinion on "every" post related to politics. As compelled as I am do to so, I don't. So way to discredit yourself. But I spend enough time around ATF to know that the Politics forum is a giant WTF.

What's interesting to me is that pretty much every Politics forum poster is intellectual enough to make reasonable arguments, yet not smart enough to not regress to the sandbox and call each other trolls all the time. There may be exceptions to this, the only one I can think of off the cuff is niss, who doesn't seem to regress to the least common denominator every time these threads come around. I mean, in general I like iron, jman, Bluff, pvn, Borodog, Shake, et al but don't know their politics, nor do I care to.

I have a general policy of not dicussing religion nor politics with anyone because those things can get touchy and ruin relationships. I wonder, do you guys ever learn anything from each other?

Slightly unrelated, but I know you guys are HUGE entertainment for those who lurk this forum but don't post in these threads. Consider why.

Also, you're an apparently previously banned poster, and you lose credibiility every time someone addresses that fact and you ignore it. Might as well man up.

[niss]

Tuq,

I think you're hot too.

XXX OOO,

Niss