Problems in the Politics Forum

southsiderosie

Over the last several months, I have seen a number of comments from posters who I enjoy reading in other forums that amount to “I used to post in Politics, but I don’t anymore”. I have to admit, of late I am not posting as much as I used to. Clearly some of this is post-elections hangover, but I do think that the Politics forum is having the same kind of problems that have come up across the website recently: how do you balance the desire for a broader audience with the desire to hang on to core posters? What should be the standards for the level of debate (this last point was particularly contentious around the time of the elections)? In the case of politics, I also think it reflects a more fundamental, problematic shift in the forum: there are too many silly, sloppy posts, too much soapboxing, too many repeat threads, and too many posters who see the forum as a place to beat everyone else over the head with their personal agendas, rather than engage in debate.

To put things more bluntly: it seems that the politics forum has been taken over by militant republicans, libertarians and the people that hate them (although this seems to have faded a bit since the elections), semi-literate cranks, and cute hoors. This seems to be driving the other 92% of the population away. How can this be addressed – or does it need to be addressed at all?

FlutterinBantam

Could have told you that yonks ago Rosie.

What's needed is a general amnesty!!!!

pablomakaveli

I don't know about others but speaking for myself i do find that im browsing the politics forum less than before and posting even less. Theres definitely a few posters who seem to be hijacking threads and turning them into a back and forth argument between each other that runs over a good few pages.

When i see a thread on politics that seems interesting ill find myself not wanting to read through it if its descended into soapboxing and circle jerking between some of these posters for the final 10 or so pages of the thread. I can see why it would be offputting for other posters as well.

Just my two cents on the matter anyway.

dashboard_hula

There are some posts/threads on Politics (getting less by the day I'll admit) that are well constructed, genuine, intelligent and thoughtful debate. Those are the ones that I subscribe to, and read the most. I do know that there is an actual debate forum somewhere on boards, but it's very quiet, and I don't actually know where it is anymore. But that's what I think a Politics forum should be. On its worst day, the P forum here is a hell of a lot better than politics.ie (don't ask me why, I just can't stand that place), but there can be an awful lot of:

1. Soapboxing. There's one particular user who you have to admire for their knowledge and intelligence considering what I believe to be their young age, but jesus they never consider another point of view. Ever. And being that they're quite prolific, it can get tiring. That's only one person, but hopefully you get my point.

2. Horrible grammer/vocabulary/sentence structure. I don't want to be a snob, but I'd like to be able to follow the debate, and nothing will make me click back faster than not being able to read the shagging thing properly.

3. Thread lengths. I haven't actually read the cannabis or Irish language threads for more than a page or 2 because they're too long and there's a bad SNR there (well, I feel anyway), but I guess that's my problem and nobody elses.

I loved the General Election and Political Debate sub-forums because they were specific, heavily moderated (for crap, not opinion) and they were a pleasure to read and participate in.

I do not for one moment believe that the Politics forum is too heavily moderated, in fact I believe that a tighter hand might actually keep the regular posters participating, and force the drive-bys, the sloppy thread-starters, the soapboxers, the militantabsolutelyeverythings etc. to either smarten up, or stay away.

Wolfe Tone

I dont see the harm in "single issue posters" posting extensively on their preferred topic.

The site is bigger than ever and what is happening in politics is a reflection of that.

Anyway I understand why people feel the way they do, and here are a few suggestions:


Super-threads for various topics

More sub forums(a NI themed one especially, or even a GFA forum could be an idea)

A "invite only" subforum(but I fear this will lead to a situation where only posters who the mods "like" would be admitted, that would be something to be wary of)

I think increased awareness of the republican forum would be a good idea too. No one posts there really.

southsiderosie

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I dont see the harm in "single issue posters" posting extensively on their preferred topic.

The site is bigger than ever and what is happening in politics is a reflection of that.

Anyway I understand why people feel the way they do, and here are a few suggestions:


Super-threads for various topics

More sub forums(a NI themed one especially, or even a GFA forum could be an idea)

A "invite only" subforum(but I fear this will lead to a situation where only posters who the mods "like" would be admitted, that would be something to be wary of)

I think increased awareness of the republican forum would be a good idea too. No one posts there really.

I'm going to ask you a serious question: why do you think that anyone else would want to post in the Republican forum, given the behavior of some republican posters in the main forum?

I used to support the idea of a Northern Ireland forum, but the more NI threads I read, the more I think the risk to reward ratio of such a forum would be far too high. First, modding that forum would be more of a headache than modding AH. But more importantly, I can't see why or how it wouldn't involve the same people who regularly engage in parallel circle jerks and flaming on the main Politics page. While it might be a welcome relief for the rest of us to ringfence some of these threads, I don't see why or how this is something that boards.ie needs to facilitate.

dashboard_hula

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I dont see the harm in "single issue posters" posting extensively on their preferred topic.

I agree with you there - if I have an interest and a high degree of knowledge in say....environmental politics, and that's what I'm known to be interested in, then you're naturally going to see a lot of that infused in my posting history. It's when I try to use every single thread topic as an excuse to twist the flow of conversation towards my specific interest that it can get tiring and irritating.

However, I agree with you on the need for a specific forum for NI politics. I'd rather all the pertinent discussions in there where I can read at peace rather than scattered throughout boards because there's no particular home for it and in some cases, derailing threads that have bugger all to do with NI.

Wolfe Tone

southsiderosie wrote: »

I'm going to ask you a serious question: why do you think that anyone else would want to post in the Republican forum, given the behavior of some republican posters in the main forum?

I used to support the idea of a Northern Ireland forum, but the more NI threads I read, the more I think the risk to reward ratio of such a forum would be far too high. First, modding that forum would be more of a headache than modding AH. But more importantly, I can't see why or how it wouldn't involve the same people who regularly engage in parallel circle jerks and flaming on the main Politics page. While it might be a welcome relief for the rest of us to ringfence some of these threads, I don't see why or how this is something that boards.ie needs to facilitate.

So they can discuss republicanism, Irish nationalism etc in a civil environment with like minded people.

southsiderosie

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

So they can discuss republicanism, Irish nationalism etc in a civil environment with like minded people.

And therein lies the problem.

Wolfe Tone

southsiderosie wrote: »

And therein lies the problem.

The republican forum is a private forum which you need to request access to. I think if more republicans knew about it they would post there and not on the politics forum. And to correct what I said earlier it is not exclusively for republicans and nationalists.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

starbelgrade

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

The republican forum is a private forum which you need to request access to. I think if more republicans knew about it they would post there and not on the politics forum. And to correct what I said earlier it is not exclusively for republicans and nationalists.

Do you need to have a beard to be granted access?

Nodin

starbelgrade wrote: »

Do you need to have a beard to be granted access?

Beards are available at the door for a nominal fee.

Wolfe Tone

starbelgrade wrote: »

Do you need to have a beard to be granted access?

Yeah, thats why I grew one a while back :pac:

pablomakaveli

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I fully agree with this. For example there is one poster (who i won't name here) who rarely seems to contribute constructively to threads but instead posts inflammatory statements that inevitably another poster will respond to and an argument arises pulling in a few more posters for good measure. He also does this in threads that are of an unrelated topic. I believe he's been banned for short periods before but he still seems to pop up regularly and not just in politics.

It's this kind of behaviour that wrecks some of the threads in politics and puts others off. He's not the only one mind but he seems to me to be one of the worst in recent times.

Wolfe Tone

If you are going to talk about people you should name names imo.

starbelgrade

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

If you are going to talk about people you should name names imo.

That never ends well.

It's better to discuss general problems in forums without turning them into a witch hunt in my opinion.

Wolfe Tone

starbelgrade wrote: »

That never ends well.

It's better to discuss general problems in forums without turning them into a witch hunt in my opinion.

Good point

pablomakaveli

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

If you are going to talk about people you should name names imo.

starbelgrade wrote: »

That never ends well.

It's better to discuss general problems in forums without turning them into a witch hunt in my opinion.

I won't name anyone for the reason starbelgrade gave above. I will say at least that i wasn't refering to any of the posters who have responded to this thread.

I just brought up that example as it was relevant to Permabears point.

stovelid

Seems to be flitering into places like AH occasionally too. One or two threads recently seem to have a certain coterie in there backing each other up (discursively and with thanks) and while that's all fine and well - and I would never advocate any kind of restrictions - it seems a little against the spirit of the place. The gargantuan Bobby Sands thread was a case in point. Not a bad thread in itself; not a bad selection of posters either side and for sure a good topic but just something ever-so vaguely bulliying about it sitting there with dissident opinion subtly unwelcome and people effectively adopting metronomic team-thanking policies.

I do think that Republicanism seems be a bit of a moral weak spot (for absolute want of a better phrase) on Boards and that sometimes things are said - or a consensus allowed to prevail - that might not neceassirly be the case where it one of, say, FF, Unionism or American military policy

Not sure exactly what I'm trying to say: it's kind of an abstruse feeling and certainly I'm not advocating a stilfing of opinion either way.

Without sounding like a tin-foil hat wearer, it's almost as if a group of people have decided to concertedly propagandize on Boards within the boundaries of permitted discussion.

Maybe I'm wrong.

FlutterinBantam

stovelid wrote: »

Seems to be flitering into places like AH too. One or two threads recently seem to have a certain coterie in there backing each other up (discursively and with with thanks) and while that's all fine and well and I would never advocate any kind of restrictions, it seems a little against the spirit of the place. The Bobby Sands one was a case in point. Not a bad thread in itself; not a bad selection o posters but just something ever-sovaguely bulliying about it sitting there with dissident opinion subtly unwelcome and people effectively adopting team-thanking policies.

I do think that Republicanism seems be an moral weak spot (for absolute want of want of a better phrase) on boards and that sometimes things are said or a consensus prevails that might not neceassirly be the case where it a, say, FF or American military policy consensus.

Not sure exactly what I'm trying to say: it's kind of an abstruse feeling and certainly I'm not advocating a stilfing of opinion either way.

Spot on Stovelid, have raised this issue before.

This kind of thing needs to be nipped sharpish,and the general management of Boards.ie need to realise that their facilities are being used to, subtly and not so subtly, promulgate a certain view which immediately draws a hard core of supporters to accuse genuine posters of trolling, and wheeling out idealistic, but immature and somewhat brainwashed individuals to make idiots of themselves whilst prodding the propaganda from a distance.

I think the game is up here.

Hopefully someone will realise that and take action.

Wolfe Tone

I think people are reading too much into it tbh I started a thread on Bobby Sands and asked for peoples memories on it, what was the harm?

Nodin

And behold, the anti-republican crap begins.....

FlutterinBantam

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

and wheeling out idealistic, but immature and somewhat brainwashed individuals to make idiots of themselves whilst prodding the propaganda from a distance.

.

.

:rolleyes:

As I was saying................

Wolfe Tone

Without sounding like a tin-foil hat wearer, it's almost as if a group of people have decided to concertedly propagandize on Boards within the boundaries of permitted discussion.

Care to elaborate on this point? Examples perhaps? I dont see this at all.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wolfe Tone

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Jesus, all I did was suggest that if more republicans knew about the RaN forum more would post there and would post less in the politics forum, which, as far as I can see, is what you want?

*looks out window*
Now that you mention it....

liah

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Spot on Stovelid, have raised this issue before.

This kind of thing needs to be nipped sharpish,and the general management of Boards.ie need to realise that their facilities are being used to, subtly and not so subtly, promulgate a certain view which immediately draws a hard core of supporters to accuse genuine posters of trolling, and wheeling out idealistic, but immature and somewhat brainwashed individuals to make idiots of themselves whilst prodding the propaganda from a distance.

I think the game is up here.

Hopefully someone will realise that and take action.

Throwing around terms like 'brainwashed' and 'making idiots of themselves' and other generally belittling and divisive comments isn't strengthening the Republican case much.

Probably going to get lambasted for this, but here goes.

I read the Politics forum every day but have never bothered participating because of attitudes like the above. It's not an inviting environment when there's the possibility that you'll be branded 'brainwashed' simply because you disagree with someone's opinion. I've got a sense of the American-style Republicanism seeping through, the general vitriolic "let's put the ideas and people who believe in them down using sarcastic quips and thinly-veiled insults without making an actual point" slipping through to other parts of the boards, too.

It's not that I disagree with the fundamentals of Republicanism or the valid arguments they produce - the opposite, actually, as I learn a lot from genuine, intelligent debate. But what seems to have developed is a kind of hysterical, Fox News style clamouring to be the loudest and drown out other opinions, put across by a seemingly systematic team of individuals hijacking topics, pedantry and nitpicking, gang-thanking, point-scoring and generally just quite aggressively forcing people to eventually drop out of the debate because while they continue to debate, it's clear they have no intention of actually seeing different viewpoints and learning from debate, but rather simply converting people to their way of thinking. This kind of behaviour tends to be typical of a very select few who are very prominent in posting, making it seem like a much bigger problem than it legitimately should be. And I'm not saying the other side isn't guilty of it at all either, certainly there's a few like that, it just seems to be those few who stand out happen to be Republican, which is unfortunate.

I don't think that any of the people complaining are actually complaining about Republicanism itself. I really don't. It's just the style of argument they (the select few) use that's become an issue, and the lack of simply knowing when to stop. It's just unfortunate that it's given other Republicans a bad rep, because it really doesn't have to be this way at all. Each side can be respectful.

Just my 2c.

southsiderosie

I'm glad to see that people have taken interest in this thread, but I'd like to ask if perhaps we can leave some breathing room here for people who haven't aired out their opinion.

I'd also ask people to really take a deep breath before they hit "submit reply" and question whether they are moving this thread forward with their post, or carrying over debates from other threads. I am a bit concerned that the turn the thread has taken will put people off from posting, and I think it's important to get as many views on board here as possible.

Thanks.

Soldie

I agree with the original poster. I am not an active poster but I browse the Politics forum on a daily basis. The reason I am not an active poster is because there are several cliques of active posters who dig their heels in at the earliest chance; they do not seem to be interested in discussion and, instead, seem to view certain thread topics as an opportunity soapbox. I think this can only be solved by a much stronger moderator presence. Check out either of the Libya threads and it won't take you long to figure out which poster should have been banned for trolling days ago.

At the time of posting this there are, amongst others, three Michael Lowry threads in the main politics forum; two threads on Libya; one on the 1916 centenary; one on Martin McGuinness; and one on Prince Albert II of Monaco visiting Ireland. The latter three threads have developed into "talk about Irish republicanism" threads. If you want the casual poster to view such threads and think "I can contribute to this" instead of "**** this" and clicking the X in the corner, then it's time to get serious about keeping threads on topic and getting rid of duplicate threads. Warnings should be given as soon as threads seem to be veering off topic, and threads should be closed if it persists. There should be no tolerance for this. As an aside (and maybe it's just me), but I cannot for the life of me figure out the logic behind the sub-forum structure in the politics forum. Political Theory, US Politics, and an EU forum -- I can understand those, but why is there still a Budget 2011 and General Election 2011 forum? If it's for referencing purposes then perhaps they can be made read only. I also don't really think the Irish Economy forum is ideal; there are many threads that would fit in both the main politics forum and the Irish Economy forum, and splitting the discussion in such a way is not really conducive to debate.

I have no problem with any of the moderators in the politics forum and I am very grateful for the hard work they put in. I don't know if more moderators are needed or if the current rules just need to be enforced more rigidly, but I think that the status quo is turning people away.

gandalf

I have stopped posting on Politics since the GE, partially because of post election fatigue but also because the standard of discourse has slipped even more than the previous time this very topic came up here.

I find it interesting that it seems to be ok that politics standards appear to be dropping to the old AH level and After Hours now seems to be adopting the strictness that politics formally had.

Wolfe Tone

Personally I think that once the threads on anything republican descend into us all running down the same road as before the offending posts and posters should be redirected to a "superthread" where we can all debate away to our hearts content without putting off posters.

Thats a fair compromise I feel, thoughts?

liah

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Personally I think that once the threads on anything republican descend into us all running down the same road as before the offending posts and posters should be redirected to a "superthread" where we can all debate away to our hearts content without putting off posters.

Thats a fair compromise I feel, thoughts?

I'd say that's a good compromise, especially considering the style. Keep it to topical superthreads and it should keep everyone happy, as long as it stops seeping into the rest of the topics and other forums.

RDM_83 again

liah wrote: »

Throwing around terms like 'brainwashed' and 'making idiots of themselves' and other generally belittling and divisive comments isn't strengthening the Republican case much.

Probably going to get lambasted for this, but here goes.

I read the Politics forum every day but have never bothered participating because of attitudes like the above. It's not an inviting environment when there's the possibility that you'll be branded 'brainwashed' simply because you disagree with someone's opinion. I've got a sense of the American-style Republicanism seeping through, the general vitriolic "let's put the ideas and people who believe in them down using sarcastic quips and thinly-veiled insults without making an actual point" slipping through to other parts of the boards, too.

Just my 2c.

I'm confused was FlutterinBantam not referring to Republican posters as being immature and somewhat brainwashed individuals to making idiots of themselves cos thats what I got from the post, and if thats notbranding people I don't know what is.

I also feel that when discussing Northern Irish politics certain posters should realise the fact that, yes there's going to be a lot of pro-SF/Republican posts, like it or not they are the 2nd largest party in the province!

liah

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I'm confused was FlutterinBantam not referring to Republican posters as being immature and somewhat brainwashed individuals to making idiots of themselves cos thats what I got from the post, and if thats notbranding people I don't know what is.

I also feel that when discussing Northern Irish politics certain posters should realise the fact that, yes there's going to be a lot of pro-SF/Republican posts, like it or not they are the 2nd largest party in the province!

Flut is involved in a lot of political threads with a very particular style, and from everything I can gather he's firmly planted in the 'staunch Republican' camp and was making a sarcastic comment in response to the quote. Either that, or in the rest of the threads he was taking the piss and in this one he's being genuine: if the latter is the case, then I apologize, but I have a feeling he's not.

RDM_83 again

Also like to point out like Soldie, I do not post often but I do check through the politics forum everyday.

On a different note, something needs to be done to invigorate the EU politics forum very little traffic there (even though it is probably the most informative part of the politics forums)

Wolfe Tone

liah wrote: »

Flut is involved in a lot of political threads with a very particular style, and from everything I can gather he's firmly planted in the 'staunch Republican' camp and was making a sarcastic comment in response to the quote. Either that, or in the rest of the threads he was taking the piss and in this one he's being genuine: if the latter is the case, then I apologize, but I have a feeling he's not.

You must have confused Irish Republicanism and American.

RDM_83 again

26-10-2010, 08:30 #71
FlutterinBantam
Registered User


Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Horsehead Nebula
Posts: 10,791
Adverts | Friends The electorate isnot totally stupid.

Allowing SF anywhere the levers of power would be like giving a group of 16 year old joyriders the keys of a Porche Carrera.

Nobody likes to see people being duplicitous,on one hand condemning a crime and on the other hand being involved in the propagation of crime.

Just doesn't square the circle.

Some of those idealists however, whose agenda clouds their judgment quite a bit,tend to overlook all this stuff


Last edited by FlutterinBantam; 26-10-2010 at 08:40.

Thanks from: Denerick

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68688162

I'm fairly sure thats not a SF supporter talking

Also a clue would be Permabear thanking his posts

liah

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

You must have confused Irish Republicanism and American.

Which is easy to do lately, given the rhetoric similarities. Are they not similar in their basic tenents? Their beliefs seem to be, once you leave out the history lessons and focus on Ireland as is. And in general ideology, one does not have to be SF to be Republican; ideology is a pretty international concept.

Anyway, fair enough, I've misconstrued some of Flut's stuff, but it doesn't change what I said at all. I don't appreciate the way he belittles people and viewpoints in order to make his point. It chases people away, and the quality of debate goes down, and here we are as a result.

Frankly, I don't care who's doing it, Republican, Liberal, Libertarian or what have you. It has no place in rational debate.

Wolfe Tone

liah wrote: »

Which is easy to do lately, given the rhetoric similarities. Are they not similar in their basic tenents? Their beliefs seem to be, once you leave out the history lessons and focus on Ireland as is. And in general ideology, one does not have to be SF to be Republican; ideology is a pretty international concept.

Anyway, fair enough, I've misconstrued some of Flut's stuff, but it doesn't change what I said at all. I don't appreciate the way he belittles people and viewpoints in order to make his point. It chases people away, and the quality of debate goes down, and here we are as a result.

Frankly, I don't care who's doing it, Republican, Liberal, Libertarian or what have you. It has no place in rational debate.

Irish republicanism and socialism are inseparably linked, flutt aint no lefty! :P


So Irish republicanism is nothing like american.


I agree it has no place tbh, and try not to do it myself.

liah

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Irish republicanism and socialism are inseparably linked, flutt aint no lefty! :P


So Irish republicanism is nothing like american.

From what I've seen of Irish people who label themselves Republican, they tend to take very conservative views in a similar fashion to American Republicanism, and the rhetoric is similar. In fairness, you can't really fault me for using the wrong term, I'm not Irish, don't know every single political party, and I can only go off of what Irish people tell me. Labeling things isn't my strong suit.

It really doesn't matter what word I used, anyway: everything I said should apply across the board. This nitpicking is missing the spirit of what I'm saying and is kind of what I'm talking about..

Wolfe Tone

liah wrote: »

From what I've seen of Irish people who label themselves Republican, they tend to take very conservative views in a similar fashion to American Republicanism, and the rhetoric is similar. In fairness, you can't really fault me for using the wrong term, I'm not Irish, don't know every single political party, and I can only go off of what Irish people tell me. Labeling things isn't my strong suit.

It really doesn't matter what word I used, anyway: everything I said should apply across the board. This nitpicking is missing the spirit of what I'm saying and is kind of what I'm talking about..

It doesnt really matter I agree and you made good points. If you want to start a thread about the differences between the two I would be delighted to contribute.

So sorry about that, I just thought flutt being called a republican was funny

stovelid

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Care to elaborate on this point? Examples perhaps? I dont see this at all.

What I'm alluding to should be fairly obvious to anybody that reads the forum regularly even if they disagree with my interpretation of it. I can go back and find the threads if required but in this case, the old exhortation for elaboration/links appears to be a sixth-form debating exercise designed to belittle what I'm (informally) suggesting or worse: just buying time in lieu of a considered answer.

As for the anti-republican thing mentioned elsewhere in the thread, I certainly am a trenchant opponent of SF/IRA but it has little bearing on this: I would be irritated by the same scenario if it was on behalf of any other political interest. I would also think my posting history in all forums - including politics when I posted there - shows I try to address the issue reasonably despite the usual catcalls of neo-unionist and west-Brit reserved for democratic critics of armed Republicanism based in or from Ireland.

The only similar thing I can think of - while not wanting to provoke a row with another group - is cycling. There seemed to be a time once where any negative mention of cyclists drew a cavalry response from enthusiasts who appear to gang up on threads on a few occasions. Again: not against the rules as such but not really in the spirit of things is it?

Like I said, I have no wish to oppose discussion anywhere and the line between people of shared interests defending a viewpoint and what is comes across as a kind of premeditated idealogical shilling is very fine and even harder to police.

Just my few cents worth.

Wolfe Tone

A far as I can see from a republican position is that there is simply a group of people who have a shared interest who like to post in similar treads, thats all there is to it.

FlutterinBantam

Now that's what you would LIKE people to think.

Just harmless lads who think similarly.:rolleyes:

Let's get it straight pal, I see a concerted effort to promulgate SF agenda wherever possible using the Boards.ie as the conduit.

Now I don't want to contribute any more to this thread as I feel it should not be hogged by 'the usuals'.

As another poster said, let others come in and judge, but you are not getting away with the 'lads who think similarly' ploy.

Give us some respect for knowing what is going on.

Nodin

starbelgrade wrote: »

That never ends well.

It's better to discuss general problems in forums without turning them into a witch hunt in my opinion.

It would seem we've an effort to turn this into a witchunt after all.

#15

There are a few reasons why I don't post in the politics forum.

- Snide, condescending and arseholey comments. It's just not worth the hassle (although I see not even this thread is spared from those comments). On occasion, I've found myself getting dragged into the same style of posting. I prefer to stay away from that.

- The Irish Economy forum. It needs to be moderated in a much stricter fashion, or preferably, discarded completely. It's probably the worst forum on boards. AH threads are more informative than Irish Economy threads, which are usually fact-free zones.
That's no reflection on the mods btw, who all do a sterling job IMO.

- The genuine malice and bitterness towards certain people or sections of society. There is a considerable cohort of idiotic posters who post random anecdotes and use it as justification for their prejudices. However, what I find much worse than those idiots is the way that genuinely intelligent posters try to conceal their prejudices with a selective reporting of facts. They influence and encourage, possibly unknowingly, the aforementioned cohort of idiots. It usually ends up in another thanks-whoring fest. There is little discussion in the forum at present IMO. There is however, plenty of pontificating and righteousness. Many of the prominent ideologues (most often libertarians and republicans IMO) seem to be soapboxers and seem to have no interest in taking on board opposing opinions. They're armed with a few carefully selected facts and come hell or high water, will not accept mitigating factors or evidence.

- The false pretence of expertise. It does my head in. My main topics of interest in the politics forum are migration and education. I can only smile at the nonsense that gets posted in threads concerning either topic. I try my best to not post in them, because it's too frustrating trying to talk to someone who doesn't really want to talk. I am not well acquainted with economics, for example, so I would never dream of lecturing someone who is well acquainted with the subject. I'm not saying that people should not post in threads if they're not experts, but a bit of humility and an open mind would go a long way.

Tl;dr Politics used to be a great forum, and a great source of information. It's gone to crap in the last few years.

That's my perception of things anyway.

If someone has a different perception of things, that's fine - I'm not going to argue. Just giving my feedback.

Nodin

#15 wrote: »

There are a few reasons why I don't post in the politics forum.

- Snide, condescending and arseholey comments. It's just not worth the hassle (although I see not even this thread is spared from those comments). On occasion, I've found myself getting dragged into the same style of posting. I prefer to stay away from that.

- The Irish Economy forum. It needs to be moderated in a much stricter fashion, or preferably, discarded completely. It's probably the worst forum on boards. AH threads are more informative than Irish Economy threads, which are usually fact-free zones.
That's no reflection on the mods btw, who all do a sterling job IMO.

- The genuine malice and bitterness towards certain people or sections of society. There is a considerable cohort of idiotic posters who post random anecdotes and use it as justification for their prejudices. However, what I find much worse than those idiots is the way that genuinely intelligent posters try to conceal their prejudices with a selective reporting of facts. They influence and encourage, possibly unknowingly, the aforementioned cohort of idiots. It usually ends up in another thanks-whoring fest. There is little discussion in the forum at present IMO. There is however, plenty of pontificating and righteousness. Many of the prominent ideologues (most often libertarians and republicans IMO) seem to be soapboxers and seem to have no interest in taking on board opposing opinions. They're armed with a few carefully selected facts and come hell or high water, will not accept mitigating factors or evidence.

- The false pretence of expertise. It does my head in. My main topics of interest in the politics forum are migration and education. I can only smile at the nonsense that gets posted in threads concerning either topic. I try my best to not post in them, because it's too frustrating trying to talk to someone who doesn't really want to talk. I am not well acquainted with economics, for example, so I would never dream of lecturing someone who is well acquainted with the subject. I'm not saying that people should not post in threads if they're not experts, but a bit of humility and an open mind would go a long way.

.................

To be perfectly honest, the vast majority of (fora?) with a decent amount of traffic could have the same issues brought against them. There are nuggets of gold, but much mining and patience required to find them.

#15

Nodin wrote: »

To be perfectly honest, the vast majority of (fora?) with a decent amount of traffic could have the same issues brought against them. There are nuggets of gold, but much mining and patience required to find them.

Fair enough.
I guess I just expect more of the political discussions. I can tolerate nonsense in sports forums, or light-hearted places like AH. But I don't know, it doesn't sit right with me in the politics section. I take your point though.

Nodin

#15 wrote: »

Fair enough.
I guess I just expect more of the political discussions. I can tolerate nonsense in sports forums, or light-hearted places like AH. But I don't know, it doesn't sit right with me in the politics section. I take your point though.

This is an anecdote, which I rarely do, however -

I was moderator on a number of the old MSN boards, and this is in fact the first Irish board I ever joined, which I only found when MSN was closing down theirs, and I was looking for an alternative (the MSN recommended replacement wasn't popular with the members).

The larger of the Boards was called FundiesVAtheists
(I believe one of the members runs it now on lefora, but most of the membership left when msn closed, as they decided to call it a day)
Membership was primarily American and Australian, few Canadians and stragglers from all over. I was the sole paddy. There were a few young members, mostly in their mid twenties, but the majority were 40 and up. At 35, I was the youngest moderator by about 20 years. There was a total ban on "language", which, because there was no filter, meant posts had to be policed 'manually' and this was done with rigour. Members included buisness people, people with published works in the scientific field, pastors, two museum curators (different continents) - all sorts, but not anytxt speak types. In many ways I was the 'bum' amongst them.

There was killins. On a regular basis. Muslim v christian, socially liberal versus socially conservatives, christian v christian, on all the varied subjects you can imagine, whether there was sufficient knowledge of the subject or not, whether there was rhyme or reason betimes. However, in the midst of this chaos was the odd gem well worth wading through the gack for, be it humour, insight or otherwise. Same on most other boards I've been on (which were mostly political and general discussion).

dashboard_hula

#15 wrote: »

There are a few reasons why I don't post in the politics forum.

- Snide, condescending and arseholey comments. It's just not worth the hassle (although I see not even this thread is spared from those comments). On occasion, I've found myself getting dragged into the same style of posting. I prefer to stay away from that.

- The Irish Economy forum. It needs to be moderated in a much stricter fashion, or preferably, discarded completely. It's probably the worst forum on boards. AH threads are more informative than Irish Economy threads, which are usually fact-free zones.
That's no reflection on the mods btw, who all do a sterling job IMO.

- The genuine malice and bitterness towards certain people or sections of society. There is a considerable cohort of idiotic posters who post random anecdotes and use it as justification for their prejudices. However, what I find much worse than those idiots is the way that genuinely intelligent posters try to conceal their prejudices with a selective reporting of facts. They influence and encourage, possibly unknowingly, the aforementioned cohort of idiots. It usually ends up in another thanks-whoring fest. There is little discussion in the forum at present IMO. There is however, plenty of pontificating and righteousness. Many of the prominent ideologues (most often libertarians and republicans IMO) seem to be soapboxers and seem to have no interest in taking on board opposing opinions. They're armed with a few carefully selected facts and come hell or high water, will not accept mitigating factors or evidence.

- The false pretence of expertise. It does my head in. My main topics of interest in the politics forum are migration and education. I can only smile at the nonsense that gets posted in threads concerning either topic. I try my best to not post in them, because it's too frustrating trying to talk to someone who doesn't really want to talk. I am not well acquainted with economics, for example, so I would never dream of lecturing someone who is well acquainted with the subject. I'm not saying that people should not post in threads if they're not experts, but a bit of humility and an open mind would go a long way.

Tl;dr Politics used to be a great forum, and a great source of information. It's gone to crap in the last few years.

That's my perception of things anyway.

If someone has a different perception of things, that's fine - I'm not going to argue. Just giving my feedback.

What they said.

Seriously - I made a remark upthread about how NI political discussion might do well to be regulated to it's own forum, mostly to neaten the place a small bit. However, it seems to me that most of the enthusiasm for a sub-forum on that topic is so that "like minded" posters can discuss the subject at will. That's not what I meant at all - although it might do well as an experiment to prove that old chestnut of a definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

A couple of direct questions, if possible:

There is a 25 post minimum requirement for the soccer forum - is that possible for the Politics forum, and is it difficult to implement?
Understandably, outright permanent bans on some of the more troublesome posters may lead to a very busy DRF for a while, but can it be done? And if it can, why is it not being done?
The word "scumbag" is completely forbidden in AH and Soccer (afaik), could the same be done in Politics with certain other trigger words?

Again, I'd like to backup what other posters have said which is that I have the utmost respect for the very difficult and thankless job that the mods have to do, but I believe that rightly or wrongly, Politics may be an example these days of what Darragh has stated in another thread as one of the reasons why people either leave or don't bother joining boards - they feel the atmostphere is too cliquey, too inconsistent, or can't get a word in edgeways from all the noise. (paraphrasing here - I think that was the gist of it).