Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

A discussion on the rules.

1…2122242627…89

Comments

  • #692
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #693
    Hayte
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 485 ✭✭Hayte


    If they don't then the first question is "why don't people talk about political issues discursively?" and "do they know how to do it?"

    I'm not saying "don't ban anyone, ever" because there are situations where it is warranted to salvage whatever is left of a debate. Its just that so often there isn't much of a debate anyway, which is why people so often derail the thread topic into areas they do know and can talk about. Sometimes people are so ill prepared that the only thing they can talk about is from indirect experience and anecdotes that are impossible to confirm/deny. All of the Israel/Palestinian territories threads going back to "Ship Bound for Gaza" are working histories of these problems.

    In all of these threads there is not even a consensus over the recent history of the conflict, which makes talking about current affairs impossible.

    Now you can ban people like Anymore and I have found nearly everything the man has said in I/P to be incredibly disingenuous, but that in itself does not fix the problem. I don't believe there is a single person participating in any of those threads that knows how to debate current affairs. There is no intervention to compel evidence or sources for claims, to disregard an argument put forth (because it is fallacious). There is no attempt to reach consensus on anything and you can't build a debate when nobody agrees on anything.

    General pointers are in the forum charter and the stickies but other than specifics on immigration, it is mostly abstract and it doesn't solve the really big problem - how can you talk about something you know nothing about and have no direct experience of? It is inevitable that people become mouthpieces for whatever news channel they watch or what their friend told them. This will always be easier to understand than statistics and demographies where you need training to interprete without inferring the wrong things.

    It is broadly left to the users to prepare themselves for debate and yet it is clear that many either do not know how. I completely understand this and I do not blame any individuals, even Anymore. This is a forum with half a million registered users and no qualification required to post in politics. I like it that way but with that volume of users, I understand that not everyone can prepare themselves to the standard required for proper debate. I like the informality but informal debate requires good faith. All of the I/P threads in recent memory are structured around hostile questioning and you can't do that informally.

    I don't blame any moderators either. This forum has at least two of the best moderators I've seen on any forum period (Scofflaw and OscarBravo). But when it comes down to it, you have the power to determine who gets a say. Before you start taking that right away from people, it would help if you publically set out the grounds for harsher sanctions before you propose harsher sanctions.


  • #694
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #695
    Silas Salmon Buckle
    Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Silas Salmon Buckle


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Well if you want a ban...


  • #696
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #697
    Silas Salmon Buckle
    Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Silas Salmon Buckle


    at last, a good excuse!! :D


  • #698
    Hayte
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 485 ✭✭Hayte


    Alls I can say is damn. You must have really annoyed OscarBravo for him to take a month off you. :P He doesn't give those out like candy.


  • #699
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,851 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    I was an angry young man.





    And permabear was a persistent muppet.


  • #700
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I don't think it's all that long since I lasted handed out a long or permaban for persistent muppetry. But the standards of persistent muppetry are much higher than they used to be...no offence intended.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #701
    Xenophile
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,073 ✭✭✭Xenophile


    What might appear to a moderator to be a "Random thought one liner" in fact, may very well be a deeply held conviction by the poster formulated over time and expressed succinctly and concisely at an opportune time in order to stimulate discussion to get feedback.

    In my opinion threads of this nature should not be closed prematurely.

    The Forum on Spirituality has been closed for years. Please bring it back, there are lots of Spiritual people in Ireland and elsewhere.



  • Advertisement
  • #702
    nesf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,644 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Xenophile wrote: »
    What might appear to a moderator to be a "Random thought one liner" in fact, may very well be a deeply held conviction by the poster formulated over time and expressed succinctly and concisely at an opportune time in order to stimulate discussion to get feedback.

    In my opinion threads of this nature should not be closed prematurely.

    Please don't tell me you were talking about this thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056530194


  • #703
    Silas Salmon Buckle
    Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Silas Salmon Buckle


    Xenophile wrote: »
    What might appear to a moderator to be a "Random thought one liner" in fact, may very well be a deeply held conviction by the poster formulated over time and expressed succinctly and concisely at an opportune time in order to stimulate discussion to get feedback.

    In my opinion threads of this nature should not be closed prematurely.

    if it's that deep a conviction they can manage more than a one liner


  • #704
    Xenophile
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,073 ✭✭✭Xenophile


    nesf wrote: »
    Please don't tell me you were talking about this thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056530194

    I was referring to a thread I opened myself five days ago and decided to make a general comment today rather than get in to a discussion with the moderator.

    I never saw the thread you referred to and I hope that it is evident from the quality of my posts that I would have no tolerance whatsoever for the type of posts on the thread you refer to.

    The Forum on Spirituality has been closed for years. Please bring it back, there are lots of Spiritual people in Ireland and elsewhere.



  • #705
    Xenophile
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,073 ✭✭✭Xenophile


    bluewolf wrote: »
    if it's that deep a conviction they can manage more than a one liner

    It may not need to be verbose......a good one liner can stay with you all day as for food for thought in a way that stimulates interest in thinking further about the subject. One liners do and will aways have a place in good communication,politics, literature, humor etc.

    The Forum on Spirituality has been closed for years. Please bring it back, there are lots of Spiritual people in Ireland and elsewhere.



  • #706
    nesf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,644 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Xenophile wrote: »
    I was referring to a thread I opened myself five days ago and decided to make a general comment today rather than get in to a discussion with the moderator.

    I never saw the thread you referred to and I hope that it is evident from the quality of my posts that I would have no tolerance whatsoever for the type of posts on the thread you refer to.

    Yeah, I was hoping the above was the case. Take it up with the moderator in question by PM, if still unsatisfied PM the CMods (i.e. me, Scofflaw and Dades) about it.


  • #707
    Dr Galen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,373 ✭✭✭Dr Galen


    Are you talking about the Sell RTE thread?


  • #708
    Xenophile
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,073 ✭✭✭Xenophile


    Dr Galen wrote: »
    Are you talking about the Sell RTE thread?

    Yes sell off parts of RTE.

    The Forum on Spirituality has been closed for years. Please bring it back, there are lots of Spiritual people in Ireland and elsewhere.



  • #709
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    Xenophile wrote: »
    What might appear to a moderator to be a "Random thought one liner" in fact, may very well be a deeply held conviction by the poster formulated over time and expressed succinctly and concisely at an opportune time in order to stimulate discussion to get feedback.

    In my opinion threads of this nature should not be closed prematurely.

    The problem is, one-liner OPs generally don't stimulate discussion - they invite a series of one-liners and ad hominems that are just politicized ranting and raving.

    The OP generally sets the tone for the rest of the thread. They don't need to be op-ed length, but they should at least put forth a clear issue or question, offer some kind of context (an article, a reference to a recent event, etc), and then take some kind of position. Preferably, the OP is preferably free of the terms "gombeen", "morons", "cnuts", or any other term that simply invites a torrent of abuse and wild accusations.

    Personally, one of the things I find so aggravating are the people who actually latch onto an interesting question or issue that could make for a great discussion, but the OP is so poorly worded or provocative that 9 times out of 10 the ensuing thread will turn into a trainwreck which is subsequently locked.


  • #710
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    southsiderosie wrote: »
    The problem is, one-liner OPs generally don't stimulate discussion - they invite a series of one-liners and ad hominems that are just politicized ranting and raving.

    The OP generally sets the tone for the rest of the thread. They don't need to be op-ed length, but they should at least put forth a clear issue or question, offer some kind of context (an article, a reference to a recent event, etc), and then take some kind of position. Preferably, the OP is preferably free of the terms "gombeen", "morons", "cnuts", or any other term that simply invites a torrent of abuse and wild accusations.

    Personally, one of the things I find so aggravating are the people who actually latch onto an interesting question or issue that could make for a great discussion, but the OP is so poorly worded or provocative that 9 times out of 10 the ensuing thread will turn into a trainwreck which is subsequently locked.

    I'd have to agree with that. Xenophile argues that the opening one-liner might be a pithy expression of a well-thought-out policy:
    As these radio stations (2FM & Lyric) provide very little public service broadcasting content they should be sold off on behalf of the tax payer.

    I can see that the above statement, fully unpacked, has a number of implications - what public service broadcasting is, for example, and the old question of public subsidy of other people's enjoyment.

    But even for someone who is prepared to unpack the statement and examine the implied policy thinking behind it, the temptation to simply respond with a short counter-statement such as "No, Lyric is one of the best stations on air" is undeniable.

    After all, my statement is also a pithy condensation of my views on public service broadcasting - and why should I not leave Xenophile to unpack my statement as I have had to do with his?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #711
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,298 ✭✭✭✭later12


    I'm not sure what I think about one-liners, but just to play devil's advocate a little:

    I cannot remember having ever attended a debate in my life where the subject was not a one liner. And yet participants usually managed to 'unpack', as Scofflaw says, perfectly cogent arguments from the subject of the discussion.

    In fact if there is one sin of which I often find myself guilty, it is of waffling. I would dearly love to be the sort of person who could condense his posts into small, concise packages. And I don't think that expanding on an OP is necessarily illuminating in itself. Sometimes it is better to start with simplicity and go on to flesh out an opinion later, not muddy the entire thread with your ramblings from the outset.

    Bad one liner:
    Yound Dev.........wat is dis man still doing in politics?

    Better one liner:
    Does the survival of the old brigade within Fianna Fail condemn the party to irrelevance, and deprive the Dail of a credible opposition?


  • Advertisement
  • #712
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    later10 wrote: »
    I'm not sure what I think about one-liners, but just to play devil's advocate a little:

    I cannot remember having ever attended a debate in my life where the subject was not a one liner. And yet participants usually managed to 'unpack', as Scofflaw says, perfectly cogent arguments from the subject of the discussion.

    In fact if there is one sin of which I often find myself guilty, it is of waffling. I would dearly love to be the sort of person who could condense his posts into small, concise packages. And I don't think that expanding on an OP is necessarily illuminating in itself. Sometimes it is better to start with simplicity and go on to flesh out an opinion later, not muddy the entire thread with your ramblings from the outset.

    Bad one liner:
    Yound Dev.........wat is dis man still doing in politics?

    Better one liner:
    Does the survival of the old brigade within Fianna Fail condemn the party to irrelevance, and deprive the Dail of a credible opposition?

    Sure, the subject of any debate is a one-liner. But you would open any debate by then taking a position on the subject and giving a few reasons why. It's also perfectly acceptable to open with a subject and then say something to the extent of "I'm not sure what I think about this because x, y, z..."


  • #713
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    later10 wrote: »
    I'm not sure what I think about one-liners, but just to play devil's advocate a little:

    I cannot remember having ever attended a debate in my life where the subject was not a one liner. And yet participants usually managed to 'unpack', as Scofflaw says, perfectly cogent arguments from the subject of the discussion.

    In fact if there is one sin of which I often find myself guilty, it is of waffling. I would dearly love to be the sort of person who could condense his posts into small, concise packages. And I don't think that expanding on an OP is necessarily illuminating in itself. Sometimes it is better to start with simplicity and go on to flesh out an opinion later, not muddy the entire thread with your ramblings from the outset.

    Bad one liner:
    Yound Dev.........wat is dis man still doing in politics?

    Better one liner:
    Does the survival of the old brigade within Fianna Fail condemn the party to irrelevance, and deprive the Dail of a credible opposition?

    Funnily enough, the job of the conference title is to do exactly what a thread title does - advertise itself and its intended contents pithily. The conference itself does not then consist of one-liners, but of contributions carefully thought out by the speakers as fitting with the title, with the opening address intended to set the scene and flesh out the title.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #714
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,298 ✭✭✭✭later12


    southsiderosie wrote: »
    Sure, the subject of any debate is a one-liner. But you would open any debate by then taking a position on the subject and giving a few reasons why.
    But I think there's a danger there of muddying the crux of the matter. You made this point yourself earlier that sometimes a poster comes up with what ought to be an intriguing question in itself, but destroys the thread from the starting gate. Sometimes this is done by setting a question in an inflammatory way, but sometimes it is done by waffling on in the OP, missing the central point of the issue at hand, and generally making a hash of the thing.
    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Funnily enough, the job of the conference title is to do exactly what a thread title does - advertise itself and its intended contents pithily.
    Perhaps, but as I said above,sometimes an OP can murder a perfectly interesting point. And if a user makes some particularly contentious remarks in an OP, these can be mistaken as representing the crux of the thread, regardless of what is written in the thread title.

    I don't think it is particularly important whether the opening arguments flesh out a subject in post #1 or post #2. I think it can add clarity to have a clear, succinct opening question to which all users can refer.

    It may even help the thread stay on topic. Sometimes, if an OP is very extensively elaborated upon, users can lose sight of what the point is supposed to be, and the thread can descend into chaos with three or four simultaneous arguments.

    Like I said, I don't know that I am actually in favour of one liners at all. These are just some issues I think should be at least considered in having one liners banned.


  • #715
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    later10 wrote: »
    But I think there's a danger there of muddying the crux of the matter. You made this point yourself earlier that sometimes a poster comes up with what ought to be an intriguing question in itself, but destroys the thread from the starting gate. Sometimes this is done by setting a question in an inflammatory way, but sometimes it is done by waffling on in the OP, missing the central point of the issue at hand, and generally making a hash of the thing.


    Perhaps, but as I said above,sometimes an OP can murder a perfectly interesting point. And if a user makes some particularly contentious remarks in an OP, these can be mistaken as representing the crux of the thread, regardless of what is written in the thread title.

    I don't think it is particularly important whether the opening arguments flesh out a subject in post #1 or post #2. I think it can add clarity to have a clear, succinct opening question to which all users can refer.

    It may even help the thread stay on topic. Sometimes, if an OP is very extensively elaborated upon, users can lose sight of what the point is supposed to be, and the thread can descend into chaos with three or four simultaneous arguments.

    Like I said, I don't know that I am actually in favour of one liners at all. These are just some issues I think should be at least considered in having one liners banned.

    It's true that ideally, all OPs would be thought-provoking models of clarity, neither too long nor too short. And I'd certainly take your point that many OPs distract from their substantive point by unnecessary digressions.

    But as southsiderosie says, the point here is that one-liners generally don't stimulate discussion. As a result of that general characteristic, they're generally a bad idea. I wouldn't outlaw them completely by any means, but I'm not going to be well disposed to an argument every time that they were a pithy encapsulation of the argument. They just look lazy, and provoke lazy responses.

    For the record, I've never had a problem shutting down a thread because of an unnecessarily verbose or poorly articulated OP.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #716
    Xenophile
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,073 ✭✭✭Xenophile


    later10 wrote: »
    I'm not sure what I think about one-liners, but just to play devil's advocate a little:

    I cannot remember having ever attended a debate in my life where the subject was not a one liner. And yet participants usually managed to 'unpack', as Scofflaw says, perfectly cogent arguments from the subject of the discussion.

    In fact if there is one sin of which I often find myself guilty, it is of waffling. I would dearly love to be the sort of person who could condense his posts into small, concise packages. And I don't think that expanding on an OP is necessarily illuminating in itself. Sometimes it is better to start with simplicity and go on to flesh out an opinion later, not muddy the entire thread with your ramblings from the outset.

    Bad one liner:
    Yound Dev.........wat is dis man still doing in politics?

    Better one liner:
    Does the survival of the old brigade within Fianna Fail condemn the party to irrelevance, and deprive the Dail of a credible opposition?



    I really appreciate your highlighting the one liner issue. As I did not feel like pursuing the matter further...........sincere thanks I am glad you did.

    In my case it is nearly 50 years since I was in full time education. In the meantime I have reflected and continue to reflect on many issues most of which I do not have the whatever it takes to go into many of these issues in depth.

    There are many people like me who skim the top of many issues and hope wish and encourage others with the ability and specialist knowledge to substantiate where they they feel motivated to do so.

    Scofflaw is very fair in his approach and shows patience which I am sure encourages posters to improve their input. Just like a good teacher should and does. You can be a teacher by example it's much better than banging on and on and on and on.

    Interesting term "unpack". It does not take much to imagine those of us who have the suitcase packed so well in advance and on arrival we are so keen to get out and about that we can happily leave it to someone else to do the unpacking. Also worth mentioning I had never heard of the word "pithy" until I came across it as a result of my post. Just thought I'd mention it here.

    My firm conviction is that my thread on "Selling off RTE 2 and Lyric" was closed far too prematurely.....it might have been interesting to give other posters a chance to have an input, for all I know they could have been in the process of doing some research before posting, in any case there was one or two interesting posts that could neither be substantiated or refuted. I believe that my post stands as a good example of a post that should not have been closed so early.

    Bye the way I feel that these type of posts should have a way of finding their way into Feedback which would give them greater exposure and the possibility of getting more feedback.

    Moderators please try to desist from falling over each other rushing in thanking each other. Maybe it would be good to thank the contributors for their input whether you agree with it or not. One further point a lack of discipline by posters is no excuse for closing good one liner posts. It's your duty to exercise sanctions.

    Bye the way, again, why do none of my posts never make it into New Posts

    The Forum on Spirituality has been closed for years. Please bring it back, there are lots of Spiritual people in Ireland and elsewhere.



  • #717
    nesf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,644 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Xenophile wrote: »

    Moderators please try to desist from falling over each other rushing in thanking each other.

    A mod thanking another mod for a mod action merely indicates the mod agrees with the action. It's a way of letting people know (and the mod know) that there's support for the action taken. Usually in this thread it's a way of saving us having the type out a post basically reiterating the same point a previous mod made.


  • #718
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,396 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Xenophile wrote: »
    Moderators please try to desist from falling over each other rushing in thanking each other. Maybe it would be good to thank the contributors for their input whether you agree with it or not.
    Just as a point of procedure, if I thank a post by anyone in this forum it's as a poster and not as a moderator (since I'm obviously not a mod here).


  • #719
    Silas Salmon Buckle
    Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Silas Salmon Buckle


    Xenophile wrote: »
    ...closing good one liner posts. It's your duty to exercise sanctions.

    those are the sanctions


  • #720
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    I'm going to have to say - and please don't think I'm getting at you personally here, Xenophile! - that this near-one-liner OP doesn't add anything persuasive to your side of the argument:
    Xenophile wrote: »
    "normative citizens being reduced to the status of disaggregated rational utility maximisers"

    I will have a better chance of understanding it.

    The resulting discussion was really not up to scratch - in particular, most of the first few posts were one-liners of little value. Failing to add that this was a speech by the President meant that it wasn't really clear this was a political thread at all, and stripping it from its context as a speech opening an economics forum produced entirely predictable knee-jerk reactions about the incomprehensibility of politicians.

    I've moved it to the Café rather than closing it, but your OP there is definitely not commendable, and its outcome was entirely predictable.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • #721
    later12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,298 ✭✭✭✭later12


    I actually think normative citizens reduced to disaggregated rational utility maximisers is a rather intriguing description.

    Not even faintly clear though, and it had me trying to de-code it for a good ten minutes. Which is more than I can say for some of the more verbose OPs.

    Having said that, I have to agree with scofflaw's point. If one-liners are not just generally banned, merely frowned upon and then possibly shut down thereafter, I fail to see any problem.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement