Politics

[+ José Soplanucas]

Are you admins going to reassess the Political forum cancellation? From my outsider's POV, it seems like your time is increasingly invested in preventing politics/religion from being discussed in other forums instead of keeping the Politics Forums in check. If the trend I see worsens, you may need a different solution.

 

[RadioRob]

I don’t foresee a return of the political issues forum as it was before. While I don’t think we will ever be able to 100 percent fully keep politics out of the forum, I do think we will be able to keep the pure direct/nasty stuff out.  And I think we’ve been successful in containing the worst of it. 

The level of vitriol on the site has dramatically decreased since mid-Feb. My goal is to look at the overall temperature of the site and keep it contained at a reasonable level. 

[RadioRob]

Also politics has not been our number one issue anymore since it’s removal. While it’s sometimes the most “visible”, dealing with other issues has been more time consuming.  

[EZEtoGRU]

Whilst I miss the politics forum, I don’t miss the right wing extremists on this site having a platform to push their hate and lies. I have always believed that the only way a politics forum can survive on this site long term is for it to be much more actively moderated/managed than it was.   If that isn’t possible, then the politics forum is better off dead. 

[+ José Soplanucas]

53 minutes ago, EZEtoGRU said:

Whilst I miss the politics forum, I don’t miss the right wing extremists on this site having a platform to push their hate and lies. I have always believed that the only way a politics forum can survive on this site long term is for it to be much more actively moderated/managed than it was.   If that isn’t possible, then the politics forum is better off dead. 

The forum was moderated. But I do not think we can discuss that publically. 

[mike carey]

26 minutes ago, José Soplanucas said:

The forum was moderated. But I do not think we can discuss that publically. 

You can't discuss whether you agreed with moderation decisions or details of them but there's no problem with talking about whether the moderators can police the forum with the timeliness and in the detail that is needed to keep it on track.

Short answer, we couldn't devote one FTE to it, so it wasn't feasible.

[SouthOfTheBorder]

I fail to see the American obsession with politics.  
It’s boring and all the discussions, facts, theories & arguments will not change one thing. The only things you can do that matter are  1)vote  2)donate 3)start a grass roots organization to drive change  
Instead, most Americans simply want to blather on about everything under creation with moral certainty of their position and talk over whomever they’re trying to convince of whatever

the polarization of America will be its own destruction

as for politics here - aren’t there like a million websites to engage in political trolling ?  why do it here when this is one of the very few places to discuss the specific common subject matter ….and it’s not politics 

[RadioRob]

The last several days for me have been busy between trying to actually make serious progress on the new review site and some stuff with my day job.  

I'm not necessarily opposed to having a conversation around a topic that directly relates to an important LGBTQ issue that has political implications, but how do we control the thread?  

Ultimately I would want it to be a gentleman's discussion without it resorting to simple political talking points or name calling, trolling or over generalization to try to paint the other side into a corner.  

How can we drive that sort of conversation here?  Past history tells me by the time we get to page 3, it will be so far off the rails that the topic will simply need to be locked.  Since I'm not sure how to contain this from blowing up, let me put this out to the community for ideas.

[+ tassojunior]

28 minutes ago, RadioRob said:

The last several days for me have been busy between trying to actually make serious progress on the new review site and some stuff with my day job.  

I'm not necessarily opposed to having a conversation around a topic that directly relates to a LGBTQ that has political implications, but how do we control the thread?  

Ultimately I would want it to be a gentleman's discussion without it resorting to simple political talking points or name calling, trolling or over generalization to try to paint the other side into a corner.  

How can we drive that sort of conversation here?  Past history tells me by the time we get to page 3, it will be so far off the rails that the topic will simply need to be locked.  Since I'm not sure how to contain this from blowing up, let me put this out to the community for ideas.

I personally think Kamala's imprisonment of Backpage and the notion that people who hire are sexual exploiters and predators who should be jailed are serious probable dangers along with SESTA but I doubt establishment Democratic party fanboys would appreciate discussing that at all. The same bitter infighting over culture and social issues the US government regime counts on to divide the peasants will take over.A nice thing about living in a totalitarian country is the lack of need to argue politics and that you can get the CIA- run NYT, WaPo, and WSJ subscriptions for $1 now.  Great crossword puzzles and recipes damn cheap. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by tassojunior

[+ José Soplanucas]

3 hours ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

I fail to see the American obsession with politics.  
It’s boring and all the discussions, facts, theories & arguments will not change one thing. The only things you can do that matter are  1)vote  2)donate 3)start a grass roots organization to drive change  
Instead, most Americans simply want to blather on about everything under creation with moral certainty of their position and talk over whomever they’re trying to convince of whatever

the polarization of America will be its own destruction

as for politics here - aren’t there like a million websites to engage in political trolling ?  why do it here when this is one of the very few places to discuss the specific common subject matter ….and it’s not politics 

Sadly, what you see only in America, I see it in many countries.

[EZEtoGRU]

1 hour ago, RadioRob said:

The last several days for me How can we drive that sort of conversation here?  Past history tells me by the time we get to page 3, it will be so far off the rails that the topic will simply need to be locked.  Since I'm not sure how to contain this from blowing up, let me put this out to the community for ideas.

You asked for thoughts and I appreciate that.  Here goes:

I think it's unrealistic to expect a voluntarily gentlemanly discussion on any issue that involves politics (even if just on the fringes of politics) in the absence of effective moderation.  Nothing about this is at all unique to this site.  It's to be expected anywhere a political issue is discussed amongst a diverse group of participants.

Waiting for eons till a thread spirals completely out of control and then shutting it down does not constitute effective moderation.  Hands need to be slapped in a timely manner.  Time-outs need to be issued when rules are broken.  Period.  Finally (and most importantly), the forum members need to see first hand that bad actors do indeed face consequences.  A poster who is currently on a "time-out" needs to be visible to other posters so everyone can connect the dots.  Time-out posters used to be visible to all posters but, somewhere along the line during Daddy's tenure, it was decided that the "time-out" indicator under an individual's "handle" on all his/her posts would be removed.  So no-one knows who is on time out versus just not posting for a while.  I don't know why this was done but I never understood it.  The posting community needs to know who is on time-out.  

I feel the above gives some constructive thoughts on the question asked.  I would expect that if these rules were introduced and enforced, moderation of any potential politics threads would become easier in short order.

Thanks again for requesting our input on this touchy topic.

 

 

 

[EZEtoGRU]

2 minutes ago, José Soplanucas said:

Sadly, what you see only in America, I see it in many countries.

Ain't that the truth.  I have lived in Colombia, Chile, and Brazil.  They are just as obsessed with politics as the US.  Same with many European countries.   

[+ José Soplanucas]

2 minutes ago, EZEtoGRU said:

You asked for thoughts and I appreciate that.  Here goes:

I think it's unrealistic to expect a voluntarily gentlemanly discussion on any issue that involves politics (even if just on the fringes of politics) in the absence of effective moderation.  Nothing about this is at all unique to this site.  It's to be expected anywhere a political issue is discussed amongst a diverse group of participants.

Waiting for eons till a thread spirals completely out of control and then shutting it down does not constitute effective moderation.  Hands need to be slapped in a timely manner.  Time-outs need to be issued when rules are broken.  Period.  Finally (and most importantly), the forum members need to see first hand that bad actors do indeed face consequences.  A poster who is currently on a "time-out" needs to be visible to other posters so everyone can connect the dots.  Time-out posters used to be visible to all posters but, somewhere along the line during Daddy's tenure, it was decided that the "time-out" indicator under an individual's "handle" on all his/her posts would be removed.  So no-one knows who is on time out versus just not posting for a while.  I don't know why this was done but I never understood it.  The posting community needs to know who is on time-out.  

I feel the above gives some constructive thoughts on the question asked.  I would expect that if these rules were introduced and enforced, moderation of any potential politics threads would become easier in short order.

Thanks again for requesting our input on this touchy topic.

 

 

 

I like your idea of making Time Out visible and the reason.

But how do you moderate misinformation and lies?

We go back to what the mods are saying. This is a free forum and there are not enough human resources for that.

[+ José Soplanucas]

Just now, EZEtoGRU said:

Ain't that the truth.  I have lived in Colombia, Chile, and Brazil.  They are just as obsessed with politics as the US.  Same with many European countries.   

What about Argentina? And we all are also equally divided.

[SouthOfTheBorder]

1 minute ago, EZEtoGRU said:

They are just as obsessed with politics as the US.  Same with many European countries.   

I spend months at a time in southern Europe - I’ve yet to meet anyone that self-identifies with a political party as Americans do.  Meaning, Americans will say I’m a Democrat or Republican as central to their very being….it’s very common.  
Our experiences may differ as I just don’t see the same polarization in Europe as in the US.  My European friends think political discussions are the height of boorish behavior.  All opinion and doesn’t go anywhere.  Isn’t there something better to talk about than corrupt politicians ? 

[EZEtoGRU]

Let's get back on topic regarding the request for thoughts that RadioRob made.  This is important and it is our chance to give input on this sensitive topic.

[SouthOfTheBorder]

3 hours ago, RadioRob said:

Past history tells me by the time we get to page 3, it will be so far off the rails that the topic will simply need to be locked.  Since I'm not sure how to contain this from blowing up, let me put this out to the community for ideas.

don’t do it - it will go down just as previously.
as is, many of the more toxic have moved to the other site….and good riddance

the current trend in trolling is to take a relatively benign news topics and then politicize the fuck out of it in the most obtuse way possible., creating a provocative point of disagreement from nothing

there are thousands of other places to talk politics - why here ???

[+ José Soplanucas]

3 hours ago, RadioRob said:

let me put this out to the community for ideas.

What about giving the OPs the right to moderate the threads they created, including the right to block specific members out? Of course, we should establish in the community rules that the OPs decisions are unquestionable. 

[EZEtoGRU]

41 minutes ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

as is, many of the more toxic have moved to the other site….and good riddance

There is very little traffic now in the politics forum on the other site.  It was quite busy for the first couple of weeks after the politics forum closed here.  That didn't last long as it is down to a trickle of activity currently. 

[SouthOfTheBorder]

11 hours ago, EZEtoGRU said:

There is very little traffic now in the politics forum on the other site.

I’m not a member there, but I do look at the forums sometimes.  In general, that site has very little traffic & it’s poorly maintained.  Sometimes only 3-4 people logged on. And it’s usually the same 3-4 people arguing about their cost of boys in a Brazilian sauna or Thai bar which amounts to a difference of about $10.  
My sense is the political forums there aren’t interesting to the toxic crew because they don’t get the same strong reactions as they did here.  So, that tells us that in absence of an audience for the provocative postings, the political forums just whither away - and it seems to be all about getting a reaction ?

and it looks like all the people who want the political forum reinstated here are also active members on the other site.  Why don’t you just post your political stuff there and give it a rest here ??  

Edited April 22, 2023 by SouthOfTheBorder

[RadioRob]

21 hours ago, EZEtoGRU said:

Finally (and most importantly), the forum members need to see first hand that bad actors do indeed face consequences.  A poster who is currently on a "time-out" needs to be visible to other posters so everyone can connect the dots.  Time-out posters used to be visible to all posters but, somewhere along the line during Daddy's tenure, it was decided that the "time-out" indicator under an individual's "handle" on all his/her posts would be removed.  So no-one knows who is on time out versus just not posting for a while.  I don't know why this was done but I never understood it.  The posting community needs to know who is on time-out.  

The IPB software itself does not show members that are "on timeout".  In Xenforo, timeout was achieved by changing the member's primary group to one that did not have access/permission.  IPB does not do that.  Instead there is a special flag within the account with that designation.  

Even if that were not the case, I have operated under the mantra of "praise in public and criticize in private".  Showing that someone is banned from the site does not explain why they were banned nor does it effectively stop others from breaking the rules.  I also don't see it as a deterrent from stopping others from breaking the rules.  When I'm driving down the interstate, I might see a police officer with someone pulled over writing them a ticket.  I know speeding is illegal and I know someone was just stopped for it...  but as soon as I'm just a little bit further up the road, I'm back to my original speed.  People are going to do what they're going to do, regardless of if they know someone else has been caught/punished for the same thing.  Until you're caught (and many times not even then), you're actions are not going to change/stop.

20 hours ago, José Soplanucas said:

What about giving the OPs the right to moderate the threads they created, including the right to block specific members out? Of course, we should establish in the community rules that the OPs decisions are unquestionable. 

If you want to do something like that, I would suggest it be done within a private club as that is absolutely possible.  Someone could create the club...  invite people to it, etc.  They could even list it within their signature to help promote it.  

Within the public forums though... I'm not sure something like that would work.  That's somewhat of a fox watching the hen house scenario.  It would become one-sided to whichever side actually created the topic.  If we were to do something like this (which I'm still not fully sold on yet)... any approved topics would be created by a moderator and be related to the LGBTQ or hiring community.  I would also be tempted to turn on Post Approval for that thread, meaning a moderator would have to approve any message before it would be seen.  However doing something like that adds to the moderator workload and gets us back into people from BOTH sides saying the moderators are favoring the other side.  So I'm again back in the same position of dealing with the issues that caused the PI forum to be removed in the first place.  It simply would just have a slightly smaller volume of posts involved.  

[Marc in Calif]

20 hours ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

as is, many of the more toxic have moved to the other site….and good riddance

There are no "toxic" political discussions (or hateful comments) on the other site. 

[+ José Soplanucas]

7 minutes ago, RadioRob said:

The IPB software itself does not show members that are "on timeout".  In Xenforo, timeout was achieved by changing the member's primary group to one that did not have access/permission.  IPB does not do that.  Instead there is a special flag within the account with that designation.  

Even if that were not the case, I have operated under the mantra of "praise in public and criticize in private".  Showing that someone is banned from the site does not explain why they were banned nor does it effectively stop others from breaking the rules.  I also don't see it as a deterrent from stopping others from breaking the rules.  When I'm driving down the interstate, I might see a police officer with someone pulled over writing them a ticket.  I know speeding is illegal and I know someone was just stopped for it...  but as soon as I'm just a little bit further up the road, I'm back to my original speed.  People are going to do what they're going to do, regardless of if they know someone else has been caught/punished for the same thing.  Until you're caught (and many times not even then), you're actions are not going to change/stop.

If you want to do something like that, I would suggest it be done within a private club as that is absolutely possible.  Someone could create the club...  invite people to it, etc.  They could even list it within their signature to help promote it.  

Within the public forums though... I'm not sure something like that would work.  That's somewhat of a fox watching the hen house scenario.  It would become one-sided to whichever side actually created the topic.  If we were to do something like this (which I'm still not fully sold on yet)... any approved topics would be created by a moderator and be related to the LGBTQ or hiring community.  I would also be tempted to turn on Post Approval for that thread, meaning a moderator would have to approve any message before it would be seen.  However doing something like that adds to the moderator workload and gets us back into people from BOTH sides saying the moderators are favoring the other side.  So I'm again back in the same position of dealing with the issues that caused the PI forum to be removed in the first place.  It simply would just have a slightly smaller volume of posts involved.  

I do think that you may be underestimating the ideological tolerance of some potential OPs. I understand that my idea would many times result in mono-color threads. But the moderators would not have to invest one second on the Politics forum. 

[BSR]

On 4/21/2023 at 5:51 PM, José Soplanucas said:

What about giving the OPs the right to moderate the threads they created, including the right to block specific members out? Of course, we should establish in the community rules that the OPs decisions are unquestionable. 

What prevents an OP from blocking people simply because they say things the OP dislikes or disagrees with?

@RadioRob, how about getting participants in a revived Politics forum to enter at your own risk?  I participate in another forum (not the other site) where the mods are much more hands off.  Insults and personal attacks abound, and the mods take action only when things get extreme.  I wish debate were more civil but understand that there simply isn't the manpower to regulate the politics section more strictly.  Basically, grow a thick skin and put your big boy pants on, 'cuz things are gonna get rough. 

That said, discussing escorts, not politics, is the raison d'être of this forum.  Since I never cared for the other forum, I am glad we have this one.

Edited April 23, 2023 by BSR
Added last sentence

[BSR]

On 4/21/2023 at 10:41 AM, EZEtoGRU said:

Whilst I miss the politics forum, I don’t miss the right wing extremists on this site having a platform to push their hate and lies. I have always believed that the only way a politics forum can survive on this site long term is for it to be much more actively moderated/managed than it was.   If that isn’t possible, then the politics forum is better off dead. 

Wow, I totally agree!  Except that the problem was leftist extremists using the forum to push their lies and hate.

Edited April 23, 2023 by BSR
Wording