Jump to content

Locked Thread


fotografr

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If members gets so out of control as to rate being banned, they are not, in my opinion, "valuable members."

 

What bothers me about taboos on certain topics is the underlying assumption that we members are incapable of disagreeing with each other without becoming hostile and abusive. This entire thread about the pros and cons of banning political commentary is proof that we can disagree in a polite fashion.

 

I completely agree that you should not be playing the role of schoolmaster. If these pre-emptive rules didn't exist, you wouldn't have to.

 

Any member is free at any time to report abusive behavior. I don't understand why that's not sufficient.

Edited by fotografr
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So you assume we cannot discuss political issues without escalating and getting out of control? That is tantamount to treating us like children.

 

Nobody ever has to get "caught up," as you put it. One is free at any time to exit a discussion.

 

This back and forth is getting us nowhere. You're the moderator and there's no way anything I say here will change the forum rules. I'll just leave it at this point.

Edited by fotografr
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaap - I agree with the person who expressed that it was a moderator (Erl, who I have a lot of respect for) who arguably instigated the political discussion in Brent's thread by alleging that American's got the election "so wrong."  I think this should be acknowledged and addressed; either it was a mistake to say this or it was not, in which case you have tied yourself up in a bit of a knot.  I frankly don't like to be told that I am "so wrong" by people when I click on this forum.  It is not worth the time to discuss the issue and it is not why I am here and pay to be here.  I don't want the forum cluttered with people telling me how wrong, stupid and evil I am.  Go to FACEBOOK and TWITTER to express yourself in this regard!

Edited by A miller
Link to post
Share on other sites

Go to FACEBOOK and TWITTER to express yourself in this regard!

If we do that, Mr Trump will get up at 3 AM and unleash a twitter rant on us.

 

Seriously, though, why isn't it possible to just ignore comments you don't agree with and move on?

 

I don't think anyone wants to have the forum permeated with heated political debates, but on the infrequent occasion when images with political content spark discussions, I really don't see the problem with letting that happen.

Edited by fotografr
Link to post
Share on other sites

If we do that, Mr Trump will get up at 3 AM and unleash a twitter rant on us.

 

Seriously, though, why isn't it possible to just ignore comments you don't agree with and move on?

 

Ha ha :)

Truth is that I don't have the impulse control that you do.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So you assume we cannot discuss political issues without escalating and getting out of control? That is tantamount to treating us like children.

 

Nobody ever has to get "caught up," as you put it. One is free at any time to exit a discussion.

 

This back and forth is getting us nowhere. You're the moderator and there's no way anything I say here will change the forum rules. I'll just leave it at this point.

No, sad experience...:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I wish it were that simple. We have had to ban too many valuable members over silly disputes, not to mention that the moderators prefer to participate in the forum instead of having to act like schoolmasters in playground squabbles.

 

 

 

I sympathise with this but it's still irritating that playground squabbles that become quite unpleasant sail by in other parts of the forum whereas political discussion gets shut down in anticipation of comparable unpleasantness.

 

My other (minor, in this context) concern that I know cannot taken into account as long as there is such a rule in place, but which makes the rule unbalanced,  is the fact that a lot of political points are made in non-political language, all the time. I think the distinction between overtly partisan politics and the more pervasive value-based expression and exchange of assumptions and assertions is largely artificial.

 

I don't think the forum benefits from the rule, though I understand why it might be seen to on the surface.

Edited by Peter H
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Consistency is found in the generally light touch of the moderators. We judge each case on its potential  of getting out of hand, based on experience. However, we need a fixed rule to base our decisions on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...