Misc - Several issues - Misc Posters Read!

[sidious618]

trampledamage wrote:

---

That happened to me once, in nothing like as serious circumstances and I just wanted to interrupt everyone's post with "I DID NOT MEAN THAT!"

Story of my life, sadly. "No, mom, that's not what I meant! Your voice isn't irritating all the time!"

[trampledamage]

okay, I'm having a bad day and don't have going to see Trek to look forward to, so I'm thinking about this more than I should. Normal silent service will resume tomorrow....



Right then.

The humour in Misc has always leant towards the juvenile and sophmoric - boys making smutty jokes about women and that level of talking - from both male and female posters.

An attempt to make Misc a better place for serious discussions on wide-ranging topics was undertaken when the lounges were created (I think that's where the lounges came from anyway). But I think this was less successful than it could have been because the lounges were made rank specific, so they don't get used much and most of the humour/chit-chat "fun" threads stay in Misc, and it's just as hard to keep a serious conversation going as it ever was.

Recently we went through a phase of "anything political/hot-button goes in TNZ" - because people were getting too unpleasant. This is unfair to those people who don't want to wade though several posts of people sniping at each other to find posts on the topic of the thread. Although there are some great, serious, detailed threads within TNZ - they can be as difficult to find as in Misc.

So, here's my idea.

Split Misc in two.

One for serious discussion, one for fun stuff. The person who starts the thread can decide whether they want serious discussion or not. Make one a sub-forum of the other if you want - or at least keep the same mods, so moving threads is easier if there is something completely misplaced.

I'm not suggesting tighter rules, just a separation - for one thing, it'll make threads easier to follow and it'll be easier to understand people's expectations. If someone posts a thread about Sarah Palin in the "fun stuff" forum, don't expect serious political discourse.


Okay, I'm done

[Holdfast]

T'Bonz wrote:

---

Acceptable: I don't like Sarah Palin because she was a hypocrite." (giving the reason why you feel she was hypocrite.) OR "I don't like Obama because he is not keeping his promise" (again giving a reason.)

NOT ACCEPTABLE:

- Palin is a jackass.
- Obama is a jackass

Neither are discussion. Both are insults. This is not the place for insults. If you need to attack a politician personally (not the politics or what he/she has done, but a personal attack,) that is NOT for Misc. That type of discussion may occur in TNZ.

If you want politics in here, this is how it will be. The mods will warn you if you get personal like you have been with political stuff.

You MAY still post political stuff. You may not post things which are insulting a person, not their policy and you may not say sexist or racist things.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

---

There are plenty of us on staff who think this is an overreaction. The problem we were dealing with was many women on the board and the staff saying that they feel uncomfortable in Misc and avoid it due to some of these remarks. So plenty of us thought we need to try to keep it in check. I don't know why this got extended to the discussion of politics in Misc, because that played a very small part in the problem. I'm sure Bonz will be along to explain, but I'm hoping some of this announcement can be scaled back a bit.

Without dredging private BR stuff into the public domain, I certainly feel able to add my voice in public to those feeling that the idea of extending "flame protection" to public figures is very much a bridge too far in terms of moderation. I agree with Spiff that seperate issues have very unhelpfully become conflated in these announcements.

However, I also feel obliged to also say that since I'm no longer responsible for any sort of policy enforcement in Misc, my comments here are purely personal (though obviously influenced by my past experience dealing with this board), written as a fairly frequent Misc poster rather than a staff member.

[RoJoHen]

I have a question. I realize that Misc is a big forum with lots of topics, so some flaming and trolling might get overlooked. How often do people actually "notify the mod" when something bothers them? How do the mods usually respond?

If a poster notified a Misc mod that some of the sexist comments were bothering them, would the mods make an announcement in the thread? Automatically issue an infraction? How often are PMs used to give friendly warnings? You know, just to say, "Hey, some of the things you're saying are bothering some of the posters. Could you try to tone it down?"

[tomalak301]

I do like the Politics subforum idea, but then we get into Brier Patch/Think Tank territory. I think it's impossible to control what people say in the face of anonymity around here and that's unfortunate, but it's also the reason I don't participate in political threads.

After thinking about this over the night, I am still shocked at some of the quotes quoted in the original post but do wonder if this is an overreaction. Misc is a big forum, with a lot of people and a lot of ideas conflicting together. I agree the sexist comments need to stop, if it is a public figure or not, but things should be taken on a post by post, context by context basis. If not, than Misc will not be as great anymore and one of the reasons Misc was great was because the mods did know a bit of lenency when a post would require a bit of lenency.

[Squiggy]

Sweet! I got a mention!

I'll add humor to the things that aren't allowed in here.

1. Fat people (or mentioning that fat people do exist. We're all God's beautiful creatures (whoops, shouldn't mention God...that might make someone feel icky))
2. Making people feel icky.
3. Speaking ill of our glorious politicians.

Well done. I'll inform the Chariman. Might wanna start censoring the avatars of certain people who have Obama terrorist fist jabbing Amademajad with a mushroom cloud in the back ground...lest the moderation of this board seem biased.

But we all know that isn't the case.

Counting down until this is locked...

[ShamelessMcBundy]

Hoser wrote:

---

Oh my.....

You know i'm taking that as tacit approval to keep on keeping on.


Whatever that means.


TITS!

[Squiggy]

Fun with selective quoting and ignoring context:

trampledamage wrote:

---

juvenile...boys...smutty...women ...both male and female .

An attempt to make...hard

hot... people...sniping at each other....


Split...in two.

...fun stuff...Make one a sub...

I'm not...tighter...just...Sarah Palin..."fun stuff" .

I am APPALLED!!!

[ShamelessMcBundy]

Oh my!

[Alidar Jarok]

Hermiod wrote:

---

It was some time ago no, so no.

Maybe you should worry about it when it's actually a problem and, for now, focus on what this thread is about.

EDIT: Squiggy, if you have an opinion on how Miscellaneous should be handled as far as moderation goes, maybe you could try discussing this in a serious manner. Jokes have their place, but there are also other times when constructive discussion might be better.

[trampledamage]

Squiggyfm wrote:

---

Fun with selective quoting and ignoring context:

I am APPALLED!!!

Oi!

I'm speechless... I'm also spitting crackers over my keyboard which isn't good...

[sidious618]

Alidar Jarok wrote:

---

Maybe you should worry about it when it's actually a problem and, for now, focus on what this thread is about.

I can give you an example. If I said "I'd like to fondle David Duchovny's ass" no one would care. Hell, some people would probably laugh. But if I said, "I'd like to fondle Jessica Biel's ass" people would bitch and moan and we'd end up with another thread like this.

[RoJoHen]

sidious618 wrote:

---

I can give you an example. If I said "I'd like to fondle David Duchovny's ass" no one would care. Hell, some people would probably laugh. But if I said, "I'd like to fondle Jessica Biel's ass" people would bitch and moan and we'd end up with another thread like this.

I can safely say that I am opposed to the idea of fondling David Duchovny's ass. I do, in fact, find it quite icky.

[sidious618]

RoJoHen wrote:

---

I can safely say that I am opposed to the idea of fondling David Duchovny's ass. I do, in fact, find it quite icky.

I've actually had a crush on him for years. I'm completely straight otherwise but I'd make an exception for that man, no doubt.

[trampledamage]

sidious618 wrote:

---

I can give you an example. If I said "I'd like to fondle David Duchovny's ass" no one would care. Hell, some people would probably laugh. But if I said, "I'd like to fondle Jessica Biel's ass" people would bitch and moan and we'd end up with another thread like this.

Actually no. I don't think anyone would care two hoots if you said you wanted to fondle Jessica Biel's ass. If you said it in the middle of a thread about how she's planning to run for the Senate, then people might have a problem.

If there was a thread about Duchovny running for the Senate and it was derailed by women posting drool smilies ( but it's your example not mine ) - then there would be complaints too. Admittedly mostly along the line of "how come they're allowed to do this when we aren't" but that's the BBS for you.