The real sequence of events is as follows:
<snip>
My mum wrote: I don't care WHO started it!
Moderator: Moderators
The real sequence of events is as follows:
<snip>
My mum wrote: I don't care WHO started it!
True.Josh_Kablack wrote:The real sequence of events is as follows:
<snip>My mum wrote: I don't care WHO started it!
It does. I have my opinions, but more often than not, the things that people talk about here are subjects that I'm completely open for discussion on. In the last year, my political views have traveled more leftward, especially as regards economics. And a large portion of that I attribute to this forum.Frank wrote:This totally happens on this forum.
This.Josh wrote:and provide backing for their arguments instead of just raw hostility.
If I recall reading the rules of the forums correctly, they have a policy of sorts that basically says you can't just post flame. You have to post substance. Which is what Josh said.Zinegata wrote:I may praise SD.net all the time
There is a lot of truth in this. But they're not us.Zinegata wrote:There are other places who do political discussions, and are willing to devote the moderating effort for it.
You're correct that technically speaking, talking about gamer chicks can relate to feminism.Orion wrote:you're basically assuming your political stance to be the correct one when you say that the thread was non-political until Crissa ruined by interpreting the gamer chick conversation as a political/feminist issue. Look, I don't know what Crissa had to say about since I don't read her posts. But those discussion about, in essence, ways to relate to women (for men)? Absolutely are political (or more properly, "social commentary.) They don't become so only when someone you disagree with posts.
I'm on the fence with this statement. On one hand, I do agree that some of the statements made in that thread are sexist against nerd/gamer women.Orion wrote:They were sharing experiences in a way which was hostile to many of the chicks in question (and in some cases by extension to women in general). It was absolutely an instance of "social commentary" since multiple posters were making generalized claims about the behaviors of an entire demographic.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
This, a thousand times this. I appreciate the ban because it partially prevents some of the bullshit, but ideally there'd be some way to keep the pyrrhic tit-for-tat from blowing up AND release the ban.virgil wrote:For me, it's not so much the existence of flame wars in general, it's more the personal feuds that frustrate me.
'Forced ignore' would be kind of hilarious.mean_liar wrote:This, a thousand times this. I appreciate the ban because it partially prevents some of the bullshit, but ideally there'd be some way to keep the pyrrhic tit-for-tat from blowing up AND release the ban.virgil wrote:For me, it's not so much the existence of flame wars in general, it's more the personal feuds that frustrate me.
Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.
FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.
You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.
I wonder if that would promote more introspection and self-improvement or indignation and retaliation?Prak_Anima wrote:"This poster has blocked you. Their posts will automatically be hidden. Click here to reveal this post"
that'd be fucking amazing....
Okay, so the FAR ends of the spectrum are not the problem, it is the overly sensitive AND vocal sinister agents of both sides that cause my unavailing grief.FrankTrollman wrote:The thing is, the "far right" and the "far left" aren't necessarily even the ones spamming shit into oblivion. I'm pretty sure I'm farther to the left than pretty much anyone else here. I think Hicks is probably farther to the right than anyone in the current arguments. People can and do have these views and make arguments in favor of them, sometimes with historical anecdotes and citations and even convince other people. This totally happens on this forum.fbmf wrote: It hasn't worked. It isn't going to work. I have to ask again: What is the point?
Game On,
fbmf
The ranting and spamming happen totally irrespective of whether the nominal discussion of the thread is "political" or not. There are plenty of things to talk about revolving around culture, economics, the role of the individual and government, social mores, religion, gender, class, the nature of money, wealth, and budgets that don't involve ranting. And honestly, people rant and spam irregardless of whether any of those things are actually the topic of discussion.
Let's be real here, Crissa's/Ubernoob's/Zinegata's latest blowup involved some people saying some kind of shitty and off topic things about women and then her going off about White Privilege. But while that was a shitty thing to happen, it was also off topic. It was off topic when it started, and it stayed off topic. People were flaming each other, not because there was any political content at stake, but simply because people like to flame each other.
You'd do better to have some sort of limit on the number of posts you can make in a flame war in a 24 hour period. Personally, I like a good flame war. The thing that makes these latest rounds of flame wars shitty is not that Zinegata and Crissa are flaming each other, but that they are creating a large number of content-free posts doing it. Posts with cryptic one liners like "Says the person who is a lying bitch" or "That's what she said" are not interesting to read, by and large. Even then, if we had Letterman delivering them it might be OK, but lately it's been degenerating to people just posting "yes it is" and "no it isn't" without crafting an argument, citing sources, or being witty. That shit has got to fucking stop.
But not talking about politics? Fuck that. It's not even that it's repressive and stifles a bunch of interesting discussions. It's that it doesn't even address the root problem.
-Username17