Not True. The ONLY way to find your limitation is to exceed them...and in this case, that is never a good thing.
Political Threads / Religious Threads
- Thread starter TxBrew
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
- Status
Then this discussion about political and religious topics being allowed should end right now. Look, fours pages of opinions so far on the topic of whether or not these subjects should be allowed! What do you think would happen if a forum that was moderated was opened to contain such content. You poor mods would have no time to do anything else, and the forum would inevitably have to be closed.
As I said, I've seen the unmoderated forum work on many other sites, and the thin skinned definitely do not enter.
Not true. I don't have to eat sand to know that it probably isn't palatable.
Evan!
Well-Known Member
How much sympathy can you really have for someone who is easily offended that voluntarily ventures into a thread about, say, taxation or global warming? I'm not saying it should be a free-for-all by any means, just that I don't think most people are being given enough credit with regards to how thick their skin is. I think the "problem" is overblown and is being exaggerated for some reason. Yesterday, a couple people were bickering in the "taxation" thread, and it was getting a little too heated and personal between them for even my tastes...and within 2 minutes, The Muncher had lockedinated it. Just how it should be (or, perhaps, just a warning to calm down in some situations could precede lockedinating, but I digress). I just don't see the urgent problem that was intimated by the very presence of this poll. There are problems here, to be sure, but I don't see this as a big one.
Philip1993
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2007
- Messages
- 1,644
- Reaction score
- 19
I disagree. On of the forums I visit (also a vocal bunch) is unmoderated and it's a nice place to hang out. There are two or three that battle DAILY, and they have their own forum (spiders not allowed) where they pummel each other at will. Interestingly, the continue to spar even though no one else ever goes to that forum.
I said "unmoderated", but in the rest of the forums self moderation is practiced with great success. If someone gets rude, the rest of the crowd shuns them until they behave or feel so unwelcome they slink away. Usually, they get quiet for awhile and return a better netizen.
On *rare* occasion someone gets banned, but it's only about one a year (notice of banning is made public).
Anyway, I can understand why Tx chooses not to have unmoderated forums. But the assumption that unmoderated forums must end in disaster is inaccurate.
+1
Time for the "cheap beer" rebuttal ==> Acceptable and enjoyable are two different things.
Seriously though. A love it or leave it approach won't work. Tx is in this to make money. And money means eyeballs on page. If you allow it to get too wild, you run off visitors. If you make it to dry/technical, you run off visitors.
I like this approach. Since we have made the bar analogy, this is the electronic version of "you boys take that outside". My other site has a forum called "Threads gone wild" where the runaways get moved to and continue for weeks...
skinfiddler
Well-Known Member
Seems like you have areas set up for non-beer related discussions anyway- what's the issue? Don't like 'em?- Don't participate
NJTomatoguy
Well-Known Member
I voted allow.
Those are 2 things I don't discuss with anyone, but will learn from others views.
Those are 2 things I don't discuss with anyone, but will learn from others views.
Philip1993
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2007
- Messages
- 1,644
- Reaction score
- 19
Serious, no mods. The site admin participates in the discussions like you or I and when he sees someone really bringing everyone down (or he gets reports of same) he brings out the ban hammer and makes a post notifying everyone of what happened and why. Usually, they get a warning to play nice or leave, but not always.
Most people get a clue when they make a new post and no one responds to it. Or they make a bad post and 10 people tell them to act like an adult or go elsewhere.
That is whats happening right now. The problem is these discussions are popping up too many places. That makes our jobs tougher than if the discussions were limited to a single spot and moderated.
You throw people into a back room and let them start throwing haymakers all day hard feelings are going to bleed over to the front of the house.
menschmaschine
Well-Known Member
The problem with politics and religion is that they are, at there core, beliefs. Beliefs rise from personal experience and are therefore, inherently personal. This is why these discussions always end up personal. When one perceives their belief is attacked, they feel personally attacked. These discussions WILL end up being devisive, no matter what. We can sugar coat it with all the 
we want, but some people form positive or negative opinions about others based on their core beliefs. If that's something we can live with on this forum, then keep them. Whatever happens, something needs to be done differently than how it's been done as of late, what with the election around the corner and all.
I vote to allow them to be disallowed.
we want, but some people form positive or negative opinions about others based on their core beliefs. If that's something we can live with on this forum, then keep them. Whatever happens, something needs to be done differently than how it's been done as of late, what with the election around the corner and all.I vote to allow them to be disallowed.
NWernBrewer
Well-Known Member
BM +1
That would eventually happen - if not happened already. People can get angry about things they feel strongly about and when the avenue of expression is closed before they are done - I could see people taking jabs elsewhere.
That said I am still for these topics, they have never gotten too bad that I have seen and add to a community experience which I feel is part of this site's strength.
That would eventually happen - if not happened already. People can get angry about things they feel strongly about and when the avenue of expression is closed before they are done - I could see people taking jabs elsewhere.
That said I am still for these topics, they have never gotten too bad that I have seen and add to a community experience which I feel is part of this site's strength.
The unofficial unmoderated area is the PM. There is even an ignore feature.
Yes it is one-one-one but that's what these thread devolve into. If people self-moderated and used the PM appropriatly, there may not be an issue.
Yes it is one-one-one but that's what these thread devolve into. If people self-moderated and used the PM appropriatly, there may not be an issue.
eschatz
Well-Known Member
on principal alone I dont believe that content should be monitored on the site. However, some of the discussions do get a bit rowdy. I totally agree with a Religious/Political thread category.
Fingers
Well-Known Member
As pathetic as it may sound, you lot are counted amongst my friends. I often debate politics and religion with my friends and of all my RT close friends, I'm alone in my opinions. I'm left wing, they're right. I'm not religious, they are. If my friends always agreed with me we'd quickly run out of things to talk about. As it is, the drunken debates go on. I'm the weirdo in the bunch.
Here's to drunken debates!
Here's to drunken debates!
We're just here to keep our neighborhoods safe, civil and a place people want to visit to talk about beer.
bethlehembrewer
Well-Known Member
BarleyWater
Well-Known Member
I don't usually pay much attention to the religious/political threads, but when half of the new posts aren't beer related, it does get a bit frustrating and hard to ignore. I hate to say it, but there are a couple people on this board that I have less respect for now, than if I had ever come across some of their responses to the devisive threads. People get angry at eachother, and say things that would never be said in person, without the aid of a keyboard and monitor to hide behind.
I however don't think the answer is to ban them, but shoving them all into one place that I never have to deal with would be great. I voted yes, and think there should be a seperate category (like there aren't enough catagories already).
I however don't think the answer is to ban them, but shoving them all into one place that I never have to deal with would be great. I voted yes, and think there should be a seperate category (like there aren't enough catagories already).
You have confused my point? or I am confused. I am saying that the owner of a site has the right (As long as it's not funded by tax money) to censor what ever they want.
bethlehembrewer
Well-Known Member
I know what you were going for. My thought is reaching yours by extension of the fact that he didn't like being told what he was saying needed to be toned down. I was just throwing it out there because it was on my mind when I read your post.
Philip1993
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2007
- Messages
- 1,644
- Reaction score
- 19
That goes against normal group dynamics. If you're at a bar or other social outlet, people start discussions, join discussions, leave discussions, change discussions, and participate in multiple discussions, all in a very dynamic and fluid manner.
What you are suggesting is that as soon as two people get engaged in a discussion that they are passionate about, the both leave the bar and go to a private booth. That would leave behind a pretty boring bar with a lot of empty seats. Kind of like drinking at the public library...
Gotcha!...and good point.
I think that is the heart of this whole thing. Nobody hates censorship more than those that are being censored.
Just as I agree that if you don't want to read or partake in the political / Religious threads you should walk away....I also believe that if you don't like that you have gotten out of hand and been censored you also have the freedom to post rhetoric elsewhere.
This is ultimately Tx Decision, and I for one thank him for allowing us to have input on the decision...even if I am getting out voted here.
TwoHeadsBrewing
Well-Known Member
I voted yes on this one. I primarily come here for information about beer, but I appreciate the political/religious banter as well. I think the mods do a good job of closing threads when they get out of hand, and that just keeps everything civil. Some have complained about the mods being too quick on the draw when closing threads, but IMHO it's been done fairly.
That being said, if the mods feel like too much of their time is being spent closing these types of threads let's make a specific area for them. I'd rather see effort going towards making this site a better "homebrew" site, than a better chit-chat forum. If I had to choose between the two...I care more about brewing than politics or religion.
That being said, if the mods feel like too much of their time is being spent closing these types of threads let's make a specific area for them. I'd rather see effort going towards making this site a better "homebrew" site, than a better chit-chat forum. If I had to choose between the two...I care more about brewing than politics or religion.
If you are at a bar, people have the option of walking away en-mass continuing the discussion and leaving the bickering two.
Unrelated to the above:
I think that there is a misconception about moderation- that it occurs in some sort of vacuum... decided upon in-the-momement by a single moderator. I'd venture to guess that I have more complaint PMS about threads than some of the people here have posts. We discuss and act when appropriate before office meetings and obligations, crying babies and life in general.
- Joined
- May 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,471
- Reaction score
- 35
Or it might leave a bar full of friendly people, laughing and enjoying the camaraderie of friends with common interests. A good bar should be like a party, not a booze fueled argument.
I stay out of hostile bars. If I did like hostile bars, I'd find one, rather than stir up trouble in friendly ones.
I'm also not opposed to having a drink or two at the library.
A civil, passionate discussion and personal attacks are two different things.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
Must....not.....click....reply.....to......taxes & global warming.......
Ummmmmm, 1,2,3,. take deep breaths, now release...
OK, my answer is..... none. :cross:
The problem isn't the subject of the discussions themselves, but the inability of people in the discussions to control themselves and respect that others have a different viewpoint. Instead, they get hostile, make personal attacks, the thread goes out of control and is locked. When I was younger, I had a "black and white" view of the world. This is how it is, I'm right, you're wrong. Then I went off to college and my world was expanded. I came to realize that people have different beliefs than me, and that's OK!
We've seen threads that started off about the long lines at Walmart go off on a wild tangent and eventually get locked. Another thread started about the high price of hops and ended up in a heated discussion of the merits of capitalism.
These threads weren't "political" from the start, but some people get passionate about their beliefs and just can't let things go, regardless of the topic. And while I don't have stats to back it up, it seems like these are the more common threads versus the ones that are obviously political from the start.
And if people get so heated about anything that they forget that this is just an internet forum and they aren't going to change anyone's mind ... well then maybe they need to take some time off from the internet as a whole and come back when they've matured a bit.
We've seen threads that started off about the long lines at Walmart go off on a wild tangent and eventually get locked. Another thread started about the high price of hops and ended up in a heated discussion of the merits of capitalism.
These threads weren't "political" from the start, but some people get passionate about their beliefs and just can't let things go, regardless of the topic. And while I don't have stats to back it up, it seems like these are the more common threads versus the ones that are obviously political from the start.
And if people get so heated about anything that they forget that this is just an internet forum and they aren't going to change anyone's mind ... well then maybe they need to take some time off from the internet as a whole and come back when they've matured a bit.
when i took human geography my teahcer taugt me to never discuss two things at work on in an interview 1) politics 2) religion. The reason is because everybody has their opinions on those two topics and it will just turn into a huge argument. I could argue politics and religion til the day i die...but i don't want to. I remeber a website i use to be a member at and it had a debate forum. I say start a debate forum so people who want to debate can debate...and people who don't want to don't have to go to that part of HBT
Philip1993
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2007
- Messages
- 1,644
- Reaction score
- 19
As they do here also. In fact, quite often you will see two people engaged in a private battle while the rest of the group carries on around them as if their posts did not exist. Just like in a real bar. And sometimes, the whole group will take sides and become engaged in the battle. Just like in a real bar.
My point was that continuing the discussion in a PM is an unnatural mode of conversation for random social banter. Now, if this were a chat room where people could say "For anyone interested, we're moving this to room 'FlameWar113'..." then your suggestion is a perfectly valid one. OT discussions can continue, but not in the main room.
True, but when you engage in public political and religious discussions, the definition of "personal attacks" in defined differently by every person reading the thread. So to say that two people should exit to a PM setting whenever it changes from "passionate" to "personal" would require a pre-emptive move anytime the discussion became merely "passionate". Talks about an mess...
All that said, I voted against banning it.
I also I vote for a private free-for-all. If wild haymakers in the backroom is going to create mortal enemies, there is nothing stopping that from happening now in PM's or offline. And I haven't seen anyone suggesting we get rid of PM's because of all the enemies it's creating.
If you can ignore a PM, you can just as easily ignore a back room argument.
Philip1993
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2007
- Messages
- 1,644
- Reaction score
- 19
speaking of people making it personal....
It wasn't directed at anyone in particular.
It's a simple fact -- if someone can't remain civil in a discussion where others have different viewpoints, then that person is immature. We're all adults here, people need to start acting like that.
But I agreed with everything else in your post
Philip1993
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2007
- Messages
- 1,644
- Reaction score
- 19
It wasn't directed at anyone in particular.
It's a simple fact -- if someone can't remain civil in a discussion where others have different viewpoints, then that person is immature. We're all adults here, people need to start acting like that.
But I agreed with everything else in your post
I know it wasn't, but I was setting up to make a point. Suppose the next guy thinks you were replying to HIS post. And he responds in kind. Now it IS personal. And in his opinion you started it... Who's wrong?
That was my point earlier. In a high-volume text based discussion, the lines between passionate, personal, and who fired the first shot blur very quickly. As a result, these types of disputes will break out as long as humans are involved.
You're convincing me to change my vote to "No".
HBT is my "happy place".
I say go elsewhere to argue, fight, spit and name call.
While I'm here, talk to me about what you're brewing. That's why I joined in the first place.
I voted no because it was better when HBT had a no politics policy I basically preferred it. I know it wasn't "official" but when a political thread would start it was beaten down so that it would never start getting bad. I'm just an easy going guy so I feel that the less fighting we have hear the better this place can be.
Evan!
Well-Known Member
Really? I find most of the political discussions to be pretty damn civil around here. I swear, some people are making this out to be more than it really is. A couple people (like yesterday with you and 2heads) get in a tussle and all of a sudden it's extrapolated into a full-blown epidemic that threatens to turn HBT into 4chan. If you ask me, that's a bunch of crap, plain and simple. These guys around here, save for a few immature mofo's with too little self control, are some of the most civil, humane, chilled-out people I know...which is exactly why I prefer to talk politics (IF I'm going to talk politics) with the people here...rather than with some rabid hate-spewing ********* on redstate.org or some crap.
You can wax on all day about the tendency of a "high volume text based discussion" to turn nasty, but I find that that tends not to be case most of the time around here. Sure, there are spats here and there, and those threads typically get closed quickly, but on the whole, I defy you to find a more civil crowd when it comes to things that are typically as divisive as global warming.
bethlehembrewer
Well-Known Member
I can see where your coming from. But, I think in a text based discussion with time stamps it should be easier to see who started it. Granted it is difficult to convey real communication through text because you of course loose the element of body language which provides the reciever with more (needed) communication. However this point is somewhat nixed by the fact we can use the smiley faces
:cross: to help convey some of that lost body language. I think there are people who have thick skin and people who have thin skin. We all have our opinion and are entitled to it. However, if you click on a political/religous chat and then are offended by it and don't leave, there is no one else to blame but you (Im not saying you to refer to you).
OregonNative
Well-Known Member
Everyone here should be adults and should be able to talk about things calmly. I will say though.. these topics can cause some pretty big arguements. The way I figure it is.. if you don't want to talk about it, you don't have to post in the threads. I don't want to see lots of arguments over it though.
Philip1993
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2007
- Messages
- 1,644
- Reaction score
- 19
You and I agree on what you just said, so I think you misunderstood my post. I was just making the point that even between civil adults, arguments are going to break out occasionally as a result of the flaws inherent in an impersonal medium.
Ultimately, it comes down to what keeps the most people visiting HBT. IMHO, an invitation by request back room (for the more opinionated) accomplishes that well. The "beer only" types don't have to tolerate the never ending battles. The "bring it on" crowd gets to spar with other like minded partners.
- Status
