For the discussion of the improvement of the forums

  • 119 Replies
  • 8168 Views
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17683
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #60 on: February 22, 2020, 03:32:45 PM »
Regarding moderation, I am not interested in becoming a mod at present time. However, I think that Sandokhan should be given the chance to mod again. The problem is with the posters, not Sandokan. All of the examples he has given of insulting posters in the suggestions forum is valid enough for action. We all know that whatever thread he deleted was probably actionable, even if the action should have been to close the thread rather than delete it. We all make mistakes.

No insulting sounds like a fair rule number one. If you can't post without insulting someone or something, you shouldn't be here. A few days time out on first offense, with increasing time on further offenses. No tolerance. Martial law on this rule. There is a difference between permanent bans and temporary bans, of course, and the temporary time outs should be given like candy until those posters shape up or ship out. 3 day, 7 day, month-long bannings. Lots of chances to shape up your debate style.

This one rule has kept things under control at the other website. Is there disagreement with this rule?

These rules can be given to people when they sign up in bold, red letters, as a warning. We shouldn't have to tolerate that.

We need either an organized debate or strict zero tolerance rules against insults, ideally both. If any of this can be pushed through then I can see this forum becoming successful and enjoyable for those who want productive discussion.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2020, 04:47:39 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17683
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #61 on: February 22, 2020, 08:25:25 PM »
Here is an idea for organized, mass debate without totally shutting everything down. AND a way to make moderating easier without the mods needing to turn into interpersonal Nazis. I got this idea from the MetaBunk forum:

At MetaBunk there is a system of post approval for the debate forums. They get lots of FE'ers from YouTube trying to argue with them and they don't want to deal with it. If you go there and try to respond to a thread your post will stay in approval mode until a moderator approves it for publishing. It must be of relevant and contributive content. It might take a day to see your post. Disagreeing or debating is not grounds for disapproval. It just has to be a quality contribution.

The debate moderators log in, looks at the thread and presses the allow button on relevant, contributive posts. Problem solved. No more off topic posts, spam, and constant bans and warnings are not needed. Not much diligent moderating of everything that is said is needed. The moderators are going to be reading the threads anyway. If people want to debate they have to put a lot of thought into their post, just like FE is forced to do at MetaBunk, and like we want in our debates.

With a  fixed debate the society otherwise focuses on other more productive ventures in the other boards - community projects, sharing of information, society activities. We allow a debate, but it's not a free-for-all.

Does this sound possible?
« Last Edit: February 22, 2020, 10:08:08 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6653
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #62 on: February 22, 2020, 10:14:26 PM »
But you have to get over this perception that everything you say should be accepted, never questioned, never challenged, and those that would oppose you should be banned.

Again, you still don't seem to understand what we are debating here.

Your proteges have no real arguments to present, so they resort right away to contentless posting and trolling, exactly as described by John, in order to further their aims. This is the crux of the matter. I have been challenged plenty of times 2008-2014 and everything worked out fine, I did not ask for anybody to be banned.

Here is the latest from your proteges:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=84509.msg2236766#msg2236766

Would anyone else accept such a condescending, snubbish message on their board?

This is what we are talking about, it was much worse before this.

Certainly it would be in the best interest of the FES to ban both jb and r right away, there is nothing else to be gained by tolerating their presence among us.

Here is another example of a post which should be removed at once to CN:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=83318.msg2236765#msg2236765

Would you debate with someone who speaks to you in such a manner? Of course not, yet you are trying to force us, the FE, to debate in this unacceptable environment.


*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6653
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #63 on: February 22, 2020, 10:18:51 PM »

The debate moderators log in, looks at the thread and presses the allow button on relevant, contributive posts. Problem solved. No more off topic posts, spam, and constant bans and warnings are not needed. Not much diligent moderating of everything that is said is needed. The moderators are going to be reading the threads anyway. If people want to debate they have to put a lot of thought into their post, just like FE is forced to do at MetaBunk, and like we want in our debates.


Another very good idea.

However, we need some FE mods too to pass a fair judgement on the contentless posting style of jb and r.

We could implement this feature only for jb and r: carefully scrutinize their messages before they would be allowed to be posted on the boards.

*

Shifter

  • 17040
  • Blind to the truth
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #64 on: February 23, 2020, 12:56:15 AM »
We could implement this feature only for jb and r: carefully scrutinize their messages before they would be allowed to be posted on the boards.

I see it working as a short term 'punishment' in order to correct poor posting behaviour and etiquette but I think the forum would get a poor reputation if this was a permanent feature (even to only select problem posters).

The way I see it, the mods wont always have to be on top of fixing the problems if they made the rules a little more strict in other forums. 90% of all the crap belongs to 2 posters on here. A few harsh warnings or even a short holiday may see them adjust their posting style. And if they dont, as long as they are on holiday from here the jobs of keeping order here will be infinitely easier anyway. Win win

This society doesn't 'owe' anything to globe earthers. If they come here, it's not too much to ask for a little respect and etiquette.
A Future Is Not Given To You. It Is Something You Must Take For Yourself

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6653
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #65 on: February 23, 2020, 01:36:28 AM »
I see it working as a short term 'punishment' in order to correct poor posting behaviour and etiquette but I think the forum would get a poor reputation if this was a permanent feature (even to only select problem posters).

Poor reputation as monitored by whom? Who would be doing the reviewing? No one. Who would know, among other forums in the same genre, that we here have decided to monitorize the messages of the top two offenders? Most other forums have this feature, you have to really earn their trust, before they allow you to post unrestricted.

They were warned harshly before. They know that the admin and mods are saying one thing, while subconsciously they are emitting a very different message: do as you did before, even worse.

Jb received, at most, a two day suspension (this after you quoted his personal insults addressed to you, if you remember, in the S&C section). A two day suspension. That is why we cannot go on like this. Contentless posting must be recognized for what it is and be moved to CN.

R did receive a two month suspension (this after much repeated calls on our part; without our input, nothing would have happened), however, Scg suddenly felt a lot of pity and decided to shorten the interval to two weeks, she offered praise, songs and poems as part of the welcoming committee. Yes, the admin welcomed back one of the worst repeat offenders of all time with songs and poems. Where does that leave us?

« Last Edit: February 23, 2020, 01:38:41 AM by sandokhan »

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 43834
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #66 on: February 23, 2020, 08:11:27 AM »
Stop making shit up. rab never received a two month suspension. He was confined to AR because he is annoying. Praise, song, and poems OH MY!
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17683
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #67 on: February 23, 2020, 10:26:03 PM »
Post approval might be unpopular with the people who want to come here and post a one liners and spam and troll, but it would be popular with the public who want to come here to see good conversations and debates. Think about that. Much of our audience just wants to observe and learn, and vastly outnumbers those who want to post low quality things. Why base our reputation on what low quality contibutors want and think?

As not to come to a shock, this could be explained very clearly and reasonably in a message right above the text area when they post:

"We expect a very high level of effort from participants who wish to engage in the debate. Posts will go into an approval process, and will take time to appear. Please make sure that your post is on topic, of contributive nature, and ideally of substantive content. Low content, off topic, and negative natured posts are not deemed acceptable for debate, and will not appear. Stick to the facts."

Participants should treat the forum as a chess match rather than a chatroom arcade. The delay will allow them to build up an argument, research, present their arguments and should not be seen as a bad thing. The debates will become what everyone wants to see.

The other non-debate boards are otherwise open, with free unrestircted discussion about news, community projects, community affairs, and more casual things.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2020, 12:22:20 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17683
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #68 on: February 23, 2020, 10:32:30 PM »
I also feel that it would be nice if we could also add in guidance like "A good idea is to consult our resources [resource page link TBD] for Flat Earth Theory to see if your question can be explained by any of the current theories. Discuss those theories if applicable." as that would cut down on repeated debates.

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16660
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #69 on: February 25, 2020, 11:36:18 AM »
My worry with post approval is that it is putting significantly more work upon our moderators who already do quite a bit. Aside from that, I like the idea.
Quantum Ab Hoc

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6653
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #70 on: February 25, 2020, 12:44:00 PM »
My worry with post approval is that it is putting significantly more work upon our moderators who already do quite a bit. Aside from that, I like the idea.

I'll do the evaluation work for jb/r, the fairest appraisal possible. If there's anything worth posting in the messages published by these two, I will assess immediately any valuable contribution.

« Last Edit: February 25, 2020, 12:45:59 PM by sandokhan »

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 15391
  • FREEDOIS IS ᗡIИIRG!
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #71 on: February 25, 2020, 07:05:10 PM »
I believe the Metabunk guidelines have been overstated. It seems they require post approval for guests (we don't allow guests to post at all), and they require post approval for a first post from newly registered members (we don't do that but I'm not necessarily opposed). It doesn't really deal with long standing members though. I also think there might be a conflict of interest in the latest proposal with respect to how and when to censor particular members and by whom. I am not really a fan of that.

Why can't the very heavily moderated Q&A as well as the poster-restricted Believers section be used to help answer questions about FE models and allow for FE believers to debate amongst each other to better hash out potential issues and/or obstacles in any given model in a space where there is no RE interference, respectively? I feel like this elephant in the room keeps getting overlooked, despite mentioning that it is, in fact, sitting in the room with us at this very moment and will certainly poop on the floor soon if we continue to ignore it.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22984
  • The Most Forum Legend
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #72 on: February 25, 2020, 11:11:26 PM »
I assume that what you say will come true. in this case, the posts will not be published until new members make 10 approved posts. and the quality of their submissions will be confirmed by the scientific board, not by moderators. this will involve our scientists in the process. This process prevent old members to trolling and shilling because they can't easily do it again. we are talking about the most positive situation right now.

Even in this case, we still have a problem jb/r, because we have to accept that they are stronger than all of us. why are you talking about things you can't do?


this workplace is on strike

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17683
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #73 on: February 27, 2020, 09:55:18 AM »
>Too much work on the moderators

Go into any thread and observe how quickly off topic, low contributing, trolling appears. If there were a few moderator actions in every thread, every moderator action would take several clicks and actions. The moderator needs to decide what to do, send warnings if applicable, etc.

In contrast to this, the moderator can just scroll through a thread and just click 'approve' on his or her favorite on-topic and contributive content, like scrolling down an Instagram feed and clicking the like button. I submit that it would take much more effort to actively moderate every thread than to passively moderate and essentially have a 'like' system.

Actively moderating and punishing people seems like a lot more work and stress. The moderators are going to be reading the threads anyway, regardless of any system used. If we go with post approval I'm willing to help out with moderation in that sort of system. If the system were set up to where moderators see an 'approve' and 'disapprove' button next to posts that would be very easy to click on a button as one reads through the thread. That sounds easy and effort free to me.

Why can't the very heavily moderated Q&A as well as the poster-restricted Believers section be used to help answer questions about FE models and allow for FE believers to debate amongst each other to better hash out potential issues and/or obstacles in any given model in a space where there is no RE interference, respectively? I feel like this elephant in the room keeps getting overlooked, despite mentioning that it is, in fact, sitting in the room with us at this very moment and will certainly poop on the floor soon if we continue to ignore it.

How would this help with the low content, off topic, and trolling posts inherent in every debate thread?

We do have answers to things like the sinking ship effect. It's inconsistent, the effect changes frequently, we can often see further than should be possible, and curvature cannot be demonstrated. Yet the same people who know this will spam sinking ship photos again and again and again, rather than to address the arguments previously given on that subject and which are published with timelapse videos in places like one of the wikis, and with accounts of inconsistency stretching back to Rowbotham. These people have been here for years, and know about these arguments, as it is frequently discussed, and will go into a thread and pretend like they do not exist. These people will often post this content in threads not even about that subject. It's trolling and spamming and happens very frequently.

Under an approval system a moderator would be reading a thread about, say, Religion and FE. Someone spams some sinking photos. The moderator either just scrolls past it or clicks 'disapprove'. Easy, nearly effortless moderating.

I suspect that if such a system were actually implemented that posting behaviors would change quickly. Eventually the moderators could possibly give some trusted posters free roam, like you suggested. But perhaps that can be up to moderator discretion. I would suggest to propose to try to require approval for all debate posts, and then change the parameters as needed if unworkable, to find a balance for what works for the moderators. All of these problems can be solved.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2020, 11:48:48 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 15391
  • FREEDOIS IS ᗡIИIRG!
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #74 on: February 27, 2020, 12:27:32 PM »
So to be clear, you are suggesting that we moderate and approve every single post until someone is cleared to post without being inhibited? What would stop someone from posting as docile as they can until no longer requiring post approval, and then posting in a way that sufficiently bothers another prominent poster to such a degree that they get placed on post approval status?

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6653
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #75 on: February 27, 2020, 01:35:01 PM »
For jb/r the approval process will be a permanent feature, to be always implemented. I don't think anyone here can stomach another instance of something like this: "Also unfortunately for you, the FE worldview is not consistent with reality." As I said, I will do the evaluation work for these two, something which should have been done the very first month they started to shitpost and to sabotage this forum.


*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 15391
  • FREEDOIS IS ᗡIИIRG!
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #76 on: February 27, 2020, 02:47:03 PM »
Well I'll just go again and state here for the record: that sounds like a bad precedent to set.

Please explain why you are so unwilling to use the Believers board for discussion between FE when it is actually built in such a way to accommodate exactly what has been asked for so far in this thread. I'll add to that, "Because no one else wants to accept my model" isn't really a great answer.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17683
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #77 on: February 27, 2020, 03:06:56 PM »
The way I see it, it will entirely change the nature of the forum. People are no longer going to be using it like a chatroom. Everyone would know how it works, that we expect a lot of effort in the debates, and so there would not be a high volume of posts.

We all know that if we actually force people to put effort into their position, that the volume of posts is going to go way down. As there is a delay, we are going to be seeing actual debate from people who take the time to create an argument, and not something that someone typed out in a minute.

Imagine a situation where the posts in the debate forum are only approved once every couple of days. If two people want to debate each other, they now know that they will have to put a lot of effort into it, as it is no longer a chatroom. We would see debates consisting of paragraphs and sources, from participants who have taken the time to construct a compelling and thoughtful argument. I believe that most of those systems allow you to edit and update your post while it is in the approval process, strengthening your argument.

If it turns out to be unworkable and the mods want to give some people free reign to post whatever they want, that's fine. But I don't really see it as necessary because I know that the volume will go down. I do agree with Sandokhan that those posters that he mentioned have shown that their posts should be approved. But I actually think that it will work out in an effortless way that it can apply to all.

For those who do want to put actual effort into their posts, and give me something interesting to read, I would be more than happy to return the favor by clicking a button to approve their post when I read it. Boydster says that he receives benefit from those posts. Is he willing to click a button next to those posts, which he admits to receive benefit from, to show approval in return? A little extra work from the mods, sure, but not really much more effort considering that they are there to read the thread for their own enjoyment and are now just favoriting on-topic, thoughtful, and relevant content as they go.

A single mouse click. If you think of the 'extra workload' that way, it appears fairly reasonable. I don't think that anyone considers liking posts on Instagram as they read through their feed as a lot of daunting work. The hardest part is reading it, not clicking the button. The post is going to get read regardless. We will be thinking about and considering the value of the post regardless of this system. Most of that work is already being done, just in our own heads. Think about that as well. All of the work is being done already. Clicking the button as you go to is such a trivial part. It will be a good thing for the society, solve all issues, and will encourage interesting debates worth reading.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2020, 03:44:45 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 15391
  • FREEDOIS IS ᗡIИIRG!
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #78 on: February 27, 2020, 03:42:03 PM »
Quote
Imagine a situation where the posts in the debate forum are only approved once every couple of days.
I am imagining that. I don't think it sounds like an enhancement.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17683
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #79 on: February 27, 2020, 03:54:56 PM »
Quote
Imagine a situation where the posts in the debate forum are only approved once every couple of days.
I am imagining that. I don't think it sounds like an enhancement.

I can imagine where the enhancement would be. Would I be wrong to say that if there was a delay on your post there that perhaps we would have seen a more thorough statement? I am willing to bet that if there was a delay that you would have been compelled to post something more thorough.

The situation would be bad for the person who wants to post a one liner, spam, troll, off topic, or low content post, but good for the audience who wants to see very thoughtful debates, and for those who actually want to put a lot of effort into a debate.

We hence see that a delay is beneficial. One day, two day, a week. Either and any example shows that people would debate more strategically and with more thoughtful content if they know that their work will not be immediately published. In our situation we know that the moderators read the threads every day, so it's probably going to be a shorter delay than that. Probably hours. A delay of any kind forces people to build better arguments if they are to engage. We get better arguments. We want good arguments with a lot of thought put into them. I don't want to debate in a chat room against the public. I can say that most of the FE don't, either. Lack of moderation is the number one complaint on these forums, and is why the FE come and go with low retention.

If I go to someone's website to debate someone on their forum I am expected to stay on topic and provide posts of high quality, else I am unwelcomed. Post approval is a common thing. On a post approval forum you usually get like one post a day per thread to make your case, and so you should think about your content wisely. Sandokan is right. Many forums require approval and trust. Why should we accept anything less here?

How will talking amongst ourselves on FE models fix the incessant off topic posting, trolling, and spam? All of that is why the FE end up leaving. I am proposing a simple solution, which should be easy to implement and execute, and will be of little inconvenience to moderators to 'like' what that are already reading for their own enjoyment, that will help the sanity and growth of the FES.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2020, 06:24:39 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 15391
  • FREEDOIS IS ᗡIИIRG!
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #80 on: February 27, 2020, 04:51:36 PM »
Quote
Imagine a situation where the posts in the debate forum are only approved once every couple of days.
I am imagining that. I don't think it sounds like an enhancement.

I can imagine where the enhancement would be. Would I be wrong to say that if there was a delay on your post there that perhaps we would have seen a more thorough statement?
A more thorough statement isn't required to state that your request is a detriment to the community rather than an enhancement. Slowing down the rate at which people can converse will only harm the community at large. Further, your description about how Metabunk works is ill-informed at best, and deceptive at worst, because they only moderate posts in the way you described for guests and first time posters. So let's not spend our time discussing how we can make this forum less active.

Why can't anyone actually address the issue below in a meaningful way?

Please explain why you are so unwilling to use the Believers board for discussion between FE when it is actually built in such a way to accommodate exactly what has been asked for so far in this thread.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17683
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #81 on: February 27, 2020, 05:19:36 PM »
MetaBunk doesn't allow guests to post. I don't know where you are getting your information from. When I made an account there I made a post on the FE board, which was went into pending mode. There was slight disappointment since the website didn't warn me about it beforehand. But we can warn our uses. Once it went into pending I was able to edit and strengthen my argument. The next day I saw that my post had been published and I got some replies. I then made replies, and those posts once again went into pending state. I again went back and edited and strengthened my replies. Slightly inconvenient, but it worked to help me build a better case.




I don't see a "post as guest" feature on that website. Do you?

Perhaps at one point they were weighing and testing different ways to balance moderation, while keeping things lenient enough, and so should we. We have our own situation. The delay is not bad. It's just different. It's writing a letter versus chatting in a chat room. There are pros and cons. The parameters on what works and what does not work can always be changed, as we see MetaBunk changing theirs.

Quote
Please explain why you are so unwilling to use the Believers board for discussion between FE when it is actually built in such a way to accommodate exactly what has been asked for so far in this thread.

The problem isn't with the Believers Forum. The problem is with the incessant trolling, spam and off topic content in normal debate. How will posting more content in the Believers Forum fix that? If I agree with Sandokhan on something will all the spam stop?

The only way to fix the problem on the forums is with actual moderation, and I have suggested a very easy and passive way to do it, since there is a problem with banning people.

Sandokhan suggested applying this only to the troublesome users, which you object to out of fairness. I think his idea would alternatively work, and is also a good idea.

How would you suggest to fix the real problems with the forums?
« Last Edit: February 28, 2020, 03:58:14 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 15391
  • FREEDOIS IS ᗡIИIRG!
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #82 on: February 27, 2020, 05:32:12 PM »
How will posting more content in the Believers Forum fix that?
You are aware the rab and JB, the very posters Sandokhan takes issue with, are not able to post in FE Believers right? And the description for that board is quite literally "A board for debate and discussion among Flat Earth Believers." If FE believers are looking for a space to discuss and debate their own FE model without interference from anyone of an RE persuasion, that is quite literally the place that has been carved out for that kind of interaction.

It has nothing to do with posting more content in any particular section. It has everything to do with actually using a particular section for its intended purpose.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17683
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #83 on: February 27, 2020, 06:45:56 PM »
We have a place for FE to talk about things among themselves, yes. It's fine as it is. If I wanted to debate with Sandokan, I would, and have. I don't understand what you are suggesting or how that helps the main debate forum.

The website is specifically inviting the public to come and debate against us. "Come debate the Flat Earthers!" is advertised to the world, to which we are expected to go and debate. Why can't we set rules for the debate we are essentially forced to participate in? The FE never signed up for, or voted for, 24/7 debates against the public.

We just want the debates to stay on topic, be good quality, and non-insulting. That will either require you to become much more strict with moderation, or we can opt for something like a post-approval mode and adjust the parameters as we go to make it workable within reason.

Boo-hoo that they might get few posts in a thread a day, as their post is approved for basic sanity, while we must be endlessly attacked by the world in a debate that we never agreed to.

Just now, we got the following post:

"So what are the Roundies to do, to convince the distrusting Flatties of anything?
We cant use evidence as proof, even their own.
Well I suppose we can only try and be nice to them and ask them questions pertaining to their own ideas.
Only if you lead people to their own conclusions can they really change.
Screw it, that sounds hard.
Continue the insults!"

Continue the insults? Not acceptable.

I don't see what you want from us. You are demanding that FE participates in an endless, rule-less debate that they did not ask for or agree to. How is that fair?

How is asking for on-topic and non-insulting debates an unreasonable request from us? This is something that the website is forcing upon us to participate in, and so we should have some say. There are other boards on this forum to have unrestricted discussions on things, that those people can go to for instant gratification. Just leave the FE out of it. If you are forcing a group of people to debate there has to be sanity to it. If you can't do that, there shouldn't be a debate at all. The quality is terrible, and we all know that. It's turning away productive discussion and interest, and something else is needed.

If we did have good quality debates and conversations, perhaps we could make progress and figure out  some things to add to the model. Junker does a good job on the other forum keeping the debates under control, and of good quality, and we have been able to build the model on the Wiki based on the discussions there because we sometimes have very good conversations that allow some progress on various topics. Junker uses the more "extreme" moderation stance to remove the clutter though; and I understand that you don't want to ban the many people who come here to troll because that might hurt their fe-fees. This is why I suggested the whitelist approach.

We used to have good conversations here, and this is how we built the original Wiki here. We were not able to continue the Wiki on this website once we were endlessly raided with worthless posters, which ceased all productive conversations. Good and insightful conversations which go in depth into the current theories will further Flat Earth Theory as a whole. You just don't understand. Allowing trolling and thread derailment is not the way to go, is not the way to moderate or run a forum, and mainly holds us back.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2020, 11:40:59 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #84 on: February 28, 2020, 03:41:09 AM »
boydster, let's look at this type of post from you:
Yes, the properties of an ideal rope. A perfect example of you asserting you are right about something that you quite simply and demonstrably are not. Thanks for bringing it up.

I spend more time calling RE out on bad arguments than I do FE. Believe it or not, you are wrong sometimes, and you should not get upset when it is pointed out, any more so than anyone else should get upset when mistaken. Instead, your arrogance gets in the way and you resort to reporting others for posting things you don't like while simultaneously gish-galloping the thread. And all of that is secondary to the fact that you actually have an entire board to interact with other people actively seeking to work out FE, yet it never gets used for interaction.

I don't question your dedication to FE. It is clearly something you are passionate about and spend a lot of time thinking about. But you have to get over this perception that everything you say should be accepted, never questioned, never challenged, and those that would oppose you should be banned.
Your take on this is absolutely appalling and is more indicative of the issue with this forum than anything else.

Clear bias demonstrated on the part of moderation here at this forum and it has absolutely nothing to do with who is right or wrong on the point of an ideal rope.

Moderators leveling a charge that Sandokhan is reporting posts just because he doesn't like them?

Sandokhan clearly demonstrates, above a great deal of others at this forum (including you and SCG and breadcrumb) he relishes the opportunity to argue for FET against all comers.
 
boydster, continuing to claim Sandokhan has trouble with JackBlack and rabinoz just because they disagree is highly disingenuous (cemented by the fact you already stated your position on the ideal rope question. I have not seen Sandokhan cede his position and I do not think you have the background to make a claim either party is right).

I think part of what I see is just the type of behavior on the part of moderation/administration here that makes this site lose its luster. I think I will be steering away more and more.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2020, 07:29:33 AM by totallackey »

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6653
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #85 on: February 28, 2020, 05:19:12 AM »
I have been challenged plenty of times 2008-2014 and everything worked out fine, I did not ask for anybody to be banned.

The post approval feature should be implemented during this weekend, if possible, for both jb and r. The review should be done by the FE (the other mods will not have to lift a finger, we will take care of monitoring the messages, me and Tom, if John approves our ideas); if the review is not done by the FE members, then we are right back where we started from.

This way we have a chance to have again good and insightful conversations, to properly answer questions in the Q&A section.

Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #86 on: February 28, 2020, 05:36:26 AM »
Should I see a flat earther that I can reasonably trust, I'm happy to promote them to moderator. That said, both boydster and scg identify as flat earthers.
Here is another distinct problem.

A flat out lie written by the administrator of this site.

Both scg and boydster are noted as not being adherents to FE.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2020, 08:48:12 AM by totallackey »

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 43834
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #87 on: February 28, 2020, 08:30:40 AM »
No, I am not an RE adherent. You, on the other hand, are a noted troll and shitposter.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #88 on: February 28, 2020, 08:47:09 AM »
No, I am not an RE adherent. You, on the other hand, are a noted troll and shitposter.
If I wrote this ^ to you, I would be warned or banned.

You certainly are not an FE adherent and have stated so on this forum.

Previous post modified to reflect the actual state of affairs.

Also states Tom Bishop is not an FE adherent in your posts, writing you think it is just a game.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2020, 09:03:01 AM by totallackey »

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 15391
  • FREEDOIS IS ᗡIИIRG!
Re: For the discussion of the improvement of the forums
« Reply #89 on: February 28, 2020, 11:23:14 AM »
When has SCG ever stated she isnít FE? Iíve never seen it. Iíve only ever seen her defending the fact that, despite anyone saying otherwise, she is.