http://gamingtrend.com
November 01, 2014, 10:18:08 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Everyone in this forum please read  (Read 9179 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Knightshade Dragon
Administrator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 21076



View Profile WWW
« on: June 24, 2008, 12:58:21 PM »

My mods and I are spending almost 99% of our time in this subforum.  That's gonna stop.  If you'd like this subforum to continue to be here, the personal attacks and petty bullshit has to end.  I receive at least 10-15 reports a week from this forum and it is from or about the same people every time.  I don't know what it will take to clean this place up (an IQ test before entry is allowed?) but this is your chance to do it on your own.  Either learn to have civil conversations or I'm closing this subforum.
Logged

Ron Burke
EiC, Director of Gaming Trend
Gamertag:
Gaming Trend
PS3 Tag: GamingTrend
Canuck
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5486


I live in Japan


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2008, 02:00:29 PM »

Someone must be doing a lot of reporting! I see a lot of crap on here but that's when I just flip to the next thread-pointless arguing gets boring real fast.  On the other hand, politics and religion has its own forum for a reason-these discussions can get pretty heated.  I say if people are going to participate in a Religion/Politics forum then they need to throw on their asbestos suit and lose the sensitivity.  Keep your fingers off the report button people!  That is for the wussies in Off Topic slywink
Logged
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11487


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2008, 02:03:50 PM »

Quote from: Canuck on June 24, 2008, 02:00:29 PM

Someone must be doing a lot of reporting! I see a lot of crap on here but that's when I just flip to the next thread-pointless arguing gets boring real fast.  On the other hand, politics and religion has its own forum for a reason-these discussions can get pretty heated.  I say if people are going to participate in a Religion/Politics forum then they need to throw on their asbestos suit and lose the sensitivity.  Keep your fingers off the report button people!  That is for the wussies in Off Topic slywink

Typical New Komeito Party passivism.  finger
Logged
Canuck
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5486


I live in Japan


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 24, 2008, 02:04:23 PM »

Although on the other hand, ad hominem attacks are the lowest form of attacks.  People should use solid arguments and well theorized rebukes when on the attack-not resort to name calling.
Logged
msteelers
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1796



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 24, 2008, 02:09:55 PM »

Quote from: Canuck on June 24, 2008, 02:00:29 PM

Someone must be doing a lot of reporting! I see a lot of crap on here but that's when I just flip to the next thread-pointless arguing gets boring real fast.  On the other hand, politics and religion has its own forum for a reason-these discussions can get pretty heated.  I say if people are going to participate in a Religion/Politics forum then they need to throw on their asbestos suit and lose the sensitivity.  Keep your fingers off the report button people!  That is for the wussies in Off Topic slywink

I feel like I have thick skin, and don't get bothered too much by posts on a message board. But even so, some of the attacks have become very personal towards others and should stop.
Logged

Tune in to hear me spout nonsense about Fantasy Football every Thursday evening at 6:08.
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 24, 2008, 02:20:58 PM »

I know some people here were completely and totally opposed to a subforum like this, and it wouldnt surprise me at all if the large number of reports isnt being done as much for trying to get rid of this subforum as for any real problems with what is being posted.
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2008, 02:23:24 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on June 24, 2008, 02:20:58 PM

I know some people here were completely and totally opposed to a subforum like this, and it wouldnt surprise me at all if the large number of reports isnt being done as much for trying to get rid of this subforum as for any real problems with what is being posted.

That is untrue.  Without getting into specifics, the vast majority of the reports come from active participants in R&P. 
Logged
Austin
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1708


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2008, 02:38:40 PM »

There is always the Unbreakable approach.  It does strike me that there are really only a couple/few who get into the ad hominem.  Heck there are plenty of far right/left position types who refuse to concede or budge, despite evidence staring them in the face, but do it without pointing at the opposing poster and throwing blatant or slightly veiled insults.  Remove the ones who cannot resist lobbing insults/personal attacks.  (from R&P)
Logged
th'FOOL
Executive Producer and Editor-At-Large
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5016


Never whistle while you're pissing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 24, 2008, 02:39:57 PM »

Quote from: Austin on June 24, 2008, 02:38:40 PM

There is always the Unbreakable approach.  It does strike me that there are really only a couple/few who get into the ad hominem.  Heck there are plenty of far right/left position types who refuse to concede or budge, despite evidence staring them in the face, but do it without pointing at the opposing poster and throwing blatant or slightly veiled insults.  Remove the ones who cannot resist lobbing insults/personal attacks.  (from R&P)

Maybe people should just agree to disagree?
Logged

Mike Dunn
Executive Producer & Managing Editor, GamingTrend
Austin
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1708


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2008, 02:45:25 PM »

Quote from: th'FOOL on June 24, 2008, 02:39:57 PM

Quote from: Austin on June 24, 2008, 02:38:40 PM

There is always the Unbreakable approach.  It does strike me that there are really only a couple/few who get into the ad hominem.  Heck there are plenty of far right/left position types who refuse to concede or budge, despite evidence staring them in the face, but do it without pointing at the opposing poster and throwing blatant or slightly veiled insults.  Remove the ones who cannot resist lobbing insults/personal attacks.  (from R&P)

Maybe people should just agree to disagree?

Sure. 

It comes down to giving the audience some credit.  I can see when person X or Y is spinning the info or when a good point is made.  It's almost like arguing to convince some middle ground, but when it goes so far it's treating the middle ground like idiots who can't possibly see the truth unless the opposition is ground into dust. 
Logged
McBa1n
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 331



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2008, 06:07:26 PM »

It's always the same handful of people peeing in the pool...
Logged
Knightshade Dragon
Administrator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 21076



View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2008, 08:07:46 PM »

Quote from: McBa1n on June 24, 2008, 06:07:26 PM

It's always the same handful of people peeing in the pool...

Couldn't agree more.
Logged

Ron Burke
EiC, Director of Gaming Trend
Gamertag:
Gaming Trend
PS3 Tag: GamingTrend
Sarkus
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2593


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: June 24, 2008, 08:39:21 PM »

I guess my question is that if this is due to a regular group of offenders, why aren't they being banned?  Or have they been banned but not been able to change their behavior?

If the latter is the case, then maybe it is time to dump this forum.  While I've occasionally participated, I don't think it's necessary for a gaming oriented board, especially since most of us are not limited to just one discussion board that we visit. 

Another alternative would be to declare this a mod free zone.  I don't know if it would work, but other boards seem relatively unmoderated in their P&R forums and as long as the personal attacks don't leave the P&R section, it shouldn't bother anyone else.


« Last Edit: June 24, 2008, 08:41:17 PM by Sarkus » Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.
Syndey: That's alright.  I have both.

- American Dad
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 24, 2008, 09:02:46 PM »

Nature of the beast, I'm afraid.
Logged
Moliere
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5107



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 24, 2008, 09:29:16 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on June 24, 2008, 09:02:46 PM

Nature of the beast, I'm afraid.



I so want this shirt.
Logged

That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
RuperT
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 204


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2008, 09:32:49 PM »

It's fun, but I've got to say that 'hilarious' is over-used.
Logged

Live: MooseFoe
PSN: Rupyrt
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2008, 09:45:56 PM »

Quote from: Sarkus on June 24, 2008, 08:39:21 PM

I guess my question is that if this is due to a regular group of offenders, why aren't they being banned?  Or have they been banned but not been able to change their behavior?

If the latter is the case, then maybe it is time to dump this forum.  While I've occasionally participated, I don't think it's necessary for a gaming oriented board, especially since most of us are not limited to just one discussion board that we visit. 

Another alternative would be to declare this a mod free zone.  I don't know if it would work, but other boards seem relatively unmoderated in their P&R forums and as long as the personal attacks don't leave the P&R section, it shouldn't bother anyone else.




Most of the stuff isn't outright CoC violations so it's kind of a gray area.  Since R&P is so charged, people take comments far more personally than they would if similar comments were made regarding gaming, movies, etc.  Very few of the reports we receive are actionable in my opinion.  The most consistent violation is the portion of the CoC that states that you should show respect for others' opinions.  Very little of that occurs at all in R&P discussions IMO and trying to moderate that is an exercise in futility. 

Mod-free is a possibility that's been mentioned but I believe that too much of this stuff tends to spill over into the other forums.  I think it's hard for most people to just turn off their reactions and feelings toward people just because they are talking about a different subject in a different sub-forum.

Further, many of our regular R&P regulars are also valuable contributors to this forum in other areas.  Since Gaming Trend is a gaming focused site, it would pain me to see someone banned for R&P who is a good contributor on gaming topics. 
Logged
UsulofDoom
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 105


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: June 24, 2008, 09:58:42 PM »

There are certain types of people that are sensitive and will allways be sensitive. icon_wink
Logged
Sarkus
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2593


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2008, 11:39:27 PM »

Quote from: Kevin Grey on June 24, 2008, 09:45:56 PM

Mod-free is a possibility that's been mentioned but I believe that too much of this stuff tends to spill over into the other forums.  I think it's hard for most people to just turn off their reactions and feelings toward people just because they are talking about a different subject in a different sub-forum.

That's very true.  I wasn't involved at all with P&R here or elsewhere until earlier this year and it's kind of shocking how people you've interacted with for years on gaming topics suddenly start acting differently after a heated debate on a P&R topic.  I've toned my own P&R involvement down, simply because I value most of the game sites much more for gaming than for other topics.

Which brings me back to thinking GT doesn't need this.  QT3 has a very active P&R section that's hardly moderated at all, OO is back with its own P&R section, and little old Popehat is all about political and religious debates, given the nature of its front page blog.  Very few people are active here that aren't also active somewhere else.

The only thing we'd lose is KD and some of his crazy ideas.  icon_biggrin
« Last Edit: June 24, 2008, 11:41:07 PM by Sarkus » Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.
Syndey: That's alright.  I have both.

- American Dad
helot2000
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 287


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2008, 11:55:14 PM »

Quote from: Knightshade Dragon on June 24, 2008, 12:58:21 PM

My mods and I are spending almost 99% of our time in this subforum.  That's gonna stop.  If you'd like this subforum to continue to be here, the personal attacks and petty bullshit has to end.  I receive at least 10-15 reports a week from this forum and it is from or about the same people every time. 
Wow...that's is truly BS.  I am sorry to hear this.  As much as I've enjoyed R&P since Unbreakable left, pull the plug if people can't shape up.  Then we'll be left to mutter profanities while sipping coffee and reading the Politics section of the morning newspaper.   Not that I've ever done that, of course.    ninja
Logged

Saving the world one post at a time.
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: June 25, 2008, 12:03:27 AM »

I'm sure Ron's post was aimed at me (among others) and rightfully so.  I'll be the first to admit I've been shrill, over-the-top and occasionally childish at times.  I'll try to do better.

However, I think a lot of the issue comes down to intellectual dishonesty.  There are a number of posters here that are continually factually incorrect and/or intellectually dishonest when posting.  It's something that I have little patience for and when I get in trouble it's always when I'm responding to these types of posts.  I need do better in dealing with such posts.  I think I'll just have a standard line of “I find your post to be intellectual dishonest and/or confusing.  Please clarify.” and/or “You've stated this before in previous threads but have never addressed follow-up responses.  Please see previous threads and clarify.” rather than retort in kind.  I think to remind myself, I'll throw those in my signature line.  That should keep me from peeing in the pool.  

I'll provide a couple of examples of what I consider intellectual dishonesty – without names - and ask questions below.  I'm asking direct questions and providing direct examples.  If you choose to respond, I'd appreciate direct answers.  I'm going to be long-winded but I'm not going to be accusatory  Read or don't read, but I'm being straightforward and fair (at least from my perspective) below.


Example/Question #1

During one discussion, someone brought up race when talking about Obama and it did not seem germane to the discussion in any way, shape or form.  So my response was direct - “Who said anything about race?  Or is that all you see when you look at him?”  Now anyone who knows me in real life understands that I am a very direct individual.  You bring something up and I'll ask you directly about it, especially as it pertains to racial issues.  I have *always* confronted racial issues head-on.  Frankly, I don't think subtlety works when dealing with race.

So, to me, this was an honest question and it's pretty self-explanatory – either there's a reason to bring up race (if so, please explain) as it pertains to the discussion or the only other logical conclusion is that race colors (no pun intended) that individual's view of Obama.  I really don't see any other option.  Maybe there is one, but if so, I'd like to know what it is.  But rather than answer the question, I was told to “go to hell”, told it was a “cheap shot” and the “I've been called a racist” victim card seems to have been played quite a lot since then.  

Now there's no doubt my response to all of that was out-of-bounds – because I said I suppose the answer was then obvious, which was a bit of intellectual dishonesty on my part and uncalled for.  For that, I was wrong.

But I still don't see anything wrong with the original question.  Should I have just asked “Who said anything about race and why would you bring that up now?”  To me, the 2nd sentence is implied regardless on whether it's spoken or not.  I'm direct, so I said it and I find it intellectually dishonest to play the victim card at that point without answering the question in the first place.  And sure enough, that's colored every other discussion I've had with that poster because I'm still troubled and puzzled on why race was brought into the discussion.


Example/Question #2

Another poster has continually said that we don't have money for program “x”.  When it's pointed out that as a percentage of GDP, we spend 50% more than any other Western country on “x” so the money is already there, the poster never responds to that fact.  Two weeks later, we'll see the same baseless claim on another thread.  At what point can you say “you've avoided answering this a half dozen times, so either respond to the facts or stfu”?  

Seriously, that's what most of us would do in real life in one way or another and I find it hard to control my fingers on the keyboard when I continually see that kind of repeated and unsupported claim.  There are a couple of posters that do that on a continuous basis and they don't discussing almost anything rationally, logically or factually.  That's the kind of baseless rhetoric that causes threads to head downhill.  Unbreakable was continually guilty of this and I know of at least a couple of folks that do this all the time as well.  They'd rather post baseless claims or intentionally twist words then engage in honest debate.  Once they do, the thread often descends into a pile of dog crap.  Again, I used the term intellectual dishonesty to describe this behavior.


Example/Questions #3

This is to provide an example of different options that are are honest, rational and logical - and when R&P works because there is no intellectual dishonesty.  Geezer posted in the “Economic Plans” thread about taxation.  I don't agree with what he said, but he was consistent and logical about his position.  Unfortunately, the thread died out before I could understand his full position but I loved how he posted his position in a logical and reasoned manner.  It was a great example of at least staking a position out there and being honest and consistent about it.  Brendan is almost always intellectually honest – his opinions are well reasoned, logical and he can factually back them up.  There's probably not a poster who cites sources as much as he does.  He's not entirely immune to responding poorly to intellectual dishonesty, but he does a damn sure better job of it than I do.


Ultimately, it all boils down to this:

How do we deal with posters that are more interested in obfuscation then real discourse?  How do we deal with intellectual dishonesty?  How do we deal with those are are more interested in the “shock value” 1-liners then posting something backed up by reason, facts and logic?  I think that will always be the crux of the problem in any forum, but especially and R&P forum.  
« Last Edit: June 25, 2008, 12:29:29 AM by Blackadar » Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: June 25, 2008, 12:17:10 AM »

One thing that is a problem about trying to moderate what you call intellectual dishonesty is that people believe different things on different issues.   What you might consider to be intellectually dishonest could very well be a difference in what people believe in.   Differing views of what is the proper role of government can many times fall into this, along with religious discussions and many other things that fit into what this subforum is here for.    I think calling out 'intellectual dishonesty' is just a poor way of dealing with something the two of you just have different opinions on too many times.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: June 25, 2008, 12:26:38 AM »

Quote from: brettmcd on June 25, 2008, 12:17:10 AM

One thing that is a problem about trying to moderate what you call intellectual dishonesty is that people believe different things on different issues.   What you might consider to be intellectually dishonest could very well be a difference in what people believe in.   Differing views of what is the proper role of government can many times fall into this, along with religious discussions and many other things that fit into what this subforum is here for.    I think calling out 'intellectual dishonesty' is just a poor way of dealing with something the two of you just have different opinions on too many times.

Sorry Brett, I tried to be as clear as possible, but perhaps I wasn't clear enough.  I've gone back to try to make things even clearer since it appears you didn't quite grasp what I was saying.  As I said, differing honest, researched opinions isn't intellectual dishonesty - hence my example in #3.  Geezer has a different opinion, but it's logical, reasonable and consistent.  That's what makes great debates.  Someone whose primary purpose is to obfuscate an issue or a repeated failure by an individual to address logical, rational responses to an unsubstantiated claim is intellectual dishonesty - hence examples #1 and #2.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2008, 12:30:55 AM by Blackadar » Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
Mookee
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 225


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: June 25, 2008, 12:30:27 AM »

Good lord. This forum is extraordinarily tame. These people reporting all this stuff should be beaten with a rubber hose. It freakin' cracks me up that people use that to 'tell' on people.
Logged
Sarkus
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2593


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: June 25, 2008, 12:31:08 AM »

Honestly, Blackadar, you just took a shot at a bunch of people on a personal level if you ask me.  And given that's the whole point of what KD is talking about, it appears to me that you don't understand how to argue without doing that.  Accusing people of intellectual dishonesty when they don't agree with you?  Hiding behind the "I'm just a direct person" argument when in your first example you took a clear shot at someone over racism? If someone says something and doesn't back it up, just point it out and walk away.  Let other readers make their own judgements.



Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.
Syndey: That's alright.  I have both.

- American Dad
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: June 25, 2008, 12:31:44 AM »

Quote from: Blackadar on June 25, 2008, 12:26:38 AM

Quote from: brettmcd on June 25, 2008, 12:17:10 AM

One thing that is a problem about trying to moderate what you call intellectual dishonesty is that people believe different things on different issues.   What you might consider to be intellectually dishonest could very well be a difference in what people believe in.   Differing views of what is the proper role of government can many times fall into this, along with religious discussions and many other things that fit into what this subforum is here for.    I think calling out 'intellectual dishonesty' is just a poor way of dealing with something the two of you just have different opinions on too many times.

Sorry Brett, I tried to be as clear as possible, but I think you missed the point.  As I said, differing honest, researched opinions isn't intellectual dishonesty - hence my example in #3.  Geezer has a different opinion, but it's logical, reasonable and consistent.  That's what makes great debates.  Someone whose primary purpose is to obfuscate an issue or a repeated failure by an individual to address logical, rational responses to an unsubstantiated claim is intellectual dishonesty - hence examples #1 and #2.

That is your opinion that their claim is unsubstantiated, or they are here to obfuscate an issue.   Its something that would damn hard to moderate with rules, as political differences can make the oppositions arguments look like that to someone.    Religious debates would seem to fall squarely into that as well.   An atheist could very well think that someone using god or religion to explain something is engaging in intellectual dishonesty, as they dont believe at all in what that person is saying.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #26 on: June 25, 2008, 12:49:39 AM »

Quote from: Sarkus on June 25, 2008, 12:31:08 AM

Honestly, Blackadar, you just took a shot at a bunch of people on a personal level if you ask me.  And given that's the whole point of what KD is talking about, it appears to me that you don't understand how to argue without doing that.  Accusing people of intellectual dishonesty when they don't agree with you?  Hiding behind the "I'm just a direct person" argument when in your first example you took a clear shot at someone over racism? If someone says something and doesn't back it up, just point it out and walk away.  Let other readers make their own judgements.

I'd encourage you to re-read my post.  I've done so and honestly cannot figure out where I've taken personal shots at anyone other than myself and one user who can't even read this forum anymore.  Those are the only two posters I've even named, so I'm not sure how I've taken "a shot at a bunch of people on a personal level".  I'd ask you to help me better understand where I've done so, but I think the examples would get more specific and then the examples would be personal. 

And, even after numerous re-reads of my own words, I can't quite figure out where you'd get the idea that I'm "accusing people of intellectual dishonesty when they don't agree with me" when I provided a direct example of how legitimate, reasoned disagreements aren't intellectual dishonesty.  If you re-read my post and still think that's what I'm saying, I don't know what else to do.  All I can say is I don't know any better way of explaining the difference between normal debating and intellectual dishonesty. 
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2008, 12:52:29 AM »

Quote from: Blackadar on June 25, 2008, 12:49:39 AM

Quote from: Sarkus on June 25, 2008, 12:31:08 AM

Honestly, Blackadar, you just took a shot at a bunch of people on a personal level if you ask me.  And given that's the whole point of what KD is talking about, it appears to me that you don't understand how to argue without doing that.  Accusing people of intellectual dishonesty when they don't agree with you?  Hiding behind the "I'm just a direct person" argument when in your first example you took a clear shot at someone over racism? If someone says something and doesn't back it up, just point it out and walk away.  Let other readers make their own judgements.

I'd encourage you to re-read my post.  I've done so and honestly cannot figure out where I've taken personal shots at anyone other than myself and one user who can't even read this forum anymore.  Those are the only two posters I've even named, so I'm not sure how I've taken "a shot at a bunch of people on a personal level".  I'd ask you to help me better understand where I've done so, but I think the examples would get more specific and then the examples would be personal. 

And, even after numerous re-reads of my own words, I can't quite figure out where you'd get the idea that I'm "accusing people of intellectual dishonesty when they don't agree with me" when I provided a direct example of how legitimate, reasoned disagreements aren't intellectual dishonesty.  If you re-read my post and still think that's what I'm saying, I don't know what else to do.  All I can say is I don't know any better way of explaining the difference between normal debating and intellectual dishonesty. 

The problem is that one persons 'intellectual dishonesty' is another persons set of facts they believe in, and I have no idea how you think that can be moderated.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: June 25, 2008, 01:04:20 AM »

Quote from: brettmcd on June 25, 2008, 12:31:44 AM

That is your opinion that their claim is unsubstantiated, or they are here to obfuscate an issue.   Its something that would damn hard to moderate with rules, as political differences can make the oppositions arguments look like that to someone.    Religious debates would seem to fall squarely into that as well.   An atheist could very well think that someone using god or religion to explain something is engaging in intellectual dishonesty, as they dont believe at all in what that person is saying.

That's a decent example.  You're 100% right - when religion gets involved, there really isn't any positive discourse because there often isn't any room for debate or interpretation.  And both sides may think the other is engaging in intellectual dishonesty because the issue is so codified.  There's no doubt that will happen from time to time in any R&P forum.  And I agree - that is virtually impossible to moderate.  That's precisely the reason why most R&P forums are lightly moderated or (occasionally) not at all.  Again, great example.   thumbsup

I think some of us - myself included - need to recognize that we've more a part of the problem than part of the solution lately.  We also had a large influx of new posters who may have been used to posting in a different manner than what we've typically had here at GT.  This thread may help both sides of the equation - helping those of us who have gotten shrill to get our act together and provide more guidance to newer members on the GT method of R&P posting.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
Sarkus
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2593


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2008, 01:12:49 AM »

Quote from: Blackadar on June 25, 2008, 12:49:39 AM

Quote from: Sarkus on June 25, 2008, 12:31:08 AM

Honestly, Blackadar, you just took a shot at a bunch of people on a personal level if you ask me.  And given that's the whole point of what KD is talking about, it appears to me that you don't understand how to argue without doing that.  Accusing people of intellectual dishonesty when they don't agree with you?  Hiding behind the "I'm just a direct person" argument when in your first example you took a clear shot at someone over racism? If someone says something and doesn't back it up, just point it out and walk away.  Let other readers make their own judgements.

I'd encourage you to re-read my post.  I've done so and honestly cannot figure out where I've taken personal shots at anyone other than myself and one user who can't even read this forum anymore.  Those are the only two posters I've even named, so I'm not sure how I've taken "a shot at a bunch of people on a personal level".  I'd ask you to help me better understand where I've done so, but I think the examples would get more specific and then the examples would be personal. 

And, even after numerous re-reads of my own words, I can't quite figure out where you'd get the idea that I'm "accusing people of intellectual dishonesty when they don't agree with me" when I provided a direct example of how legitimate, reasoned disagreements aren't intellectual dishonesty.  If you re-read my post and still think that's what I'm saying, I don't know what else to do.  All I can say is I don't know any better way of explaining the difference between normal debating and intellectual dishonesty. 

Well, when I read this:

Quote
There are a number of posters here that are continually factually incorrect and/or intellectually dishonest when posting.  It's something that I have little patience for and when I get in trouble it's always when I'm responding to these types of posts.

It comes across as you not considering that there are differences of opinion and interpretation.  Pulling out terms like "intellectual dishonesty" is a personal attack, because it's an accusation about that person's core behavior.  If someone has a dissenting view, you can present your facts and then ask them to do the same.  If they don't, you don't need to start calling people out at a core level.  As someone who did some organized debating in high school and college, I can assure you that anyone who started arguing in a debate about the other person's "intellectual dishonesty" would not have done well.

The problem here isn't how you react to people who want to debate the way you would like to, it's how you react to people who don't.  I wish everyone would engage in a series of factual exchanges with the presentation of evidence, but this is the real world.   A lot of P&R is simply opinion and we're just having fun listening to new ideas.  I don't expect everyone to come prepared with legitimate sources to back their views up and I don't get mad if they don't.

Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.
Syndey: That's alright.  I have both.

- American Dad
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: June 25, 2008, 01:33:37 AM »

Quote from: Sarkus on June 25, 2008, 01:12:49 AM

It comes across as you not considering that there are differences of opinion and interpretation.  Pulling out terms like "intellectual dishonesty" is a personal attack, because it's an accusation about that person's core behavior.  If someone has a dissenting view, you can present your facts and then ask them to do the same.  If they don't, you don't need to start calling people out at a core level.  As someone who did some organized debating in high school and college, I can assure you that anyone who started arguing in a debate about the other person's "intellectual dishonesty" would not have done well.

The problem here isn't how you react to people who want to debate the way you would like to, it's how you react to people who don't.  I wish everyone would engage in a series of factual exchanges with the presentation of evidence, but this is the real world.   A lot of P&R is simply opinion and we're just having fun listening to new ideas.  I don't expect everyone to come prepared with legitimate sources to back their views up and I don't get mad if they don't.

To a great extent, I agree with you.  I still think it's pretty easy to see when someone is being intellectually dishonest.  Then again, we may be operating on a different definition of "intellectual dishonesty".  For example, Wiki has it defined pretty tightly as "advocating a position one knows to be false".  I tend to use it in conjunction with a wider array of tactics like quoting out of context, strawman arguments, subject redirection, being purposely vague and so forth.  Either way, I'm agreeing with you in that my own responses have been unacceptable from time to time.  I've identified that and I'll work on it.  However, our responses to such tactics will still differ since we're different people with different experiences and different backgrounds.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
naednek
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4681



View Profile
« Reply #31 on: June 25, 2008, 01:36:43 AM »

Quote from: Sarkus on June 24, 2008, 08:39:21 PM

I guess my question is that if this is due to a regular group of offenders, why aren't they being banned?  Or have they been banned but not been able to change their behavior?

If the latter is the case, then maybe it is time to dump this forum.  While I've occasionally participated, I don't think it's necessary for a gaming oriented board, especially since most of us are not limited to just one discussion board that we visit. 

Another alternative would be to declare this a mod free zone.  I don't know if it would work, but other boards seem relatively unmoderated in their P&R forums and as long as the personal attacks don't leave the P&R section, it shouldn't bother anyone else.




We've actually discusses this, however I think if that would happen, I think it would leak into other subforums, and that's certainly not what we want.

We all know it's election year, and it's all about blaming the other camp from the media and people here.  We're just asking to stop and civil about it, talk about the issues, but don't bring in the attacks.
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3167



View Profile
« Reply #32 on: June 25, 2008, 02:59:25 AM »

Quote
I think some of us - myself included - need to recognize that we've more a part of the problem than part of the solution lately.  We also had a large influx of new posters who may have been used to posting in a different manner than what we've typically had here at GT.  This thread may help both sides of the equation - helping those of us who have gotten shrill to get our act together and provide more guidance to newer members on the GT method of R&P posting.

No offense, but I've seen far more troll-like, personal flaming behavior here in GT than I ever did in OO. Maybe it's us who should be giving you lessons.
Logged
warning
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7325



View Profile
« Reply #33 on: June 25, 2008, 03:04:55 AM »

I picture this comic everytime I read some of these "OMG the stakes are sooo high!" posts here:

Logged
DarkEL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2931



View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: June 25, 2008, 05:20:06 AM »

Here's my personal thoughts on the subject

On one hand - the general membership of the community doesn't want to feel censored or feel like there are topics that are forbidden from conversation. Being an election year, there's a lot of need to be able to share election stories, or comments, etc. And occasionally people like to discuss things that can dip into spirituality matters. So if you ask the general population if they want to allow to have R&P discussions - they're going to say yes. Because those talks can be quite fun and interesting from time to time.

The problem comes in that you also have some percentage of the population who then take the R&P discussions to a whole different level. So instead of being a casual place to talk about ideas, philosophies, etc. -- they advance it to a level where the emphasis changes into a non-stop debate. So they become focused on providing links to endless resources to argue their points and providing counter-arguments about the validity of each resource that the other side provides. Snarkiness and borderline insults are the lingua franca in these conversations. I just don't see how this type of attitude is applicable to a gaming site nor how it is good for the community as it promotes elitism in an area of the forums and discourages other from participating.

And before anyone thinks I'm talking about them - I'm not. I have absolutely no one in particular that I'm thinking about. Just a general impression from the entire R&P forum. I think pretty much everyone in there is a good member of the community, but some people seem to have a problem when these topics turn into a debate.

I think going wild-wild west would be a bad idea here as it would just encourage even more of this behaviour and it would spill over into the other areas of the community. I know I've been guilty of reading more into some peoples posts in other areas of the forum simply because of having read previous posts from them in R&P topics.

Personally - I think that there are plenty of available forums out there on the global internets that are focused on the exact type of debate that this smaller group wants. So ideally, it would be best if the people who want to do debate could express that side of their personality on those sites while still contributing here in the other areas of the site.

I don't want to see R&P forbidden from the site as I think it's good for us to be able to occasionally share thoughts, opinions, etc with each other about such important topics that affect our lives. It's just the belief that R&P should be a debate that seems to be the problem.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2008, 05:23:21 AM by DarkEL » Logged
Trappin
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 28


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: June 25, 2008, 07:20:31 AM »

Just shut the P&R forum down. Nothing is debated here that isn't already argued about on thousands of other political forums.

Logged
Victoria Raverna
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1096


Auspiciousness, prosperity, and good fortune


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: June 25, 2008, 09:35:34 AM »

I guess it is pretty much the question of if GT want people who like to post and read R&P.Or they don't want or need them?

If you want them then you need to have this R&P area for them to come to GT. Not everyone have time to post at more than one forum so if GT doesn't have it, they go someplace else where they can post R&P topic in addition to the gaming stuff.

Logged
Geezer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 532


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: June 25, 2008, 12:16:21 PM »

Quote from: Trappin on June 25, 2008, 07:20:31 AM

Just shut the P&R forum down. Nothing is debated here that isn't already argued about on thousands of other political forums.



Hell, just shut down GT.  I mean, there's plenty of other gaming forums around. 
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3167



View Profile
« Reply #38 on: June 25, 2008, 01:26:54 PM »

I don't know why closing the entire forum down is a better solution than simply removing problem offenders. If they violate CoC, ban their ass. Problem solved. Surely if you're getting that many problem reports, there are certain names that repeatedly come up.
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: June 25, 2008, 01:33:36 PM »

Again, because they aren't clear cut violations of the CoC.  But the charged nature of the R&P forums makes people report stuff that they would never report in the other forums.  The signal to noise ratio of real, actionable reports to non-events is incredibly low but it's still time consuming to sort through it. 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.185 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.048s, 2q)