Could this forum survive if......

Anyone could have seen that thread being closed though. It should never have been made. Devo, you were a mod once so you would be able to answer this question. What does a recently banned member have to gain by making a thread like that? A site admin actually posted twice in the thread and it still spiraled downhill. I was a bit at fault for it and am man enough to admit it but let's be honest here, the thread should never have even been made. It was a dig at the mods and they finally had enough and shut it down. Originally Posted by paintedbynumbers

Tough one man, its really more about the mod himself, I never minded private criticism or private conversations about public issues.

Some consider any form of public opposition or questioning as a sign of disrespect, and, react harshly, that is something I had to learn to tolerate, and it made me a better leader, a good leader should praise far more than punish, its just basic psychology.

One of things we eliminated was single mod bans, it took a triumvirate first, then just two of us after Speed left, and, eventually the decision that bans would only be made for things that threatend the board or its members, threats, etc, and of course "The Verboten" things of which you can never speak.

I didn't go into the banned thread with any particular animus, or hard POV, other than I that I think self policing and dropping the anger/reporting of other members is a preferable way of ending staffs need to police us externally.

EDIT TO AD:

RE, the thread itself, it went on too long, I myself would think a discussion to help eliminate the situations that caused the ban would be appropriate, but, it didn't come across that way.

But sometimes, you have to go down roads you don't know, just to see where they end.

Sometimes it ends in a great discovery, sometimes it ends at water, and you drown...

Oh well.

Pun intended.

Will it survive? Probably


I thinck Bio may start swinging his shiny hammer around these parts. As a former mod you know that whiners who needlessly pound the triangle don’t make staff happy and unhappy staff do unhappy things. Originally Posted by AmishGangster

Pretty much my thoughts as well, I just don't wanna see stupidity bring hail down on all our heads.

Banning begets banning, some need to do better.

Gentlemen

Thread was closed by ECCIE staff, trying to restart this conversation is ignoring staff instructions.

Let’s move on

To get back to Devo’s original thoughts here:

In the Post Fosta version of Eccie we now are in is the purpose of having coed and the sandbox set up the way they are still the best way to group threads? Since much of what coed used to be for cannot be posted there anymore perhaps Eccie would be better served to make the sandbox a local political forum and move everything else to coed? And banning all political speech from coed. In this scenario the members who don't wan’t to deal with politics could avoid the entire forum instead of having to sift through political threADs to find the Official Steelers threAD or a threAD about your favorite condiment as those would now be in coed.

I don’t see political rhetoric toning down anytime soon in Pittsburgh or nationally, maybe its better to adapt the forums to the state of the masses than to try and forcefully subdue political posters so all the forums survive, albeit in a slightly different state?

I'd argue that both co-ed and sandbox still serve purposes that would be more apparent if the political discussion occurred in the national political forum or if there were a dedicated local political forum.

I'd argue for the former over the latter and keep the political threads in one space. This assumes that they're even worth it to permit given the lack of ability for some folks to self-regulate which I feel makes Devo's suggestion untenable. The social contract only works if all parties honor it.

We've seen the slap fights enough times to know who does and who doesn't.

Slap fights...lol. Good one and appreciate the humor on a touchy subject. Good thing to take away from these discussions is that there are some passionate people who care about their vision of the country and politics. While things can get overheated or repetitive, in general I would rather have the forum than not. Slapping aside, it's good to see things from the other side also.

To get back to Devo’s original thoughts here:

In the Post Fosta version of Eccie we now are in is the purpose of having coed and the sandbox set up the way they are still the best way to group threads? Since much of what coed used to be for cannot be posted there anymore perhaps Eccie would be better served to make the sandbox a local political forum and move everything else to coed? And banning all political speech from coed. In this scenario the members who don't wan’t to deal with politics could avoid the entire forum instead of having to sift through political threADs to find the Official Steelers threAD or a threAD about your favorite condiment as those would now be in coed.

I don’t see political rhetoric toning down anytime soon in Pittsburgh or nationally, maybe its better to adapt the forums to the state of the masses than to try and forcefully subdue political posters so all the forums survive, albeit in a slightly different state? Originally Posted by AmishGangster

This.

I'd argue that both co-ed and sandbox still serve purposes that would be more apparent if the political discussion occurred in the national political forum or if there were a dedicated local political forum.

I'd argue for the former over the latter and keep the political threads in one space. This assumes that they're even worth it to permit given the lack of ability for some folks to self-regulate which I feel makes Devo's suggestion untenable. The social contract only works if all parties honor it.

We've seen the slap fights enough times to know who does and who doesn't. Originally Posted by HDGristle

It appears my suggestion has become the law, continue the ugliness or else you get a ban.

My prideful self would rather change my behavior voluntarily rather than have someone force me to change it.

And bluntly, the name calling really does NOT do anything to further a good passionate debate.

Stevepar and I deep down knew that, and, its how we found peace with each other, tolerance, respect, and even to like each other in our own way.

I'd argue that both co-ed and sandbox still serve purposes that would be more apparent if the political discussion occurred in the national political forum or if there were a dedicated local political forum. Originally Posted by HDGristle

The best solution isn’t always realistic. And realistically there is no chance of local political forums being created and added to the current line up. Additionally local topics from every area nationwide would seriously crowd the national forum making it unusable and in turn driving the rhetoric back to other forums.

Could, but most areas aren't having the same volume of discussions as we are here and we're well known to be the exception and not the rule. And even then, the majority of the volume here in terms of flooding comes from one very, very vocal member.

I think you overestimate the challenge and overplay the risk.

Even 1 local topic a day on average from 25% of the areas would bog it way down. This site isn’t into change not the site itself, the guidelines, the members or the content. And certainly when the change isn’t actually needed. The Biomed1 has stated pretty bluntly if you don’t like it don’t read it and all the posturing by the lefties here the past week hasn’t gotten its target pointed out. In fact I bet those on the anti political crusade have been pointed more than their target has. Shooting for something that actually may happen someday is a better play than trying to aim for the stars

I think even 1 new local thread per day from 25% of the areas is an overestimate because most easily fall into other convos and really aren't unique. Other forums don't have the daily deluge we do

As for the rest, doesn't really matter. Biomed's comment cut the same way for both sides.

As for my points... 9 total, lifetime. Those are the only infraction points I control or really care about.

AG, so post election we've seen that the same local effort has been focused on what are essentially national or non-local issues perfectly suited for the national political forum.

The daily drumbeat of new anti-Fetterman is now about AZ and Nevada elections as part of larger voter-fraud discussion and anti-mail-in ballot campaign. Markey vs Twitter. Schumer's thoughts on paths to citizenship. San Francisco. Who people think the President and VP slates will comprise.

Looks a lot less Pittsburgh focused to me, which I offer as evidence of your concern for the sanctity of the National forum being overblown. Those would be right at home there. We ourselves only seem to be getting maybe 1 truly local political thread per day at this point.

Local discussions about what are perceived national topics is not something to be discarded. What happens in the scenarios you mention could have a strong effect in a state like PA which is a huge red blob with a couple blue dots on either side where the homeless and woke live. PA is dead center in the known voter fraud existence, any discussion about voter fraud has to go through Philly before it ends.

Regardless of all that, what you desire just is not realistic here on Eccie. Biomed and his mod posse will will swing the ban hammer until they need rotator cuff surgery before that happens. Fighting this fight is no different than people who still want the last Presidential election overturned, its just not happening

A lot of change seems unrealistic to some until it happens. And so much has.

And ECCIE continues to roll on