PD & GD

[Guest]

@djensen:

In general, moderation should be a fun hobby not a tedious job. Although, the moderators won’t say so to me, I bet moderating GD & PD seems more like a tedious job than fun hobby. Among other things, the shut down is to give the moderators a break.

@Jennifer:

I was suspended for arguing with a moderator on the public forums instead of privately.

When I started it WAS fun.  For months though it has been a chore which eats up huge chunks of my free time.  I fully understand why CC previously resigned from the post.

And to clarify Jen, you were suspended specifically for violating a forum policy which explicitly states that if you have an issue with a moderator ruling on an issue, you take it up with the site owner, admin, or another Mod privately.  Had this not been a formal written forum policy, it would not have been an issue.

@Jennifer:

Works for me, the level of idiocy on display in the PD has been astronomical for a long time.  I think the entire system should be scrapped, or a better leader be appointed, IMHO.  Someone who can be impartial and keep the forum from turning into an evil conservative/evil liberal slander fest.  One who doesn’t go throwing around big words and accusations of crimes would be stellar.

We actually have SEVERAL moderators of the PD forums, I have just been the only one willing to invest the time necessary read all the crap that gets posted.  And believe me, i have read more BS in the last year since I became a Mod than I ever needed.  If folks want a new mod, fine, but THAT decision is up to the site Owner and Admin.

[jsp4563]

Yahoshua

I have to disagree with your whole approach.  It’s all these rules that brought us to this point.

Political discussion, by it’s very nature, elicits the passions of americans, it’s what makes our nation great.  The whole purpose of the 1st ammendment was to protect political speech no matter how aggregious we find it.  The Supreme Court is still wrestiling with these issues even today, expecting a moderator to decide them is folly.

The political boards should be unrestricted in content, the moderator should confine their rulings to posts that violate “actual” laws which would expose the site to legal action, such as copy right infingment, Slander, or Libel.

Peoples opinions are just that.  As the saying goes, opinons are like assholes…everyone has one.

[guildofblades]

And to clarify Jen, you were suspended specifically for violating a forum policy which explicitly states that if you have an issue with a moderator ruling on an issue, you take it up with the site owner, admin, or another Mod privately.  Had this not been a formal written forum policy, it would not have been an issue.<<

Switch, being on the outside looking in I realize that perhaps I missed some of what happened. But what I saw was a long thread where both you and Jen were arguing over the value of the markets and to the degree they had risen during the current president’s term, with both of you choosing different dates and means of interpreting the numbers, both to fit your particular political view points. Nothing wrong with that, mind you.

But what “seems” to have happened next was that you put in your last word, then closed the thread. Jen then got in “trouble” for posting on the subject again my opening new threads.

Not really fair for you to engage in an argument, sneak in a final word, then lock out the person you were arguing with from responding. It was an abuse of your position, given your intimate involvement in the argument that was going on.  It was like saying your final word, then using your position of power to shut up the opposing view.

I have no problem with the thread being closed and if some other moderator had made the decision independently that would be fine. But the situation just looked wrong the way it worked out.

Maybe these sections need two active moderators so the “other” one can moderate when needed when the first one is too intimately engaged on the discussion?

Ryan S. Johnson
Guild of Blades Publishing Group
http://www.guildofblades.com
http://www.1483online.com
http://www.thermopylae-online.com

[Guest]

JSP:
The rules pretty much ARE restricted to actual criminal actions, unless you think handling an issue you have with a Mod by contacting an admin or another mod is too much, or unless you want a pure unadulterated flame fest, in which case there are many, many other forums to fill that need.

And GOB:
It was a plagiarized post that caused the issue, and it is not the first time plagiarism (i.e. copyright violation) has been an issue with Jen’s posts.  She was previously suspended for plagiarism earlier this year.

These are the forum rules as posted for PD.  (copy and pasted direct from the PD Rules thread)

Political Discussion Forum Policies and Rules:

Political Discussion venue of the AxisandAllies.org web site is NOT A&A related.  It exists as a courtesy to the forum users to allow the discussion of non-Axis and Allies topics.  Abuse of this forum will not be tolerated.  Excessive problems caused by the use of the forum can result in the removal of users from the forum, as well as temporary or permanent closure of the forum.

This forum is to diuscuss all matters regarding politics, religion, policy, current events, or other similar issues.

The following are are prohibited:
1.  Ad Hominum attacks.  Discussing issues and disagreeing with an issue is permitted.  Personal attacks are not.

2.  Flaming is explicitly prohibited.  A flame is considered a blatant and ill-intentioned attack on a fellow forum member for a particular post or viewpoint posted by that forum member. The use of racial slurs, open racism, or advocacy of genocide based on race are considered flames against an entire group and are thus prohibited.  Whether a comment is a flame or not is up to the discretion of the moderators.

3.  Flame Baiting is explicitly prohibited. Baiting is a comment intended to draw a fellow forum member into making a flame. Whether a comment is baiting will be up to the discretion of the moderators.

4.  All posts are subject to the laws of the United States of America.  As such, any activity or post which violates those laws is explicitly prhobited.  This would include, but is not limitted to:  violation of copyright laws, slander/libel, terroristic threats, fraud, criminal solicitation, etc.

5.  Questionable posts should be reported.  In the event you see a post that you feel may be a violation of any of the above policies, or is otherwise detrimental to the forum, you are asked to NOT respond publicly via posting to any thread or post, but to use the “Report to Moderator” link that is at the bottom right of every post made to the forums.

The Moderators of this site have exclusive and final authority as to what constitutes a violation.

Questions regarding any of these policies should be directed to any of the site moderators.  Questions regarding any decision of a moderator should be directed to site co-owner Yanny.

I do not see a problem with those rules for what SHOULD be a rational and reasoned discussion that is a SIDE TOPIC AREA for a group of GAMERS.

And to be honest, after re-reading the rules, I have let a HECK of a lot slide by over the past several months that should NOT have been permitted to let stand.

[Guest]

BTW:  All bold, italics, etc. are exactly as shown in the PD Rules topic

[Amon-Sul]

@ncscswitch:

BTW:  All bold, italics, etc. are exactly as shown in the PD Rules topic

the rules are fine, even great :wink:

we just have to stick to them, when someone brakes the line-a warning
if he goes way down it, - very long suspension

[Weekend Gamer]

The latest ban came about due to a racial slur by one who shall remain nameless.  That was a clear violation of the rules and I reported it as such.

As for being a free-for-all, the PD forum has been pretty much that already – the level of discourse has been so low I don’t even bother to respond to most of the stupidity I read.  I certainly would not blame David or the mods if they wanted to ditch PD forever.  The problem is, I think people around here (you know who you are) will find a way to inject their political views in some other forum.  So you might as well have an outlet for it.

I think the rules as they are read just fine.  They just need to be enforced (and observed by the mods themselves).  If folks don’t honor a ban, then perhaps more drastic measures should be taken.

[ezto]

Ban repeated offenders and do ip checks so they don’t make a new account (i say ban ip if thats possible). I was temporarily banned for flaming and should be permanently banned if I flame or break another rule.

[djensen]

Yes, it may have “seemed” that way but it also may not have been the case. So instead, I would like to blame software or our use of it. The reason being that locking could be used to stop a conversation that gets out of hand but it can also be used for non-negative purpose such as really old threads that you might want for reference but don’t want to keep going. Basically, stop a conversation and move on. In PD and GD we really need “blocking” where you can see the thread title but cannot read anything in the thread until a resolution to whatever problem has been decided. We don’t have a blocking feature. We can move the thread but that’s a pain in the neck and the thread would probably never get moved back.

Finally, it’s not easy being a mod. Sometimes it seems to non-mods like you’re advancing your cause in a conversation when you’re intentions were not as such.

@guildofblades:

And to clarify Jen, you were suspended specifically for violating a forum policy which explicitly states that if you have an issue with a moderator ruling on an issue, you take it up with the site owner, admin, or another Mod privately.  Had this not been a formal written forum policy, it would not have been an issue.<<

But what “seems” to have happened next was that you put in your last word, then closed the thread. Jen then got in “trouble” for posting on the subject again my opening new threads.

Not really fair for you to engage in an argument, sneak in a final word, then lock out the person you were arguing with from responding. It was an abuse of your position, given your intimate involvement in the argument that was going on.  It was like saying your final word, then using your position of power to shut up the opposing view.

[djensen]

Huh? I’m not sure I understand the point of anti- statement. Or was it mostly sarcasm. Maybe we do need a sarcastic smiley. According to this page (http://www.cg.tuwien.ac.at/~helwig/smileys.html) the normal smiley can be used for sarcasm but this one :-> is more sarcastic or something.

If the statement was serious … this website isn’t run by the U.S. Government. This site is not a democracy, nor a republic. It’s a hobby and barely a business. If I felt like it, I could delete all posts that use “can’t” because I prefer “cannot.” :wink: (I’m not going to do that by the way, I just can’t).

“Security/patriotic act” measures would be more like the government monitoring all traffic across this site because they feel like it. Censorship would be the government subsequently blocking certain types of search before the HTTP POST reached this server. The former is possible the later would be hard. Okay, I digress the point it start using the sarcastic smiley

:->

@nuno:

@Jennifer:

the level of idiocy on display in the PD has been astronomical for a long time.

Agreed.

@Jennifer:

I think the entire system should be scrapped, or a better leader be appointed, IMHO.
…
Til then, I agree, the PD should be shut down indefinitely.  Just my opinion.  After all, I believe the forum was created when we all began arguing over the 2000 elections before it was confirmed who the President elect was.  Seven years of discussion on it may be enough, no?

Understandably, with evidence on iraq Disaster becoming increasingly crystal everyday,
Americans couldn’t support their traditional “freedom of speech” propaganda any longer.

Therefore my participation last July in the forum could only trigger the increase of such “security/patriotic act” measures,
such as Bans, Censorship, etc…

@Jennifer:

perhaps the rulings will be less partisan and allow for the forum to regress from slander and name calling and progress toward intellectual debate.

:lol: Jen.

[djensen]

That’s still really tough. Especially since I don’t want to see ANY hate speech (neither the technical legal definition nor the casual definition) nor misogyny, nor homophobic remarks, etc. I do not want to be associated with that and it will not be allowed.

Maybe some sort of community moderation. Sure, people will take side but maybe votes (thumbs up/thumbs down) for posts would help?

@Emperor:

Yahoshua

I have to disagree with your whole approach.  It’s all these rules that brought us to this point.

Political discussion, by it’s very nature, elicits the passions of americans, it’s what makes our nation great.  The whole purpose of the 1st ammendment was to protect political speech no matter how aggregious we find it.  The Supreme Court is still wrestiling with these issues even today, expecting a moderator to decide them is folly.

The political boards should be unrestricted in content, the moderator should confine their rulings to posts that violate “actual” laws which would expose the site to legal action, such as copy right infingment, Slander, or Libel.

Peoples opinions are just that.  As the saying goes, opinons are like assholes…everyone has one.

[frimmel]

Being able to say whatever you want tends to mean that you can’t. Don’t we need to keep in mind a little more, “My right to extend my arm ends at the other guy’s nose?”

[Jermofoot]

I don’t see the sarcastic smilie…unless there is no emoticon for it and the symbolic representation is supposed to be taken as a sarcastic point.

ooo…a wiki forum.  I love wiki, but I don’t think it would work too well in a forum.  Although, I had that same reservation when I heard about wiki in the first place.  I’d give it a shot.

[ajgundam5]

I was actually planning on not even bothering with PD anymore about a month ago. I decided I would only look at topics if they caught my interest but I ended up checking out every new thread which led me to posting again and blah blah … I don’t think I would be devastated if we lost PD & GD since I only started coming here because of A&A but PD & GD are definitely a big part in why I am on this site so much.

[Guest]

Being 100% honest…

I come here for the purpose of gaming.

If PD and/or GD remained gone permanently, it would give me more time for other activities, or even perhaps for more than 1 game at a time!  :-D

[frimmel]

What? A map program in Switch’s future?

[Weekend Gamer]

@frimmel:

What? A map program in Switch’s future?

I wouldn’t get carried away, Frimmel.  Switch has been known to play two games at once and STILL use his board to manage both – go figure.

[Guest]

:-P, but that was a slow mo game on one and I had to spend a LOT of tiem re-setting my board between moves :-P

[Guest]

Yep, we can, so long as discussion is civil among members.

You would do well to learn that lesson rather than try to fan the flames of discord.

And yes, call that a warning.

[NoMercy]

This is a gaming site true,

I think PD and GD should be removed as well. (will save a lot of poeple of time and arguing.)

For example it will save Switch a ton of time (I think as he stated he is the only Mod which checks these)
and a ton of other poeple just go in there and argue.

We must also keep in mind the younger audience who may come in for a peek or may want to play some games, so we should keep PD, GD and language etc… out of it, that is just my opinion though.