Yep, eXtremely Mysterious.

Hey now, I had to take a vacation a few weeks ago for calling another member a smartass. Is that a slap to you?
BTW, I don't mind being called a member of the Three Stooges. I like that in fact. You did not hear a complaint from me.

I never saw the suspension. At the time all I saw was the usual, "Hey, now Myster X that isn't good." Without any editing to your text or anything.

Kind of like the latest one:http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showpost.ph...8&postcount=18

Also, I never called you a Stooge. I wouldn't stoop that low.

Here's the latest and greatest:

http://forums.dvdtalk.com/showpost.p...42&postcount=7

Come on.

When facts presented as "worthless" it's a signal to me that I don't need to return to that sub-forum.

And this is one of, if not the single, biggest problems in that forum. I refer to you potentially not returning. Why let one stupid remark from one or two posters force you to not return, or to not engage in the reasoned manner in which you wish to? Why not ignore those comments and move on? Or wait for others to respond in a more appropriate manner? I realise that not all posts/topics will generate that type of activity and response, even if they should, but it doesn't deter me from trying again at another time. Force the issue, force the discussion so those types of comments don't win out.


By the way, I completely agree with your posts in that thread, so I really didn't have much to offer. Sorry.

Because there will always be someone whose idea of a response is the equivalent of "Yeah, so?" or "Nuh-uh!". And if that were just 'one stupid remark', then yes, it could be ignored and hopefully drowned in actual somewhat meaningful activity/response; however, very rarely is it only one response. I've seen entire threads where the 'other side' was represented by the 'net equivalent of "Your momma". Now, to an extent that does signify there's not enough activity to keep the thread going, but in the more common cases, there's enough signal to make it worth while, but the noise keeps cropping up.

And the first person has gotten the political exile for this post.


Which is a perfect example of the one line, party bashing generalization that add nothing to discussions.

I think we'll see the rule mainly used for clear violations of the rules like that post, that most will have no problem with it, and the forum will be much better for it.

I don't think it's going to stifle debate etc. like some of the naysayers believe. It's just going to weed out the trolls.

Codswallop!

From : Political Forum Moderator @ DVD Talk Forum <[email protected]>
Sent : Tuesday, April 4, 2006 3:03 PM
To : [email protected]
Subject : Exile from the Political Forum

This is a message from Political Forum Moderator at DVD Talk Forum (
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/index.php ). The DVD Talk Forum owners cannot accept
any responsibility for the contents of the email.

To email Political Forum Moderator, you can use this online form:
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/sendmessage...r&userid=69909

OR, by email:
mailto:[email protected]

This is the message:

Your posts

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...15#post6901015
http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...13#post6901413

were in violation of the Politics and World Events forum rules (found here:
http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=460813).

You are barred from posting in the Politics and World Events forum for one week.
Just as with suspensions, if you sign up with a new account or in any manner use
another account in order to circumvent this exile you will be banned from DVD
Talk.

I have to say those are some pretty mild posts considering some of the rough-and-tumble that goes on in the political forum.

BTW, please keep the summer_wind liberal forum thread open, and least until his head a-splode.

Looks like the new rules are having a positive effect already.

Not suprising to see outrage about the new rules from folks that like to say stuff to the effect of "liberals = terrorists".

Anyway, whether said in jest or not, blanket comments don't promote discussion and don't help the atmosphere. It just leads to petty sniping and insults.

A little moderation can hopefully resolve this without banning folks completely, and make the forum more useful to read. I don't need to spend 20 minutes sifting through "terrorist! pinkie commie!" and "fascist dictator!" namecalling.

OK, I don't know exactly in which thread this belongs, but it surely belongs somewhere:

<img src = "http://users.ameritech.net/cinemastuff/000fgq8z.png"></img>

You would think that.

Semi-on topic: I'd like to see people who throw bombs outside of the Politics forum be dealt with, especially as it's usually the same guy doing it:

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread....08#post6813308
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread....30#post6896530

wm lopez isn't attacking others though, so it doesn't really fit (unless your talking about the responses to his/her comments).

The poster is a broken record and it does get old. Been on my ignore list for ages. More should do the same and hopefully the posts will stop.

I get your point Josh, but my point is: why should habitual threadcrapping be met with 'put them on your ignore list' rather than administrative action? I've reported his posts in the past, and he could have been warned without us knowing about it, but he keeps on doing the same shit, so obviously the message isn't getting through.

Maybe this wasn't the proper thread for my comment, but it seems like the administration is trying to cut down, not only on personal attacks, but also blanket statements. Why should he get a pass just because he's doing it ine every forum but Politics?

I think people need to start using the ignore button or take a break from the forum in general. It's worked wonders for me when some things annoyed me. I've been here since 2000 and I think I've reported about 5 posts to the mods in that time period. These rules make it pretty easy to get people kicked from the forum.

Problems with the Politics Forum as I see it:

Too much interference by the moderators in threads. As I've said before, I believe folks take this forum way too seriously.

A little more political idealogical balance among the moderators if they are going to 'actively moderate' would be of some benefit.

It's amusing at times to see folks complaining about the lack of serious responses and asking for serious discussions. Often times, IMO, those 'serious discussions' are merely very lengthy posts with a few two-bit words thrown in for good measure and really saying very little - quite often, nothing.

I have to say in the week or so the new rules have been in place, the political forum has already improved. And consequently I'm posting more there now.

Discussion seem more on track, the mods are doing a good job of enforcing the new rules, and people seem to have for the most part adapted their posting to stay away from attacks and gross generalizations.

Since the new rules are in place I've almost completely avoided the place. But I guess some might see that as a good thing.

I've been moving away from the forum as well unfortunately. I don't think I've posted as much in other in a long time.

It, at least it seems to me, that the rules come about because people who rarely visit the Politics Forum are not happy with what's happening in the forum. They want rule changes; and, 'management' seems to oblige.

That's just not true. There have been many forum regulars who wanted to see a change.