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.

:lol:

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.

Do you?

If so - why?

I'm not sure I consider myself a forum regular, but yes, I support the new rules. In my opinion DVDTalk tries very hard to keep the level of discussion here higher than on a lot of other forums, and this was glaringly absent in Politics Talk. The kinds of posts that are now against the rules never would have been acceptable in any of the other forums.

:hscratch:

This is about politics. It's not about 'I need advice on which lawn mower to buy' or when I can get the best deal on a particular DVD.

Obviously there's going to more 'heated' discussions when you're talking about abortion, gay marriages, religion, etc. than there is on the less controversial forums.

I've seem some very heated 'discussions' in the Sports Forum - witness the one about Bonds.

That's an easy out for people that just want to be able to say whatever they want without repercussions. To me, that's even more reason to have these rules in place. If you want a free-for-all atmosphere where you can say anything you want, there are lots of forums that will accomodate you.

Passionate discussion should not preclude respectful discussion.

Where did I say I wanted a free-for-all, you can say anything forum?

I did say there are two many restrictions - generalization is one.

"The Republican Party best represents the interests of the rich in this country" is a generalization. It's true, but it's a generalization nevertheless.

I think there are an awful lot of people who used to contribute to political discussions on DVDTalk (both before and after the birth of the Politics Forum) who no longer visit, or rarely visit, the Politics forum these days. I think some of these people may want rules changes, and their opinions or desires shouldn't be dismissed or even slightly discounted because they no longer visit the Politics forum very often. You make it sound like there are people who are disinterested in political discussion on DVDTalk who want rules changes. The reality is that some of these people, perhaps most or all, may just be disinterested in political discussion as it occurs now on DVDTalk.

After all, there's got to be a reason that they want rules changes...

How does such a generalization help the level of debate?

Look, you're either going to accept that the rules are place to help foster more intelligent (not kneejerk) debate, or you're not. Instead of saying something like the above, why not mention specific people or policies?

Exactly.

The discussion here is tightly moderated in the other forum areas, and politics needed rained in.

Of course the discussion will be passionate, but that doesn't mean they have to devolve into heated arguments involving snide attacks on other members, or bashings of parties etc. that add nothing to the argument.

I applaud the mods for trying to rein the discussion in, and it seems to be going well as far as I can see. Their aren't fewer posts in the forum, and debates seem to be staying more on course.

And I think it's a good idea to try to keep the rules in that forum consistent with the rules of the site as a whole. If people can't discuss politics in a manner consistent with the general forum rules, then perhaps political discussion should just be tossed aside as it certainly isn't a requirment on a DVD site. I view it, and the other off topic forum areas, as a luxury Geoff provides on his DVD site to help foster the community here.

If politics can't meet those standards, and again devolves into the kind of attacks we were seeing all the time before, do away with it IMO. No need to have a forum area that divides the community being built on the site in general.

We're not a community.

You frequent the Sports Forum, don't you? Do you seriously believe that the thread about Bond's alleged steroid use was tightly moderated?

Even though tempers may flare now and again in the Sports Forum, I heardly believe the giving of baseball scores is contentious as discussions of politics, religion, sexual preference, gun control, etc.

I think you'll forget that fact. The politics is, by nature, different in tone from the other forums.

I'm imagining no one reported anything in that thread. Forums are tightly moderated when things get reported to the mods, but I'll admit the sports forum is another that probably needs reined in a bit.

At any rate, quit while you're ahead. This just comes across as sour grapes from someone who got exiled.

I've said over & over the same thing before I was exiled.

I have a simple solution for those who can't stand the heat of the Politics Forum - get out of the kitchen.

Of course the issue is that this is a private forum and the administration doesn't what certain kinds of "heat" in there, so members will have to adapt.

I don't see the big deal since the rules don't dissallow heated debate, but rather dissallow the type of inflammatory remarks, pointless one liners, etc. that add nothing to the debate.

It should only be an issue for people who can't articulate their opinions in a reasonably thoughtful and respectful manner.

Of course not. But people should "dilute" the presentation of their opinions so they are stated in a manner that isn't attacking another member, or just a troll post flame baiting people by making gross over-generalizations.


I think responses like that should be banned, just because they piss people off AND add absolutely nothing to the debate.

If you disagree with someone, craft an intelligent, respectul response that deliniates why you disagree with them. Don't just post some dumbass one liner (or in this case one word) response expressing your disagreement and dismissing the other persons opinion in a rude, offhand manner. It adds nothing to the debate.

I think this bears repeating.

A response doesn't have to be lengthy to be of substantive value, and I agree many of the longer responses are pointless.

But you're arguing in extremes, as if they only response options were "hogwash!" or long, rambling posts.

One can disagree, and state why they disagree in a respectful manner, in only a few sentences. In fact, that describes many of the best posts in the forum.

People shouldn't ramble needlessly in lengthy posts, but there's also no reason for even bothering to post something if you're just going to dismiss someone's opinion with a one liner. If you can't take the time to explain why you disagree, don't respond to the post at all. Just my two cents on the matter. :notroll:

And I realize some posts really can't be responded to with more than "hogwash!" or "bullshit!" I simply ignore those posts and don't give them the satisfaction of a response. :notrolls:

no, generalizing millions of people with one line is fluff. the adults who participate in the forum should have the intelligence to put forth an argument that doesn't require generalizations of millions of people to one characteristic

You're taking this far too seriously.

You don't think there is room for levity on the forum?

Apparently you don't if your above post is any indication.

:up:
I heard people who complained about the forum since things are not going the way they wanted to hear.
"This is the reason why I don't wander here anymore."

Well BFD, don't like what you hear or don't agree with it, leave. Last I know, the forum is NOT bend to your party affiliation. It's a discussion board, not Republican Talk or Democrat Talk.

Straw man. I haven't seen one person, in this thread or elsewhere, say that they weren't reading the forum because it leaned one way or the other politically.

Since it seems pretty out in the open, I'm wondering if our local & vocal Libertarian crew was offended by C-Man's comments.

C-Man, I think your posts that are more along the lines of levity, would better accepted if you added ;) and :) versus :lol: or rotfl

Just my 2 cents