I reported one the other. I actually thought the rule DID apply to Otter.

I'm all for it. You have certain trolls that frequently post ridiculous, indefensible articles silently, hiding behind the author's words. I'd love to see them state why they're posting the articles.

I don't think I've reported any posts, but I've come close so I'll give my two cents.

Let's be blunt, this problem is caused largely by one forum member. I agree that threads will live or die on their own merits, but what you end up with is the tendency for someone to post a boatload of threads because they take little effort in the hopes that something will stick. So we end up with a bunch of crap threads and maybe one or two that might generate interesting discussion. But how many people don't even bother to click on these threads because it's the same person starting them and they know there won't be any discussion?

What about thread bumps? Especially if the thread is months or even years old and the subject matter is only tangentially related?

You mean like how someone bumped the illegal immigrant thread with an article about a latina that killed someone in a car accident, implying she was an illegal immigrant even though she wasn't, and using that as justification of their anti-illegal immigrant stance?

Yeah, that was kind of annoying.

Attempts at "forum domination" has in the past been regarded as outside of the rules excepting instances, for example, where we were encountering informative posts that were the raison d'etre of a particular forum and so were valued by the wider membership.

The member(s) of who you speak would not appear to be of the kind that Other members value/respect so in an extreme case - perhaps if he/she/it posted more than a certain number of essentially empty posts over a short period - there would be a case for reporting/suspending etc under the forum domination doctrine. But that would be something for members in general and the Other mod team in particular to consider.

I don't think it's necessary, as some others have said for the most part the articles speak for themselves.

I have reported a few - I think if a thread is worth starting, the OP obviously has some thoughts about it. Why is it so hard to share them?

I can go to news sites and read articles too - what makes this place different is the discussion about those articles and the OP should be starting things off.

Why not make all the Political forum rules apply to the entire site?

I think such a rule would help prevent DVD Talk from becoming a news aggregator site.

There are cases where the story in the link is newsworthy and speaks for itself ("Bomb explodes at Boston Marathon") so a comment is not necessary, but if you want to be consistent, I'd prefer to have the rule everywhere.

I voted yes.
Don't think there should be topics started with "hey look at this" posts without commenting on why he wants us to look.

Just posting links without saying what the link leads to also drives me nuts.

Probably doesn't matter at this point but I posted no. I avoid the political forum because of this rule. I generally make a comment after posting an article but sometimes, if the article speaks for itself, I don't. What happens when other forum members start nit-picking your opening comments? That you only commented because it was a rule or the comment didn't justify posting the article? How many more reports will be issued because someone didn't like your opening comment?

This feels like an over-reaction to a single forum member's actions. A warning followed by a suspension if it continues should be enough to take control of that situation.

If it's a decent subject/article, the discussion will grow. It doesn't need prodding. Especially in the Otter Forum. It's either latched onto, mocked or forgotten.

Some pieces don't lead themselves to commentary in the first post, or it colors the thread in the wrong direction. Many people will reply to the commentary instead of the actual news story.

So the Caption This Picture posts would become illegal?

It's a good rule for Politics, which is intended for people who want to have an argument. The rest of the forum doesn't need it.

If you start a thread with an article comment on it. I don't think that is too difficult.

Yes, it would be illegal, just like all DVD Talk rules which have been enacted into law.

Still waiting on Obama to overturn the "No threads of an explicit sexual nature" rule.

Agreed. You obviously have an opinion on it, so why not share it?

We need a strong, third political party to keep oppressors like DVD Talk in line.

You'd think so. But a lot of times people hide behind articles in order to avoid having to defend their own opinions. A telling word that is often used in this scenario is "interesting", as in "Here's an interesting article about the Holocaust".

While it seems there is a small majority who believe this should be adopted as a universal rule, it isn't clear cut. And many have brought up reasonable dissenting thoughts.

Is it fair to say though that most would not object that the posting of some commentary in the first post, or the first new post in a bumped thread, being a strong recommendation? And that continued abuse of this recommendation, especially when pertaining to "news" stories and the like, should result in warnings and possible administration action?

I think this is a good suggestion. A one off article/link with no commentary seems to be ok, but folks that all they do is start threads with links and no comment will likely get a warning and continued abuse could lead to thread closure or a suspension. There are maybe a handful of people this would currently apply to.

While we're at it, can we also put in a rule that you can't post articles and continually misrepresent their contents?

Since this was brought up in a thread, I was curious if there has been any official ruling on this yet.

Sorry Tom, I missed this comment. Based on the results of the poll and verbal discussion here I think we would say that we prefer that articles that start a thread have some comment on them, but other than the rule in the politics forum, there will not be a hard global rule for this across all forums. Someone who makes a habit of simply posting articles or links with no comment will be asked to stop. A mistake here or there we're not going to instantly close the thread or suspend someone.

How about just posting a movie poster with no comment? Like maybe 8 new threads in 30 minutes? Is that ok?