This is merely taking the crowd's temperature and is in NO WAY indicative of any changes being considered.

I've honestly not seen much of a noticeable change.

It's getting better again. But I know you mean worse when I say better. With the exception of a few of us who don't cower to threats, most got to afraid to speak their minds and tell others to go fck themselves when needed. Getting better again in that fewer are pissing themselves and giving the ol' fck you when the felling strikes.

I think it was a good idea, just terribly executed when put into practice. Not that I am suggesting going back to the old ways. However currently, the way rule violations are handled is often confusing and in a lot of cases contradictory. I think amendments are needed to improve the system. Just don't trash the system because of the problems that come with it.

Ah yes, just like government. Create a problem, implement a solution to created problem, grow the original solution. Claim the problem is getting better while of course it's getting worse.

I said considerably better and I mean it. Fewer threads that devolve into name screaming matches, passionate? Yes, schoolyard? Not as much.
More people from both sides offering "offensive", or however one would care to characterize them, opinions and being open and honest in disagreement. That's a good thing.

Lot's of good stuff gets thrown about around here, some I agree with, much I don't, but generally it's thoughtful. The mind-numbing idiocy we can all see is expected as well, but we know who the source(s) will be, and it's always good for a little comic relief.

It's pretty clear there is an educated (by book or by life, oft times both) group here, otherwise I don't know why anyone would bother to check in day after day. I'm not sure how it' compared to the many years passed, as I'm still a relative n00b compared to a lot, but it seems pretty chill to me.

Why? It's not young 'uns training panties a-bunchin again, is it?

We've lost some good posters, IMO, on all sides, though there have been some decent discussions in the last couple of weeks where we have been able to get bast the race baiting and discuss actual solutions. Mach and UCF have become better opposition posters. I don't think Torch should be banned based on PMs to mods when the AUP strictly says to take mod issues to PM... JMO. I also don't think most of the posters that got caught up in the "nulclear" ban should have. I feel some on the right were banned just because they also post on another board and some on the left were banned for no reason at all just to have the appearance of "balance".

I think it would get better overall if people learned how to use the ignore feature.

The old Spin Room was more prone to groupthink and ad-hominems. Today it's about better quality discussion. I have no idea why people have issues with the rules. Really, if you act like an ass, you will be treated like one. Remember that and no one SHOULD have any issues. Forcing people to up their game to show more data or to better flesh out their views is a GOOD thing.

(05-04-2015 07:20 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  I think it would get better overall if people learned how to use the ignore feature.

That would have fixed all the complaints that caused all the changes. But they wont use it. They would rather get offended by anonymous words on the net and complain.

(05-04-2015 07:56 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 07:20 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  I think it would get better overall if people learned how to use the ignore feature.

That would have fixed all the complaints that caused all the changes. But they wont use it. They would rather get offended by anonymous words on the net and complain.

That's the other point about this. Why do people get offended in the first place? It's a discussion forum, not a cheerleading one...

I'm voting "present" here.

Some people may be unhappy. Some people just live that way while others may be situationally unhappy because of something having to do with one of the mods. Doesn't matter. Ultimately the goal state is to have civil conversation.

The goal was to deflect from gts reading private messages.

It's a push

The two rooms have sort of merged.

(05-04-2015 07:25 AM)miko33 Wrote:  The old Spin Room was more prone to groupthink and ad-hominems. Today it's about better quality discussion. I have no idea why people have issues with the rules. Really, if you act like an ass, you will be treated like one. Remember that and no one SHOULD have any issues. Forcing people to up their game to show more data or to better flesh out their views is a GOOD thing.

We do need to keep in mind that this is not some sort of academic exercise here. This is an online forum.

I know there are people who would like to pretend that is their world, but it isn't and this is a place for casual conversation.

(05-04-2015 08:57 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  It's a push

The two rooms have sort of merged.

I tend to agree. I selected that it has gotten a little better...mainly because the change did scare off a few of the problems.

Well one of the things I've seen is the name calling in the main room has went down.. There are still issues though. I wouldn't call it a vast improvement nor would I be championing the way things are going.

Here's a thought and it's only a thought.. But I would be in favor of a rotating mod system. Get several people and every month rotate in and out.. I feel that some of the mods here have gotten either burned out or too invested.. that's just my thoughts.

(05-04-2015 09:08 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  We do need to keep in mind that this is not some sort of academic exercise here. This is an online forum.

I know there are people who would like to pretend that is their world, but it isn't and this is a place for casual conversation.

I don't think people are trying to make this forum an extension of the university experience. What I saw in the past was the classic case of people feeling enboldened to act like a verbal savage because they hid behind the anonymity of a username and a keyboard. Then there is another thing to consider - why is it a bad thing for people who may not have experienced spending time in a university setting not being given a small taste of what it's like to have to defend ideas critically? Even here I'd bet money that almost every person posting on this forum has a bachelor degree and I'll bet a significant percentage of people have an advanced degree be it a law degree (JD?), MBA, masters sci in engineering, etc.

Unless I'm sorely mistaken, the predominant group of posters on this board, and the type of poster who would be attracted to this type of board, would be those who have at a minimum a bachelor of science from a university.

No offense intended to those who may have stopped at the associates level, stopped pursuing a 4 year degree or stopped after HS. The point I'm trying to make is that the type of people who tend to come to these types of forums are the same type who are not strangers to defending ideas with critical thought and "showing their work".

(05-04-2015 09:18 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 09:08 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  We do need to keep in mind that this is not some sort of academic exercise here. This is an online forum.

I know there are people who would like to pretend that is their world, but it isn't and this is a place for casual conversation.

I don't think people are trying to make this forum an extension of the university experience. What I saw in the past was the classic case of people feeling enboldened to act like a verbal savage because they hid behind the anonymity of a username and a keyboard. Then there is another thing to consider - why is it a bad thing for people who may not have experienced spending time in a university setting not being given a small taste of what it's like to have to defend ideas critically? Even here I'd bet money that almost every person posting on this forum has a bachelor degree and I'll bet a significant percentage of people have an advanced degree be it a law degree (JD?), MBA, masters sci in engineering, etc.

Unless I'm sorely mistaken, the predominant group of posters on this board, and the type of poster who would be attracted to this type of board, would be those who have at a minimum a bachelor of science from a university.

No offense intended to those who may have stopped at the associates level, stopped pursuing a 4 year degree or stopped after HS. The point I'm trying to make is that the type of people who tend to come to these types of forums are the same type who are not strangers to defending ideas with critical thought and "showing their work".

I don't disagree with anything that you have said, even though I think the level of education here is irrelevant.

My point is that on the spectrum from drooling ad hominem to full legal citations the new shift is too far to the ladder in my opinion.

This is, after all, a place for casual conversation. As such, it is up to each individual poster to discern between **** information and correct information.