What improvements would you like to see in this discussion forum?

The_Squid · April 27, 2014

You can see your warnings when you open your profile, I believe.

I know that... I was wondering how/why Betsy thinks that my offending posts weren't given warnings/demerits/suspension by the mods... She insists I should have been punished for them... How did she know that I wasn't?

jbg · April 27, 2014

I know that... I was wondering how/why Betsy thinks that my offending posts weren't given warnings/demerits/suspension by the mods... She insists I should have been punished for them... How did she know that I wasn't?

She, like G-d himself, is all-knowing </sarcasm>.

Argus · April 29, 2014

I know that... I was wondering how/why Betsy thinks that my offending posts weren't given warnings/demerits/suspension by the mods... She insists I should have been punished for them... How did she know that I wasn't?

When you report your neighbor's crime to the police, but nothing visible happens, it's going to be your assumption the police don't care. It might even be your assumption that since the police didn't do anything about it (as far as you can see) it's all right for you to behave in the same manner.

This is what happens through lack of communication. Perhaps if the person complaining got a reply to their complaint. For example, some time back people started using the term CONS to describe the conservatives. Since I'd recently taken heat for using the LIEBERALS term (and didn't want to get suspended) I didn't want to reply in kind, so I complained about it instead. I've X'd out the member's name (former member) but as you can see, instead my wondering if anything was even done with my complaint, Greg sent a brief response.

Thanks for pointing that out. I've notified XXXXX that CON servative isn't allowed in this forum.

Cheers,

Greg

Admin

Edited April 29, 2014 by Argus

jbg · April 30, 2014

Since I'd recently taken heat for using the LIEBERALS term (and didn't want to get suspended) I didn't want to reply in kind, so I complained about it instead. I've X'd out the member's name (former member) but as you can see, instead my wondering if anything was even done with my complaint, Greg sent a brief response.

I received a communication about that term about a month after I started here.

Charles Anthony · May 10, 2014

I think it would be a good idea to be more accomodating to the posting of images and perhaps this could be achieved technically without requiring extra work on the part of the poster.

My thought is to have all images appear in a small thumbnail or perhaps an auto-generated link that only says [iMAGE] in a post so that it can not distract nor distort the display of a thread. If a reader wishes to view the image in full detail, then the reader may click on it. The image would appear in full form to only the reader.

This is how many social media sites now deal with images.

Charles Anthony · May 25, 2014

I believe we should aim to combine and merge concurrent uninterrupted post-streams (particularly a slew of one-lineers) by the same author. Here is an example of what I mean. Posts #519 to #528 in the Pro/Con?Life thread would hypothetically be combined thusly into 1 single post:

It's probable smart for any politician in Canada to just be quiet about being a Christian until challenged on it. Then he's wise to pretend to be a Chritian. To me it's pretty obvious that Justin Trudeau is far too intelligent to truly believe in sky fairies and so he needs to fake it. Christians are easily convinced and the rest of us surely won't hold it against him.
What you're saying is that you believe Justin Trudeau is lying through his teeth about his Catholicism, making a sham of his visits to churches. Perhaps your standards of morality are so low that you accept blatant dishonesty without issue but many people, religious or not, would take issue with that level of phonyness.

I don't want to short change you, so let me be clear that I understand your argument and I'm not claiming that you're wrong.
Don't you think, then, that Justin Trudeau ought to know that instead of claiming he's defending a Charter right?

In America, a woman needs to see a doctor and then wait three days before proceeding with her abortion. If she doesn't then she could be found guilty of murder and be executed for that crime.
American laws are a patchwork because they're mostly state laws. That you don't understand isn't surprising since everything you have to say about the US seems to be based on blind ideological extremism.

See this is what we don't really know......just b/c John Mackay or Jim Karygiannis feel left out in the cold doesn't make it so. He may have built a significant (not total) consensus in the caucus but felt to go public quickly so to be "open" before nominations went too far. I think he could've played the media game better but the ideal behind it was appropriate.
You don't think it might have been a good idea to at least inform his caucus before going to the press? Or maybe that that is an indication of how much respect he has for them?

I think the need for abortion should be reduced. Men should have to wear a dick ring that cries like a baby everytime they get an erection, to remind them that their equipment should be wrapped up unless they want to pay child support for 18+ years.

Men shouldn't be allowed to vote on abortion. It's none of their business.

If men weren't required by law to support the baby a woman decides to have, for the next 18 years you might have a point.

So I guess....the anti-abortion folks just want to restrict a womans choice, how misogynistic of you !
Are you saying the Swedish, Finnish, Norwegian, Danish, Belgian, Dutch, French, German, Italian, Spanish, British, Australian, Austrian, Icelandic etc governments are all misogynistic?

Some people's views on abortion are certainly more relevant than those of some other people. When old men rant against abortion it is difficult to resist the temptation to ask why does the issue bother them so much as it most certainly doesn't personally concern them.
Are you concerned about people starving in Africa? About brutalities in Syria? About Russian agressiveness in Europe? About slavery, pollution, corruption and other issues beyond the borders of your country? None of that personally concerns you.

What do you all think of that?

Big Guy · May 25, 2014

I believe we should aim to combine and merge concurrent uninterrupted post-streams (particularly a slew of one-lineers) by the same author. Here is an example of what I mean. Posts #519 to #528 in the Pro/Con?Life thread would hypothetically be combined thusly into 1 single post:

What do you all think of that?

It would certainly condense the replies. But - there is a tendency for participants to quickly scan a thread and jump over the ones that appear too long winded or too long. I am not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing.

Personally, I would jump over the sample post that at quick glance appears that it will take too long to entertain.

Edited May 25, 2014 by Big Guy

The_Squid · May 25, 2014

The poster can do that themselves if they simply hit the multiple reply button. You don't need to waste your time merging all these posts.... just give demerits/warnings for the really flagrant ones.

Smallc · May 26, 2014

This forum is almost impossible to use on a phone. Having to combine everything would make it that much harder.

cybercoma · May 26, 2014

I agree with SmallC and more often than not a person reads a reply, then responds to it. It's a serious pain regardless which platform to flag each post you want to respond, then go back to them in the editor to respond. And to what end? Less "clutter"? We're having organic discussion here, so I don't see that much benefit to it.

Smallc · May 26, 2014

I agree cyber. I'll lose the response in my head if I wait.

jbg · May 26, 2014

I believe we should aim to combine and merge concurrent uninterrupted post-streams (particularly a slew of one-lineers) by the same author. Here is an example of what I mean. Posts #519 to #528 in the Pro/Con?Life thread would hypothetically be combined thusly into 1 single post:

*****************

What do you all think of that?

Excellent idea but wouldn't you and Greg be due some kind of pay for that kind of labor?

Charles Anthony · May 26, 2014

No.

Argus · May 27, 2014

I believe we should aim to combine and merge concurrent uninterrupted post-streams (particularly a slew of one-lineers) by the same author. Here is an example of what I mean. Posts #519 to #528 in the Pro/Con?Life thread would hypothetically be combined thusly into 1 single post:

What do you all think of that?

The problem with this is that all the different people I replied to in that one "post" are going to delete everything but their part, and reply separately to that, thus producing a whole bunch of separate posts once again, ie, immeidately tearing apart your combined post. Are you going to combine all those separate posts from different people replying to me into one big post again? And wouldn't you have to wait until everyone had replied? What if someone fails to reply? How long would you wait?

Edited May 27, 2014 by Argus

cybercoma · May 27, 2014

It also makes it a pain in the ass to edit the quote when replying to someone who makes a huge combined post like that.

WestCoastRunner · May 31, 2014

I have been targeted in chat with quite derogatory comments. Should the standards held in the message boards be applied in chat as well?

jbg · May 31, 2014

I have been targeted in chat with quite derogatory comments. Should the standards held in the message boards be applied in chat as well?

Copy and paste them, and then report.

Michael Hardner · May 31, 2014

I'm not sure if Chat is considered moderated or not.

Charles Anthony · May 31, 2014

Should the standards held in the message boards be applied in chat as well?

I do not think that is practical due to the fleeting presence of the text.

However, if you want that, sure. Do as JBG said above and we can look into it. Just make sure your report answers the question: "What do you want us to do about it?"

Argus · May 31, 2014

I have been targeted in chat with quite derogatory comments. Should the standards held in the message boards be applied in chat as well?

People go into chat?!

WWWTT · June 3, 2014

I have been targeted in chat with quite derogatory comments. Should the standards held in the message boards be applied in chat as well?

Are you suggesting adding a report feature there?

If not, than maybe your concern is better in a more appropriate thread?

WWWTT

WWWTT · June 3, 2014

People go into chat?!

I only go when Charles Anthony is there.

It's actually pretty good!

Last time I got to take jabs at the guy for being a smoker

WWWTT

Charles Anthony · June 11, 2014

I believe this long-standing rule should be respected and enforced.

Multiple Member Accounts

Any member who opens more than one member account -- for whatever reason -- will be immediately banned from the forums.

Internet Proxies

The use of internet proxies to bypass a suspension or a ban is forbidden. Members who choose to use a proxy to access the Mapleleafweb risk suspension and or banning.

At the bottom of the Forum Rules And Guidelines.