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

[Charles Anthony]

If you Report a post and you expect moderator intervention, please offer a recommendation of precisely what that intervention should be --- in your opinion.

If you Report a post and you want an explanation, start by explaining yourself first. Do not just say: "This is trolling OBVIOUSLY!!! DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!" but rather say: "This is obviously trolling because....." and give us something to discuss with you through the PM function.

"We define "trolling" as a message that serves no constructive purpose and is likely to cause offence or arguments". What is not clear from that rule definition is interpretation and action-remedy.

It does not have to be clear. None of that is a concern for people who follow the forum rules.

If I can understand the message in a post and if I believe it is on-topic-enough, then the post fails the "no constructive purpose" test and I deem it to NOT be trolling.

If you can not understand the message in a post or if you can not understand how it is on topic, then I would expect you to politely ask for an explanation in the public forum rather than to seek censorship privately from a moderator.

If you wish to censor a fellow member, then it behooves you to justify YOUR "subjective blah blah" blah to the moderating team. Nobody owes YOU an explanation why a fellow member is NOT censored, for goodness' sake. For instance: "This is obviously trolling because I asked troll to explain his off-topic inflammatory comment and he did not. He just repeated his flame-bait comment. I asked him a 2nd time POLITELY and he repeated it over and over again without explanation. Thus, I believe troll should be permanentaly banned from the forums due to posting an off-topic comment." or something like that.

I've recently asked (twice) for your subjective (supreme ruling) definition of what a troll/trolling is. You must have missed my first request.

Your question was answered the 1st time and linked the 2nd time. If you ask again, your actions would be deemed to be trolling by myself --- mild trolling and easy enough to ignore but trolling nevertheless.

please advise on your "supreme ruling subjective" definition, interpretation. and action-remedy of/for a troll/trolling - thanks in advance

The advice is the same: Follow the forum rules and you will do fine. Ignore those who do not follow the rules and be proud of the discipline you bring to the forum.

This statement shows you really haven't listened to much of what the "whiners" have been saying. Sigh.

What I am getting at is that my own political views on most matters are more offensive and shocking than anything your "trolls" may serve up. On top of that, I have no interest in defending my views. Thus, if I was compelled to participate in the discussions, I would come across as trolling.

I am also suggesting that occasionally charges of "trolling" are really just confused requests for censorship at their core. In other words, I have a better sense of the partisanship than you do.

[jbg]

Do not just say: "This is trolling OBVIOUSLY!!!" but rather say: "This is obviously trolling because....." and give us something to discuss with you through the PM function. With all due respect, many of you guys label something as "trolling" because you fail to understand the message of your alleged-troll and sometimes, you fail to want understand.

If something is obviously improper, such as an ad for "Russian sex fiends" or "Persian handbags" do I really have to explain the problem?

Edited June 26, 2014 by jbg

[cybercoma]

Spam and trolling are different.

[Bob Macadoo]

My own political views on most matters are more offensive and shocking than anything your "trolls" may serve up. On top of that, I have no interest in defending my views. Thus, if I was compelled to participate in the discussions, I would come across as trolling.I am also suggesting that occasionally charges of "trolling" are really just confused requests for censorship at their core. In other words, I have a better sense of the partisanship than you do.

Offensive views do not a troll make. Not defending those views doesn't count either....just a poor debater.

Occasionally some false troll calls may appear but they pale in comparison to true calls......IMO shrugging your shoulders closing your eyes and chanting "sub-ject-ive, sub-ject-ive" does not a moderator make either.

Finally the above is not proof you have any better sense of partisanship other than the fact I'm told you are the Almighty around here and cannot be questioned.

[bush_cheney2004]

The force is strong with this one......

Edited June 26, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

If I can understand the message in a post and if I believe it is on-topic-enough, then the post fails the "no constructive purpose" test and I deem it to NOT be trolling.

If you can not understand the message in a post or if you can not understand how it is on topic, then I would expect you to politely ask for an explanation in the public forum rather than to seek censorship privately from a moderator.

well, there ya go! According to you, asking you to deal with trolls/trolling is... asking you to be the conduit for "censorship"!!!

plain and simple: explain why my posting this was:

- per your notification/1 week suspension outcome, both trolling (on my part) and a personal attack?

- how is quoting another member's exact words, verbatim, a personal attack... how is it trolling?

- more pointedly, what on-topic and constructive purpose attachment do you presume to associate with the 30 quotes I strung together?

- how is the content of those 30 quotes... constructive?... on-topic?

- how are those 30 quotes not a representation of trolling?

note: that 30 quote example is but one of many... many... that could be easily put together from the posting history of the same guy.

.

[Argus]

What I am getting at is that my own political views on most matters are more offensive and shocking than anything your "trolls" may serve up.

Do you feel, as a self-confessed radical, that you have the ability to properly assess the intentions of posters and whether what they post ought to be punishable?

In particular, you consider your views to be highly offensive, presumably to the mainstream. Would that not make mainstream views highly offensive to you? And if so, just how outrageous would you find views on the other side of the mainstream fence? You have, for example, often used the word "outageous" in describing my views, even views I don't regard to be particularly shocking or far from mainstream opinion.

[Charles Anthony]

Do you feel, as a self-confessed radical, that you have the ability to properly assess the intentions of posters and whether what they post ought to be punishable?

I am not sure my personal philosophy has any bearing in that regard but it might. However, I see you guys primarily as creative writers. Your opinions are largely secondary.

As a reader of the forums, I am interested in learning new information about current affairs. I learn from all you guys. The arguments between you guys get in the way of that but slogging through your nitter-nattering is worth it most of the time because you all share different facts and sources and experiences.

Secondly, I appreciate good creative writing. Some of you guys are exciting to read because of your debating skills and or your humor.

In short, I do not care about your opinions much the way you guys do. I care that your opinions are expressed clearly more than I care about judging your opinions.

In particular, you consider your views to be highly offensive, presumably to the mainstream. Would that not make mainstream views highly offensive to you?

Yes.

And if so, just how outrageous would you find views on the other side of the mainstream fence?

Put it this way: If my kids grew up to hold "outrageous mainstream views" such as many of you do then I would consider myself to have failed as a father. I used to hold most of your "views" at one point. My own father did too.

However, my opinions of other people's opinions are irrelevent. I find it exciting to discover different opinions on the same matters.

You have, for example, often used the word "outageous" in describing my views, even views I don't regard to be particularly shocking or far from mainstream opinion.

Indeed, I have. You have recently made me re-adjust my tolerance level more towards yours.

Offensive views do not a troll make.

That is not what I said.

I said that I would be perceived to be trolling. I did not say that I would be trolling.

If something is obviously improper, such as an ad for "Russian sex fiends" or "Persian handbags" do I really have to explain the problem?

Nobody ever does now. I think we can cope either way.

How about you? Can you report that stuff with a clear conscience without making sure those ads are improper?

[Bob Macadoo]

The above is probably the most informative submission I've read from you. Let the processing continue.....

[monty16]

The trouble is, the ugly unsubstantiated charge of trolling will again rear it's ugly head and shame on any moderator who is taken in by it.

And to those who stoop to making the charge, we should all understand that it's your last desperate attempt to silence that which hurts your ears.

Edited June 29, 2014 by monty16

[Citizen]

I would like to see the forum listed on Tapatalk

[Bonam]

One improvement would be not to have 15 threads about Israel/Palestine every time there's another skirmish there. One or two threads would be more than plenty. Perhaps some thread merging is in order?

[bush_cheney2004]

OK....but if Israel "nukes" Gaza, that may deserve its own thread !

[jbg]

OK....but if Israel "nukes" Gaza, that may deserve its own thread !

What about a thread I'm dying to start? About how Canada controls the airspace and military access to Angle Country (link explaining Angle Country) and Point Roberts (link explaining Point Roberts). These are Western versions of "open-air prisons" (link) of the type that many say Israel maintains in Gaza, and Nasser's Egypt previously maintained there.

[cybercoma]

One improvement would be not to have 15 threads about Israel/Palestine every time there's another skirmish there. One or two threads would be more than plenty. Perhaps some thread merging is in order?

If you message Charles and let him know what threads you think will be merged, he probably has no problem doing it. You need to provide him the links to all the threads and give him a brief explanation about how they're all the same topic. I'm sure most people on the forum wouldn't mind a single thread for the ongoing fighting in Gaza right now. There certainly doesn't need to be as many threads as there are.

[guyser]

What about a thread I'm dying to start? About how Canada controls the airspace and military access to Angle Country (link explaining Angle Country) and Point Roberts (link explaining Point Roberts).

Build a ferry dock and get a boat.

Youre welcome. Anything else?

[jbg]

What about a thread I'm dying to start? About how Canada controls the airspace and military access to Angle Country (link explaining Angle Country) and Point Roberts (link explaining Point Roberts). These are Western versions of "open-air prisons" (link) of the type that many say Israel maintains in Gaza, and Nasser's Egypt previously maintained there.

Build a ferry dock and get a boat.

Youre welcome. Anything else?

That would be a border violation. I went to the opera house straddling the Derby, Vermont and Stanstead, Quebec border. One must leave via the country from which they arrived. Thus, the existence of the border effectively surrounding these towns converts them into Gaza-style open air prisons.

[guyser]

That would be a border violation.

No....ferry from Pt ROberts to mainland USA.

Now your border guards and TSA are full of idiots but they should know that PT Roberts is US soil.....what a sec.....maybe not, afterall thye didnt recognize a DC drivers licence , threw it back at the guy and said " I want US drivers licence."

Edited July 31, 2014 by Guyser2

[WestCoastRunner]

When a status update is posted that is related to a very active thread, I would like to see it merged into the thread. Who wants to post in several different places that relate to the same issue. It seems to degrade the quality of this forum. Am I wrong with my thoughts on this? If someone can tell me the advantages of doing this, then please do!

[WestCoastRunner]

To just clarify my position. I can understand when a thread isn't active that someone may want to post a status update, but clearly when there is a 'very' active thread, these updates should be merged into the thread.

[sharkman]

Well, in the Ferguson Unrest thread, you posted a total of 7 times in the space of a couple of hours this evening. It might help you to spread out your contributions a little if you have to enter a separate conversation in the status updates thread. After all, people in a group may have 2 or 3 conversations going at the same time.

[WestCoastRunner]

Well, in the Ferguson Unrest thread, you posted a total of 7 times in the space of a couple of hours this evening. It might help you to spread out your contributions a little if you have to enter a separate conversation in the status updates thread. After all, people in a group may have 2 or 3 conversations going at the same time.

This makes no sense. Can you further explain it?

[WestCoastRunner]

I am learning how to roll with the punches and how to not recommend suggestions for making this forum a better place for everyone including new folks when I know they will be ignored.

[WestCoastRunner]

It's no wonder there is a degradation in status updates when there is no effort to improve the quality of this forum regardless of the suggestions/complaints that have been given time and time again. I have only been here perhaps 6 months and I have seen many suggestions/improvements contributed to but I have seen nothing to discuss or implement those suggestions. I recall there was a topic asking for new categories. I suggested a few relating to women, but I have yet to see anything implemented or even anything acknowledging my suggestions. Does anyone here ever read the suggestions that are put forth?

[cybercoma]

Nah. They just take them so you can feel like you're contributing.