Negative posters.

[OREZ]

There is an ignore function, if you don't like certain posters.

I've considered using that but I came to this conclusion. If I have to do that, I'm basically burying my head in the sand, pretending the forum is more civil than it is. If I need to take that measure I think it doesn't really make sense to participate at all.

[OREZ]

The 'silly drama' is what fuels forum life.

I really hope you're wrong about that.

[LordEd]

It is a very fine balance, moderating a board. Moderate too much and you'll kill it, moderate too little and you'll have chaos.

Everything in moderation, including moderation.

... I'll go ban myself now.

[Jo]

I really hope you're wrong about that.

Well, I'm not. Lots of other things go on in a forum, lots of good topics, bad topic, whatever. But the silly drama is the draw, like it or not. That's not why said drama stays in place, though - we do try to keep things running without too much drama - but like it or not, the drama gets the interest.

Read the rest of my post from which you quoted. Remember the Riposte & Parry? If the whole board was like that, ie no personal attacks, no off-topic remarks, this board would dry up and die within a month. Just as the Ripostte & Parry did.

[Tacklewasher]

There is an ignore function, if you don't like certain posters.

I've considered using that but I came to this conclusion. If I have to do that, I'm basically burying my head in the sand, pretending the forum is more civil than it is. If I need to take that measure I think it doesn't really make sense to participate at all.

I disagree. It is saying nothing more than you don't like certain posters. It doesn't speak to the whole board until your ignore list starts to really grow.

Now to figure out how to put myself on ignore....

[GordonH]

^^^ I don't use either ignore function or the foe list, just causes holes within threads. As I see it everyone is entitled to his/or her opinion, one can agree or disagree. Pretty simple

[Tacklewasher]

^^^ I don't use either ignore function or the foe list, just causes holes within threads. As I see it everyone is entitled to his/or her opinion, one can agree or disagree. Pretty simple

That's fine for you. I don't see you calling for, what is effectively, more censorship. For Orez, it would seem like a better solution then expecting everyone to live up to their standard of posting.

[flamingfingers]

I don't use the "Ignore" feature at all. Posters who have proven to me to be numbnutz I mainly scroll through maybe skimming a few lines here and there. Then I get to read the responses if there are any and maybe make a post myself..... Just sayin'.

[GordonH]

^^^ Poster follows the rules of forum no need to censor. Unfortunately many don't & post is removed.

[FSmith59]

Lots of other things go on in a forum, lots of good topics, bad topic, whatever. But the silly drama is the draw, like it or not. That's not why said drama stays in place, though - we do try to keep things running without too much drama - but like it or not, the drama gets the interest.

Read the rest of my post from which you quoted. Remember the Riposte & Parry? If the whole board was like that, ie no personal attacks, no off-topic remarks, this board would dry up and die within a month. Just as the Ripostte & Parry did.

As much as I hate it, you are 100% correct.

One needs to just look at post counts on certain topics. There is only one or two being the devil's advocate (trolling), but those topics end up having hundreds of replies.

[the truth]

And if you get rid of that edge, the forum will die as it will no longer be interesting. Just take a look at the number of views each threads get, the most controversial threads are by far the most popular.

I do understand what your base point is, as it can very tiring, and it can be problematic if you become emotionally invested. Remember you don't have to attend every argument you're invited to.

Sometimes it's beneficial to just type out a scathing reply, let it sit for a couple of minutes, and delete it without ever posting it. Most people deeply involved in heated debate on forums never change their viewpoint anyways.

soooooooooooo true, what were talking about here is -OVERMODING---IS THAT EVEN A WORD???--- anyway you know what I mean, I used to belong to a great sports fourm a few years ago , it was a very busy one too tons of people on it everyday, not sure how it happened but they changed a few rules there mods started over moding and withing 4 months the place just died, I KID YOU NOT

[Bsuds]

If the whole board was like that, ie no personal attacks, no off-topic remarks, this board would dry up and die within a month. Just as the Ripostte & Parry did.

I enjoy some off topic remarks and sometimes find that when they are removed and it actually takes away from the discussion. After all when you are talking in person many off topic remarks are made. Sometimes the levity of the remark will help calm the discussion a bit. As long as it doesn't get out of hand I think you (mods) should be a bit more forgiving.

[Jo]

We're pretty lenient, overall. It depends, though, on the situation.

Generally speaking, if off-topic one-liners are made, and they are stale same-old same-old stuff (which is usually the case), we usually remove them. Or if off-topic comments threaten to derail the thread into a *bleep* match, we remove them. If a topic is serious, we are more likely to remove the off-topic stuff, but if a light-hearted comment is made in a less-serious thread, we will generally leave it unless it is the kind of comment better suited for, say, the Speakeasy.

As I say, it all depends.

[Glacier]

I think that there are a number of reasons why "serious" sections like R&P die, but one of the main ones is that most people would rather have emotionally based arguments over logically based arguments. Furthermore, I think that getting challenged on our facts is often misconstrued as a personal attack, and thus when we cannot respond in kind (with our own personal attack), we feel that it's unfair. No one wants to take part in discussion where the rules are unfairly tilted in someone else's favour.

[Jo]

If you challenge someone's view, you won't have your post edited or removed. However, if you name-call and ridicule them, it ceases to be a challenge and becomes a personal attack.

Both sides of all arguments have that kind of 'challenge' removed.