[Discussion]N&P Cleanup

[Spyder]

Sorry if I'm backtracking here.

Just so I understand the problem with N&P:

• People are making dumb threads
• People are making dumb replies
• N&P is full of thinly veiled vendettas
• N&P's signal to noise ratio is no longer acceptable

Please fill in any I'm missing.

As mentioned on page one of this thread, tidying N&P is not a small job. It's been suggested that we introduce rules to prohibit the posting of various news items and generally govern N&P behaviour. The problem with additional rules is that when you raise the basic requirements for posting rules is that it makes the forum more cumbersome to use.

Infact what I (and others) predict would happen is that we'll just wind up driving the bulk of N&P noise into Off Topic*, and that's assuming that any policy we introduce will be enforceable (which it probably won't.)

We already know that we're not going to fix N&P overnight, so instead of trying to fix it overnight maybe we should try for a long term improvement by encouraging more quality discussion.

Have a sticky in N&P titled "Think Before you Post" with words to that effect in the post, encourage people to just think about their posts, what other people have posted before them and how they're contributing to the thread.

If we can just cut down on dumb replies, the problem of dumb threads will take care of itself, as should the vendetta and signal to noise ratio problem.

What I would also go so far to suggest is that we, as senators, make an effort to lead by example (something which I myself am guilty of not doing from time to time.) Just before we post to N&P, or anywhere else for that matter, just quickly think "is this post befitting of a senator?"

We're all senators because at one point each of us set the standard in the forums. Let's continue to do so.

*Edit: Ignore this point if that's actually what we want.

[phongn]

Broomstick and Surlethe might be good options for moderator. If Mad is still around or active I might nominate him as well.

With due respect to either Senator, have either much experience in moderating? N&P is a nasty place to be thrown in head-first and Broomstick sometimes becomes a bit impassioned in her arguments.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Surlethe would be a shoe-in IMO, if he has enough time--he's been extremely absent from the board of late. Not sure about Mad.

When I was running Divine Salamis--which managed to be a fairly sizeable community until financial trouble forced me to discontinue its operation--I had a competent and respectable moderatorial staff. The highest on their lists was my co-admin on the board, Steve, Big Steve from SB.com to be precise. He was a Supermod there, and the only decent one, who regularly applied the rules when all the other mods ignored them at will, which is why he eventually resigned.

He was impeccable as an admin at Divine Salamis as well, enormously competent and very able to handle the responsibilities of a modship. Unfortunately, his living situation is tenuous right now, but I would recommend him to be considered as an N&P moderator anyway. He would do an excellent job at it, I have no doubt, and if does have regular internet access at the latest place him and his father are moving to, I would think he should be obvious for the posting. I can't believe anyone could find Steve to be an unacceptable moderator--he may only have about 2,500 posts here, but most everyone knows him here, Dalton recommended him for the Senate when it was first organized, and his records on other boards speaks absolutely to his credit. We need more stable people like that in the moderating staff.

[Broomstick]

Broomstick and Surlethe might be good options for moderator. If Mad is still around or active I might nominate him as well.

With due respect to either Senator, have either much experience in moderating? N&P is a nasty place to be thrown in head-first and Broomstick sometimes becomes a bit impassioned in her arguments.

I have no experience moderating, and last time I was asked to moderate I turned it down due to lack of time in my life (that has changed).

Yes, I get passionate, but like Edi and threads on Russia, I believe I have the maturity and insight to not moderate threads where I'm getting down and dirty and defer to another moderator. Even when I do get hot under the collar, when a mod or similar authority says "cool it" it I do and I shut up at that point. I get loud, but I don't really get out of control.

I'm not particularly eager to be a moderator because I see it as much if not more a burden than a privilege. If chosen, however, I will do my best.

[Lagmonster]

Another alternative to bringing on new staff is to shuffle the existing staff. Extract people from forums where they are too personally committed and move people from forums where they are underused, so as to get the benefits of long-term service, confident moderators being assigned to new roles.

[Broomstick]

[*]N&P is full of thinly veiled vendettas

My feeling about the vendetta issue is that there isn't so much a vendetta - a planned pursuit and confrontation - as long-standing differences of opinion that come up again and again and again. There are a few pairs of people I know who will always butt heads every time a particular issue comes up, and some of them are taking those differences of opinion quite personally. It's all very well to say people should agree to disagree, but it can be quite hard to put into practice.

[Keevan_Colton]

I completely agree with Shep's points. The last couple years on N&P have degraded into attacks if you're not "left" enough. Then there's the "'Merica is eeeeevil!!" snipes in a multitude of news stories that have nothing remotely to do with America!

News story: "Venus explodes!" N&P: "Fuckin' Americans...."

How's about we start here with the whole, post evidence or shut the fuck up thing?

Going to give us a link Poe or just keep pulling shit out your arse?

If it's going to be shit then you should mosey on over to the HoS and post in the appropriate forum.

[Keevan_Colton]

^ bingo - the moderators have mentioned this. I do not have it from God Wong but from His prophets.

Ah, but of course, someone said it...it must be true. Strangely though I cant seem to find anything since this debate has been going on from Mike on the topic. But I'm sure there are lots of people here that can speak for him...the religious metaphors are a nice touch, "coz I believe" is after all the cornerstone, who needs an actual quote or anything

[Keevan_Colton]

Sorry if I'm backtracking here.

Just so I understand the problem with N&P:

• People are making dumb threads

Yet the one thread that anyone has actually cited was locked. Apparently however, locking isnt enough...people must be made not to do things rather than fixing them after the fact.

[*]People are making dumb replies

Yes they are, often the longer replies are the worst offenders. Frankly letting a discussion carry on without deleting half the posts seems like a fine solution to me.

[*]N&P is full of thinly veiled vendettas

No, it's just full of people that dont like each other on a very basic level. That's what happens when you mix people that believe in liberal values and people that want to nuke brown people.

[*]N&P's signal to noise ratio is no longer acceptable[/list]

It's as good as it has ever been. There seems to be some pining for a golden age when things were less spammy. Newsflash to the Senate, that was never the case.

<snip for length>

The fact is we've had this shit in the mod forum before, all of it, and it got shot down back then for the same sort of reasons. Some people wanted to make it so you had to be approved to post in SLAM, or that some people would be barred from SLAM in order to improve the quality of discussion there. None of this shit flew then and it's being peddled again for N&P, and the same problems:

Stifling discussion
Added workload and usergroups to create
Added maintainance overhead, either clearing people for posting in a particular forum or barring them.
No real gain other than some people never having to read posts that piss them off.

I've also written entire essays during my degree on the topic of self censorship and frankly it's the worst kind. All you need to look at for that is the US media, where stories dont get covered because of self censorship rather than outside powers. Oops, Poe will be along in a moment to bitch, but it's a relevant analogy.

[Keevan_Colton]

Nope, just a little reminder about the stupidity of some of this shit.

Why did you argue the point at all if you so obviously hold our opinions in such low regard?

You have read my signature, right? It's been brought up in this very thread, yet it's been completely misunderstood. The reason I'm here calling this stuff bullshit is to make sure that people know it is. If I just shut up and leave you to it then the assumption becomes that the "silent majority" is with you.

Oh, and POLITENESS as a prerequisite for moderators, on STARDESTROYER.NET?

At what point did politeness become a bad quality? Does the board's liberal attitude toward profanity mean that any measure of politeness is positively undesirable? Do you think rudeness for its own sake to be a virtue?

At what point did Ms Manners get the task of appointing staff here? We're talking about requirements...I can be perfectly polite when I chose to be, but when dealing with bullshit I generally don't chose to be polite.

[Lord Poe]

I completely agree with Shep's points. The last couple years on N&P have degraded into attacks if you're not "left" enough. Then there's the "'Merica is eeeeevil!!" snipes in a multitude of news stories that have nothing remotely to do with America!

News story: "Venus explodes!" N&P: "Fuckin' Americans...."

How's about we start here with the whole, post evidence or shut the fuck up thing?

Going to give us a link Poe or just keep pulling shit out your arse?

If it's going to be shit then you should mosey on over to the HoS and post in the appropriate forum.

Frankly, I'm finding your conduct deplorable. Off the meds again, are we?

Yeah, Keevan. Let's pretend this never happens in N&P! None of the other problems other senators have brought up for six pages seem to resister as problem with you either, it seems. I don't keep a dossier of every thread where all these problems happen, no. But it is interesting that you asked for actual proof from my post, based on your history. Just to let you know, I'll not further derail this thread with responses to your hijacking, so this is the only one you'll get out of me.

Here's a recent one that I remember that had me laughing my ass off, and encapsulates what I was talking about:

Bus Rider Decapitates Fellow Passenger

Wow...in Canada? Weird...bet the passenger was American. I mean, that was the most shocking part of the article for me, not necessarily that the guy flipped out and killed someone. This is a sick world we're living in, people. sick world.

[Edi]

Sorry if I'm backtracking here.

Just so I understand the problem with N&P:

• People are making dumb threads

Yet the one thread that anyone has actually cited was locked. Apparently however, locking isnt enough...people must be made not to do things rather than fixing them after the fact.

The newest Putin thread

This is the kind of shit that has been talked about and it seems that unless the moderators actively start deleting shit, locking threads or simply flushing them, warnings and other admonitions have precisely fucking zero effect.

[*]People are making dumb replies

Yes they are, often the longer replies are the worst offenders. Frankly letting a discussion carry on without deleting half the posts seems like a fine solution to me.

I refer you to the example thread above, which has become far too fucking prevalent.

[*]N&P's signal to noise ratio is no longer acceptable[/list]

It's as good as it has ever been. There seems to be some pining for a golden age when things were less spammy. Newsflash to the Senate, that was never the case.

Let's see some evidence for that claim then, since you seem to be so keen on enforcing it on everyone else here.

The fact is we've had this shit in the mod forum before, all of it, and it got shot down back then for the same sort of reasons. Some people wanted to make it so you had to be approved to post in SLAM, or that some people would be barred from SLAM in order to improve the quality of discussion there. None of this shit flew then and it's being peddled again for N&P, and the same problems:

Stifling discussion
Added workload and usergroups to create
Added maintainance overhead, either clearing people for posting in a particular forum or barring them.
No real gain other than some people never having to read posts that piss them off.

Yes, it was discussed in the mod forum way back when and this was exactly the result. So reducing posting privileges, from what I have seen from this thread, was shot down fairly early on. Other things have not been. Have you been paying attention at all?

I've also written entire essays during my degree on the topic of self censorship and frankly it's the worst kind. All you need to look at for that is the US media, where stories dont get covered because of self censorship rather than outside powers. Oops, Poe will be along in a moment to bitch, but it's a relevant analogy.

As someone who mostly agrees with a lot of your political views and even shares some of your assessments of some people on this board, I have another couple of things to add:

I don't give a flying fuck what you have or have not written about anything and I don't see any of its fucking relevance here. What I have seen in this discussion is you acting like a complete, unrepentant, unmitigated fucking asshat and goat-molesting shitheel with his head shoved so far up his ass that you're looking out of our mouth into your colon. You're a goddamn disgrace to all the rest of us moderators who have participated in this thread to a greater or lesser degree and trying to have a constructive discussion. RedImperator is perhaps the most capable and evenhanded of all the moderators on SDnet and he called you out already a couple of pages ago and your reply to him essentially amounted to "You're not an admin, so STFU, you don't know shit and fuck you!". That same message applies to you in full measure as well.

So take your overblown superiority complex and delusions of adequacy, set them on fire, shove them up your ass and just fuck off. Right now you're just speaking out of your ass and shitting out of your mouth, and it isn't improving this fucking debacle of a Senate crapfest any.

[Keevan_Colton]

Four quick points Edi:

1. That was a politics related thread, Putin is after all a mjor player in world politics, so the "stick it in OT" thing wouldnt really apply.

2. That's the wrong thread now, while you were busy with this I was actually off attending to that thread.

3. I'm glad you feel I dont fit in with the tone of the moderating staff, because, if you go take a look at the spam you're bitching about in the split thread two of the offenders are mods.

4. How exactly do you propose that I demonstrate that things have not changed. A lack of change would have no particular evidence after all. A change can be conclusively demonstrated. The opposite can only be proved by showing that there is no evidence of change...you're asking me to provide evidence of there being no evidence....cheers for that....

[Connor MacLeod]

With due respect to either Senator, have either much experience in moderating? N&P is a nasty place to be thrown in head-first and Broomstick sometimes becomes a bit impassioned in her arguments.

I don't see that as a bad thing. For one thing it would probably make them more willign to learn, and more dedicated to the task (noone wants to fuck up a job when they've been given a responsibility, right?) And to be honest, how many experienced mods are there that would be willing to take up the task there? Some of the mods are active in other forums, but not many.

And both Broomstick AND Surlethe have debating experience in N&P and I would ilke to think they command some respect there - that could be an asset as well. (Better than bringing someone who didnt know anything about the forum or rarely participates there.)

As for becoming impassioned, yes I was aware of that when I suggested it, but I think it might not be a bad thing for her either. I believe personally she can be capable of holding back her passions (she DID back off when she and Ender were arguing in here.) So while she becomes impassoned, she doesn't seem to become so emotionally invested that she would go off the deep end, IMHO. and a little passion never hurts either.

Frankly I dont think either inexperience or passion would be a reason to exclude her. I'd trust her enough to appeal to a fellow mod, supermod or admin for advice or a second opinion if she felt unsure on making a call, or to step back and let another deal with it if she feels she's too close to the issue.

[Connor MacLeod]

There are other possible mods I could suggest:

1.) Seanrobertson, whom I believe may be a senator here (I haven't checked). He's incredibly incredibly nice, but no pushover. He's smart, he's meticulous, and he's always polite and very supportive of his friends. He's also part of the Babtech staff on Brian Young's website and has similar associates like Ted and myself (See below). I dunno if he'd go for N&P or modship, but I flet its worth mentioning him.

2.) Ted C - he's a very patient, fair and evenhanded type, rarely given to passionts or fits (he managed to debate Darkstar. At Spacebattles. For more than one post. And almost never lost his temper.) The only thing with that is I dont know if he'd actually want to go into N&P, but he's a smart and reasonable guy, so I figure I'd let him know. Like Sean, he also is a member of Brian Young's babtech site and has associations iwth many of the same people I do, which is where he earned a great deal of my respect.

3.) Stas Bush. I have virtually no contact with this guy, but from what I've observed he's generally an above-average participant in the N&P forum. and as I (dimly) recall he started out alot worse than he is now (He was also back in the sci fi and fantasy forums alot more often then) but he's improved IMMENSELY over the years, which also (IMHO) speaks well of him (not many people on this forum have improved that way.)

(BTW Stas: If I am remembering your past history incorrectly, my apologies. The most I remember is you having at some point a SST:roughneck chronicles avatar at some point, and I think being a SW purist.)

[Edi]

Stas is one of the shoe-in candidates for moderatorship if new ones are added. He would make an excellent mod.

[Ender]

From a plebe (Lonestar)

Since Keeven is so hot for evidence that a lot of threads are 'RRARRGH! USA! REPUBLICANS!"(he was unable to provide evidence that I was a "rightwing cuntface" when I asked him to in a PM, so I find his demands of evidence pretty funny) I would point to the consistent use of the nickname "gimp" for Senator McCain.

I'm not a fan of McCain, and I don't plan on voting for him in November(I have started threads on this very board making fun of how isolated he is from the common man), but it seems pretty fucking low to make fun of people because of their injuries.

If I were to start referring to, say, Nitram as "The Cripple" in every instance I talk to or about him on this board I would be titled or banned…and rightfully so. So why is it acceptable to do so in this instance? Because he's a Republican?

Is *THIS* the height of political discourse in N&P? We even have Senators starting threads with it in the title…and yet, people are asking Poe for evidence that there isn't a perception that N&P is not a circlejerk flamefest with little to nothing to offer?

When we make fun of a guy's injuries in who knows how many posts?

It baffles the shit out of me that there are people who honestly don't see the perception that is being created…and seem to disagree with other rightwing cuntfaces like RedImperator, Connor, and Lord Poe.

Frankly I'm in agreement. Do one liners talking about "the crawfrod Caligula" add anything to the discourse at all? The place may be a flamepit, but I would hope that basic decency would mean people would refrain from calling McCain "the Gimp", but that clearly isn't happening. What does spelling it the "Republikkkan" party do to add weight to your criticism and argument? There is a difference between "mockery of stupid people" and bottom of the barrel pandering to show that you are on the bandwagon as well.

[Ender]

That's what happens when you mix people that believe in liberal values and people that want to nuke brown people.

Wow, nice black and white fallacy. Because there is NO middle ground at all. Thanks for another example as to why you have no business being a moderator, much less one in N&P.

By the way, nice abuse of power with the whole, "taking pot shots at posters in a public forum where they can't respond" earlier, have you considered acting like an adult and apologizing for that breech yet?

[Imperial Overlord]

Frankly I'm in agreement. Do one liners talking about "the crawfrod Caligula" add anything to the discourse at all? The place may be a flamepit, but I would hope that basic decency would mean people would refrain from calling McCain "the Gimp", but that clearly isn't happening. What does spelling it the "Republikkkan" party do to add weight to your criticism and argument? There is a difference between "mockery of stupid people" and bottom of the barrel pandering to show that you are on the bandwagon as well.

N&P has been like that as long as I've been here and its not confined to nasty one liners. Trolling death threads comes to mind, with gloating of the anniversary of Rachel Corey's death and a deliberate split into two separate threads when Pope John Paul II died not stopping pro-pope people from trolling in the other thread. There's a level of viciousness in N&P that simply isn't present anywhere else.

[Keevan_Colton]

Frankly I'm in agreement. Do one liners talking about "the crawfrod Caligula" add anything to the discourse at all? The place may be a flamepit, but I would hope that basic decency would mean people would refrain from calling McCain "the Gimp", but that clearly isn't happening. What does spelling it the "Republikkkan" party do to add weight to your criticism and argument? There is a difference between "mockery of stupid people" and bottom of the barrel pandering to show that you are on the bandwagon as well.

Oh, right, sorry, you're whinging about the style being used in posts about America, here was me thinking that this was all about people just randomly turning up in unrelated topics to go "America Sucks!" now it's "People dont have enough respect anymore.", go fuck yourself in your self important little ass.

Again, when the fuck did Ms. Manners get an appointment to the administration here?

As for the rest of it, Lonestar can go shove a flagpole up his ass since he's got a pair of quotes in his signature designed to take a stab at me (with an amazing inability to fuck up the typing while mocking a typo) along with an unhealthy predisposition towards the right to shoot the fuck out of people I get to consider him a rightwing cuntface.

[Ender]

Oh, right, sorry, you're whinging about the style being used in posts about America, here was me thinking that this was all about people just randomly turning up in unrelated topics to go "America Sucks!" now it's "People dont have enough respect anymore.", go fuck yourself in your self important little ass.

Yes, how dare different people address different issues. Clearly we should be one monolithic block who all thinks the same and argues the same points of an issue. After all, if we thought differently we would clearly be right wing, and right wing is evil.

Again, when the fuck did Ms. Manners get an appointment to the administration here?

There is a difference between bluntly or rudely presenting a point of view, and substituting insults and tough talk for intelligence and understanding. Such behavior stifles actual discussion.

As for the rest of it, Lonestar can go shove a flagpole up his ass since he's got a pair of quotes in his signature designed to take a stab at me (with an amazing inability to fuck up the typing while mocking a typo) along with an unhealthy predisposition towards the right to shoot the fuck out of people I get to consider him a rightwing cuntface.

Yes yes, play the internet tough guy. It isn't like you have the stones to own up the the problems that have occurred on your watch, much less the problems you actually cause (problems your fellow mods and usual allies are calling you on). Best to keep flamespraying this thread to try and distract from fixing the problems. Because if we do, you lose the area you use to try and run some pathetic self delusion of adequacy. It's well known you like to pretend that you are anything close to a functional human being, instead of an utter failure who is to arrogant to think professionals can help fix the fact that you are fundamentally fucked in the head. So talk big. Try and walk the walk. Make impotent threats. Try and intimidate people. Pretend that you are someone whose opinions matter instead of a crazy in desperate need of help. Keep it up, with 6.5 billion people on the globe you might fool someone. But you won't find that person here. We all know that in the end you are nothing.

[Connor MacLeod]

I think the distinction we're looking for here isn't so much that criticism of America (or religion, or Republicans/conservatives) happens and that it shouldn't (because there are plenty of examples where it is justified) but rather that such threads can attract more spammy bullshit, because its perceived as more "Acceptable" to mock Republicans/America/religion regarldes of whether or not there is anything of substance attached to it or not.)

Its in the same vein as what was discussed in the Colfax thread just now - some people seem to view him as some sort of perpetual chewtoy who will ALWAYS be an acceptable target for abuse, and thus treat him so (hence the dogpile.)

[Ghost Rider]

Okay, only for moderators, but where MIKE actually asks should we clean up N&P over the scientology thread...in Feburary this year.

So no, this isn't some delusion, and is likely why Mike isn't coming in here asking what the fuck is up with the Senate and the moderators here.

[Publius]

Ah, but of course, someone said it...it must be true. Strangely though I cant seem to find anything since this debate has been going on from Mike on the topic. But I'm sure there are lots of people here that can speak for him...the religious metaphors are a nice touch, "coz I believe" is after all the cornerstone, who needs an actual quote or anything

If Mr. Wong is opposed to the proposals, there is every reason to believe he will say so, and the matter will be closed. If he is indifferent, he will say very likely say nothing, rather than waste his time saying so. If he is supportive, he need only say so, and the matter will be closed. Even if he is indifferent, then it is a matter fit for the general administration, and the Senate has every liberty to discuss the matter (the very purpose of the Senate is to "discuss board policy" and to "discuss that which is bothering the masses").

Therefore, it is of no practical matter whether or not there is any particular decretal from Mr. Wong authorizing a clean-up. He can veto at any time he likes. Otherwise, we are merely acting within the bounds of the role he already gave us. You yourself insist that he who is silent is seen to consent. If this is so, on what grounds do you object?

No, it's just full of people that dont like each other on a very basic level. That's what happens when you mix people that believe in liberal values and people that want to nuke brown people.

If the only opposing position to speak of is genocidal racism, why have you not nominated these people for pillorying? The board as a whole is highly unsympathetic to such contemptible views; PR6 notes that "white supremacists" are subject to summary banning, as well as "anyone whose behaviour would be considered a violation of Canada's hate speech law," and goes on to mention a moratorium on a series noted for its misogyny and "genocide fantasies with no redeeming value." Even if the particular claims of the people you mention are not indictable under s. 318 or s. 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada, this hardly constitutes a defense on this board, as this is not a court of law and the administrative staff is perfectly capable of adjusting for circumstances (IR3 mentions the freedom of the staff to act in spite of the particular wording of the rules "if they have agreed that you've done something wrong").

Furthermore, if the only opposing position is so odious, why is there any discussion at all? You and all other moderators would be perfectly free to suppress their screeds as having no redeeming value. There is no merit in preserving such bile.

It's as good as it has ever been. There seems to be some pining for a golden age when things were less spammy. Newsflash to the Senate, that was never the case.

There appears to be a consensus among those participating in this discussion that the state of the forum is not "as good as it has ever been." The fact that you disagree with that opinion does not make it untrue any more than the consensus would make it true. Evidently there is grounds for dispute on the matter, and it appears thus far that the greater number disagree with you, whether out of misplaced nostalgia or not. Do you disagree with this assessment?

Stifling discussion
Added workload and usergroups to create
Added maintainance overhead, either clearing people for posting in a particular forum or barring them.
No real gain other than some people never having to read posts that piss them off.

That is your assessment, certainly. It may well be true. Nevertheless, it appears thus far that the consensus of senators participating in this discussion feel that an increased burden of some kind or other would be worth the cost. It is to be remembered that we were chosen for inclusion in this advisory body precisely to provide feedback and suggestions on board policy; it simply happens that in this case, the consensus appears to disagree with you.

I've also written entire essays during my degree on the topic of self censorship and frankly it's the worst kind. All you need to look at for that is the US media, where stories dont get covered because of self censorship rather than outside powers. Oops, Poe will be along in a moment to bitch, but it's a relevant analogy.

Your personal writings on the subject are not relevant if you do not post them where the rest of us are free to examine them and then agree or disagree; otherwise, they are audiatur et altera pars. Furthermore, the analogy is flawed; no one is advocating that uncomfortable news be censored. Rather, the main suggestion is to eliminate from a particular forum those stories that do not generate meaningful discussion.

You have read my signature, right? It's been brought up in this very thread, yet it's been completely misunderstood. The reason I'm here calling this stuff bullshit is to make sure that people know it is. If I just shut up and leave you to it then the assumption becomes that the "silent majority" is with you.

It is well that you object to that which offends your sensibilities. Do you think anyone else in this thread is doing anything different?

At what point did Ms Manners get the task of appointing staff here? We're talking about requirements...I can be perfectly polite when I chose to be, but when dealing with bullshit I generally don't chose to be polite.

In the first place, no one ever said that politeness was a sine qua non for a moderator; as you can plainly see, Connor MacLeod suggested "possibly c.) some politeness if possible" (Mon, Sep 01, 2008 1:14 pm). It is you who then objected to "POLITENESS as a prerequisite for moderators" (Mon, Sep 01, 2008 1:51 pm), which objection is no more than a strawman response. Do you consider politeness to be positively undesirable, that you reject it even as an optional possibility?

As a general matter -- and please be assured that this is not directed at any one person -- , let us not forget why we are here. This body is a policy advisory group on an Internet discussion board. The question at hand is a proposed change to policy for a particular forum. We are not politicians, and lives and fortunes are not at stake. We ourselves were chosen for inclusion in this group because of the quality of our posting and our contributions to the board. It is, in short, a recognition of good behavior. There is no need for invective; we have the freedom to participate in this group's discussions because we were felt to be good examples. Let us not now set a poor example by poor form and needless back-and-forth.

As previously mentioned, it appears that there is a consensus that something ought to be done. The main question, then, is what that something ought to be. The point has been raised that more robust moderation may well be enough; the problem of "me too" posting is already addressed by PR5. The suggestion for an op/ed tag is merely a cosmetic alteration to PR11. The proposal to siphon off insubstantial stories -- "human interest" and "true crime" stories that do not invite meaningful discussion -- is merely a change in implementing PR8. These are all very trifling things. Is this truly worth such vitriol? Or are we, notionally some of the board's finest contributors, incapable of having a good discussion?

[Coyote]

No, it's just full of people that dont like each other on a very basic level. That's what happens when you mix people that believe in liberal values and people that want to nuke brown people..

That is quite a sweeping charge there. All the conservatives on this board are genocidal racists?

I demand proof.