[Discussion] Board Culture

[NecronLord]

I’ve got to say, that I agree with many of the points mentioned here. I also believe that improving the standards of logic required of posters may be a worthwhile endeavor. While I don’t think ‘saturation moderation’ is an answer, I do think that certain moderators (by which I mean me) could certainly be doing more.

I also agree that there is a case to be made that we use too much profanity. It has, as everyone has stressed, its place, and is part of the board’s identity. But in some respects, it has passed beyond being effective (I find myself unable to remember when I last flamed anyone) to the point that most often I type one, and then delete it, because I doubt it will have any impact.

From the other threads, I find myself taken with ray245’s idea to instigate debates on chosen topics. I think this is definitely worth considering, and, if not ‘chosen by the senate’ then certainly instigated by the staff (I’d personally be happy to moderate and provide topics for such debates as required; tough of course, the problem might be finding people to participate)

Indeed, though it’s of relatively little importance to board culture, I’ve some ideas on that regard. The ‘What are Star Trek Sensors Capable Of’ thread springs to mind as a well-received example in this regard, that might be worth following. The highlight of the fantasy forum in recent years, to my mind, has been the ‘Middle Earth Bestiary’ thread, which followed a similar line. It might be worth considering instigating a series of analyses and discussions regarding topics in the fiction forums – just what is the best assessment and quantification of the capabilities of the eponymous Imperial Star Destroyer? Of a Galaxy Class Starship, and so on. This would be similar to the concept of ‘resetting’ to allow those who don’t remember the ‘early days.’

Of course, I don’t want to put too much emphasis on such staff-instigated discussion, but I think that if nothing else, enforcing high standards of logic and analysis in high profile ‘flagship’ threads in these areas might improve the standard of others by example.

[Connor MacLeod]

Even when you get into inexact sciences, there are still standards of rigour. Looser than they may be for physics, but standards nonetheless.

Okay, so do you have ideas for what sorts of "standards" you would enforce. As an example, how would we handle evidence in politicla debates (IE citing various news networks?) I admit I'm not entirely sure where to begin with this.


And as an aside: If we want to enforce "logic" more, we should probably make more use of the Coliseum. If two people in a thread seem to be come basically duellists, ,maybe that discussion should be put INTO the Coliseum, rather than allowed to be mired down in the general thread. OR if there is a particularily strong bit of contention.