|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Is the increased number of conspiracy threads a problem or not a problem? |
| I can live with the status quo |
|
55% |
[ 11 ] |
| I think some policy or moderation should be required |
|
45% |
[ 9 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 20 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Enrico Palazzo
Mod Team
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 2:40 am Post subject: Conspiracy threads (a separate poll) |
 |
|
This is a separate poll, so we can organize peoples' thoughts on the issues, so things don't get jumbled. We want your feedback on whether the conspiracy threads are really a problem in terms of the status quo (we don't mean eliminating them mind you).
Basically, the question is is the increased number of conspiracy threads a problem or not a problem? How do you feel about it?
1. 'Can you live with the status quo?',
2. 'Do you think some policy or moderation should be required?
Your input is appreciated... It takes time to look at everything to have a snapshot for the community, so have patience......Another poll may follow this one, but we can't determine that yet. We are trying to be scientific and judicious about things while conforming with the guidelines and a desire for a decent posting community.
Thank you,
The above was contributed by your mod team.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
agentX
Joined: 12 Oct 2007
Location: Jeolla province
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's fine.
If a person does not want to read something, that person does not have to read it. It's as simple as that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd recommend the following topics each be confined to one Mega thread(that is, one thread per each of the following topics)...
Kennedy assassination theories(possibly including Robert)
9-11 truth
Banking conspiracies(including the Federal Reserve and the Trilateral Commission, even though the latter isn't technically about banking)
UFOs(maybe include chemtrails in that)
Ritualistic sex abuse(not that that's been a huge topic, and it does overlap somewhat with the banking plots)
I'm not trying to single out the IGTG crowd here, it's just that this thread is about that gang's preferred themes. And I'm undecided about whether or not I'd want the mods enforcing this, or if it would just be a good guideline for the posters themselves to follow.
Last edited by On the other hand on Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:18 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| There is a UFO thread floating around too and IGTG actually seems to use it for his catch all stuff. |
Good point.
When a NEW "hot" or otherwise "current" story pops up on the web, i OFTEN simply use the "key-word" search function.
i.e. Rather than immediately starting an entirely NEW thread, one is thus able to "piggy-back" the new catch on an existing link.
Techniques such as this clearly help to 1) keep down the clutter, 2) further extends the original discussion, & 3) refreshes readers' memories etc.
i find this approach to be highly effective.
igtg.
Last edited by igotthisguitar on Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:35 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Enrico Palazzo
Mod Team
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
OTOH, Ya-Ta-Boy, Gopher, Manner of Speaking, your feedback has been good so far. Of course, Regicide and IGTG are posters, they want to post as they wish. What can be done in that regard?
Let's look at the concept of freedom of speech. IGTG and Regicide say any regulation even voluntary might infringe on their freedom of speech.
Another poster brought up the point that excessive posting about conspiracies that relate to each other would infringe on the freedom of speech of other posters, because it would be akin to screaming speech by it being excessive.
The two arguments are interesting. Which thread is the most common when it comes to the conspiracy theories? Can not the posters who post such things stick to one thread.
There is freedom of speech, and there is freedom of speech. Should someone for example have religion crammed down their throat in the name of freedom of speech? How different would that be say from having
conspiracy theories posted in a certain way that would make other posters feel their rights are violated. Is there a happy medium, a way that the posters who post these things and their detractors can have
a middle ground? We are having regicide and Gopher and others getting defensive. There's an ego match going on.
It appears the conspiracy thing is an issue to many posters. Is the main thread the JFK one? I, for one, am not familiar with the conspiracy threads, nor do I pretend to have any expertise on the matter, nor am I proposing the mods enforcing this or that. Simply, your feedback is being solicited from Regicide and IGTG and those who may think they should have the definite right to post these things, but don't want to feel things are rammed down their throat. People even before this topic was brought by the mod were fighting and bickering in the conspiracy threads...
The above is simply to ask the forum members what they think are solutions to the problems, if they have a give-and-take solution.
I do not propose to have a solution at this juncture or to know the depth of the problem as perceived by some... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 12:17 pm Post subject: ... |
|
|
I take issue with "conspiracy" threads being singled out. I'll go into that more on your other thread about how many threads and such.
One topic, one thread. In this sense, Sirhan Sirhan being programmed by the CIA and that Gong Show guy being a CIA agent = 2 threads.
I think a more important issue is the one mindmetoo brings up about threads just disappearing. If you're looking to establish what should and shouldn't be posted, I think locking threads makes things a lot more transparent than them just disappearing.
Moreover, as far as I'm aware, mods can merge threads. It's not really clear to me why this isn't done more often as opposed to locking threads.
Ultimately, I think merging would eliminate a multitude of instances where a thread might otherwise be locked.
"Disappearing" threads only adds to the intrigue around here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Poktanju
Mod Team
Joined: 15 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 2:43 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
I take issue with "conspiracy" threads being singled out. I'll go into that more on your other thread about how many threads and such.
One topic, one thread. In this sense, Sirhan Sirhan being programmed by the CIA and that Gong Show guy being a CIA agent = 2 threads.
I think a more important issue is the one mindmetoo brings up about threads just disappearing. If you're looking to establish what should and shouldn't be posted, I think locking threads makes things a lot more transparent than them just disappearing.
Moreover, as far as I'm aware, mods can merge threads. It's not really clear to me why this isn't done more often as opposed to locking threads.
Ultimately, I think merging would eliminate a multitude of instances where a thread might otherwise be locked.
"Disappearing" threads only adds to the intrigue around here. |
Conspiracy threads are not the only issue being singled out. We are and will continue to poll and discuss specific aspects of this forum, in hopes to ascertain a consensus of opinion on what users feel ails this forum and what should be done to improve it, if anything.
As for merging threads, we don't have the ability to do that. Hence, why you'll occassionally see us locking threads that are duplicates. But determining what is indeed duplicate or has some uniquely different tangent can be subjective, at times, which is why we are opening up the discussion to users on how they'd prefer for the forum to handle these instances.
As for the disappearing threads issue, we invite users to PM one of us if you notice a thread of yours is missing. More often than not, it has been pulled for review and/or is being cleaned up, before being sent back out. Usually, we are able to send the thread back out before anyone notices its absence and other times, people notice and complain of its absence. Sending PMs to notify users about a pulled thread that might be coming back within 10-15 minutes, is adding extra and redundant work for us. And given the amount of threads that get pulled in for review from all areas of the forum and allowing for time to clean up or solicit other mods for feedback, its impossible for this to be as consistent and orderly as users want. The very best that we can suggest is for users to PM one of us, in the event that a thread has not come back within the next time that you visit the forums again and notice that its still not there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Enrico Palazzo wrote: |
| OTOH, Ya-Ta-Boy, Gopher, Manner of Speaking, your feedback has been good so far. |
Thank you.
| Quote: |
Of course, Regicide and IGTG are posters, they want to post as they wish. What can be done in that regard?
Let's look at the concept of freedom of speech. IGTG and Regicide say any regulation even voluntary might infringe on their freedom of speech. |
My response to that would be to point out that we ALREADY have restrictions on our freedom of speech here. Dave owns this forum. Not us. He's given us permission to participate in this forum provided we agree to follow the TOS.
In addition, I've said the following in another thread and I'll repeat it here:
Personally, I don't care how many "conspiracy theory" threads are started, or threads on anything else, for that matter...I have no issue with WHAT is posted, just HOW it is (in some cases, repeatedly) posted.
I object to repeatedly starting new threads on the same topic over and over again. In some cases, a new thread is started on the exact same topic as one previously posted, and if any responses are made, they are (often) ignored by the thread author. This suggests that the thread author is, in effect, spamming the forum by simply advocating their viewpoint. I think it was Gopher who said it was the equivalent of running around and posting advertisements on somebody else's buildings and property.
Last year, there was a very long, extensive thread on the subject of the Cassini spaceprobe mission to Titan. I can't remember if it was me or Mithridates who started it, but as weeks and months went by we both made new posts to the thread, as new data from the mission was analyzed and published. We didn't need to start a new thread every time NASA issued a new press release, AKA "More on the Titan Mission..." There was no need to; keeping new information on the topic restricted to - and posted to - the same thread made it easier for readers and respondents to keep up on the topic. It's something you do if you have consideration for the people reading the material you present.
Suppose I was rabidly interested in the Spirit and Opportunity spaceprobes NASA has placed on Mars; and suppose I started a new thread every time NASA issued a new press release? I wouldn't do it because A) it's inconsiderate to the other members of the forum, and B) I would get loads of complaints along the lines of, "enough already!" It wouldn't matter whether or not they are interested in the topic, or whether or not they agree with my viewpoint. It would be the excessive and repetitious posting they would find annoying.
| Enrico Palazzo wrote: |
| Another poster brought up the point that excessive posting about conspiracies that relate to each other would infringe on the freedom of speech of other posters, because it would be akin to screaming speech by it being excessive. |
Dave's ESL Cafe Current Events Forum is a public discussion board. It is not Dave's blog, nor is it anybody else's. Anyone who joins the forum and agrees to follow its guidelines is free to start a discussion thread and/or respond to a current thread. I am sure there are a great many people who read the threads and posts on this forum, but are unable to respond - but only because they have not bothered to register for membership.
It follows, therefore, that the act of starting a thread is, in fact, a public invitation to participate in a discussion on a particular topic, the one the thread author is interested in. Thread authors do not have the power to exclude respondents, limit discussions to a particular set of individuals, or delete respondent's posts. Only the Moderators do that. The Moderators limit their powers to deleting or "editing" only those threads and posts that, in their opinions, violate the TOS.
Since any given thread author is initiating a public discussion, it follows therefore that the thread author should have consideration for any respondent post, and should be willing to accept that some responses to their thread will express opinions that the author does not agree with. If the thread author is not willing to accept this, then what is the point of the author starting the thread?
It's a public discussion forum, after all. The only person entitled to post commercial advertisements here is Dave.
Consideration for the respondents of a topic thread would and should include limiting the threads to one thread - one topic. That's not censorship. It's just doing things in an organized and considerate fashion.
Partly by being accountable to the forum community for what discussions you initiate.
Topic respondents, by the same token, should have the same consideration for the topic author. Even if the topic of the thread strikes the respondent as bizarre, off-beat, or just plain stupid, they should still be willing to treat the thread author with courtesy and consideration. They should be willing to consider the thread author's theories and viewpoints seriously and respond courteously. Otherwise, what's the point of participating in the thread?
| some forum members wrote: |
| Why not just ignore the threads you don't like? |
Because that's restricting the rights of the readers of the thread, for the convenience of the thread author. It's saying, "I'll start whatever thread I want to, and I don't give a *** about the respondents. I don't have to take any responsibility for what I post." It's infantile.
If you're not interested in considering the opinions of the respondents, why start the thread in the first place? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 7:16 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| He's given us permission to participate in this forum provided we agree to follow the TOS |
For the love of cheesecake! What's TOS?
i PM'd one of the mods, but they were not too keen on spelling this one out for me.
For the record, i'll state it again:
While on the one hand the forum offers a great oportunity to engage in a lively discussion & exchange of numerous ideas & theories,
Dave's ESL has also clearly earned the title of "harshest censorship policies" i've yet to see in any online forum.
For its part, moderation tends to be quite inconsistent, biased and erratic.
Why e.g. sincere & poeticK expression is frowned upon, while repeatedly mean EGO-based attacks & insults are allowed to persist ought to speak volumes.
*shrugs*
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| "Disappearing" threads only adds to the intrigue around here. |
Yep. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
TOS:
While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. Therefore you acknowledge that all posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators or webmaster (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should they see fit. As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised.
This forum system uses cookies to store information on your local computer. These cookies do not contain any of the information you have entered above; they serve only to improve your viewing pleasure. The e-mail address is used only for confirming your registration details and password (and for sending new passwords should you forget your current one).
By clicking Register below you agree to be bound by these conditions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
T = ?
O = ?
S = ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
W
H
A
T
? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arjuna
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
I'd recommend the following topics each be confined to one Mega thread(that is, one thread per each of the following topics)...
Kennedy assassination theories(possibly including Robert)
9-11 truth
Banking conspiracies(including the Federal Reserve and the Trilateral Commission, even though the latter isn't technically about banking)
UFOs(maybe include chemtrails in that) |
I second this proposal. I also think making them stickies will be a good way to prevent the creation of new threads. There is already a big thread on 9-11 that you can make into a sticky. But maybe you don't like the idea. Whatever.
Last edited by arjuna on Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arjuna
Joined: 31 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
T = ?
O = ?
S = ? |
tos tos tos... ???
Terms Of Service ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
