PDA

View Full Version : Ahem.



PotshotPolka
24 Sep 2009, 09:16am
Please note that the discussion of politics is taken very seriously by many.

As such, please do not post if you cannot back up your statements and/or defend your point of view.

Simply put, for those of you that apparently just crawled out of god know's where, this isn't your goddamn facebook account or youtube. This isn't a place to mindlessly ejaculate whatever comes out of your mind, and then defend it just as your opinion.

We here, unlike the asshole known as SG OTF, have standards, which are very, very simple, and can be abided by being comited to the following.

Either use empirical evidence, construct an argument around a thesis, or get the hell out. If someone tells you that you're acting stupid, there is a highly probability that it's true, since the views here are not one sided, and the statements we make are ususally made with much consideration.

Also this isn't really a lulz section. There are some lulzy things, and sometimes there aren't. Trying to make politics "lulzy" around here will probably leave you staring at image macros and messages trying to convince you that immolation is your only purpose in life.

LegalSmash
24 Sep 2009, 09:20am
Simply put, for those of you that apparently just crawled out of god know's where, this isn't your goddamn facebook account or youtube. This isn't a place to mindlessly ejaculate whatever comes out of your mind, and then defend it just as your opinion.

We here, unlike the asshole known as SG OTF, have standards, which are very, very simple, and can be abided by being comited to the following.

Either use empirical evidence, construct an argument around a thesis, or get the hell out. If someone tells you that you're acting stupid, there is a highly probability that it's true, since the views here are not one sided, and the statements we make are ususally made with much consideration.

Also this isn't really a lulz section. There are some lulzy things, and sometimes there aren't. Trying to make a such a thing such as politics "lulzy" around here will probably leave you staring at image macros and messages trying to convince you that immolation is your only purpose in life.

This.

Also, addressing part of topics that are to your interest, but completely far from the main point is violating said statement above.

SilentGuns
24 Sep 2009, 11:32am
Il be honest , to me this is the lulz section. The many anti-obama threads just bring a smile to my face.



But some of these threads are very interesting and I can learn new stuff , so thats why I hate when people from the OTF come filling it with shit.

PotshotPolka
24 Sep 2009, 11:45am
Maybe to you, Estonian, but idiots like this undermine those of us with valid arguments:

http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/blog_mass_destruction/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/obama-is-bad-man1.jpg

PingPong
24 Sep 2009, 02:27pm
Im do not post in the political section very much but i do read most of the threads made learning new things. Im not that great in politics but when i do post i make sure my post has proof or some direction to it and isnt just made up. You have to know your limits to loling and being serious

TheTruth
24 Sep 2009, 02:49pm
Maybe to you, Estonian, but idiots like this undermine those of us with valid arguments:

http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/blog_mass_destruction/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/obama-is-bad-man1.jpg

He has a Browns shirt. His arguement is invalid.

Italian Jew
24 Sep 2009, 03:11pm
He has a Browns shirt. His arguement is invalid.

It is a sweatshirt. Now get out.

TheTruth
24 Sep 2009, 03:21pm
It is a sweatshirt. Now get out.

I was talking about his arguement ;_;

Astrum
24 Sep 2009, 05:15pm
I'm discussing a few things with the board right now. Something I'd like to see is Politics changed a bit. It would be nice to see Off Topic (worthless spam trap I can ignore), General Discussion (actually discuss things, but it doesn't have to be on a serious level), and Serious Discussion (serious discussion, doesn't have to be politics but it has to be intelligent discourse). Basically I'd like to get rid of the Politics section which doesn't include other areas of important subjects and introduce Serious Discussion and General Discussion in its place.

The libertarian thread I locked could easily fall into the General Discussion forum, as could the democrat one that Repeat posted. They're funny, you can discuss them, but if you want to actually debate the positions of libertarians, democrats, republicans, etc... then you can make a proper topic in SD. Stuff such as "What is your favorite Girl Scout Cookie?" can stay in the OT section.

Thoughts?

RedOctober
24 Sep 2009, 05:47pm
thanks Astrum, i agree that something has to be done, but i would like to keep a politics section even if we have a serious discussion section. i would like to see an economics section added please.

Astrum
24 Sep 2009, 05:50pm
Well the point of Serious Discussion would be you can discuss politics, science, economics, really anything of importance. Possibly use prefixing to sort it out easily.

Dracula
24 Sep 2009, 05:54pm
I'm discussing a few things with the board right now. Something I'd like to see is Politics changed a bit. It would be nice to see Off Topic (worthless spam trap I can ignore), General Discussion (actually discuss things, but it doesn't have to be on a serious level), and Serious Discussion (serious discussion, doesn't have to be politics but it has to be intelligent discourse). Basically I'd like to get rid of the Politics section which doesn't include other areas of important subjects and introduce Serious Discussion and General Discussion in its place.

The libertarian thread I locked could easily fall into the General Discussion forum, as could the democrat one that Repeat posted. They're funny, you can discuss them, but if you want to actually debate the positions of libertarians, democrats, republicans, etc... then you can make a proper topic in SD. Stuff such as "What is your favorite Girl Scout Cookie?" can stay in the OT section.

Thoughts?

This please.

LegalSmash
24 Sep 2009, 05:58pm
excellent idea.

Italian Jew
24 Sep 2009, 06:03pm
How would you enforce the section? (i.e. some Regtard keeps spamming his images and unrelated BS in the serious discussion section)

Dracula
24 Sep 2009, 06:04pm
How would you enforce the section? (i.e. some Regtard keeps spamming his images and unrelated BS in the serious discussion section)

Ma_Forum Ban

PotshotPolka
24 Sep 2009, 06:07pm
Take off the leashes and let us destroy them Litkey style. And yes, just label the OTF section SG/b/ and damn it to the depths of hell.

Dracula
24 Sep 2009, 06:08pm
Take off the leashes and let us destroy them Litkey style. And yes, just label the OTF section SG/b/ and damn it to the depths of hell.

<3 No rules section

Bad Dog
24 Sep 2009, 06:14pm
So then basically Off Topic would just be people posting stupid pictures/videos/spam? How is that different then right now?

PotshotPolka
24 Sep 2009, 06:28pm
So then basically Off Topic would just be people posting stupid pictures/videos/spam? How is that different then right now?

It would stay in there, quarantined, and anyone that would dare spread the filth would be purged.

Bad Dog
24 Sep 2009, 06:31pm
It would stay in there, quarantined, and anyone that would dare spread the filth would be purged.

its funny you say it like that because Off Topic is where all the swine flu topics are.

Astrum
24 Sep 2009, 07:47pm
its funny you say it like that because Off Topic is where all the swine flu topics are.

Seriously?

Yeah, we really don't need moderators. Nope, the AOs+ have this entire board under control.
Yes I'm referring to someone in particular. They know who they are.

Itch
24 Sep 2009, 08:46pm
I like the idea of separating things out.

Keep the crap in one place and serious discussion separated..
Sub-categories such as politics, economics, etc. would help keep it clean and allow you to find the things you're interested in easily.

Excellent idea Astrum.

PingPong
24 Sep 2009, 09:25pm
Yes, yes and yes.

Harbor
24 Sep 2009, 09:44pm
"What is your favorite Girl Scout Cookie?" can stay in the OT section.

Thoughts?

Girl scout cookies are serious business.

On a more serious note, i 100% agree with you Astrum good idea.

Astrum
25 Sep 2009, 12:11am
How would you enforce the section? (i.e. some Regtard keeps spamming his images and unrelated BS in the serious discussion section)

Sorry, missed this, IJ.

I'm really pushing for moderators right now. This is the only forum I know that doesn't have per-forum (or per-section) moderators. This won't happen overnight though...

tank40175
25 Sep 2009, 05:45am
Love the idea Astrum. Would be really nice for this section, provided it is properly moderated.

RedOctober
25 Sep 2009, 07:19am
I like the idea of separating things out.

Keep the crap in one place and serious discussion separated..
Sub-categories such as politics, economics, etc. would help keep it clean and allow you to find the things you're interested in easily.

Excellent idea Astrum.

ya, thats what i was going for when i was asking to keep the politics, economics, etc.

sub-categories would work great!

Lux
25 Sep 2009, 01:48pm
Can you make an American politics section because we have to live in the US and research for 10 hours to not be raped with fury...?

I don't mind discussing general stuff but when my own opinion isn't good enough and I have to copy+paste someone who's opinion is apparently acceptable I'm gone (which is basically why these SRS discussions attract about 5 people)

PotshotPolka
25 Sep 2009, 02:05pm
Can you make an American politics section because we have to live in the US and research for 10 hours to not be raped with fury...?

I don't mind discussing general stuff but when my own opinion isn't good enough and I have to copy+paste someone who's opinion is apparently acceptable I'm gone (which is basically why these SRS discussions attract about 5 people)

Or maybe you could of read Astrum's idea about a general discussions area replacing the non-retarded part of the off topic section.

Dracula
25 Sep 2009, 02:13pm
Or maybe you could of read Astrum's idea about a general discussions area replacing the non-retarded part of the off topic section.

He cant, because Astrum lives in America. We are obviously to hard to understand.

Red
25 Sep 2009, 02:23pm
We have funny accents and shit

Lux
25 Sep 2009, 06:01pm
Or maybe you could of read Astrum's idea about a general discussions area replacing the non-retarded part of the off topic section.

It didn't sound like that. It sounded like removing the 24/7 period boys in politics section from the casual ones......off topic is off topic.......but politics could be split up.....some of the threads aren't that serious, if you really believed what you say then you'd be trolling every non serious post in the politics section (and there is quite a lot) but obviously you just choose to vent your anger on certain people.


We have funny accents and shit

dood?

Btw Drac stop sucking period boys cocks pls

trakaill
25 Sep 2009, 10:03pm
Btw Drac stop sucking period boys cocks pls

Thats brought quite disgusting images to my head..
can we have non paying admins as Moderators? The legal and IJ thing is not suck a bad idea..
If not then please Red take the Job

Kennith
25 Sep 2009, 10:51pm
Yea, I've always been strict around this section of the forums cause I would like the off-topic to be in off-topic and its annoying to skip through a post that just says, "lol, obama sucks" and not have anything relevant to say about it. +1 post somewhere else.

Astrum
26 Sep 2009, 12:24pm
Thats brought quite disgusting images to my head..
can we have non paying admins as Moderators? The legal and IJ thing is not suck a bad idea..
If not then please Red take the Job

Red is an administrator. That's two steps above a moderator.

LegalSmash
26 Sep 2009, 07:22pm
Red is an administrator. That's two steps above a moderator.

I do not believe that was the answer to the question asked though.
Seriously, on another matter, shit like what was posted by that imbecile who started the "you can run obama but you can't hide" thread. Shit like that needs to be curtailed here.

PotshotPolka
26 Sep 2009, 07:30pm
I do not believe that was the answer to the question asked though.
Seriously, on another matter, shit like what was posted by that imbecile who started the "you can run obama but you can't hide" thread. Shit like that needs to be curtailed here.

That and the "limpdick" moderators around here won't issue a ban without a full fledged investigation and tribunal.

Astrum
26 Sep 2009, 11:35pm
I do not believe that was the answer to the question asked though.

The answer is "kind of". Apparently this subforum (http://www.steamgamers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=250) has 12 moderators, 2/3 of which are not admins. So it's definitely possible. The problem is I don't just want moderators for this section. I want moderators for every section. This requires actually selecting candidates and doing some (actually a lot) of back-end stuff and implementing more or less a hierarchy which I'll discuss in a bit.

The point of the Red comment is everyone with a red name has super moderator status over every forum, plus control over the forum itself. So no one with a red name will become a listed moderator.


That and the "limpdick" moderators around here won't issue a ban without a full fledged investigation and tribunal.

We have two classifications right now in accordance with how vBulletin sets up division of power. Super moderators and administrators (technically there's also super administrator but I digress). Regular moderators will not be able to ban people. They will basically be able to move threads*, edit posts, merge duplicate posts, delete posts, lock threads, and possibly even give users infractions (if they gain enough they get a temp ban or something). That would basically be the extent of their powers**.

Now, before we can actually select moderators I'd like to condense the forums. Personally I see 47 forums, I think you guys see 40. That's way too many. I know Cloud is on board with what I'm talking about so here's basically what's going to happen.

1) Compact and reorganize forums. This desperately needs to happen before anything else.
2) Figure out a way for the moderators to contact a super moderator or administrator if they need something to happen (mass deletion of threads, ban people, change sig, rename users***, a few others).
3) Get some vB mods to help us out with this. I have probably 30 tabs open right now and I'm looking into it.
4) After all of that, we can get moderators.

I know it's a long list of stuff to do, but I'm not going to select moderators for 40 forums only to compact it down to 25 a week later. Also, since moderators can only do so much we basically need a system similar to what we have for server admins right now so issues can be escalated and dealt with in a timely fashion.

Feel free to post any more questions you have, although none of this is set in stone. Alternatively PM me.

*I need to look into how this is done. Since they don't have mod status over other forums they may not even be able to move threads into those. I'll have to figure that out.
**It's also entirely likely that you will be able to make people "moderated". Basically whenever they post something that post is inserted into a queue of moderated items. A moderator or above will have to approve/deny this post before it's shown on the forums. At this point I'm more used to SMF where warnings (infractions in vB) will eventually elevate a person to moderated status.
***Administrator only

LegalSmash
27 Sep 2009, 04:40am
Thanks for clearing that up. May I add two points however:

I think polka's comments are well stated on the issue of admin inaction in the forums. If we ARE to have a hypothetical srs biznz forum for politics and other activities, then we should have more discriminating eyes protecting the integrity of the thread, forum, etc., even at the risk of pissing off some of our less intelligent or useful membership. This being the case, I don't believe banning, temp or perm, imbeciles will be anywhere near as effective as deleting their posts, locking and removing their threads, or handing out sparingly infractions, or rep points that are not positive based on an inability to behave themselves, or to gtfo.

Second, I think that a forum with absolutely no fly zone with imbecility will have me, red, polka, astrum, IJ and MAYBE, MAYBE five other people posting in it. I don't really have a problem with this, but remember that the last time we had issues and talk of this sort of action, the politics forum became as dead as terry schiavo's batting arm.

I have no problem with cleaning up the forum, however, proactively banning patrons to the server for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd time "stupid comment" or "stupid thread" will likely get us no visitors.

Lux
27 Sep 2009, 02:47pm
Thanks for clearing that up. May I add two points however:

I think polka's comments are well stated on the issue of admin inaction in the forums. If we ARE to have a hypothetical srs biznz forum for politics and other activities, then we should have more discriminating eyes protecting the integrity of the thread, forum, etc., even at the risk of pissing off some of our less intelligent or useful membership. This being the case, I don't believe banning, temp or perm, imbeciles will be anywhere near as effective as deleting their posts, locking and removing their threads, or handing out sparingly infractions, or rep points that are not positive based on an inability to behave themselves, or to gtfo.

Second, I think that a forum with absolutely no fly zone with imbecility will have me, red, polka, astrum, IJ and MAYBE, MAYBE five other people posting in it. I don't really have a problem with this, but remember that the last time we had issues and talk of this sort of action, the politics forum became as dead as terry schiavo's batting arm.

I have no problem with cleaning up the forum, however, proactively banning patrons to the server for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd time "stupid comment" or "stupid thread" will likely get us no visitors.

Fair enough and correct, but you can't have the best of both....either you have super serious rules that only a few people will be bothered to stay in-line with or have looser rules, but consequentially less wall of text intellectual posts.

I don't mind the idea of sub section mods but IMO putting one of "you guys" in as a mod for the politics section as it is now would be a conflict of interest.

PotshotPolka
27 Sep 2009, 03:43pm
I don't mind the idea of sub section mods but IMO putting one of the people that are willing to put in the time to post a well developed, concise argument, and and only ask the same of others in charge of the politics section they populate and nurture is just way to smart of an idea.

This. What's with "you guys" and wanting to lower the standards? It's like your goddamn motto.

Lux
27 Sep 2009, 04:24pm
This. What's with "you guys" and wanting to lower the standards? It's like your goddamn motto.

You are the one who has alienated yourself from the rest of SG IMO with this thread

I don't want to lower the standards just to have a debate with you, if you want to have your own forum with your own super serious rules then have it, but it'd be nice if there was a forum where people could talk about non off-topic shit without being hounded down.

I only say "you guys" because I don't consider myself part of the "politics section" group because I don't have the time or interest in most of the subjects to bother. You say "we" as in you and the perfect crew who are above "the other assholes".

I can't really relate with you at all Potshot or many of the people here (although sometimes I tend to agree), and I can't respect the authority and opinion you seem to think is king here, and I don't think ANYONE else should either. That is my opinion, but then this thread is just yours too.

PotshotPolka
27 Sep 2009, 05:15pm
No, I was baiting you on this and it confirmed my suspicions. You think "we" are elitist, that "we" don't want others in here because "we" don't the "others" ruining "our" section.


The section exists for debate, not to accomodate. The idea isn't to chase out people with ideas that are "unpalitable" its to simply keep out the obvious trolls, and to convince users that the section is very competitive in its debate form.

If this sidelines a large portion of the forums because they unable to comprehend this, it's apparently a problem since that just makes the hand full of us willing to speak clearly on these topics elitist.

What we consider "king" around here isn't the motherfucker with the banhammer, its just logical debate, that's all we ask for.

Astrum
28 Sep 2009, 12:57am
but it'd be nice if there was a forum where people could talk about non off-topic shit without being hounded down.

That's why I suggested splitting Politics into General Discussion and Serious Discussion.

GD would be, as the name implies, discussion. Although it's not going to be mindless spam like OT. SD would be reserved for actual debate. I know it's asking a lot for random people on the internet to communicate in an intelligent and thought out manner, but we're going to have a section dedicated to that (SD). If people are going to spam nonsense in SD then they'll have their posts deleted.

As a side note, when this forum (or rather SD) gets moderators we will keep a watchful eye on it to make sure arguments aren't being won by, "I have moderator, therefore I delete your post." I want to see honest to God debate.

Jaffa
28 Sep 2009, 05:16am
With regards to condensing the forums:

After a quick look down the current forum sections, i think we can definatly merge/get rid of a lot of the scrim sections and stickies (stick the competitive gaming divison stuff in with this), merge the sport sections, merge the anime section with somewhere (or turn it all into a general media/entertainment section), merge some of the modding sections, merge community events and announcements.

I do like the idea of general discussion and serious discussion sections, I think it will do a lot to make a distinction for newer/younger users, so they don't post and be attacked by our Politics Squad. I'm not sure we'll need moderators for every section though, i don't think most of our sections are really active enough to warrant members assigned to manage them.

My biggest recommendation towards appointing moderators to the serious discussion/politics section, is to make sure they are american! I see a few posts here talking about inactive administrators. The reason the politics section might be getting ignored is because over half of the AOs/other positions are from Europe. I can't say for the others, but i don't usually read all the american politics threads, as i find it hard to relate towards some of the issues. If you find spam/flame bait/ignorant posts, report them so we can view them and make a decision.

Lux
28 Sep 2009, 07:36am
No, I was baiting you on this and it confirmed my suspicions. You think "we" are elitist, that "we" don't want others in here because "we" don't the "others" ruining "our" section.

The section exists for debate, not to accomodate. The idea isn't to chase out people with ideas that are "unpalitable" its to simply keep out the obvious trolls, and to convince users that the section is very competitive in its debate form.

If this sidelines a large portion of the forums because they unable to comprehend this, it's apparently a problem since that just makes the hand full of us willing to speak clearly on these topics elitist.

What we consider "king" around here isn't the motherfucker with the banhammer, its just logical debate, that's all we ask for.

Fair point, to me your opening post wasn't like this though.


That's why I suggested splitting Politics into General Discussion and Serious Discussion.

GD would be, as the name implies, discussion. Although it's not going to be mindless spam like OT. SD would be reserved for actual debate. I know it's asking a lot for random people on the internet to communicate in an intelligent and thought out matter, but we're going to have a section dedicated to that (SD). If people are going to spam nonsense in SD then they'll have their posts deleted.

As a side note, when this forum (or rather SD) gets moderators we will keep a watchful eye on it to make sure arguments aren't being won by, "I have moderator, therefore I delete your post." I want to see honest to God debate.

This is exactly what I wanted to hear :usa2:

PotshotPolka
28 Sep 2009, 08:18am
So long as your willing to ban from all N&P sections trash like this I'm fine:


as do i.


This is what this socialist is doing with our money

http://4gifs.com/gallery/d/132926-1/Billbath.gif

LegalSmash
28 Sep 2009, 08:28pm
With regards to condensing the forums:

After a quick look down the current forum sections, i think we can definatly merge/get rid of a lot of the scrim sections and stickies (stick the competitive gaming divison stuff in with this), merge the sport sections, merge the anime section with somewhere (or turn it all into a general media/entertainment section), merge some of the modding sections, merge community events and announcements.

I do like the idea of general discussion and serious discussion sections, I think it will do a lot to make a distinction for newer/younger users, so they don't post and be attacked by our Politics Squad. I'm not sure we'll need moderators for every section though, i don't think most of our sections are really active enough to warrant members assigned to manage them.

My biggest recommendation towards appointing moderators to the serious discussion/politics section, is to make sure they are american! I see a few posts here talking about inactive administrators. The reason the politics section might be getting ignored is because over half of the AOs/other positions are from Europe. I can't say for the others, but i don't usually read all the american politics threads, as i find it hard to relate towards some of the issues. If you find spam/flame bait/ignorant posts, report them so we can view them and make a decision.

Personally, I would love to see more intelligent debate with our neighbors across the pond, and I welcome their involvement on threads regarding issues that transcend nationality.

Omar
30 Sep 2009, 12:54pm
IMO, splitting politics into GD and SD is a really good idea, I think it would be just great to split the casual, really short-posters from those who actually is trying to prove a fucking point with some decent facts.

BTW,

now for the not so srs buzniz


I like the idea of a no rules section, I just want to try it out, just on trial with ofcourse the exception of CP and other shit that would violate the law of america (Fuck yeah)

I think we should change P into SD and GD and make OTF into SG/b/

Ganzta
30 Sep 2009, 07:31pm
IMO, splitting politics into GD and SD is a really good idea, I think it would be just great to split the casual, really short-posters from those who actually is trying to prove a fucking point with some decent facts.

BTW,

now for the not so srs buzniz


I like the idea of a no rules section, I just want to try it out, just on trial with ofcourse the exception of CP and other shit that would violate the law of america (Fuck yeah)

I think we should change P into SD and GD and make OTF into SG/b/

im pretty sure you were one the reason why this thread was made, Mr. Hitler-is-from-Australia

Bad Dog
30 Sep 2009, 09:52pm
A no rules section would be a fun idea at first, but I guarantee that a no rules section would get some idiots in trouble. Just because its a "no rules" section doesnt mean people wont take somthing from that section and bring it up on say...an admin app?

Omar
1 Oct 2009, 06:49am
im pretty sure you were one the reason why this thread was made, Mr. Hitler-is-from-Australia

You're stupid for saying that. It's not me, I haven't posted anything in the politics section for ages. And everytime I do, it's pretty serious, gtfo my back.

Delirium
1 Oct 2009, 02:52pm
Im pretty sure Ganzta wasn't in your back. GTFO of life.

Seprating the Forums into subsections of different skill levels of debate is a good idea.

Astrum
1 Oct 2009, 03:04pm
I think this thread has run it's course...