Test Forums: Off Topic for Politics and Religion

[Kathryn41 3,205]

cohorts of regulars isn't the problem; the way they post in OT is. I am officially disappointed in this decision and do not believe that 10 hours is a valid 'trial' run.

[Ban Hammer 13,517]

balanced? what doyoumean?

it means the fuzzy one watches fox news.

[Pooky 3,828]

it means the fuzzy one watches fox news.

And I thought a balanced opinion just meant you had a chip on both shoulders

Edited September 4, 2010 by Pooky

[trillium13 84]

I am officially disappointed in this decision and do not believe that 10 hours is a valid 'trial' run.

I agree. That's not even enough time for a lot of people to realize a change has been made.

I liked it better separated.

[Captain Ewok 1,900]

I posted this to the mods so I will repost to clarify. "Actually it is not dead. Things were just too easily buried in a sub forum. I am probably going to recreate a better version as an entire new forum for politics and religion and set up some rules. I want to do it right. An OT sub forum seemed wrong (off topic should be the catch all forums not something divided up). The new politics and religion forum will go right below OT."

I still think there is merit to adding the forum. It was just not quite the way I hoped in terms of location and setting up rules. Making it a sub forum was not the right approach. I was short on time as I was being dragged out the door by my "other half" so I undid the change until I can do it the right way tonight (1PM here now). So long story, it will be back and actually better I think.

[TBoneTX 46,072]

Well, you're the Admiral, si man, but I give Kathryn's first post in this thread a +5, she man, and I liked it a lot exactly the way you had it, si man.

[Captain Ewok 1,900]

I saw how busy the forum was and generally I hate to bury forums (as a sub forum) that are that busy. It makes navigation more difficult.

[TBoneTX 46,072]

I want a legitimate sub forum that discusses either submarines or hoagies, si man. The former can navigate through the oceans, and the latter can navigate through our digestive systems & alimentary canals. Alimentary, Watson, si man.

Edited September 4, 2010 by TBoneTX

[Captain Ewok 1,900]

On a side note, I admit I rushed this a bit . Hopefully though the final iteration is as good as possible. I value the feedback, especially when you let me know if I am goofing up (nerd/dunce hat is on)!

[TBoneTX 46,072]

a side

I want potato salad as a side with my sub forum, slurrrp man.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I too was beginning to see a friendlier, more interesting Off Topic forum begin to arise even in the far too short time the option existed. The point of the exercise was to provide a separate location to post the controversial subject matter that was overwhelming OT and turning away those who would like to participate in an off topic discussion without it becoming an aggressive free for all, and yes, I thought it was working. The apparent vacuum in OT is only because the handful of people who are monopolizing OT - the ones who get involved in the controversial subject matters - were moved over to the controversial topic sub-forum and others had not yet realized a friendlier OT was available.. I definitely don't think there was enough time given to test the political/religious sub-forum at all - a trial should be a few days at the very least.

We do need to have some place where people can post off topic subject matter without everything becoming politicized and argumentative between just a handful of people. Right now, that doesn't exist -anymore - on VJ. OT currently belongs to just a few who monopolize it and turn almost every thread that is offered into some sort of a political or religious football to be tossed back and forth between themselves.

Yep.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I haven't had regular access to the internet for the last 10 days, so I've been out of the loop, but IMO, fragmenting and creating separate subforums by topics is the wrong approach to keeping harmony on the boards.

Captain Ewok - as an alternative idea, how about allowing posters of threads when they first create them, to designate a category for their thread and then add a filter feature for viewing Off Topic where anyone can choose which categories to view?

So for example, if I started a thread containing a news article about the Catholic Church, I could check two or three categories - news, current events, and religion. Someone who has the religion filter checked would not see the thread, but would see it listed under news or current events.

Some possible categories for filters:

• Religion
• Politics
• News
• Current Events
• Science
• Games
• Humor
• Immigration

Threads don't always fall so neatly into one specific category, but by using a filtering feature, viewers can then choose what they want to see or not.

Of course, people can show some restraint and simply ignore whatever threads they don't want to read or participate in.

Edited September 4, 2010 by El Buscador

[Captain Ewok 1,900]

I like the filtering idea; just not as easy to implement.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I too was beginning to see a friendlier, more interesting Off Topic forum begin to arise even in the far too short time the option existed. The point of the exercise was to provide a separate location to post the controversial subject matter that was overwhelming OT and turning away those who would like to participate in an off topic discussion without it becoming an aggressive free for all, and yes, I thought it was working. The apparent vacuum in OT is only because the handful of people who are monopolizing OT - the ones who get involved in the controversial subject matters - were moved over to the controversial topic sub-forum and others had not yet realized a friendlier OT was available.. I definitely don't think there was enough time given to test the political/religious sub-forum at all - a trial should be a few days at the very least.

We do need to have some place where people can post off topic subject matter without everything becoming politicized and argumentative between just a handful of people. Right now, that doesn't exist -anymore - on VJ. OT currently belongs to just a few who monopolize it and turn almost every thread that is offered into some sort of a political or religious football to be tossed back and forth between themselves.

Kathryn, we normally agree on a lot of things, but on this I completely disagree with you. Having heated, lively discussions was never the problem. It was when posters would step over the line and violate the TOS. Some here may start threads just to entice other members, but even that shouldn't be a worry because others can simply ignore the thread entirely. Speaking only for myself here, but at this point, really the only reason why I view/post in OT is to hopefully engage in a lively discussion, even if it gets heated, short of it becoming a flame war and a total mockery of the TOS.

I believe there are far more effective ways to address the total disregard for the TOS by some members without taking away the enjoyment of Off Topic, including having lively discussions about heated topics.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Kathryn, we normally agree on a lot of things, but on this I completely disagree with you. Having heated, lively discussions was never the problem. It was when posters would step over the line and violate the TOS. Some here may start threads just to entice other members, but even that shouldn't be a worry because others can simply ignore the thread entirely. Speaking only for myself here, but at this point, really the only reason why I view/post in OT is to hopefully engage in a lively discussion, even if it gets heated, short of it becoming a flame war and a total mockery of the TOS.

I believe there are far more effective ways to address the total disregard for the TOS by some members without taking away the enjoyment of Off Topic, including having lively discussions about heated topics.

I can appreciate your perspective, and agree that lively discussions are not the problem - except that they don't remain at 'lively' - they often go well past lively and even heated and become aggressive, disruptive, insulting and sometimes incendiary. It happens a lot. Those heated lively discussions that you enjoy are not the problem - it is what they regularly become that is the problem.

We spend between 75 to 100% of our moderating efforts on any given day moderating Off Topic - that is one forum out of 47 forums that consumes the Lion's share of our work - and until today it was the one forum that has absolutely nothing to do with the site's stated purpose - to assist members on their immigration journeys.

You say others can ignore the thread, but it isn't just the threads that is the problem - it is the behaviour of those posting in the threads who do not confine their poor behaviour to just those threads. It spills out into other threads, other forums and these individuals often make victims of VJ members who innocently post something in OT and suddenly find themselves under attack. This is why I feel strongly that there needs to be a separate place where those members who enjoy the 'heated, lively' discussions that border on becoming flame wars (and often pass the border) can go without ruining things for other VJ members. Providing a separate forum - or sub-forum or whatever it turns out to be - based upon the subject matter that most often becomes problematic should be a win-win situation for all.

I don't see how having a separate forum for such discussions would interfere with you having your 'lively discussions" or stop you from enjoying both Off Topic and the new Politics and Religion forum. You can still 'play' and now others who don't like to rough-house can have a share of the playground as well.

I agree that there are far more effective ways of dealing with the disruptive elements however, I suspect such steps may be beyond our abilities to effect or beyond the site's willingness to implement.

Edited September 5, 2010 by Kathryn41