Test Forums: Off Topic for Politics and Religion

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

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.

I can understand the frustration with trying to effectively moderate in OT, but trying to manage which threads belong where is now going to be a new frustration for Moderators, IMO, nor do I see how this will help solve the root of the problem. I don't see how threads can be so neatly categorized by topics as general as Religion or Politics when those areas can cover just about any topic. For example, if I post an article from a science journal on Climate Change, I would think that would fall under science and not politics, whereas, if say, Bill, posts an article from the New York Post which attempts to discredit science, that's political. However, I doubt that the Mods are going to be able to consistently discern political threads on science from science based threads.

Anyhow, I really hope that Captain Ewok will be able to implement some kind of filter feature so that people can choose what topics they will see, rather than trying to compartmentalize forums based on topic content that is too broad and vague to reasonably organize.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

The system you are talking about is called "tagging" and it can certainly benefit the forum. The main issue right now is that IPB (the software we use) does not support that feature without some serious modifications (which introduce upgrade nightmares when a modification of that scope is created). The Country Portal system is the closest thing we have to this right now however that was completely custom (ability to list topics form various forums based on country and other factors). I will say that adding tagging is something that I am happy to add if it is integrated into IPB or has a solid third party developer.

[^_^ 5,021]

I think the separate forum for P/R is working very well!

[Heracles 417]

Excellent idea.

Edited September 6, 2010 by Heracles

[Heracles 417]

I don't see how threads can be so neatly categorized by topics as general as Religion or Politics when those areas can cover just about any topic. For example, if I post an article from a science journal on Climate Change, I would think that would fall under science and not politics, whereas, if say, Bill, posts an article from the New York Post which attempts to discredit science, that's political.

Well other forums also include news stories in that category. Basically anything controversial is limited to one specific section and does not deter others from general OT discussions. Likewise, anyone entering that section clearly understands that things can get heated and personal.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

For example, if I post an article from a science journal on Climate Change, I would think that would fall under science and not politics, whereas, if say, Bill, posts an article from the New York Post which attempts to discredit science, that's political. However, I doubt that the Mods are going to be able to consistently discern political threads on science from science based threads.

You really do think you have a lock on the truth, don't you?

Any thing "scientific" is political these days!

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

You really do think you have a lock on the truth, don't you?

Any thing "scientific" is political these days!

Apparently you don't know the difference between a peer-reviewed scientific journal and the New York Post.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Apparently you don't know the difference between a peer-reviewed scientific journal and the New York Post.

Evidently, neither does the IPCC.

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

Sorting out what threads belong in P & R and what should remain in Off Topic is already becoming a fiasco. Apparently to some who have the ability to move topics use the most broadest definitions for threads.

If implementing a filter feature would be too difficult, what about simply adding colored flags to threads within Off Topic where someone can easily see what kind of topic the thread is?

[Kathryn41 3,205]

I'm liking the new Off Topic - I can browse there and enjoy the subject matter and not have to go into the Politics and Religion forum unless I receive a report.

If you think threads are being moved indiscriminately, then PM the questionable moves to someone on the mod team and we'll take a look. It could be that we need to set some more carefully defined parameters to help make those decisions more clear. This is still the trial period, though, so I suspect there will be bugs to work out.

There would still have to be some sort of judgment call to set up warning flags or identifying flags on individual posts as well - that also sounds like it might become quite cumbersome.

Edited September 7, 2010 by Kathryn41

[^_^ 5,021]

Sorting out what threads belong in P & R and what should remain in Off Topic is already becoming a fiasco.

Name a few threads which got moved inappropriately. I don't see any.

[TBoneTX 45,288]

Name a few threads which got moved inappropriately. I don't see any.

Nor (overtly) do I, si man... er, no man. Also, a system of colored flags might be tedious to implement, and some folks are slightly or massively colorblind, si man.

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

...a system of colored flags might be tedious to implement, and some folks are slightly or massively colorblind, si man.

context blindness seems to also be a problem for some folks.

[TBoneTX 45,288]

context blindness seems to also be a problem for some folks.

I'm more in favor of protext than of context, si man.

[^_^ 5,021]

So Captain, how are the two forums (Off Topic and Politics/Religion) doing in terms of traffic? P/R seems to be faster paced than OT is, but that's just an observation without any data. I'd love to know how things look from a web analytics point of view.