If you haven't noticed, I haven't really participated around here recently. Few reasons, mostly to do with time and a loss of interest in slamming my head into a brick wall.

While I haven't participated, I still check in occasionally, but I can't possibly keep up with the posts, so I've taken a hands off approach to the spin room. That has always been my philosophy in here anyways, hands off.

Occasionally, I've responded to reported posts with a "cool it off" and I closed a thread the other day because it was getting way off topic, but I don't think that's changing the overall behavior of this board. I don't expect it to change either.

The problem with this method is that I only end up responding to the few people who violated the rules in the particular thread that was reported. I miss all of the threads where they are the target of ridicule. So when I do get a report I have a hard time taking any action based on one person's opinion of what justice is.

Just a few of my thoughts. I'm opening this thread to hear your thoughts on the spin room. What's good? What's Bad? What do you think of the hands off management? What do you think the role of the moderators in here should be? Any criticisms are welcome.

I plead with both side not to respond to troll threads and posts.

.

All-in-all your new approach seems to be working its self out without any problems.

Sure there are heated moments and super opinions, but overall, it is working.

And when you speak of "Ridicule", most in here give as good as they get so it is pretty even on that end of the scale.

I think your idea has been a success in that all posters in here are able to hold their own in any conversation or topic.

I am just glad to be off your Radar for as long as I have .... LOL

.

It's a gang mentality. This is an ultraconservative ***** board. If that's what you want it to be, its a success. If not, then you're not quite where you want to be.

(10-02-2009 12:56 PM)Artifice Wrote:  It's a gang mentality. This is an ultraconservative ***** board. If that's what you want it to be, its a success. If not, then you're not quite where you want to be.

I don't want it to be about what I want it to be. I think most of the older posters on here will tell you I am not an ultra conservative.

Seems to me like it's SUPPOSED to be a ***** board.
As far as the ultraconservative, I don't think that's accurate. Probably looks that way to someone whose own viewpoint is left of left, but I imagine there are people on here whose views are so far right that they think this is a liberal ***** board.
On balance, it's clearly more conservative than liberal. But it's a far cry from ultraconservative.
Most of the people do try to engage in genuine discussion.
There is one exception who generally has nothing of value to add but persists in virtually nothing other than ad hominem attacks, but most of the time I can remember to ignore him, and efforts to curtail his kind would probably result in over-restriction of the good stuff that goes on here.

(10-02-2009 01:17 PM)Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:  

(10-02-2009 12:56 PM)Artifice Wrote:  It's a gang mentality. This is an ultraconservative ***** board. If that's what you want it to be, its a success. If not, then you're not quite where you want to be.

I don't want it to be about what I want it to be. I think most of the older posters on here will tell you I am not an ultra conservative.

Not saying that's what you want, but it's definitely what you have. There's a place for everything though. The board I mod has a politics forum, and it's decidedly more liberal/libertarian.

(10-02-2009 01:24 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  On balance, it's clearly more conservative than liberal. But it's a far cry from ultraconservative.

95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc. It's dishonest to even suggest it's anything but a very conservative attack board.

I'm not here to pick a fight. It's just the truth. If you disagree, there's nothing I can do for you other than the facts. Thanks.

(10-02-2009 01:32 PM)Artifice Wrote:  95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc. It's dishonest to even suggest it's anything but a very conservative bombast board.

I'm not here to pick a fight. It's just the truth. If you disagree, there's nothing I can do for you other than the facts. Thanks.

I never understand this attitude.

If you don't like that "95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc" POST SOMETHING THAT ISN'T!

And that ma'am is nothing but the facts.
Thanks

(10-02-2009 01:32 PM)Artifice Wrote:  

(10-02-2009 01:17 PM)Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:  

(10-02-2009 12:56 PM)Artifice Wrote:  It's a gang mentality. This is an ultraconservative ***** board. If that's what you want it to be, its a success. If not, then you're not quite where you want to be.

I don't want it to be about what I want it to be. I think most of the older posters on here will tell you I am not an ultra conservative.

Not saying that's what you want, but it's definitely what you have. There's a place for everything though. The board I mod has a politics forum, and it's decidedly more liberal/libertarian.

(10-02-2009 01:24 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  On balance, it's clearly more conservative than liberal. But it's a far cry from ultraconservative.

95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc. It's dishonest to even suggest it's anything but a very conservative attack board.

I'm not here to pick a fight. It's just the truth. If you disagree, there's nothing I can do for you other than the facts. Thanks.

Not our fault you libs can't back up your statements with facts.

(10-02-2009 01:49 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(10-02-2009 01:32 PM)Artifice Wrote:  95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc. It's dishonest to even suggest it's anything but a very conservative bombast board.

I'm not here to pick a fight. It's just the truth. If you disagree, there's nothing I can do for you other than the facts. Thanks.

I never understand this attitude.

If you don't like that "95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc" POST SOMETHING THAT ISN'T!

And that ma'am is nothing but the facts.
Thanks

Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't bother. Really depends on how bored I am. I get more interesting, informed discussions elsewhere. I rarely ever learn anything here. :shrug:

(10-02-2009 02:09 PM)Artifice Wrote:  Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't bother. Really depends on how bored I am. I get more interesting, informed discussions elsewhere. I rarely ever learn anything here. :shrug:

That's because you traipse through the spin room with your index fingers in your ears screaming "LALALALALALA!"

(10-02-2009 01:32 PM)Artifice Wrote:  

(10-02-2009 01:17 PM)Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:  

(10-02-2009 12:56 PM)Artifice Wrote:  It's a gang mentality. This is an ultraconservative ***** board. If that's what you want it to be, its a success. If not, then you're not quite where you want to be.

I don't want it to be about what I want it to be. I think most of the older posters on here will tell you I am not an ultra conservative.

Not saying that's what you want, but it's definitely what you have. There's a place for everything though. The board I mod has a politics forum, and it's decidedly more liberal/libertarian.

(10-02-2009 01:24 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  On balance, it's clearly more conservative than liberal. But it's a far cry from ultraconservative.

95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc. It's dishonest to even suggest it's anything but a very conservative attack board.

I'm not here to pick a fight. It's just the truth. If you disagree, there's nothing I can do for you other than the facts. Thanks.

What board do you mod?

Spin Room AUP
Since people can't play nice, here's a much more stringent AUP that will be enforced heavily.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This forum strives to be a place for meaningful, mature and enjoyable discussion of political issues. In order to further these goals, the moderators and administrators have decided to implement the following policy with respect to the moderation of the forum and the type of posting which is appropriate. Note that these rules are in addition to, and do not replace, <a href='http://www.ncaabbs.com/frontpage/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4' target='_blank'>AUP</a> . The rules will be applied as objectively and impartially as reasonably possible, but are subject to the interpretation and judgement of the moderators and administrators.

(1) Ad hominem attacks, insults and flames are not acceptable. Posts which consist largely or entirely of such comments will be deleted. Otherwise substantive posts which contain some ad hominems or flames will be edited to remove the inappropriate material while retaining the substance of the post.

Rule #1 is violated in almost every thread.

Calling a fellow poster a liar, deceitful, or a similar accusation, is not acceptable, even if you believe that your fellow poster really is a liar or deceitful. This kind of accusation never furthers the debate. The only acceptable response on P.D. to what appears to be a lie from a fellow poster is to present evidence or argument to contradict what your fellow poster has said.

(2) Hyperbolic or overly emotive language and imagery, such as unwarranted comparisons to Nazi Germany, are generally discouraged, and will be deleted if they appear to serve no purpose other than to inflame the discussion.

Broken on many threads.

(3) Off-topic posting or hijacking of threads is inappropriate. Threads which are off topic in the Political Forum will be moved to a more appropriate forum. Posts in individual threads which have little or no relevance to the topic of that thread will likely be deleted. A person prompted to bring up a side-topic in the course of a discussion should start a new thread, and link to it in the original thread.

Happens all the time.

(4) Multiple threads on the same or very similar topics serve no purpose. If a thread is started on a subject which is already being discussed in an active thread, the new thread will be closed.

(5) Threads which become overly heated or develop into flame-wars will be closed.

Almost every thread.

(6) People who refer to arguments or comments made on other threads should include a link to the thread in question as well as a relevant quote from it.

(7) If a person breaches these rules, then in the first instance a moderator will warn the individual as to his or her behavior. Repeated and flagrant violations will result in action by the administrators, which may include the suspension or withdrawal that person's posting privileges.

Also doesn't seem to happen.

(10-02-2009 02:55 PM)dwr0109 Wrote:  Spin Room AUP
Since people can't play nice, here's a much more stringent AUP that will be enforced heavily.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This forum strives to be a place for meaningful, mature and enjoyable discussion of political issues. In order to further these goals, the moderators and administrators have decided to implement the following policy with respect to the moderation of the forum and the type of posting which is appropriate. Note that these rules are in addition to, and do not replace, <a href='http://www.ncaabbs.com/frontpage/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4' target='_blank'>AUP</a> . The rules will be applied as objectively and impartially as reasonably possible, but are subject to the interpretation and judgement of the moderators and administrators.

(1) Ad hominem attacks, insults and flames are not acceptable. Posts which consist largely or entirely of such comments will be deleted. Otherwise substantive posts which contain some ad hominems or flames will be edited to remove the inappropriate material while retaining the substance of the post.

Rule #1 is violated in almost every thread.

Calling a fellow poster a liar, deceitful, or a similar accusation, is not acceptable, even if you believe that your fellow poster really is a liar or deceitful. This kind of accusation never furthers the debate. The only acceptable response on P.D. to what appears to be a lie from a fellow poster is to present evidence or argument to contradict what your fellow poster has said.

(2) Hyperbolic or overly emotive language and imagery, such as unwarranted comparisons to Nazi Germany, are generally discouraged, and will be deleted if they appear to serve no purpose other than to inflame the discussion.

Broken on many threads.

(3) Off-topic posting or hijacking of threads is inappropriate. Threads which are off topic in the Political Forum will be moved to a more appropriate forum. Posts in individual threads which have little or no relevance to the topic of that thread will likely be deleted. A person prompted to bring up a side-topic in the course of a discussion should start a new thread, and link to it in the original thread.

Happens all the time.

(4) Multiple threads on the same or very similar topics serve no purpose. If a thread is started on a subject which is already being discussed in an active thread, the new thread will be closed.

(5) Threads which become overly heated or develop into flame-wars will be closed.

Almost every thread.

(6) People who refer to arguments or comments made on other threads should include a link to the thread in question as well as a relevant quote from it.

(7) If a person breaches these rules, then in the first instance a moderator will warn the individual as to his or her behavior. Repeated and flagrant violations will result in action by the administrators, which may include the suspension or withdrawal that person's posting privileges.

Also doesn't seem to happen.

It's mainly because there are no moderators left to watch after this place.

(10-02-2009 01:32 PM)Artifice Wrote:  95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc. It's dishonest to even suggest it's anything but a very conservative attack board.

Not at all.
Such comments could easily come (and many do) from people whose viewpoints are very much in the center.

If Obama were close to the political center, then a 95% attack rate by those more conservative than him would signify an ultraconservative bias.

But if Obama is further left than 95% of Americans, then a totally representative cross section could easily produce a result where 95% of the posts attacked him for not being conservative enough. And I'm pretty certain that Obama is way closer to beilng further left than 95% of Americans than he is to being middle of the road.

My best guess (without tedious analysis) is that the prevailing sentiment on this board is right of center but hardly ultraconservative, and that Obama is well to the left of center. I believe your perspective is also considerably left of center, so that Obama looks moderate to you and anyone to the right of him looks ultraconservative. I understand the perspective, but I don't think that your 95% observation (if correct, and I'm not sure whether it is or not) means what you say it means.

dwr0109:

You're pretty much right on.

(10-02-2009 03:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-02-2009 01:32 PM)Artifice Wrote:  95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc. It's dishonest to even suggest it's anything but a very conservative attack board.

Not at all.
Such comments could easily come (and many do) from people whose viewpoints are very much in the center.

If Obama were close to the political center, then a 95% attack rate by those more conservative than him would signify an ultraconservative bias.

But if Obama is further left than 95% of Americans, then a totally representative cross section could easily produce a result where 95% of the posts attacked him for not being conservative enough. And I'm pretty certain that Obama is way closer to beilng further left than 95% of Americans than he is to being middle of the road.

My best guess (without tedious analysis) is that the prevailing sentiment on this board is right of center but hardly ultraconservative, and that Obama is well to the left of center. I believe your perspective is also considerably left of center, so that Obama looks moderate to you and anyone to the right of him looks ultraconservative. I understand the perspective, but I don't think that your 95% observation (if correct, and I'm not sure whether it is or not) means what you say it means.

It was the same way, long before Obama got elected.

(10-02-2009 03:09 PM)Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:  dwr0109:

You're pretty much right on.

I do not have a real problem with any of the violations other than #1.
There are a few posters on here that the second their conception of the world is questioned....choose to resort to this nonsense instead of being able to debate in a civil manner. I wish the mods would get this in check. Its one thing to engage in good natured ribbing...its another thing to just be insulting and contemptuous in posts.

(10-02-2009 03:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-02-2009 01:32 PM)Artifice Wrote:  95% of the threads on here are Dems/Obama/Liberals are bad/etc. It's dishonest to even suggest it's anything but a very conservative attack board.

Not at all.
Such comments could easily come (and many do) from people whose viewpoints are very much in the center.

If Obama were close to the political center, then a 95% attack rate by those more conservative than him would signify an ultraconservative bias.

But if Obama is further left than 95% of Americans, then a totally representative cross section could easily produce a result where 95% of the posts attacked him for not being conservative enough. And I'm pretty certain that Obama is way closer to beilng further left than 95% of Americans than he is to being middle of the road.

My best guess (without tedious analysis) is that the prevailing sentiment on this board is right of center but hardly ultraconservative, and that Obama is well to the left of center. I believe your perspective is also considerably left of center, so that Obama looks moderate to you and anyone to the right of him looks ultraconservative. I understand the perspective, but I don't think that your 95% observation (if correct, and I'm not sure whether it is or not) means what you say it means.

There are several posters on here that do not claim gang colors and bash both sides for their nonsense. The NeoCons on here do however make long rambling posts and tend to get noticed the most with the use of elaborate sigs and such.
I would not call the spin room ultra conservative...but...right leaning ...yes.

Unfortunately, the only people that best know the Spin Room and could really ID what is garbage are all the regular posters, and it would probably be hard to maintain any impartial moderation.