Discussion of Pit rules

I’d prefer there not be “stickies”. I don’t mind the rules. It’s hard to imagine any great thread is going to be hampered by having to avoid a few conversational conventions.

The stickies are something else.

  1. They appear at the top of every room display. Most people don’t read them, and the ones that have are regulars, and don’t need to be told in the first place.

  2. They take up server power. Notice that when the SDBM is slow, messages paint themselves one-by-one? Every one of those stickies is adding about 5% overhead to the part of the download burden that’s involved particularly in retrieving messages.

  3. Administrators, I know you’re in charge. I admire and respect your work. I’ll send chocolate flowers on Halloween. Just leave it. Put the rules in a FAQ someplace, and don’t mess with the board’s function, putting up “dumbo signs” that safety is everyone’s business, that loose lips sink ships, that a penny saved is a penny depreciated.

Hate speech…I would like to think that we’re a good enough bunch that in the situation where someone did try to pull that crap, we would either destroy him/her with our superior wit immediately, bring the poster to the mods’ attention, or both.

Well, if that’s what the hate speech thing is, I don’t like it. I support rules against actual hate speech, and if somebody comes in here trying to recruit Klan members, or being really obviously hateful against a group of people, they should be banned.

Saying “Fenris is a poopy head” (Yeah, ok, “pustulant shit for brains”), on the other hand, seems like a legitimate flame. I wouldn’t want to see somebody get banned for that.

Actually, I disagree on this single point. The bizarre sports nonsequiter (along with the bizarre cooking nonsequiter: “How do you make a grilled cheese sammich?”) is one of the very few tools that Dopers have to quiet down a thread that’s gotten WAY out of hand. There’ve been cases where the situation was ugly enough that I e-mailed a mod and then did a Pitjack in hopes of derailing some of the ugliness until a mod could get there. There was a thread (I no longer remember the details) where at least one, and maybe two Dopers in good standing were really savaging each other. WAAAY beyond the norm even in the Pit, IIRC. A successful Pitjack turned it into a harmless discussion and at least one (and maybe both) Dopers are still around. (I’m being vague on purpose: I don’t want to dredge the thread up. It was UG-ly)

What else can one do? We don’t want to sit around and just do nothing, we can’t post “Ok folks, time for a time out. Everyone cool down.” 'cause we’re not a mod. And besides, I’ve ssen that kind of faux-Mod comment escalate things all to hell but I’ve never seen anyone go nuts from a Pitjack comment, if only because (even if it’s annoying) it makes the attaker look nuts.

The “lawnchair” thing I agree with. If you’re going to participate in a flame thread, have the guts to participate. Take a stance! But I really think that moderate use of a Pitjack is a good thing.

Fenris

I agree with all the new rules, though I feel (as others appear to do) that the term “hate speech” needs to be defined better. I read it to mean attacks based on a persons: Ethnic group, nationality, religion, socio-economic background, sexuality, disability and gender. You could also add what a poster does for a living in there as well. YMMV.

Something that really bothers me: I think board policy is that if you come across a suspected troll, you email a mod - Calling someone a troll is not recommended. If that is right, then can we do away with the self-elected Troll-Hunter Generals that pop up from time to time? The Lobely threads from a month or so ago come to mind. I’ve been called a troll by one of the THG’s in those threads and it pissed me off no end, there’s really no comeback to being labeled a troll.

So far, and as it stands, I like the new rules, or at least the clarification on the old ones. I’m surprised at those who are upset that there are any rules here, because quite frankly, I don’t remember a time were there weren’t any rules in this forum.

I like 'em.

*My two cents, followed up with another two cents-

I really disagree with that technique, and have voiced my disagreement a number of times here.

I don’t think it’s one poster, or a group of posters, duty or place to decide when and where they feel it’s gone too far, or over the top. That’s what the mods are here for, and that’s what they do best-- keep a lid on things and keep things on track.

When it gets out of hand, or beyond the point of no return, they swoop in and say, ‘Mellow it out or we’re going close this sucker’, or they close it outright, with a comment or two telling the people to chill.

I really think it’s arrogant to feel that since you, or others, have a problem with a thread taking a certain turn, or it’s heading into a direction that disturbs you, that it’s then your duty to interject so much crap that the discussion is forced to stop.

That’s not your job, or your duty.

You don’t see the contradiction there? ‘It’s not alright for us to say, ‘Hey, calm it down’, because we’re not mods, but it’s ok for us to interject and blanket the thread with non-sequitors, to the point that the discussion has stopped, because we, or I, feel it’s gone on long enough.’

Come on. How is the non-sequitor hijack, meant to stop the thread, not taking on the role of a moderator?

Woops. I kind of lost the context of this thread towards the end.

My post was simply meant as a counter to the vote to keep the non-sequitor alive. I don’t want to re-debate the thing in it’s entirety here and now.

So, count me in as a vote against the non-sequitor hijack.

partly_warmer, although I think you’re probably right about people who have been here a bit not reading those stickies, they would never be read at all if they were only in the FAQ. When a new member is ready to post, at least those stickies - which have fairly specific titles - will be right there for them to look at. It would be better, of course, if the content of those stickies was displayed during the registration process, but even so, I think they’re useful as they are.

ivylass, most people in this bunch are good enough to know not to use hate speech, but there is such wide disparity of personalities and backgrounds here that every now and then a truly hateful person does post. Also, there have been many instances in which normally composed people lapsed into hate speech because particular buttons were pushed. It happens from time to time. It’s a problem when the person exhibits a pattern of it.

As CnoteChris mentioned, if you don’t like the direction a thread is taking - whether it’s in the Pit or another forum - then don’t go into it. Don’t post to it, don’t read it. No one’s making you do it. And it’s certainly not your responsibility to make sure people are behaving.

In fact, the whole “what can we, as mere members, do?” thing is a bit silly - it’s not our job or our duty to police these fora.

Now, people have mentioned in here that the “lawnchair rule” is a bit weird, and that it’s an example of the Mods imposing their will upon us. Yes, I’d have to agree that it is an odd regulation. But since Lynn is an administrator, it’s more of a “this is our place, and our rules” kind of deal. If you came to my house and I told you that you weren’t allowed to bring a lawnchair, you’d either respect that rule or leave.

As Anthracite said, the purpose of the Pit must be addressed as well. Is it the place for members to bitch at each other? Is it a place to rant about life’s problems (customer service, poor drivers, boss, etc.)? Is it a place to complain about the message board as a whole? All three, for now. But when Member A calls out Member B in a Pit rant, should everyone else just sit on their hands? If they post a “me, too” comment, they’re accused of piling on. Sure, there’s some entertainment value in watching two people go at it, but only to a degree (for me). If all the combatants are going to do is scream profanities at each other, then it’s a useless thread to me. Personally, I’d rather see such a thread take on a debating format - where Poster A, taking umbrage at something Poster B says, opens a thread that asks Poster B to explain more fully his actions and then attacks the posts of Poster B point by point, rather than attacking Poster B himself.

I dissent. If gazelle burgers were popular at McDonalds, cheetahs would starve.

Thank you for the quick response, Lynn. I still think the rule is a bit silly but it’s not a big deal and it doesn’t seem like anyone else agrees with me so I’ll just shut up now. :slight_smile:

Lib, Joe_Cool, I think the “put a link in your parodies” rule is not because some people might find not putting a link offensive; rather it is that not putting a link in results in a poster doing inadvertant trolling and causing mass confusion all because they are either too lazy to add the link or they enjoy causing great upset on the part of the posters they fool. Without a link, you may post a parody of someone’s racist post, and everyone assumes you are racist, and flames you, then finds out you are kidding. Remarkably like what happens when a troll posts racist thought they do not believe in. While you may not have intended to do a “real” troll, a post that says thing you do not beleive and results in a huge shitshorm is basically trolling, and if you do not give people at least a good hint what you are trying to do you are responsible for stirring up the anthill. The parody threads are generally not in such a context that a normal poster can figure it out unless he has read the thread it references; it’s not like all the people who get whooshed by a parody thread are just stupid. So we want a link so that a reasonably intelligent poster can figure out what the thread is actually about.

As regards posting offensive things wrt various deities certain posters may consider very dear to them, public figures have always been legitimate targets for flames (so long as we are not in danger of being sued for libel), and since God(s) is/are everywhere, you can’t get more public than that. :smiley: Besides, I think I covered this very situation here and you conceded my point.

See, I think that when you attack someone instead of their beliefs, it gets you nowhere. If I were to say “Gaudere looks silly in her silly moderator hat”, it wouldn’t explain as much as “Gaudere, your ideas on the socioeconomic impact of post-Bolshevik Ukraine on the world economy are totally off-base”. In a gentlemanly debate, you support your arguements with reasons. When you read threads that say “Go to hell, Poster X”, usually the first thing in the rant is a link and a quote to what pissed the OP off. I think the Dope frowns on Pitting someone for no reason. Also, pitting someone based on personal grudges is bad taste.

This is the only thing on the list that bothers me. Personally, I think it is valuable to know if someone “hates”. We are here to fight ignorance, right? Can’t fight something that is hidden.

If I might be allowed a quick story. When I first got here, I was very intolerant of religious folk. I had an axe to grind because I am gay. I posted a few things that might be construed as “hate oriented”. As a result, I got flamed royally and deservedly so. I was forced to confront my prejudices and I realized that I needed to take a harder look at what I really believed and what kind of person I wanted to be. I have long since abandoned my beliefs and have found many Christians on the board that I really respect. To me, that made all the flames worthwhile. I’m a happier, better adjusted person now.

I realize that my situation might be a rarity. A simple pit thread is not going to cure everyone, or even most people, of their hatred. But it does plant a seed at least when you realize that a bunch of well-respected, intelligent posters think that your ideas are moronic. If you have a desire to better yourself, you take notice and re-evaluate what your opinions are.

IMHO, it would be a shame to not allow the potential of changing a bigots mind to occur, no matter how rare that event may be. We are mostly adults here and I think the system works well. Otherwise, the ignorance will still be present, we just won’t be as aware of it.

I’m a little curious about the "don’t say or imply someone is on your ignore list.

This situation may seem a little contrived , but it has happened to me on other message boards. Say there is another poster X with whom you have had much bad blood in the past, and it seems every interaction gets real ugly and personal completely away from the original point. So you decide that the best thing is to just not interact, and ignore all their posts because you know you will react badly. Which works fine until some day you are in a debate with some other people. X comes in and posts something, which you know it is best just not to look at. Later in the thread people start implying that you are losing the agrument because you havn’t responed to X’s post. Under the new rules are we just not supposed to say that we choose not to interact with that person? It seems like it could get wierd with things just hanging, and with not being allowed to explain your actions.

I would want to know if I did something that caused someone to put me on their ignore list, so I could try to work out whatever I did to cause hurt or angry feelings with them by email.

I hope I would never DO anything to cause that sort of reaction, but if I did, I would want to know.

I think you just have to exercise caution with your ignore list. You should know that if you choose to ignore someone and they appear in a GD/Pit thread, you might have to respond to something they’re saying due to the nature of the thread. It’s not difficult to look at an ignored poster’s post, and you can ignore them in other threads. You just have to realize the reprecussions of having the ignore list and realize that with some people it’s inevitable you’ll come into contact with them. Seeing how this is an open message board, the person pissing you off has just as much of a right to be somewhere as you, unless they’re breaking board rules. If you get pissed off every time they say something in a thread like that, then it’s your responsibility to either keep your cool or stay out of that argument.

Plus, it could be used as a cop out. If you’re getting hammered in GD/Pit you can just go “la la la, you’re on my Ignore List so I don’t have to listen to you.”

That said, I have to side with those for the nonsequitors. Although mods are omnipotent, they often don’t like meddling in mundane affairs and there isn’t going to be a moderator keeping an eye on every thread 24-7-365. Thus, if a thread is getting nasty fast, the nonsequitors can be a good way of preventing people from doing stupid and bannable things.

As for the lawn chairs, I agree with you, Lynn. If you want to watch a good thrashing, go ahead, but you don’t have to announce your presence. It’s worse than a 1900th post party in terms of wasting bandwidth. MPSIMS is for MPSYMS, not the Pit.

Ignore lists because of a misunderstanding are not what I’m talking about, and seem kinda stupid. I’m talking about one pubic abscess in particular on another board. He was just a master of pushing my button and goading me into over-reacting, making me look like the asshole, and him like the victim. It was totally intentional just to get people to hate me, and it was working. I knew I couldn’t win, so I refused to read anything of his again. But if I hadn’t been allowed to explain why I wasn’t responding, then he would have won in a different way by making me look afraid to debate his points.

That seems like an exceptional case then. If I felt that there was somebody trying to push my buttons at every single turn, I’d e-mail a mod explaining the situation, as this person doesn’t seem like the considerate type. Hopefully there could be some sort of mediation.

You say that this was on another board though, were the people there as smart as they are here. This is the only message board I go on but from what I hear we’re one of the smartest out there. People here are fairly perceptive, and if they notice that PosterX is always trying to get you to fly off your rocker, they’ll probably end up siding with you. Like I said, mods are omnipotent so they’d probably pick this up sooner or later as well. I bet if you even gave them a big enough bribe, or friendly e-mail, depending on which you were dealing with, they’d let you post that you’re ignoring PosterX for the sake of your sanity.

I thought that once, but I outgrew it.

No, I’m not trying to insult you. It takes a lot of work to realize that you can convince yourself that whatever the Masturbating Chimps have to say or do, it’s not of interest to you anymore. It’s a long process, but you can get through it.

And it feels so much better not to read their filth. My only regret is that there is no “auto-censor” function that puts “***” in place of words (although, I am working on a client-side browser plugin to do just that…). There are a small number of the people on this Board are so profoundly sick, hateful, and disgusting that it makes me feel dirty just to even see their names.

Based on my many, many conversations and e-mails with people, you would not believe how many very “popular” posters show up very commonly on the Ignore lists of many people.

Lynn’s rule about not discussing who specifically is or isn’t on an Ignore list is a good thing - the Pit would fill with flames-o-plenty otherwise. And why would it do so?

Because what affects the Masturbating Chimps on the SDMB, what hurts them the most, is the knowledge that a large number of posters have such infinite contempt for their childish, immature, uneducated, narcissistic, harassing, and hateful antics and posturing; that they will not even deign to read a word they post.

Trust in the Ignore list. It will set you free.

Why would one ever feel he or she absolutely had to respond to what another member said? That implies a certain lack of free will and self-control. If someone’s that focused on getting me to say something back to them, I won’t give them that courtesy and will instead choose not to respond. If they continue to goad - which is a form of harrassment - then it’s time to contact a moderator or an administrator.

No one has the power to make me say something on a message board. That’s my responsibility, and I won’t duck it for any reason.