I think what the OP was getting at is that people should be able to report obviously false statements to the moderator if the poster does not return to the thread. Presumably they would provide clear evidence of how the post was wrong in the report.
Then the poster would be notified by the moderator that someone has given a good citation that contradicts what they posted. At that point, the person who posted the falsehood could be enlightened, choose to ignore the evidence, or provide a counter-citation.
Is that right? I think most people are confused about the process suggested.
Something like that, perhaps - or maybe just a culture where a follow-up by PM/email wouldn’t be considered inappropriate. Really, all I’m asking is: given that the ethic of the board is ‘fighting ignorance’, should we not care that some examples of patently counterfactual ignorance go uncorrected.
That’s not unworkable, but it’s an awful lot of bookkeeping for IMO little reward. I think it could be warranted in extreme and habitual cases, but not as a general policy.
Suppose I was to PM someone who posted an egregiously counterfactual driveby comment in a GQ thread where the factual answer was readily apparently and the scientific consensus is not at all unclear - and I said (for example) something like:
Now, if the recipient of such a message reports me as a stalker or otherwise complains, am I going to be told to back off?
I’m not really familiar with the PM conventions here at the SDMB, but I can’t see how that could be considered in any way stalking or against the TOS. I would think that the point of having private messages on a message board is to communicate about what people post.
I get the feeling that most people might initially be a bit embarrassed by it, but ultimately appreciate the correction.
I personally think it’s good for people to be a bit ashamed in that sort of situation as well. Maybe it will discourage them from posting carelessly in the future.
I don’t think you can really be “stalking” with a single message. And if you’re contacting the same person repeatedly often enough that it would be stalking, I think you’ve probably missed getting the hint that that person doesn’t want to be corrected. On an occasional basis, though? I’ve gotten messages like that from other posters, and generally don’t mind (especially if it’s phrased politely like in your example).
The problem isn’t that GQ has changed, it’s that the world has changed. Questions with bona fide factual answers can be answered elsewhere, easily, by anybody.
All that are left for GQ are vague opinion-ish questions like “How hard is it to go from enlisted man to officer” and “Why hasn’t air travel seen technological jumps” and “Are there any countries the US couldn’t take over?” Any one of these could plausibly be moved to IMHO. But then, nothing would be left for GQ. I’m not sure GQ still has a mission in 2013.
What you’re suggesting seems like the board instituting some aggressive form of calling out posters and correcting them. I don’t agree. People have the right to be wrong. People have the right to post and then stop reading a thread. People have the right to ignore being corrected. You can’t beat sense into someone. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it participate on the SDMB in a reasonable and informative manner.
If someone is consistently posting incorrect information, repeatedly ignoring correction, then they can venture into territory that requires actual moderation to prevent disruption in the threads. But aggressively hunting down people for making a comment to inform them they are ignorant… that is stepping beyond politeness and the role of a message board.
If you are repeatedly messaging the same person, then they indeed might feel you are acting like a stalker, following them around and correcting their every mistake. They have the right to remain ignorant.
What do you suggest? You’re taking this a step further than Mangetout, into the territory that the mods have addressed. What do you propose? How do you expect it to work?
And, of course, it implies this “community of highly-knowledgeable persons” is actually highly-knowledgeable. (as opposed to simply believing it, and repeating it to each other for years)
I don’t really like the “Fighting Ignorance” motto, at least not if we take it seriously. If it was “Taking Wacky Questions Seriously”, or some such, it would reflect my interest in this place and the column more closely. Granted, it isn’t that punchy.
Nonsense. I just drilled a couple of holes in concrete with a masonry bit in my battery powered drill. No hammer action whatsoever. And even if you do use a hammer drill, the headache will go away once you pierce the Dura Mater. Here, let me demonstrate… [grabs raindog’s head]
Dunno. “The Straight Dope Message Board : A Bit Like Yahoo Answers” kinda takes the shine off it, for me. We only have one forum dedicated to factual questions.
When people post crap, it usually gets corrected. Sometimes the crap that was posted was something I thought was true, but didn’t post it because I wasn’t sure and couldn’t be bothered to do the research. So the fact that crap gets posted and corrected IS fighting ignorance.
Sometimes the wrong information includes valid keywords or terms-of-art that put those with good research skills on the scent of the real correct answer. I am pretty sure I have posted things along the line of “I have no idea the answer, but here are some keywords that may help” before, and even if it is not spelled out, that can work.
As for posters not returning after a correction: So what? If they think the correction is wrong, and say so, it turns into a pissing contest, often as not. When that is the case, it is probably best that they just let it go. Sometimes the correction is based on a misunderstanding, and correcting that just derails the thread. Sometimes the correction sows doubt, but the poster of the correct information remains unconvinced…what good does posting “Now you have me wondering…” do?
Well I suppose we could start going door to door, and asking people if they believe any of several things on a list, and then if they say yes we could tell them they are wrong and why. That is much more along the theme of fighting ignorance than just posting a message board where anyone can join and say whatever they want, or people can choose not to join and have their ignorance fought. But I think that crosses the bounds of good taste and polite behavior.