How Active Must I Be?

Its hard to respond to a thread I created when I’m sleeping. What if I left my house for a few hours, or a few days? What if I was sick? What if I had a question, and started a post because I wanted to share a story? I also don’t have the internet on my phone, and not constantly on the internet. I was waiting for some responses, and was going to respond, but saw my thread was closed (Huxley/Orwell). Do I have to be like the fuckers who stare at a screen every 5 seconds?

If this is about the thread I just closed, the issue wasn’t the lack of responding. It was that you didn’t include any post in your OP.

Who’re you calling a fucker?!

I think what my esteemed colleague is saying is no, you don’t. One of the great things about this board is that you can be any kind of fucker you want to be.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Well, I was waiting for a few interested people to read it, so we could have a discussion later. And I still replied. Give me a character limit.

I won’t speak for the limits Chronos wants to see, but in Great Debates and Elections we hope to see original posters comment on their opinion on the topic being put forward to give respondents something to respond to with their own take.

I think there would be resistance with “jack-boot policing”, so they edge the line of tolerate behavior. When people conform and just go along with either X and/or Y, the power drunk become addicted and keep trying to get away with their objectives…

The Public Space now isn’t the Town Square, its communication like Facebook, Twitter, etc… If someone is banned, there is no other Twitter. I’m sure there are many who spent years trying to build the online audience (as opposed to the traditional), and the threat is enough for people to self-censor. Of course, they mention a few names that most people don’t like, so the general population think “Oh well, its not ME”.

The invisible hand of the free market will take care of that. Platforms that are less free will be replaced by platforms that are more free. Tumblr isn’t doing well after they banned adult content.

If there are no alternatives to Twitter, it’s because the censorship there is acceptable to the market.

I think its the other way around… People don’t even need to read the TOS to know what is acceptable and what isn’t, so they engage in self-censorship, maybe even more than they have to. They know being banned from Facebook means there’s 2 billion people you can’t connect with. And those close to them use this, too. So I only see the grips tightening more and more, especially with all the monopoly and merger.

Sorry you’re not having fun here. We’ll miss you.

Those of us who have been around awhile know that it’s board policy that, when you start a thread, you need to provide more than just a link to some outside source. You need to write some context to go with it: what it is and why you want to discuss it. Plenty of other posters have been reprimanded and/or had their threads closed for this, so it’s not a surprise to me that Chronos closed yours, but his explanation for doing so probably could have been clearer.
So I looked through the SDMB Rules, but I didn’t find an Official Rule against what you did (starting a thread with just a link and no context). It’s certainly current policy, but is it an official rule? Is it in that thread but I overlooked it? Is it written elsewhere? Should it be added to that list of official rules I linked to?

Maybe people on Facebook agree there are 2 billion people they would rather not connect with.

The issue wasn’t that you didn’t respond - actually you did to that thread - but that you provided a bare link rather than starting a discussion. And when you did respond after a request you didn’t really say much.

You do sometimes provide substantive OPs, but you also have a habit of posting minimal OPs asking other people’s opinions but not giving your own.

A good example is this thread. You posted a list of “10 best” movies selected by directors without giving any opinion of your own. Even when someone asked your opinion, you failed to respond (although you did respond to another comment), even though the thread was active for more than a week.

Some other recent minimalist OPs by you, in which you throw out an example or list without any discussion or reason for your opinion:

Now, you don’t have to give an extensive discussion in an OP, but if you are soliciting other people’s opinions it would be courteous to give your own.

No, there’s no formal rule against it. However, a number of other things, such as hijacking a discussion, may be moderated even though not spelled out in the rules.

Given the comparison to Facebook, this deserves comment. This board is intended to be a forum for discussion, not simply to share things that caught your fancy like on Facebook. What you did in this thread in question would have been more appropriate for Facebook than here.

Yup, the awesome power to close threads is pretty addictive. I think I’ll go close some at random now. FEAR MY POWER!:smiley:

I wasn’t referring to this place… I pasted my reply to the thread that was closed.

And if I ask a question without an answer, maybe I’m asking rhetorically. Maybe I’m curious…

Now we’re getting existential.

You didn’t ask a question. You didn’t state an opinion. You didn’t do anything but post a link.

Well, that was certainly confusing, especially since the rest of your post was about being banned or censored.

Now you’ve completely lost me. In the thread in question, you didn’t ask any question at all. You posted a statement in the title and a bare link.

Look, if you put half as much effort into your OPs as you have in complaining about the closure of this one, they wouldn’t be closed.:wink:

Some examples of statements that could have been in your OP, but weren’t:

I agree with this article.
I disagree with this article.
I think the author of the article made some good points, but I’m not sure about his conclusion.
I think both dystopias are scary, but in different ways.
I think Brave New World is scarier, but 1984 is more accurate.
I think 1984 is scarier, but Brave New World is more accurate.
I think that the authors of the works in question are biased as to which one is better/scarier/more accurate.
I think that Fahrenheit 451 was better/scarier/more accurate than either.