New Rule about Thread Titles when Pitting Other Posters

Fair question. The actual phrasing is relatively benign, but the meaning is obvious - its unlikely anyone is getting pitted over their support for racial equality. I’m inclined to say it’s acceptable, though.

I’d say better to find some title that works, myself, even if it takes some thinking. Hell, just a “This Is An Omnibus Pitting” could work for the Trolls 'R Us one. Although I’d hate losing that lovely title.

If it flies in GD, it should fly as a title. But I think that particular “views on race” phrasing would be very dependent on the surrounding sentence…

Also - the bolded bit is kind of directly contradicted by one current Pit poster, and my previous pittings.

My concern there is that the title is so generic it’s almost meaningless. Just going off the title, it looks like the whole Pit forum, but in the form of a single thread. There’s also the thread currently titled I Pit damariajashi and DemonTree, which is also an omnibus thread, but for racists instead of trolls. Since the original thread title called out those two specifically, I didn’t spend a lot of time worrying over the title change, but it’s since been pointed out that it’s not exactly descriptive of the thread anymore. Two thread named “An omnibus pitting,” and “Another omnibus pitting” isn’t ideal.

Although, considering Babale’s question, I could go with “I Pit posters for their opinions about racism,” or something similar, and change the Trolls’r’Us thread to “An Omnibus Pitting,” relying on the thread’s length and history to make the context clear.

Actually, I’m going to walk back my response to Babale temporarily and bring it up in the mod loop. Since the issue is Pit titles showing up in non-Pit threads, I should see what sort of titles the other forums’ mods are comfortable with.

I generally discourage linking fromt he troll’r us thread, not because of potential for insult, but because it often means that the troll ends up following it back and trolling the troll thread.

But that’s led to more than one sock banning, so I’d say is serving its purpose.

While the bigotry itself is definitely part of the issue, the main reason I made that thread was the disingenuousness. That’s why it was the first word in the title. So I would prefer a title that covers how they discuss it.

Personally, I wouldn’t actually waste time pitting someone who is openly racist. Nor would I pit someone for legitimate disagreement (i.e. Miller and I on one recent topic). But it’s when they are using rhetoric and junk to try and pretend they’re not being racist (or otherwise bigoted) that gets so under my skin.

That’s not to say I’m opposed to a more generic omnibus thread about racism or bigotry in general. Just that it wasn’t my reason for making that thread.

(Also, I wish I’d noticed this thread before PMing you.)

Well, at least I can still pit myself with vulgar titles.

I should bring back my Doofus pit thread name.

I was thinking this would become a problem some day. About the technical solutions.

  1. It is possible to blur or hide backlinks with the site theme but it’s all or nothing. There’s currently no way to only blur/hide links to the Pit.

And that’s it. :frowning:

It is theoretically possible to hide only Pit links, but as far as I can tell this would require changes to Discourse itself.

~Max

How about “I pit Poster XXX for his demented views on race”? “perverted views”? “Unenlightened views”? “Misbegotten views”? “Crummy views”? All OK? Some and not others?

No, none of those would be acceptable.

First off, thanks for the rule change, and for rolling it out so quickly. Hopefully most posters will cooperate with the intent of the rule, and not hassle you with a bunch of rule lawyer posts. Good luck!

That said, I think the " one pittee per thread" is a great idea. If you are angry enough to pit someone, make the effort write out a paragraph. If you can’t put that much effort into it, maybe you weren’t that angry after all.

I don’t see how the two relate. Sometimes you can come into a thread after several idiots have already made tag-team posts that require pitting (especially if you’re in a way different timezone to the USA’s ones) - why should you not be able to pit all of them for their collective idiocy in that thread?

Given the complaint that the Pit is just ‘attack other posters and not much else’, a claim easily dismissed by actually counting the fucking titles in the fucking Pit, a One Pitee, One Subject, One Thread ‘’‘rule*’’’ just gives them more ammo.

*I don’t think that rule is in place . . . yet.

An illustration for techno-peasants…

Since believing people of different races should be treated equally is considered racist these days, it’s really more likely than not. :upside_down_face:

Let’s keep politics out of this thread as much as possible, and keep it focused on the new policy. I don’t want to see a hijack here about what constitutes “being against racism.”

Okay. I think it’s a good change, anyway. It wasnt really consistent with the rules to have those links regularly popping up accusing posters of being a troll or whatever.

Thanks for going through them all and making the changes.

Trolls R Us → Who’s that tripping over my bridge?

~Max

Another reason that I approve this rule change is that it makes the SDMB a bit more safe for work.

A bit less profanity in the title bars and tabs is welcome.