As everyone knows, this board allows threads to be created in the Pit to discuss the behavior of a specific member. The typical justifications for these type of threads are for things like side discussions of heated discussions or to discuss a member’s behavior. Typically, these threads are derogatory towards the member. But rather than being used to discuss a specific instance, these threads may go on for years where people post any thing that bothers them about the member no matter how minor it may be. Even if the threads can be justified by saying it’s to have a side discussion of a heated topic, it seems wrong that there are threads that are years-long where people dump on a member for whatever bothers them in the moment. It seems overly cruel. If that member is so awful that people get to insult them for years, then they should be banned. If the admins don’t think they should be banned, then the other members should just deal with their behavior. I’m sure that no one here is universally loved by everyone. Everyone here does something that annoys someone else here. That’s the way life is.
I think having open pit threads for years makes the problem worse. It takes no effort to complain about someone if they already have a Pit thread. Just add your gripe anytime you like. But if instead people had to make a new Pit thread because the older one was locked, the effort would mean it would have to be for things that were more Pit worthy. I believe that Discourse allows topics to be automatically closed after a period of time. Assuming that’s true, I think Pit threads against members should only have a limited lifespan and then they are locked. Additional Pit threads can be created against that member, but there wouldn’t be a never-ending thread that goes on for years with thousands of posts of random gripes.
Another thing I think would be beneficial is to tag these Pit threads with something like ‘member-pitting’. This would allow people to ignore them if they prefer not to see those kinds of threads.
I’m not certain it’s a problem that needs solving, but I think you’re right it’s a less-than-ideal situation.
I’m curious how many such topics exist and see occasional refreshing traffic where the guest of honor hasn’t already been banned? I know the mods will generally lock a topic pitting a bannee since the topic in now moot and the bannee no longer can defend themselves.
IOW IME … A long-ago topic about Poster X that is open but was last updated 36 months ago seems like a benign-enough thing not needing any action now. But a long-ago topic about Poster Y that gets a new round of opprobrium added at least monthly is a problem worth addressing. Although I’d genuinely wonder at that point whether the problem is Poster Y’s Pit topic, or Poster Y themselves.
I get your point that the psychological / emotional barrier to entry for adding a post is smaller than for creating a topic. But how much smaller and for who? The sorts of folks who relish posting a personal attack in the Pit are not our shrinking Violets. I think for those mentalities, the post/topic difference is barely a speed bump. If that. T the degree my surmise is true, time-limiting a topic just ensures that problem Poster Y has a series of Mini Ongoing Pittings, rather than just ne Great Ongoing one. That hardly seems like a benefit to the rest of us.
Separately to the above …
Your idea for a new “member-pitting” tag is sensible on its own and, like all tags, can’t have any bad side effects. Best if the OP attached the tag themselves to save the Mods the effort.
This is completely wrong. Reasons for banning have nothing to do with popularity (although the Trolls R Us thread might give one a different impression). And people like to complain about behavior of other members that are not ban-able offenses. Also, so what if the old thread is closed? It’s actually marginally easier to start a new one anyway, than to search to find an old thread.
I would frankly suggest you save your sympathy. If someone is sufficiently embarrassed by a Pit thread about them, or about some of the comments therein, they have several options: they can ignore it (most do), they can change their posting behavior, or they can cease to post here.
…adding to their running Pit thread is how we “deal”.
You can look at how many people had running pit threads … and then were banned for (some pretty obvious in hindsight) egregious patterns of behaviour. IMO, many people who have had long-standing Pit threads are that awful, and the admins were way too lenient, for too long with most of those trolls. I’m thinking of shodan, of SlackerInc, of Martin_Hyde.
That’s a good thing.
You seriously overestimate how much effort it takes to make a new thread. It’s literally an option in the quote box.
Instead there’ll be hundreds of threads pitting the same troll. You think that’s better?
That’s a far more sensible suggestion
Or hey, how about you just mute the whole damn Pit, since you clearly don’t like the forum (this isn’t the only complaint you’ve made about it this week). There, problem solved.
The effort I’m talking about in creating a new pit thread is more around the thoughtfulness that the thread creator puts into creating the post of the thread rather than the negligible effort to click a button. When someone creates a pit thread, there is some effort they put into the initial post around why they are creating it, what problem they see, what the solution might be, etc. But as the thread goes on, it becomes more about general griping about the person rather than whatever the transgression brought on the thread initially.
I don’t think there would be hundreds of active pit threads for a person if this was implemented since there’s not hundreds of active pit threads for a person today. There might be hundreds of closed pit threads, but I would expect that these limited life pit threads would work pretty much like the current ones. People would post to the one open thread. If there wasn’t an open one, they could open a new one. And I do think it would be better to have hundreds of pit threads rather than one long one. I think that would highlight a troll better when they have “Pit thread for Soandso #10”. I think when someone has a lot of pit threads, it shows that they were disruptive enough that people took the time and energy to create all those threads for all those transgressions.
Pit threads for many of these trolls wouldn’t need all the effort you seem to think. Usually just quoting their post is sufficient. Sure one can throw in some invective, but trolls mostly damn themselves.
Pit threads against specific posters are already labeled as such in the title (“I Pit Superdude,” for instance), so your suggestion is a solution in search of a problem.
Also, as has been stated time and again, if the Pit bothers someone, they have the option of not using the forum. They also have the option of not clicking on those threads that include a poster’s name.
I prefer the running pit threads. I like that it’s easier to start a complaint. Maybe in the past we were too quick to Pit, and it would make sense to have to have the inertia of starting a new thread. But, these days, I think it works out just fine.
If we did what you suggest, I think we’d actually just wind up with there being less inertia in starting a new Pit thread. It’s rare now because we don’t have to. For people who don’t already have running Pit threads (or for whom the thread is particularly old), I think this makes them less likely to be Pitted.
I know I’ve gotten mad enough to Pit someone before, but didn’t bother because I didn’t want to make a whole new thread. But back when new threads were the norm, I was more willing to make a new thread.