Moderator Note
I expect to see more of a discussion about the moderation itself, not the issue that spawned it.
I realize that the accuracy of data is relevant to the moderation, but if this thread continues to basically just be bickering over data and not about the moderation, that’s not an ATMB issue and this will be closed.
I agree that it was not breaking news and didn’t belong in the thread, and should be moderated on that basis. Since the statement was at least debatable, I’ll withdraw my comment that it was misinformation.
However, since I have previously issued notes to SayTwo for posts in that thread that are not appropriate as Breaking News, and that he has persistently initiated discussions that didn’t belong there over a period of many months, I am maintaining the thread ban. He has also engaged in similar behavior in other threads in the Quarantine Zone, and I feel his participation in the forum in general has been highly problematic. I would strongly suggest he change his behavior in that forum.
This is factually incorrect. What I said was to take the discussion to another thread. I concede the point is at least debatable. That debate, however, does not belong in the Breaking News thread, an opinion with which you evidently agree. (And as engineer_comp_geek says, it does not belong here either.)
I agree, in spirit, with moderating posts that spread “misinformation.” There is too much crap on the internet that people take as gospel. However such moderation should be used very sparingly and in the most extreme cases, because anything less will stifle honest debate. Otherwise, we are only about a step and a half away from this:
Poster: We should cut taxes because it will stimulate economic growth.
Moderator: False. All of the data shows that cutting taxes does not help the economy. You are spreading misinformation and you may no longer post in this thread. If you continue, you will be banned.
^^^ Agreed. Save it for things like Holocaust denial, 9/11 was an inside job, Covid-is-a-tot-al-hoax or Flat-Eartherism.
Honest debate, on the other hand, is honest debate, and that sort of squelching would be blatantly partisan.
Whatever the case, debate does not belong in the Breaking News thread.
It’s never been clear to me what is the protocol for discussion that is sparked based on something posted in Breaking News. I mean to say, when someone drops an article there that, let’s say, is seen as incorrect for one reason for another, or has implications that are worth exploring, is that discussion supposed to be picked up, or started, in a separate thread, and the article meant to simply stand on its own in Breaking News as a sort of record, or reference point?
As always, it depends. If one news report says one thing and another report contradicts this, there’s no problem mentioning the contradiction. On the other hand, generally anything “worth exploring” is going to be too in-depth to remain in the breaking news thread.
You don’t want to have in-depth discussions in breaking news threads. You want to keep breaking news threads focused on the news as it develops. For anything in-depth, start a new thread and link back to the post that spawned the new discussion.
This has been the standard practice for all breaking news threads, not just the one in QZ.
Breaking news threads in QZ are required to be clearly marked as breaking news, otherwise they are treated as general discussions. Other than this, breaking news threads in QZ follow the same basic rules as breaking news threads in MPSIMS. Keep religion and politics out of it. No rants, no big debates. Breaking news threads often involve hot button topics, and those heated discussions usually belong in another forum like GD or the Pit. For those types of comments, start a new thread and link back to the post that spawned the discussion.
Treat others with respect, even if you disagree about a hot button topic.