Could the mods please consider a sticky in all forums that basically states if you start any thread that is based on disliking something, that you must include a counter example of something you do like, to give context.
I HATE THE BEATLES - so what?
I HATE THE BEATLES but LOVE THE WHO - okay, can see where you are coming from
I HATE THE BEATLES but LOVE JUSTIN BIEBER - going to be an interesting trainwreck
After years of these threads I realize that they invariably waste my time because people don’t know how or are unwilling to back up their tastes.
I suppose there’s a point to the proposal: in the wider world of Internet discourse, just dropping an unsupportable and undebatable hatebomb is trolling. Low-quality trolling, really, of the “Obvious troll” flavor.
And that’s the weakness of the proposal. It assumes that there are posters who post useless stuff like this out of innocent intent. I think that’s naive; my experience is that such posts are inevitably and bluntly trolling, and a sticky asking trolls not to troll is close to the dictionary definition of “futile”.
If that’s trolling then the board is full of them. Maybe I should start reporting those threads, since they’re clearly violating the “don’t be a jerk” rule.
Same here. And I’ll go out on a limb here, go as far suggesting this suggestion isn’t very smart.
“Hey, I have an idea! Let’s take all the topics I don’t prefer and put them in their own forum! We could call the new forum.. ~tries to think of a clever name for the new forum~..topics I don’t prefer”!
I’m truly surprised at the reactions here. If you have a conversation with a friend and he expresses an opinion without backing it up, do you just nod, or do you press him for reasons? I’ll bet you ask for reasons.
The suggestion to not open threads that seem to be expressing a dislike for something is not very useful. I would have no idea if the thread contains arguments or just complaints. How would anyone? One would have to open it to see.
My complaint is that too many do not supply arguments.
To not see this or to be dismissive of it makes no sense to me.
From a conversation standpoint, I agree people should provide context and explanation. I mean, just posting “I hate X” isn’t a conversation. If someone asks, “But why do you hate Justin Beiber”, then you should explain. If someone asks for context, it’s only reasonable to provide it.
My objection is to the demand that the moderators make a new rule and enforce what is really best handled as the dynamics of conversation. If someone doesn’t clarify when asked, then stop reading their stupid threads. Or call them out in the Pit. Or whatever.
This is where we differ. I consider very few people here friends, and fewer than that probably think of me as one. So I could care less if some stranger wants to make an ass out of himself on the Internet.
This community tends to police itself. Good threads rise to the top, shitty ones disappear. Everything (mostly) works fine the way it is.
You could replace “Me:” with “drewtwo99:” and that’s pretty much exactly what I do. People who get into arguments with their friends about why X is better than Y or why X is just the best thing ever, are ridiculous. It’s like they are stuck in a middleschool pissing match or something.
