Yes. Post 104.
As BigT pointed out, barring a rules change on where rants go, this solution is entirely inadequate. In other words, we’re going with door #2.
I don’t see why a rant on FGM couldn’t go in IMHO or MPSIMS under the current rules. Rants that get moved to the Pit are generally political in nature and are moved out of GD or Elections.
I suppose if you only want to rant then sure. If however there is interest in actual discussion, then not so much. If you want a space to curse everyone out, disparage their lineage, but also put sharp lanes around specific topics, then that’s a different animal.
The thing is, hijacking and threadshitting are par for the course in the Pit.
And pretty much allowable. Deciding you want to rant AND be protected somehow is just silly.
If you want discussion, you know where it goes. I fail to see how The BBQ Pit can live up to your expectations.
Again, an argument being merely wrong is not the same thing as an argument being frivolous.
- People stop feeding the damned trolls and start ignoring hijackers/threadshitters.
How’s that working out for you thus far? :dubious:
Well, since people like you keep feeding the trolls and refuse to ignore hijackers, it’s probably not going to work out. :dubious:
Beautifully, thanks! It’s actually exactly what I do. Or at least try to do, but if I fail and wind up letting myself get sidetracked I certainly don’t blame the mods.
(Oh wait, were you calling yourself a troll/hijacker/threadshitter??)
Yeah. We all try. And almost inevitably, someone fails, and then more people fail, and the thread goes to shit. This is how trolling works. This is how trolling is supposed to work. “DNFTT” is all well and good in theory; in practice, it does very little to actually fix things unless everyone agrees on who is trolling and everyone coordinates on not responding to them.
And there is not a forum on the internet where you get that.
Especially here, on a forum with a motto of “Fighting Ignorance Since 1973”, you have people basically hardwired to offer good-faith defenses of their positions, even towards bad-faith actors. Especially towards bad-faith actors, as they’re more likely to defend their positions badly, which invites correction.
“Do not feed the troll” is a good personal ethos. But it does not actually solve the problem of trolls disrupting discussions, because even if every active member can do it 99% of the time, there’s a whole lot of active members.
If DNFTT actually worked, moderated discussions wouldn’t need rules against trolls. We’d simply ignore them.
It has limited utility. Sometimes you can get everyone to ignore them, and then sometimes they go away.
One time in particular when it doesn’t tend to work is when bigotry is involved. Not only does that compel people to respond to correct the issue, it is usually at least partially believed by the troll, even if their exact language is designed to provoke a response or piss people off.
Why is that? You state your opinion, but you don’t back it up with reasoning.
Why can’t we have a place where you can rant about an issue without also allowing other people to come in and hijack it to be about another topic? Why is that silly? Ranting is a separate concept to hijacking and threadshitting. It is entirely separate from the ability to personally attack people (the reason the Pit exists).
So then, there is no inherent link that makes it where, to allow ranting, one must also allow threadshitting and hijacking. There is no inherent link. However, on this board, rants are either locked or moved to the Pit.
That is why I made my suggestions. the more I think about it, the more I think the MPSIMS idea is the best. It even has precedent, as Gfactor’s old rule list said that things that everyone agrees are bad should be put in MPSIMS.
It seems an easy solution. Allow rants in MPSIMS again. Don’t move all rants to the Pit. Allow someone to make a thread about how bad FGM (or other nearly inarguable barbaric concepts). Then MPSIMS rules apply, and hijacking, threadshitting, flaming, and personal attacks are not allowed.
Can anyone tell me what is wrong with my idea? BPC, do you object? Any MPSIMS mods?
What about Czarcasm, who started the thread? Or any other posters who agree with the premise of the OP? I admit I don’t necessarily remember the gender of all posters, but I know several women have posted in this thread. What do you think?
It seems that allowing people to complain about women’s topics in MPSIMS and not allowing any female topics outside the Pit to be hijacked to be about men would be a good solution to the problem stated in the OP. Just say you won’t move those threads to the Pit or close them.
And if you want to tell me that is already current practice, then great! It doesn’t seem so to me, but maybe I’m wrong. I’ve seen rants moved to the Pit, but never to MPSIMS.
Overall, I think we’ve learned that the Mod team feels that discussion of women’s issues are of far less import than those of men.
After all, a thread on FGM can be subjected to relentless harrasment by Slacker, and they just shrug their shoulders and say “It’s the Pit.”
So far as I can tell, strictly to ruin the discussion, Slacker has posted far more times in that thread than any other single poster. He could have made up his own thread to protest…whatever the hell his problem is with male circumcision, yet he chose a thread on a different topic entirely to vent his spleen. Why did he choose to do so? I believe it’s because he cannot stand to believe that any woman can have a concern that is of more worth than the concerns of any male.
Okay, believing that circumcision is analogous to FGC doesn’t make someone a crackpot. Peter Singer shows animal rights isn’t just for crackpots, but if you were in a circumcision thread, and a few posters started going on and on about debeaking chickens until everyone was arguing about the poultry industry, I think you’d want them to start their own thread. That’s what happened in the FGM thread: You and SlackerInc made it about circumcision, and those who still wanted to talk about FGM said, “Guys, start your own thread!”
Do you understand that you and many others who agree with you (like coffeecat) are begging the question every time you claim that MGM (circumcision) is “a different topic entirely”? You state at as an evident truth, when at least four of us in that thread have strenuously disagreed that it’s a different topic, and we have provided support for that position from an eminent Yale bioethicist.
Furthermore, this is not just an abstract point. I don’t think you realize how much you actually undermine your own cause by segregating the issues. By doing so you implicitly endorse the idea that MGM should not be banned. This provides an opening for those who advocate FGM to medicalize it by analogy to circumcision, in order to preserve its legality. Is this what you want? Puzzlegal has said she is fine with this, but I doubt many of the rest of you agree. None of this can be sorted out while pretending MGM is an unrelated issue.
That’s not begging the question, that’s just you being wrong and the rest of us moving past the question that’s already been answered to the question that is more interesting.
Right, the four of us and the Yale bioethicist are just so unambiguously, incontrovertibly wrong that our perspective is not even worth consideration. :rolleyes:
Well…yes.
Four people in a thread with dozens of respondents who disagree is hardly evidence that the four are right.
By the way, about the Yale bioethicist…