07-26-2013 07:31 PM
64 123
tools
  1. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    I think it's worth pointing out that when people make comments that are ... generally opposed to societally accepted ideals such as diversity, equality, etc. it is difficult to consider that irrational fears are a perspective that should be respected in the same light as logic, critical thinking and inclusiveness. I fully understand the need to show respect to the person, but if we're going to have an honest dialogue, it is not so easy to distinguish between the person and their comments and hold each separately in the discussion. Attacking the ideas of one person aggressively doesn't require attacking the person, but that line gets crossed here way too often.
    Exactly. It happens EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

    Yeah there could always be 1 person who disagrees.... Sure but the majority changes over the time. Take my constitution reference, first time it was rejected as it didn't have the numbers, later on it was OK just passed and I guess if it was taken now it would definitely pass for the abolishment of slavery.


    Time and time again shows ideas a recircled but the majority belief is shifted to a varying view. Thus a need for re discussion. I have a simple answer.... The people who don't go on AC due to this section apparently. Tell them simply not to look in it, I am sure their grown adults who can decide what they want to look at. Often there are threads I disagree with but I can choose not to open it, I suggest the same.


    Posted via Android Central App on a magical nexus 4 which is powered by secret forest creatures.
    The simple answer is to discuss politics on a site that focuses on politics.
    07-26-2013 12:52 AM
  2. Fairclough's Avatar
    If you don't want politics discussed or any debate, why have a politics section... Its politics no one is always going to agree. Unless its forced upon the majority

    Posted via Android Central App on a magical nexus 4 which is powered by secret forest creatures.
    GadgetGator likes this.
    07-26-2013 01:05 AM
  3. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    If you don't want politics discussed or any debate, why have a politics section... Its politics no one is always going to agree.


    Posted via Android Central App on a magical nexus 4 which is powered by secret forest creatures.
    I quoted two posts, and highlighted one of them, for a reason. Civil discussion about issues breaks down to personal attacks far too frequently.

    Too much time is spent by the Mod team in this section, "waiting" for the line to be crossed. That's simply unacceptable.
    07-26-2013 01:09 AM
  4. Aquila's Avatar
    If you don't want politics discussed or any debate, why have a politics section... Its politics no one is always going to agree. Unless its forced upon the majority

    Posted via Android Central App on a magical nexus 4 which is powered by secret forest creatures.
    I like having the section because it gives us an easy method to discuss topics without it bleeding over into the rest of the site.
    Fairclough and GadgetGator like this.
    07-26-2013 01:11 AM
  5. Jennifer Stough's Avatar
    I like having the section because it gives us an easy method to discuss topics without it bleeding over into the rest of the site.
    That's the issue though. Many users have gotten comfortable with the lax environment in the politics section and have allowed their blatant disrespect of others to bleed over into the general forums. I can't say how many times I've seen it. It's the same individuals, everytime.

    Jennifer Stough
    Forums Moderator
    Droid DNA
    07-26-2013 01:13 AM
  6. Fairclough's Avatar
    Hey Jennifer havent seen you in this section in a bit, welcome back. Isn't that what infractions are for though? To warn individuals rather then criminalise a whole group?


    Posted via Android Central App on a magical nexus 4 which is powered by secret forest creatures.
    GadgetGator likes this.
    07-26-2013 01:17 AM
  7. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Hey Jennifer havent seen you in this section in a bit, welcome back. Isn't that what infractions are for though? To warn individuals rather then criminalise a whole group?


    Posted via Android Central App on a magical nexus 4 which is powered by secret forest creatures.
    Criminalize? You should expand upon that a bit so I understand fully what you're implying. Nobody is criminalizing anybody else in the way that I understand the term. I will wait for clarification before I reply further.
    07-26-2013 01:27 AM
  8. Jennifer Stough's Avatar
    Hey fairclough. Yes, I have been trying to steer clear from this forum, if we are being honest here. Yes, infractions are for individuals and the community should not have to pay for the actions of a certain group. However, when it is the vast majority of people, every single time, it requires us (the mod team) to have to sit in and babysit so to say, because every once in a while, someone from the outside ventures in, unbeknownst of the environment. Since we are being honest here, the same applies to the lounge. Not everyone is savvy to the workings of this inner group. Those who are not, can find it easy to be insulted or take something out of context. I have noticed that lately, we are required to spend more time in the lounge and the politics section babysitting, than we do helping others.


    Sent from my HTC6435LVW using AC Forums mobile app
    07-26-2013 01:27 AM
  9. Jennifer Stough's Avatar
    To further expand on that, I don't believe anyone is being heavy handed or criminalizing anyone. It is just about time that the politics section is held to the same regards as the rest of the site. Too many times, users have been allowed to discriminate or disrespect another based on sexual preference, religion, or political belief in the name of "opinions." While it is all fine and dandy to start claiming constitutional rights, this is a privately owned forum and ultimately, the users are subjected to the rules put in place. If broken, it is a privilege to be here, not a right.

    Sent from my HTC6435LVW using AC Forums mobile app
    Aquila likes this.
    07-26-2013 01:33 AM
  10. Aquila's Avatar
    I stand by my comments in post #6.

    I like this section and enjoy participating on it, but I don't see it as worth the trade-off from my understanding of the intended function of or processes of the forums/site in terms of volunteer time, added stress to moderators and, perhaps more importantly, members (no offense, but you guys signed up for a job, casual members didn't), and/or the general erosion of an enjoyable environment for us to get together and nerd out about gadgets, etc.

    There is ultimately nothing preventing those of us who want to have these discussions from doing so on another website and/or a Hangout, etc. and keeping a wall of etiquette and propriety between those conversations and our conduct here. This locale is merely convenient due to the proximity of those we choose to debate with, but Mobile Nations is under no obligation to provide such a service, nor to include it in the Android part of the forums.

    While it is here, I choose to participate (perhaps unwisely) but I think all of us can agree there are days where participation here detracts from the experience of the rest of the forums. It doesn't have to be that way, but as Kevin indicated, it happens way too often and that's what makes this a negative value proposition, in my opinion.
    07-26-2013 01:39 AM
  11. Aquila's Avatar
    That's the issue though. Many users have gotten comfortable with the lax environment in the politics section and have allowed their blatant disrespect of others to bleed over into the general forums. I can't say how many times I've seen it. It's the same individuals, everytime.
    The former statement is a great argument for increasing the standards of adherence to terms and conditions, etc. while the latter indicates that you guys already know that the forums would be more enjoyable without some of us here. I know that you guys are sometimes (thankfully) reluctant to, in Jerry's terms, "push a button", but we're all adults and should be aware of when we're crossing the line and unsurprised and not at all offended to be reminded of our expectations.

    Now, to the point that you guys are consistently making that to send all those reminders or push all those buttons, etc is an undue burden on the moderation staff.... that basically provides for two easy options. Get more staff or otherwise find a way to deal with it, or curb the behavior. I don't want you guys to have to work harder than is reasonable, and if the most reasonable solution is, "take it outside", then we just need to deal with that.

    I don't want to go elsewhere, but I completely understand if that's the choice. There may be a middle ground, but if there is, it's not being painted by this conversation yet.
    Fairclough likes this.
    07-26-2013 01:47 AM
  12. Jennifer Stough's Avatar
    The former statement is a great argument for increasing the standards of adherence to terms and conditions, etc. while the latter indicates that you guys already know that the forums would be more enjoyable without some of us here. I know that you guys are sometimes (thankfully) reluctant to, in Jerry's terms, "push a button", but we're all adults and should be aware of when we're crossing the line and unsurprised and not at all offended to be reminded of our expectations.

    Now, to the point that you guys are consistently making that to send all those reminders or push all those buttons, etc is an undue burden on the moderation staff.... that basically provides for two easy options. Get more staff or otherwise find a way to deal with it, or curb the behavior. I don't want you guys to have to work harder than is reasonable, and if the most reasonable solution is, "take it outside", then we just need to deal with that.

    I don't want to go elsewhere, but I completely understand if that's the choice. There may be a middle ground, but if there is, it's not being painted by this conversation yet.
    I want to establish that the amount of time spent in these certain forums aren't exactly a burden, as much as it is a disappointment, to me at least. If this were a perfect world, everyone would behave as adults and there would be no limit to what political discussion you could have. But to those who brought up rights early, riddle me this:

    "Your right to swing, ends where the other man's nose begins."

    This discusses the infringement of rights. You are free to your rights until they interfere with another. It is in this that out problem arises.

    We cannot be seen as condoning discrimination, and with the way that the politics section is being handle as if now, that is a very easy assumption to make. Many times I have received pms in regards to why we let a thread run a certain length, or allow a member to speak in such a manner. Yet, were the table turned and we took action, we would be too heavy handed.

    It is my belief that there is no happy medium in the handling of this section. It is sad when this one section has the power to make users leave, want to leave, or behave in such a manner that there membership would be at threat. It's even the frequents that complain and ask for threads to be closed. I feel the term "glutton for punishment" is very appropriate here.

    Sent from my HTC6435LVW using AC Forums mobile app
    07-26-2013 01:57 AM
  13. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    The former statement is a great argument for increasing the standards of adherence to terms and conditions, etc. while the latter indicates that you guys already know that the forums would be more enjoyable without some of us here. I know that you guys are sometimes (thankfully) reluctant to, in Jerry's terms, "push a button", but we're all adults and should be aware of when we're crossing the line and unsurprised and not at all offended to be reminded of our expectations.

    Now, to the point that you guys are consistently making that to send all those reminders or push all those buttons, etc is an undue burden on the moderation staff.... that basically provides for two easy options. Get more staff or otherwise find a way to deal with it, or curb the behavior. I don't want you guys to have to work harder than is reasonable, and if the most reasonable solution is, "take it outside", then we just need to deal with that.

    I don't want to go elsewhere, but I completely understand if that's the choice. There may be a middle ground, but if there is, it's not being painted by this conversation yet.
    But here's the thing, there are quite a few people that don't know where the line is, so they cross it, and then cry foul when we "push the button". The issue in some cases is that in one section they were allowed to speak or say things in a way that doesn't fly in another section (not always, but we've seen it). The solution is to then enforce the rules equally in all areas, which means that conversation may effectively be "killed" in sections where rule breaking and/or line-walking happens on a regular basis.

    You've been here long enough to see the different "styles" tried in this section, and as this thread has indicated, none have worked to satisfy all involved. When we can't satisfy everyone, we go back to the rules. What I'm having a hard time understanding is why people are actually, in a way, arguing against enforcement of the rules that they agreed to follow when they joined the forums.

    Just to be clear, I don't want anybody to leave the forums. You've also said more than once that people seem to be incapable of debating issues separately from the people. That would be the middle ground, and it hasn't been able to happen.
    07-26-2013 01:57 AM
  14. Fairclough's Avatar
    Criminalize? You should expand upon that a bit so I understand fully what you're implying. Nobody is criminalizing anybody else in the way that I understand the term. I will wait for clarification before I reply further.
    I believe Jennifer took the wording the right way, categorizing a whole group based on the individual actions of a small number of people. Similar to stereotyping people, e.g If a a few numbers of people were to abuse a mod, one might criminalise the whole forum and punish everyone based on that small minority of individuals. An example would be criminalizing the politics or lounge people would be to remove the forum as a whole based on the actions of individuals - which I am inferring you would prefer as you have suggested in a previous post that we (as in political posters) head to another site. I just don't see the point of not being able to re discuss older topics or any politically hot topic while having a "Political Section" my view is basically ether have no political section were no politics happens or allow a politic section where politics occurs and as issues re come into the public eye can be re discussed.

    Too many times, users have been allowed to discriminate or disrespect another based on sexual preference, religion, or political belief in the name of "opinions."
    I agree it should be clean debate without discrimination, but isn't what the threads like DOMA etc are discussing the social discrimination of people based on sexual orientation? I view people should be allowed to express their political views on the topic. Person I am for equality and the legalisation of it, however, I would allow people to say they aren't in favour of it sure - I would just draw the line if they were going to say there are (as in "user x you will go to hell") type of scenario. Thats were i believe infractions should be done and enforced as an example, Im sure if proper examples were made people would follow and see the line rather than punishing the whole section. Jennifer may I ask which inner group your referring to, general users of politics/lounge or specific people etc?
    GadgetGator likes this.
    07-26-2013 02:04 AM
  15. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    I believe Jennifer took the wording the right way, categorizing a whole group based on the individual actions of a small number of people. Similar to stereotyping people, e.g If a a few numbers of people were to abuse a mod, one might criminalise the whole forum and punish everyone based on that small minority of individuals. An example would be criminalizing the politics or lounge people would be to remove the forum as a whole based on the actions of individuals - which I am inferring you would prefer as you have suggested in a previous post that we (as in political posters) head to another site. I just don't see the point of not being able to re discuss older topics or any politically hot topic while having a "Political Section" my view is basically ether have no political section were no politics happens or allow a politic section where politics occurs and as issues re come into the public eye can be re discussed.

    I agree it should be clean debate without discrimination, but isn't what the threads like DOMA etc are discussing the social discrimination of people based on sexual orientation? I view people should be allowed to express their political views on the topic. Person I am for equality and the legalisation of it, however, I would allow people to say they aren't in favour of it sure - I would just draw the line if they were going to say there are (as in "user x you will go to hell") type of scenario. Thats were i believe infractions should be done and enforced as an example, Im sure if proper examples were made people would follow and see the line rather than punishing the whole section. Jennifer may I ask which inner group your referring to, general users of politics/lounge or specific people etc?
    No forum is being removed. Threads get closed when rules are being broken to an extent that dealing with individuals won't (or hasn't) solved the problem. That then makes it a "group" problem, and not a problem with individuals. The threshold of when a thread gets closed has been tightened, a lot.

    So the line that you would draw would be someone else expressing their beliefs about what they think will happen to you when you die because you're doing something that they believe is wrong? Do you see the problem there? They are expressing their beliefs the same as you, but you don't like what they believe, so it's offensive. Clearly then, they shouldn't be allowed to express those beliefs, right? So if someone is offended by your beliefs, then you shouldn't be allowed to express them, either, right?

    We're not going to discuss any potential issues with any member. At all.
    07-26-2013 02:13 AM
  16. gollum18's Avatar
    Why not just incorporate a filter to prevent the threads in the politics section from popping up in the hottest/latest threads section. It could also be used to filter out other sections/threads as well.

    It seems like it would be simple enough to do. I mean ac has some pretty good devs, they should be able to knock a filter out in no time.

    That would stop all this bickering back and forth. And it would also prevent strays from wandering in here, just to get offended and report us, thereby lowering your overall workload.

    Its quite the simple solution, to a rather dramatized problem.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    Fairclough and Live2ride883 like this.
    07-26-2013 02:15 AM
  17. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Why not just incorporate a filter to prevent the threads in the politics section from popping up in the hottest/latest threads section. It could also be used to filter out other sections/threads as well.

    It seems like it would be simple enough to do. I mean ac has some pretty good devs, they should be able to knock a filter out in no time.

    That would stop all this bickering back and forth. And it would also prevent strays from wandering in here, just to get offended and report us, thereby lowering your overall workload.

    Its quite the simple solution, to a rather dramatized problem.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    A large number of members use a mobile app like Tapatalk as their primary means of using the forums. Tapatalk doesn't support quite a few of the features that have been custom made for the forums. Getting them to do so is almost impossible (they still haven't even implemented unanswered threads properly, for example).
    07-26-2013 02:19 AM
  18. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Why not just incorporate a filter to prevent the threads in the politics section from popping up in the hottest/latest threads section. It could also be used to filter out other sections/threads as well.

    It seems like it would be simple enough to do. I mean ac has some pretty good devs, they should be able to knock a filter out in no time.

    That would stop all this bickering back and forth. And it would also prevent strays from wandering in here, just to get offended and report us, thereby lowering your overall workload.

    Its quite the simple solution, to a rather dramatized problem.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    You're also missing the point about the rules needing to be followed. Someone needs to explain to me why we shouldn't enforce the rules in this section just like we do in the rest of the forums.

    "Oh hi Mr. New Member. You see all that really offensive stuff going on over there? The stuff that we're allowing to go on. We know that it might offend you, so just go ahead and turn this filter on and pretend that we're not allowing it to happen." That doesn't really sound all that positive to me. That's not the message that we're looking to send to people that visit the forums.
    07-26-2013 02:22 AM
  19. Fairclough's Avatar
    Wouldn't that become the user own fault then for not taking advantage of a filter which would be available if developed. E.g. Personally if I use Google and safe search (or they used a non provideded service) was turned off I wouldn't complain to Google for what I saw as it was my own fault for not using the available filter.

    I believe the above post isn't referring to ignore abuse but not showing lounge threads in starred area's as people like you said get a bit peed off about that.

    Posted via Android Central App on a buttery smooth Nexus 4... before you ask 4.3 is 'very nice' (In a borat voice)
    07-26-2013 02:25 AM
  20. gollum18's Avatar
    You're also missing the point about the rules needing to be followed. Someone needs to explain to me why we shouldn't enforce the rules in this section just like we do in the rest of the forums.

    "Oh hi Mr. New Member. You see all that really offensive stuff going on over there? The stuff that we're allowing to go on. We know that it might offend you, so just go ahead and turn this filter on and pretend that we're not allowing it to happen." That doesn't really sound all that positive to me. That's not the message that we're looking to send to people that visit the forums.
    I was not talking about any rules Kevin. And my filter would not be a language filter. Had you read my suggestion properly, it would stop threads from this section from appearing in the latest/hottest threads section.

    Take no offense to this statement Kevin, but I honestly suggest you take a break from here. You sound as if you are becoming quite frustrated with what happens here.

    For the certain group that leaves and never returns when they see the politics section. I'm certain their intention was to discover something about android when they came here. Had a filter been in place, they may not even have known the politics section exists.

    We all know each other here and I find it highly unlikely that these reports you keep mentioning are coming from members who are frequent visitors here. But instead most likely come from people who wander in here, due to threads showing up in the latest section.

    Why would it be hard to incorporate a filter? Can you answer my question without dodging it this time by bringing up something that I didn't even mention in my original post.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    Fairclough and GadgetGator like this.
    07-26-2013 02:29 AM
  21. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Wouldn't that become the user own fault then for not taking advantage of a filter which would be available if developed. E.g. Personally if I use Google and safe search (or they used a non provideded service) was turned off I wouldn't complain to Google for what I saw as it was my own fault for not using the available filter.

    I believe the above post isn't referring to ignore abuse but not showing lounge threads in starred area's as people like you said get a bit peed off about that.

    Posted via Android Central App on a buttery smooth Nexus 4... before you ask 4.3 is 'very nice' (In a borat voice)
    That's not an accurate comparison, especially since you have no idea how many complain to Google about "what's on the Internet". You must have also missed the numerous lawsuits levied towards Google in many countries about removing content from search results for various reasons. A quick Google search gave me these:

    BBC News - Google sued over Bettina Wulff search results

    Max Mosley Sues Google For Unflattering Search Results -- Creating Even More Unflattering Search Results | Techdirt

    So yes, people do complain to Google about what comes up in search results.


    You're still skipping over this question: Why should we allow the rules to be broken in one specific section while simultaneously properly enforcing them everywhere else?
    07-26-2013 02:36 AM
  22. Fairclough's Avatar
    That's not an accurate comparison, especially since you have no idea how many complain to Google about "what's on the Internet". You must have also missed the numerous lawsuits levied towards Google in many countries about removing content from search results for various reasons. A quick Google search gave me these:

    BBC News - Google sued over Bettina Wulff search results

    Max Mosley Sues Google For Unflattering Search Results -- Creating Even More Unflattering Search Results | Techdirt

    So yes, people do complain to Google about what comes up in search results.


    You're still skipping over this question: Why should we allow the rules to be broken in one specific section while simultaneously properly enforcing them everywhere else?
    We can agree their silly if they complain when measures are in place to filter. I did answer the question before, you don't you place infractions. After all that's what I thought they are for?


    Posted via Android Central App on a buttery smooth Nexus 4... before you ask 4.3 is 'very nice' (In a borat voice)
    07-26-2013 02:43 AM
  23. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    I was not talking about any rules Kevin. And my filter would not be a language filter. Had you read my suggestion properly, it would stop threads from this section from appearing in the latest/hottest threads section.

    Take no offense to this statement Kevin, but I honestly suggest you take a break from here. You sound as if you are becoming quite frustrated with what happens here.

    For the certain group that leaves and never returns when they see the politics section. I'm certain their intention was to discover something about android when they came here. Had a filter been in place, they may not even have known the politics section exists.

    We all know each other here and I find it highly unlikely that these reports you keep mentioning are coming from members who are frequent visitors here. But instead most likely come from people who wander in here, due to threads showing up in the latest section.

    Why would it be hard to incorporate a filter? Can you answer my question without dodging it this time by bringing up something that I didn't even mention in my original post.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
    The discussion is about the rules. It's always been about the rules. I know exactly what you were saying with your suggestion. I gave you an example of why, in quite a few cases, it simply wouldn't even be an option for members (no Tapatalk support). It doesn't matter how well you know each other outside of the forums, honestly. Rules are rules. If people are reporting things as offensive we have to take a look. That doesn't mean action will be taken.

    But let's go down the filter road. The way you're saying it is that the Politics section (or possibly more than just this section) would automatically be hidden from view. Effectively creating a "closed community". If they can't see the section when they visit, and therefor don't know it exists, then no new viewpoints, beliefs, ideas, etc would be introduced into the conversation. You're saying, in not so many words, that you want your own little corner of the forums where you can say what you want without fear of offending anyone. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen. Really, if you want a place to discuss controversial topics and not have random members, or "strays" (man, that's kind of offensive), wandering in, then why not just create a hangout and have the conversation there? Even if the filter is opt-in the damage (so to speak) has already been done, because the member has already seen the offensive posts.

    The reality is that we have people from all walks of life visiting the forums at all hours of the day. We try to keep things family friendly. If a discussion can't be had in a family friendly way then that's when we have to step in and do something about it. Sometimes we just notice it while browsing the forums, other times it's reported.

    So now, please answer my question. Why should we allow the rules to be broken in one section and not the others?
    07-26-2013 02:51 AM
  24. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    We can agree their silly if they complain when measures are in place to filter. I did answer the question before, you don't you place infractions. After all that's what I thought they are for?


    Posted via Android Central App on a buttery smooth Nexus 4... before you ask 4.3 is 'very nice' (In a borat voice)
    Then we'll get accused of being heavy handed. Happens all the time. There's a process in place, and we exercise judgement. If we just "pressed the button" every time we took action, then we'd have far fewer members regularly frequenting the Politics section. Think about this...for all of the "keep it civil" types of posts there could have been at least one infraction, in some cases more. Get to the predetermined point level, and you'll get a ban. Those of you that frequent this section will know that there have been quite a few "keep it civil" type posts from Mods.
    07-26-2013 02:55 AM
  25. Fairclough's Avatar
    It might be heavy but bans keep the threads on rolling. I'm sure if its clearly across the line most the users will be OK with that, however when its a iffy ban or infraction I could see were debate can be sparked.


    Posted via Android Central App on a buttery smooth Nexus 4... before you ask 4.3 is 'very nice' (In a borat voice)
    07-26-2013 03:00 AM
64 123

Similar Threads

  1. What's so great about this thing?
    By jlee91780 in forum Droid Bionic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-04-2011, 02:08 AM
  2. I am so confuzzled, sorry about this question...
    By Mayfly in forum AT&T Captivate Rooting, ROMs, and Hacks
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-27-2011, 08:24 AM
  3. Should I be upset about this dirt under my screen.
    By rem_kujawa in forum HTC EVO 4G
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 07-06-2010, 08:12 PM
  4. More info about this car charger
    By rfs830 in forum HTC EVO 4G
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-21-2010, 10:23 AM
  5. Anyone heard about this or had it happen to them???
    By DaveOH32 in forum Verizon Droid Incredible
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-02-2010, 12:47 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD