Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Oct 16, 2008 - 11:41am PT
|
Obviously there has been a lot of spraying of numerous redundant political threads, climbing pic threads and threads that aren't what they say they are.
Who is right?
In my mind, it's all about "Intent" If you are trying to share something with the community, political, climbing, or otherwise, you're cool.
If you are trying to make a childish point by thinking your particular bit of insight is so different than the ones in the thread of the same subject, then it pushes the rest of the content down and out. It's also not helpful to champion your preference by force with a posting of multiple redundant threads. We're bigger than that. If you want to play silly, just do it in your own single thread.
Let's have the intent of sharing the space here with some respect (even if we give each other grief) and keeping similar content in one thread. (like only one debate thread, or one pic thread by the same guy)
Everybody gets the point that too much of anything is a drag. It's how we do it that counts.
Peace
Karl
|
|
MisterE
Trad climber
My Inner Nut
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 11:47am PT
|
I had a dream...
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 12:40pm PT
|
Of course Karl is right.
But having said that I've just pushed some quality sh#t down one spot on the first page.
Kev's first wall, WFLT trip report, is pretty cool and most bump-worthy. Check it out.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 12:44pm PT
|
I conscientiously refrain from starting political threads, except for one on the Canadian election. I do post to other people's political threads, which I suppose makes me an accessory after the fact. I know I shouldn't, especially as a frostback, but it is important stuff, and often entertaining. I try to atone for it by other threads and posts of more value.
By posting this, I haven't bumped this thread - it was already at the top of page 1.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 12:56pm PT
|
Lois
Since you were not here last night you have absolutely no clue about Karl's post above.
You're speculating and talking into the wind ......
|
|
dirtineye
Trad climber
the south
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 12:58pm PT
|
We have moderation.
It's called Whack-a-mole.
Karl, it's laudable to make a call for discretion, good luck getting that result, LOL.
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 12:59pm PT
|
It's simple: some have decided they don't like political threads so they take it upon themselves to trash the threads. It's childish. They don't realize that there is an easy tit for tat response to this problem when they post. I prefer not to go in that direction. Chris, I'm sure, is aware of the problem and, I hope, take the necessary steps to correct it.
This is an oblique effort to censor. Only the management of ST has the right to do that.
If one doesn't like political threads, don't read them. It's too bad there are people not intelligent/mature enough to grasp that simple concept.
|
|
klinefelter
Boulder climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:05pm PT
|
LEB - The fact that political threads - or any thread, for that matter - DO remain on the front page means lots of people want to talk about that topic.
Actually, it's often the result of certain members posting too often, with little or no regard to common forum etiquette. For example, derailing topic threads by discussing your cat or your garden. These are unnecessary bumps that throw your statement above out the window.
Part of the current problem with OT threads dominating the front page are the fault of the admins, and their reluctance to code some simple functions into the forum, or at the very least, providing some clear guidelines for posting topics and replies.
|
|
Jim E
climber
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:17pm PT
|
^^^^^^^^^^
If there really is a god clearly it is smiting climbers.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:22pm PT
|
I think one of Karl's major gripes (which I agree with) is NOT the political threads, but the MULTIPLE threads discussing the same freaking issue.
Keep it in as few threads as possible. The Palin bonanza was a good example, there must've been 10 different threads where 2 would have sufficed.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:30pm PT
|
nothing on this site creeps me out as much as the tranny avatars.
i try to avoid the political threads. if most users here decide that they want to spend all their time on the presidential campaign, there's not much anyone can do unless chris decides its damaging his brand and institutes an "climbing thread only" rule.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
sorry, just posting out loud.
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:30pm PT
|
If we can get consensus and agreement in writing, it works for me. Appealing to people that already agree, doesn't work for those that would otherwise keep doing their own thing. While it is highly respectful of the anti-majority to allow random non climbing posts and even political ones, without a vetting process or enforcement against a given objective standard, then the internet drama is likely to continue.
I think I rage about once a year, kinda like Cmac. But I don't expect things to change. It's just a visible statement of my general preference.
|
|
WoodySt
Trad climber
Riverside
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:31pm PT
|
ST is in a sense infinite in that there is room for all threads. There is no middle ground here; there is no nuance or gray area. If you trash someone's thread for whatever reason, you're wrong. If someone tries to dominate the site, Chris has the authority to correct that. Only he has that right. The site belongs to him. Anyone assuming that authority besides the management is abusing his/her presence on ST.
I strongly recommend that it stop before things deteriorate further.
If the management determines that alterations in accepted content etc. take place, then that's it. As long as management accepts the past approach to posting threads, that's also the rule.
Those that don't accept what is so obvious should be admonished to behave or removed from ST. That again is totally up to management, though. Whatever is done, I adhere to the rules established by management as should all others.
Mungeclimber,
You've abused your presence on ST. You chose to trash other's threads because of your "rage". That's the behavior of someone quite immature. Possibly you also behave in this manner in other aspect of your life. It's time for you to grow up along with the others contributing to this childish fit.
|
|
MisterE
Trad climber
My Inner Nut
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:35pm PT
|
I like the "fewer threads" approach, Karl. I am guilty of following Munge in his multiple threads, but at least they weren't political! Now how to discourage that behavior?
Werner - I am thinking it was the full moon last night.
The Outpatients were out in force!
;-]
|
|
klinefelter
Boulder climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:38pm PT
|
Keep it in as few threads as possible. The Palin bonanza was a good example, there must've been 10 different threads where 2 would have sufficed.
But most people don't understand this. And why should they? These are unwritten rules you mention, and that's why some moderation of any community forum is a good thing. It seems like the same people bitching about the off-topic chaos on the front page are also immediately resistant to any changes in the function or moderation of ST forums. Why not implement filters, or ignore features, or some kind tagging system. Or appoint some users to apply some soft moderation? This is standard for 99% of the communities on the web.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:39pm PT
|
munge's threads don't bother me at all. given the limited # of posters-- or ips --responsible for redundant political threads, i have no objection to munge running five or six climbing threads simultaneously.
mike's posting random climbing pix into ongoing political discussions is probably more annoying.
maybe he's just going art school retro and doing the dada thing.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:43pm PT
|
"Why not implement filters, or ignore features, or some kind tagging system. Or appoint some users to apply some soft moderation? This is standard for 99% of the communities on the web. "
No!
We are better off policing ourselves as we are currently doing in this thread.
|
|
klinefelter
Boulder climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:48pm PT
|
Yea, I'm sure this thread, as countless others like it in the past, will solve everything.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 01:53pm PT
|
Karl started this thread because of what you started doing last night Mungeclimber.
I'm pretty sure that's what triggered Karl's "Posting ethics is all about Intent" thread.
|
|
Blakeb
Big Wall climber
Ditch
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2008 - 02:03pm PT
|
Werner and karl are right, repetitive threads are annoying, even more so if they are about politics. Cant we combine all of these into one thread and that goes for munge's pic threads as well. Redundancy can save lives, but on the internet it is f*#king annoying to browse through
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!