Suggestion: Serious Discussion Topic?

[Shiningmonkey]

I think it's a good idea. Just hold on until I get 1,000 posts

[Koir]

Originally Posted by TalnSG

Let's strike that requirement and replace it with a formal request explaining why they think they should be allowed to participate being submitted to either a moderator or a group of users with the authority to approve or deny.

As of this date, the above statement is probably the most ridiculous thing I have read in this forum.

This is a forum, not a business corporation. Let's keep that in mind.

[MissMisa]

Originally Posted by Koir

As of this date, the above statement is probably the most ridiculous thing I have read in this forum.

This is a forum, not a business corporation. Let's keep that in mind.

Unfortunatly Koir, if the Serious Discussion had absolutely no requirements, it would just end up like all the other threads that have been classed as Serious Discussion - spammed in, argued in and then for the people who are debating are the ones effected when the whole thread is deleted. We need to have some kind of restrictions on which people are able to post in such forums, otherwise there would be no point in at all, which I think there is. Our debates have been spoiled by immature members for long enough - I'm sure if this kind of topic ever came about, we could ask members which would be the most appropriate. 100 posts, 500 posts, 1000 posts to gain access, having to PM a moderator, or simply being here for a long period of time, whether it be 10 days or 30. These are all specifics that need to be voted on and are not yet to be set in stone.

[EveV]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

Unfortunatly Koir, if the Serious Discussion had absolutely no requirements, it would just end up like all the other threads that have been classed as Serious Discussion - spammed in, argued in and then for the people who are debating are the ones effected when the whole thread is deleted. We need to have some kind of restrictions on which people are able to post in such forums, otherwise there would be no point in at all, which I think there is. Our debates have been spoiled by immature members for long enough - I'm sure if this kind of topic ever came about, we could ask members which would be the most appropriate. 100 posts, 500 posts, 1000 posts to gain access, having to PM a moderator, or simply being here for a long period of time, whether it be 10 days or 30. These are all specifics that need to be voted on and are not yet to be set in stone.

None of those things are going to keep down immature arguments.
The only way to do that is give people who want to be immature a place to be immature.
Like I suggested in my original post.

The only thing those restrictions well do is seperate old members from the new.
Which is just down right wrong.

[Tyrien]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

Unfortunatly Koir, if the Serious Discussion had absolutely no requirements, it would just end up like all the other threads that have been classed as Serious Discussion - spammed in, argued in and then for the people who are debating are the ones effected when the whole thread is deleted. We need to have some kind of restrictions on which people are able to post in such forums, otherwise there would be no point in at all, which I think there is. Our debates have been spoiled by immature members for long enough - I'm sure if this kind of topic ever came about, we could ask members which would be the most appropriate. 100 posts, 500 posts, 1000 posts to gain access, having to PM a moderator, or simply being here for a long period of time, whether it be 10 days or 30. These are all specifics that need to be voted on and are not yet to be set in stone.

That's where I stopped reading.

Proper moderation and ban threats (that are actually followed through with promptly) if the rules are broken solve these problems, and allows anyone to participate without it turning into an elitest "smart people" forum.

Having a higher post count has NOTHING to do with post quality. A member who has 1200 posts is not a guarantee for being any smarter or mature than someone with 50.

[MissMisa]

Originally Posted by Tyrien

That's where I stopped reading.

Proper moderation and ban threats (that are actually followed through with promptly) if the rules are broken solve these problems, and allows anyone to participate without it turning into an elitest "smart people" forum.

Having a higher post count has NOTHING to do with post quality. A member who has 1200 posts is not guarantee for being any smarter or mature than someone with 50.

I know... it's just hard to decide these things. You are probably right. I've just noticed a correlation between users with a lot of posts/being here a long length of time and the quality of their posts, so I decided to throw it out there. But you are right about moderation though, it would be the best way to solve the problem.

Like I said, the other from I frequent allows you to post from the get-go, but is heavily moderated. I couldn't decide whether this was from the maturity of the general user base anyway, and combined with the modding. If you did read the rest of my posts, I said it would be better if people voted on things so we could come to an argreement on what would be the best way to go about looking after a Serious Discussion thread.

[Tyrien]

I've done this on another forum I admined.

It worked fine, I made a moderator specifically for that forum so the other mods didn't have to worry about it, but could mod it if they wanted to. Every once and a while there would be someone who thinks they're funny. Two habits formed after a little while of this: One other people would ignore them, but if they commented on them would take the post seriously, or not make it the topic. The second was these people would receive temp bans ranging from a day to a week depending on how idiotic it was, sometimes more. Other members noticed this and realized not to dick around in their unless they were legitimately interesting in discussing the subject coherently.

[MissMisa]

Originally Posted by Tyrien

I've done this on another forum I admined.

It worked fine, I made a moderator specifically for that forum so the other mods didn't have to worry about it, but could mod it if they wanted to. Every once and a while there would be someone who thinks they're funny. Two habits formed after a little while of this: One other people would ignore them, but if they commented on them would take the post seriously, or not make it the topic. The second was these people would receive temp bans ranging from a day to a week depending on how idiotic it was, sometimes more. Other members noticed this and realized not to dick around in their unless they were legitimately interesting in discussing the subject coherently.

Well if worked pretty well there, then this could be implemented if a Serious Discussion forum ever did get made here. Sounds like a good idea to me.

Really, I just wanted to know if people approved of having one, rather than how it would run, but it's good to take a look at that too.

[EveV]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

I know... it's just hard to decide these things. You are probably right. I've just noticed a correlation between users with a lot of posts/being here a long length of time and the quality of their posts, so I decided to throw it out there. But you are right about moderation though, it would be the best way to solve the problem.

Like I said, the other from I frequent allows you to post from the get-go, but is heavily moderated. I couldn't decide whether this was from the maturity of the general user base anyway, and combined with the modding. If you did read the rest of my posts, I said it would be better if people voted on things so we could come to an argreement on what would be the best way to go about looking after a Serious Discussion thread.

Most people voting would be the older members or the " smarter" members.
So obviously which ever option put new members/unpopular members " below" us would win.
Not intentionally though it's just unconscious stereotyping towards those who are new/not really known.

We really don't need that type of thing on this forum just like Tyrien said.


I doubt this forum is going to be created anytime soon.
For now all members need to come together have a discussion about each others egos.
Egos are generally what lead to those immature arguments.
Also we need to come to terms that debating is arguing and sometimes the mods just have to let it fly as long as it stays on topic.

Nothing should be closed like it is nowadays until it turns into, "My penis is bigger then yours! You're ugly!" crap.

Alot of members on this forum just love to bring up each others flaws which usually end up getting a topic closed.
It's so preschool.

Originally Posted by Tyrien

I've done this on another forum I admined.

It worked fine, I made a moderator specifically for that forum so the other mods didn't have to worry about it, but could mod it if they wanted to. Every once and a while there would be someone who thinks they're funny. Two habits formed after a little while of this: One other people would ignore them, but if they commented on them would take the post seriously, or not make it the topic. The second was these people would receive temp bans ranging from a day to a week depending on how idiotic it was, sometimes more. Other members noticed this and realized not to dick around in their unless they were legitimately interesting in discussing the subject coherently.

Oh I miss wolfro : (
Moment of silence...

[MissMisa]

Originally Posted by EveV

Most people voting would be the older members or the " smarter" members.
So obviously which ever option put new members/unpopular members " below" us would win.
Not intentionally though it's just unconscious stereotyping towards those who are new/not really known.

We really don't need that type of thing on this forum just like Tyrien said.


I doubt this forum is going to be created anytime soon.
For now all members need to come together have a discussion about each others egos.
Egos are generally what lead to those immature arguments.
Also we need to come to terms that debating is arguing and sometimes the mods just have to let it fly as long as it stays on topic.

Nothing should be closed like it is nowadays until it turns into, "My penis is bigger then yours! You're ugly!" crap.

Alot of members on this forum just love to bring up each others flaws which usually end up getting a topic closed.
It's so preschool.

Yeah I never meant to suggest a divide between forum members, just something that can be in a sense 'earned' over time - but I suppose you are right in saying that it could (and probably would) end up as dividing the popular and unpopular members - and I certainly wouldn't want that, after all I know what it's like to be a new member as it wasn't so long ago!

I agree about egos though. People on JF have a massive problem with this kind of stuff, and it usually ends in petty insults which is something we don't want. When things get heated then that can be tolerated as long as people don't make PERSONAL attacks on others. Me and MMM have a big disagreement about illegal music downloads but I hold no negative thoughts about him at all - his opinion is just different to my own. And a lot of people are able to agree to disagree, just a minority who can't do that. But a lot of people can never admit they are wrong, which is also a problem too.