Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > Feedback > Merging Lounge and Pol Lounge?

Merging Lounge and Pol Lounge? (Page 4)
Thread Tools
Demonhood
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 13, 2011, 09:22 PM
 
If you two want to hash it out, take it to PM. You don't need thous...err, dozens of witnesses.

Don't do so and infractions shall fly.
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 13, 2011, 09:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
No, it's not for no reason. It's because the way you conduct yourself pisses people off constantly*. Instead of acting all butt-hurt and playing the victim, some people respond with humor instead.

*no, I don't think you're doing it on purpose. I don't think you're even aware of it. You're forward. You don't hold your tongue, you don't mince words, you speak your mind. This is not necessarily a problem, in fact it can be quite a likable quality. The problem is that you expect everyone around you to walk on eggshells, when you're not willing to do the same. Your aggressive personality style begets the same in return. Deal with it. Get over yourself.
What pisses people off is I won't subscribe to their will. Case in point, the cancer thread. I refuse to demonize the man "just because" every one else does. I want real evidence to show it merits calling him a fraud and a theft. And since no one can post anything of substance towards that I get hated on for not jumping the collective band wagon. It pisses you off that I won't subdue to per-pressure and change my stance on something just because you tell me I should.

My opinion is leaning towards fraud based on factual stuff I found in the last week or so but im still waiting for some one else to bother to lift a finger and back up there position.

A few other threads fit this bill. Because I wont go along with majority with out factual and real evidence it pisses people off. I don't operate that way. Im free thinking. I don't subscribe to "just because", per-pressure and trends. I make up my own mind and I stick with it and when I am shown im wrong I do accept that and change my opinion. Its just not often this is the case. So im sorry for not being a zombie accepting everything every one says at face value as true and fact.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 13, 2011, 09:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Demonhood View Post
If you two want to hash it out, take it to PM. You don't need thous...err, dozens of witnesses.

Don't do so and infractions shall fly.
Are we not talking about the problems in the forum. Is this not a perfect example of the stuff that goes on here that causes problems. Little jabs here and there, condescending posts and other bs. Maybe its good to get it all out in the open?

My last reply was done up before you had posted. I will heed your warning. But I personally think it would be better to let it out and use it to learn what some of the serious problems are on here.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 13, 2011, 09:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Are we not talking about the problems in the forum. Is this not a perfect example of the stuff that goes on here that causes problems. Little jabs here and there, condescending posts and other bs. Maybe its good to get it all out in the open?
One of the problems is that you are completely ignoring the little jabs and bs that comes out of you, and then the responses in kind all seem unwarranted (to you). Doctor, heal thyself.
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 13, 2011, 10:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
What pisses people off is I won't subscribe to their will.
Let me tell you about a little emotional defense mechanism I sometimes use. When I get into a conflict, I try to think of some explanation for it that doesn't involve me doing anything wrong. Like for example, if I just blame everyone else for some simple petty motive like "they're just mad that I'm right" or "they're just bitter that I am more handsome than them" or "I didn't want those grapes anyway because they're sour," then I don't feel bad for being involved in something negative, because it's their fault not mine. They're probably thinking the exact same thing about me. So using this method, no one feels sorry for their part of the responsibility, and the negativity can continue uninterrupted. It works great. The trick is, never try to imagine a way the other person could possibly be right.


Because I wont go along with majority with out factual and real evidence it pisses people off. I don't operate that way. Im free thinking. I don't subscribe to "just because", per-pressure and trends. I make up my own mind and I stick with it and when I am shown im wrong I do accept that and change my opinion. Its just not often this is the case. So im sorry for not being a zombie accepting everything every one says at face value as true and fact.
You're going to start name-calling before anyone even takes your bait? If someone comes back and decides to call you a "zombie" in return, are you going to try to claim that they insulted you without provocation?

Well, this thread will probably get locked now, but I imagine you are going to blame this whole dust-up on me, as if I sought you out in this thread to jump down your neck over something from another thread. Just remember, that you're the one who brought me in from another thread, not vice versa. I hope you can take this as an example of how sometimes you're the one jabbing people, even if you consider it a harmless "nudge," and all they're doing is defending themselves.

Demonhood, fwiw I did take that specific disagreement to pm. Have mercy on us
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 14, 2011, 08:43 AM
 
Opinionated people are not only at times combative, but competitive. Moderating such a forum will always be difficult and I have a huge amount of respect for those who volunteer for it. I've never been banned outright, but have definitely ridden the grey and I think the moderation has been fair and honest with me.

Perhaps we should channel the combative into the competitive while making the system a little more interesting for all. Score the debates.

You could use the following educational standard for debate scoring:
  • Opening statement was clear, well organized, factual, and relevant.
  • First argument in support of its position was stated clearly, was relevant, and well informed.
  • Rebuttal to opposing side's first argument was clear, relevant, well informed, and effective.
  • Second argument in support of its position was stated clearly, was relevant, and well informed.
  • Rebuttal to opposing side's second argument was clear, relevant, well informed, and effective.
  • Third argument in support of its position was stated clearly, was relevant, and well informed.
  • Rebuttal to opposing side's third argument was clear, relevant, well informed, and effective.
  • Closing statement was stated clearly, was relevant, and effectively summarized the team's position.
  • Answers to audience questions were clear, well-informed, and relevant.
  • Overall preparedness, effectiveness, and professionalism in the debate.
Winner gets the coveted Spliffdaddy *SMACKDOWN award.

Or... let us post threads about other forum posters.
ebuddy
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 14, 2011, 09:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Demonhood View Post
If you two want to hash it out, take it to PM. You don't need thous...err, dozens of witnesses.

Don't do so and infractions shall fly.
Not pointing this out to you in particular, but remember what people said about this shit spilling over to non PL-threads. yeah.
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 14, 2011, 12:36 PM
 
A pessimist would say the cup overflowed and spilled an ounce. An optimist would say the cup contained a pint.
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 14, 2011, 05:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
A pessimist would say the cup overflowed and spilled an ounce. An optimist would say the cup contained a pint.
ROFL, and the engineer would say the cup is to small.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 15, 2011, 08:09 AM
 
Debate scoring requires that both debating parties are present throughout the entire process, which is not true of online discussions. With that quibble stated, ebuddy's suggestion has merit. Of course formal debating never seems to actually include statements about someone else's mom and farm animals, never seems to include reference to prior debates either party has participated in, nor for that matter whether or not any member of either side has been accused of being a "fanboy." So it would be difficult to apply basic debate scoring rules to management of our PWL, but we could indeed apply some of the principles.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 15, 2011, 03:34 PM
 
Maybe we should test out a debate forum, with clear strict rules. Something to replace the PWL if it can be shown to be successful. A winner is declared after a week for every thread which is then locked.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 15, 2011, 03:37 PM
 
Roget's Rules of Thunderdome!
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 15, 2011, 03:52 PM
 
a bad boys room would be a nice addition, when 2 people need to hash it out lock them in a private thread for 24 hours to get it all out. A time out area.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 15, 2011, 06:41 PM
 
The problem with debate scoring is who does the scoring? I am not saying that I believe this to be true, but you already had some complaining about how moderators in the Pol Lounge were biased one way or another. I don't really believe that anyone participating in the Pol Lounge cares about "winning."

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 15, 2011, 07:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
The problem with debate scoring is who does the scoring?
Tina Turner of course
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 15, 2011, 08:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
Tina Turner of course
Tina Turner.
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 15, 2011, 09:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Debate scoring requires that both debating parties are present throughout the entire process, which is not true of online discussions. With that quibble stated, ebuddy's suggestion has merit. Of course formal debating never seems to actually include statements about someone else's mom and farm animals, never seems to include reference to prior debates either party has participated in, nor for that matter whether or not any member of either side has been accused of being a "fanboy." So it would be difficult to apply basic debate scoring rules to management of our PWL, but we could indeed apply some of the principles.
I appreciate that ghporter. Although to be clear I was ribbin' the forum. It would be a terrible idea for all the reasons you mentioned and would just makes things more sterile, less attractive, etc.

But... what about the PWL Club Roast that the participants agree to? You know... talk to a lawyer, make it work.
ebuddy
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 08:01 AM
 
While I saw the humor, I also saw some really workable parts in the idea of debate scoring. Like the idea that posts should be applicable and all conform to a set of standards that keep things running smoothly. The problem still comes down to the framework for those standards. As ebuddy states, strict, formal rules would inherently and without a doubt reduce the freedom of expression members typically experience in the PWL.

I need to state clearly here that MOST PWL threads are NOT problematic. But the percentage that are, and the degree to which they become problematic are both so significant that the PWL requires lots more effort to police, and that policing is significantly less effective than in any of our other forums. This is, in great measure, because of the loose and flexible nature of our rules. To keep those rules working requires cooperation if not total buy-in, from ALL participants. If half the participants in PWL discussions grew a spine (and/or a pair), some thicker skin, and came to realize that these words on the screen cannot in any way harm them, we'd probably have plenty more cooperation. The sticking point in that is that most of the problem PWL threads bypass logic and go straight for emotion-and emotional discussions are very good at overwhelming logic in the best of us.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 03:21 PM
 
How about a new policy for the PWL of deleting posts that are inflammatory or bickering in nature. If enough of our posts get deleted when might change posting habits. Would also remove the ammo for others to join in on collective lynching.

For debate scoring I would elect Glenn as he seems pretty level headed

I think a debate forum would work if it had strict rules and a template that all debates had to follow.

IE

Opening Thread / Topic Starter

>> Topic
>> Position
>>Support
>>Clarification

Following Posts

>>Position
>>Support
>>Clarification
>>Rebuttal / Cross Examination

Every post would have to follow the same template, any lacking the template would be deleted.

Could even test it out in PWL with a test debate thread to see how far it can go and what kind of useful information ends up being posted. They don't even need to be scored per say.


Example Post


Topic: High Fructose Corn Syrup is aggravating the overweight problem in the America's
Position: Supportive of this claim

Support

The most widely used varieties of high-fructose corn syrup are: HFCS 55 (mostly used in soft drinks), approximately 55% fructose and 42% glucose
High-fructose corn syrup - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The addition of High fructose corn syrup is adding to the over weight problem in North America. This is because of the higher amount of fructose in the solution. Even at just 5% more then table sugar which is 50/50 glucose and fructose, that 5% add's up over heavy consumption.

According to the American Heart Association, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32543288.../#.TsQL1D3Nm-U Americans are consuming 22 teaspoons of sugar a day. With the majority of sugar in processed foods being high fructose corn syrup what would have been 11 teaspoons worth of glucose and 11 teaspoons worth of fructose is now 12.1 teaspoons of Fructose and 9.9 teaspoons of glucose. Over a year of consumption that is an additional 401 teaspoons of Fructose in our diet.

Clarification

The simple act of removing HFCS from our food and products will reduce consumption of fructose by 401 teaspoons for the average American. Additionally the consumption of to much sugar in our diet is in itself a problem but it is made worse with the change of the ratio between fructose and glucose. The 5% seems like a small number but it adds up to a lot over the course of a year.


------------------------------
Replies would have to follow the Rebuttal / Cross Examination template.

I think it would work.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 03:34 PM
 
Do you really think we require that level of censorship, Athens? I definitely don't. Such external constraints would be very difficult to enforce, be additionally burdensome to the staff and not really help anyone as far as I can see. When things really get carried away the staff deals with it. I think the PWL serves its purpose, and in regulating it we should air on the side of free speech.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 03:47 PM
 
I support the Athens Agenda contingent on Tina Turner's participation
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 03:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Do you really think we require that level of censorship, Athens? I definitely don't. Such external constraints would be very difficult to enforce, be additionally burdensome to the staff and not really help anyone as far as I can see. When things really get carried away the staff deals with it. I think the PWL serves its purpose, and in regulating it we should air on the side of free speech.
I was proposing a separate debate forum with that level of censorship for those that like to actually debate. I don't think PWL can change for good or bad. It is what it is. Will totally depend on individuals. If more people worked out there differences the way we did, it might be more pleasant in there. But that will depend on people. At least in a debate forum with strict rules, and templates it won't have the history the PWL has now.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 05:07 PM
 
As I stated earlier merging the regular Lounge and the PWL is a bad idea. Eliminating the PWL altogether would be an even worse idea IMO ... simply because then I'd have little to no reason to even come around at all. When it comes to Mac oriented topics, I abandoned the forums on Macnn.com for the Macintoshian Achaia over at ArsTechnica.com years ago. Why? Because it's a single Mac related forum that isn't split off into dozens of sub forums. Therefore it actually has enough traffic to keep your interest level up. Imagine that.

OAW
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 05:17 PM
 
@Athens
I don't think you could convince the staff even if we were paid Historically, managing the PL used to be one of the most time-consuming duties here on MacNN. I still remember the joys of people protesting 1-point infractions, claiming the action was clearly politically motivated.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
brassplayersrock²
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 05:39 PM
 
I still go by my earlier statement of "Hell NO!" as my response to the thread's question.
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 06:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
@Athens
I don't think you could convince the staff even if we were paid Historically, managing the PL used to be one of the most time-consuming duties here on MacNN. I still remember the joys of people protesting 1-point infractions, claiming the action was clearly politically motivated.
Hehe I would do it for Free

OWA brings up a good point, to many sections in the forum for the few users we have. We should merge forums into this simply structure

Apple Computers
(Mac Pro,Mac Mini, Macbook Pro, Macbook Air)

Apple Devices
(iPod, iPhone, iPad, AppleTV

Honestly I think it should be just Apple Hardware. The iDevices and Computers should be one forum

Apple Software
(OS X, iLife, Final Cut Pro etc)

Non-Apple Hardware and Software
(Windows, Linux, PC's, Zune etc)

Developer Center, Networking and Hardware Hacking

Gaming, Music, Graphics and other Hobbies

MacNN Lounge
- PWL

Feedback
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 06:41 PM
 
Additional to the merging of forums, we should have a Facebook Page, Myspace page and Google+ page that are official MacNN forum pages which link back to each section of the forums from those social media sites. Since it seems adding like and +1 buttons and deeper facebook integration isn't a option right now, a official fan page would be a good stop gap separate from any MacNN fan page that might already be there.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 11:20 PM
 
Argh.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 11:29 PM
 
I'd like a subforum where I can find out what turtle777's Farmville scores are.
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 16, 2011, 11:59 PM
 
Then we should all get a sub forum

besson3c forum
Athens forum
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2011, 12:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Then we should all get a sub forum

besson3c forum
Athens forum

The problem is that my forum would be too much for the MacNN servers to handle. There would also be a lot of orgies and pony riding.
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2011, 12:27 AM
 
Mine would eclipse them all with constant fighting lol
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
brassplayersrock²
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2011, 10:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
The problem is that my forum would be too much for the MacNN servers to handle. There would also be a lot of orgies and pony riding.
What KIND of pony riding? What?! That's the first thing that came to mind when I saw orgies and pony rides in the same sentence.

Besides, read this: http://www.latimes.com/health/booste...tory?track=rss
( Last edited by brassplayersrock²; Nov 17, 2011 at 11:00 AM. )
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2011, 01:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by brassplayersrock² View Post
What KIND of pony riding?
The poop kind.
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2011, 01:21 PM
 
Anyways... does any one else think the forums are to split up into specifics?
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 17, 2011, 01:43 PM
 
Yes. It didn't occur to me until OAW pointed it out, but it was a good idea before that.
     
ShortcutToMoncton  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2011, 09:53 AM
 
That's exactly along the same lines as what I've been saying (although the Pol/Regular lounge debate obviously has other factors).

Having too many subforums is only useful if it's absolutely too much to handle in a single forum. But in this case, what results is 20 posts/day spread out over 10 different forums, meaning each seems completely dead. The only reason to go into these forums is to see what new posts have been made - and when there's only a couple a day, well, people just don't visit as often. (Same with the old Lounge, where you could visit at any time of day and there'd be new material to see - that just doesn't happen any more.) So people actually visit less, and subsequently there's a downward spiral of interest.

Anyways, I think it's pretty clear there's not much interest in any real change to the current format. Apparently this has been an issue for years now, but nothing's been attempted. Ahhh, governance by committee I imagine. Oh well.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 19, 2011, 05:16 PM
 
It ought to be possible to implement this as a preference, so each viewer can choose whether to see the forum's threads bundled or all mixed together.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2011, 03:41 PM
 
Also a nice idea.
     
ShortcutToMoncton  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2011, 01:15 PM
 
Slightly off-topic, but why the **** is there a thread about baseball in the Pol Lounge? WTF people, that's just ****ing dumb.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2011, 05:06 PM
 
The edit log shows no moves, so the OP created it there.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2011, 08:58 PM
 
That thread is explicitly labeled as a "religious" issue, and frankly, the designated hitter is one of the more contentious rules in MLB-and has been for a long time. So it pretty much makes sense to me that the thread is in the "let's all argue about this" forum.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
ShortcutToMoncton  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2011, 09:24 PM
 
WTF? So there's no arguing in the regular Lounge any more? Oh, something that's NOT religious, political, or otherwise labelled under any "political" designation you can come up with - but because it's contentious it has to be shielded from the eyes of the ****ing pussies who might see some differing viewpoints?

What a total crock of shit. I'm honestly disgusted by you guys.
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2011, 11:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
WTF? So there's no arguing in the regular Lounge any more? Oh, something that's NOT religious, political, or otherwise labelled under any "political" designation you can come up with - but because it's contentious it has to be shielded from the eyes of the ****ing pussies who might see some differing viewpoints?

What a total crock of shit. I'm honestly disgusted by you guys.
*tap* *tap* The thread was made in the PL. As in, the OP put it there intentionally.

Calm down, go eat some chocolate, or maybe get a nice massage.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2011, 11:23 PM
 
- Topics where people might get into heated debates = PL
- Topics where people can be civil = Lounge

What's the problem?
     
ShortcutToMoncton  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2011, 07:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
- Topics where people might get into heated debates = PL
- Topics where people can be civil = Lounge

What's the problem?
Because it's arbitrary and makes zero sense. So from now on all car threads go in the Pol Lounge, because we still have heated arguments about cars even though Rob isn't around? All music threads go in the Pol Lounge, because Doofy and besson might heatedly argue over music?

None of those things are political. Even remotely. Breaking up this place into randomly arbitrary discrete boxes makes no sense, and is contributing to the lack of traffic.

Seriously, how does it make any sense to put a thread about sports or music in the Pol Lounge, where at least 40% of the members who still bother to visit the Lounge don't go? And then we all complain about how dead this place is?

Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
*tap* *tap* The thread was made in the PL. As in, the OP put it there intentionally.

Calm down, go eat some chocolate, or maybe get a nice massage.
So? What the hell does that have to do with anything? If any of us put a thread in a certain area, mods move it if they consider it to be in the wrong area. If I put a thread about chocolates and massages in the PL because it might lead to debates, should it stay there, too?
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2011, 07:20 AM
 
It's about time this thread got moved to the Political Lounge.
     
ShortcutToMoncton  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2011, 08:07 AM
 
Heated debate is for one and only one place! Hope no one tries any heated debate over Lion's new features any time soon - we'll have to add a new Pol OS X Lounge just to handle it!
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2011, 07:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
So? What the hell does that have to do with anything? If any of us put a thread in a certain area, mods move it if they consider it to be in the wrong area. If I put a thread about chocolates and massages in the PL because it might lead to debates, should it stay there, too?
I'm inclined to err on the side of freedom for thread topics outside of the technical forums in the absence of a pattern. If for some reason PWL became a den of Lounge refugees and their threads, I'd probably start moving them. Why not ask the OP?
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2011, 11:54 PM
 
What I don't like seeing is posts made in the lounge moved into one of the sub categories "because it fits there". If I was to post something about networking in the lounge, perhaps a discussion thread more so then a help thread I would expect it to be left alone unless I request it moved. I can something about networking being posted in the Macbook forum being moved. Thats ok.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:12 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,