Deadlocks in Debates

[ParadigmShifter]

I think the main problem everyone notices is when 2 posters dominate the thread with their walls of multiquotes, nitpicking each other, which stifles proper debate. We don't care if someone made a logical fallacy in one of their posts. Mention it and move on if you must. Don't just pick the low hanging fruit to deflect attention away from the real debate.

 

[Joecoolyo]

That is

Why is it

the most awful

so bad?

way to post.

When picking apart

People who do that

people's posts you can

should be decanted

get much more specific regarding

into small jugs.

the content of said post, making it so your argument is that much better.

Like what I did above, now that I thoroughly dissected your post, I can really get to the juicy stuff, like critiquing your word choice, and posting examples of why your hyperbole regarding the jar stuffing is a logical fallacy (relevant Wikipedia link).

In fact, I even might go out of the way to find a Youtube video, or possibly a link to an obscure blog (you probably haven't heard of it), just to show you my level of commitment to this debate. (bold is necessary, as it makes me more right)

 

[JollyRoger]

Just pull one quote from each poster and make fun of it. Should be easy enough in a snipping match. That might pull them off of each other and onto you long enough for others to get the thread back on track.

 

[MobBoss]

Some styles already are against the rules. Some people just can't resist a "style" that mocks or belittles other people... constantly.

I wouldnt call those 'styles' inasmuch I would say inappropriate comments.

Other "styles" consist of single-smiley posts.

Report those all the time. Sometimes they get addressed...sometimes they dont.

Do you see what I mean?

You mean like only posting a cartoon as a reply as opposed to offering real discussion?

Don't be silly, MobBoss - we don't know what kind of hairstyle you have, so it would be absurd to give you any sort of feedback about it.

Ah...while totally silly on my part (since I dont have a lot of hair), more than a few OT members have indeed posted personal pics....some even with silly haircuts.

But I think you got my point.

It seems like mods have been splitting off some of these OMC arguments into their own threads recently, which must be helpful for the discussion (and let's not forget: quite funny).

I am betting there is quite a bit of discussion behind the scenes about the pros/cons of doing that....I am not so sure trying to humiliate posters before their peers something positive regardless of the amount of lulz it gets from some factions. Its all fun and games until your the one being made fun of...then the story changes.

Otherwise the best solution is probably for everyone who is still interested in continuing the discussion to put the deadlocked posters on ignore for the duration of it, and then when the debate has run out of steam, take those posters off ignore (if they so choose). The ignore list doesn't have to be a permanent expression of pure loathing.

I agree. Personally, I dont mind reading such discourse when it occurs. Doesnt bother me in the least, but there is a function for you to choose if you cant take it. As you say here, perhaps if people exercised that option more often, it would be less of an issue for them.

That is the most awful way to post. People who do that should be decanted into small jugs.

I disagree. Methinks I will now label such a style as 'progressive' to show how avaunt garde it is.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

If you can't handle being made fun of maybe the internet isn't for you.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

You've never argued with someone on this forum 1 on 1?

I just noticed this. I don't remember if I have.

 

[Catharsis]

My poor post. It doesn't deserve to be subjected to this Benihana-style savagery.

I am betting there is quite a bit of discussion behind the scenes about the pros/cons of doing that....I am not so sure trying to humiliate posters before their peers something positive regardless of the amount of lulz it gets from some factions. Its all fun and games until your the one being made fun of...then the story changes.

I agree. Personally, I dont mind reading such discourse when it occurs. Doesnt bother me in the least, but there is a function for you to choose if you cant take it. As you say here, perhaps if people exercised that option more often, it would be less of an issue for them.

I disagree. Methinks I will now label such a style as 'progressive' to show how avaunt garde it is.

Is this the death of 'using the ignore list is a sign of weakness'? It'll be disappointing if you stop using that little adage. Damn your new progressive agenda.

As regards humiliation, well the situation is pretty ridiculous to start with, right? Having an argument with someone you can't even see on a topic you can't hope to influence, an argument so intense that you've driven out all other discussion, that's kinda humourous. Calling attention to it is healthy, so long as it's not meant maliciously: it reminds us of what we're really doing.

Looking a bit silly doesn't make one's points any less INDISPUTABLY correct

EDIT: re: arguing 1 on 1, I don't think I've ever done that either, except possibly when I was really new, but that was just because I figured that was what you had to do in an off-topic forum.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I wouldnt call those 'styles' inasmuch I would say inappropriate comments.

If people have a tendency to mostly post mocking replies to other people, that can be considered a posting style. If it goes overboard or crosses a line, that makes it against the rules.

I am betting there is quite a bit of discussion behind the scenes about the pros/cons of doing that....I am not so sure trying to humiliate posters before their peers something positive regardless of the amount of lulz it gets from some factions. Its all fun and games until your the one being made fun of...then the story changes.

There is indeed a bit of spirited discussion about the pros and cons of this. Mostly it isn't whether it should be done, but when and how. We recently had a couple of instances where an OP got reported for trolling, but since it had been split off from another thread, it wasn't actually a real OP. We have since made an effort to leave a moderator's message confirming that such posts are split off from other threads and were not written with the same standards that a normal OP is required to have.

The intention was not to shame anybody, but simply to extract a conversation that was side-tracking the original topic and giving it a thread of its own. We ask your patience while we improve our own skills with this, as it's a new thing we're trying in order to lessen the chances of a thread getting closed for veering wildly off-topic.

 

[MobBoss]

If you can't handle being made fun of maybe the internet isn't for you.

I dont really care what the average poster thinks of me, but I expect better of moderators. Is that wrong?

Is this the death of 'using the ignore list is a sign of weakness'? It'll be disappointing if you stop using that little adage. Damn your new progressive agenda.

Nope. I still maintain that belief. Read how I parsed my comment again, so that you can see it still fits quite nicely into what I wrote.

If people have a tendency to mostly post mocking replies to other people, that can be considered a posting style. If it goes overboard or crosses a line, that makes it against the rules.

Then people should /report it and move on, and mods either act on it...or not. Right?

Or are you in favor of poster vigilantes crying for people to ignore each other?

The intention was not to shame anybody, but simply to extract a conversation that was side-tracking the original topic and giving it a thread of its own.

Then I suggest more neutrality, and fewer comments making comparisons to old married couples. Such labeling would be across the line if a poster did it, and it shouldnt be any different from a mod.

 

[Bill3000]

I dunno, I think a public shaming would be far more useful than an infraction when it comes to behavior modification.

 

[Hygro]

It could be, but I'm not a fan of public shaming or excessive ridicule. It can be an unduly powerful force, that stamps down even that which was good.

 

[Bill3000]

Use it sparingly, then?

 

[Hygro]

Exactly. Best when consensus emerges from diversity, combined with (universally?) good values. Then if someone opposes diverse consensus and operating from not good values is being the wackness, it's good for a lot of people to chime in.

 

[Mise]

Which is why a public rating system would be a highly effective behavioural modification tool.

It also has the benefit of already being a built in feature of vBulletin forums, so the mods can't dismiss that.

It can be like this:

negative rep = Level 0
0-50 rep = Level 1
50-100 rep = Level 2
etc. Can obviously tweak the rep levels to suit how people use the system... Maybe set a floor below which users can't go, e.g. -25 or something, so people don't sink into the abyss, never to return.

People will want to "level up" - we're all computer came players, afterall! We can't resist going up the levels. And we'll take greater care in our posts to ensure that we earn upvotes.

 

[Hygro]

Public rating systems are good for that reason, but the most useful effect is the point where a person sees he/she just got up or downvoted. I.E. the private feedback of the post. The lame part of a public rating system is seeing other people's "rep". The main other forum I frequent has a reputation system and I love it for the feedback, positive and negative, but I dislike the public aspect where I am biased by their public rep display. I have maximum reputation on that forum too, and I still prefer the actual scoring to be private.

 

[Mise]

I suppose the scoring and the level could be private. In any case I see no reason why we shouldn't try it out and see if it improves things. If it makes things worse then we can change it back.

Can the mods at least have this as an option?

 

[Hygro]

I suppose the scoring and the level could be private. In any case I see no reason why we shouldn't try it out and see if it improves things. If it makes things worse then we can change it back.

Can the mods at least have this as an option?

Yeah, that would be awesome. And even if it's private your logic of wanting to level up will hold true. It's not like people can't talk about it anyway...

 

[azzaman333]

I suppose the scoring and the level could be private. In any case I see no reason why we shouldn't try it out and see if it improves things. If it makes things worse then we can change it back.

Can the mods at least have this as an option?

Even though I agree that it deserves a trial, I can't see it happening while the moderators ban threads that compliment other users because they're elitist.

 

[Abaddon]

I dont really care what the average poster thinks of me, but I expect better of moderators. Is that wrong?

Why would they think you any more of a prat than we might? They are just average posters too.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I dont mind the occasional picking-apart-quote. But when its pages after pages of that stuff it gets tiring and the thread deteriorates.