Deadlocks in Debates

[JollyRoger]

Here is a novel idea. If you dont like that, or cant handle that, then why dont you ignore it?

Doesnt that solve the issue from your perspective?

Sounds great. I expect to see no complaints from you on things you can ignore (gay pride parades, Muslim community centers, etc.)

 

[Mise]

Here is a novel idea. If you dont like that, or cant handle that, then why dont you ignore it?

Doesnt that solve the issue from your perspective?

No. As has already been explained to you, incessant tit-for-tat quote-wars drown out all other discussion. They flood threads, destroying them and ruining them for everybody else.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

No. As has already been explained to you, incessant tit-for-tat quote-wars drown out all other discussion. They flood threads, destroying them and ruining them for everybody else.

This is what I was going to say. Even if you have it on ignore, other people dont. And they will miss other posts among the quotewars.

Now, I dont mind splitting up quotes if it makes it easier to read. But quotewars rarely do.

 

[Abaddon]

We can't ignore it, because the discussion has been derailed and destroyed. If we wanted to debate the subject contained within the thread, we no longer can.

 

[Joecoolyo]

Heh, I kinda like the idea of a quotewar.

"I choose you, Voltaire!"

"Voltaire used: A witty saying proves nothing"

"It was super effective!"

 

[Valka D'Ur]

If you treat people like children, why should you expect them not to behave like children?

@Valka: for every example of a forum where it screwed things up, there's another example of a forum where it makes things much, much better.

And I explained how it would solve deadlock in debates earlier, you must have missed it It seems that there is a widespread hatred of deadlocked debates; anyone engaging in the incessant tit-for-tat quote-wars will surely get mass downvoted. That will discourage people from doing it in the future.

Just out of curiosity, what do you think would be the consequences of being downvoted? Why would it discourage people?

People won't change their posting habits unless they have some reason that's more than, "Oh, look at all those downvotes! People didn't like what I said. Oh, well. *shrug*"

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Heh, I kinda like the idea of a quotewar.

"I choose you, Voltaire!"

"Voltaire used: A witty saying proves nothing"

"It was super effective!"

Not that kind of a quotewar.

 

[Lord Baal]

Just out of curiosity, what do you think would be the consequences of being downvoted? Why would it discourage people?

People won't change their posting habits unless they have some reason that's more than, "Oh, look at all those downvotes! People didn't like what I said. Oh, well. *shrug*"

He probably thinks they'll leave the forums in a huff. I'd likely keep posting just out of sheer bloody-mindedness, and I suspect many others would too.

 

[JollyRoger]

I would think that if I wasn't getting any down votes, that there was something wrong with my posts.

 

[Mise]

Just out of curiosity, what do you think would be the consequences of being downvoted? Why would it discourage people?

People won't change their posting habits unless they have some reason that's more than, "Oh, look at all those downvotes! People didn't like what I said. Oh, well. *shrug*"

I've explained this too You can set "levels" in the vB system, so that if you have, say, 0-50 rep you're at Level 0, at 50-100 rep you're at Level 1, 100-150 is Level 2, etc. Your incentive is to level up -- afterall, this is a computer games forum! We're all addicted to levelling up. Ideally you'd have your level somewhere under your avatar, where you postcount etc is (actually, replacing post count with rep or level would be pretty great...). But Hygro's also pointed out that the incentive is still there (though I believe lessened somewhat) when the level is hidden on your profile page, or even hidden from public view completely.

Even without the levels, people like getting upvoted. Trolls like getting downvoted, but that's okay because it makes them easier to identify and ignore.

It also means that you get some "closure" in deadlocked threads -- you have a safe, relatively harmless way of signalling your "dislike" for someone's posting. Right now, the only way of doing that is by saying it -- and if you are REALLY offended by a post (but the post doesn't cross the line in terms of rules), your only two options are to respond with as much vitriol as you can muster (whilst still staying inside the rules, of course), or to ignore them. The first option leaves you with a little bit of closure, but clearly is detrimental to the forums and helps to destroy the thread. The second option leaves you with no closure, and just makes you less and less happy with the deteriorating quality of the forums.

The other option is the "Like" button I raised before. I believe in vBulletin forums you can "thank" people for their posts? I've seen it on other forums, which I'm pretty sure are vBulletin forums. This would effectively allow "upvotes" but not "downvotes". Has a similar signalling mechanism -- i.e. you upvote people who aren't engaging in incessant tit-for-tat quote wars, or who are trying to stop them and return some sanity to the thread. But it wouldn't effectively stop people from engaging in tit-for-tat quote wars.


The long and the short of it is that there's no way for anyone to break up an incessant quote war. The only thing we can do is wait for one of them to slip up (as inevitably happens) and troll or flame the other person. Then we can report it and they earn a red card, and hopefully some Moderator Action: text telling them to STFU. That is clearly a situation in which nobody wins. It needs to change.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Camikaze]

I reckon the biggest danger with any rep system is that it could tend to towards people being reluctant to express opinions rather than being reluctant to express those opinions in an annoying way, so that the system would end up stifling differing opinions more so than the style in which they are written. To me 'liking' a post indicates something about the content, not the structure. So people would like posts based on whether they agreed with the message, rather than on whether or not they appreciate the politeness or quality of the post whatever viewpoint it is expressing.

 

[Mise]

Personally I'd like to try it out and see what happens, rather than speculating like this. Can we perhaps turn it on in one forum for a few months, to see how people are using it, before jumping to the conclusion that it will fail?

 

[Virote_Considon]

Personally I'd like to try it out and see what happens, rather than speculating like this. Can we perhaps turn it on in one forum for a few months, to see how people are using it, before jumping to the conclusion that it will fail?

This post receives +1 Thanks.

 

[Dachs]

I would recommend that we do it first in WH if WH had any real heavy activity and if that weren't just a transparent attempt on my part to get easy rep

 

[Abaddon]

I have just thought of a new idea. We could defend the thread like bee's defend from Hornets.

If we all start posting as fast as possible, their little quote war will get lost in it all, and we will claim the thread back!

 

[azzaman333]

I have just thought of a new idea. We could defend the thread like bee's defend from Hornets.

If we all start posting as fast as possible, their little quote war will get lost in it all, and we will claim the thread back!

If that works at all, it will only work until bans for spamming start getting handed out.

 

[Dachs]

I have just thought of a new idea. We could defend the thread like bee's defend from Hornets.

If we all start posting as fast as possible, their little quote war will get lost in it all, and we will claim the thread back!

Yeah, this is an Abaddon post.

 

[Hygro]

No. As has already been explained to you, incessant tit-for-tat quote-wars drown out all other discussion. They flood threads, destroying them and ruining them for everybody else.

Precisely.

 

[CurtSibling]

If the debate is deadlocked, do call Perf he will come in and give everyone the clear truth they need

I am only a PM away too!

 

[MobBoss]

No. As has already been explained to you, incessant tit-for-tat quote-wars drown out all other discussion. They flood threads, destroying them and ruining them for everybody else.

We can't ignore it, because the discussion has been derailed and destroyed. If we wanted to debate the subject contained within the thread, we no longer can.

Guess what? Threads end. Get over it and move on.

And to paraphrase a quote I read recently in that book 'stuff my dad says'. 'If this issue is kicking your butt that bad, I got bad news for you in life....'