Decline in OT activity

[BenitoChavez]

If I start blowing up bridges, please don't assume that I "snapped".

So we should assume that its calm, rational, and premeditated? I'm sure your prosecutor would love to see this post

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So we should assume that its calm, rational, and premeditated? I'm sure your prosecutor would love to see this post

Every act of violence I have ever committed has been calm, rational, and premeditated. I've never denied one. If I start blowing stuff up, I will have decided that it indeed needs to be blown up.

Admittedly, I cannot see any way I would ever come to think that about bridges, so in that case perhaps I would have snapped.

 

[Pangaea]

*waves to the NSA*

 

[Timsup2nothin]

*waves to the NSA*

We will not ask what part of the anatomy one would wave at the NSA.

 

[Hygro]

We will not ask what part of the anatomy one would wave at the NSA.

Link to video.

 

[Borachio]

Link to video.

5:17

 

[Ayatollah So]

Decline in OT activity? Where??

 

[innonimatu]

I think age has to do with it too. Most of the regulars on OT have been around for a long time. Long enough to have seen the cycles of discussion. Very few threads are being made, but even those that are are rehashes of the same tired old topics we've been having for years now, so everybody going in knows generally how the thread is going to go.

This.

But it seems to me that there have been fewer people coming and going in recent years than during the mid/late 00s. Younger people spending their online time in Facebook and a few other walled gardens, perhaps? There is some natural attrition as older members spend less time here, and they were not replaced at the same rate.

I'm sad that the history section was deserted by quite a few people some years ago. But I also ceased posting there so I shouldn't complain.

 

[Oruc]

There are several things to discuss here. I’ll throw out some possible questions:

• What is your opinion of the decline in OT activity?
• Why is this happening, in your opinion? Feel free to mention any possible factors, including moderation as long as the discussion is general and mentions no specific cases.
• Does it bother you that the forum isn’t as active as it used to be, or do you prefer a more sedate posting rate?
• Is this a site-wide phenomenon?
• Do you have any suggestions for slowing or reversing this trend?
• Did I pick a useful measure of OT activity?

It's a shame what's happened to the place, but I only come here for nostalgia's sake (13 years is alot of memories to just throw away) and if im not working or doing overtime I'll be on image boards. It's alot more free form there with a greater range of opinions and political views, you can also defend a position vigorously and abandon it within the same thread with no loss of face.

I believe last time we were asked in a site questionaire on how to reverse the trend I said either ban a whole load of people or just manage the decline.

I didn't realise their was so many people here who went to reddit (I mean it's a left wing place so I'm not that surprised) I can't get past the layout and the upvoting is an awful system.

 

[Leoreth]

But it seems to me that there have been fewer people coming and going in recent years than during the mid/late 00s. Younger people spending their online time in Facebook and a few other walled gardens, perhaps? There is some natural attrition as older members spend less time here, and they were not replaced at the same rate.

Isn't it more that CFC is the walled garden in this scenario?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Isn't it more that CFC is the walled garden in this scenario?

No, because as I understand it Facebook is far easier to manage in such a way that only people who agree with you in the first place will have their opinions in front of you. That's the 'walled garden.' We may have a community that agrees among ourselves more than not, but we still have plenty of disagreements.

 

[Leoreth]

Okay, I was thinking in terms of overall community but of course it's easier to surround yourself only with people you agree with on social networks.

 

[Light Cleric]

Yeah, Facebook is much easier to keep dissenting opinions out(disclaimer: I basically stopped using Facebook once it went to public access and got taken over by everyone's grandparents). There's also not much nuanced discussion there to say the least.

I don't Ignore List people here out of principle but even if I did it wouldn't do much good because their posts would get quoted and discussed anyway. There is a sense where you might not say something because you don't want to deal with the annoyance of people not getting it and then piling on the 5% of your post that was misunderstood(or, God forbid, may have defamed a political idol) in the same vein of "I thought about going outside but I don't want to get bit up by mosquitoes and itch all day", but it's hardly a "walled garden" in the way social media is.

edit: got ninjad

 

[Rashiminos]

I don't want to say "I told you so" but, I told you so.

People don't discuss things because they aren't allowed to actually discuss things. There's a narrow frame of acceptable dialogue, and outside of that if the moderators don't shut down the discourse then other posters do and the mods step back and let it happen. There's no system for dealing with passive-aggressive trolls, so the calm trolls drive away the passionate debaters because the mods only target strict breaches of etiquette.

The result is that the people who made this forum are tired of being treated this way, and leave. I predicted this years ago, before the Chamber and Tavern split even happened. I'm sad to say that it's coming true, but there it is.

This is also the reason the Chamber/Tavern split was a terrible idea, and... no, wait... I'll leave it at that.

Is there any reasonable way to deal with calm, passive-aggressive trolling? I can't think of how to do that without shutting down even more discussion than we already do.

Also, was it better at any time in the past in your opinion, and if so, what decisions were made that led us to the current situation?

There are some world events that are simply beyond the forum's control (Ukraine).

I don't want dick pic and babe threads!

I don't understand their appeal anyways - just fire up Google/Bing and you've got all the nipples you could possibly want without the interruption of any commentary.

The appeal for me is noting which posts may feature some degree of objectification and which posters...

 

[Mise]

Is there any reasonable way to deal with calm, passive-aggressive trolling? I can't think of how to do that without shutting down even more discussion than we already do.

Also, was it better at any time in the past in your opinion, and if so, what decisions were made that led us to the current situation?

Passive aggressive trolling, or trolling that was within the rules, has always been a problem for as long as I can remember. It's also been a game that people consciously play. I've argued in the past that, if someone is trolling like this, and someone responds to such trolls in a way that might cross the line, the responder shouldn't be punished (or should be given more leeway than if the post had been out of the blue). But I've changed my mind - I no longer think that's a solution. I don't think there is a solution.

 

[Kyriakos]

^I think the OT is now surely MASSIVELY better and more civilized than in the past

I have to suppose that there are less debates cause most of the posters are the same, and they are older now and don't have the time or incentive to discuss stuff they know about/are interested in using some web forum. They have circles in those interests to discuss such things at length.

 

[Mise]

Don't get me wrong - it's orders of magnitude better than in the past!

 

[Rashiminos]

Passive aggressive trolling, or trolling that was within the rules, has always been a problem for as long as I can remember. It's also been a game that people consciously play. I've argued in the past that, if someone is trolling like this, and someone responds to such trolls in a way that might cross the line, the responder shouldn't be punished (or should be given more leeway than if the post had been out of the blue). But I've changed my mind - I no longer think that's a solution. I don't think there is a solution.

I don't think trolling fully falls under the purview of mod curating. The troll senses an opportunity to feed and the mods are rightfully discouraged from telling posters exactly what and how to post. The non-trolling posters could change the composition of the thread so that the troll can no longer be availed of its desired goal, but that's easier said than done.

 

[sophie]

I don't want dick pic threads!

I don't understand their appeal anyways - just fire up Google/Bing and you've got all the nipples you could possibly want without the interruption of any commentary.

The appeal is that it's funny. CFC takes itself way too seriously.

 

[MjM]

Forums in general just aren't what they used to be. Coupled with the fact that Civ5 and Civ:BE were both stinkers, CFC will naturally get less traffic.