Red Diamond Threads

[GenMarshall]

Somehow, I find this whole ganging up and pileing up agains a suspected troll a bit elitist. Not to mention not letting legit users set and voice their own views.

 

[Maniacal]

Removing the "view post" button might help.

 

[aelf]

But the fact of the matter is that certain people are recognized as trolls by a substantial number of people - this information coming from off-site because nobody specific can actually be referred to as a troll here, of course¹ - and yet those very same people end up as perfect trollbait and respond, like lemmings, to those very same trolls. And in some cases this has gone on for more than a year with no real change in anybody's reaction to any of it.

Well, it's fun to beat down trolls and call them out for it. It makes you feel like you're the better person or allows you to let off steam at something. So I don't see what's so surprising about this. Trollbaiting works, but not just because people are stupid and fall for it for no reason.

 

[useless]

Who exactly are the trolls?

 

[MobBoss]

Well, it's fun to beat down trolls and call them out for it. It makes you feel like you're the better person or allows you to let off steam at something. So I don't see what's so surprising about this. Trollbaiting works, but not just because people are stupid and fall for it for no reason.

This kind of thing has already been argued in site feedback where its long been established that 'beating down' others because of one's own perception of them being 'trolls' is just as bad as the person doing the trolling. Whats to say that their motivation is the exact same as yours? That they are trolling people they perceive as trolls and justify their own behavior that way?

What you suggest just ends up in an endless 'push me, shove you' cycle where everyone involved loses.

 

[Dachs]

Well, it's fun to beat down trolls and call them out for it. It makes you feel like you're the better person or allows you to let off steam at something. So I don't see what's so surprising about this. Trollbaiting works, but not just because people are stupid and fall for it for no reason.

It's completely unsurprising - to me, at least - and I don't believe I've said one way or another that responding to trolls is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing. I did say that, because of the way people respond to trolls (regardless of why they do it; I myself noted that I respond to trolls intentionally in the same paragraph), Tarquelne's idea would not work as he seemed to think it would.

 

[timtofly]

Who exactly are the trolls?

Since talking about and naming such people on here is up to the mods, I will wait for them to answer. I do however think that no one wants to be labeled as a troll, nor wants to even call someone a troll. Every one is given a fair shake to express their thoughts and opinions as long as it fits into societies boundaries. Even questions have their places and can be used effectively for means to an end. Questions can be used cleverly by purpose or sometimes even by chance. Learning to figure out who people are and how they interact is very important in maturing as a human.

 

[useless]

I was labelled as one for asking a legitimate question, in his "Ask an evangelical" thread.

 

[MobBoss]

Since talking about and naming such people on here is up to the mods, I will wait for them to answer. I do however think that no one wants to be labeled as a troll, nor wants to even call someone a troll. Every one is given a fair shake to express their thoughts and opinions as long as it fits into societies boundaries. Even questions have their places and can be used effectively for means to an end. Questions can be used cleverly by purpose or sometimes even by chance. Learning to figure out who people are and how they interact is very important in maturing as a human.

Oh, there are plenty here that want to call others trolls.....they expound in site feedback constantly for the precise right to do that.

I guess a play on an adage is appropriate in consideration. 'One man's troll is another man's intellectual'.

 

[timtofly]

I was labelled as one for asking a legitimate question, in his "Ask an evangelical" thread.

There is room for maturity in every one, not just the curious.

 

[downtown]

I feel like we're spending more time talking ABOUT RD threads than we are IN RD threads.

We get pretty meta sometimes here.

 

[Defiant47]

You can't start going around calling people trolls. Period. People shouldn't be allowed to "call out" on trolls.

1) It is antagonistic. No different from calling someone an idiot. And there's a reason we don't allow that.

2) What if that's just their posting style? Trolls by definition are posting to get a rise out of someone. But if we have people that innocently post in a certain way that could be perceived as trollish, then you can see how it would be problematic to allow flaming of their posts.

3) What if they're just dumb? If they post things that make little sense because they actually lack the intellectual capacity for logical reasoning (e.g. the smaller kids), then calling them out as trolls will not resolve anything.

4) What if the post in question is ambiguous, or skirts the rules? We need a rigorous method of assessment, and if we allow slight maybe-trolls to be called out, then the forum will degrade into a flame-fest.

And no, popular consensus isn't enough (although moderator consensus might be). If something is trollish, simply report it - if it actually does meet the requirements for trolling. If it doesn't, then tough beans. Man up and either play the game, or focus your efforts towards people that are actually worth talking to.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I feel like we're spending more time talking ABOUT RD threads than we are IN RD threads.

We get pretty meta sometimes here.

This is an RD thread. And yeah, we do

 

[aelf]

This kind of thing has already been argued in site feedback where its long been established that 'beating down' others because of one's own perception of them being 'trolls' is just as bad as the person doing the trolling. Whats to say that their motivation is the exact same as yours? That they are trolling people they perceive as trolls and justify their own behavior that way?

What you suggest just ends up in an endless 'push me, shove you' cycle where everyone involved loses.

It's completely unsurprising - to me, at least - and I don't believe I've said one way or another that responding to trolls is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing. I did say that, because of the way people respond to trolls (regardless of why they do it; I myself noted that I respond to trolls intentionally in the same paragraph), Tarquelne's idea would not work as he seemed to think it would.

I'm just giving some reasons for why people take that bait, that's all. Not saying that that's a Good Thing or a Bad Thing either.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Just make the "top" 10% moderators, thus reducing their volume of posting.

thanks, but we do not need more "chaos" in staff.

No no no, hold on a second. You and many others many have grown older on the forum, but the vast majority are the same mid-teens they usually are. There are so many new people joining all the time. This is a gaming site. OFF-TOPIC is just a subsection of that - the hint is in the name. This is an area for light relief from the rest of the forum which is far more focused on what they found CFC for in the first place. If you want a high brow discussion, join a debating team or a seminar, just take it somewhere else. Don't feel the need to turn off-topic into one. That was never the reason the majority joined CFC. It seems like OT is changing just for a few loud voices when you have so many people that are perfectly happy with it as it is.
CFC is not a sinking ship, quite evidently, and it is not hemorrhaging members, so why the need for change? We are doing the classic thing of all large organizations that desperately innovate and change because they FEEL they should.

RD is not an attempt to make OT "high brow" in any way. It is to help make moderating easier and promote better discussions when appropriate.

This all sounds like mediating discussions rather than moderating them.

Exactly. It generally works, but is time consuming.

Obviously people come for different reasons and the goal should be to accommodate the enjoyment of everyone, but you miss the point if you think seriousness and entertainment/trolling are mutually exclusive. As Jolly has pointed out the founding fathers of the US were well known trolls. They were also well known enlightenment thinkers.

Let me be clear as to my view. I have no problem with red diamond as long as they are exclusively thread starter based and not mod assigned. The reason the “serious” people are so strongly opposed to a split off of OT is they know it would die. I assume everyone realizes that and so you must ask yourself if that is the case is there really so much demand for such threads? No one is worried that the regular OT would die if you split off a serious component.

Nevertheless, the red diamond could be great if it led to loose modding of the rest of OT and the resistance is from concern that it will not lead to that but instead become the new standard. So really I’d be curious to know if new modding standards have been issued for the rest of OT. This is part of the selling point of red diamond but I have not seen any sign of this as threads are still being closed for no apparent reason that I can see (ie things like discussion going no where or OP not sufficiently serious or someone complained about something). Again there are a group of us that find this extremely annoying control. We would like to debate like many of the great thinkers and debaters in history (OK we’ll give up the obscenity, direct threat of violence, and reference to the oppositions sexual proclivities and genealogy) but we’d at least like to keep some of the sarcasm and not be told like children that the discussion is not sufficiently meritorious for the hallowed halls of the civfanatics OT site.

If this occurs for those who would like to have "fun" then I think red diamonds are a great success if not then no. BTW I have never in 10 yrs needed to “report” a post and the idea of a "mature" debater seeking outside intervention because someone responded to his argument with a trollish slippery slope overstatement of his last point is, how should I put it—immature. Perhaps mods thinking that all reports are a “problem” to be dealt with is one of the problems.

In my opinion I think the opt in for RD is acceptable. We have not had much conversation about it in staff though.I do hope that the mods who work OT more regularly than I have been recently,have been showing more leeway where moderation is less appropriate. That was seminal to the original concept.

I was labelled as one for asking a legitimate question, in his "Ask an evangelical" thread.

Moderator Action: Let's not go down the path of telling our personal stories of injustice. thanks.

 

[GamezRule]

Moderator Action: The following quotes from this thread are an example of my concerns over good discussion topics not being RD. I think that the thread is diminished by them and folks have to wade through them to find the interesting stuff.

Our discussions in staff about this are about our choices:

Do nothing, let ruined threads run
Lock it
Make it RD
Infract the bad posts.

You forgot the most important option:

Accept that not all "serious" threads were intended to be RD, and treat it like a normal thread.

 

[Birdjaguar]

You got your post here before I finished mine.

Mobboss's thread on the debt ceiling has generated staff talk. See my in thread comments here;

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=10693949#post10693949

It is a good topic but with problems. Some mods want to just close it, others make it a RD. It certainly isn't a lighthearted fun thread. The original premise of making all discussion threads RD was built around the idea of controlling this type of thread.

What do you think?

1. Close it?
2. Ask Mobboss to change it to RD or close it?
3. Leave it but infract for bad behavior?
4. Do nothing, allow such threads as is in OT?

If you think #4 is the best choice, I want to why. Thanks.

 

[GamezRule]

He didn't tag it. If he wants it to be RD, let him change it on his own. Infract it like you would any other pre-RD serious OT thread.

Halfway between 3 and 4.

 

[Cutlass]

It's not a bad thread. It's not perfect. But there isn't a lot of real problems in it. Leave it.

 

[Birdjaguar]

It's not a bad thread. It's not perfect. But there isn't a lot of real problems in it. Leave it.

Your bickering with MB is part of the problem; that stuff gets old very fast. Do you really think we should encourage such posting?