Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
To me this sounds like you're not trying to improve threads with RD, but try to educate the people posting here to be more respectable and lift their game. Noble intentions, but doomed to fail as we both know. If the non-RD thread gets more traction because people are allowed to bicker, I too think that's unfortunate but it is "what the people want".So if we were to allow two threads on the same news item; one RD and one non-RD, how would that pan out in terms of activity? History seems to suggest that people are generally attracted to a fire. Troll threads often get very high activity. Does this mean that the worse of the two threads will be preferred, because it gives people more of an opportunity to troll, or to observe trolls, or to watch others squirm? What happens when a moderator action is posted in the RD thread to improve the quality? Wouldn't it just be easier for the poster in question to take it to the non-RD thread, rather than actually being bothered to think about what they're posting? Doesn't this create an echo chamber? And wouldn't this drag with them those that they are arguing against (because there is someone WRONG in the other thread)? Is that an accurate representation of what people prefer? I'd be tempted to follow a conversation to the non-RD thread if it meant there was someone to actually argue against, but in reality I'd most likely prefer to be arguing against them in a situation in which they had to abide by the RD standard. But because I would've jumped ship to the non-RD thread, it gets my activity instead, and the RD thread dies. I think a lot of the time unless you've got two sides who are willing to engage in a civil and productive discussion it's a race to the bottom in terms of posting quality. If one side of the argument doesn't want to play ball and discuss an issue, then they'll move the conversation to being of a lower quality. RD threads largely work on the basis of 'if you want to discuss this issue, please abide by these standards/conventions', but if on any given topic you can instead go and not abide by those standards/conventions, can they actually be upheld?
Perhaps that's a rather pessimistic view of what would happen. How do you think two simultaneously running threads on the same news item would pan out if one were RD and one non-RD?
But the one thing I find odd is ... are we allowing trolls to troll in non-RD threads all of a sudden? I heard about the less strict moderation, but I was arguing under the assumption that forum rules with regard to flaming and trolling also apply to non-RD threads.
Second, while you have been urging us to wait and see how things pan out with RD threads, you are pretty quick to predict and condemn what will happen with parallel RD and non-RD threads. When we had the two homophobia threads, I'd be very happy with an RD thread where we could seriously discuss this, and yes, maybe mosey over to the non-RD thread as well.
So, like some wise man once said, why don't you give it a try and see how it works out?
You know.
Kind of like you asked of us.
