What do & don't you like about CFC forums?

[earlc]

There's something positive to be said about the swearing policy for sure. I don't even know what it is because I've never felt reason to swear on these forums. Maybe a big ol' h-bomb would eventually escape, but not yet.

Youtube and facebook are completely different. If I write a comment at either of those places, I'll look back over my post and think whoa, did I really need to drop so many f-bombs? Typically yes, the people there are terrible. But the point is that the standard of discourse that is established to a large extent determines the level of discourse moving forward.

 

[Hygro]

I just don't get the desire to swear as part of a discussion.

The posters whose speech is stifled by a lack of verbal freedom, and therefore are dissuaded from posting in anticipation of censorship, are also the ones producing higher quality, yet less inflammatory posts. Like @Owen Glyndwr . "But Owen has nearly 15,000 posts!" Well he could have 20k, driving thousands of more responses if a part of him didn't die inside before deciding to use brackets and generalizations as his self-administered CPR.

Youtube and facebook are completely different. If I write a comment at either of those places, I'll look back over my post and thing whoa, did I really need to drop so many f-bombs? Typically yes, the people there are terrible.

rofl

 

[Synobun]

Not having 5,000 posts where swearing is integral to the content seems like a fair loss.

 

[Hygro]

That's not at all the equation. If responding to a post requires X units of motivation, and there's a Y unit motivation tax because you know if you bother you have to work harder in case you need to find less accurate language to convey your meaning, you might be frequently demotivated from trying to respond whether or not you were going to use any banned words in the first place.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

you need to find less accurate language to convey your meaning

I would challenge that analysis - how can a ban on swearing lead to less accurate language??

Then there's having to actively censure my speech because the Media standards still haven't quite caught up with particles that have become standard in everyday speech.

There is no word we censor here that I would regard as standard in everyday speech, swearing is nowhere near as common in society as some of you seem to think.

 

[halfhalfharp]

I am quite surprised to see a thread closed because some of the discussions are viewed as off topic.

Off topic posts are to be reminded and directed to the topic, this is reasonable.
(Though what is off- and on-topic remains debatable, for this is a free forum that everyone can express their opinions I guess, as long as they are not contradicting forum rules? I didn't see a off-topic rule in the forum regulations, so I am curious.
And I would like to see moderator explaining more about which posts he/she views as off-topic)

But closing the whole thread for the off topic posts feels like non-specific massacre to all that are watching that thread.
Is it really a necessity to close that thread for off-topic posts? Or is there a micro-management that can prevent spoiling the whole thread?

 

[Noble Zarkon]

(Though what is off- and on-topic remains debatable, for this is a free forum that everyone can express their opinions I guess, as long as they are not contradicting forum rules? I didn't see a off-topic rule in the forum regulations, so I am curious.
And I would like to see moderator explaining more about which posts he/she views as off-topic)

But closing the whole thread for the off topic posts feels like non-specific massacre to all that are watching that thread.
Is it really a necessity to close that thread for off-topic posts? Or is there a micro-management that can prevent spoiling the whole thread?

It's very much a judgement call as to whether not the thread is a) capable of and b) worth saving, if a thread is closed and you disagree / want more information than PM the Moderator in question and (politely) ask for an explanation.

As for the rules re Spam look at the section entitled POSTING IN THE FORUMS, especially the sections on posting in the correct forum and spam.

 

[leif erikson]

I am quite surprised to see a thread closed because some of the discussions are viewed as off topic.

Off topic posts are to be reminded and directed to the topic, this is reasonable.
(Though what is off- and on-topic remains debatable, for this is a free forum that everyone can express their opinions I guess, as long as they are not contradicting forum rules? I didn't see a off-topic rule in the forum regulations, so I am curious.
And I would like to see moderator explaining more about which posts he/she views as off-topic)

But closing the whole thread for the off topic posts feels like non-specific massacre to all that are watching that thread.
Is it really a necessity to close that thread for off-topic posts? Or is there a micro-management that can prevent spoiling the whole thread?

This is a specific case and should be resolved via conversation (Private Message) with the moderator that performed the action. Site Feedback is for discussion of general topics associated with the rules.

 

[Synobun]

I am quite surprised to see a thread closed because some of the discussions are viewed as off topic.

Off topic posts are to be reminded and directed to the topic, this is reasonable.

Is it really a necessity to close that thread for off-topic posts? Or is there a micro-management that can prevent spoiling the whole thread?

Threads can be salvaged if the off-topic deviation is limited and if there was some on-topic discussion that had already taken place. If the OP was largely ignored and the contents of the thread are mostly all off-topic ramblings, or the derailment has gone on for several pages, any type of moderator action besides closing it would likely lead to the same fate: no more discussion. It's difficult to get things back on track if the collective has already abandoned the original premise.

In the past I've seen all off-topic posts get deleted wholesale. Success rate of that is limited. A moderator note is also limited, and often requires multiple reminders or infractions. Closing the thread instead may quell all future posts in that thread but it would reduce workload, the reminders, and prevent spam infractions. A thread being closed also doesn't mean that the subject is off-limits. Someone else can try again with a different OP or a greater effort to keep things on track, and the poster can also ask for initial help from a moderator to make sure things stay on-topic.

Edit: Keep the little label beneath my username in mind. I don't represent the views of the current staff team. Just providing my opinion as both a user and a former staff member.

 

[Hygro]

I would challenge that analysis - how can a ban on swearing lead to less accurate language??

Because you have fewer words and idioms that correspond to their direct and intended meanings.

There is no word we censor here that I would regard as standard in everyday speech, swearing is nowhere near as common in society as some of you seem to think.

I'm in society. Why wouldn't I know?

 

[sophie]

I would challenge that analysis - how can a ban on swearing lead to less accurate language??


There is no word we censor here that I would regard as standard in everyday speech, swearing is nowhere near as common in society as some of you seem to think.

Give me an alternative to <intensifying particle> that would replicate exactly the specific syntactic, meaning and tone colorings which are characteristic of that word. Same with <generalizing pronoun>.

Also: terms that are either archaic or esoteric are immediately out as they would run afoul of replicating the tone colorings requirement.

 

[Hygro]

See I'm losing Owen's precise meaning upon impact because I have to stop and consider what he means with his workaround!

 

[Arakhor]

Only because he's being deliberately obscure in an attempt to make a point about something that will never change on CFC.