What do you think of the quality of OT discussion today?

[Hygro]

The quality of discussion here has steadily improved since the old days. The cliquishness has decreased. There's still lively discussion and enthusiasm. Foruming isn't so novel anymore but as forums go, this one is doing really well.

I've been thinking for the past 6 months or so that this place has been really fun. There's been a large turnover in who is a regular, and we've got a lot of really good voices here.


@ Light Cleric, You have to remember there are a lot more readers than posters for every thread. Things that are seemingly missed are often not. Good posts are frequently just not responded to because they stand on their own. People quietly recognize their quality.

As long as you know you've written something good, thinking about it from the reader's perspective and that your facts and analysis is based on truth, you're coming out ahead in the discussion--particularly in the long-run.

Meanwhile, the insiders' club has existed from day one (I was an outsider once...) but it's extremely penetrable--it's not about join date, it's about posting a lot, with a huge recency bias. See, from my perspective, you're one of the main OT guys right now, so that makes you part of the center of the OT social scape.

 

[Kyriakos]

I think that post #15 (by Phrossack) is a pretty good synopsis, although it also is (in my view) from a needlessly gloomy viewpoint, which crucially distorts the issue given this is afterall as often said just an internet forum and we can't all like everyone else here anyway

As for the cliques: they were smashed since some time now, as they deserved. Internet forum cliques are the analogous of highschool bullies, or even kindergarden ones, and equally moribund and pointless. So that was surely a positive development

 

[dusters]

It's pretty fine. Still interesting to read and i recognise all the big names who post a lot and i know what can i expect of them. I miss some of the older posters though.

I post what i mean, straight to the head. Lately i see topics concerning tabloid type news. Why we as serious adults shall spend our time discussing every mass shooting? (rhetorical question).

More discussion about philosophy, science and politics, less about stuff which isn't very relevant in a long run.

Criticism is welcome, this thread is awesome.

 

[JollyRoger]

I'm trying to summon the courage to post more, but it is very intimidating to enter a thread sometimes.

 

[Kyriakos]

As for posting style, i either post a number of paragraphs when the thread has a philosophical theme or similar, OR mostly one-liners in either political or far more carefree threads

 

[Lord of Elves]

I post what i mean, straight to the head. Lately i see topics concerning tabloid type news. Why we as serious adults shall spend our time discussing every mass shooting? (rhetorical question).

You're clearly a very discerning, intelligent person. Those people who die in mass shootings, they really are a bunch of drama queens.

 

[madviking]

babe thread is doing as well as its ever done

 

[cybrxkhan]

babe thread is doing as well as its ever done

Best post of this thread.

 

[Goodfella]

I don't know how it compares to the olden days but this site provides free, high quality entertainment, usually for at least an hour a day, sometimes much more. It might be a waste of time, but it's a productive and educational waste of time which is a lot more than I can say for most diversions. Generally, and though I'm not looking for quality on the level of an academic journal, a lot of the popular political threads are incinerated by political knee-jerking and other forms of stupidity. However, threads like "politics and racism in grammar", "Guess the Map", and WW2 Vets and Millenials, are fun and interesting enough that I continue to visit this site multiple times a day. We have some douchebag posters, but douchebags are everywhere, and often enough there are we have hilarious posts like Gori's Hamlet rap. Overall, if I had to take a shot in the dark, I'd guess that the glory days people on here talk about are like most glory days. In other words, they never existed.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Overall, if I had to take a shot in the dark, I'd guess that the glory days people on here talk about are like most glory days. In other words, they never existed.

I assure you, the thread about Canada's listerine epidemic was very real.

 

[Kaitzilla]

People talk about the things they care about.
There is humor.
There's a babe thread.
Mods do a great job.

OT right now is as good as it gets on the internet these days.

 

[Borachio]

<good and interesting stuff>

I'm quite glad you started this thread, Borachio! This ought to be stickied, so that the mods and members can check the community's pulse. Right now, that pulse seems to be getting fainter. Members are the lifeblood of the forum, and when its hostile atmosphere and bitter, unproductive arguments cause respected members of the community away, it reduces the quality and quantity of discussion, which further drives away posters.

Well, for a start, members of a community are in it together and look out for ways to help each other, not attack each other. A sense of permanence helps keep posters around and makes each one more valued to the community, since nobody cares about posters if they'll be gone in a matter of months or weeks.

Hey! Thank you! I'm quite glad I started it too.

After a bit of slow start, it seems people have had something on their minds all this time after all.

 

[Mise]

What do you think of the quality of OT discussion today?

I agree with Hygro that it's something of a golden age. A little different to the previous golden age around 2011, before the split, but just as golden.

And how do you think it might be improved?

more posters

How do you rate your own style of posting?

witty, informed, and commendably impartial.

What, without directly criticising anyone, would you like to see less of?

I want to see more of the same.

What would you like to see more of?

The same!

Would you prefer I hadn't started this thread?

I wouldn't prefer you hadn't started this thread, no.

 

[warpus]

I think the forum merge was a good thing.

The quality of the discussion is good enough, I have no complaints.

 

[Zack]

3000 times better than when certain posters dominated the discussion.

 

[Wrymouth3]

If threads containing justification for MRAs, racial violence, and empathy for Hitler are around in 2014, then me and everyone else here has a very different understanding of the word "golden."

 

[Zack]

If threads containing justification for MRAs, racial violence, and empathy for Hitler are around in 2014, then me and everyone else here has a very different understanding of the word "golden."

cybrxkhan already said there were too many middle-class white guys, man. When you have a big homogeneous group, some people are going to lean over and say stupid bigoted stuff. Especially when it's anonymous.

edit: I think people are more referencing that a lot of problem posters from the past are gone.

 

[Light Cleric]

@ Light Cleric, You have to remember there are a lot more readers than posters for every thread. Things that are seemingly missed are often not. Good posts are frequently just not responded to because they stand on their own. People quietly recognize their quality.

As long as you know you've written something good, thinking about it from the reader's perspective and that your facts and analysis is based on truth, you're coming out ahead in the discussion--particularly in the long-run.

Meanwhile, the insiders' club has existed from day one (I was an outsider once...) but it's extremely penetrable--it's not about join date, it's about posting a lot, with a huge recency bias. See, from my perspective, you're one of the main OT guys right now, so that makes you part of the center of the OT social scape.

I guess so, but like for example I've written several times how it might be better for liberals in the long run if they sit out an election and really make the Democrat party not take them for granted anymore, rather than vote in yet another election where they're just folding to the party that knows they will get their vote no matter what. They KNOW Hillary is going to end up like Obama but they're just going to acquiesce in the general and vote party line. Why wouldn't your standard Washington politician, let alone a Clinton, use you like a doormat? I always associated people on the left as the agitators(I don't use that as a necessarily bad term, some things need to be stirred up), but here I just see more and more complaining and just taking what the establishment gives. If you don't have the money and you give up your vote, what power do you have? What good is it voting for Hillary if she's going to do a bunch of moderate/conservative stuff you don't like AND it's going to get put down as "socialist" or "liberal" by the masses if/when it fails? Why not let a Republican do it and let him go down in flames?

But almost no one ever addresses that or explains why that's not a good idea, they just go on with the same complaints and bravely taking down people who are never going to see a word they wrote, or they pick out 10% of the post and distort it and throw the rest away.

I'm trying to summon the courage to post more, but it is very intimidating to enter a thread sometimes.

You know how some evenings you want to go chill outside but it's 90 degrees, kinda humid, and you're going to get bit my mosquitos and you just think it's not worth the hassle and the pests? I don't really call that "intimidating". I just don't want to be itchy.

 

[Richard Cribb]

What do you think of the quality of OT discussion today?

Perfectly adequate for a message board dominated by young men with few worries who are exactly one hour ahead of their time. Or a golden age, as some people would prefer to call it.

And how do you think it might be improved?

Actually I haven't thought much about it. Perhaps a daily post limit for each member.

How do you rate your own style of posting?

To the extent I post at all these days; embittered, arrogant and humourless.

What, without directly criticising anyone, would you like to see less of?

Know-it-alls, moderator pets.

What would you like to see more of?

People with illiberal political convictions, both on the left and on the right.

Would you prefer I hadn't started this thread?

Yes.

Also, is it just me, or do we have more commies here than we used to? (No offense to said commies)

I think it is you.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

It's kind of boring right now. Not enough interesting non-political threads.

Related to what Light Cleric said, dogpiling is really terrible and needs to go. If someone already responded to someone's post, don't repeat their points with different words. That is not discussion but rather clutter.

There have been times when I've composed a post, and then decided to just not post it.

Glad to know there are more people who do that.