Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Make this site better with your ideas and suggestions.
User avatar
racechick
Missing Mod
Posts: 23581
Joined: 03 Aug 07, 11:08
Favourite Driver: Lewis Hamilton
Favourite Team: Mercedes AMG Petronas
Location: Nottinghham UK

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by racechick »

I think it's objectivity that's lacking not subjectivity. That, and a refusal to even try to see where the other party is coming from. And as with most problems and disputes, there are faults on both sides.
I've said it before both in threads and in pm's, if you really can't tolerate what another person is saying, put them on ignore.
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Abe Lincoln


Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. Abe Lincoln
User avatar
CigarGuy
Posts: 258
Joined: 10 Oct 14, 12:37
Favourite Driver: Alonso/Button
Favourite Team: McLaren
Location: Clearwater, FL

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by CigarGuy »

racechick wrote:I think it's objectivity that's lacking not subjectivity. That, and a refusal to even try to see where the other party is coming from. And as with most problems and disputes, there are faults on both sides.
I've said it before both in threads and in pm's, if you really can't tolerate what another person is saying, put them on ignore.


Preach, sistah! PREACH! I think it starts with having to RESPECT anothers opinion(s). If not, ignore is your friend!
Speaking English as a second language
RyRy
Posts: 1115
Joined: 30 Aug 09, 11:53

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by RyRy »

racechick wrote:I think it's objectivity that's lacking not subjectivity. That, and a refusal to even try to see where the other party is coming from. And as with most problems and disputes, there are faults on both sides.
I've said it before both in threads and in pm's, if you really can't tolerate what another person is saying, put them on ignore.


While I agree mostly users should also show and explain where they disagree but respectfully, one time someone isn't respectful it instantly impacts every other time the two involved in this scenario interact.

I don't agree with half of what is said on this forum and every other Formula 1 forum/website... BUT I try and hold my tongue and I think mostly succeed. Ignore it and move on.
CookinFlat6
Banned
Posts: 7206
Joined: 21 Apr 12, 21:22
Favourite Driver: Hamiltonian
Favourite Team: HDL
Location: Banned

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by CookinFlat6 »

Hey Vaptin

Seeing as you are interested in new ideas when you start moderating, what do you think about this post I made elsewhere a while ago

CookinFlat6 wrote:Im talking about policing the moral rules of debate

deliberate lies or insults should not be tolerated

lies by mistake, one pointed out should be retracted

Attempts to deceive or to perpetuate a fallacious debate

Some forums have rules that cover false and misleading info and these are policed

Some forums also have rules that cover knowingly perpetuating baseless claims or arguments

This would make a world of difference to the quality and integrity of the space

Be warned: arguments are welcome, personal insults are not

Xenophobic, homophobic sexist and other hateful comments are not welcome here. Please report them. Particularly egregious comments may result in the member being permanently excluded without warning. We accept that nationalism, feminism, religion and political viewpoints are important to motorsport but are welcome only where they concern it.

You may not post information on this forum that is knowingly false. "It's just an opinion" as an afterthought, having created an argument, is simply not good enough.


why should a member be allowed to continue to perpetrate an argument after proof is provided that it is wrong or a lie? why let this slide and then blanket censor both sides if the liar is shamelessly willing to continue?

doesnt make sense - dont insult others, dont be rascist, sexist but you may continue to twist lies knowing it inflames those with particular sensibilities, - similar to race and gender
Image
2014 Monster 26x Bookie Mugger
2015, 2016 WDC: LH44
User avatar
sagi58
Posts: 10203
Joined: 23 Jul 13, 22:05
Favourite Driver: He Who Drives for Ferrari!!
Favourite Team: Scuderia Ferrari
Location: 5 miles North of "X"!

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by sagi58 »

racechick wrote:I think it's objectivity that's lacking not subjectivity...


Thank you for catching that, RC!!
What that could/should have read was...

sagi58 wrote:Nothing new here! It's all about one's perspective and the subjectivity involved when it comes to favourite teams/drivers.
ImageAfter the agony of defeat, success will be sweet!
User avatar
racechick
Missing Mod
Posts: 23581
Joined: 03 Aug 07, 11:08
Favourite Driver: Lewis Hamilton
Favourite Team: Mercedes AMG Petronas
Location: Nottinghham UK

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by racechick »

We have a situation on the forum, as happens in life, in work , in social situations, where group A and group B, come at situations from completely opposing angles. They disagree about most things, choices, teams, drivers, ways of expressing themselves, ways of dealing with dispute, and it's a fruitless task to ask them to respect each other, because they don't and they won't. Respect has to be earnt, and neither of these groups have done anything to gain the respect of the other.
What we can ask as a forum is that these two groups do consider other users; users that have their own views but as RyRy and Vaptin have said, will often let things go in the interest of others and the smooth running of the forum. Respecting someone you completely disagree with on all counts is not a viable option. Tolerating them is. But if that's a step too far, IGNORE them!
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Abe Lincoln


Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. Abe Lincoln
vaptin
Posts: 6397
Joined: 25 Jul 09, 13:42

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by vaptin »

racechick wrote:We have a situation on the forum, as happens in life, in work , in social situations, where group A and group B, come at situations from completely opposing angles. They disagree about most things, choices, teams, drivers, ways of expressing themselves, ways of dealing with dispute, and it's a fruitless task to ask them to respect each other, because they don't and they won't. Respect has to be earnt, and neither of these groups have done anything to gain the respect of the other.
What we can ask as a forum is that these two groups do consider other users; users that have their own views but as RyRy and Vaptin have said, will often let things go in the interest of others and the smooth running of the forum. Respecting someone you completely disagree with on all counts is not a viable option. Tolerating them is. But if that's a step too far, IGNORE them!


Yeah, as you say it's about not getting bogged down in winning the argument, or an us v them thing and just losing sight of the whole, the wider topic and that you're going down a dead end and there are other things much more fun.

Actually, maybe we could try more active moderating? That might help, e.g. moderators not just only stepping in when punitive mesaures are required, but trying to pre-empt or guide threads or posters back to topic or whatever.

Interestingly it seems a core part of points made on this thread are already on the forum guidlines:


Should you have an issue with another member, don't fight it out on the forums. Ninety percent of the time it will be a misunderstanding, and nothing that cannot be resolved with a well placed "emoticon"."



To use more phrases - it's about breathing or just letting it go and moving on.
CookinFlat6 wrote:Hey Vaptin

Seeing as you are interested in new ideas when you start moderating, what do you think about this post I made elsewhere a while ago



Oh, no, there's nothing about me becoming a mod or anything. I was just posting my views and suggestion as a user of this forum. If I was a mod, I'd just force everyone to comply and not bother with this discussion rubbish.

I think there is some merit in not allowing clearly non-factual statements. It won't mean everything a poster sees as non-fact can be banned though, since in F1 a lot of our information comes from third party media sources, reports quotes etc. we won't always know actually what is fact and what isn't. But I guess, we could just make the definition between what is fact and what is true.

Might be a fair bit of effort for the moderators though, to check up on making sure things are clearly against verifiable evidence before removing or editing a post?
CookinFlat6
Banned
Posts: 7206
Joined: 21 Apr 12, 21:22
Favourite Driver: Hamiltonian
Favourite Team: HDL
Location: Banned

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by CookinFlat6 »

Hey Vaptin,great answer, we cant ban rumours, but we can draw the line at posting information that has been proven to be false and stop poster knowingly posting false info . Yesit could be a burden on the mods to check, however why not say that once something is reported for being a load of tosh, then it gets withdrawn automatically unless the poster cares to furnish evidence of justification in believing it to be true. For example on the trivia thread, I posted some info, that upon closer examination and investigation was not as robust as I had thought. Once more info had been supplied by the objector I no longer feel the need to claim its true

Now there are 2 yardsticks on here who would not leave it at that and gracefully quit the line of argument. Nope, they would twist the story, and change the focus, and insist they were right and that they had a right to continue saying that, but really its just a fallacy of no interest in meaningful debate and only motivated by ""balancing"" the energy of those with ""original opinions"". And after 30 pages would start weeping about being made fools off and the report button would be eroded quicker than a Bosnian mountainside. And then if we were lucky they would flounce off in a huff, if not they would stat all over again with another inane meaningless objection or falsity

For me, these fallacies are against the spirit of open debate,

anyway Vap, what do you think of this post I made earlier on a different thread? again, someone could report the discussion as having been proven or discredited and appeal for it o be ended, end of story no more bickering - the person on the receiving end of the derision/ridicule would then have to make a case for been allowed to continue being ridiculed for not being able to admit wrong etc

CookinFlat6 wrote:This thread could have done with someone trying to read the discussion and then moderating it by identifying the part that is not helping to facilitate the natural function of a forum - discussion that is constructive, i.e select the member that is not adding to the the knowledge pool, or is actually lying, or twisting the argument, ignoring points and generally losing. Like a referee who thinks 'this debate has been concluded, member x should therefore quit'

Now obviously I am not suggesting the moderators change the way they operate, or making comments on the moderating, just lamenting the absence of a referee on the Lewis thread, as we all know that some people will always resort to the logical fallacies when losing and other participants are not best placed to terminate the debate

Traditional open debate forums say in the local town hall always have a referee or public vote to decide things when one side turn to the fallacies - That would be moderating the debate as opposed to blocking it once it has stopped being constructive

just my 2 pence worth, but someone behaving in a way not within the common rules of constructive debate does not have an automatic right to continue, so when an argument is based on a statement that is clearly shown to be untrue or fallacious, a type of refereeing would be to step in and declare it null and void, instead of expecting the participants to decide to stop

the house of commons debates are no different and thats why a chair has to have the final say, rather than ask everyone not to argue or not to disagree in the interests of an easy life - thats not constructive

on autosport forum, the referees are always quick to jump in once an argument is proven or dismissed, saying things like 'x, you still didnt produce this proof, its obvious you dont have any because you changed the subject, so this debate is over before it becomes pointless bickering'

but the referrees would ofcourse have to have some sound knowledge of F1 and have no motivations for intervening beyond facilitating a flow of constructive and lively debates

in fact the more I think about it, I think a knowledgeable but fair and nice person like RC could be encouraged to respond to requests for judging the outcome of a debate whenever any participant, observer or moderator feels it is getting heated or pointless. she could then step in read the main points and declare it closed - sometimes without agreement and sometimes by declaring the credible side based on the evidence presented

Image
2014 Monster 26x Bookie Mugger
2015, 2016 WDC: LH44
User avatar
sagi58
Posts: 10203
Joined: 23 Jul 13, 22:05
Favourite Driver: He Who Drives for Ferrari!!
Favourite Team: Scuderia Ferrari
Location: 5 miles North of "X"!

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by sagi58 »

vaptin wrote:...I was just posting my views and suggestion as a user of this forum. If I was a mod, I'd just force everyone to comply and not bother with this discussion rubbish.

I think there is some merit in not allowing clearly non-factual statements. It won't mean everything a poster sees as non-fact can be banned though, since in F1 a lot of our information comes from third party media sources, reports quotes etc. we won't always know actually what is fact and what isn't. But I guess, we could just make the definition between what is fact and what is true.

Might be a fair bit of effort for the moderators though, to check up on making sure things are clearly against verifiable evidence before removing or editing a post?


Let's not forget about misquoting, misrepresenting and using ridiculous/insulting/immature terms to refer to other forum members in the false hope of expecting them not to notice the inside "joke"!
ImageAfter the agony of defeat, success will be sweet!
User avatar
myownalias
Mod
Posts: 9317
Joined: 27 May 09, 23:16
Favourite Driver: Jenson Button
Favourite Team: Williams
Location: Wichita, KS

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by myownalias »

As moderators we make sure everyone behaves and we enforce rules and hand out appropriate punishment. However we are not referees, we will not decide who is right or wrong and delete comments that we believe are wrong. Just inside the mod team we all have contrasting opinions on drivers/teams etc and frankly we have our own bias. The thing with debate is there is often not a clear cut right or wrong and not all discussion is based on hard facts, sometimes as members we just have to agree to disagree and move on with our lives.

It takes at least two people to create an argument, which can be avoided by simply acknowledging someones opinion and moving on. But instead we end up in circular arguments because both sides are attempting to put the world to rights according to their mindset. I don't agree with RC about respect, I believe we should give a certain level of respect to everyone that crosses our paths, being it in person or online. I'm not saying we should give ultimate respect to everyone, that is earned, but as basic level of respect should be given to everyone.
myownaliasThe Englishman in KansasTwitter: @myownalias
What's Burning?
Banned
Posts: 21486
Joined: 24 Feb 10, 00:09
Favourite Driver: Lewis Hamilton, Nico Hulkenberg
Favourite Team: Porsche North America, Porsche LMP1
Location: PULL IN CASE OF FIRE

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by What's Burning? »

Hard to respect people that deny what they say, lie about it and manipulate, complain behind the scenes and fein insult at any slight even though they bought the biggest shovel for all the bullsh!t they've served, however there's remarkably, inexplicably one would say only one side with warnings.

I heard about short leashes I heard about repetitive arguments, I can even go read the guidelines about the slightest insults regardless of subtlety not being tolerated, but it obviously applies only to one side.

Perhaps that's the problem that's been created. You show up at a friend's house and they've let their bitch sh!t in the the patio and didn't bother to clean it for months afterwards, for whatever reason, they're busy, lazy, inattentive or otherwise preoccupied. After a while there's not room to tread on regardless of carefully you try and you find don't want to visit that friend to go have a beer in their patio... you dig? :drink:
"I don't want to be part of a forum where everyone has differing opinions." Boom...
CookinFlat6
Banned
Posts: 7206
Joined: 21 Apr 12, 21:22
Favourite Driver: Hamiltonian
Favourite Team: HDL
Location: Banned

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by CookinFlat6 »

Whats annoying is expecting everyone to regard the dog that made the mess with the same approach usually advised for dealing with the guy on the station platform that makes inane noise and yells random sayings at other passengers without a shred of self awareness or understanding of what is appropriate or even real.

This 'smile politely and look away quickly' mechanism is ofcourse a conditioned response that ties in with our desire to 'not rock the boat' and to maintain a front for anyone outside our 'class' or 'level' or 'peer group' . This is a trait that is meant to suggest a 'better' personality. However its flawed because cynical elements will instinctively exploit this conditioning in most well brought up and well adjusted people. An sooner or later we have a need for a Churchill. i.e WC was shunned for being too direct and uncompromising and for not suffering fools. Yet the appeasers had to come kiss his bottom when their 'dont rock the boat' lazyness spawned someone cynical who just kept on pushing.

Now I am not saying there is no place for the 'deal with fallacy by withdrawing' types,nope, they are the fabric of civilised society , however the small minority of uncompromising types willing to stick their necks out for what they know (by knowing history) to be useful or not to society are easy to penalise and blame instead of the braver effort of tackling the 'fallacious' are the same ones that are needed when sh!t hits the fan

In every forum as in life, out of every 100 posters there are a handful who actually understand the benefits of a forum, the rest are just plodding along. We grow mentally by using our mental faculties. The benefits of having a small pool of these people who are willing to provide genuine opinions on life as it happens is something a normal person would spend a lifetime assembling, the internet makes it quicker - if you know whats what

What I am saying is that I am here to hear what a handful of members think about things I also think about, and as each one has a certain 'style' and when you have a critical sample size you are effectively looking at a microcosm of the wider populace. Therefor you appreciate the widest set of beliefs and viewpoints AS LONG AS they are honest, consistent and genuine. What you dont want are flakes who change according to the argument, mostly stubborn and argumentative as a defence mechanism for their ignorance. As long as they are not in your face then alls good.

However, conflict is mechanism for evolution and growth, its everywhere in nature, the seas vs land etc etc Conflict is good, as long as its natural. If its natural then it stops once the issue is resolved to the longterm benefit of both forces. When you pump iron, you have to rip your muscles for the longer term gain of bigger ones.
Debate is a form of conflict and as long as its actually a debate then theres no real loser or winner in the long term as both gain. However with many people its not debate, its the fallacies. And those unable to differentiate between posts that add value and those that are merely there as a fallacy - well they are also part of the problem

Any forum is therefore functional because of a minority, and when this minority start to feel that lazyness and appeasement has outstripped the harder path of taking responsibility for the integrity of the space - well you are left with inane meaningless fallacies - and that does include jokes instead of jokey opinion

If you actually read this, its an appeased version of the rant I made earlier - if you didnt, then feel free to b!tch and moan about it anyway :thumbup:
Image
2014 Monster 26x Bookie Mugger
2015, 2016 WDC: LH44
User avatar
sagi58
Posts: 10203
Joined: 23 Jul 13, 22:05
Favourite Driver: He Who Drives for Ferrari!!
Favourite Team: Scuderia Ferrari
Location: 5 miles North of "X"!

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by sagi58 »

Shoes that fit come in all shapes, sizes and colours. :wink:
ImageAfter the agony of defeat, success will be sweet!
What's Burning?
Banned
Posts: 21486
Joined: 24 Feb 10, 00:09
Favourite Driver: Lewis Hamilton, Nico Hulkenberg
Favourite Team: Porsche North America, Porsche LMP1
Location: PULL IN CASE OF FIRE

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by What's Burning? »

Is that a reference to the dog chit analogy from a couple of posts up? :shrug:
"I don't want to be part of a forum where everyone has differing opinions." Boom...
CookinFlat6
Banned
Posts: 7206
Joined: 21 Apr 12, 21:22
Favourite Driver: Hamiltonian
Favourite Team: HDL
Location: Banned

Re: Current Issues with Forum behaviour?

Post by CookinFlat6 »

I thought the post was the smiley that shows it was a witty ""last word"" put down, with the actual text just to satisfy the 'minimum characters for a post' rule

Sorry I cant resist it, but how does a shoe of different sizes fit the same foot???? surely someone has confused the saying - "if the shoe fits" which implies the right sized shoe is the only reality, how does that become "shoes of different sizes fit the same person" or is it that shoes in different sizes fit different people with different size feet - :yikes:
Image
2014 Monster 26x Bookie Mugger
2015, 2016 WDC: LH44