TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 46 of 46

Thread: That Ignore feature that nobody seems to use

  1. #26
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Land of the crazy
    Quote Originally Posted by Thirith View Post
    I agree with Nameless Voice, added to which: if we were to consistently take that approach, then just be honest about it and get rid of the moderators. (Not what I would want to happen, but if it all comes down to "You don't need to listen, regardless of what lies and slander people spout", even having moderators is pointless.)
    Moderators are needed to enforce the forum rules, not control the narrative. Which rule is nbohr1more breaking?

    I don't think the role of a moderator on any forum is to prevent people from voicing alternative opinions on a subject, even if they are wacky opinions.

    And the last half-dozen years or so should have provided ample evidence that "You don't have to listen" is a dangerously careless tack to take.
    How so?

    In the case of nbohr1more, and jkcerda before him, they're not posting crap all over TTLG, they're keeping their political posts in the appropriate threads.

    Some people are drawn to their posts like moths to a porch light, and can't stop responding to them. So one wacky post gets amplified 20x because it turns into 2 pages worth of exposition and argument. That's OK if that's what people want to spend their time doing. But don't complain about the noise if you're one of the people creating it. If you want it to stop, then stop. I don't mean you specifically Thirith, but anybody who is asking for moderator action while continuing to engage with nbohr1more.

  2. #27
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Yeah, I'm not for banning dumb opinions, but I do think moderators should keep a lid on some of the, er, ad hominems thrown back and forth.

  3. #28
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Land of the crazy
    Well, accusing people of being shills is something a moderator could reasonably act upon, starting with a warning.

    The ad hominems have been flowing the other way too though.

  4. #29
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    I'm not even sure why anyone's offended by the whole shill thing. It's so absurd that it's hilarious. TTLG's had much worse.

    As for the ignore function - if we're not mature enough to stop ourselves from pointlessly responding, then we're not mature enough to resist reading hidden posts. I don't see the point of it.

  5. #30
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by froghawk View Post
    ...if we're not mature enough to stop ourselves from pointlessly responding, then we're not mature enough to resist reading hidden posts.
    I dunno, that is pretty much exactly where my maturity level lies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pyrian View Post
    ...ad hominems thrown back and forth.
    Quote Originally Posted by heywood View Post
    The ad hominems have been flowing the other way too though.
    Yeah, I said that. Unca' in particular has been way over that line.

  6. #31
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: The Land of Make Believe
    Quote Originally Posted by Azaran View Post
    Besides ignoring the person, if what they claim can be easily refuted...then refute it! If I ran a science forum and some person came in claiming the earth was flat, I wouldn't ban them, I'd let everyone counter all their points and let reality speak for itself. Unless it became obvious that they were trolling.
    Would that scientific reality had the power you're suggesting. This is the post-truth society, where arguments are won by those who hector, bully and shout loudest (at both extremes).

  7. #32
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by heywood View Post
    Moderators are needed to enforce the forum rules, not control the narrative. Which rule is nbohr1more breaking?

    I don't think the role of a moderator on any forum is to prevent people from voicing alternative opinions on a subject, even if they are wacky opinions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Thirith
    And the last half-dozen years or so should have provided ample evidence that "You don't have to listen" is a dangerously careless tack to take.
    How so?
    Fine. If you think those things, after four years of President Alternative Facts and everything that led up to 6 January 2021, there's really not much to talk about. I consider nbohr's brand of crazy dangerous, real-world dangerous, and I believe it's become all the more dangerous because it's been constantly fed by some over the last half-decade (but also before that) and ignored by others. And I think it's important not to provide it with more platforms. No, I don't think there's anyone here at risk of catching nbohr's craziness if they don't already lean that way, but I do think that by allowing him whatever platform he can find here we're feeding his delusions and beliefs on an ongoing basis - whether we respond to him to try to refute him, as Azaran says, or whether we ignore him, like you suggest.

  8. #33
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2002
    Location: melon labneh
    Anyone posting demonstrable falsehoods, especially ones that are typically used to emotionally or politically manipulate, without a sincere apology after being corrected deserves to be banned imo. Some things are not just "alternate viewpoints" and for free speech to work, everyone must have a right to assume good faith from others.

  9. #34
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by heywood View Post
    Moderators are needed to enforce the forum rules, not control the narrative. Which rule is nbohr1more breaking?
    How about this?

    Quote Originally Posted by TTLG Forum Rules
    No Abusive Behaviour.

    You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this Forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, abusive, hateful, harassing, obscene, sexually explicit, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. Hate speech is not tolerated. We will not tolerate abuse upon another member.

  10. #35
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Knowingly.. do you really think he knows?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thirith View Post
    Fine. If you think those things, after four years of President Alternative Facts and everything that led up to 6 January 2021, there's really not much to talk about. I consider nbohr's brand of crazy dangerous, real-world dangerous, and I believe it's become all the more dangerous because it's been constantly fed by some over the last half-decade (but also before that) and ignored by others. And I think it's important not to provide it with more platforms. No, I don't think there's anyone here at risk of catching nbohr's craziness if they don't already lean that way, but I do think that by allowing him whatever platform he can find here we're feeding his delusions and beliefs on an ongoing basis - whether we respond to him to try to refute him, as Azaran says, or whether we ignore him, like you suggest.
    And then you silence them and increase their martyr complex, make them further convinced that they have something important enough to say that it's worth silencing, and make them even louder wherever else they choose to speak. Silencing them reinforces their narrative in a lot of ways.

  11. #36
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Land of the crazy
    Do you feel abused by somebody posting deep state conspiracy bullshit? It's not knowingly false to nbohr1more, he's not posting it in bad faith, he really believes it. It's like religion. And where's the hate? If there is any hate to be seen here, it's flowing at him rather than from him.

    You guys seem to believe in the same fallacy as nbohr1more, that political arguments in a dumpster thread in the off-topic forum of an obscure website dedicated to a long dead game studio would have any influence on the bunch of old regulars who visit it.

    And if you really think that what the guy posts here is somehow dangerous, why keep amplifying it?

    Some forums I visit have rules against discussion of politics and religion, which is fine. But TTLG has no such rules. You want this place to be a little exclusive club where nobody from the political opposition is allowed. I really hope that's not where we end up.

  12. #37
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    The guy is insane, and I don't think anyone takes him seriously, but you specifically asked which rules he'd broken, and I pointed to them.

    He'd probably also just go away if people stopped humouring his insanity, though.

  13. #38
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2009
    Location: thiefgold.com
    Quote Originally Posted by SD View Post
    This is the post-truth society, where arguments are won by those who hector, bully and shout loudest (at both extremes).
    Sad but true

  14. #39
    verbose douchebag
    Registered: Apr 2002
    Location: Lyon, France
    Quote Originally Posted by Azaran View Post
    Besides ignoring the person, if what they claim can be easily refuted...then refute it! If I ran a science forum and some person came in claiming the earth was flat, I wouldn't ban them, I'd let everyone counter all their points and let reality speak for itself. Unless it became obvious that they were trolling.
    Like when I refuted nbohr's claims that COVID-19 was made in a lab using paragraphs of gene engineering science (including going over the function and purpose of various gene engineering techniques) to talk through key points in a Nature paper showing that the probability of lab manipulation was infinitessimally small - where did that get me?

    First a link the website of one of the authors with a commentary that his site was way too fancy for him to not be a paid shill, then a later comment, that my work experience in the field of gene engineering was a bit convenient, and thus the jury was out on me being a paid shill. Yeah, that went great.

    That said, I think 2 things here:

    1) The ignore function is semi-useful. I've got Tony and Nbohr on ignore because their signal:noise ratio makes them not worth the effort, but sometimes, someone quote something which is just a bit too easy to get my teeth into to ignore. That's on me for sure, but it doesn't mean I'm not an adult - claiming that to be an adult means perfectly ignoring your every waking impulse is just not a realistic or sympathetic way to think of other humans. Tony is easier to ignore as his nonsense is not as occasionally interesting / bizarre as nbohr's.

    2) I think the moderation wants to be there, but as a light touch. Banning for being controversial is not what any forum wants, and tbf, anyone going into a "general" forum section on any site knows full well that's where all the arguments and bullshit happen, so if you want a nice forum experience, usually best to stick to the content areas. That said, definitely all for ban hammers when lines are crossed and forum rules are broken. Nbohr's conspiracy waffle, while pretty low value (except when the crazy crossed the interesting threshold), is not ban-worthy, but refuting the validity of other people's contribution on the baseless assumption that they are in the pay of bad actors looking to enslave humanity, is past the line, as that is seeking to disenfranchise other people from the act of discussing, which is what we are here for. To be honest, once you start eliminating other people's opinions at that fundamental level, you have ask why they are even here having the discussion. If this forum is compomised by the deep state, why be here?

  15. #40
    Taking the Death Toll
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Location: they/them mayhem
    The thing is, this forum does not as a rule care about lines crossed. How many lines did Subjeff cross over the years and nothing happened to him? Or Tony? Or Vae? Or Evabot? Or me? Would Subjeff even be gone if he hadn't gone so far as to harass Al? Is that where the line actually is?

    A forum lives and dies on its moderation, and the laissez-faire approach this forum has traditionally taken I think has been to its detriment.

  16. #41
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2009
    Location: The Spiraling Sea
    Quote Originally Posted by june gloom View Post
    The thing is, this forum does not as a rule care about lines crossed.
    Objectively, there is no such thing as "lines crossed"...You are only asserting your subjective perspective upon those that contradict your ideological sensibilities...and as such, your bigoted intolerance for free expression reveals itself for all to see.

  17. #42
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: Switzerland
    Karl Popper called, Vae. He’d like a word.

  18. #43
    Taking the Death Toll
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Location: they/them mayhem
    As I said the last time this came up, why would I have contempt or intolerance for something that doesn't exist?

  19. #44
    Administrator
    Registered: Oct 2000
    Location: Athens of the North
    Quote Originally Posted by Vae View Post
    Objectively, there is no such thing as "lines crossed"...Y
    As far as the forum is concerned there are lines laid out in the forum rules. You may have a different assessment on whether the lines are insufficient or go too far but from the point of being able to post here that's immaterial.

  20. #45
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2002
    Location: In my room

  21. #46
    verbose douchebag
    Registered: Apr 2002
    Location: Lyon, France
    That is a solid gif.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •