|
Post by Admin on Jul 13, 2005 14:27:06 GMT
I checked my email this morning to find that Algenon had set me up as the admin for this site. That is all I know. I will not be "personifying" this Admin role -- I will not be present here in these boards as Admin but rather will continue to be who I usually am in these forums (Arseovrteakettl). When I need to, I will don the Admin cap and act as administrator. The rest of the time, I will just be one of you guys. My only acts as Admin will be to exercise the powers of an administrator of these boards (creating new forums, deleting old ones, signing on moderators, etc.). In exercising those powers I will strive to be as fair as possible, and I will always seek feedback from the board as a whole before acting. If anyone has suggestions about these boards, or wishes to be a moderator, or to see a new kind of forum, or anything else, please let me know here. - Admin
|
|
tonic
Master Baitor
RR Special Correspondent
Ready for the action now, danger boy?
Posts: 1,759
|
Post by tonic on Jul 13, 2005 15:38:16 GMT
I personally would like to hold some discussion on the forum rules. I think they are lame as hell and need to be reworked. At no time should a thread or poster be allowed to run wild without mod intervention. A few ppl have mentioned how they dislike when someone highjacks a thread. Well make that a rule-- if they are about to start a new subject based on a quote from someone else let them start a whole new thread bringing over the quote in the new thread without high jacking the old thread.
Maybe an area that we can sound off if we feel someone is being overly abusive on the forums to hash it out and speak about it as a group. A occ type talk to clear the air. ?
Ignore feature available? I would rather someone ignore me then leave a message board over my stupid comments.
Why is it also ok to constantly insult each other and not other ppl outside our own forum? I never got this rule if anything shouldn’t we respect our fellow posters more ? Im not talking about censorship here cause when you are debating a topic it can get heated but just some proper rules of debate Please browse through this article on debating and give feedback on what might help us out here. Ive bolded the ones i think apply the most to us.
HOW TO DEBATE LIKE A PRO
Debating is not just knowing the issues. Debating is not just arguing. It is an exchange of ideas in which both sides try to make the case for their position. It is knowing how the frame the issues in a palatable framework that matches your audience.
Both the ability to debate well, and knowledge of the points of argument are essential to your ability to convey our issues to your audience. The eight-second sound bite has replaced true debate in this country and created the illusion that important issues are one-dimensional.
To debate well, you must select relevant arguments from irrelevant content and rhetorical presentation. You must, most importantly, relate specific facts and data that directly combat point-by-point the cheap labor lobby propaganda. Remember that debates are not a zero sum game - there is no winner or loser. A constructive debate generates critical thought in the audience. A constructive debate does not merely offer an analysis of problems but offers real solutions and alternatives.
It is our duty, as citizens, to increase the awareness of the importance of rational debating. Constructive debating is an art.
Goal - The first rule is to remember that your goal is to persuade the audience, not to persuade your opponent. Do not become frustrated when your opponent is not convinced or does not respect your argument. No matter what your opponent says or does during the debate, it is your composure, confidence, open-mindedness, and points of debate that will convince the audience. If you become frustrated, the audience will view you as the losing side.
Clarity - Avoid using words that can be interpreted differently by different readers or that have different connotations to different users. A connotation is a feeling or definition that is attached to a word, yet not included in its dictionary definition. Often a word may have a positive connotation with one audience and a very negative connotation with another. Try to use words that are neutral to generic audiences, or tailor your words to your specific audience.
Quoting - Quoting an authority is not evidence. Quoting a majority opinion is not evidence. Any argument based on opinion - expert, authority, or majority - is not objective evidence. Authorities, experts, and majorities can be wrong and frequently have been.
Emotionalism - Personal attacks on your opponent are an admission of intellectual bankruptcy. Keep attention centered on the specific point of debate - after all, the goal of the debate is to persuade the audience about your point, not about the opponent. Even if the audience dislikes your opponent because of your attack, it makes the opponent's argument no less credible in their eyes.
Causality - Avoid confusing correlations with causality. Just because two events or items are related does not mean that one causes the other. For example, people who drive Mercedes generally have higher incomes, but that does not mean that people's incomes would rise if we gave them Mercedes.
Innuendo - Do not make allusions to circumstance, popular belief, accusations, or other statements. Politicians and political pundits are excellent examples - they often make innuendos when they cannot prove a direct statement. Do not fall prey to this debate mistake. When you are called on an innuendo, your debate will ultimately fall through.
Sources - Quote your sources of information as often as possible. Be sure that your sources are credible and unbiased. Often international publications give a different perspective than local news. Your opponent's publications are often the source of the best ammunition. Your opponent might put out a publication stating, "There are 14 million American jobs offshored because of America's failing education system." And you can use that publication to state, "According to our opposition's publication, at least 14 million jobs have already been offshored." (This is only an example, do not use this number!)
Understanding - Understand each of your opponent's arguments. The best way to practice debating is to ask a friend who is also passionate about the issue to debate with you while you take up your opponent's position. If you can successfully debate the position of your opponent, then you can successfully debate your own position.
Respect - Always respect your opponent in a debate. If your opponent does not deserve respect, it will become obvious to the audience. But if you, the speaker, disrespects your opponent, then it will be you who loses the respect of the audience, even if it is your opponent who deserved the disrespect.
Experience - Always relate relevant personal experience. An antedote or personal story always strikes a chord with the audience because they want to hear concrete, first-hand examples.
Open Mindedness - Always keep your mind open to learning from your opponent, no matter how wrong he is on the issues. There will always be a debate where your opponent hits you with new information or a new argument that you have not heard before. Keep your mind open to this new information. You will come across as more credible if the audience perceives you as having an open mind.
Stereotyping - Do not stereotype your opponent or his followers. Even if the stereotype usually holds true, there is always an exception that your opponent can trot out to damage your credibility.
Cliches - Do not use cliques in a debate. Cliques may be widely known, but they are not proven, and there are always exceptions to a clique. There are also cliques that are the opposite of other cliques.
Slippery Slope - Do not make statements that one thing is wrong because it could lead toward something else that is wrong. This is the old, "give them an inch and they will take a mile" rule. In law, limits are clear. If we set an absolute limit on H-1Bs, then the cheap labor lobby cannot bring in more unless they change the limit.
Correlation - Be careful when drawing conclusions. For example, I have heard people say, "A significant percentage of people in our prisons are illegal aliens, therefore, most illegal aliens must be criminals." Of course criminals always want to flee when being pursued, so criminals will also migrate here. But that does not mean that most illegal aliens are criminals. We know that the majority of illegal aliens are simply coming to the USA to work, primarily out of desperation.
Jargon - Use words that your audience would commonly use. Using big words or jargon will not make you seem like an expert. For example, why use the word 'utilize' when you could utilize 'use'?
Euphemism - Do not try to make words sound softer or more politically correct. Use the proper term. An example of this is "ethnic cleansing" replacing the word "genocide". Or "undocumented worker" replacing the legal term "illegal alien". Remember, your goal is to appeal to the audience, and middle America respects a straight-forward approach.
Raising the Bar - If your opponent proves one point, give him that point. Do not insist that he then prove another point in order for that point to be valid. Just move on to the next point gracefully.
Common Sense - Unfortunately there is simply not a common sense answer for most of the issues that we debate. There are many issues where even our allies disagree. Each side believes their answer is common sense. Clearly some of these people are wrong. If the answer were obvious, then there would be no need for debate because your audience would already be convinced - and never forget that your goal is to persuade the audience, not to persuade your opponent.
Absurdism - When you show that one of your opponent's points leads to an absurd conclusion, it does not generally destroy his entire argument. Usually you only succeed in showing that that point does not apply in all cases.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 13, 2005 17:02:15 GMT
There appears to be no way to have an ignore feature in these forums.
I will appreciate hearing people's feelings about the rules and features (such as karma). If I get a sense that people want them changed, then I will set up some polls and do it democratically.
I would also like to know how people feel about the Sheriff's Office.
Comments/suggestions please.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jul 13, 2005 17:09:14 GMT
Well I'm not going to lie and say I read all of Tonics post.......... Jesus Christ girl, paraphrase that shit!
Anyway, I'm glad you are running the show Arse, and I look forward to you abusing your powers.......err I mean treating everyone fair.
I agree with Tonic about the rules,
The no attacking/talking about non members is the stupidest rule ever, and I have been against it from day one.
Hijacking threads, I agree here as well, and honestly I think this should be one of the ONLY two rules. Buuuuuut I think the person that started the thread should make the call on what is and whats not Hijacking. If the thread starter doesn't have a problem, than no fault no foul.
Rule 2 should be, there are no rules.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jul 13, 2005 17:13:34 GMT
Karma I like
About the Sheriff's Office, I say drop it and delete it, and handle all problems out in the open for all to see.
If you need to talk to a fellow Mod in private do it via PM's.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jul 13, 2005 17:16:52 GMT
Almost forgot, My vote goes for Raistlin, Tonic, and myself for mods.
|
|
tonic
Master Baitor
RR Special Correspondent
Ready for the action now, danger boy?
Posts: 1,759
|
Post by tonic on Jul 13, 2005 17:25:39 GMT
I dont want to be a mod pally thanks though. I personally think frith has done a great job in her role. Shaw i have to say when you speak out about something has also made attempts to right a wrong.
I do agree on creating a sub forum with "squabbles" to be worked out. Out in the open.
|
|
|
Post by rexxlaww on Jul 13, 2005 17:28:03 GMT
Pally, check your PM's
|
|
tonic
Master Baitor
RR Special Correspondent
Ready for the action now, danger boy?
Posts: 1,759
|
Post by tonic on Jul 13, 2005 17:29:12 GMT
Not rules...more like guidelines
|
|
|
Post by FrithRae on Jul 13, 2005 17:31:24 GMT
um..since this board is for basica announcements and not long ass discussions I'm locking the thread.
Keep in mind I DO feel this discussion needs to be had (assuming its not already being had in a trhead I've not read yet and if it hasn't I'm going to post about it momentarily)...
but just not here....
so as my first real act as a mod since I came on...
*click*
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 13, 2005 17:44:04 GMT
HERE IS A NEW RULE: any mod who locks/moves/edits or otherwise affects a thread will not be a mod much longer.
SORRY -- I am waaaaaaay out of line here. My apologies to Frith. However, there will be no locking of threads under my management. : )
|
|
tonic
Master Baitor
RR Special Correspondent
Ready for the action now, danger boy?
Posts: 1,759
|
Post by tonic on Jul 13, 2005 18:04:07 GMT
To firth I know your intentions were good and i hope you are not pissed off. At the moment though tensions are high and we need to work this out so we can all move forward. I love you and hope you understand why the thread needs to stay unlocked.
|
|
|
Post by Nali on Jul 13, 2005 18:14:34 GMT
I definitely agree that the powers that be should have cut off the Condolences thread at the pass. I'm much more used to php than proboards, so in php I know it was easy to just split a thread once it started to go off topic. This isn't something we often need, but sometimes our arguments about one thing turn into another, and from what I've seen, we've been left to self-police. For example, we had a thread going about gay marriage, but it started to turn into a ... whateveryouwannacallit thread. Darkwater (I think it was Dark that did it) had sense enough to create a new thread, rather than continue it in the gay marriage thread. So then why have mods? Because in some threads, like the condolences one, we don't do well at policing ourselves. So the mods should do what they've been appointed to do. I'm rambling. Crazy day at work. And I can't believe how much crap you asshats spew at each other between the time I leave work one day and the time I check the forum from work the next.
|
|
tonic
Master Baitor
RR Special Correspondent
Ready for the action now, danger boy?
Posts: 1,759
|
Post by tonic on Jul 13, 2005 18:17:11 GMT
I definitely agree that the powers that be should have cut off the Condolences thread at the pass. I'm much more used to php than proboards, so in php I know it was easy to just split a thread once it started to go off topic. This isn't something we often need, but sometimes our arguments about one thing turn into another, and from what I've seen, we've been left to self-police. For example, we had a thread going about gay marriage, but it started to turn into a ... whateveryouwannacallit thread. Darkwater (I think it was Dark that did it) had sense enough to create a new thread, rather than continue it in the gay marriage thread. So then why have mods? Because in some threads, like the condolences one, we don't do well at policing ourselves. So the mods should do what they've been appointed to do. I'm rambling. Crazy day at work. And I can't believe how much crap you asshats spew at each other between the time I leave work one day and the time I check the forum from work the next. Yes yes total agreement! I dont mean funny side jokes but serious derails as nali just mentioned need to be modded.
|
|
|
Post by FrithRae on Jul 13, 2005 18:18:30 GMT
oik Arse 1- um...mods jobs are to lock threads that dont need to be repeated over and over and over again 2- this is exatly WHY we need a sheriff's office, thank you drive through - this matter should have been addressed in the sheriff's office so that I could then explain fully my actions and not be threatened to be removed because I locked a thread. The only one I've ever locked. 3 - Admin you knew I was going to bring this up exactly in the thread I just posted since you gave me persmission to do so - hence I didn tthink the debate needed to happen in multiple threads at once... 4 - Tonic - read what I just wrote. Read the thread in the religion/political I just spent 15 minutes, not to mention last night mulling over - to post and have this discusssion THere. My concern was that the entire point of the discussion was to keep it in ONE place. If its here, and then over in Other Rants, and then over in the Religion/Politics Forum - well then that's just a really bad way to have a single discussion about the same thing. I have never abused any power on this forum I have been given - I'd really appreciate if you guys would show a little faith and realize I didn't do it just to lock down discussion. Since WHEN have I ever not wanted to discuss something (unless I outright say *I* dont want to talk about it, and I've never stopped others ) Now Admin if you would be so kind to redirect all discussions to the really big post I just made so that it can all be in the same place - that would be great . I mean it was easier to just lock it so that it would be easy to see where the new discussion was but... apparently I'm not trusted to do my job.
|
|