PRSI reminded me of a TV show in the 1960s, where a couple was more happy fighting than when they were getting along. Is that archived anywhere for viewing or is it hidden?Yeah, put the political forum back, seriously.
PRSI reminded me of a TV show in the 1960s, where a couple was more happy fighting than when they were getting along. Is that archived anywhere for viewing or is it hidden?Yeah, put the political forum back, seriously.
No clue, I’m guessing it is archieved in an inaccessible locked vault but as I said in another post, under the current conditions that Mac Rumors imposes for political discussion, imo it’s much better to find a more lenient place to talk politics.PRSI reminded me of a TV show in the 1960s, where a couple was more happy fighting than when they were getting along. Is that archived anywhere for viewing or is it hidden?
Hmm your user name seems familiar, I think I have seen it from another tech forum....Speaking as someone who's been a paid moderator, volunteer moderator, and site administrator for message boards and user communities both far smaller than MacRumors, and a couple that dwarf MacRumors: If I had a dollar for every time someone made request to relax restrictions or moderation under the flag of "free speech" (particularly in the last couple years) I'd be a wealthy man.
I'm beyond the point of not having cynicism toward such requests. All the world is a big ball of agendas, just waiting to shouted, preferably louder than someone else's agendas.
Rules of engagement exist for a reason: From Robert's Rules of Order governing a board meeting, down to a volunteer moderator at a site like MacRumors toiling to keep a thread on track. Attempting to relax those rules is not in service of "free speech," it is in service of chaos, and no one is going to convince me otherwise.
(note: my opinions are my own and do not reflect policy for any community I have in the past or may currently serve as moderator for. I have no connection to MacRumors as anything other than an appreciative user.)
Could we do an experiment where for a 2 week period only spam or illegal content would be removed, but otherwise allow free speech on the forums?
4chan
Please never visit that place at work or where somebody may see you, enable private browsing and don’t post there unless you know what you’re getting into, though. Not for the squeamish.
I am curios - what’s your hypothesis? What observation or data is your hypothesis based on? How will it be tested with that particular "experiment"? What’s your "control"?
One obvious answer is rational discussion related to politics, religion and certain social issues. Not saying this prohibition is a bad thing. I do not come to MR for that type of discussion, but there were people who certainly did in the past.I haven't seen anyone else ask the obvious question, so I will. Assuming you're a decent person wanting to simply engage in rational discussion, what on earth would you possibly want to communicate on this forum that you are not able to already with moderation as it is?
You defend 4chan but then go on to say...
Assuming you're a decent person wanting to simply engage in rational discussion, what on earth would you possibly want to communicate on this forum that you are not able to already with moderation as it is?
One obvious answer is rational discussion related to politics, religion and certain social issues. Not saying this prohibition is a bad thing. I do not come to MR for that type of discussion, but there were people who certainly did in the past.
I can think of plenty. Sometimes it’s better just to not “touch” a subject at all since it’s mere discussion or debate might be triggering to those on the outside looking in.
As a safe example, I assume: merely mentioning the globe in all its spherical curvaceousness could upset certain beliefs, despite how rational they might be. If you think they’re irrational, that’s a perfect example of how rational thinking itself may be colored. Thus, better not to bring it up or attempt to “fairly” moderate it at all.
Discussions concerning the notch do inflame the passions in some, indeed many, Apple enthusiasts. Even I have trouble keeping my emotions in check on this issue but, alas, have been able to stay within the confines of the rules. So, I think we agree.I was thinking of on-topic material (i.e. Mac-related). But the reason why those other issues are not allowed to be discussed is because too many people have proven over and over again to be incapable of keeping their emotions out of the discussion and end up being too much time and trouble to moderate. While people can and do get heated about Mac topics too, it's not anywhere close to the level it is with politics or religion.
Correct. I have no filter, no limits, and no shame at all.
If you can give an example of a Mac-related topic that would be verboten under the current rules, I'd be interested to know what that is.
Mac related? Eh, not so much. Apple related? Ooooh boy. See? Not going there. Nuh-uh. Can’t even mention what’s going on with Apple now. I’m trying to go a week without a ban, at least. Don’t ask. Don’t DM about it. It has already been made clear that it is not allowed, so there. I think it falls mostly under politics, which was nuked. So that should settle that.
triggered by the person's name
That’s kind of what I mean. The mere mention of some things, even if purely factually clinical as if it were a dictionary definition, can be censored. Thus, I don’t discuss or even mention or allude to some things.
A benign picture of a flower in a field can become problematic if utilized by some.
they are notI would hope this is how the forums are already moderated.
Unfortunately such discussions never remain rational. I didn't even know they were restricted subjects here but I have no problem with that.rational discussion related to politics, religion
No. Next please.Could we do an experiment where for a 2 week period only spam or illegal content would be removed, but otherwise allow free speech on the forums?
Ah man, I remember those days...The amount of insults on their own would be enough to create flame wars and some threads would delve into madness.
That reminds me of the forums when the original iPhone was released, and then, again, when the price was dropped. There was so much anger and people didn't want to behave.No. Next please.
In all seriousness, this would be an incredibly bad idea. The amount of insults on their own would be enough to create flame wars and some threads would delve into madness.
Oh, I remember that, so many people got insta-banned.That reminds me of the forums when the original iPhone was released, and then, again, when the price was dropped. There was so much anger and people didn't want to behave.