SuperWatto posted:Well... You just did! Or you could say something like "don't dissect posts to the nitty gritty and follow them up with a flurry of one-sentence bursts. It's bad manners."
Ulicus posted:SuperWatto posted:Well... You just did! Or you could say something like "don't dissect posts to the nitty gritty and follow them up with a flurry of one-sentence bursts. It's bad manners." How is it bad manners, though? If someone has made one point through one paragraph and you break up that one paragraph just so you can disagree/agree the same way multiple times, then then certainly, I understand frowning upon such a thing. Otherwise... why is it a problem? I've posted in both the ways Keralys demonstrated and consider both to be appropriate depending on the content of the post and how I think best to frame my response. It's not something I do arbitrarily, nor for its own sake.
Rogue_Follower posted:What, that we expect that people don't act like jerks, be clear when posting, have some basis for their opinions, read something before they review it, don't start arguments just for the hell of it, don't clog up threads with petty personal issues, and don't post incomprehensible babble that doesn't help the discussion at all?
Rogue_Follower posted:By actively starting and encouraging more constructive topics? Offering special events and threads? Keeping more open lines of communication? I'm not sure either, really. But I think that an open discussion on what everyone wants out of the forum is a start...
Rogue_Follower posted:I understand what you mean. And I also don't believe this is some sort of magic bullet solution. But I do think that there is something to be said for making explicit what we expect. We haven't done that in a long time. Heck, we don't even have the official Lit rules posted anywere, besides the spoiler policy and TOS. That's what needs to change. We need more transparency on what we expect of the forum and where we want it to go. ("We" being all the users, not just the moderation team.)
AdmiralNick22 posted:When regular posters and VIP's feel so threatened or offended that they choose to leave, there is a problem.
AdmiralNick22 posted:One of the reasons that these boards are so much more popular than other SW boards is that the climate is usually very welcoming. Not only that, but it used to attract large numbers of VIP's who generously discussed their works, fielded questions, engaged in discussion and became active participants in the boards. Having said that, one thing that is how far we need to go to fix things. However, I fully agree with the commnets that John Ostrander made back in dp4m's thread- revamp the Code of Conduct, sticky it, and reinvite older posters and VIP's back into the fold.
AdmiralNick22 posted:Bravo to Rogue_Follower for putting this thread up. I am suprised that I did not notice it until this morning.
rhonderoo posted:I'll add that I've seen countless times when a lengthy post (or even smaller one) broken down and quoted point by point is taken out of context, and tends to derail or dilute the conversation for the worse. Sometimes, it even looks as if it's done on purpose. It's this kind of thing that makes it hard for others to respond, because the discussion has took on tangents, as well as the "quotee" having to start defending things that might be taken out of context when presented as the whole idea took on a totally different meaning.
Master_Keralys posted:One point that's worth making is that there are different ways of doing that sort of post and response, too. For example, there's a huge difference between the following: ... See what I mean? It's precisely the same content – copied and pasted directly. But the effect is completely different. How do we get people to understand that?
Havac posted:<img src="http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s252/HavTFN/Hiter-Havac.jpg"> I think we can generally agree that we want to set high standards for our posters, and we always want to make Lit a better place. The sticking point seems to be the feeling that the mods might take it too far, or that too big a deal is being made of a minor problem. I think that's certainly a legitimate concern, but I also don't think that it's something that's likely to prove too great a problem. If we start doing things a new way, and the mass of the boards doesn't like it, we will be open to concerns. This isn't a one-decision-and-done-for-the-rest-of-time process.
Jedimarine posted:# Do not state opinions, assumptions, personal canon, or rumors as fact. Identify them for what they are. # Be prepared to back up your points with evidence and facts, as necessary. Likewise, be prepared to explain the reasoning behind your criticism of something. Don't these two in conjunction essential say "just the facts, ma'am." who decides "as necessary"? Is "reasoning" a fresh word for "facts"...nothing critical without facts? If all we are doing is stating facts, then there is no discussion, no debate...it only leaves the realm of "contradicting" facts available for discussion...and that would seem to be more a subject we'd like to leave buried, since contradiction has caused some serious trouble in the past.
Ulicus posted:SuperWatto posted: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well... You just did! Or you could say something like "don't dissect posts to the nitty gritty and follow them up with a flurry of one-sentence bursts. It's bad manners." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How is it bad manners, though? If someone has made one point through one paragraph and you break up that one paragraph just so you can disagree/agree the same way multiple times, then then certainly, I understand frowning upon such a thing. Otherwise... why is it a problem? I've posted in both the ways Keralys demonstrated and consider both to be appropriate depending on the content of the post and how I think best to frame my response. It's not something I do arbitrarily, nor for its own sake.
Jedi Ben posted:Whilst I can agree with the notion of threads staying on topic and people being able to feel they can create a dedicated thread for specific tangents, what happens when the thread is a spoiler thread? It's happened that the singular general discussion thread for a new book has literally been overloaded due to the level of interest. Not quite sure how to solve that one.
