Un question....

Discussion in 'Communications' started by RidingMyCarousel, Apr 20, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
  1. RidingMyCarousel Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 20, 2002
    star 6
    Hi there. I'm a bit wondering, but since when has questioning a system (in this case, basher/sanctuary threads) been "drama causing"? It's a simple questioning of the system and people speaking their mind out in the open. While this may not be the best way to approach the issue, it is simply an easier route to have their voices heard to the masses of this Star Wars forum; a forum created by fans for fans.

    It's just a simple question.

    Since when has it been problematic to ask questions about a system? I understand some people can't discuss issues civilly and flaming and baiting can occur, but why can't people discuss what's on their mind? If the flaming, baiting and problems in these discussion threads in this "communicaitons" forum were kept clean and kept on topic, would the discussion be allowed whatsoever?

    Or is questioning a system here wrong? If people are saying it isn't working well right now, can their voices not be spoken? Some may thinks things work well, some may not.

    Just wondering.

    You see, I'd like to see some discussion on this matter civilly, but if it's not allowed, I won't bother with it. And if it's allowed, may a new thread for all JC members to discuss it be created and moderated? I'm sure both points might like an actual discussion to this issue, instead of just a mess.

    Thanks. :)
  2. GriffZ Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    May 27, 2001
    star 6

    This is a very good, very valid question. I - along with others that I have talked to - have been wondering this very same thing.

  3. anidanami124 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 24, 2002
    star 6
    I don't know how this will turn out but I would like to post this

    Not just in TPM or AOTC fourms. But look ever where in the JC you will see all kinds of cliques. Heck in away I'm part of a clique look at my sig. I'm apart of the Dark Lords of the JCC.

    If you close down the BS thread and the DF thread's that will lead to all those cliques in all the other part of the JC to being closed.

    We have cliques for the WWE/ECW/WCW, for LOTR, for The Matrix, and so on. There are all kinds of cliques. What should people who want talk about just football have a thread for themselevs and so on.

    We even have cliques off the inernet there all around you. People have them for a reason. They have them so that they can join with those people at times to talk with them about what they like. So they BS thread IMO can stay for the bashers.


    I had posted this in a thread G-M-T started.
  4. RidingMyCarousel Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 20, 2002
    star 6
    Dan, I'm not questioning the groups or anything along those lines. I don't rather know them that well, but I would like to know if discussion will be allowed on this matter.

    If not, why not? Because communications isn't being properly moderated? Or because "that's the way things are and they won't change so get over it"?

    And if so, I'd like for another thread to be created on the issue and it actually kept in line so that a real discussion can come forth.

    :)
  5. YodaJeff Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2001
    star 7
    "Not just in TPM or AOTC fourms. But look ever where in the JC you will see all kinds of cliques. Heck in away I'm part of a clique look at my sig. I'm apart of the Dark Lords of the JCC."

    There is a big difference between threads in a Community-type forum and in a movie forum.
  6. anidanami124 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 24, 2002
    star 6
    I give up. I don't know why the last tow were locked. But this whoel thing of wanting to close one thread because it hurts the fan base it getting out of hand.

    I don't know what I can even say but this. Threads are not the problem. Posters are the problem. The posters that troll, spam, and flame.

    The thread were started just to single out oen group of members. Some of those members I call freinds.

    If I have to talk sides I'm on there side. I'm on the side of all those who have any type of clique. We all at times wish to get way and talk with those that like just AOTC's, or those that like just The Love Story in AOTC's.

    Or those that want to talk with those that did not really like the PT and so on. Maybe the 1st thread was closed because one member started to flame people. Who can say?

  7. RidingMyCarousel Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 20, 2002
    star 6
    I give up. I don't know why the last tow were locked. But this whoel thing of wanting to close one thread because it hurts the fan base it getting out of hand.

    Dan, I won't get into this sort of debate here. That's for another thread and another time. I'm going to PM you; if you'd like to continue discussion on the Defense Forces/Bashers threads, we can do so there. :)
  8. GriffZ Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    May 27, 2001
    star 6

    I don't think this was ever supposed to be about removing all "cliques" from the JC - that's not only impossible to do, but is a bad idea in general. I think the whole purpose of the original discussion was to look at the merits of keeping the "Basher/Gusher" sanctuaries.

  9. Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 1999
    star 6
    I do think that having exclusive threads that exclude members who disagree is inherrently unhealthy for discussion. With the "basher/gusher" threads especially, they serve only to keep an uneccessary and negative division between fans alive.

    All I wanted to do in my last thread was discuss the matter in the forum I was under the impression this sort of thing was meant for. There hadn't even been any flaming when it was locked, it was closed under the declaration that it was "drama".

    I don't see anything about "drama" in the TOS.
  10. The_Sith_Prophet Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 22, 2003
    star 3
    My thread was locked because a group of high ranking TF.Ners who belonged to the Bashers/Gushers guild didn't like me questioning those threads.
  11. Yodaminch Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 6, 2002
    star 6
    Im curious as an aotc regular where are their sanctuaries? I thought Yodajeff never allowed them. I remember seeing him lock at least 5 and repling in one thread how he doesn''t believe in sanctuaries.
  12. YodaJeff Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2001
    star 7
    There still are sanctuaries in the TPM forum. There also is an AOTC Defense Force, but that's in the SW Community forum.
  13. Yodaminch Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 6, 2002
    star 6
    So currently the aotc forum has no cliques?
  14. YodaJeff Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2001
    star 7
    Not in the AOTC forum itself.
  15. Master Salty Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 18, 1999
    star 6
    No matter where you go in life, real or cyber, you will always have cliques. There's no way around it. It's natural for people to congregate with people that tend to believe in the same things.
  16. Quixotic-Sith Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 22, 2001
    star 6
    Since when has it been problematic to ask questions about a system? I understand some people can't discuss issues civilly and flaming and baiting can occur, but why can't people discuss what's on their mind? If the flaming, baiting and problems in these discussion threads in this "communicaitons" forum were kept clean and kept on topic, would the discussion be allowed whatsoever?

    Or is questioning a system here wrong? If people are saying it isn't working well right now, can their voices not be spoken? Some may thinks things work well, some may not.


    *sigh*

    Where to begin...

    Okay, underlying all of the highbrow motivations for the past two topics there has been one common undercurrent - eliminating the Sanctuary. While others may make the claim that it is about eliminating "fanbase divisive" threads (poppycock, as evidenced by the many users who reported the threads helping them feel comfortable in the forums), the underlying effort (as delineated specifically off-site) was to eliminate the Sanctuary and hopefully by proxy eliminate the "basher" presence. The folks can try to dress this up in whatever finery they like, but the truth lies elsewhere. The recent efforts to lock the Sanctuary were brought about by folks who historically have been antagonistic to people who were less than thrilled by the prequel movies thus far, and have wuite colorful track records to boot (moderators and above, feel free to check the usernotes for the dramatis personae of the past two threads).

    For those of you who care to take a look, there is a clear example here. With fair warning, the language at that site is not family-friendly. Further, I would suggest reading a few of the threads in that forum to get a better idea about the folks who are starting these petitions. I note especially the opening few lines:

    Several people from the Jedi Council have banded together to stand firm and make the call for the abolishment of the Bashers Sanctuary alone and perhaps the Defence Forces as well.

    This is what we need you to do, could you find pages where Bashers in their own Sanctuary have insulted other people.


    At issue isn't questioning the system, though it is couched in those terms. Go-Mer above, for example, has a history of mislabeling the threads, describing them as havens where dissent isn't tolerated. That's nonsense; *Go-Mer's* dissent isn't tolerated in there because he has a history of trolling in the forums (again, moderators and above, feel free to check his usernotes). If dissenting voices weren't allowed, strilo, SomeRandomNerd, royalguard and others wouldn't be allowed to post there. By virtue of the fact that they do and that they contribute positively to the discussion demonstrates the inherent fallaciousness and ulterior motives of the folks who are objecting.

    I label it drama because it simply is an effort to rid the forums of folks they don't like. Check other sites where these folks post to see what I mean. By stirring up trouble here (and by extending the drama into Comms to try to get more attention), they hope to make this out to be a larger issue than it actually is - the great majority of the visitors to the TPM forum enjoy the forum as it is. By raising a ruckus, they hope to take the moral high road, saying it's "for the good of TF.N" - I didn't get the memo that there was any real problem; traffic in the TPM forum is what it has always been, we're attracting new posters and generating new discussion four years after the films release. By attempting to play the victim, these folks hope to portray themselves as martyrs for the cause, as selfless folks dedicated to their beloved forums, rather than folks who would prefer to avoid simply dealing with the fact that others disagree with them.

    I have seen these types of topics pop up before, by the same folks or their friends, with the same veiled motives. They become quite transpare
  17. anidanami124 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 24, 2002
    star 6
    Quix nice post there. ;) You made a lot of good points. ;)
  18. C-3P0 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 20, 2001
    star 4
    Personally, I stopped regular posting at TFN, especially the TPM forum, about a year ago because I was sick of the constant Basher/Gusher threads, and I for one was extremely dissappointed when a prominent member of the Basher's Sanctuary was made the TPM mod.

    For the life of me I don't understand why anyone who dislikes TPM would become mod for that forum.

    I feel that the TPM board became a "basher only" haven.


    I've lurked from time to time since then, but unfortunately, I truly felt that my postive opinions of TPM in that forum were unwanted, so I left it.




    The AOTC forum, on the other hand, has been a much better experience for me. People who like, and dislike the movie co-exist. Primarilly, because these Basher/Gusher threads have been mostly disallowed. (Though I must admit being saddened to see a thread called Liking AOTC does not make you a gusher, and us "gushers" can acknowledge the faults in the film. on the front page of the AOTC forum today.)
  19. Gay-LenKenobi Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 20, 2000
    star 5
    So, basically, you don't like that there are a lot of bashers in TPM.

    And eliminating the Sanc. and the TPM DF is going to get rid of the bashers?

    Ever think that perhaps the AOTC forum has a better balance of gushers and bashers because the FILM was has a better balance of gushers and bashers?
  20. General Kenobi Administrator Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 31, 1998
    star 6
    My thread was locked because a group of high ranking TF.Ners who belonged to the Bashers/Gushers guild didn't like me questioning those threads.

    Just a point: The thread I locked last night was rapidly deteriorating into personal attacks. If the Comms/TPM/AOTC mods feel this topic is appropriate, it's their call on unlocking it or allowing new ones. I have rarely, if ever, frequented Basher/Gusher (or DF) threads.
  21. GriffZ Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    May 27, 2001
    star 6

    I'd like to make one point: If a thread has to be locked because a few members are flaming/spamming/trolling/generally breaking the rules, then to me that shows a clear lack of proper moderation in that forum. Why not just ban the trouble-makers early on? Why close the entire thread?

    I'm not pointing any fingers at anyone (I understand where you were coming from, General Kenobi), but seeing what happened here has just strengthened my belief that this forum needs a dedicated mod.


    //gets off soapbox


    EDIT: Heck griffz might even remember me from the AOTC forum

    I do. And I remember you as being pretty cool.

  22. C-3P0 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 20, 2001
    star 4
    Edited to add: This is a reply to Gay-LenKenobi.


    No.

    I think the AOTC forum is moderated in such a way as to make both bashers and gushers comfortable.

    I don't have some agenda here. I haven't posted regularly in over a year.

    I'm simply posting here, because the issue speaks directly to why I stopped going to the TPM forum.

    I posted in the TPM forum since 1999 under the name General JarJar. And as a matter of fact it was my comm thread "Is anybody moderating the TPM forum?" that got the ball rolling towards a better period when cbjedi became mod, then Oakessteve.

    I have no personal animosity towards Quixotic-Sith at all.


    I'm not sure many of the TPM forum regulars remember me, but I got along just fine on a personal level with just about all of the bashers.

    Heck griffz might even remember me from the AOTC forum. :D
  23. YodaJeff Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2001
    star 7
    "Okay, underlying all of the highbrow motivations for the past two topics there has been one common undercurrent - eliminating the Sanctuary."

    Last I checked, people were asking for both the Sanctuary and Defense Force threads to be locked, not just the Sanctuary.

    "While others may make the claim that it is about eliminating "fanbase divisive" threads (poppycock, as evidenced by the many users who reported the threads helping them feel comfortable in the forums), the underlying effort (as delineated specifically off-site) was to eliminate the Sanctuary and hopefully by proxy eliminate the "basher" presence."

    Please don't assume what the "underlying effort" was. Not everyone has hidden motivations.

    "The folks can try to dress this up in whatever finery they like, but the truth lies elsewhere. The recent efforts to lock the Sanctuary were brought about by folks who historically have been antagonistic to people who were less than thrilled by the prequel movies thus far, and have wuite colorful track records to boot (moderators and above, feel free to check the usernotes for the dramatis personae of the past two threads)."

    Not every member who was trying to have a civil discussion has a shady past.

    "For those of you who care to take a look, there is a clear example here. With fair warning, the language at that site is not family-friendly. Further, I would suggest reading a few of the threads in that forum to get a better idea about the folks who are starting these petitions."

    Not all the members who posted in those threads are a member of that site, which I have asked others not to bring up. People should be able to rant off-site if they want to.

    "At issue isn't questioning the system, though it is couched in those terms."

    Some of the people truely are questioning the system, and don't have hidden motivations.

    "Go-Mer above, for example, has a history of mislabeling the threads, describing them as havens where dissent isn't tolerated. That's nonsense; *Go-Mer's* dissent isn't tolerated in there because he has a history of trolling in the forums (again, moderators and above, feel free to check his usernotes)."

    Umm, I could have sworn that punishments given out to users wasn't supposed to be public information. :confused:

    "If dissenting voices weren't allowed, strilo, SomeRandomNerd, royalguard and others wouldn't be allowed to post there. By virtue of the fact that they do and that they contribute positively to the discussion demonstrates the inherent fallaciousness and ulterior motives of the folks who are objecting."

    The creator of the Basher's Sanctuary himself said that he prefers it when "gushers" don't post in there.

    "I label it drama because it simply is an effort to rid the forums of folks they don't like."

    They want to rid the forums of a divide, not of certain members.

    "Check other sites where these folks post to see what I mean."

    Off-site stuff should have no bearing on what happens here.

    "we're attracting new posters and generating new discussion four years after the films release."

    Too bad most of that discussion is in two threads.

    "By attempting to play the victim, these folks hope to portray themselves as martyrs for the cause, as selfless folks dedicated to their beloved forums, rather than folks who would prefer to avoid simply dealing with the fact that others disagree with them."

    If everyone can deal with the fact that others disagree with them, then why does there need to be a sanctuary and Defense Force?


    "(Though I must admit being saddened to see a thread called Liking AOTC does not make you a gusher, and us "gushers" can acknowledge the faults in the film. on the front page of the AOTC forum today.)"

    I'm keeping a close eye on that thread. So far, it's pretty much just been "gushers" explaining that there are parts of AOTC that they didn't absolutely love. If things start getting out of hand, I'll step in./>
  24. Quixotic-Sith Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 22, 2001
    star 6
    Last I checked, people were asking for both the Sanctuary and Defense Force threads to be locked, not just the Sanctuary.

    Then you need to make yourself a bit more aware of the situation. There has been a long-standing effort to rid TF.N of the Sanctuary. TPM Forum History 101 - ask the regulars, they'll fill you in.

    Please don't assume what the "underlying effort" was. Not everyone has hidden motivations.

    Quite true. However, that's just been my experience in the two years I've been here and an active participant in the TPM forum.

    Not every member who was trying to have a civil discussion has a shady past.

    Again, quite true. But the folks who historically have raised these kinds of threads tended to have this kind of shady past. Again, TPM Forum History 101.

    Not all the members who posted in those threads are a member of that site, which I have asked others not to bring up. People should be able to rant off-site if they want to.

    Which is why it is asinine to suggest that if someone states publically that they are going to cause drama here that it should have no bearing on how we react to that thread when it appears. There is a difference between off-site ranting and using the "off-site" clause as a defence for bad netizenry. I do not moderate off-site behavior; if I did that, I would be banning a lot more people than I actually do. I do, however, use off-site behavior to inform my moderation here - I will not be played for a sucker.

    Some of the people truely are questioning the system, and don't have hidden motivations.

    And it's the bad seventeen who ruin it for those three. Most of the "civil discussion/veiled drama" threads were started by the same folks, socks of the same folks, or friends of the same folks who have checkered histories or other ideologies.

    Umm, I could have sworn that punishments given out to users wasn't supposed to be public information.

    Note that I did not repost his usernotes, but merely referenced publically available information (if you care to reread the threads in the TPM forum).

    The creator of the Basher's Sanctuary himself said that he prefers it when "gushers" don't post in there.

    The creator of the Basher's Sanctuary is one voice out of many. There are many, many more who welcome strilo, SomeRandomNerd, royalguard, etc.

    They want to rid the forums of a divide, not of certain members.

    Check the threads at SOTJ about redxavier, DrEvanzan, and the Basher Posts from Hell. There is no interest in getting rid of a divide (which stems from experience, not the threads) - there is interest in getting rid of posters.

    Off-site stuff should have no bearing on what happens here.

    Again, there is a difference between moderating off-site behavior and being informed by it.

    Too bad most of that discussion is in two threads.

    Someone more familiar with the forum would see the error in that sentence.

    If everyone can deal with the fact that others disagree with them, then why does there need to be a sanctuary and Defense Force?

    Why do we need *any* of the threads that tend to attract common points of view? Why don't we simply just change human nature, instead?

    *EDIT*

    This is now simply rehashing issues that have been beaten to death before in many forums and threads. Until it can be demonstrated that Sanctuary type threads are explicitly against the Terms of Service, there is no need to lock them. On that note, I'm off to bed, as I'm due back at the hospital by 7AM.
  25. GriffZ Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    May 27, 2001
    star 6

    Would you say that you have a personal stake in keeping the Sanctuary/Defense Force open, or do you feel you are being completely unbiased in your decision?

Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.