To AR Is Human . . .

[Love Zhaoying]

10 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

If, by "free thinkers", you mean free of the constraints of evidence and logic... sure.

The concept of Reporting for "Off-Topic" cramps my Free-thinking.

So, perhaps I should stop whining about others who aren't good at "staying on topic", whilst hitherto I have endeavored to only nag those who are off-topic when warned by our Molecular kin.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

The concept of Reporting for "Off-Topic" cramps my Free-thinking.

So, perhaps I should stop whining about others who aren't good at "staying on topic", whilst hitherto I have endeavored to only nag those who are off-topic when warned by our Molecular kin.

The moderation here has become much more focused upon staying on topic, to the degree that mods will sometimes quote the OP in warnings to the thread, in order to remind us what we are supposedly talking about.

In effect, that actually tends to empower the OP. It was once true that, when you began a thread, you had no control over where it went. That's no longer so much the case. And it means that ARs about derails likely have more weight with mods than was once the case.

[Love Zhaoying]

14 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

The moderation here has become much more focused upon staying on topic, to the degree that mods will sometimes quote the OP in warnings to the thread, in order to remind us what we are supposedly talking about.

In effect, that actually tends to empower the OP. It was once true that, when you began a thread, you had no control over where it went. That's no longer so much the case. And it means that ARs about derails likely have more weight with mods than was once the case.

I know, I know!  My half-joking point was, this squashes "free thinking" just a little bit. 

But the problem IMHO going off-topic is, sometimes there is no end to it.

In this case, "on topic" - I'd in the past Report a post if it was going into say, "Politics" off-topic, in an apparent attempt to derail the thread. 

[Love Zhaoying]

21 hours ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

X marks the spot?

I'm sorry, but I just can't see this without thinking of the picture I posted once of a face on a cat butt, which got me into immediate trouble!

Maybe I can try to forget that image, and think of the first version of the live CATS movie instead, which had digitally added cat-butt holes.  (Who thought THAT was a good idea?!?)

[Silent Mistwalker]

4 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I agree -- in theory.

But, to use an immediately available example, this thread is about reporting abuse on the forums. That can often mean talking about "the rules" (what exactly constitutes "abuse") and also moderation -- which I specifically asked people not to discuss -- because moderation is an integral part of the abuse reporting mechanism.

So, is every mention of moderation here "off topic" or, worse, a rule-breaking "criticism" of forum moderation?

I don't think so, because no one has taken issue with particular decisions, or criticized "mods" themselves: rather, there have been questions about the rules under which they themselves must operate.

But some could make the argument that we are going "off topic" or into forbidden territory by even mentioning moderation.

If everyone stuck to the law, we wouldn't need cops, judges, juries or jails.

I didn't mention or imply anything about moderation.

It is a simple fact that if people would behave like decent human beings, we wouldn't need a lot of things we must have because all it takes is ONE to screw it up for ALL.

And there is always that one. Because humans are "dumb animals", in general.

[Silent Mistwalker]

57 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

The moderation here has become much more focused upon staying on topic, to the degree that mods will sometimes quote the OP in warnings to the thread, in order to remind us what we are supposedly talking about.

In effect, that actually tends to empower the OP. It was once true that, when you began a thread, you had no control over where it went. That's no longer so much the case. And it means that ARs about derails likely have more weight with mods than was once the case.

The problem with that is the discussion tends to drift from one thing into another eventually drifting off course. That is the course of a normal conversation. We are being forced to go against what we have been doing as a species for thousands of years. You betcha we're going to kick and scream about it.

[Arielle Popstar]

3 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I mostly agree with what you say here, except for the last sentence, which seems to revisit the old canard about an "FIC" or "Cartel." In my experience, discipline is meted out here pretty even-handedly, in the sense that I don't see one ideology or the other getting special treatment. "Authoritarianism" seems to suggest an organized and orchestrated mechanism to control, suppress, and manipulate -- otherwise, it's not really deriving from an "authority." And I really don't see that.

As for "echo chamber" . . . well, yes, maybe, but you seem vocal enough? I'm pretty sure you're getting your points across: not too many of us don't know where you stand on things, however "contrary" they may be to the opinions of most other posters.

And that, to be clear, is a good thing.

Surely we have crossed words before on the "hive mind" as it was termed in that other S/L forum where it was even more tangible then it is here. It frankly puzzled me that something so obvious couldn't be seen by those in the hive itself, even though those of us who were outliers saw it so plainly. As it relates to the topic, I have been seeing an increasing amount of it here and its effect on how the forum and thread directions progress, as well as those who stay and those who leave voluntarily or otherwise. 

The intent may not be authoritarian but even individually, the hive collective by its numbers and concerted will, will have an effect on the direction a thread takes and by Reports on those who are not following the narrative, have an impact on who stays and who goes and what is allowed to be talked about. After all, the main focus for a moderator is to keep some semblance of peace and tranquility within the forums, causing the least damage possible to the forum as a whole when taking any actions. That often makes it more expeditious to moderate the one rather than the many even if the argument is good.

And yes, I suppose I am vocal enough but I am careful to stick to the principles of the discussions rather than the personalities involved. I put extra effort into not calling out the intelligence, thoughts or feelings of those I am debating with, even if they are doing so to me, because I am fairly sure that if I wasn't, my time here would be quite limited, being the outlier I am.

[Silent Mistwalker]

43 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I'm sorry, but I just can't see this without thinking of the picture I posted once of a face on a cat butt, which got me into immediate trouble!

Maybe I can try to forget that image, and think of the first version of the live CATS movie instead, which had digitally added cat-butt holes.  (Who thought THAT was a good idea?!?)

Those are cookies ffs. No human face in the frame.

The one I think you got in trouble for was the Trump one wasn't it. Now you know why I never posted it no matter how much it fit with the discussion. I knew without doubt it would get yoinked. Just because it was hilarious and would have deeply offended the ... 

[Love Zhaoying]

25 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

The problem with that is the discussion tends to drift from one thing into another eventually drifting off course. That is the course of a normal conversation. We are being forced to go against what we have been doing as a species for thousands of years. You betcha we're going to kick and scream about it.

^^ YES!!!

[Scylla Rhiadra]

20 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Surely we have crossed words before on the "hive mind" as it was termed in that other S/L forum where it was even more tangible then it is here. It frankly puzzled me that something so obvious couldn't be seen by those in the hive itself, even though those of us who were outliers saw it so plainly. As it relates to the topic, I have been seeing an increasing amount of it here and its effect on how the forum and thread directions progress, as well as those who stay and those who leave voluntarily or otherwise. 

The intent may not be authoritarian but even individually, the hive collective by its numbers and concerted will, will have an effect on the direction a thread takes and by Reports on those who are not following the narrative, have an impact on who stays and who goes and what is allowed to be talked about. After all, the main focus for a moderator is to keep some semblance of peace and tranquility within the forums, causing the least damage possible to the forum as a whole when taking any actions. That often makes it more expeditious to moderate the one rather than the many even if the argument is good.

And yes, I suppose I am vocal enough but I am careful to stick to the principles of the discussions rather than the personalities involved. I put extra effort into not calling out the intelligence, thoughts or feelings of those I am debating with, even if they are doing so to me, because I am fairly sure that if I wasn't, my time here would be quite limited, being the outlier I am.

This is a direction that has the potential to take us into a bad place. We're mere posts away from people decrying "wokeism" on the one side, and QAnon on the other. I'd really like to not go there.

You seem to be implying, however, that certain perspectives are more likely to be ARed, and, most significantly, more likely to be removed by moderators.

I can't imagine how you have determined that that is so, beyond your own anecdotal impression.

Do you have any actual evidence of that?

[Love Zhaoying]

17 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

You seem to be implying, however, that certain perspectives are more likely to be ARed, and, most significantly, more likely to be removed by moderators.

I place my bet on: those perspectives lead to political arguments, off-topic discussions, etc. Two things that are on the "likely to get Reported" list (which is on topic).

[Kiera Clutterbuck]

27 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

certain perspectives

Oh I feel it to, Miss Scylla. Its the woes of bein' a free spirit.

[Madelaine McMasters]

8 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Oh, great! On behalf of us repeat offenders, I thank you!

...peers over her glasses at you

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

...peers over her glasses at you

* raises his glass of root beer to his peers * 

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Surely we have crossed words before on the "hive mind" as it was termed in that other S/L forum where it was even more tangible then it is here. It frankly puzzled me that something so obvious couldn't be seen by those in the hive itself, even though those of us who were outliers saw it so plainly. As it relates to the topic, I have been seeing an increasing amount of it here and its effect on how the forum and thread directions progress, as well as those who stay and those who leave voluntarily or otherwise. 

The intent may not be authoritarian but even individually, the hive collective by its numbers and concerted will, will have an effect on the direction a thread takes and by Reports on those who are not following the narrative, have an impact on who stays and who goes and what is allowed to be talked about. After all, the main focus for a moderator is to keep some semblance of peace and tranquility within the forums, causing the least damage possible to the forum as a whole when taking any actions. That often makes it more expeditious to moderate the one rather than the many even if the argument is good.

And yes, I suppose I am vocal enough but I am careful to stick to the principles of the discussions rather than the personalities involved. I put extra effort into not calling out the intelligence, thoughts or feelings of those I am debating with, even if they are doing so to me, because I am fairly sure that if I wasn't, my time here would be quite limited, being the outlier I am.

I think any Borg would be offended at all this apparent denigration of the "hive mind". It's always good to consider one's audience. 

[Rat Luv]

58 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

The problem with that is the discussion tends to drift from one thing into another eventually drifting off course. That is the course of a normal conversation. We are being forced to go against what we have been doing as a species for thousands of years.

I agree! I try to stay on topic but sometimes the chat takes you to other places...I don't see why it's a bad thing, as long as people aren't being rude or snide. 

Another (non-SL) forum I read is the total opposite of here - threads from 10 years ago get dug up regularly, and people go off on tangents all the time. The 'official' Covid thread there ended up becoming pages and pages about David Bowie performances...so someone created a thread called something like Bowie Youtube Classics  and posted a load of Covid news updates 

[Arielle Popstar]

37 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

This is a direction that has the potential to take us into a bad place. We're mere posts away from people decrying "wokeism" on the one side, and QAnon on the other. I'd really like to not go there.

You seem to be implying, however, that certain perspectives are more likely to be ARed, and, most significantly, more likely to be removed by moderators.

I can't imagine how you have determined that that is so, beyond your own anecdotal impression.

Do you have any actual evidence of that?

There have been a number of threads in past where as it dragged on and started to dwindle into incoherency on one side, that certain members who by their posts had identified themselves on that particular side, started to publicly call for the thread closure. Those threads were then closed within short order. Often combined with IBTL posts. 

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 minute ago, Rat Luv said:

I agree! I try to stay on topic but sometimes the chat takes you to other places...I don't see why it's a bad thing, as long as people aren't being rude or snide. 

Another (non-SL) forum I read is the total opposite of here - threads from 10 years ago get dug up regularly, and people go off on tangents all the time. The 'official' Covid thread there ended up becoming pages and pages about David Bowie performances...so someone created a thread called something like Bowie Youtube Classics  and posted a load of Covid news updates 

I'm not used to it either and doubt I ever will get used to it. This is the only forum I have ever been a member of (there's been a lot!) that actively inhibits normal conversation drift.

Although I'd probably draw the line at resurrecting 10-year-old threads. That's a bit too rank. It would also depend on the subject matter.

[Kiera Clutterbuck]

I disagree with the inhibition of conversational drift too. The spontaneity inherent in threads that are allowed to morph on their own often makes them more interesting than a thread that sticks rigidly to a topic.

[Love Zhaoying]

12 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

 started to publicly call for the thread closure. Those threads were then closed within short order. Often combined with IBTL posts. 

I have a solution: report calls for thread closure and IBTL posts. While made under the pretext of being helpful - those posts are most likely..off topic!

Brilliant!

[Rat Luv]

3 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Although I'd probably draw the line at resurrecting 10-year-old threads. That's a bit too rank. It would also depend on the subject matter.

Somebody found one from 2008 😮 slagging off Facebook and privacy concerns...which seemed like it could have been written last year...lol. 

Sometimes people revive old music threads and it's eerie seeing mentions of live venues from 10-12 years ago, or Myspace, and hardly any of them exist anymore...or talk about 2000s music like grime when it was actually happening. It's like another world that's disappeared forever.

[Love Zhaoying]

3 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:

I disagree with the inhibition of conversational drift too. The spontaneity inherent in threads that are allowed to morph on their own often makes them more interesting than a thread that sticks rigidly to a topic.

The very idea of "General Discussion" implies general discussion. Yes! Looks like our hive-mind is edging towards a solution: to not report "off topic" posts! Which is on-topic!

[Love Zhaoying]

11 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Although I'd probably draw the line at resurrecting 10-year-old threads. That's a bit too rank. It would also depend on the subject matter.

There's no rule against shaming Necromancers, is there?

[Rat Luv]

5 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

There's no rule against shaming Necromancers, is there?

[LittleMe Jewell]

IMO, I don't see anything wrong with minor tangents that might get a bit of side talk, but seem to get back to the main topic.  In the true sense of things, any discussions at all in the What does your Avatar look like Today" thread is off-topic, but as long as the tangents are related to the pictures and as long as the tangent doesn't last too long, then I don't see it as an issue.

In the Peeve thread, there are often comments on someone's peeve, usually because someone else can relate -- and that is what conversation is all about anyway.  However, it is more those times when the side discussions become the main point for many pages and folks just won't let it go.  IMO, those are the times when the off-topic is pushed onto the realm of "it needs to be stopped".

More of an issue, IMO, is when someone goes off on a tangent from the core topic and uses it to incite others or uses it as a way of talking about some topic that was very recently shut down in another thread.