Can we limit a users threads?

Author: thett3

Posts

Total: 81
#31
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@thett3
Well not everything has the intellectual rigor of “There is no compromising with MAGA Republicans. They are today’s slave holders”
That was the gist of the Washington Post article I was expanding on genius. I suppose you think your screeds are better written and sourced than that long established newspaper.

Topic's author
#32
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I know for a fact that they are
#33
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@thett3
I guess I’ll have to start snitching on him whenever he insults me/others in the hopes of getting him banned then
Oh poor baby, did I hurt the little genius’ feelings?

Topic's author
#34
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
yeah

#35
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@thett3
I know for a fact that they are
That is laughable. You are a fool

#36
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Vader
despite the low effort they put into them
Low effort? Who are you to judge?

Gee you have put out some awesome threads like 

“HAPPY BLEACH DAY” and “UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS”

Were those examples of high effort?

#37
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Just balance it out with OAN time and you will continue to be a moron.
OAN and CNN are both owned by billionaires. Why do you love one and hate the other?
#38
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Public-Choice
OAN and CNN are both owned by billionaires. Why do you love one and hate the other?
Are you suggesting that wealth is an indicator of being a liar?

#39
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 1,065
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Are you suggesting that wealth is an indicator of being a liar?
Are you suggesting billionaires have nothing at all to gain from having access to hundreds of millions of Americans with a TV channel or news website?
#40
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@thett3
bbmrocks
I appreciate the callout, even if my user is horribly butchered 😂


The politics section is completely unusable right now, it’s pure low effort spam from IWantRooseveltAgain and Greyparrot. I’m also not a fan of Oragami basically copy pasting MSNBC but he doesn’t do it as much as these two

Greyparrot sorry buddy <3 u but the low effort threads are a problem
I have to agree. I don’t know exactly what policy could be reasonably implemented based on the way the forum infrastructure is set up and the desire to not censor as there is no objective measure for the quality of a post to go off of.

But I have to say, the past year or so, I’ve felt very little desire to post anything. When you have low effort hyper-partisan threads being the norm, you’re not even setting the groundwork for a decent discussion. It has become increasingly tedious to find anything worth responding to because I have to dig through those threads hoping that I’ll see someone providing a good-faith, at least moderate-effort post. That basically doesn’t happen because the main post to respond to has nothing of intellectual merit.

I <3 Parrot, and he’ll understand. But others won’t. And I don’t know, I guess we just have to hope that we have some rule breaking among the others. Roosevelt is awfully belligerent, so it’s only a matter of time before his babble isn’t an issue anymore.

But back to the point: I think most people feel the way we do. The percentage of worthwhile posts are dwindling greatly. I remember how it was back ~4 years on this site. So many bright liberals and lefties to converse with. Most of them that remain don’t post even close as much as before (need more WhiteFlame!). Again, I don’t know how we go forward, and the situation might be unsalvagable
#41
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I just skimmed them. Pretty sad.
Not enough coloring pages and pictures for you?

#42
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,281
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@thett3
There would have to be discretion for individual forums. I think limits on threads per week are fine for the politics, current events, and religion forums, but I am 100% opposed to any sort of measure on the forum games forum.

I think it would be great if we can get a movement of better effort posters coming in and taking over the site. It's a bit of a pipe dream, but it might be worth a shot. It's probably failed before, but whatever.

Another thing I just want to mention is that sometimes good discussion can come from a quickly-written OP, like this thread I made that I felt had some good posts. Unfortunately, there were more users that just posted garbage in that thread, and I'm not sure what we can do about that.
#43
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,281
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@thett3
Could anyone seriously imagine a potential user of any merit whatsoever seeing the politics section right now and saying “oh yeah I want in”
No. It honestly looks worse than the religion forum right now. I can't believe I'm saying that.
#44
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,281
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
This is why no one on this site takes you seriously, Roos. You post endless red herrings and association fallacy arguments, only to call a well-thought-out post "sad" because it isn't inflammatory enough to activate your neurons. You hyperfixate on whatever the latest outrage is so much that you've become a programmed NPC. You're predictable af. You're probably going to post some deflection as a response to this.
#45
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,281
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@SirAnonymous
I think I want to write an article for you at some point.
#46
SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,140
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
-->
@Mharman
Sent you a PM. But in general, if anyone wants to write an article for the Bard, PM it to me. Odds are I'll include it because it's one fewer article for me to write.
#47
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,669
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@thett3
Maybe you could try not reading the threads you don't want to read.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the site isn't going to start censuring threads based on whether you like them or not. 
Threads like “Republican Senate candidate in Nevada is literally a bastard” and “There is no compromising with MAGA Republicans. They are today’s slave holders” are of zero value. It’s true that I don’t have to read them, but since they are crowding out everything else I increasingly find myself not reading anything on this site at all. I seriously doubt I’m alone. If the owner and mods of this site are okay with that it is what it is, but if I were in charge I would try to clean it up a little  
Perhaps there's a reason you aren't in charge.

So this thread, is this what you call high effort, did you put a lot of thought into it? 

I'm sorry, but I'm not getting the intellectual stimulation, maybe it's too deep for me, can you expand, maybe explain the finer points, provide sources.
Topic's author
#48
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Mharman
Yeah I don’t think we need to overthink a policy tbh. This community is quite small and right now there’s a specific individual who is to a large extent ruining it for everyone else. It can be dealt with on a case by case basis. The site leadership needs to tell him to knock it off
#49
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@thett3
It’s just hard to see the point of posting on this site when I have to scroll through dozens of threads with vitriolic sub 90 iq “analysis” before there’s anything worth reading. I hate rules more than almost anyone else but at some point things become unusable 
This is why I advocated for making esperanto the site language. Most people with sub 120 IQs aren't going to be bothered to even learn it, so it acts as a great filter plus it is kind of a thing a lot of commies like so it will get more leftists on the site . Honestly none of these people are challenging to debate and the few liberals who are challenging either rarely debate or are actually moderates
Topic's author
#50
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Sidewalker

So this thread, is this what you call high effort, did you put a lot of thought into it? 
No, and I haven’t made a solid post in a long time because I know it will be buried under a mountain of spam. Go take a look at the politics section, is that really what you want? Why?
#51
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,281
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@thett3
Works for me.
#52
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@thett3
The site leadership needs to tell him to knock it off
I think that is a bit optimistic. He isn’t breaking rules by flooding the forum with low-effort posts.

He clearly isn’t a reasonable guy. There needs to be a “knock it off, or else”

Barring mod action, we have two strategies:

-first, we need to be the site we want to see. I haven’t made a forum topic since much before your last. We need to be doing everything we can to encourage good posters to create topics

-second, we need to politely ask the more rational people that are responding to his threads to not bother trolling him or engaging with him. A troll gets no dopamine from a one-post topic with zero likes

#53
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
Oh the racist is back. Tell us again how blacks are an inferior race of people. 
#54
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Can’t wait until this site thrives in your absence ^_^

#55
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
Can’t wait until this site thrives in your absence ^_^
Oh, am I disrupting your echo chamber? I’ve looked back at the old threads. It’s just morons talking to morons.

But don’t you want to tell us again about your theories on inferior races?
#56
Avery
Avery's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 323
1
2
5
Avery's avatar
Avery
1
2
5
I don't see how you could be for removing their threads, if you're in favor of freedom of speech. A lot of those threads are low quality, but they're still hitting the basic thresholds for what qualifies as a thread. Albeit I've seen a few that merely have "discuss" as the OP elaboration, and that might warrant deletion. But besides that, they're having an opinion on topics and providing some meat in the OP -- is that really not enough?

Having said that, personally, I think the Roosevelt guy isn't worth interacting with at all (he's a far left Ad hom bot). I just don't read anything he writes at all and scroll past it until I find someone else. If that means I have to scroll down on the politics page, or even click the second page, that really isn't a big deal for me. I think he's a far inferior version of Oromagi, but that doesn't mean he has to go or be censored. 

As for Greyparrot, I think he provides standard right wing arguments. I'd prefer if they had greater depth, but I couldn't fathom deleting them based on that.
#57
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
you are limiting free speech if you do this
#58
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
LMAO how doe sit feel reporting the post and then getting cock blocked. 
#59
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
I notice quite a few arrogant egos in this thread.
Topic's author
#60
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@RationalMadman
@Vici
@Avery
I don't see how you could be for removing their threads, if you're in favor of freedom of speech.


you are limiting free speech if you do this

Make better threads, first amendment advocate.
I don’t view this as a freedom of speech thing at all. My issue with freedom of speech online has always been people getting censored simply for having an opinion that goes against a narrative, no matter how well reasoned or respectful they are. I don’t think telling a user that they can’t make the website their personal Facebook page in a way that destroys it for other users is a violation of any sort of valuable speech. That seems like the entire purpose of moderation