I would like to hear from everyone on this, including those who don’t usually frequent here, but would like to post in here.
I vote for having more than there was before.
I did not vote because the options are too narrow. What do you define as trolling, flaming or personal insults? What is trolling, flaming or insulting to one person may be entirely acceptable to others. In my opinion, the only thing that should definitely not be allowed are:
- Threats of physical violence.
- Outing of real names.
- Spamming/posting the same content over and over again to such a point where it makes absolutely no contribution to the discussion.
In my opinion, everything else should be allowed, including “name calling.” The reason I say this is that what constitutes name calling is not always clear. If someone calls me a fascist or a nazi, is that considered in the same light as being called a mother fucker? To me, all three would be equally insulting, but I would never call for someone to be banned for it. A simple request from the mod to keep it civil would be appropriate.
BFM, I know you mean well, but you start down a very slippery slope when you say that you will not allow things like name calling. What is name calling? To whom does it apply? Is it only prohibited to call another poster a name, or do you also prohibit posters from calling public figures names? I didn’t and will not vote for George Bush, but I still take offense when posters make personal attacks against the President of the United States without making any attempt at making a substantive argument. That goes on all the time in the IP forum, but nodody is crying to ban posters for it.
You have stated that you want everyone to feel welcome in the IP forum. I’m sorry, but the P in IP stands for politics, and discussions about politics naturally get quite heated. The goal of the forum should be to allow open debate, not to make people feel comfortable or welcome. Just because it is open to all doesn’t mean that all will want to participate in discussion. There are plenty of forums on Forumosa that I never brouse or post in. Granted, this is not because I feel intimidated by the atmosphere in those forums, but because they just don’t draw my interest. However, IMO the IP forum has been and should continue to remain different. The open forum is not necessarily a place for adversarial debate. We don’t call each other too many names in the learning Chinese forum. Sure, there are some heated discussions in these forums, but they are not political or debate forums. In contrast, adversarial debate is pretty much the only thing the IP forum is suited for. The TP forum gets just as heated, but nobody over there is whining to ban poster X or make the forum more inviting for poster Y, and both you and I know that that forum gets its fair share of neanderthal poddy mouths.
I think that the only things that should be prohibited in the IP forum are threats of physical violence, outing of real names and spamming. In order to maintain a certain level of civility, the moderator(s) may remind a poster that their arguments would be better made without harsh language. If a poster continues to post the same or similar harsh language, especially while refusing to make a substantive argument, that should be stopped on the grounds that it is spamming, not because of the language itself. Nobody likes to hear a broken record who adds nothing to the debate. In my opinion, the only person who has broken this rule as of late has been BroonAle. I see nothing wrong with one poster telling a softy poster that if he can’t stand the heat (or adversarial discusion), he should get out of the kitchen. What was that old saying about sticks, stones and words?
I agree with Jive Turkey. Spamming and Trolling is a pain in the arse to pick through.
Personal insults, however they are defined, add colour to the debate. As long as the name calling stays within the forum and doesn’t spill outside into other forums or into a trip to your adversaries house with the local mafia, then I think its fine.
This is a politics forum, not the knitting forum. It will get heated by default.
Erm…any chance of a knitting forum?
Needless to say (but I will anyway), I agree with Jive Turkey.
[quote=“Dangermouse”]I agree with Jive Turkey. Spamming and Trolling is a pain in the arse to pick through.
Personal insults, however they are defined, add colour to the debate. As long as the name calling stays within the forum and doesn’t spill outside into other forums or into a trip to your adversaries house with the local mafia, then I think its fine. [/quote]Fine with you maybe, but according to the poll, it’s not fine with everyone else.
It indeed a pain in the arse to pick through, but I’ve been doing it for a while now, might be better if people didn’t do it in the first place :loco:
[quote=“Jive Turkey”]If someone calls me a fascist or a nazi, is that considered in the same light as being called a mother fucker? To me, all three would be equally insulting, but I would never call for someone to be banned for it. A simple request from the mod to keep it civil would be appropriate. [/quote]That is all I want, to keep it civil.
Is that why it’s quiet in here lately ? Noone has anything civil to say ?
I voted for anything short of trolling, name calling, etc., but I doubt it will ever work out that way. It’s too anonymous here, imo.
In order accomplish both goals here (limit the moderator’s presence and keep the flavor), we should use real names instead of pseudonyms.
In my opinion, you should never say here what you would not say directly to somebody’s face. It’s not only the civilized way, it’s also the only way to naturally limit the duties of a moderator in this forum. Using real names will also keep the flavor, but it will be a more natural flavor, not unlike real conversation.
Insults and sarcasm are too cheap as it is now.
Although many, if not most, would object to using real names, I still think we should never say anything here that we wouldn’t say, directly, in somebody’s presence. IMO, as long as we continue to use pseudonyms here, we will need a babysitter, er moderator.
I agree I think we should be allowed to call people names. For example I hate Ironlady. I have never met her but I know that I hate her. I would love to call her many other indecenies but out of fear I will not. That is what they have over us. The power to kick us off. The thing I want to say is what is to stop us from logging in under a diffferent name. So we loose all of our posts big deal I have 40 some.
I voted for no moderating whatsoever, not because I think there is no need for moderating, but because the survey is extremely flawed. Nobody has defined what trolling, flaming of personal insults are. It sounds nice to say that that kind of behaviour won’t be allowed, but how are you going to define what trolling, flaming or insults are? You can try, but I stongly doubt you will be able to come up with an air tight definition. Ah, but you say use “common sense.” I’m sorry, but if you haven’t yet been able to post definitions of the behaviour that you won’t allow and those definitions haven’t been “commonly” accepted, then I don’t have much confidence in what a couple of moderators consider “common sense.” I suspect that what is common sense to you may be quite stifling to me.
I understand where you are coming from, but I strongly disagree. Because of where some of us live or the kinds of people that we have to dwell among, it could be dangerous to attach our names to our views in a public forum. It is not necessarily a bad thing for people to be emboldened to say things on this forum that they would not say to their everyday acquaintances. I don’t care what anybody on this forum’s name is; I just care about their positions on issues, why they take those positions and how well they defend those positions in debate. The facts and the arguments are what’s important. Although I am all for maintaining a civil atmosphere (though I admit that I am not always a completely civil poster), I don’t want people to “tone it down.” I spend all day talking to people who guard their opinions, never say what they actually think and never show how passionate they are about issues. I don’t want more of the same on this forum. I know BFM’s intention is not to sanitize the forum, but I fear that this will be the result if the rules are not kept to a bare minimum.
I couldn’t care less what TM, Fred Smith or MT’s names are, and you’re sure as hell never going to know mine. For some of us, posting our real names could put us in real danger. If it comes to that, you’ll never see me post here again.
The standards for IP will be the same as they are for any other forum on Forumosa. If you think there is repression of free speech in the Living in Taiwan Forum, the Open Forum or the Culture and History Forum, you’re probably on the wrong website to begin with. 
We encourage people not familiar with Forumosan posting standards to browse the forums and get a feel for the place. Take a look in the flame and flounder forums - it soon becomes pretty clear what is acceptable and what isn’t.
Why have any standards at all? Well, while we will never require members to put their real names to their posts, some of us DO attach our names and identities to this place - I use the name Maoman on these boards, but my real name, occupation, nationality, address, even phone number is easily found. Same goes for Gus, the founder of this website. Same goes for a lot of the moderators here. There’s no way I would put the hours I do into Forumosa if I were ashamed to publically stand behind the website and what goes on in here. So we have a few rules - big deal. So does every civilized society. If you truly want a no-holds-barred forum, they’re out there, I think. Or you could always start your own website. In the meantime, we’re going to keep on doing things the way we think is right. Despite phenomenal growth in the last year and a half, I believe that this website’s greatest days are yet to come. Please forgive us any missteps along the way, and know that we are doing our best to make Forumosa the best internet resource, discussion forums, and cyber community for expats in Taiwan. 
I’m not arguing that there should be no standards whatsoever. The point where I seem to differ with you and BFM is how you are going to define those standards. No one has yet tried to explain what will be considered “trolling,” “flaming” or “personal insults.”
Let me make sure I understand you. Are you saying that the standards and style of moderating in the IP forum under Tigerman have been unacceptable?
I don’t agree with the idea that all forums on Forumosa can be moderated with the exact same standards. The substance of every forum varies. In my opinion, the standards and style of moderating should be allowed to vary as well-as seemed to be the case when Tigerman was moderating the IP forum. To say that all forums on Forumosa must adhere to one set of standards seems totalitarian and inflexible.
I doubt that is why it is so quiet. I think the more likely reason is that everyone is still uneasy about the changes and are unsure of what is acceptable. Tigerman is suddenly no longer the moderator. That could be for personal reasons or it could be because Maoman et al were not satisfied with his moderating. The reason why has not been explained. That in itself is not necessarily reason to be alarmed. However, the new moderators basically came in with a bang, and a rather rude one at that. Rather than easing into it, the first comments we heard from BFM about moderating the IP forum were that there would be no debates regarding freedom of speech and that it would no longer be “the Fred Smith Forum.” Way to go. Single people out without saying exactly why, why don’t you. Then it seems that Tigerman is being damned with faint praise; it seems so because the new moderators are suddenly dissatisfied with the way the IP forum has operated since it was established and seem intent on turning it into something akin to a kindergarten.
BFM, your above comment shows us all that you have little or no tolerance for open, spirited debate. You started out by singling one poster out for criticism, but not explaining exactly what he did wrong. Then you have the gaul to speculate that the reason there are fewer posts is because no one has anything civil to say? The reason nobody is posting is because you have in effect threatened them with censorship, but not even told them clearly why someone may be censored. Why not just close the whole IP forum down?
I vote for moderation in moderating. As long as another poster doesn’t threaten a poster, engage in verbal abuse with clearly vulgar language, or troll, then all posts should be accepted and tolerated.
I have been happy with the way my posts have been accepted in this thread. I have never felt that I was in danger of being banned or that a moderator was being unreasonable with me. As a matter of fact, I think that forumosa has a very liberal policy as far as what is acceptable for a post.
Honestly, I don’t care who the IP moderator happens to be as long as there is an opportunity for everyone to voice their opinions about political matters.
LONG LIVE THE IP FORUM!!! 
Buttwipe!
[quote]Rather than easing into it, the first comments we heard from BFM about moderating the IP forum were that there would be no debates regarding freedom of speech[/quote]Sigh… why I do even bother. ?..
I never said anything of the sort if you would care to read it again, I said I was not going to bother debating wether saying “fuck you, you puking idiot” is valid speech.
I already said to use your common sense. What have I said that is unreasonable that is making people unsure if they can post ? What is so unclear about “no flaming, no personal insults to another member of the board” ?
I resigned as moderator because… 1) I was tired of having my personal integrity challenged day in and day out by certain idiot posters, most recently Traveller. I have a bad temper, and when insulted (and I consider questions re my integrity an insult), I tend to hit back as hard as I can (I thought shut your stinking anus of a mouth was a very appropriate response to sphincter lips Traveller when he incessantly accused me of lacking impartiallity (as a moderator). This could have been avoided, IMO, had I some support from the administration in the IP Forum. The administration and the other mods frequently complimented my moderating style in the private forums, but it would have been very helpful, IMO, had the administration supported my impartiality in the IP Forum in response to certain recent posts accusing me of lacking impartiality (unless the administration actually felt that I did lack impartiality… but, then, why the support in the private forums?). Not only did I feel a lack of support, but on the day that I resigned, I felt actually undercut. The day BroonAle was posting his “knob” statements in different threads was in fact a work day. While I spend a lot of time on-line during work days, it takes longer to perform certain moderating functions than it does to merely post a reply. I might have floundered some of the “knob” posts eventually, but definitely not all of them. They were crude, no doubt… but they nonetheless constituted political speech, which I believe is deserving of a high level of protection. Moreover, I do not understand the complaints that such posts destroy or harm the integrity of the threads. How so? When you come to such a post, it takes about a half of a second to read it and then you go on to the next post. 2) Obviously, my notion of free speech differs substantially with that of the administration. I have nothing but respect for the administration, and I consider Forumosa to be an excellent website, as good as any I’ve ever seen and far better than most. But, I believe that political speech is worthy of a much higher level of protection than are most other types of speech. The administration has already indicated that the IP Forum will be moderated per the same standards as other forums. I think that’s a mistake, but reasonable minds may differ (and the administration’s opinion prevails, rightfully, over mine). Additionally, and this debate has already been hashed out… the administration and BFM have stated that no insults will be permitted. Well, I believe that sarcasm is an insult, in most cases, and is thus just as worthy of prohibition as a straight-on insult. Few agree with me on this issue. But, I cannot understand why it is acceptable to insult a poster provided the insult is clever and or civil in nature. I fail to see the logic in such reasoning. As I believe that the administration and moderators, whoever they are, will permit sarcasm and civil insults to stand, I will not post in this forum any longer. My temper is too bad and I do not tolerate sarcasm when I am engaging in substantive debate. If I think the sarcasm is off the mark, I will respond with a strait-on insult. Thus, I would quickly be banned from this forum. Why should I bother? Finally, 3) I do not believe the administration and some other mods were satisfied with my moderating.
That is precisely how I feel. It should be obvious from my statements in reply to certain of Big Fluffy Mall Guard’s posts (some direct and some indirect) regarding my moderating. I’m not at all happy about that.
I have two problems with that. 1)… singling out in this forum is wrong, as transgressions occur from all sides of the debate. Yet only one side ever complains. I guess its true, the squeeky wheel does get the grease. 2)… when questioned regarding his criticism of the poster he singled out, Big Fluffy Mall Guard could not defend his criticism.
I’m sure that the IP Forum will get back on its feet again soon. However, it will not be the type of forum in which I wish to participate. When initially asked to moderate this forum, I indicated that free speech was very important to me and that the only way I would accept the role of moderator was if I could allow free speech (per my notion thereof, naturally).
Also, and this has little to do with the administration or the moderators, but, I am fucking tired of debaing with certain morons who accuse me of “lying” when I disagree with them or with posters who will not reply to relevant questions in the course of debate. Let them post in the IP Forum without me.
[quote=“Big Fluffy Mall Guard”]Sigh… why I do even bother. ?..
I never said anything of the sort if you would care to read it again[/quote]
WTF? Here is what you said:
Did I misread that?
In your capacity as a moderator, you previously threatened Mr. He when he disagreed with you regarding the facts of a certain political matter in a different forum. You see no chilling effect from that action, coupled with your statement that you would not debate free speech and that things were going to be done your way?
BTW, there is no such thing as common sense… especially in a political discussion. What is acceptable to some as a clever remark is flesh-ripping sarcastic insult to another, while calling someone a “fascist” is acceptable to some but a response of “Jagoff” is unacceptable.
It seems I can’t do anything to make anyone happy, no matter how much I try to clarify my “no flaming” remarks. When I say “no flaming” I’m accused of trampling on people’s freedom on speech, just the same as when I said “no racism”
Maybe the IP forum is just unworkable, noone wanted to be civil before, and noone wants to post now that some civility is required. If I remember rightly, it was only created because a handful of posters virtually took over the Open Forum.
Just how evil and unreasonable do you think I am exactly ?
No, it seems that you don’t know what “racism” is. You accuse FS of posting racist material when his posts clearly are not racist. Just because Traveller and you think they are racist doesn’t mean they are. 
Took over the Open Forum? WTF are you talking about? Where were people supposed to post re political issues prior to the establishment of the IP Forum? And that “US Foreign Policy Sucks” thread that you didn’t seem to mind that lasted for over 90 pages was started, unless I am mistaken, by Maoman in the Open Forum.
Here is what you posted and underlined:
[quote=“Big Fluffy Matthew”]It seems I can’t do anything to make anyone happy, no matter how much I try to clarify my “no flaming” remarks. When I say “no flaming” I’m accused of trampling on people’s freedom on speech, just the same as when I said “no racism”
Maybe the IP forum is just unworkable, noone wanted to be civil before, and noone wants to post now that some civility is required. If I remember rightly, it was only created because a handful of posters virtually took over the Open Forum.
Just how evil and unreasonable do you think I am exactly ?[/quote]
Good god, this is ridiculous.
Look, we have the rules, Maoman has posted them. Basically, they say that we should behave as if we had children, not as if we need parents. How much clearer could it need to be? 
You are not evil nor unreasonable, BFM. From here on, let the chips fall where they may. If IP falls, fine. Let it re-merge with Open. If that happens, who knows?
Maybe future posts will be calculated thusly: New Open posts - old Open posts (pre-IP-closing-posts) > IP Posts - Old Open.
After all, everyone is postulating that others are dying to post in IP yet afraid to do so. Where is their outlet if this is so? Don’t worry, you’ll obviously never - NEVER - please everyone, so why try?
Don’t sweat it, forumosa will survive far more than the demise of IP, imo.
It’s not worth the trouble, imo. Never sweat the small stuff. I’m sure that forumosa will never suffer any deficit of cranks.
Carry on, man.