This is not exactly the most appropriate thing to say to someone who is upset.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Goodbye Perhaps?
- Thread starter rocala
- Start date
Funny how they want to keep the political toxicity for the sake of keeping site revenue up (because that's what it comes down to - money), but don't mind loss of revenue from people leaving and reduced traffic.
I'm not sure where the idea came from that the staff "want to keep the political toxicity"; over the last few months in particular, staff have been increasingly discussing addressing hostile and toxic posting, whether in political threads or otherwise (but we have also discussed that same issue and had to deal with it at different points over the years). What would be unfeasible would be deleting the political forums altogether or significantly diminishing their visibility, since that would drive away and go against the wishes of a significant subset of the membership. It would also indeed affect revenue, which is not ours to risk, as I said, because it's the owners' money rather than the volunteer staff's.
The political forums have existed for longer than I have been a member here, and they also existed during what some members would consider to be the forum's best days. I think that any solutions to the current issues will need to ensure that we (the staff) address the problems that some members have brought up and at the same time not throw the baby out with the bathwater or overlook the feedback of any of the different subsets of the membership.
It is an honest frank response for Frank Frank
I sincerely believe your expectations are to high for fallible humans in an open forum.
Secret Chief
Degrow!
Who can express beliefs on this thread then? Or should it be mostly data?
I don't believe they are.
There are two fora I'm on dedicated to Jack the Ripper, as I've mentioned, and the owner of one is an author, and many posters are also published authors, TV experts on the subject, and so forth. Those fora is very good for academic and meaningful discussion, and have been since 2005 or so.
It can be done and it can be maintained.
Secret Chief
Degrow!
I know it can be an issue. My ex-wife ate meat, (double the washing up!) but good fortune shone upon us and we got divorced.
I have been involved in Debate Forums for over 20 years. and such expectations are to high considering the fallible nature of the humans involved. I have the dull gamete of experiences with different forum members great to whatever. That is the reality of online forms.
There are a few forums you have to run the gauntlet and be thick skinned more than this one, but this is at times is how you learn how to debate and handle problems in real life,
I actually get involved not to necessarily convince others of anything, but to learn by researching and learn topics, understand what and why people believe what they do, and learn debate methods,
Last edited:
It absolutely fine to express your beliefs and opinions, but it is unreasonable to expect others to agree, or even at times be friendly about what you believe.
Did you read the OP?
Spice
StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
But probably not with the participation numbers hoped for. I know of a strictly religious forum that has currently a total of about 10,000 threads in 6 sub-forums. I'm not currently a member and there's no guest viewing, so I can't speak to the activity, RF certainly has more "clicks" which is what the advertisers want.
Secret Chief
Degrow!
I agree (no pun intended).
So it's better to give someone that final shove who already has one foot out the door then?
I'll also remind you that "friendly" is part of the forum mission.
Secret Chief
Degrow!
Strangely, yes. Including "for some response, I am genuinely interested."
Sorry, I posted the above before asking what I had meant to ask:
What steps do you believe would address your current concerns regarding the forum?
I wanted to include the question in my reply to you (@Saint Frankenstein), but I welcome input from everyone else and would like to read their thoughts on this if they wish to share them.
One is fairly active and there are core members who are on everyday. You can certainly expect replies within a day or two and it has worked for decades. I much prefer it. If less activity means less toxicity, I would like that.
I'm quite confident the OP isn't exactly interested in a "suck it up, buttercup" response.
Secret Chief
Degrow!
Ok. In that case I'm in agreement.
Secret Chief
Degrow!
My only concern is the ongoing loss of the New Thread listing. I was also concerned about turning the place into some sort of online seminary but your previous post assuaged that concern.
