POLL: Trump/Biden/Etc.

[Jayhawker Soule]

You could have asked nicely and I would have responded nicely.

It was a rhetorical question.

 

[Rival]

It was a rhetorical question.

So you just came here to take a crap on my thread and leave.

You should stop doing that.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

As I mentioned elsewhere, those of us who 'surf' the forum using the 'new posts' feature to see the most recent posts find themselves having to week through the political threads in order to find threads they want to read or participate in.

I think the 'opt-in/out' suggestion that I mentioned in my first post ITT would be an equitable solution. Do you see a downside to members having the ability to opt out of seeing political forums? Or having members who are interested in reading and discussing politics having the ability to opt in?

I see no downside to either of those options. As it happens, I also "surf" the forum using "new posts." I guess I'm just good at simply not seeing the stuff that doesn't interest me. It's like when I go to the library or bookstore -- I just don't spend any time in the sections I don't care about.

The whole world is like this, you know. You may be watching a particularly good show on TV, and simply turn away and talk somebody else on the couch when the commercials come on. You walk down the street when shopping for clothes, and simply ignore the majority of stores you pass by, and it doesn't bother you that they're there. When you're at a party, there is like a group talking about something you find boring, so you gravitate to the group you find more interesting.

I am just not a fan of those who want to censor for everybody what they don't particularly care to see. That strikes me as very selfish.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I mean for moderation. It's a massive unnecessary pain.

Someone has to clean up, individually, all those posts on those threads that get out of hand.

Which is often all of them.

Okay, I see that, but surely the majority of members are not staff, are they? That's a task you take on voluntarily.

 

[Rival]

Okay, I see that, but surely the majority of members are not staff, are they? That's a task you take on voluntarily.

It is, but it's also kind of like trashing your house just because you have a cleaner.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

So you just came here to take a crap on my thread and leave.

No, I came to point out that the poll is, in my opinion, obviously and fatally flawed.

 

[Rival]

No, I came to point out that the poll is, in my opinion, obviously and fatally flawed.

There were multiple polite ways of saying that.

Kindly stop derailing the thread.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I see no downside to either of those options. As it happens, I also "surf" the forum using "new posts." I guess I'm just good at simply not seeing the stuff that doesn't interest me. It's like when I go to the library or bookstore -- I just don't spend any time in the sections I don't care about.

The whole world is like this, you know. You may be watching a particularly good show on TV, and simply turn away and talk somebody else on the couch when the commercials come on. You walk down the street when shopping for clothes, and simply ignore the majority of stores you pass by, and it doesn't bother you that they're there. When you're at a party, there is like a group talking about something you find boring, so you gravitate to the group you find more interesting.

I am just not a fan of those who want to censor for everybody what they don't particularly care to see. That strikes me as very selfish.

I have no interest in censoring anyone. I'm more interested in finding the best solution for everyone.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I have no interest in censoring anyone. I'm more interested in finding the best solution for everyone.

I apologize if you took my comment to mean you -- I did not, but can see that I didn't make that clear. But some members who voted to see no politics at all are clearly in favor of censoring at least that.

Just one more comment, if I may -- while I don't really take much interest in many of threads in the forum, I always leave myself open. Every once in a while, I'll notice something that piques my interest a bit, and I'll take a look, just to see what it's about. And sometimes, that will get me involved in a conversation I wasn't expecting, but that turns out to be productive.

And once in a while, I'll actively begin discussion -- as I have in the past with threads such as "Joan of Arc's Voices" or "A question for all religious believers -- why is your religion more true than any other?" On the latter, at least one member accused me of trolling and "trying to pick a fight." But it is, to me, a genuinely interesting question, the answer to which would speak absolute volumes about human nature.

You know, I truly think it's not a bad thing to get out of our comfort zone once in a while, and really ponder something new, something from which we might learn.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Would you like to see fewer to no more threads about this topic on RF?

I'm tired of it, many are, and @rocala has had issues and has documented them in his latest thread where he may opt to leave.

Would you prefer not to see such threads?

Does it detract from your RF experience?

Yes, I'm another one who would love if the political threads were gotten rid of or could be hidden. The political mudslinging has been out of hand for awhile and distracts from what the site is supposed to be about, like the forum mission has been thrown out. It's definitely not like how it was when I first came here and it definitely is a big reason why I take a lot of breaks from this place. Many people who were regulars have left and I suspect it was at least partially due to this.

 

[Rival]

but can see that I didn't make that clear. But some members who voted to see no politics at all are clearly in favor of censoring at least that.

I'm not in favour of censorship, it's not the politics itself necessarily, but the tone of the threads.

If you compare it to the current UK general election thread you'll immediately see the difference. The US politicking is highly flammable and very few seem to be able to be nice about it. If it were 40 or so years ago I doubt we'd be having this problem. Until the tribalism is fixed, I'm for banning the politics threads.

 

[Stevicus]

This is my main gripe.

When Brexit happened Brits had one main thread we tended to use.

Every time Trump farts there's a thread about it by 10 people.

Yes, if it was reduced to fewer threads, that might be better.

I can see it to some extent. With many religious discussions, people talk about their beliefs and how they came to them, sometimes including some personal testimony which might give some insight. I think people find that easier to relate to, even if they don't agree with another person's beliefs. Agreement doesn't seem quite as important as understanding each other.

With political discussions, it seems just the opposite, as there's a lot of posturing, as if people think they're on some kind of political talk show or panel discussion. People end up repeating the same talking points and talk past each other. There's no real meeting of the minds, no genuine attempt at understanding the other person's point of view (nor do very many seem to even care about that).

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

There were multiple polite ways of saying that.

That is true. My apologies.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

People end up repeating the same talking points and talk past each other.

So, too, any thread that references Revelations, Isaiah, or Evolution.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I support an opt-out option for the political forums, but not completely banning them.

As others have mentioned, I also simply ignore them when I don't want to participate in them.

 

[We Never Know]

Would you like to see fewer to no more threads about this topic on RF?

I'm tired of it, many are, and @rocala has had issues and has documented them in his latest thread where he may opt to leave.

Would you prefer not to see such threads?

Does it detract from your RF experience?

Put them at the bottom with covid. Only accessed if purposely going there.
That way they are not all over the latest activity or what's new feeds.

 

[McBell]

Would you like to see fewer to no more threads about this topic on RF?

I'm tired of it, many are, and @rocala has had issues and has documented them in his latest thread where he may opt to leave.

Would you prefer not to see such threads?

Does it detract from your RF experience?

In My Opinion...

an ability to ignore individual threads and individual subforums would be most excellent.
Like the ignore function works for members but on the thread and subforum level.

Having to wade through a bunch of threads you have no interest in to get to the ones you are interested in can get annoying.

I would also love to see the ability to "turn off" the forums you are not allowed to post in.
Perhaps having a box to click to turn their appearing on and off.

I also think the default for such settings should be on.
Then we can go in and select the ones we do not want to see.
But anyway said ability would be set up is better than not having it at all.

 

[Secret Chief]

Politics is an important part of life -- and religion, like it or not, plays an important role, even though the U.S. Constitution makes a deliberate effort to keep it out. And it is election season, in a very important country in the world, and this election could spell enormous changes not only in the U.S. but world-wide, and that makes it a topic of some moment and interest.

Basically this, plus I suspect the most represented nation on RF is America so it's a legitimate outlet to have and so has the most input. By contrast if a nuclear bomb went off in Manchester there'd probably be half a thread on it max.

 

[Rival]

In My Opinion...

an ability to ignore individual threads and individual subforums would be most excellent.
Like the ignore function works for members but on the thread and subforum level.

Having to wade through a bunch of threads you have no interest in to get to the ones you are interested in can get annoying.

I would also love to see the ability to "turn off" the forums you are not allowed to post in.
Perhaps having a box to click to turn their appearing on and off.

I also think the default for such settings should be on.
Then we can go in and select the ones we do not want to see.
But anyway said ability would be set up is better than not having it at all.

Admins have the ability to make a sort of subforum like we have for Covid where all the threads would be contained. We are looking into doing this.

 

[McBell]

Perhaps a member customizable filtering New Threads link/button?