- Joined
- Jul 1, 2011
- Messages
- 67,218
- Reaction score
- 28,530
- Location
- Lower Hudson Valley, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
From this point forward, the moderation team will be treating the Constitutional Convention as we would any other thread in the game forum. It is up to you to make this into something productive, and we will not police your partisan disagreements. The success or failure of this experiment is completely on you.
If by some chance we are required to take a moderation action to address an especially serious global offense, you will be banned from this subforum.
1) As president, I have made an executive decision that, in order to help ensure that this conference maintains a sustainable level of activity, we should allow any DP poster who wishes to join the convention to do so by contacting the president or the Sec'y and requesting to be made a member.
As a result of that decision, I'd like everyone to welcome our newest member, Joko104
2) It has just come to my attention that this forum is operating under the rules that are different from the rest of DP.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/dp-co...p-constitutional-convention-announcement.html
As it's been explained to me, this means that the mods will not infract anyone for anything that is worth less than 10 point. In other words, things like baiting, flaming, and trolling are allowed in this forum. Since I have no interest in moderating a forum which allows such behavior, I am resigning my position as president and handing the presidency to the only other officer the convention has - Vasudatorrent. My decision becomes effective as soon as Vasudatorrent accepts his new position.
1) As president, I have made an executive decision that, in order to help ensure that this conference maintains a sustainable level of activity, we should allow any DP poster who wishes to join the convention to do so by contacting the president or the Sec'y and requesting to be made a member.
As a result of that decision, I'd like everyone to welcome our newest member, Joko104
2) It has just come to my attention that this forum is operating under the rules that are different from the rest of DP.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/dp-co...p-constitutional-convention-announcement.html
As it's been explained to me, this means that the mods will not infract anyone for anything that is worth less than 10 point. In other words, things like baiting, flaming, and trolling are allowed in this forum. Since I have no interest in moderating a forum which allows such behavior, I am resigning my position as president and handing the presidency to the only other officer the convention has - Vasudatorrent. My decision becomes effective as soon as Vasudatorrent accepts his new position.
Do you necessarily need to moderate it? Surely we can formulate some reasonably parliamentary rules and put in place an enforcement mechanism that doesn't require one person to play cop.
Do you necessarily need to moderate it? Surely we can formulate some reasonably parliamentary rules and put in place an enforcement mechanism that doesn't require one person to play cop.
Please do some communications with the mods to make certain you understand that message (if you haven't already). You've been great for the Convention and this would be a real lose. Maybe wait to see how that notice is actually implemented and applied?
And thank you.
1) We can vote for whatever rules and enforcement mechanisms we want to, but that doesn't stop anyone from doing what they want to. As long as they are not engaged in a "serious global offense", any poster (including non-members) are free to do whatever they want, includin derailing threads
2) I want to be clear about what I mean by moderating this forum. I do not mean being a DP mod and handing out infractions. I mean leading and directing the discussions in a way that helps make them productive. If that's not what the President does, then what is the Presidents' job? To make rules (that anyone can ignore at will) unilaterally?
That's not what I signed up to do.
1) As president, I have made an executive decision that, in order to help ensure that this conference maintains a sustainable level of activity, we should allow any DP poster who wishes to join the convention to do so by contacting the president or the Sec'y and requesting to be made a member.
As a result of that decision, I'd like everyone to welcome our newest member, Joko104
2) It has just come to my attention that this forum is operating under the rules that are different from the rest of DP.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/dp-co...p-constitutional-convention-announcement.html
As it's been explained to me, this means that the mods will not infract anyone for anything that is worth less than 10 point. In other words, things like baiting, flaming, and trolling are allowed in this forum. Since I have no interest in moderating a forum which allows such behavior, I am resigning my position as president and handing the presidency to the only other officer the convention has - Vasudatorrent. My decision becomes effective as soon as Vasudatorrent accepts his new position.
What do you think is going wrong?
Not naming anyone, very short list of those participating are so aggressive and trollish that it drives others off and pushes it towards being like the basement. If there is nothing Convention officers can do and if moderators won't do anything, the future looks bleak. Unmoderated forums - despite cries for unlimited free speech - quickly just become name-calling flame fests. That's likely the concern. Sangha has always made in clear he wants the Convention to be conducted in an orderly and respectful manner regardless of strong feelings on issues.
Most who are participating are excellent and sincere. It only take a few to spoil it for everyone.
Ask mods if any of them would go along with there being NO enforce except 1.) serious global rules like Helix said and 2.) ban someone from this sub-forum IF this requested by the Convention staff (ie Prez upon agreement of at least one of the other 2 officers)? The mod wouldn't even have to review the messages and a sticky could be posted warning of this.
The Convention could establish rules by which a person is removed or not - as guidance to the Convention leadership (elected leadership).
This would take all the bother off the moderators and keep enforcement entirely with the Convention.
The first rule that is proposed to "open" the convention is to limit free speech?
Exhibit A for why I don't want to be a part of that even if it is a workable solution
The first rule that is proposed to "open" the convention is to limit free speech?
Jeez, you didn't even get to make a "Your president is not a crook speech".Since I have no interest in moderating a forum which allows such behavior, I am resigning my position as president
V-man hasn't been around for a few days.handing the presidency to the only other officer the convention has - Vasudatorrent. My decision becomes effective as soon as Vasudatorrent accepts his new position.
Another solution would be to just ignore the trolls altogether. That's what I do when I'm just tired of certain people. The right-wing is inherently combative and since things are not going their way in this convention, it's obvious that they intend to take it down. I think the continuing sort of disorder is creating fodder for such an environment. We can always drop them from the convention; we don't need mods for that, just send out warnings and if they don't get it, publish the names of those to be ignored.
I missed some the early debates because I couldn't find the convention, but I'll bet the 2nd Amendment thread is a mess...
i bolded the part that i have an issue with........
our founding fathers, who wrote a pretty good document, had men of character on all sides of the arguments
they debated ideas.....sometimes heatedly
we have many more people in the middle or to the left on this site.....and in this forum
some of us want to make sure that at least the conservative side is heard
things like limited government......privacy laws......gun rights.......
they can be debated.....and there will be major differences from both sides
i dont know how the votes will go....but if they go as the numbers might suggest, this "new document" will be very different from the founders originally wrote
i hope to remain through this.......but attacks aimed at everyone on the right doesnt seem to be productive to me
i bolded the part that i have an issue with........
our founding fathers, who wrote a pretty good document, had men of character on all sides of the arguments
they debated ideas.....sometimes heatedly
we have many more people in the middle or to the left on this site.....and in this forum
some of us want to make sure that at least the conservative side is heard
things like limited government......privacy laws......gun rights.......
they can be debated.....and there will be major differences from both sides
i dont know how the votes will go....but if they go as the numbers might suggest, this "new document" will be very different from the founders originally wrote
i hope to remain through this.......but attacks aimed at everyone on the right doesnt seem to be productive to me
This seems like an honest question to me.
My honest answer is no. Speech will not be limited in the convention. The debate exchanges will not be moderated, as helix has pointed out.
The only problem that I see is that sangha is stepping down as President. He is probably smarter than I am and sees this as a ploy designed to undermine the convention.
Yes, that does mean "open trolling season" for anyone that got up on the wrong side of the bed.
It will be hard to ignore the type-by trollings. But that is what must be done, and when done properly, will be successful.
Reconsider if you will sangha. If not, welcome to the Presidency vausderatorrent. I shall soon learn to spell your name. lol
It's not. That quote also isn't in this thread.
I "liked" your post but I want to be clear about one thing. I do not think the DP mods are trying to undermine anything. It's just that when I accepted the position I assumed that DP's regular rules would be in effect. Since that is not the case, I am stepping down.
huh?
post # 14 in this thread
Sorry; can you clarify please?
I "liked" your post but I want to be clear about one thing. I do not think the DP mods are trying to undermine anything. It's just that when I accepted the position I assumed that DP's regular rules would be in effect. Since that is not the case, I am stepping down.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?