• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Would this be agreeable to Convention Delegates?

Vote on prohibition against trolling, baiting and flaming

  • Yes, the officers should be able to stop trolling, baiting and flaming.

    Votes: 19 82.6%

  • No, any trolling, baiting and flaming should be allowed.

    Votes: 4 17.4%
  • Total voters
    23
J

joko104

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
65,981
Reaction score
23,408
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Moderators are not willing to read through all these messages to decide was does and doesn't break the rules. However, the delegates could set rules by which visitors (not voting delegates) and delegates could be requested to be removed from this Convention Sub-Forum (banned from the Convention). The THREE officers (President, VP and Secretary) would have to vote among themselves to have someone banned from the Convention and if so, they could request forum staff to sub-forum ban that member. It would be up to forum staff, of course, whether or not to agree to this proposition.

The alternative is this Convention becomes more a flame fest than the basement. It also means extreme racist, Nazi or just extremely hateful insults would be allowed. Remember, anyone whether or not a delegate can post and no way to stop it even if they're doing so to try to derail the Convention.

So, this is the poll and it is yes or no.

Yes: it should be a rule of the Constitutional Convention that, if after one or more warning by Convention officers, a person posting on the forum continues to seriously flame, bait or troll other members, the 3 officers as a panel may request forum staff to ban that member from the Convention sub-forum.

No: There will be no prohibition against anyone seriously flaming, baiting, stalking and trolling Constitutional Convention threads.

Folks, make your comments but this is a yes or no vote. Lack of a yes means there will be no rules against personal insults, trolling, flaming, baiting or attempting to derail threads or the Convention by anyone - delegate or not.
 
Last edited:
Looks like we have little choice.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Looks like we have little choice.
Click to expand...
I voted no.
I prefer dealing with the problems associated with free speech, rather than limiting that speech.
Definitions such as "seriously flaming" are nebulous, at best.
Since the DP mods, apparently, don't want to deal with this particular area, I don't know what the solution is.:shrug:
 
joko104 said:
The THREE officers (President, VP and Secretary) would have to vote among themselves to have someone banned from the Convention and if so, they could request .
Click to expand...
Do we have three elected officers?
 

Given all the mess today with this exercise, I am unsure how we are going to proceed well.
 
I'll be sure to let the mods know what's expected of them. :roll: Why sure. What could possibly go wrong with having 3 people vote on, not just a thread ban, but a permanent sub forum ban which doesn't even happen under martial law.
 

I say let the trollers hang themselves and leave the mods out of it.
 

I vote yes...but ONLY on the condition that the accused has the opportunity to defend his or her alleged actions.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Given all the mess today with this exercise, I am unsure how we are going to proceed well.
Click to expand...
Maybe we could just focus on our existing constitution, and try to clarify some of the disputed/controversial portions.
Of course, the courts have been trying to do this for 200+ years, so I'm not certain we would get anywhere.
I dunno.
 
radioman said:
Maybe we could just focus on our existing constitution, and try to clarify some of the disputed/controversial portions.
Of course, the courts have been trying to do this for 200+ years, so I'm not certain we would get anywhere.
I dunno.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I've said from the beginning that we need to set an agenda. An agenda run by and recorded by the officers, will set order. Right now, the whole thing is going willy-nilly because because we have no framework and our officers are whittled down to just accompanying opinion.
 
If we can't trust the officers to be reasonably fair, what's the point? Should the officers have some authority - or serve no purpose whatsoever? It comes down to that. No one officer could get anyone banned from the Convention threads. They could NOT move threads, change messages, issue infractions. alter messages or close down any thread. Rather, they (not one of them) could at least TRY to remove someone - likely even not a delegate - who is only trying to derail, flame or attention whore with waves of messages. With the notice the moderator just posted (and Sangha resigning because of), otherwise no one could do anything.

The PLUS is that moderators will NOT be policing the Convention, will not be issuing infractions (other than such a porn etc), and will not be moving or closing threads. I count that as a BIG plus and towards free speech.

As it is now, the extreme racist/Nazi/attention whores who suddenly join the forum could troll the Convention into the ground - or just pick some side or member and troll them into the ground. A hardcore conservative or liberal could come from upstairs and endlessly flame the others side. While they can be individually put on ignore, most people will just bail out if that fills the threads. Its no fun having a troll stalking you incessantly - and the ignore feature doesn't block quotes.

But its up to delegates. Do you want a way to block anyone from posting or no way at all? It does come down to that.

It's not the same as Mafia games because there is no partisan and ideological fury that arises in those. Other members don't raid Mafia games much as they aren't interested in them (and/or don't understand what it is).
 
Last edited:
Glen Contrarian said:
I vote yes...but ONLY on the condition that the accused has the opportunity to defend his or her alleged actions.
Click to expand...

That is a fair condition. There has been no efforts by the officers to retaliate or get anyone. Rather, a moderator advised there will be NO enforcement except of porn, posting personal info etc. That makes this forum more open to being trash threads and derailing junk than the basement. I don't think it would last long that way.

This is less enforcement than anything up stairs, less power than any mod, DM or bartender. No infractions or thread closing and it takes the officers, no one person could do it. It is a safeguard against the Convention being outside trolled into the ground.

This topic and poll doesn't stop all the other topics and issues continuing on.
 
I doubt anyone ever intended this whole thing, including the Game Forum, to be this exclusive club. The dangers in "banning by popular vote" should be apparent. In order to justify something so significant, I'd think the problem would have to be real severe and have already presented itself. I don't see where that's the case and quite frankly, I've seen some baiting between participants. Right now there's some leeway for that. Not sure you'd like it any better if there wasn't.
 
I just want to let everyone know that this is now an official thread and the results of this thread will be considered binding on the convention

To anyone new to this thread, please read the OP and the OP I wrote in the thread linked below and then please vote in this poll
http://www.debatepolitics.com/dp-co...64-two-important-announcements-president.html

29A said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Amandi said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
American said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
americanwoman said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
APACHERAT said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
azgreg said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Bigfoot 88 said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Buck Ewer said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Chantal said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Citizen.Seven said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
CycloneWanderer said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
d0gbreath said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
DaveFagan said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
DifferentDrummr said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
EMNofSeattle said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
ernst barkmann said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
FreedomFromAll said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Gaius46 said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
gdgyva said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Geoist said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Grand Mal said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
grip said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
hallam said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Hatuey said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
haymarket said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
iliveonramen said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
imagep said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Jango said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Jesse Booth said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
jet57 said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
joG said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
JP Hochbaum said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Kal'Stang said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Korimyr the Rat said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Kushinator said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Lovebug said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Luftwaffe said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
mak2 said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
ModerateGOP said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Moot said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Navy Pride said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Nilly said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
NIMBY said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Ockham said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
OrphanSlug said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
paddymcdougall said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Paleocon said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
PirateMk1 said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Poiuy said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Psychoclown said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
rabbitcaebannog said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
radioman said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
RedAkston said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Removable Mind said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
rjay said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
roguenuke said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
sookster said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
TeleKat said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
The Mark said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
TheDemSocialist said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Threegoofs said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
TurtleDude said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Unitedwestand13 said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Unrepresented said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Visbek said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
whysoserious said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Wiggen said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
Your Star said:
My ideas are important too.
Click to expand...
 

There's nothing exclusive going on here. You, for example, are not a delegate but here you are, posting and discussing this matter and no one is objecting or trying to stop you.

And if you would like to be a delegate, send me a PM requesting that you be allowed to vote and have your vote counted.
 

Join up X.
 
Sorry folks. Didn't realize some things had changed in how this was going to be handled. Re-opening the thread. I've been away from the forums for some time due to personal reasons. I'll try and catch up as I can.
 
Last edited:
Kal'Stang said:
Sorry folks. Didn't realize some things had changed in how this was going to be handled. Re-opening the thread. I've been away from the forums for some time due to personal reasons. I'll try and catch up as I can.
Click to expand...

Thank you.

OK FOLKS. VOTE. The purpose of this poll is to give some means for the full set of our Convention elected officers to address a SERIOUS TROLL-STALKING-DERAILMENT attack - if that happens. It would take the officers - not one officer.
No power to close threads, move messages, alter messages or do infractions.
Warning would have to be given. The member (including non-delegates) could tell their side and make their defense.
The officers have shown they are fair despite their differences on issues, and there will be 3 officers. If we can't trust them to be fair, its pointless anyway nor any reason to have them if the can do NOTHING even in the most extreme situation.

It's up to you. Do you want at least some orderliness to the Convention or it a runaway free-for-all with not structure?
 
The occasional truly disruptive person will need to be dealt with and that job should fall to our elected leaders. I trust that they will be fair and evenhanded.
 
Seriously? What the Hell kind of question is this??? That's like asking if police officers should be allowed to stop aggravated assault!
 

Look at you, joko! Participating in the convention and supporting it with well thought-out arguments! I remember when you were one of the biggest critics of this whole thing. Here, have a meme.

 
sangha said:
There's nothing exclusive going on here. You, for example, are not a delegate but here you are, posting and discussing this matter and no one is objecting or trying to stop you.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you don't have this power that you're so desiring yet. Don't think I don't have an idea of who you already have in mind.

And if you would like to be a delegate, send me a PM requesting that you be allowed to vote and have your vote counted.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you'd rush to welcome me. Lol.
 



I cant really vote one way or another on this issue without knowing all of the details. But really shouldnt we get the officers in place before we make decisions like this? I would be happier if the officers discussed such things and then presented a detailed plan with options. Seems kind of cart before the horse to me.

I have belonged to several different committees and clubs in my lifetime and I am used to the organised efforts of those groups. So far this endeavor has lacked any real form. Everyone seems worried about people losing interest in the project, but in my experience disorganisation is the surest way to kill a project like this. If resentment is built between members then that resentment will only grow. We should assure that we will all remain equal, period.
 

And if the "officers" have a personal or ideological problem with someone? Keep in mind that everything you support happening to someone else, could happen to you.
 
Last edited:

Wait until everyone who doesn't toe the right line gets thrown out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…