Etiquette and political discussions

[Rob C]

Surely this is a case of using common sense.  I have stopped reading threads that go on and on and can degenerate into a few people arguing back and forth.  I am happy to be criticised, but only if it is constructive. If someone is abusive to me, I walk away.  If this forum is to thrive, then don't allow language that causes people to walk away.

Jonathan

Jonathan, boredom drives people away before threats.

Comes a time one realises that attitudes, if genuine and not adopted for the sake of Internet argument, will never be changed, and all one is doing is running up one's own electricty bill.

People have their beliefs for whatever reasons that they do, and no argument will change ideas firmly estabished within the mind and soul. Young minds have their fixations because the young think they are right; the older minds have their fixations because they know they are right. Even when they are not. Why, how can this be? Because few things are either right or wrong; most are just reflecting differing shades of reality and interpretation of its evidence, painted in any colour you find flavour of your month.

I can only say that I have found it increasingly difficult to keep even a soupçon of interest alive in these related threads of politics and political correctness. It's due to the failure of my desire to keep my head above water in these accelerating whirlpools of cant and obfuscation.

From whether Jeremy should or should not be a Mod. (why anyone would want to be one is a question for debate in its own right) through to whether or not the CC should be nuked or not, the discussion has turned tedious in the extreme. Seems to have become a debate about my maths degree being more worthy than your degree; my years on a gaming site (wow!) of more value than yours on a photographic site; and this from people who, at the same time, insist that LuLa should be confined to matters solely photographic. Be careful of what you wish, folks, how else would you be able to find excuse to float your impressive banners?

[texshooter]

There are only three types who engage in online political debates: 

those who enjoy the drama,
those who fear losing the argument, and
those who haven't yet learned that nobody cares what anybody thinks.

[Chris Kern]

I think it would be useful for those of us who decide to post in this forum, especially on political topics, to enter a location—at least by country, if not country and city—by filling in the location field in their user profiles (see attached).

One of the things I value most about the LuLa forums is their international character.  I'm especially interested in hearing the views of posters who are not in North America.

Again, I'm proposing this with reference especially to political topics, but it would be also be useful to know where a poster is based when replying to technical inquiries because some information, especially involving particular vendors, is inherently country-specific.

It only takes a few seconds to enter a location and, unless you're in a witness-protection program, I don't think it involves giving away any sensitive information.

[Otto Phocus]

Some people just need to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."  -- some old dead guy

[RSL]

I think it would be useful for those of us who decide to post in this forum, especially on political topics, to enter a location—at least by country

I'd agree, Chris, and add that they should tell us how old they are. Makes a difference.

[Rob C]

I'd agree, Chris, and add that they should tell us how old they are. Makes a difference.

Careful! You will immediately estrange one particular, pre-teen, age-conscious member!

;-)

[landscapephoto]

If I may suggest something: what if the forum introduced a maximum amount of posts per day per person in any thread in that section? It seems that the discussion are becoming more conflictual when people exchange posts in rapid succession. Putting a software limit to the number of posts and publishing it in advance may prevent that.

I would also add an element of strategy to the discussion. Suppose the limit is chosen to be 5. Someone having used 3 posts would be enticed to think twice before using the remaining two for that day.

[Jeremy Roussak]

If I may suggest something: what if the forum introduced a maximum amount of posts per day per person in any thread in that section? It seems that the discussion are becoming more conflictual when people exchange posts in rapid succession. Putting a software limit to the number of posts and publishing it in advance may prevent that.

I would also add an element of strategy to the discussion. Suppose the limit is chosen to be 5. Someone having used 3 posts would be enticed to think twice before using the remaining two for that day.

it's an interesting idea, but I am not aware of the forum software having that feature and it's certainly not something that could be done manually.

Jeremy

[Rob C]

If I may suggest something: what if the forum introduced a maximum amount of posts per day per person in any thread in that section? It seems that the discussion are becoming more conflictual when people exchange posts in rapid succession. Putting a software limit to the number of posts and publishing it in advance may prevent that.

I would also add an element of strategy to the discussion. Suppose the limit is chosen to be 5. Someone having used 3 posts would be enticed to think twice before using the remaining two for that day.

What an odd perspective.

In other words, the more interesting a topic may become, the less one would be able to participate! Quiet extraordinary thinking.

Rob

[BernardLanguillier]

Thanks, great move!

Cheers,
Bernard

p.s.: and this comes before Trump fires all of his staff! 

[landscapephoto]

it's an interesting idea, but I am not aware of the forum software having that feature and it's certainly not something that could be done manually.

Jeremy

Maybe there is an add-on for the backend to do that?

[Alan Goldhammer]

I was off line last week during a visit with my West Coast daughter.  As a former moderator of what I thought would be an apolitical thread I can only wish Jeremy good luck and hope that his job is not as time consuming as mine was. 

[BobShaw]

As a former moderator of what I thought would be an apolitical thread I can only wish Jeremy good luck and hope that his job is not as time consuming as mine was.

It doesn't need to be time consuming.
You make the statement of the way it is and then close the thread. Works every time.
This is already two pages and the only comment that mattered was the first.

[donbga]

The Coffee Corner has not been a happy place of late. The forum’s description indicates that it is for “discussion of photographic topics of a general nature” but several threads have been purely political, some overtly so and some masquerading as having a connection, however peripheral, with photography. Discussions have become unnecessarily aggressive, more heat has been generated than light, some threads have descended into acrimony and some members have been temporarily barred from posting. Perfectly reasonably, Kevin and Chris took the decision to ban further political discussion.

I have now started to act as a moderator. I enjoy discussion and rational argument; I spend my working life indulging in it. I like hearing political views, whether they coincide with or differ from my own. I have therefore taken the decision, with the agreement of Kevin and Chris, to reopen the forum to politics and the word “photographic” has been removed from the description. Political discussion must, however, be confined to the Coffee Corner: this is a photographic site.

We have retained the last sentence of the board’s description: “Posters must conduct themselves in a civil and adult nature”. I intend to moderate political discussions very much more strictly than those on photography-related topics. The rules are set out below: they will apply in particular to political discussions in the Coffee Corner, but the principles apply to all exchanges in any of LuLa’s forums.

• Discussions must be conducted politely.
• Robust discussion is to be encouraged but offensive language is not. That is not intended to be a ban on all language which to which anyone might take exception - we are not maiden aunts - but consideration of whether the words used would be spoken in a face-to-face conversation in a home will give some indication of what is acceptable.
• Ad hominem attacks on members will not be tolerated.
• The forum is not, however, a “safe space”, in which views which some might find upsetting are silenced merely because some might find them upsetting.

Sanctions will be applied, flexibly but rationally, to those who break the rules. The sanctions will include deletion of the offending post; warnings, private and/or public; temporary bans from posting, beginning with a week; and, for persistent and repeat offenders, permanent exclusion. On occasion, it may be necessary to lock or delete the entire thread.

We are all adults; many, if not all, of us are professional people. I can see no reason why interesting and thoughtful discussions cannot take place in compliance with those stipulations. I hope they can.

Jeremy

I would also suggest public floggings and allowing a limited number of F-Bombs per year for each paying Forum member.

After all Boys will be Boys, eh Jeremy.

Don Bryant

[SBlev]

I joined Luminous Landscape to hear discussions of photography. I am disappointed in the site. I care nothing about another's opinion on politics, nor anyone's "rant" on anything. I just want to hear constructive discussions of photographic equipment and its application to photographic technique. Sorry, but I don't want political discussions, even though I may be the only one.

[digitaldog]

Why bother?   Seriously.  It isn’t as though there are not eight billion places on the net to harangue about politics.

Exactly!

Better move LuLa owners; close down that forum. Jeremy's time would be well spent elsewhere. Then all we can argue about is Nikon vs. Canon (or is Sony the new fill in the blank), Mac vs. Windows, Epson vs. Canon/HP. At least they are all photo related. Etiquette and political discussions; an oxymoron.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...Sorry, but I don't want political discussions...

Nobody is forcing you to read them.

[Jeremy Roussak]

Political discussions are banned everywhere on this site. I have deleted today's mini-discussion and remedied my carelessness in leaving this thread unlocked.

Jeremy