You have been removed from this thread

[Rusha]

I put people on ignore when they're malicious or encourage that in posters.

Same here.

What they have to say doesn't interest me. I have, however, responded to posts by people who have had me on ignore or declared the intent, where the post or issue interested me.

Every now and again, I will take someone off of ignore to see if they have evolved (insofar as their character, civility, etc.). If they have great, if not, back they go.

 

[glorydaz]

Most of the atheists I've debated and differed with over the years here have been largely civil and honest in difference.

By contrast, the lower and more routinely duplicitous comments I've read around here over the years have been written by people professing a faith in Christ.

Same here.



Every now and again, I will take someone off of ignore to see if they have evolved (insofar as their character, civility, etc.). If they have great, if not, back they go.

Ah yes, the New Puritans surface briefly to show how "civil" they are. :chuckle:

 

[annabenedetti]

I put people on ignore when they're malicious or encourage that in posters. What they have to say doesn't interest me. I have, however, responded to posts by people who have had me on ignore or declared the intent, where the post or issue interested me.

I had to learn to how to put people on ignore over the years, and finally ended up with something that works really well. When I put someone on ignore, while they're there (for however long- or short-term), they're figuratively dead to me. I don't talk about them in threads, don't discuss them with other posters in threads, don't remind them they're on ignore by quoting the ignore feature ("this message is hidden because...), don't respond to them because I saw their post to me quoted by someone else.

In other words, I've learned to use the ignore function the way it's set up to be used. :chuckle:

 

[Town Heretic]

I had to learn to how to put people on ignore over the years, and finally ended up with something that works really well. When I put someone on ignore, while they're there (for however long- or short-term), they're figuratively dead to me. I don't talk about them in threads, don't discuss them with other posters in threads, don't remind them they're on ignore by quoting the ignore feature ("this message is hidden because...), don't respond to them because I saw their post to me quoted by someone else.

In other words, I've learned to use the ignore function the way it's set up to be used. :chuckle:

I like to think that I've improved the system. lain:

I also sometimes like to think Wednesday is a color.

 

[Ktoyou]

I like to think that I've improved the system. lain:

I also sometimes like to think Wednesday is a color.

Wednesday is a greenish colour, or a light, which looks more green than blue, or yellow.

 

[annabenedetti]

Wednesday is a greenish colour, or a light, which looks more green than blue, or yellow.

I quite like the sound of that color, especially since I was born on a Wednesday.

 

[annabenedetti]

I like to think that I've improved the system. lain:

I also sometimes like to think Wednesday is a color.

Looks like Kat's a step ahead of you. :chuckle:

 

[Ktoyou]

I quite like the sound of that color, especially since I was born on a Wednesday.

Great, The colour is like a teal green

 

[annabenedetti]

Great, The colour is like a teal green

That makes me happy. Thank you, Kat. I'll think of Wednesday in that color from now on.

 

[Ktoyou]

That makes me happy. Thank you, Kat. I'll think of Wednesday in that color from now on.

Good to hear, I think of Thursday as some shade, of light blue, like sky blue and Friday as purple to violet, Saturday seems red and Sunday is yellow. Monday feels like dove gray.

 

[Lon]

Honestly, what do you attribute the significant decrease in forum traffic to? :think:

It has some to do with Battle Royales, I believe. Enyart, Knight, and others who had more draw have not been posting as much. There are fewer one-on-ones as well. I still have about as many 'guests' lurking when I post as I ever did. I don't believe I'm any sort of huge draw, but I'm saying with me in particular, the numbers are the same.

There may be some truth to civil conversation and debate or lack thereof as well, but I don't think that's really the problem, just ebb and flow on TOL I believe. -Lon

 

[Town Heretic]

It has some to do with Battle Royales, I believe. Enyart, Knight, and others who had more draw have not been posting as much. There are fewer one-on-ones as well. I still have about as many 'guests' lurking when I post as I ever did. I don't believe I'm any sort of huge draw, but I'm saying with me in particular, the numbers are the same.

There may be some truth to civil conversation and debate or lack thereof as well, but I don't think that's really the problem, just ebb and flow on TOL I believe. -Lon

Twitter and FB have impacted just about every forum. Along with that a lot of the bells and whistles have gone by the boards here that could give someone just showing up a way to identify. Remember when we could do something as goofy as animate and alter the look of our profile page significantly? Mine still has the smiley hanging by a balloon. One time I did the whole page in moving green waves. Sounds goofy, but it's one reason I had nearly 40k visitors to the page. And we had more stat tracking, which was fun. You could look at a number of stats and find how you were positioning among the old and new kids.

And that's before we get to the HOF/thread award presentations with Knight handing out kudos, or the week of playing nice, things that gave the joint a sense of community. I think that as the forum drain began Knight lost a little of the daily interest in being the TOL glue, let those things fall to through the cracks and the process accelerated. Couple that with the purges/prunnings that eliminated a lot of posts and threads by long time members, like chrys, who then faded into the background and wandered off.

Or, it's probably the times, but the admin accelerated the process inadvertently by removing things that gave TOL a different, closer feel. And without that communal sense and draw we didn't replace great posters with new great posters, for the most part. We may get a lot of second looks, though I can tell you that's lessened using Quixote's as the barometer, but we don't get the new blood needed to drive topics and fill the ranks.

Doesn't feel like a recipe for a turnaround. I don't believe it's a cycle. I suspect that if those things that distinguished TOL came back, over time, it could reverse some of the damage and become a more vital place, but that's a lot of sustained effort and change to get any sort of return and I don't believe the will is there, which given how long the powers that be have been in place makes sense.

 

[annabenedetti]

It's likely that most of our members are over 40. That's one problem. Younger posters bring energy and enthusiasm, older posters tend to be more set in their ways, more resistant to change, more suspicious of newcomers. Make that older conservatives and you magnify the situation. Not saying these are universal traits, but enough have them, and some to a greater degree.

How often has a new poster joined whose views don't align with the status quo, and in a short period of time they're repped into the red, labeled as a troll, or told they're only here to stir the pot? Good discussions need a little pot-stirring.

Another problem is visible neglect of the forum by admin. (And I don't need to be lectured on what work goes on behind the scenes.) It's just as important what's going on at the front of the house.

A forum owner's public connection to the forum is what most rank and file members see. Is he present a reasonable amount of the time? Does he connect with newbies, old-timers, drop in to say hi, post a new thread, encourage conversation, make sure modding is even-handed, or even bother to explain why the forum lost days' worth of posts?

@Knight seems to have checked out of TOL, rarely answers questions in the Ask Knight thread, doesn't welcome new members, only posts about flat earth. If he doesn't appear to care about the forum enough to be present, why should anyone else care? If moderation shuts down active participation, killing discussions on a regular basis, why bother to start another thread?

This forum could thrive if someone really wanted to bring it back to life.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

One solution is to have a few safe-haven forums, wherein dissent contrary to the stipulations of these safe-haven forums is prohibited. Thus, the like-minded can congregate therein without interference from the drive-by types, naysayers, and pot stirrers. These safe-have forums could possibly have a sub-forum for "debate", wherein the rules for dissent no longer apply, e.g.,

Open Theism

Debate Open Theism​

Dispensationalism

Mid-Acts Dispensationalism​

Debate Mid-Acts Dispensationalism
​

Calvinism

Debate Calvinism
​

Denominations

Assemblies of God
Baptist
Catholic
Methodist
Presbyterian
Wesylan​

Cults

Jehovah's Witnesses
Mormons
New Age
Scientology
​

Theology

Eschatology​

Debate Eschatology​

Harmatology
Pneumatology
Trinitarianism​

Debate Trinitarianism​

Soteriology

​

and so on...you get the idea.

Of course, this setup bumps up against the raison d'être of TOL, where anything goes for the most part. I do think that could still be accommodated in some other forums and in the "debate" sub-forums and go towards making TOL a family-safe environment, too.

As things currently stand, the one big blob of posts all over the map appeals to those seeking every shiny object to make themselves seen. More division of the big topic buckets with accompanying rules would reduce this effect.

Lastly, a wee edit to your previous:

Make that older conservatives or liberal and you magnify the situation.​

I am not sure of the original intent of confining your magnification to just older conservatives. It seems to imply older liberals do not exist or are not subject to the same potential entrenchments. That would be odd.

AMR

 

[Lon]

Doesn't feel like a recipe for a turnaround. I don't believe it's a cycle. I suspect that if those things that distinguished TOL came back, over time, it could reverse some of the damage and become a more vital place, but that's a lot of sustained effort and change to get any sort of return and I don't believe the will is there, which given how long the powers that be have been in place makes sense.

Yes, all this too, I agree.

 

[annabenedetti]

One solution is to have a few safe-haven forums, wherein dissent contrary to the stipulations of these safe-haven forums is prohibited. Thus, the like-minded can congregate therein without interference from the drive-by types, naysayers, and pot stirrers. These safe-have forums could possibly have a sub-forum for "debate", wherein the rules for dissent no longer apply, e.g.,

I'd like to see a politics forum where people can't block you from their threads because they don't like your point of view. Not a protected forum for moderates and liberals, that would also kill discussion and speaking for myself, I don't need a safe space. More like a forum where posters can't be blocked and a moderate/liberal view doesn't invite a ban for being 'disruptive.' Not a lot of spirited discussion these days, I don't know how much missing spirit is temporary or permanent.

Of course, this setup bumps up against the raison d'être of TOL, where anything goes for the most part.

It's only "anything goes for the most part" for posters who hold the status quo. The bar set for status quo members here ranges from pretty low to nonexistent. This is part of the problem, since multiple members of the status quo have wished for posters whose views they don't like to be permanently banned, eliminating a lot of what made this place interesting. And lively.

Lastly, a wee edit to your previous:

Make that older conservatives or liberal and you magnify the situation.​

Wondering why you didn't quote me directly? Just curious. In any event, I don't plan to edit it.

I am not sure of the original intent of confining your magnification to just older conservatives. It seems to imply older liberals do not exist or are not subject to the same potential entrenchments. That would be odd.

No, I wasn't implying that at all, it seems you've inferred something other than I intended. The majority of posters here are conservative to right wing, and in social psychology there's a personality type called Right-wing Authoritarian Personality. There is no left-wing counterpart to this. Not that there aren't "older liberals," since there are millions of them, or that they can't be politically entrenched, but that's not what I was getting at.

I've posted this before, so I'll just add it below.

On Right-wing Authoritarian Personalities:

People who score high in RWA characteristics manifest a high degree of submission to authorities (they perceive to be legitimate) in the society they identify with, and a higher propensity to show aggressiveness towards those who they perceive violate those social norms (and they see their aggressiveness as sanctioned by the authorities to which they submit).

They show a high degree of adherence to social norms (you go outside the box of what they see as "normal," and you're going to be aggressed).

They're fearful - they see the world as a dangerous place, requiring strong action to stamp out what they see as a threat.

They're self-righteous - they feel justified in looking down on anyone their authority figures perceive as less moral than themselves.

They require structure. They tend to be inflexible.

They tend to frame their worldview in terms of ingroups and outgroups, and perceive that outgroups threaten the traditions and values held by their ingroup - which attitude, as you might expect, correlates positively with higher rates of prejudice.​

 

[WizardofOz]

One solution is to have a few safe-haven forums, wherein dissent contrary to the stipulations of these safe-haven forums is prohibited.

We already do. They're called Musterion threads.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

One solution is to have a few safe-haven forums, wherein dissent contrary to the stipulations of these safe-haven forums is prohibited. Thus, the like-minded can congregate therein without interference from the drive-by types, naysayers, and pot stirrers. These safe-have forums could possibly have a sub-forum for "debate", wherein the rules for dissent no longer apply, e.g.,

Open Theism

Debate Open Theism​

Dispensationalism

Mid-Acts Dispensationalism​

Debate Mid-Acts Dispensationalism
​

Calvinism

Debate Calvinism
​

Denominations

Assemblies of God
Baptist
Catholic
Methodist
Presbyterian
Wesylan​

Cults

Jehovah's Witnesses
Mormons
New Age
Scientology
​

Theology

Eschatology​

Debate Eschatology​

Harmatology
Pneumatology
Trinitarianism​

Debate Trinitarianism​

Soteriology

​

and so on...you get the idea.

Of course, this setup bumps up against the raison d'être of TOL, where anything goes for the most part. I do think that could still be accommodated in some other forums and in the "debate" sub-forums and go towards making TOL a family-safe environment, too.

As things currently stand, the one big blob of posts all over the map appeals to those seeking every shiny object to make themselves seen. More division of the big topic buckets with accompanying rules would reduce this effect.

Lastly, a wee edit to your previous:

Make that older conservatives or liberal and you magnify the situation.​

I am not sure of the original intent of confining your magnification to just older conservatives. It seems to imply older liberals do not exist or are not subject to the same potential entrenchments. That would be odd.

AMR

You seem to like to 'restrict and limit,' huh? I'm glad Knight is in charge here. Know what I mean?

 

[Arthur Brain]

We already do. They're called Musterion threads.

:rotfl:

 

[glorydaz]

It's likely that most of our members are over 40. That's one problem. Younger posters bring energy and enthusiasm, older posters tend to be more set in their ways, more resistant to change, more suspicious of newcomers. Make that older conservatives and you magnify the situation. Not saying these are universal traits, but enough have them, and some to a greater degree.

The "problem" is not with those over forty. It's with those who think they're smarter than their elders. What we need is more grownups and fewer of these up coming liberal know-it-alls.