Other POLL: Should there be a politics/debate discussion forum?

[Hall Kervean]

Or should they stay in General Discussions?
I mean, they're not harming anything.
And a lot of times, things that weren't political end up getting political.
My vote is ye
I don't want that scummy general discussions all up in my politics



[Oh, and mods/admins, the reason this isn't on the suggestions thing is because I thought that it'd be smarter to ask those that would be actually affected by it first.]

 

[The Son]

Yes, I don't want to dig through pages of general discussion for politics

 

[Little]

Yes, but I think it'd have to be heavily monitored by mods. It's ultimately up to staff, particularly the mods that will have to sift through this section frequently. But other than that, I don't see why not.

 

[Panzer]

Now this is a story all about how
My life got flipped-turned upside down
And I'd like to take a minute
Just sit right there
I'll tell you how I became the prince of a town called Bel-Air

In west Philadelphia born and raised
On the playground was where I spent most of my days
Chillin' out maxin' relaxin' all cool
And all shooting some b-ball outside of the school
When a couple of guys who were up to no good
Started making trouble in my neighborhood
I got in one little fight and my mom got scared
She said, "You're movin' with your auntie and uncle in Bel-Air."

I begged and pleaded with her day after day
But she packed my suitcase and sent me on my way
She gave me a kiss and then she gave me my ticket.
I put my Walkman on and said, "I might as well kick it."

First class, yo, this is bad
Drinking orange juice out of a champagne glass.
Is this what the people of Bel-Air living like?
Hmm, this might be alright.

But wait I hear they're prissy, bourgeois, all that
Is this the type of place that they just send this cool cat?
I don't think so
I'll see when I get there
I hope they're prepared for the prince of Bel-Air

Well, the plane landed and when I came out
There was a dude who looked like a cop standing there with my name out
I ain't trying to get arrested yet
I just got here
I sprang with the quickness like lightning, disappeared

I whistled for a cab and when it came near
The license plate said "Fresh" and it had dice in the mirror
If anything I could say that this cab was rare
But I thought, "Nah, forget it."
– "Yo, home to Bel-Air."

I pulled up to the house about 7 or 8
And I yelled to the cabbie, "Yo home smell ya later."
I looked at my kingdom
I was finally there
To sit on my throne as the Prince of Bel-Air

 

[Iskandar]

Yes, but I think it'd have to be heavily monitored by mods. It's ultimately up to staff, particularly the mods that will have to sift through this section frequently. But other than that, I don't see why not.

Agreed, though I would hope the mods remain as unbiased as possible and let everyone speak their mind. Of course if it becomes a meme fest, or extremely violent then yeah shut that thread down, but if everything seems fine and civil, then the mod should leave it be. Of course I encourage the mods to join in too.

A good 25% of the threads would become meme fests in a few posts though lol so those mods would have a lot of work.

 

[Hall Kervean]

A good 25% of the threads would become meme fests in a few posts though lol so those mods would have a lot of work.

. It certainly would be if we had new threads every few minutes. We get new threads every few... maybe every few hours up here.
Maybe on the politics/debate discussion subforum, the mods have to give more detailed reasons when they delete something. Not that I really think they're biased, but as a precaution. If it's too much of a hassle for a mod, though, then I suppose that'd be impractical!
Unless it's because they were spamming memes. Then they can just say they were spamming memes. And everyone would understand.

 

[Sizniche]

Anyone who thinks encouraging political discussion on a roleplay site is a good idea needs to be crucified.

 

[Hall Kervean]

Anyone who thinks encouraging political discussion on a roleplay site is a good idea needs to be crucified.

Well, you've missed a lot.
But it's better to confine it out of the way of others, since it's gonna happen anyways.

 

[Sizniche]

Well, you've missed a lot.
But it's better to confine it out of the way of others, since it's gonna happen anyways.

Fair enough, apologies for the outburst

 

[Tove]

I don't see why not, a separate spot to keep all of that in and monitored if there's time to do that.

 

[Idea]

To be honest, this may not be a political discussion subforum, but discussion and debate are pratically synonimous. I don't think the problems found on either camp can be solved via creating a separate forum, as most of it boils down to people can't take criticism

 

[Hall Kervean]

To be honest, this may not be a political discussion subforum, but discussion and debate are pratically synonimous. I don't think the problems found on either camp can be solved via creating a separate forum, as most of it boils down to people can't take criticism

Very true, but some threads on general discussion don't relate to debate, specifically. Like the ones that ask to share your favorite books.

 

[The Gunrunner]

I haven't read the other posts and I'm too drunk and lazy to do so.
Rp nation used to have a debate section, which may be why the moderators won't have one up again. Not a dedicated one, anyway. "Why was it removed?" you ask, well it's because it often degraded into something like the Trump thread - Or so it is said. I think the idea that moderators will have to monitor it comes with a mild amount of contempt, though I don't mean to insult, on the grounds that they are already monitoring threads to a degree. Additionally, if this requires more moderation than others then it kind of points to the issue: It's dangerous in terms of the possibility of becoming toxic.
Personally, I love debating. However, I do understand why the mods removed it and why they don't have intention to bring it back up. As to the above explanation, I may be misremembering but I believe that exact explanation was given by a moderator inside a thread similar to this - "Bring back the debate section" or something to that effect.

Thus, I am the only one who voted "Split." I think debating is important for personal growth as it causes one to think more critically about their opinions, and it most certainly stops the stupid "I'm entitled to my opinion" and "I stand my ground" stuff. It's good for someone to throw out ideas when they are unjustified in their own minds and accept others when they have arguments one recognizes as convincing, but the moderators are not obligated to provide that space. It's not a school, it's a roleplay thread - Up to them.
There is also an equal possibility of people continuing to be illogical despite exposure to arguments - there's plenty of forums evidence to that - so I suppose I'm being quite optomistic in assuming this would result in something positive. Oh well, it's bed time now.

 

[Hall Kervean]

I haven't read the other posts and I'm too drunk and lazy to do so.
Rp nation used to have a debate section, which may be why the moderators won't have one up again. Not a dedicated one, anyway. "Why was it removed?" you ask, well it's because it often degraded into something like the Trump thread - Or so it is said. I think the idea that moderators will have to monitor it comes with a mild amount of contempt, though I don't mean to insult, on the grounds that they are already monitoring threads to a degree. Additionally, if this requires more moderation than others then it kind of points to the issue: It's dangerous in terms of the possibility of becoming toxic.
Personally, I love debating. However, I do understand why the mods removed it and why they don't have intention to bring it back up. As to the above explanation, I may be misremembering but I believe that exact explanation was given by a moderator inside a thread similar to this - "Bring back the debate section" or something to that effect.

Thus, I am the only one who voted "Split." I think debating is important for personal growth as it causes one to think more critically about their opinions, and it most certainly stops the stupid "I'm entitled to my opinion" and "I stand my ground" stuff. It's good for someone to throw out ideas when they are unjustified in their own minds and accept others when they have arguments one recognizes as convincing, but the moderators are not obligated to provide that space. It's not a school, it's a roleplay thread - Up to them.
There is also an equal possibility of people continuing to be illogical despite exposure to arguments - there's plenty of forums evidence to that - so I suppose I'm being quite optomistic in assuming this would result in something positive. Oh well, it's bed time now.

HA PSSH BED TIME
And yeah, that makes sense. It really does.
I was just hoping we could consolidate our cancer ^^
Please don't tell me that "degrading into something like the Trump thread" is going to be a phrase; though it's hilarious that there's literally a solid, obvious cutoff point between relevant, good-natured debate and discussion and the worst nightmare of a moderator.

 

[Idea]

Very true, but some threads on general discussion don't relate to debate, specifically. Like the ones that ask to share your favorite books.

I'd say even that invites debate. If soemone just lists "my favorite books are so and so" ok there is nothing to debate there, but if someone says "my favorite books are these because I think they have really deep characters and the plot is intelligent", then being on a DISCUSSION forum, and if you disagree, one should be allowed to point that they disagree and why. With respect, of course. Instead even in threads pertaining to major issues people consider some form of attack that someone comes and says "with all due respect, I believe you are wrong, and here are the reasons why I think this".

 

[Hall Kervean]

I'd say even that invites debate. If soemone just lists "my favorite books are so and so" ok there is nothing to debate there, but if someone says "my favorite books are these because I think they have really deep characters and the plot is intelligent", then being on a DISCUSSION forum, and if you disagree, one should be allowed to point that they disagree and why. With respect, of course. Instead even in threads pertaining to major issues people consider some form of attack that someone comes and says "with all due respect, I believe you are wrong, and here are the reasons why I think this".

Coming from the harsh battleground of the Trump thread's last 7 pages, I'll refrain from naming anyone in particular who forgot to add the first part and the third part and removed the "I believe."
But that, too is a very good... point...

It just got so meta up in here *o*

 

[Idea]

Coming from the harsh battleground of the Trump thread's last 7 pages, I'll refrain from naming anyone in particular who forgot to add the first part and the third part and removed the "I believe."
But that, too is a very good... point...

It just got so meta up in here *o*

Well, yeah, you're gonna find brutes everywhere, but those people are not gonna stop doing something just because they shouldn't be doing it, now would they?

Personally, I believe there are few more respectful things a human being can do than speak out when they think something is wrong. Because being wrong will often be a detriment to someone's happiness or well being. To give an obvious example, if someone is wrong about a medical pratice, saying something can save their life- or maybe it can save your own, because when you opened the discussion maybe it is you who ends up convinced by the arguments of the person you crticized. That's what a discussion, an argument, is supposed to be. People sharing information and correcting their own viewpoint to improve everybody's lives.

 

[Hall Kervean]

Well, yeah, you're gonna find brutes everywhere, but those people are not gonna stop doing something just because they shouldn't be doing it, now would they?

Personally, I believe there are few more respectful things a human being can do than speak out when they think something is wrong. Because being wrong will often be a detriment to someone's happiness or well being. To give an obvious example, if someone is wrong about a medical pratice, saying something can save their life- or maybe it can save your own, because when you opened the discussion maybe it is you who ends up convinced by the arguments of the person you crticized. That's what a discussion, an argument, is supposed to be. People sharing information and correcting their own viewpoint to improve everybody's lives.

Very true *nods sagely

And that may be, as well. But there is a proper way to do it, like you said. Disrespectful arguments are still valid arguments, but they won't be received. Which means nothing got accomplished, and that just devolves into fighting.
It's a delicate balance.

 

[Idea]

Very true *nods sagely

And that may be, as well. But there is a proper way to do it, like you said. Disrespectful arguments are still valid arguments, but they won't be received. Which means nothing got accomplished, and that just devolves into fighting.
It's a delicate balance.

Yes. But learning how to argue properly is not that hard- I know that because I by the 11th grade, I knew it, and I'm far from some genius. Yeah, a fallacy slips under my nose here and there, but no one has to be Socrates to have a proper argument. It's mostly a matter of being willing to listen

 

[Project Naiad]

Nah there shouldn't. A few wonky politic threads in the General Discussion are fine, but this is a roleplay site. If anyone wanted to discuss politics they certainly wouldn't come here to do so.

 

[ApfelSeine]

I haven't read the other posts and I'm too drunk and lazy to do so.
Rp nation used to have a debate section, which may be why the moderators won't have one up again. Not a dedicated one, anyway. "Why was it removed?" you ask, well it's because it often degraded into something like the Trump thread - Or so it is said. I think the idea that moderators will have to monitor it comes with a mild amount of contempt, though I don't mean to insult, on the grounds that they are already monitoring threads to a degree. Additionally, if this requires more moderation than others then it kind of points to the issue: It's dangerous in terms of the possibility of becoming toxic.
Personally, I love debating. However, I do understand why the mods removed it and why they don't have intention to bring it back up. As to the above explanation, I may be misremembering but I believe that exact explanation was given by a moderator inside a thread similar to this - "Bring back the debate section" or something to that effect.

Thus, I am the only one who voted "Split." I think debating is important for personal growth as it causes one to think more critically about their opinions, and it most certainly stops the stupid "I'm entitled to my opinion" and "I stand my ground" stuff. It's good for someone to throw out ideas when they are unjustified in their own minds and accept others when they have arguments one recognizes as convincing, but the moderators are not obligated to provide that space. It's not a school, it's a roleplay thread - Up to them.
There is also an equal possibility of people continuing to be illogical despite exposure to arguments - there's plenty of forums evidence to that - so I suppose I'm being quite optomistic in assuming this would result in something positive. Oh well, it's bed time now.

Well you're not wrong that it would be a pain to moderate a subforum like that
If it existed I'd do it willingly, but since it doesn't, I'll appreciate the higher levels of civility that come from not devoting an entire subforum to the subject (plus, when you take out all the toxic threads, I don't imagine there'd be enough constructive threads to really warrant an entire subforum anyways). I'm totally fine with the number of political threads being limited.

I definitely agree that debate is important, and very useful. I find it invaluable to get the experiences and opinions of those with vastly different life experiences. I get some of that in my classes, but not nearly enough to really allow me to sustain a broad perspective like I'm able to do after learning from others around the world via forum sites. Political and controversial topics can be very informative and constructive. That's why debate threads and controversial topics aren't branded as "kill on sight", even though we don't think it would be good to devote an entire section to it. Having a place that draws in people looking for a fight is not the most productive way to organize things.

The unfortunate thing is, no one knows how to debate properly. They know how to attack the experience and credibility of the person they are responding to, but not how to properly refute the ideas themselves with their own knowledge and research. That's never going to change, because there will always be more people who get incensed by what they read, and respond in a non-constructive manner. That, or political threads become meme havens and a personal chatroom for like minded people (nothing wrong with that, per se, but it's no longer a debate at that point anyways). A lot of the time, people are either looking for a fight, or an echo chamber, so even if they did know how to debate constructively it still won't always turn out that way.

---

So yeah, I completely understand why such a forum is wanted, but I am against it. Not because I don't want to moderate it (I don't mind moderating the political threads which do come up in general discussion, since they're often interesting), but because people can't constructively debate. Having a political subforum will draw in the people looking for a fight. Unfortunately, many people think "debate" is synonymous with "yell at people I think are stupid and wrong because they disagree". Having such a subforum draws in those types of people, more so than just having debate threads make their home here in general discussion. It fosters a negative environment because people go in looking for a fight.

I have not, on any of the forums I have been a part of, seen a political subforum which was not ripe with toxicity.

To use the Trump thread, which was already brought up with an example, that didn't go south because of one dissenting user. There was a lot that was inflammatory remarks, targeted attacks, and even a lot completely off topic bantering. These things happened right from the get go, most of which was deleted in a vain attempt to keep people from straying from the intended topic. It stayed up for much longer than it probably should have, because the staff does want to encourage constructive and respectful debate. I've seen many threads which, for whatever reason, manage to stay civil throughout. I've also seen many that become arguments or off topic by the second post.

Having a subforum devoted to politics draws in people who want to rile others up or degrade other's opinions. As it is now, they have to actively look for threads of a political nature, which is already more effort than some want to put into it, so that keeps a bigger proportion of controversial threads civil and on topic.

 

[Borkus Lazorus]

No and that's the end of it /short answer.

Okay, time for a long answer, then.....

Let me say that it is possible to run a good, some-what stable political forum that doesn't border on Orwellian moderation. Toxicity can't be removed from internet debating. It is an inherent aspect of it that takes into account all sectors of humanity with the grandiose variation of beliefs, personal opinions, personal knowledge, values and all that fine stuff that makes humans humans. We argue on the internet because we like to argue. Because humans are fucking social beings.

RPnation is not meant to be a debate forum in any measurable sense of the word 'debate' and I agree it shouldn't be. There have been no rules regarding standard debating. Trolling and flame-baiting is allowed on these forums without little to no punitive measures whatsoever (Because this is a roleplay forum, not a general forum.) People go on here to roleplay, not get involved in long-ass internet debates that are 90% of the time crap and 10% of the time constructive and useful. A political debate discussion forum would quickly shrivel up and decompose into a pile of refuse.

It is very, very hard to maintain a good political subforum that doesn't devolve into Reddit and Tumblr shit-fests. You need tonnes of moderators. You need rules up the wazoo. This would cause far more hassle than RPnation would need.

Therefore, a political debate discussion forum would not be the proper course for RPnation.

Personally? I don't like seeing it but just let the general discussion be its own meme filled heaven.

 

[Sibelle Grey]

There are reasons why debates most often go horribly south on RpN, one reason being the behavior of those involved-- those with faults in the way they go about it (which are not well received by those who are stronger debaters), and those who confuse 'debate' with 'attempt to insult into silence'. If you recognize yourself in any of that, you're part of the reason why we can't have nice things
*side-eyes others*
*side-eyes self*
Meaning that our attitudes are the problem. People don't know when to agree to disagree and they don't know how to deal with frustration when others don't budge, so debates on here so often devolve into condescension and insults.
Obviously, it's a no from me. RpN is a roleplaying site, and debate as an interest (like anime, video games, or art) is secondary to the roleplaying aspect. However, unlike anime, video games or art, debate or more accurately the way we do it on this site fosters a very negative environment. A separate sub-forum would be a mess within the first forty-eight hours, if debate within it is done as it's currently done in the discussion forum. Just not worth it.

 

[SmugViking]

yeah. people suck balls lmao.

 

[TPBx]

Tbh if people wanted to discuss politics on a forum, theres a reason why sites like reddit, tumblr, and 4chan exist.