Quote:
Originally Posted by tore
Janszoon actually answered this question in the poll thread. As he wrote, the reason is simply that if the poll was anonymous, you could rig it with sock puppets. For example I or you could make fake accounts for the purposes of upping either the Yes or the No vote. |
Yes I saw that in the poll thread. It actually makes sense that way, so I will withdraw my question.
Quote:
If the point of a thread is that it has no topic and anything can be discussed in it, then I guess posts in that thread can't be off-topic.
|
That just avoids my point. I'm saying that just because a thread is labelled, let's say, "John Zorn is great", does not mean someone at some point might start talking about, say, Merzbow, and then someone else might reference my dislike of him, leading to a discussion about what a girl I am, and then from that someone might say they wondered why people have a problem with sexuality identification, till someone says "let's get back to Zorn", and we do. What then is lost through that tangential conversation? Assuming nobody insults anyone or does anything to hurt another member, all you've had is a digression from the thread, and eventually going back to it. But you would infract everyone who brought it off-topic? That could be everyone talking in it, and so what's left of the thread but tumbleweed? Even if it's not everyone, you're going to lose a lot of people from what was a lively (if somewhat seemingly directionless) conversation. So how is that good? Keeping the thread on topic at all costs is the most important thing? But it isn't, not always. People like to digress, and rigidity is seldom welcome.
Quote:
|
Having threads with loosely defined topics in the lounge is a great way to create threads where one could have more relaxed discussions.
|
So that means the Lounge is the only place we're allowed have fun? We have to be serious in every other thread outside of that? Oh wait: I asked that before, but you have yet to confirm this.
Quote:
Of course. Were I a mod under the suggested policy, I'd infract myself if I thought I deserved it. Or I would hope that Jans or another mod would.
|
Yeah, sorta proves my point. Why should Jansz get infracted when it's obvious he does this sort of thing all the time and is not a spammer nor trying to derail any discussion? Are his years here and all his many many contributions to be wiped out by one smiley?
Quote:
|
Who watches the watchmen? The watchmen, of course.
|
Sometimes the watchmen are not needed. NSA anyone?
Quote:
I do police myself. I just do it according to my own internal morals / code of conduct rather than outside pressures. For example, I generally try to follow the rules because I think the forums would be a better place if everyone did, not because I worry about the consequences if I don't.
|
That's just great, but I don't want you policing me. As I've pointed out, people (mature people) here know when enough is enough and are adult enough to call a halt to whatever shenanigans they have been carrying on. They don't need a point system to tell them to stop.
The only example in recent times I can think of was when Grtwhtgvity was asked to stop insulting people, did not, and was banned for a week. Instant justice, within the current system. Worked fine. How is that not enough?