But,

Idk what you mean by "that that wasn't really the question in the first place". Was the poll rephrased or something before I voted? Maybe I missed something, if so ignore my example.

Sure we can, and then we can make a poll to try and change it.

I wasn't going to reply to this thread, and I'm not sure if you'd want my opinion on things around here, but here it is anyway, and I mean no offense whatsoever:

I've only observed a few instances of people demanding change to the way things are run here, and for the most part the changes are brought up from someone who's presence here is a bit more stoic, which is uncommon for the majority of the other members, which are a bit more laid back. This, to me, seems like a control issue. Someone that won't allow a bit of youthful playfulness into a discussion, or needs their thoughts and opinions on what they believe to be taken very seriously by a group of strangers just seems a bit off. Sure, there are times when things get sketchy here, and there will always be trolls, and sometimes people feel the need for posting only one word, or a small phrase, and if you ask me, it's been handled with as much tact and grace as one could possibly expect from the few who are in the position to deal with it. I really only see this poll as an attempt at controlling something which is by nature, a chaotic entity, and is already being handled as such in a manner that not only nurtures fun and friendly discussion, but also addresses the intellectual side of things as well.

That's all I've got.

^ Yes, that 20-10 was a clear vote rejecting tore's infraction package. I don't think anyone is trying to overturn that; this poll is about various other issues too.
Anyway, I like you way too much to push the point, Roxy; I don't want to argue with someone who calls me "love." :laughing: :love:

In the long conversation about this topic in Tore's original thread, he kept framing the issue the loaded way it's framed in the part you quoted. But that's not an accurate description of the two sides. The question is really "should context be taken into account when enforcing the rules or not?" Making it about long term members receiving special treatment is a red herring that distracts for the real issue.

Pretty much this. Tore has complained that the chaotic nature of the board has attracted those who thrive in such an environment, and repelled those who don't, but he frames it in such a way that he takes it for granted that an atmosphere run by "noisy kids" is by nature inferior to a more serious one.

Of course a certain atmosphere attracts some and repels others, but treating the current vibe as if its something that's "gone wrong" as opposed to just an environment that you happen to dislike is to treat a subjective issue as if it's objective.

My biggest complaint that pushes me to Tore's side is that serious discussion gets derailed too often by drama/"having fun". There is a time and a place for both, and I think bolstering and setting up some new forum standards will help alleviate that.

Such as when? Musical discussion tends to remain on topic. Current Events-type discussion sometimes go off on tangents, but that's usually after they've run their course to an extent.

The fact that YorkeDaddy had to put a disclaimer warning people they will be reported for going off topic in the thread he made "Competitive League of Legends" speaks clearly to the point I was making. I don't really feel like digging through old topics to give you multiple examples of threads being derailed in the name of fun or emotions->name calling instead of debate/discussion.

Well I was just asking for general examples, like political discussions. And I see a video game discussion as just naturally lending itself to derailments about other video games. Even with stricter rules on that kind of thing (and since it's in a Lounge subforum, I imagine it would fall under the "Safe Zone" caregory).

Basically, for that kind of thing, I just think thread creators and contributors should be more proactive with requesting that derails get moved to new threads if the discussion merits it, or preexisting ones dedicated to general discussions of that specific one.

Otherwise you can just say something like, "Hey, guys, can we get back on topic?" I don't imagine anybody around here is a big enough dick to just tell the person to **** off.

I don't think stricter modding on that front is necessary, as greater non-mod member oversight would solve the problem, and I don't think that's something to ask that would be unrealistic, as it wouldn't mean members policing themselves, but rather other members just being more proactive with maintaining the integrity of threads they're already invested in.

Edit: As to drama, I would tentatively agree that mods step in more actively when it comes to derailing, but unless people get used to reporting posts (which I don't see happening, as it's just not something that I think occurs to most members) then I don't think a rule change would really help, since they can only intervene when they know about it.

I'm not sure if this has been stated already, but I'd like to highlight the importance of reporting posts you find offensive. I think I can speak for the whole mod team by saying we don't read every single post or conversation that goes on.