Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: What constitiutes a political discussion?
  • Subject: What constitiutes a political discussion?
Subject: What constitiutes a political discussion?

Hi I'm RT and I like to argue!


Posted by: prometheus25

Posted by: SonicJohn
Hey, DeeJ? I'm all for sarcastic point-across-getting remarks and quips on this site, but can you please not joke about self-harm?

I expect that from stress-filled adolescants in the Flood. Not from the Assistant to the Community Manager at Bungie.
*rolls eyes*

Or we could just all be adults and realize it was clearly in jest?

And if we don't, I'm going to poke myself repeatedly with a mechanical pencil.


Posted by: RigZ Boi
To be honest, I think the mods don't do a great job with political threads. I've seen plenty of hot-topics on The Flood discussing subjects which are undoubtedly related to politics go on without being locked.

They can't be everywhere at once . . .

[Edited on 12.19.2012 11:52 AM PST]

  • 12.19.2012 11:49 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

ODST Expeditionary Force I The WorkPLace I Mythics
Technically Mythic
Posted by: Cobravert
I just saw a green monkey nut shot a small tan lizard(?) in a gunny sack.


Posted by: RighteousTyrant

Posted by: prometheus25

Posted by: SonicJohn
Hey, DeeJ? I'm all for sarcastic point-across-getting remarks and quips on this site, but can you please not joke about self-harm?

I expect that from stress-filled adolescants in the Flood. Not from the Assistant to the Community Manager at Bungie.
*rolls eyes*

Or we could just all be adults and realize it was clearly in jest?

And if we don't, I'm going to poke myself repeatedly with a mechanical pencil.


Posted by: RigZ Boi
To be honest, I think the mods don't do a great job with political threads. I've seen plenty of hot-topics on The Flood discussing subjects which are undoubtedly related to politics go on without being locked.

They can't be everywhere at once . . .


Hey, self-harm from mechanical pencil pokes is srs bsnss. Don't joke.

  • 12.19.2012 11:53 AM PDT
  • gamertag: Anroll
  • user homepage:

I'm grey.... da boo de da boo dae

If I wanted to read comments from people telling each other that they are wrong or stupid, I would visit the website of a cable news network. or youtube

  • 12.19.2012 12:50 PM PDT

I will gladly concede that my self-harm reference was in poor taste. That said, chew on this: If you found that upsetting, how then would you respond to an open door policy on political vitriol on Bungie.net?

  • 12.19.2012 1:08 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: DeeJ
I will gladly concede that my self-harm reference was in poor taste. That said, chew on this: If you found that upsetting, how then would you respond to an open door policy on political vitriol on Bungie.net?
Self harm and politics are in two totally different boats as far as people's sensitivity goes, IMO.

People who self-harm have issues with depression an obviously the process of self-harm is traumatic for anyone who goes through it. Politics only get people mad if they let it get them mad. Vitriol is only effective if people react to it.

  • 12.19.2012 1:10 PM PDT

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Vitriol is only effective if people react to it.

It seems as if you're helping me make my point.

  • 12.19.2012 1:19 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: DeeJ
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Vitriol is only effective if people react to it.

It seems as if you're helping me make my point.
And yet that isn't to say that people will always react. If I had said "vitriol is always 100% consistently effective" I feel like that would've helped your point even more. And saying vitriol is never effective is just ignorant.

Main point: vitriol is only effective when it's reacted to emotionally and, to be honest, in the vast majority of political debates I've seen survive for a few hours on The Flood, there's 2 or 3 people actually taking everything personally, using gross amounts of ad hominem, stating opinions as facts, etc. while everyone else is disagreeing, but doing so in a civilized (well, civilized by The Flood and BNet's standards) debate on the subject at hand.

  • 12.19.2012 1:24 PM PDT

XBL GT: xxMayDay31xx
PSN ID: xxMayDay31xx
32/M/Alabama
That's right. I just dropped some AOL IM protocol.


Posted by: DeeJ
I will gladly concede that my self-harm reference was in poor taste. That said, chew on this: If you found that upsetting, how then would you respond to an open door policy on political vitriol on Bungie.net?


I think "play nice" is enough of a rule to enforce. Flaming should be punished, not the topic.

Honestly, is the Flood really any better with all these "So I like this girl..." and "Halo 4 sucks" threads that run non-stop all day.

Personally I'd like to see the conversation get more adult. Yeah I know this is coming from the "blind people and toilet paper" topic creator.
But IF, and it may be a big IF, we can be civil about politics, is like to see it be an option.

  • 12.19.2012 1:30 PM PDT

@trueunderdog

Chapter

Narwhallace Smithington: Gone, but not forgotten. Never approve of anything lil guy. <3
Furious George: The new -blam!-

Double-Z, your opinion of The Flood isn't really high; would it be fair to say that "civilized by The Flood and BNet's standards" isn't very civilized at all...in your opinion?

Please be honest and consistent with your attitude towards the off-topic board.

Mayday, I'd like to see the day when people can be civilized on this subject and enjoy the boards to their fullest potential but as it stands right now, I don't see that happening. That the early pages of this thread (which isn't even about politics specifically, rather, what constitutes political discussion) had people calling each other names, it doesn't leave me with much faith.

[Edited on 12.19.2012 1:37 PM PST]

  • 12.19.2012 1:32 PM PDT

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
...in the vast majority of political debates I've seen survive for a few hours on The Flood, there's 2 or 3 people actually taking everything personally, using gross amounts of ad hominem, stating opinions as facts, etc. while everyone else is disagreeing, but doing so in a civilized (well, civilized by The Flood and BNet's standards) debate on the subject at hand.

I appreciate your perspective, Z. I'm listening. It's unfortunate that the extremely vocal minority ruin what could be a completely civil conversation for the rest of us.

  • 12.19.2012 1:32 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Member

Don't judge a book by its cover, unless it has bacon on the cover, then it is a good book.

-Me


Posted by: DeeJ
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
...in the vast majority of political debates I've seen survive for a few hours on The Flood, there's 2 or 3 people actually taking everything personally, using gross amounts of ad hominem, stating opinions as facts, etc. while everyone else is disagreeing, but doing so in a civilized (well, civilized by The Flood and BNet's standards) debate on the subject at hand.

I appreciate your perspective, Z. I'm listening. It's unfortunate that the extremely vocal minority ruin what could be a completely civil conversation for the rest of us.


The Flood is my main home and let me tell you, all it takes is one troll and the whole thread goes up in flames. The Flood has enough problems, the last thing we need to do is allow those kind of topics

  • 12.19.2012 1:43 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: True Underdog
Double-Z, your opinion of The Flood isn't really high; would it be fair to say that "civilized by The Flood and BNet's standards" isn't very civilized at all...in your opinion?

Please be honest and consistent with your attitude towards the off-topic board.

Mayday, I'd like to see the day when people can be civilized on this subject and enjoy the boards to their fullest potential but as it stands right now, I don't see that happening. That the early pages of this thread (which isn't even about politics specifically, rather, what constitutes political discussion) had people calling each other names, it doesn't leave me with much faith.
I post in The Flood on a regular basis now and my opinion of it has drastically changed but that doesn't change the fact that, in my opinion, some of the louder voices on The Flood can be the most antagonistic, immature, and obnoxious. Say there's a room full of fifty people all discussing, oh, I don't know.... favorite colors. S'pose forty-five of those people are all pleasantly discussing their favorite colors, why they like them, and why they dislike other colors. Also s'pose there's 5 people in the middle of the room vehemently arguing about their favorite colors, calling all the other colors and their appreciators vulgar names, and doing all this at a volume far from what one might consider "inside voices". To a casual passerby of this Color Convention, they're not going to notice the two polite gentlemen in the corner politely discussing the contrasts of magenta and turquoise, they're going to notice and remember the five hoodlums calling each others mothers the most vile names imaginable because someone dared to say that blue was superior to yellow.

That's kind of how I see The Flood. The majority of them are fine and dandy BNetters who I enjoy debating or discussing things with. But that 10% of misbehavers can easily ruin that image for the cool, calm, and collected majority. Hence I chose to reference that 10% because those are the ones that would, most likely, ruin the chances of an open-door policy to political discussion and be the ones throwing about the vitriol.

  • 12.19.2012 1:53 PM PDT

Per Audacia Ad Astra

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
That's kind of how I see The Flood.
I've noticed that if I actually go through a topic page-by-page instead of skipping to the end, there are legitimate posts that have been somewhat shrouded by the inappropriate stampede.

  • 12.19.2012 1:58 PM PDT

Take a step back with me and enjoy a taste of the bittersweet that is our current generation.

I enjoy Battlefield and Call of Duty, and Gears of War.

20 years old, manager of my family's business, aspiring officer of the law.

I love anything political.

I understand this for the below.Posted by: DeeJ
I appreciate your perspective, Z. I'm listening. It's unfortunate that the extremely vocal minority ruin what could be a completely civil conversation for the rest of us.

I'd like to comment on this.

Among various private groups I've had a plethora of political discussion which, due to the nature of the demographics, amount to me and a select few arguing with most everybody else. The discussion starts, almost exclusively, civil. Eventually, and with fail, somebody who I'd otherwise consider a level-headed fellow intellectual enters the argument with little more substance than an insult laying the bait on the floor. It's the same thing here (although from the 2 pages I've seen in the gun control thread things were pretty calm). Frustration also sets in when you have mis-communications because we are using text and not having a physical discussion, which leads to much of the same.

[Edited on 12.19.2012 2:24 PM PST]

  • 12.19.2012 2:22 PM PDT

The Forerunner, the Great Journey, and Heaven Theory

[Announcement Trailer] Halo: Forerunner

Posted by: Agustus
I lol'd at the absurd miscommunication that occurs whenever dibbs post something. Perhaps his brain is so highly evolved that he can no longer clearly communicate with lesser life forms, even among his own species.

Posted by: DeeJ
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
...in the vast majority of political debates I've seen survive for a few hours on The Flood, there's 2 or 3 people actually taking everything personally, using gross amounts of ad hominem, stating opinions as facts, etc. while everyone else is disagreeing, but doing so in a civilized (well, civilized by The Flood and BNet's standards) debate on the subject at hand.

I appreciate your perspective, Z. I'm listening. It's unfortunate that the extremely vocal minority ruin what could be a completely civil conversation for the rest of us.
Again, further clarification as to why the rule was implemented (as opposed to it's our website we do what we want) would work wonders. There's obviously a reason behind implementing the rule and from this post it seems that it's because a vocal minority ruin the discussion. Why, then, are the discussions prohibited when you could just as easily let them run their course while removing those who cannot play (or discuss) nicely?

  • 12.19.2012 2:40 PM PDT

It only takes one bad apple to spoil the tree. However, I have to say that your post isn't 100% percent true even though I agree with that 10%, but some of the thread subjects are just too volatile. I distinctly remember there being a thread on a political subject a while back. Recon was more then willing to take a wait and see approach with it, but he ended up having to lock it in the second it reached page two.

This "Open Door" policy would only work if everyone, and I mean 100% of the potential posters can behave themselves and not post one word of Fecal Matter Flinging Insults. I just don't see that happening any time soon.

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
That's kind of how I see The Flood. The majority of them are fine and dandy BNetters who I enjoy debating or discussing things with. But that 10% of misbehavers can easily ruin that image for the cool, calm, and collected majority. Hence I chose to reference that 10% because those are the ones that would, most likely, ruin the chances of an open-door policy to political discussion and be the ones throwing about the vitriol.

  • 12.19.2012 2:46 PM PDT

"I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle- victorious"


Posted by: Gaara444
It only takes one bad apple to spoil the tree. However, I have to say that your post isn't 100% percent true even though I agree with that 10%, but some of the thread subjects are just too volatile. I distinctly remember there being a thread on a political subject a while back. Recon was more then willing to take a wait and see approach with it, but he ended up having to lock it in the second it reached page two.

This "Open Door" policy would only work if everyone, and I mean 100% of the potential posters can behave themselves and not post one word of Fecal Matter Flinging Insults. I just don't see that happening any time soon.

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
That's kind of how I see The Flood. The majority of them are fine and dandy BNetters who I enjoy debating or discussing things with. But that 10% of misbehavers can easily ruin that image for the cool, calm, and collected majority. Hence I chose to reference that 10% because those are the ones that would, most likely, ruin the chances of an open-door policy to political discussion and be the ones throwing about the vitriol.


I agree with Garaa444. If we opened the floodgates, everyone would have to co-operate to keep the thread civilised and humane. But I do see some problems with policy.

  • 12.19.2012 2:54 PM PDT

XBL GT: xxMayDay31xx
PSN ID: xxMayDay31xx
32/M/Alabama
That's right. I just dropped some AOL IM protocol.

But people are already required to be respectful to one another.
You ban enough jerks for being a jerk, you can have any topic you want, and stay civil.

We've gotten used to being respectful in all these goofy topics that fill the Flood already.

Political respect, I believe, can be learned.

[Edited on 12.19.2012 3:08 PM PST]

  • 12.19.2012 3:07 PM PDT

Key

@Gaara & M4L1K

That's the thing though. In reality, 90% of the discussion is absolutely fine, but that 10% creates the perception that "these people can't handle this discussion because all they do is -blam!- and moan and fight with each other". It's a fabricated, altered view of what 90% of that discussion actually is. It doesn't mean we can't handle it, it means 10% of us can't handle it and they're the ones who constantly participate in it. Maybe people who get too heated in a Politics/Religion-only forum could get banned specifically from that forum for a certain amount of time (if their offense is not too egregious).

That way they can continue to use BNet and, if they don't act out on other parts of the site, politics and religion are clearly their catalyst that pushes them over the edge into inappropriateness and they'll probably get consistently banned from that forum, while they function (fairly) normally on The Flood, The Community, etc.

Just a thought. It's probably bad. Most of mine are.

[Edited on 12.19.2012 3:14 PM PST]

  • 12.19.2012 3:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

GrownPrism is NOT my gt. Happened when signing into my xbox live account. My real gt is here:

http://www.bungie.net/Stats/Reach/Default.aspx?player=SYNTHES lS&sg=0

The only problem I have with political discussions is the frequent blind hate of another members political party. When they stay civilized they can be interesting, but like someone already said, nobody is going to change their opinion.

  • 12.19.2012 3:23 PM PDT

The idea is good, but certain Political subjects should still stay out of it. Some can be good with certain levels of moderation (The Fiscal Cliff). Others however, will always be too volatile to discuss (Same-Sex Marriage).

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55

[Edited on 12.19.2012 3:34 PM PST]

  • 12.19.2012 3:34 PM PDT

Key

I'm still fuzzy as to why same-sex marriage threads not about laws thereof are locked, to be honest.
Posted by: Gaara444
The idea is good, but certain Political subjects should still stay out of it. Some can be good with certain levels of moderation (The Fiscal Cliff). Others however, will always be too volatile to discuss (Same-Sex Marriage).

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55

  • 12.19.2012 3:35 PM PDT

XBL GT: xxMayDay31xx
PSN ID: xxMayDay31xx
32/M/Alabama
That's right. I just dropped some AOL IM protocol.


Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
I'm still fuzzy as to why same-sex marriage threads not about laws thereof are locked, to be honest.
Posted by: Gaara444
The idea is good, but certain Political subjects should still stay out of it. Some can be good with certain levels of moderation (The Fiscal Cliff). Others however, will always be too volatile to discuss (Same-Sex Marriage).

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55



Because its mostly based on religious belief, more so than political.

  • 12.19.2012 4:20 PM PDT

Hi I'm RT and I like to argue!

Posted by: xxMayDay31xx
Political respect, I believe, can be learned.
Of course it can.

B.net's problem is that it has a steady influx of users of an age where they generally haven't learned how to discuss politics respectfully in real life, face-to-face conversations, much less on the Internet. So that learning process, for the site as a whole, literally never ends. None of us came to B.net because we want to be teachers of politics or cordial debate.

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
I'm still fuzzy as to why same-sex marriage threads not about laws thereof are locked, to be honest.
If the Flood can't be trusted with mere politics, how on earth do you expect them to maturely and cordially discuss homo-blam!-ity?

  • 12.19.2012 4:25 PM PDT

Both sides have a habit of quietly insulting each other modestly in their posts.

"If you don't agree you're stupid."
"Only the people who share my opinion are right."

They can't say Yes or No without insulting the other side. regardless of what is Right or Wrong.

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
I'm still fuzzy as to why same-sex marriage threads not about laws thereof are locked, to be honest.


[Edited on 12.19.2012 5:01 PM PST]

  • 12.19.2012 5:01 PM PDT