viewtopic.php?f=24&t=2004975
retrieving GONYK's message from last thread.
GONYK wrote:This thread is getting one more chance. For your convenience, I will post Cap's announcement about what the rules of engagement are in this threadCapn'O wrote:Sports and culture/politics frequently intersect. Over the past few months the intersection has become even more prominent with the very balance of the game becoming affected by current events. We lost the last quarter of our Knicks season to the pandemic and more recently the players chose to strike due to racial justice concerns.
Political/cultural threads offer the board an opportunity to connect beyond the game and we encourage our users to participate and engage beyond the game. That said, managing OT politics threads has been a constant challenge for the mod team as these threads are most likely to turn into personal squabbles with multiple TOS violations. Recently, the mod team has gained feedback from numerous posters that the hostile environment in these threads has been a turnoff not only from the threads but from the board itself.
This announcement serves to inform users that the mod team intends to be more hands on in these threads in coming months. We plan on using temp bans and thread halts with more frequency if and when these threads derail too far from their original intent or become a hotbed for personal insults and baiting. Flame wars that turn into personal bickering between two or three posters neither help progress a conversation on an issue nor are enjoyable or interesting to read. The mod team generally aims to avoid losing regular posters over political threads as much as we can.
We will also be managing the overall number of political threads on the board. At the end of the day, this is a Knicks board and the site does have a current events board located here:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewforum.php?f=69
Perhaps most important of all, we remind posters that when you see content that you disagree with to respond by addressing the post content and not the poster. Here’s an example:
Not ok – attacks the poster
“You are a Russian mail order bride”
Ok – attacks the post
“Your post shows the hallmarks of the worldview of a Russian mail order bride. I hereby cite the following official stances from the ‘National Association of Russian Mail Order Brides’ as evidence…”
Aside from whether calling people names is nice or not, the first example provokes an inherently personal response. The poster has to defend not only the idea presented but their very character. Character is above your pay grade and above the pay grade of the mods. The second keeps the conversation focused on the content and sources.
Likewise, posts that generalize character for entire groups of people are similarly inflammatory and generate personal responses. We have posters from all over the world of many nationalities, races, religions, identities and so forth on this forum. We have cops and frequent protesters here as people who have close connections to many groups. Remember, the person opposite you or somewhere in the middle is the person that you have to convince.
When infractions come up
Report and the mod team will make a call. But note a few things:
- We aren’t going to be enforcing every little name that comes up in these threads. More egregious acts and repeated acts are what we’ll be looking for. Just because somebody says something a little rude doesn't mean it needs to be... really even acknowledged...
- We look at context. If we see a report and see that the person reporting is responding in kind then both parties are at risk.
- We may just choose to halt or close threads that have turned into abject flame wars.
With that said, enjoy the rest of your weekend and these discussions and may the Knicks grab the Steph Curry of this years draft!
Stick to this, and we should be fine.
If you feel that someone is trolling or in this thread in bad faith report rather than reply.
Let's have a good discussion about important issues.
