I agree - and raised this issue in the mod forum. Recently there has been an uptick in people poking their forum enemies, presumably to start a fight (and maybe trying to get the other person moderated). Often the poker is doing it in a way that isn’t bad enough to get moderated, but is doing consistent poking, which at some point is likely to generate the desired response.
My view is that it’s unfair to only moderate the person who responds (even if there response is the only one that clearly crosses the line), and that perhaps we should be more pro-active in stopping stuff before it gets out of hand - in particular when it’s two people that have a history.
I’m not going to call out names here, as I’m pretty sure everyone who is engaged in this behavior knows exactly what they are doing.
Arguments happen. They get prolonged when both sides insist on getting the last word in. Punish the people who can’t self-throttle and end up in a back and forth where they repeat the same point without adding any new info. Give combatants a warning that they have to let one or more people post something substantive before they can reply to each other.
I have no objections to heated substantive arguments - but people are poking their enemies in random threads about random old stuff completed unrelated to the current topic.
Some of the arguments that lead to bans seen to be from people who ignore the software’s warning about responding too often to another poster. Maybe mods should give less leeway to posters who have clearly ignored that caution.
I know that no one is going to believe this but I honestly thought commonWealth was the other poster Tilted silenced which is why I cross posted Tilted’s be nice warning to the Poker News and Live Streams thread.
Are we actually crimping down on two regular posters discussing a war that is literally live right now that is destroying civilizations and possibly lead to ww3 and the butthurt that’s too much to ignore is much smart and brainiac?
I’d prefer to slow down the process of UP ending up being a total of 10 posters arguing about moderation.
I’m not really blaming you but I found bbb7 and micro’s posting amongst others very informative in here. I’ve seen threads start off with good content only to get completely broken over bullshit whining over silly verbatim. You’re never going to eliminate that hostility completely unless you shrink this place down to the tiniest of flakes who end not knowing shit about anything other than what bothers them. I’d prefer that UP allows what’s left for discussion on this topic if that has to include a few mean words like smart and brainiac.
I was referring to jmann posting “Excellent point, much smart.” and then Max replying “Braniac.” Those two have a history and I was hoping they would stop before things went off the rails. If they want to keep discussion something substantive that’s fine, but I was just asking them to do so without personal attacks - I don’t think that’s stifling discussion.
I was taking no issues with bbb7 and micro’s posts.
This has already happened no? Years and years of fighting over moderation, with the result being active membership dwindling from 150 ----> 25, all in an effort to appease like 3 posters who are terrified of the scroll button.
As I mentioned in the Emoji thread, I can’t use a keyboard or mouse these days due to tendonitis, so the thought of using a scroll wheel or button does indeed terrify me
