[Discussion/Announcement] NSG's "Wing" Megathreads

[Godular]

Well locking the CDT will only cause more backlash against the Mods, especially Christians that like discussing theology in the thread.

Of course we will have to wait and see what the Mods do, but it is highly unlikely it will get locked.

If it’s highly unlikely the mods will actually follow their policy then there’s a problem.

At least on this front I agree. If they wish to retain a semblance of impartiality, the religion threads would also have to be locked.

I’d say in that case, much like the wingthreads, folks could just make threads about specific topics within the overarching theme.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Well locking the CDT will only cause more backlash against the Mods, especially Christians that like discussing theology in the thread.

Of course we will have to wait and see what the Mods do, but it is highly unlikely it will get locked.

Right, which is why my real point is that LWDT shouldn't have been locked.

Locking only one of them would have caused even more outrage.
I guess collective punishment seems wrong to you, but it's politics. Sometimes you lose and it's not fair.

[Cisairse]

Right, which is why my real point is that LWDT shouldn't have been locked.

Locking only one of them would have caused even more outrage.
I guess collective punishment seems wrong to you, but it's politics. Sometimes you lose and it's not fair.

I mean, there was a shit ton of outrage anyway.

It just seems like from my point of view the LWDT was punished for something the RWDT did.

[Aeritai]

Well locking the CDT will only cause more backlash against the Mods, especially Christians that like discussing theology in the thread.

Of course we will have to wait and see what the Mods do, but it is highly unlikely it will get locked.

Right, which is why my real point is that LWDT shouldn't have been locked.

It is weird that the LWDT Thread got locked I agree with you there.

[Alcala-Cordel]

Locking only one of them would have caused even more outrage.
I guess collective punishment seems wrong to you, but it's politics. Sometimes you lose and it's not fair.

I mean, there was a shit ton of outrage anyway.

It just seems like from my point of view the LWDT was punished for something the RWDT did.

I'm sure if they didn't lock the LWDT they'd have a horde of angry right-wingers yelling at them for being biased. They should have only locked the RWDT though despite that and left the left alone

[Cisairse]

I mean, there was a shit ton of outrage anyway.

It just seems like from my point of view the LWDT was punished for something the RWDT did.

They shouldn't have locked the LWDT, but I'm sure if they didn't they'd have a horde of angry right-wingers yelling at them for being biased

I mean there was already a horde of angry RWDTers spamposting porn.

[Alcala-Cordel]

They shouldn't have locked the LWDT, but I'm sure if they didn't they'd have a horde of angry right-wingers yelling at them for being biased

I mean there was already a horde of angry RWDTers spamposting porn.

I'm not surprised, but why?

[South Odreria 2]

They shouldn't have locked the LWDT, but I'm sure if they didn't they'd have a horde of angry right-wingers yelling at them for being biased

I mean there was already a horde of angry RWDTers spamposting porn.

So you’re just gonna post false information, huh

How would you know that it was a “horde of angry RWDTers?”

[Washington Resistance Army]

Right, which is why my real point is that LWDT shouldn't have been locked.

Locking only one of them would have caused even more outrage.
I guess collective punishment seems wrong to you, but it's politics. Sometimes you lose and it's not fair.

It's not politics lol, it's running a forum.

[Cisairse]

I mean there was already a horde of angry RWDTers spamposting porn.

So you’re just gonna post false information, huh

How would you know that it was a “horse of angry RWDTers?”

I don't know it was a horde (certainly not a "horse"), for all I know it was just one person.

The posts in question did specifically mention that the pornspam was in retribution for RWDT being closed.

[Alcala-Cordel]

I mean there was already a horde of angry RWDTers spamposting porn.

So you’re just gonna post false information, huh

How would you know that it was a “horse of angry RWDTers?”

I doubt they're hiding their political motives while they do this

[Luziyca]

They shouldn't have locked the LWDT, but I'm sure if they didn't they'd have a horde of angry right-wingers yelling at them for being biased

I mean there was already a horde of angry RWDTers spamposting porn.

I'm sure it was only one or two people, but even one pornspammer is one too many.

[South Odreria 2]

I mean there was already a horde of angry RWDTers spamposting porn.

I'm sure it was only one or two people, but even one pornspammer is one too many.

You are so brave for expressing the sentiment that the porn spam was bad.

[The Archbishopric of York]

Locking only one of them would have caused even more outrage.
I guess collective punishment seems wrong to you, but it's politics. Sometimes you lose and it's not fair.

I mean, there was a shit ton of outrage anyway.

It just seems like from my point of view the LWDT was punished for something the RWDT did.

The mods have specifically stated that the behaviour of thread participants in the RWDT was not the reason that they began considering closing the "wing" threads, though it may have been the deciding factor. So they were already considering locking both threads for other reasons, if you take what has been said by moderators in this thread at face value. Besides which, in the long run a situation where a left-wing discussion thread was permitted but a right-wing discussion thread was not would obviously be untenable. It would look to any newcomer like blatant bias on the part of the mods whatever the justification given was.

[Luziyca]

I'm sure it was only one or two people, but even one pornspammer is one too many.

You are so brave for expressing the sentiment that the porn spam was bad.

Because porn spam is a great way to undermine support for having the wing megathreads open. I imagine if someone posted porn all over NS when the chill and chat threads on Forum 7 were banned back in 2011 or 2012, I would bet all my money that the mods would never have given chill and chat threads a second chance.

[USS Monitor]

I don't think trying to get the Christian Discussion Thread locked in the name of consistency is a great plan.

It doesn't have the same problems that got LWDT and RWDT locked. It does a decent job of staying on topic and following site rules, and I would argue that Christian theology is a narrower topic than "right wing" or "left wing." There isn't any common thread that ties all the right wing or left wing ideologies together the way Jesus ties all the Christian denominations together. Christians can have strong disagreements about how they interpret Jesus' message -- that's why they have a discussion instead of just being a hivemind -- but they all share a central figure that they look to for guidance. "Right wing" and "left wing" don't have that.

Posters are informed of a warning when they next log on.

Since when

That would be news to me, too.

[Cisairse]

I mean, there was a shit ton of outrage anyway.

It just seems like from my point of view the LWDT was punished for something the RWDT did.

The mods have specifically stated that the behaviour of thread participants in the RWDT was not the reason that they began considering closing the "wing" threads, though it may have been the deciding factor. So they were already considering locking both threads for other reasons, if you take what has been said by moderators in this thread at face value. Besides which, in the long run a situation where a left-wing discussion thread was permitted but a right-wing discussion thread was not would obviously be untenable. It would look to any newcomer like blatant bias on the part of the mods whatever the justification given was.

But, this is literally in the OP:

In addition, it has bred problematic cliques that have become insulated from rules enforcement due to an unfortunate combination of thread participants refusing to report (and even actively discouraging reporting of) rulebreaking conduct and thread outsiders being disinclined to dig into it to locate and report it. Moderation lacks the time and the manpower to babysit such threads personally, and thread regulars have proven repeatedly that they either can not or will not regulate themselves.

[Cisairse]

I don't think trying to get the Christian Discussion Thread locked in the name of consistency is a great plan.

It doesn't have the same problems that got LWDT and RWDT locked. It does a decent job of staying on topic and following site rules, and I would argue that Christian theology is a narrower topic than "right wing" or "left wing." There isn't any common thread that ties all the right wing or left wing ideologies together the way Jesus ties all the Christian denominations together. Christians can have strong disagreements about how they interpret Jesus' message -- that's why they have a discussion instead of just being a hivemind -- but they all share a central figure that they look to for guidance. "Right wing" and "left wing" don't have that.

But LWDT hasn't had RWDT's issues following site rules, either. And of course there's a common thread tying right/left wing ideologies together: Adherence to right/left wing values! In fact, discussing how various specific points of theory or history relate to those common values was one of the most popular topics in LWDT.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I don't think trying to get the Christian Discussion Thread locked in the name of consistency is a great plan.

It doesn't have the same problems that got LWDT and RWDT locked. It does a decent job of staying on topic and following site rules, and I would argue that Christian theology is a narrower topic than "right wing" or "left wing." There isn't any common thread that ties all the right wing or left wing ideologies together the way Jesus ties all the Christian denominations together. Christians can have strong disagreements about how they interpret Jesus' message -- that's why they have a discussion instead of just being a hivemind -- but they all share a central figure that they look to for guidance. "Right wing" and "left wing" don't have that.

Christology is a much more divided and broad topic than political wings tbh. It has a history of 2,000 years and there've been more than a couple wars of extermination over it. Likewise as Cisairse said the LWDT didn't have the exact same problems as the RWDT, but it was locked anyways. If that's the standard we're going with then yes the CDT should be locked too for matters of consistency. Failure to do so shows this move wasn't properly thought through despite it being a supposedly several months long thing.

[The Archbishopric of York]

The mods have specifically stated that the behaviour of thread participants in the RWDT was not the reason that they began considering closing the "wing" threads, though it may have been the deciding factor. So they were already considering locking both threads for other reasons, if you take what has been said by moderators in this thread at face value. Besides which, in the long run a situation where a left-wing discussion thread was permitted but a right-wing discussion thread was not would obviously be untenable. It would look to any newcomer like blatant bias on the part of the mods whatever the justification given was.

But, this is literally in the OP:

In addition, it has bred problematic cliques that have become insulated from rules enforcement due to an unfortunate combination of thread participants refusing to report (and even actively discouraging reporting of) rulebreaking conduct and thread outsiders being disinclined to dig into it to locate and report it. Moderation lacks the time and the manpower to babysit such threads personally, and thread regulars have proven repeatedly that they either can not or will not regulate themselves.

Just a quick comment on both of the above posts.

The initial catalyst for the internal moderator discussion on the two threads was neither directed at the RWDT nor at the culture of rule-breaking in the latter.

The moderator who first opened the two threads to discussion earlier this year titled his discussion 'LWDT & RWDT' - with the LWDT mentioned first - and was narrowly focused on the extent to which the two threads were increasingly devolving into chat threads. This was the sole initial focus.

It would be fair to note that the internal culture of the RWDT did subsequently become a focus of discussion, but that was only quite late in the day, and by the time that happened the majority of the moderator team was already in favour of shutting down both threads.

So to be clear:

The internal culture of the RWDT (whether we frame perceptions of the positively or negatively) may have been the final catalyst in taking action, but it was not the initial cause of the internal discussion, and the decision to lock had been taken before 'rule breaking' and 'non-reporting' had come into focus.

The LWDT was therefore not 'caught in the crossfire'.


It's the source of some regret to me that so much of the discussion in this thread has been focused on rule-breaking on the part of some RWDT participants when this isn't what initially led to the moderation team discussing the two threads and taking the decision to lock them. I can see why that's been the focus of much of the discussion, and many of our own posts and announcements have helped to build this perception. We perhaps haven't been as clear on this point as I might have hoped; but I would stress the distinction between immediate catalyst and initial cause.

Nobody should read too much into this post; that I wish we had been clearer in outlining some points is simply a matter of stress, not a disagreement in policy.

[The Reformed American Republic]

So you’re just gonna post false information, huh

How would you know that it was a “horse of angry RWDTers?”

I don't know it was a horde (certainly not a "horse"), for all I know it was just one person.

The posts in question did specifically mention that the pornspam was in retribution for RWDT being closed.

And the pornspammer has hit this site previously when other things happened. It's just an angry DOS player trying to find excuses to stir up trouble.

[Cisairse]

But, this is literally in the OP:

Just a quick comment on both of the above posts.

The initial catalyst for the internal moderator discussion on the two threads was neither directed at the RWDT nor at the culture of rule-breaking in the latter.

The moderator who first opened the two threads to discussion earlier this year titled his discussion 'LWDT & RWDT' - with the LWDT mentioned first - and was narrowly focused on the extent to which the two threads were increasingly devolving into chat threads. This was the sole initial focus.

It would be fair to note that the internal culture of the RWDT did subsequently become a focus of discussion, but that was only quite late in the day, and by the time that happened the majority of the moderator team was already in favour of shutting down both threads.

So to be clear:

The internal culture of the RWDT (whether we frame perceptions of the positively or negatively) may have been the final catalyst in taking action, but it was not the initial cause of the internal discussion, and the decision to lock had been taken before 'rule breaking' and 'non-reporting' had come into focus.

The LWDT was therefore not 'caught in the crossfire'.


It's the source of some regret to me that so much of the discussion in this thread has been focused on rule-breaking on the part of some RWDT participants when this isn't what initially led to the moderation team discussing the two threads and taking the decision to lock them. I can see why that's been the focus of much of the discussion, and many of our own posts and announcements have helped to build this perception. We perhaps haven't been as clear on this point as I might have hoped; but I would stress the distinction between immediate catalyst and initial cause.

Nobody should read too much into this post; that I wish we had been clearer in outlining some points is simply a matter of stress, not a disagreement in policy.

Ah. I missed this post. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

I still disagree with the decisions of the moderator team, and the timing is quite interesting, but, alas.

I am curious why only the wingthreads were shut down, though. It seems as if several other megathreads are firmly within the criteria listed by Reppy for being shut down.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Ah. I missed this post. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

I still disagree with the decisions of the moderator team, and the timing is quite interesting, but, alas.

I am curious why only the wingthreads were shut down, though. It seems as if several other megathreads are firmly within the criteria listed by Reppy for being shut down.

This^^^

I'm not suggesting other megathreads be shut down out of malice. I'm doing it because by everything I've seen from moderation they meet the same criteria that got the WDT's locked. If moderation wishes to be taken seriously and not appear wildly arbitrary the rulings on the WDT's should either be rescinded or a number of the other megathreads should be locked too.

[USS Monitor]

But LWDT hasn't had RWDT's issues following site rules, either.

It was still really broad. Also, as others have said, it would be untenable to allow a left-wing thread, but not a right-wing one.

And of course there's a common thread tying right/left wing ideologies together: Adherence to right/left wing values!

That's not a common thread. That's a tautology, "right wing ideologies are right wing!"

Sharing a central figure is a much more clearly-defined connection.

I don't think trying to get the Christian Discussion Thread locked in the name of consistency is a great plan.

It doesn't have the same problems that got LWDT and RWDT locked. It does a decent job of staying on topic and following site rules, and I would argue that Christian theology is a narrower topic than "right wing" or "left wing." There isn't any common thread that ties all the right wing or left wing ideologies together the way Jesus ties all the Christian denominations together. Christians can have strong disagreements about how they interpret Jesus' message -- that's why they have a discussion instead of just being a hivemind -- but they all share a central figure that they look to for guidance. "Right wing" and "left wing" don't have that.

Christology is a much more divided and broad topic than political wings tbh. It has a history of 2,000 years and there've been more than a couple wars of extermination over it. Likewise as Cisairse said the LWDT didn't have the exact same problems as the RWDT, but it was locked anyways. If that's the standard we're going with then yes the CDT should be locked too for matters of consistency. Failure to do so shows this move wasn't properly thought through despite it being a supposedly several months long thing.

If you're against the locks, why are you trying to get more threads locked? It's counterproductive.

You're more likely to get additional threads locked than to get them to rescind the ruling on LWDT/RWDT.

[Cisairse]

And of course there's a common thread tying right/left wing ideologies together: Adherence to right/left wing values!

That's not a common thread. That's a tautology, "right wing ideologies are right wing!"

"Christians follow Christ!"

See the resemblance?

Sharing a central figure is a much more clearly-defined connection.

I don't see why adherence to right-wing values is not a "central figure" for right-wing politics. These are terms with discrete meanings, after all.