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

[WayNeacTia]

Just to add to this, it'd also be good if to DEAT a nation it required two Mods to do it, rather like two operators both needing to turn separate keys to fire a weapon.

And long-term forumbans.

What exactly would that achieve? Both can be overturned fairly quickly if there was a mistake.

[Washington Resistance Army]

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

Trying to get the mods to enforce their standards uniformly is counterproductive? At the bare minimum it should be what we expect from site staff.

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

If that's the standards the team wants then that is absolutely what should happen. Only locking the WDT's and none of the other megathreads will only add further fuel to the belief that, yes, moderation is arbitrary and not at all consistent.

[Cisairse]

Ftr I'm not just talking about CDT.

Take, for example, the libertarian discussion thread. This is a thread dedicated to half the political compass, just like RWDT and LWDT were. But it is not locked.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Ftr I'm not just talking about CDT.

Take, for example, the libertarian discussion thread. This is a thread dedicated to half the political compass, just like RWDT and LWDT were. But it is not locked.

The Libertarian Discussion Thread is arguably a worse offender than LWDT or RWDT because both left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism exist. Not only is it dedicated to the bottom half of the political compass, but it covers both sides too.

[USS Monitor]

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

"Christians follow Christ!"

See the resemblance?

I see you playing stupid word games. Christ is a specific person. "Right wing" is a vaguely defined term.

The similarity of the words "Christ" and "Christian" does not mean that they are exactly the same thing. One is a person and the other is a religion.

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.

"Right wing values" is not a person, and the definition of it can be very fuzzy.

If you started something like a Maoist thread, where you discussed the legacy of one influential political figure, I would expect that to pass muster.

[USS Monitor]

Ftr I'm not just talking about CDT.

Take, for example, the libertarian discussion thread. This is a thread dedicated to half the political compass, just like RWDT and LWDT were. But it is not locked.

The Libertarian Discussion Thread is arguably a worse offender than LWDT or RWDT because both left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism exist. Not only is it dedicated to the bottom half of the political compass, but it covers both sides too.

That makes more sense to me than the argument for locking CDT.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

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.

You seem to value consistency very highly, if it's more important to you than whether current megathreads get locked or not.

It's hard to escape the idea that you are motivated by malice after all. When you're urging mods to do something you know will be highly unpopular and only add to the unrest ... seeing the likely consequences, it isn't just about consistency for you is it?

[Washington Resistance Army]

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.

You seem to value consistency very highly, if it's more important to you than whether current megathreads get locked or not.

It's hard to escape the idea that you are motivated by malice after all. When you're urging mods to do something you know will be highly unpopular and only add to the unrest ... seeing the likely consequences, it isn't just about consistency for you is it?

No, it is. As I've stated prior I'm a mod elsewhere and consistency and maintaining a good image of impartiality are about the most important parts of being a moderator in my eyes.

[Mostrov]

I really concur that many of the other megathreads should be shut down.

The Feminist for certain should go.
The Christian discussion thread is ruled by cliques, and is not Christian as it is Catholic.
Abortion and Gun Control would also fall on this side of discretion.

Megathreads were created for them to be easier to moderate than a scattering of threads. Is this a move away from megathreads as a concept?

---

I think there needs to be a clarification of rules regarding the following terms: trolling, flaming and flamebaiting. As it stands they are far to arbitarily enforced and too much is left to the discretion of moderation. Furthermore, the rules lawyering and bad-faith acting by certain posters is obviously in defiance of the spirit of moderation but is given a legitimization. If people were to name the most toxic players in general, I am confident there would be wide consensus. Of course I understand that what I think should happen with regards to the rules is unlikely to really be feasible given it would encounter more rules lawyering and so on.

If there is a single suggestion I could have done, it would be an introduction of bad-faith posting in general. Not a warning for a single post that riles people up or is snarky; but a long-term pattern of behaviour, with the onus on the reporter to demonstrate it.

[The New California Republic]

Just bringing up this post again since the subject has been brought up several times in the last few pages:

So by this logic, is Christian Discussion going to be locked? "Christian" is a very broad term, it can cover anything from the Roman Catholic Church, to the bajillion different types of protestantism, to Mormonism and Calvinism.

It could be argued that it too fails the standard that the Mods have set:

What qualifies for a megathread?

• A topic which has at its focus a specific, singular subject, such as a current news event (IE: election thread, anti-police protests), a frequent recurring debate (IE: abortion, gun control), or a political figure (IE: the US president.)
• Discussion on that specific, singular subject as the thread's primary focus, not simple socializing motivated by underlying interest in the subject. Conversational drift is okay, but it must remain on that specific, singular primary focus.

It is neither a current news event, nor is it a frequent recurring debate, and nor is it a political figure.

And you are right, how generic is too generic in order to fail the above metric? Christianity, it can be argued, is about as broad as "Left Wing".

[Esternial]

Again, as I stated before, you can make a thread and suggest enhancements to the OSRS if you find some parts too vague. If you argue your case well, changes can be made.

I have done so myself in the past.

You'll notice I was agreeing with you(that people are more interested in complaining about vague generalities than making suggestions), and posted a handful of suggestions a couple of pages back(on top of a much larger number of suggestions by a different poster).

I wasn't addressing you specifically, sorry if I came across like that, but in general I fear any helpful suggestions are more likely to sink away in this particular thread due to aforementioned complaining going on.

[Ghost in the Shell]

unfortunate. my legacy is over </3
Though I'm surprised this didn't happen sooner. Myself and others have caused significant problems for the moderation team and the RWDT community was continuously walking on thin ice. Shame but it is what it is. 21 threads is an incredible run for the rwdt. If anyone has the discord link if it's still up, please tg me!

[Joohan]

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.

We're trying to demonstrate that if the mods wanted to be consisted with their ruling in the matter of megathreads, then they would have to get rid of a lot of other fun and beloved Megathreads.

Nobody actually wants that. This ruling does not and will not improve the overall experience of NS, and if recent events have proven anything, have made it an objectively more toxic place. People from all across the spectrum coming together to express a mutual feeling that the mod's don't actually care and aren't inclusive with the userbase, trolls riding waves of discontentment to spam porn and other bait, long running nations straight up leaving NS in protest.

This whole decision feels like bad faith moderation, and we're trying to tell you that.

[Agarntrop]

If we have to apply this unneccesary standard universally half the threads on NSG will end up being locked.

Again, by shutting RWDT and LWDT on these dubious grounds we have opened Pandora's box when it comes to enforcing the new standards laid out by Reppy.

[Valrifell]

If we have to apply this unneccesary standard universally half the threads on NSG will end up being locked.

Again, by shutting RWDT and LWDT on these dubious grounds we have opened Pandora's box when it comes to enforcing the new standards laid out by Reppy.

We'd have to lock two, maybe three, megathreads.

There's more to NSG than megathreads.

[Agarntrop]

If we have to apply this unneccesary standard universally half the threads on NSG will end up being locked.

Again, by shutting RWDT and LWDT on these dubious grounds we have opened Pandora's box when it comes to enforcing the new standards laid out by Reppy.

We'd have to lock two, maybe three, megathreads.

There's more to NSG than megathreads.

They take up an enormous amount of activity and there's no good reason to remove them, same with LWDT and RWDT.

I think the mods have a different motive regarding RWDT tbh and just decided to shut LWDT too to look unbiased.

[La Xinga]

Snip

Just to add to this, it'd also be good if to DEAT a nation it required two Mods to do it, rather like two operators both needing to turn separate keys to fire a weapon.

Wouldn't it be harder? Maybe 2 mods for a DOS nation.

[Katganistan]

I suppose it might well seem that way to some incorrect folks.

Folks like Reploid Productions?

Moderation lacks the time and the manpower to babysit such threads personally

I think you vastly overestimate the importance of those two threads if you expect ten percent of the moderation team to be sitting on them to watch 20 or so posters -- a fraction of the people who actually are using the site -- 24/7.

Of course, there would then by accusations of moderation unfairly targetting those threads, looking for reasons to warn/ban/delete posters because bias.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Folks like Reploid Productions?

I think you vastly overestimate the importance of those two threads if you expect ten percent of the moderation team to be sitting on them to watch 20 or so posters -- a fraction of the people who actually are using the site -- 24/7.

Of course, there would then by accusations of moderation unfairly targetting those threads, looking for reasons to warn/ban/delete posters because bias.

You seemed to have the manpower to watch Atlas like a hawk a few years ago.

[Ghost Land]

Just to add to this, it'd also be good if to DEAT a nation it required two Mods to do it, rather like two operators both needing to turn separate keys to fire a weapon.

Wouldn't it be harder? Maybe 2 mods for a DOS nation.

Are you proposing that it require agreement of 2 mods just to DEAT somebody who's already DoS and keeps coming back? What a waste of time!

On topic, there are six pages of Moderation thread titles that contain "RWDT", most of which seem to be reports. There are three pages of Moderation thread titles that contain "LWDT", most of which also seem to be reports. It seems like there was plenty of reporting of naughty or rule-breaking behaviour in these threads. I'm certain not everything that could be actionable was reported, but I'm a firm believer in self-moderation when possible: people shouldn't have to report every single potentially actionable post if they're not even offended or bothered by it, and it's only natural as a culture develops for the amount of banter to increase.

On the other hand, other people have quoted my post saying that the megathreads contain all the discussion in one place, allowing a greater variety of topics on the front page of the forum. The opposite is also true: all the political discussion remains contained within a few threads, and when someone wants to bring up a new point regarding to politics, he or she just goes into his or her echo chamber thread of choice and posts it in there, where the same ten or so people who frequent the thread will respond to it but it's very low-visibility to everyone else who doesn't normally read that thread; the person posting the new discussion topic also now needs to make sure he or she isn't threadjacking as is. Cramming all the discussion into a few megathreads makes the forum look more dead by increasing the amount of time spanned by the first page of NSG: as of right now, the last thread on page 1 of NSG was last posted in at 5:11 GMT, or about eight hours ago. On 5 October 2012 at 10:45, the last thread on page 1 of NSG was last posted in at 8:14, or only about two and a half hours ago. Even in 2012, the topic diversity seems increased compared to now, with there being a few perennial discussion threads but the notable absence of the wing threads or any other megathreads in the modern sense other than sports threads, two religious discussion threads, and TET. Heck, the third-biggest thread at that time was "Capitalism vs. Communism", which stayed active for at least a month.

It's pretty clear to me that NSG is dying a slow and painful death, and I don't like that. Hopefully having gotten rid of the LWDT and RWDT will bring some more diversity in discussions back to the table, but one constant is that great members from the past are leaving and will continue to leave, and clearly the culture of the wing threads was important to some people as we've already seen people leave over this too. There's no way to win.

[Katganistan]

I think you vastly overestimate the importance of those two threads if you expect ten percent of the moderation team to be sitting on them to watch 20 or so posters -- a fraction of the people who actually are using the site -- 24/7.

Of course, there would then by accusations of moderation unfairly targetting those threads, looking for reasons to warn/ban/delete posters because bias.

You seemed to have the manpower to watch Atlas like a hawk a few years ago.

Try talking about something current and related, GVH.

[The New California Republic]

Just to add to this, it'd also be good if to DEAT a nation it required two Mods to do it, rather like two operators both needing to turn separate keys to fire a weapon.

Wouldn't it be harder?

No. As I clarified after:

That would make dealing with spammers a lot harder.

Deleting spammers and adbots and DOS nations is a different kettle of fish from deleting users who are at the end of the line in terms of warnings, and it'd be no problem to say that in the former case just one Mod is needed, but two is needed for the latter.

[USS Monitor]

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.

We're trying to demonstrate that if the mods wanted to be consisted with their ruling in the matter of megathreads, then they would have to get rid of a lot of other fun and beloved Megathreads.

Nobody actually wants that. This ruling does not and will not improve the overall experience of NS, and if recent events have proven anything, have made it an objectively more toxic place. People from all across the spectrum coming together to express a mutual feeling that the mod's don't actually care and aren't inclusive with the userbase, trolls riding waves of discontentment to spam porn and other bait, long running nations straight up leaving NS in protest.

This whole decision feels like bad faith moderation, and we're trying to tell you that.

1. I'm not a mod.

2. You're not going to make them reopen the locked threads. You shouldn't argue for things that you don't actually want, because the mods might decide to give you what you asked for. If you argue for more threads to be locked, you might just get them locked.

Just to add to this, it'd also be good if to DEAT a nation it required two Mods to do it, rather like two operators both needing to turn separate keys to fire a weapon.

Wouldn't it be harder? Maybe 2 mods for a DOS nation.

DOS already requires a vote. It's not something one mod can do unilaterally.

[Vistulange]

1. I'm not a mod.

He didn't say you were, Monitor. He was talking about moderation, the team, in general.

[USS Monitor]

1. I'm not a mod.

He didn't say you were, Monitor. He was talking about moderation, the team, in general.

He said "you" as if I was part of the mod team.