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

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Abolish the mod system. This is an extreme version of suggestion #2. More players will spam and say bad stuff, but we have the "Add foe" button to ignore them if necessary.
Cons: Doxxing, slander, incitement toward violence, etc. will still exist - and will most likely be left unchecked (unless if someone works up the courage to call the police, which is unlikely)

This has got to be the worst suggestion in this thread so far. It is so bad that I actually wonder why you even suggested it in the first place. Turning the forums into the Wild West is absolutely not an option.

That suggestion was me aged 14.

[Valentine Z]

This has got to be the worst suggestion in this thread so far. It is so bad that I actually wonder why you even suggested it in the first place. Turning the forums into the Wild West is absolutely not an option.

Agreed. It would be "the Wild West" but with more spam.

Spam, threats, insults, flaming, trolling. What do we say, is this YouTube comments section?

-----

@ Forsher's suggestion: Secondly, I would change the nature of Arts and Fiction. At the moment, we've got four basic types of thread there... *snip*

As for redefining the threads, would it also be a good suggestion to have a much more defined split NSG into political and non-political bits? I definitely am aware that it is way easier said than done because of the nature of the topics (even a video game thread can turn political), so...

- Perhaps we can have NSPol (which sounds like /pol/ now that I think of it) for political megathreads (Gun Control, LGBTQ+, Christian, Islam, Buddhist, LWDT/RWDT) or news with a political stance in nature (e.g. Trump's Re-election, COVID, HK Riots...)
- Then have A&F renamed to NSG, or something, for casual general OOC talk without the nasty political bits (Talk about guns (not gun control), TET, actors/actress news, video games).

Both of them will have megathreads and non-megathreads; just the matter of "Which goes where", which I suppose could split casual talk (new NSG) with actual political debate (NSPol)?

Personally, I think the current problem is that A&F, to paraphrase / borrow what Forsher said, is underutilized, and most of the time, NSG is a catch-all for any kind of OOC topic, and this includes casual chats that pop up now and then (with the exception of TET).

Feel free to support / tear down, as always!

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Agreed. It would be "the Wild West" but with more spam.

Spam, threats, insults, flaming, trolling. What do we say, is this YouTube comments section?

-----

@ Forsher's suggestion: Secondly, I would change the nature of Arts and Fiction. At the moment, we've got four basic types of thread there... *snip*

As for redefining the threads, would it also be a good suggestion to have a much more defined split NSG into political and non-political bits? I definitely am aware that it is way easier said than done because of the nature of the topics (even a video game thread can turn political), so...

- Perhaps we can have NSPol (which sounds like /pol/ now that I think of it) for political megathreads (Gun Control, LGBTQ+, Christian, Islam, Buddhist, LWDT/RWDT) or news with a political stance in nature (e.g. Trump's Re-election, COVID, HK Riots...)
- Then have A&F renamed to NSG, or something, for casual general OOC talk without the nasty political bits (Talk about guns (not gun control), TET, actors/actress news, video games).

Both of them will have megathreads and non-megathreads; just the matter of "Which goes where", which I suppose could split casual talk (new NSG) with actual political debate (NSPol)?

Personally, I think the current problem is that A&F, to paraphrase / borrow what Forsher said, is underutilized, and most of the time, NSG is a catch-all for any kind of OOC topic, and this includes casual chats that pop up now and then (with the exception of TET).

Feel free to support / tear down, as always!

This has been suggested before. For reasons only known to Max however he doesn't want any new sub-forums.

[Valentine Z]

This has been suggested before. For reasons only known to Max however he doesn't want any new sub-forums.

Well, that's a bummer. Ahh, it's worth a shot! Though to be fair...? I don't think we will need new sub-forums. I mean, we could just redefine NSG and A&F, then. ^^;

[Dumb Ideologies]

On forum culture, I have foggy and possibly unreliable recollections of NSG formerly having more threads which were at least semi-social and "community-building" for lack of a better word rather than strictly debate. Did the separation become more codified when Forum 7 was reintroduced, with that becoming the place for anything "chatty"?

[BTEC Barry]

well i think they should hire me as a moderator for these wing megathreads
theyre probably about birds and stuff but if not i can still make them to the mod rules unlike their attiude now -----> which is

[Nobel Hobos 2]

On forum culture, I have foggy and possibly unreliable recollections of NSG formerly having more threads which were at least semi-social and "community-building" for lack of a better word rather than strictly debate. Did the separation become more codified when Forum 7 was reintroduced, with that becoming the place for anything "chatty"?

The_pantless_hero used to start topical threads that were funny, we'd all make jokes for six pages then move on to the next one.

Everyone trying to be funny whether or not they had talent, did tend to be a bit spammy I guess.

[BTEC Barry]

On forum culture, I have foggy and possibly unreliable recollections of NSG formerly having more threads which were at least semi-social and "community-building" for lack of a better word rather than strictly debate. Did the separation become more codified when Forum 7 was reintroduced, with that becoming the place for anything "chatty"?

The Pantless Hero used to start topical threads that were funny, we'd all make jokes for six pages then move on to the next one.

Everyone trying to be funny whether or not they had talent, did tend to be a bit spammy I guess.

whos that

[Nobel Hobos 2]

The_pantless_hero used to start topical threads that were funny, we'd all make jokes for six pages then move on to the next one.

Everyone trying to be funny whether or not they had talent, did tend to be a bit spammy I guess.

whos that

Good point, I spelled the name wrong.

[Esternial]

Spam, threats, insults, flaming, trolling. What do we say, is this YouTube comments section? ;)

-----

@ Forsher's suggestion: Secondly, I would change the nature of Arts and Fiction. At the moment, we've got four basic types of thread there... *snip*

As for redefining the threads, would it also be a good suggestion to have a much more defined split NSG into political and non-political bits? I definitely am aware that it is way easier said than done because of the nature of the topics (even a video game thread can turn political), so...

- Perhaps we can have NSPol (which sounds like /pol/ now that I think of it) for political megathreads (Gun Control, LGBTQ+, Christian, Islam, Buddhist, LWDT/RWDT) or news with a political stance in nature (e.g. Trump's Re-election, COVID, HK Riots...)
- Then have A&F renamed to NSG, or something, for casual general OOC talk without the nasty political bits (Talk about guns (not gun control), TET, actors/actress news, video games).

Both of them will have megathreads and non-megathreads; just the matter of "Which goes where", which I suppose could split casual talk (new NSG) with actual political debate (NSPol)?

Personally, I think the current problem is that A&F, to paraphrase / borrow what Forsher said, is underutilized, and most of the time, NSG is a catch-all for any kind of OOC topic, and this includes casual chats that pop up now and then (with the exception of TET).

Feel free to support / tear down, as always! :P

This has been suggested before. For reasons only known to Max however he doesn't want any new sub-forums.

I don't think there needs to be an entirely separate subforum. In fact I think there already are plenty of casual OOC threads (thread about food, etc.) and there is nothing preventing new ones to spawn.

It would just end up splitting up communities more, I reckon.

[Grenartia]

Okay... suggestions. Should probably read some of the others but I'll just go in blind.

Obviously the first step is defining megathreads. I would characterise megathreads as "any thread which is better thought of as an aggregation of multiple OPs or which is intended to prevent the formation of multiple OPs". (This applies just to NSG.) I would characterise an appropriate megathread as one which cannot conceivably contain just about anything.

So... it is not clear to me that, say, the Christian Discussion Thread is a megathread. Would a topic like, "On the Influence of Christian Theology on Western Values" be merged in? How about "Is Christianity Just a Jewish Sect?" or "The Crusades were an Inevitable Consequence of Organised Christianity"? But just because there are topics that could co-exist isn't enough. "Is Catholicism Monotheistic?"

On the other hand, it seems obvious that if I wanted to create a thread like, "New Poll Predicts Biden Will Win Every US State" that it'd get merged into the 2020 US Presidential Election Megathread... when it's made (I don't see it right now). And, in particular, it's obvious that such a thread is intended to consume many smaller but newsworthy in their own right stories from generating new OPs.

It seems to me that if we're continually thinking of topics that sound like they don't really belong in a megathread and it's hard to think of something that sounds like it should be in the thread... then it's not a megathread.

My approach:

• megathreads should be exclusively made by mods and should be strongly biased towards "temporary" practice
• temporary practice means that they're deployed:
  • if there is suddenly a spate of threads about pretty much the same thing, or
  • for subjects that will predictably be highly sprawling if the OPs are meant to be generic (e.g. the Olympics, US elections, Covid)
  • and are subject to harsher standards than other threads re: gravedigging (e.g. seven days with no new posts = thread lock)
  • and aren't renewed as a matter of course on reaching the 500 page limit
• threads are discouraged from including "discussion" in the name

This raises questions about what a "spate of threads" would actually mean. Let's say at least three threads with at least three (maybe four) pages of replies in which there's a substantive overlap in content.

I think the point about discussion is really important. Firstly, I think it encourages chatty behaviour and vaguely defined topics. Secondly, I think a lot of threads that include "discussion" in the title are just entirely ordinary threads but discussion makes it seem like they're something else.

I would then apply this to all the current threads, i.e. they all get closed overnight. Except... don't actually close them. Lock them briefly and direct people to explain what the threads actually are in "Appeal the Closure of X" moderation threads. If after, say, a week, it's apparent people have been unable to define cohesive subjects for the thread or a consistent frequency of new individually substantive topics... close the thread.

That would be a detriment, specifically for the trans thread, because more often than not, whenever trans topics come up, people necessarily get caught up in the minutae of various aspects of the trans experience. Say someone makes a thread about a transgender person getting discriminated against at a store. Within 10 pages (likely before page 5, even), it will have devolved into several separate debates about whether or not more than 2 genders exist, whether children can actually be trans, whether or not trans people can pee in public bathrooms, etc. And copypaste that same scenario if a week later, someone posts a thread about a different trans-related topic. You then have 2 of basically the same discussions, just repeating themselves.

That's why we need the trans megathread.

But I'd go farther, and argue that the identity-related discussion threads (lumping in the CDT, IDT, JDT, and various language discussion threads for the sake of argument) aren't just a 'useful dumping ground for when 50 noobs each make a thread of their own on the same subject', they're also valuable community resources. Dedicated threads for these subjects, populated and OP'ed by members of those communities, are vital educational tools, to allow people on the fora to learn about trans issues, or the finer points of the various abrahamic religions, etc.

I realize you have some kind of anal-retentive OCD about "megathreads clogging the front page of NSG", but the threads I'm talking about serve an important purpose that would be hindered by your proposal. I'll even meet you halfway and agree that the car and gun threads should go in A&F.

[Grenartia]

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=457511

In the RWDT edition of that time, there were plenty of regulars saying 'napki did nothing wrong', despite him blatantly targetting several people for harassment. They circled the wagons rather than accept one of their own did something wrong. This isn't even an isolated incident in terms of harassing others (though I will admit in terms of unmerited accusations thrown at others, it is unparalleled to my knowledge), and I encourage anyone else who experienced harassment from a RWDT regular, that was egged on by other regulars from the thread, to speak up as well.

Idk about you but I was raised to always defend my friends or family. Even if you know they're in the wrong, if it's someone you don't know much or don't care about, your friend is in the right by default.

That's a pretty toxic value to have, ngl.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Idk about you but I was raised to always defend my friends or family. Even if you know they're in the wrong, if it's someone you don't know much or don't care about, your friend is in the right by default.

That's a pretty toxic value to have, ngl.

Why is that? Your friends should do the same to you in return.

[Diopolis]

(snipping intro and conclusion bits)

To the moderators, here are a few suggestions (with their own merits and drawbacks) to improve the NationStates moderation system and (hopefully) help the players and moderators reconcile with each other:

1. Implement a constitution. Codifying and strictly adhering to a set of fair rules will reduce confusion, inconsistencies, and the divide between players and moderators. (Frankly, I disagree with a vast majority of the forum rules; however, given said rules, I would rather know they are enforced consistently and impartially than impulsively.)
   
   • Cons: Need to write a way to amend it without rendering it useless, need some way to ensure this isn't violated, rules themselves are flawed and open to interpretation

So basically the One Stop Rules Shop with a different name.

Limited mod powers. By reducing your powers (which could range from "more mods are needed to make a ruling" to "only grant you figurehead power"), less players will feel that the mods are abusing their powers.

• Cons: Need to figure out how much is good enough

The mods have just the right amount of powers: I don't really see much need to reduce the powers that the mods and admins have on this site.

Hold your posts to a high standard - ensure they are all civil and polite. It can be angering to see those who disagree with you shrug off your points and ad-hominem you and those you respect (I should know; I'm not exactly a model player myself). Regardless, speaking politely and with patience in the face of stress will mean more players who disagree with you politically will respect you more and see you more as an individual person with principles than just a faceless entity with a banhammer. By setting a shining example on how to behave, you could persuade players to more willingly follow the rules.

• Cons: It won't work for everyone (some will find hostility where there is none, and some may act rudely despite you attempting civility), and everyone is human and makes mistakes

This ought to be what we all should strive for on NSG, or indeed, any other forum on NS, regardless of whether or not we are part of the mod team on this site. Sure, we may be human, and we make mistakes, but we should strive to hold ourselves to a high standard and accountable for our actions.

Abolish the mod system. This is an extreme version of suggestion #2. More players will spam and say bad stuff, but we have the "Add foe" button to ignore them if necessary.

• Cons: Doxxing, slander, incitement toward violence, etc. will still exist - and will most likely be left unchecked (unless if someone works up the courage to call the police, which is unlikely)

If I wanted a modless wasteland where I can say anything I want with zero repercussions whatsoever, I'd go to 8chan.

Diversify the mods. Have individuals who politically disagree with the majority of you in the moderation team. Maybe those who don't care that much about power or politics. That way, there will be less reason for us to believe your rulings are politically biased. Please don't ask me, however.

• Cons: The site is pretty highly populated by individuals on the left (harder to find willing people on the other side), and a number on the right may disagree with a notable number of rules and rulings dissuading them from volunteering

I do agree with you that NS could use more active mods. I don't know if political diversification or even gamseside/forumside diversification could help resolve the problems, but getting more people who can pass the standards to be a mod and who want to be mods on the mod team would certainly not hurt.

There was a push to diversify the mods politically a while back, wasn't there? IMO it did help, even if it was only partially successful.
In any case I can think of two more towards the right posters I'd nominate to help balance out the overwhelmingly center-leftness of the mod team.

[Grenartia]

That's a pretty toxic value to have, ngl.

Why is that? Your friends should do the same to you in return.

I wonder how much bloodshed and social unrest has been caused by that unironically tribalistic attitude.

Besides, if one of my friends or relatives raped a kid, or shot up a church, or was an unironic Nazi, I would be an automatically bad person for defending them. But this is getting to be a threadjack.

[Esternial]

That's a pretty toxic value to have, ngl.

Why is that? Your friends should do the same to you in return.

I mean, this is rather off-topic but that's not very healthy.

Having friends that challenge you and help you grow is a lot better than people that enable toxic or possibly even illegal behavior.

Now I'd stand by my friend if he instigated a fight, but I'd still give him an earful. I very much rely on my friends to give me their perspective and point out what I may not be seeing - and vice versa.

[Grenartia]

So basically the One Stop Rules Shop with a different name.


The mods have just the right amount of powers: I don't really see much need to reduce the powers that the mods and admins have on this site.


This ought to be what we all should strive for on NSG, or indeed, any other forum on NS, regardless of whether or not we are part of the mod team on this site. Sure, we may be human, and we make mistakes, but we should strive to hold ourselves to a high standard and accountable for our actions.


If I wanted a modless wasteland where I can say anything I want with zero repercussions whatsoever, I'd go to 8chan.


I do agree with you that NS could use more active mods. I don't know if political diversification or even gamseside/forumside diversification could help resolve the problems, but getting more people who can pass the standards to be a mod and who want to be mods on the mod team would certainly not hurt.

There was a push to diversify the mods politically a while back, wasn't there? IMO it did help, even if it was only partially successful.
In any case I can think of two more towards the right posters I'd nominate to help balance out the overwhelmingly center-leftness of the mod team.

I have concerns about specifically promoting any right-wingers to modhood without ascertaining whether or not they have any biases against minority groups. We don't need a Parkus or OEP on the modteam.

[Diopolis]

There was a push to diversify the mods politically a while back, wasn't there? IMO it did help, even if it was only partially successful.
In any case I can think of two more towards the right posters I'd nominate to help balance out the overwhelmingly center-leftness of the mod team.

I have concerns about specifically promoting any right-wingers to modhood without ascertaining whether or not they have any biases against minority groups. We don't need a Parkus or OEP on the modteam.

Parkus and OEP's preexisting record was such that it's highly unlikely they would ever get modded anyways.

[Grenartia]

I have concerns about specifically promoting any right-wingers to modhood without ascertaining whether or not they have any biases against minority groups. We don't need a Parkus or OEP on the modteam.

Parkus and OEP's preexisting record was such that it's highly unlikely they would ever get modded anyways.

You entirely missed the point. We don't need someone with those sorts of prejuidices, but with a clean record, on the mod team.

[Diopolis]

Parkus and OEP's preexisting record was such that it's highly unlikely they would ever get modded anyways.

You entirely missed the point. We don't need someone with those sorts of prejuidices, but with a clean record, on the mod team.

I mean, it's rather telling that you're going "right wingers shouldn't be mods because we can't trust them not to be racist".

[Grenartia]

You entirely missed the point. We don't need someone with those sorts of prejuidices, but with a clean record, on the mod team.

I mean, it's rather telling that you're going "right wingers shouldn't be mods because we can't trust them not to be racist".

I mean, lets face it, right-wing ideologies undeniably tend to be more dismissive of the basic human dignity of certain people, and I for one, would rather not have to play Secret Hitler with new recommends to the mod team.

[Sedgistan]

There was a push to diversify the mods politically a while back, wasn't there? IMO it did help, even if it was only partially successful.
In any case I can think of two more towards the right posters I'd nominate to help balance out the overwhelmingly center-leftness of the mod team.

Go ahead and nominate them: viewtopic.php?p=2190782#p2190782

The mod team cannot know everyone who plays NS, and that's why it helps to have nominations from players, to bring potential moderators to our attention. There's several of us on the team who were initially nominated in this way.

I have concerns about specifically promoting any right-wingers to modhood without ascertaining whether or not they have any biases against minority groups. We don't need a Parkus or OEP on the modteam.

A bit harsh. As has been mentioned in the OP of this very thread "right wing" is a broad church comprising a vast range of different viewpoints. We're not all jackbooted Nazis looking for some minorities to oppress.

[The New California Republic]

There was a push to diversify the mods politically a while back, wasn't there? IMO it did help, even if it was only partially successful.
In any case I can think of two more towards the right posters I'd nominate to help balance out the overwhelmingly center-leftness of the mod team.

Can you point out a single instance of a mod having their judgment in a ruling impaired by their politics?

[Diopolis]

There was a push to diversify the mods politically a while back, wasn't there? IMO it did help, even if it was only partially successful.
In any case I can think of two more towards the right posters I'd nominate to help balance out the overwhelmingly center-leftness of the mod team.

Go ahead and nominate them: viewtopic.php?p=2190782#p2190782

The mod team cannot know everyone who plays NS, and that's why it helps to have nominations from players, to bring potential moderators to our attention. There's several of us on the team who were initially nominated in this way.

Will do. Working on collecting supporting links.

[Aureumterra]

There was a push to diversify the mods politically a while back, wasn't there? IMO it did help, even if it was only partially successful.
In any case I can think of two more towards the right posters I'd nominate to help balance out the overwhelmingly center-leftness of the mod team.

Can you point out a single instance of a mod having their judgment in a ruling impaired by their politics?

Yeah I haven’t seen mods banning people out of politics. I keep hearing about a mod ten years ago or something who went insane after George Bush won