The state of the swamp

[leXX]

Originally posted by Cjais

Depends on what is defined as flaming. If the current parameters are used, then yes - I love flame wars.

Even if things ran rampant and flaming was tolerated, I highly doubt I'd care enough for the thread to be closed - anything is more exciting than what's going on now.

 

I disagree totally. I for one would prefer things to stay as they were rather than see a whole load of flame wars.

 

Here's the deal: You see a flame war. What do you do? Do you tear into it and participate? Do you find it boring and proceed to create a better thread, or find somewhere else to post? Do you care? Do you lock it, and stop the "flaming"? Do you lock it before the "flaming" has even begun?

 

To answer your question, you lock it before the flaming has begun. The mods can sense when things are going to get 'out of control', and by that I mean 'personal'.

 

I do mind spam, but I'm just so careless when it comes down to it. Look at the swamp right now. Look at it - 95% of all topics lack a topic. Every thread turns into small talk. Do I bitch and moan about the mods blatantly ignoring rule 3? Do I care if this place turns into RSN? Nay.

 

So you don't mind non topic threads then? or are you being siarcastic? Make your mind up.

 

Would it now? Lenient with regards to what? Spam or flaming? Flame wars are way more interesting than the current non-topics (your favourite yadda yadda). All hell has already broken loose with regards to spam, people are just blind enough to not realize it.

Show me a thread that has turned into a flame war, and I will show you a thread that has a topic, is interesting to many people, and brings people's opinions out like nothing else. This is what I crave.

 

Well you may crave flame wars but I don't. I like a good intellectual conversation the same as the next guy, but when it starts to get ugly it should be closed.

 

Lexx, of all people, why do you care? You're one of the best person I've ever seen to avoid topics you do not like talking about. Why do you want flame wars stopped? Do they bother you? No. I don't think they bother anyone but the mods and people not participating in them.

 

Yes, I am very good at avoiding topics I do not like. Why would I participate in a topic where I see no valid outcome either way. I could argue until I'm blue in the face that Evolution is a better theory than Creationism but where will it get me, nowhere fast is where. I'm not gonna change most peoples mind on the matter and I quite frankly don't care. Let ppl believe what they want to believe, doesn't bother me.

 

That, lexx, is a flame with regards to point 1 of the rules.

 

How in the hell is that a flame when I'm saying I don't want to see flame wars? I find your definition of flame very interesting.

 

Why do you want to punish people because they're voicing their opinions? Why do you care? This is the internet ffs - these forums are more strict about the freedom of speech than the real world.

 

So long as that opinion is voiced in a mature PC manner, I see no problem.

 

I know. As stated several times before, I can handle the game threads. But I cannot handle everyone's need to create 17 game threads. 3 should be enough, dammit.

 

Why only 3? I see game threads as important a part of the swamp as any other thread.

[Surfnshannon]

Ok...lemme try to understand this...

 

 

FLAME WARS - OKAY

 

GAME THREADS - BAD

 

*you want a flame was...you don't want game threads and you are pissed that the mods closed the apostle thread.

 

Am I right?

 

Well the difference I see in flame wars and game threads is this. Game threads don't HURT people. Flame wars do. I think that when a thread topic is discussed in a reasonable, mature and responsible manner than the thread should remain open to discussion. HOWEVER, when a thread topic goes into IMMATURE, IRRESPONSIBLE and UNREASONABLE discussion - I think the posters should be warned to keep down the FLAMING. But then you get into a whole mess of "WELL WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER UNREASONABLE". Threads about Jesus, apostles and religion are just asking for immature people to post there and sometimes we post and do not mean to offend other people. I mean basically....I can't go to work and put up a bunch of crosses and start asking people do they believe in athiesm or god? I would get fired! So - same goes here. You have to keep things that are TOO PERSONAL out of the STAR WARS GAMING FORUMS. If you wanna post about god or apostles or whatever....find another forum to do that in.

 

I think that you are good forummer but lately you have been a bit too moody. You were flaming that one guy and he didn't DO ANYTHING - then now you are pissed that the apostle thread was closed...even though...I looked at it and was complete spam and didn't even understand what the whole thread was about. So - IOW - please post topics that stimulate some responsible discussion, make it clear what the topic is about and then realise that if it turns to spam and get locked....It isn't because you are irresponsible and immature - it is because the topic may be too much for this forum to handle and you should take it else where. Remember most people here are what 13-17. Why do they need to start debating apostles?

[C'jais]

Originally posted by leXX

I disagree totally. I for one would prefer things to stay as they were rather than see a whole load of flame wars.

 

And how would you define flame wars? Insults? Making jokes on religions? Saying blue is better than red?

 

To answer your question, you lock it before the flaming has begun. The mods can sense when things are going to get 'out of control', and by that I mean 'personal'.

 

And when things get personal, the entire topic must get locked, of course. When things get personal, people are going to cry. When things get personal, I don't care, and neither do those that are supposed to get hurt, it seems.

 

So you don't mind non topics thread then? or are you being sarcastic? Make your mind up.

 

I hate non topics. But I don't care enough for them to be closed.

 

You obviously hate flame wars, and would like them closed, even though you and neither are anyone else.

 

Well you may crave flame wars but I don't. I like a good intellectual conversation the same as the next guy, but when it starts to get ugly it should be closed.

 

I didn't say I liked flame wars. I said that by the mods defination of flame wars, I like 'em. When it gets ugly, people are still discussing something, whether its heated or not. Why it should it be closed, if it stays on topic?

 

As a matter of fact, "flame wars" are staying far more on topic than most threads these days. I dare you to disprove this.

 

Yes, I am very good at avoiding topics I do not like. Why would I participate in a topic where I see no valid outcome either way. I could argue until I'm blue in the face that Evolution is a better theory than Creationism but where will it get me, nowhere fast is where. I'm not gonna change most peoples mind on the matter and I quite frankly don't care. Let ppl believe what they want to believe, doesn't bother me.

 

That made no sense. By your defination, we shouldn't even care to argue about anything just sit play game threads because arguing about something won't change anyone's opinions.

 

How in the hell is that a flame when I'm saying I don't want to see flame wars? I find your definition of flame very interesting.

 

You said the majority in this place are intellectually incapable of holding a good discussion. Many people ín here are going to that as an insult, and rightly so.

 

So long as that opinion is voiced in a mature PC manner, I see no problem.

 

Mature PC manner? So, it's different to argue on a PC, than in the real, nasty world? How come?

 

Why only 3? I see game threads as important a part of the swamp as any other thread.

 

Right. The swamp needs 23 game thread, otherwise it won't be the swamp anymore. There was a time when the swamp had 2 friggin' game threads, and by God I miss that time.

[ZBomber]

Ug,... this is getting confusing.......

 

1) The mods and admins do all they can. You don't like it, then take a long walk off a short plank.

 

2) Flame wars aren't good. Some people can get really offended, and they might leave. You think they are fun, imiginae what its like to be a mod, trying to handle a flame war. NOT fun.

 

3) Spam? How is spam good? The peopel are only doing it because they want a higher post count. If one person does it, they all do it, and it would get out of hand. Topics like, "dog" and it would say "cat". It would take alot of LF's bandwidth up too.

 

This is just what I have to say.

[leXX]

Originally posted by Cjais

And how would you define flame wars? Insults? Making jokes on religions? Saying blue is better than red?

 

I've already told you my definition of flame. Insulting someone personally is what I consider a flame. I don't consider a good debate flaming. Making jokes are not flames.

 

And when things get personal, the entire topic must get locked, of course. When things get personal, people are going to cry. When things get personal, I don't care, and neither do those that are supposed to get hurt, it seems.

 

Fact is alot of people DO care. I don't like get insulted personally and neither do alot of people. You may not care but that does not mean it is whole forums opinion. If I replied to you with 'shut up you stupid white honkey dane' and you replied with 'no you shut up you black ghetto b1tch' would you consider that ok?

 

I hate non topics. But I don't care enough for them to be closed.

 

It all depends on your definition of spam doesn't it and I think the mods have every right to make up their own definition.

 

You obviously hate flame wars, and would like them closed, even though you and neither are anyone else.

 

That didn't make any sense.

 

I didn't say I liked flame wars. I said that by the mods defination of flame wars, I like 'em. When it gets ugly, people are still discussing something, whether its heated or not. Why it should it be closed, if it stays on topic?

 

If it stays on topic and doesn't get personal, I agree.

 

As a matter of fact, "flame wars" are staying far more on topic than most threads these days. I dare you to disprove this.

 

Again, depends on your definition of 'flame war'.

 

That made no sense. By your defination, we shouldn't even care to argue about anything just sit play game threads because arguing about something won't change anyone's opinions.

 

I said topics 'I don't like', not ALL topics.

 

You said the majority in this place are intellectually incapable of holding a good discussion. Many people ín here are going to that as an insult, and rightly so.

 

It's a fact and you know it. I didn't name any names so I'm not flaming anyone.

 

Mature PC manner? So, it's different to argue on a PC, than in the real, nasty world? How come?

 

PC = Politically Correct

 

Right. The swamp needs 23 game thread, otherwise it won't be the swamp anymore. There was a time when the swamp had 2 friggin' game threads, and by God I miss that time.

 

If you don't like the game threads, don't participate in them and ignore them, simple as that. What's the problem? Are they taking up valuable flaming space?

[C'jais]

Originally posted by STTCT

Ok...lemme try to understand this...

 

 

FLAME WARS - OKAY

 

GAME THREADS - BAD

 

*you want a flame was...you don't want game threads and you are pissed that the mods closed the apostle thread.

 

Am I right?

 

No. I do not want flame wars, but I don't think they should be closed. I don't want to see several dozens of game threads, yet I don't care about them being closed.

 

Well the difference I see in flame wars and game threads is this. Game threads don't HURT people. Flame wars do.

 

Is that so? And that is why we should close every thread that has the potential to escalate into a flame war? No "flame war" has ever hurt me, and if it did, I'd walk away. The internet hurts people. Simply being online can render you dizzy with the multitude of links to sites that can deeply hurt you. Scary.

 

 

Threads about Jesus, apostles and religion are just asking for immature people to post there and sometimes we post and do not mean to offend other people.

 

So again, anything with the potential to hurt people

 

I mean basically....I can't go to work and put up a bunch of crosses and start asking people do they believe in athiesm or god? I would get fired!

 

Of course. Doing that sort of thing on the job is stupid. Talking about it on the street shouldn't get you hunted down by the speech control police. You cannot compare a FREE TOPIC FORUM a job.

 

So - same goes here. You have to keep things that are TOO PERSONAL out of the STAR WARS GAMING FORUMS. If you wanna post about god or apostles or whatever....find another forum to do that in.

 

Why should I? This is the swamp. Any topic is allowed as it says, no?

 

Why do I need to take into account the 6 year olds that get offended by the word penis? Those 6 year olds exist on any forum.

 

I think that you are good forummer but lately you have been a bit too moody. You were flaming that one guy and he didn't DO ANYTHING

 

If you knew the whole story, you'd realize that what you just said would be the understatement of the year - but I deeply apologize to anyone looking at my posts. Sorry.

 

then now you are pissed that the apostle thread was closed...even though...I looked at it and was complete spam and didn't even understand what the whole thread was about.

 

That thread wasn't meant to be taken serious. That thread was designed with the goal of FUN, like the game threads. It was not spam, it had a topic.

 

So - IOW - please post topics that stimulate some responsible discussion

 

Let it be known that I'm trying. I really do. And I suggest you go out and tell everyone to do this, not just me.

 

make it clear what the topic is about and then realise that if it turns to spam and get locked....It isn't because you are irresponsible and immature - it is because the topic may be too much for this forum to handle and you should take it else where. Remember most people here are what 13-17. Why do they need to start debating apostles?

 

I'm 17. They do not need to debate apostles or Jesus or whatever - that's exactly my point. They can ignore it and go create their own topics.

 

The topic is too much for this forum to handle? I applaud everyone participating in the Evolution thread, and I'm deeply sorry - I'll never create such topics again.

[C'jais]

Originally posted by leXX

I've already told you my definition of flame. Insulting someone personally is what I consider a flame. I don't consider a good debate flaming. Making jokes are not flames.

 

Yet a joke played on Christianity was deemed flaming.

 

Fact is alot of people DO care. I don't like get insulted personally and neither do alot of people. You may not care but that does not mean it is whole forums opinion. If I replied to you with 'shut up you stupid white honkey dane' and you replied with 'no you shut up you black ghetto b1tch' would you consider that ok?

 

Good point. I would stop replying to the thread. If I did reply, it'd be my own damn problem.

 

It all depends on your definition of spam doesn't it and I think the mods have every right to make up their own definition.

 

They're currently contradicting their defination.

 

If it stays on topic and doesn't get personal, I agree.

 

As Shock said, people are taking any little thing personal. If it gets personal, the people offended can leave instead of getting the whole thread locked, just as I can avoid replying to game threads instead of getting them locked.

 

Again, depends on your definition of 'flame war'.

 

The flame wars recently, have stayed on whatever topic there was.

 

It's a fact and you know it. I didn't name any names so I'm not flaming anyone.

 

You are - you're applying it to a group (this forum) and many people would get hurt, whether or not you named is irrelevant.

 

If you don't like the game threads, don't participate in them and ignore them, simple as that. What's the problem? Are they taking up valuable flaming space?

 

Stop saying I like flaming, when I've said several times I don't.

 

And if you don't like discussions that are viewed as flame wars, don't reply to them. What's the problem? Are they taking up valuable non topic space?

 

Please people, don't warp my posts so they read "I like flaming." I like the freedom of speech, but I hate flaming, and I hate topics without a topic. Self-censoring is an ugly thing.

[ShockV1.89]

My only real problem is the mods jumping the gun on the lock thread button. I've seen threads that could be a funny goof and a place to talk about said funny goof get locked, because "it's spam," or whatever. Likewise, threads that could be legit discussions get locked because "it might, someday, possibly turn into a flame war."

 

This is the "any topic" forum. Should I not be allowed to discuss something like evolution with other rational, logical human beings, simply because someone has bible on the brain and gets offended at someone not having the same opinion as them? It's very easy to say "that offends me, I dont like it" but that doesnt mean that whole threads should be locked for the sake of a few.

 

Eh. Do we care? Not really.

 

I'm thinking you do. I'm thinking an email or PM went out among most/all of the mods suggesting you not close this thread. I say this only because I've seen threads criticizing moderator action get locked down within the first two posts, but this one is going on and on. Not saying it's a bad thing or anything, and it's encouraging to see you guys might be open to public criticism.

[C'jais]

1) The mods and admins do all they can. You don't like it, then take a long walk off a short plank.

 

Who says what the mods think is bad is appropiate? The mods do.

 

The mods can do whatever they want, since there are rules in this place, and they can enforce them since they own this thing. I'm merely pointing out the inconsistencies, contradictions etc in these rules.

 

2) Flame wars aren't good. Some people can get really offended, and they might leave. You think they are fun, imiginae what its like to be a mod, trying to handle a flame war. NOT fun.

 

The people that get offended can stop replying to the topic in the first place.

 

3) Spam? How is spam good? The peopel are only doing it because they want a higher post count. If one person does it, they all do it, and it would get out of hand. Topics like, "dog" and it would say "cat". It would take alot of LF's bandwidth up too.

 

How is spam good? Take a close look at the Swamp and RSN. Please tell that what's taking place there isn't spam.

[ZBomber]

Yet a joke played on Christianity was deemed flaming.

 

Well, hoiw offensive was the joke? Was it like "Christians are stupid" Or was it like "You believe in one good, your a bunch of losers, see ya in hell" ?

[C'jais]

Originally posted by ZBomber

 

Well, hoiw offensive was the joke? Was it like "Christians are stupid" Or was it like "You believe in one good, your a bunch of losers, see ya in hell" ?

 

Neither. It wasn't flaming Christians in any way.

 

It went as follows: "If you were Jesus, which people would you take as your apostles?". I, personally, can't see any flaming in this.

 

EDIT: I've strayed completely from my original post now, it seems - I'm sorry. I went off some ridiculous tangency and proceeded to describe which kind of forums I'd tolerate etc.

 

This is not about not punishing flamers or spammers - this is about "jumping the gun on the lock thread button" as Shock so simply pointed out. Shock has it going, I clearly haven't.

 

You're in your full right to close this, as I'm straying far and wide from the topic. And I really should do my homework now.

[leXX]

Oh, so you don't like flame wars! Then what was this all about...

 

Depends on what is defined as flaming. If the current parameters are used, then yes - I love flame wars.

Even if things ran rampant and flaming was tolerated, I highly doubt I'd care enough for the thread to be closed - anything is more exciting than what's going on now.

 

I need a clearer definition on what you consider a flame war to be before I can continue this discusion because quite frankly, you are confusing me.

 

You are - you're applying it to a group (this forum) and many people would get hurt, whether or not you named is irrelevant.

 

I truly believe only 10% of the ppl in this forum are mature enough to hold a decent debate without having to get personal. If you consider what I just said to be a flame, fair enough, but I feel the mods agree and that is why so many threads are stopped in thier tracks before they get out of hand.

 

And if you don't like discussions that are viewed as flame wars, don't reply to them. What's the problem? Are they taking up valuable non topic space?

 

I don't reply to them and I've already stated that I don't like spam so what's the point?

[ZBomber]

Originally posted by Cjais

 

Neither. It wasn't flaming Christians in any way.

 

I went as follows: "If you were Jesus, which people would you take as your apostles?". I, personally, can't see any flaming in this.

 

 

Thats a joke?

[ShockV1.89]

It was a goof thread saying "If you were Jesus, who would your apostles be?"

 

People began naming all sorts of names. One person named a bunch of people from Lucas Forums. Another mentioned the seven dwarves...

 

Just a goof. If you actually take offense at this, well... there's no point in catering to oversensitivity...

[Sivy]

i didn't take the thread seriously, i just thought it was an interesting way of saying 'pick 12 people you would like to follow you around', i certainly don't think any offence was meant by it but i think people should avoid starting threads with "if you were Jesus"

[GonkH8er]

We close threads when they get to about this level of flameyness.

 

 

We don't deliberately close threads to piss you guys off. We close them to protect everyone.

 

Sure, you have a right to free speech, but we have the responsibility to make sure that your free speech doesn't cause mindless yelling.

 

 

If presented the same disruptive thread, many mods would respond differently. Some would close it immedietely, some would try and get it back on task, and some might hope that it'll sort itself out by itself, which it rarely does.

 

Personally, I like to give threads a chance to show their value, but if they don't after another 10 or 20 posts, I can them. But if I can see that a thread is going nowhere, fast, or going somewhere it shouldn't, I close it. The reason we close threads before the flaming starts is exactly as LeXX said. We can sense a flame war coming on. I've been moderating these forums for over a year now and I was an admin back at jediknight.net before that. I've been around gaming and non gaming forums for a while, as much as I have faith in everyone to be mature and not flame, it happens, and I hate to see it happens, because when someone is bitten, they bite back, and personal grudges form. These are supposed to be friendly places, not places where we make enemies.

 

The mods, super mods and admins aren't machines. We're humans, just like you. We have opinions too. We can be offended by things too. The only difference between us is that we've been given the power to close threads that are offensive in any way.

 

 

Personally, I like Cjais. He's a nice guy. Don't bag him out because he thinks we're too strict. Hundreds of you think it too, but you just dont have the guts to say it. There's a few mods spread over the Lucasforums network who seem like they have a random vegetable shoved somewhere in their backside. Some people just can't take as much crap as other people. We all post innapropriate things now and then. Heck, I've done it back in my hay day. It's all part of joining in the community, and learning the rules. We cross a few lines, we get burnt, we learn not to cross them again.

 

Someone said something about flame wars being ok, if they stay on topic and dont get personal. The thing about flame wars is that's exactly what they are. Personal attacks. Remarks without base. Random insults.

 

eg- "OMG you're an atheist.... you're going to burn in hell for being such a stupid idiot and not believing in Christ. I can't wait to see your dumb ass fry"

 

or vice versa.

 

I closed the original 'Creationism vs Evolutionism' thread because that's what it turned into. It went into a 'Theist vs Atheist' thread, with unsults flying and closed minded arguments. The reason we have objective threads and debates like that is to open people's minds about other possibilities. We don't find out what people believe in just so we can laugh at them or call them stupid. We find out how they life and think so that we can grow as a person and at least be semi permiable to ideas other than our own. Unfortunetely, many people are arrogant and closed minded, and fail to see that their are other ways to live life than their own.

 

We're just trying to do our job. Our Volunteer job. It's not all peaches and cream having power.

 

 

Just something for everyone to think about and cool down. Feel free to reply.

[ShockV1.89]

Erm... I really dont see where this particular thread got "flamy." Thus far, as far as I can tell, it's been legit discussion. If you were to close this, I'd be hard pressed as to know why, since I see no flames yet.

[Sivy]

not everyone is going to agree when a thread is lock. but instead of complaining about it just move on, that's what i say

[C'jais]

As Shock, I cannot see where this thread got flamy. Heated yes, but there hasn't been any personal insults yet.

 

But, well said GonkH8er, and I apologize again for going off a tangent. It shouldn't have reached the point where I began telling people to "flame off" and generally began spouting off some inane gibberish about spam/flame....

 

I created this thread in nearly completely unprovoked anger, and I won't reply to it again until I've cooled down. That said, i still feel we should work out some sort of clear defination of what's viewed as "flame enticing".

 

I'll work some more on the slow and patient approach.

 

EDIT: In the warm glow of hindsight, I deeply apologize to you, Muratus as well - it appears the dark side has been holding firmly anchored to anger the last few days

 

Jais - off to homework.

[Surfnshannon]

uhem - i don't think this thread is to the point of flameyness yet. I haven't called cjais a closed minded ignoramous yet (I'm just kidding cjais!) I thought we were discussing this as mature people. Guess not. I am only responding to your posts because I too feel that sometimes the mods go a little extreme - and no I'm not afraid to post that. But on this issue of flame wars and discussing things that for some (are too personal) to discuss without insulting one another - then I do not feel that the mods jump the gun on this.

 

I'm going to respond to your responces to me cjais

 

 

 

No. I do not want flame wars, but I don't think they should be closed. I don't want to see several dozens of game threads, yet I don't care about them being closed.

 

Why don't you think flame wars should be closed? If they are going no where - then what did the "flame" thread accomplish? A bunch of people creating vendettas against one another.

The game threads should be closed because you think they are spam...well...I agree that there should not be 1300 game threads. There should be a couple however - it isn't like people are in there to hurt others feelings like flame wars. Heck one is say something about the person above you - and most people put nice things.

 

 

Is that so? And that is why we should close every thread that has the potential to escalate into a flame war? No "flame war" has ever hurt me, and if it did, I'd walk away. The internet hurts people. Simply being online can render you dizzy with the multitude of links to sites that can deeply hurt you. Scary.

 

I never said that we should close every thread that has the "POTENTIAL" to escalate to a flame war. I said when it does escalate to a flame war - or a thread does not fully explain itself to where others will be confused that the thread is about insulting rather than discussing. Or is full of meaningless posts that have nothing to do with the thread topic. I think that is a good reason to close threads - when it is obviously the topic has lost meaning and maturity. Um what is this silly responce about the hurting people...well that's why I avoid sites that would or have "hurt me". I come here because this place has never "hurt me". But if there were people bagging on my religion or being stupid I would probably not come here.

 

 

 

Of course. Doing that sort of thing on the job is stupid. Talking about it on the street shouldn't get you hunted down by the speech control police. You cannot compare a FREE TOPIC FORUM a job.

 

No doing that on the street would not get me hunted down by speech police - it would probably get me hunted down by someone who deeply disagreed with me. Just like a cnn poll said today "Do you think burning a cross is freedom of speech or an act of prejudice" Just because you can burn a cross in your yard doesn't mean that you aren't asking for trouble. I personally would want the police to take it down!! And about this comparing a free topic forum to a job - hum well in a job we have a set of rules - here we have a set of rules. I could compare a forum as standing around different rooms debating topics and if one room is full of people throwing stuff and hurting people than the police would come and take them away.

 

 

 

Why do I need to take into account the 6 year olds that get offended by the word penis? Those 6 year olds exist on any forum.

 

We are not debating whether or not a 6 year old is on these forums or not. We are debating if people in the age range that we are can handle discussing relatively mature topics without stooping to an immature level. Why should you take into account why others would be offended by your posts...maybe it is called a little something like...respect for others.

[obi]

A lot of crap to catch up read, so I'm just going to say this:

 

 

Just because we don't like a thread, doesn't mean we can close it.

 

These forums are visited by many. Not just you guys, but many visit and do not register. Now, say we leaned off a bit on the 'spam' and 'flames' here. Now, say a person by the age of....oh.....say 10 manages to find this place. He/she comes in a sees all of this mishap. How would you feel if that had happened?

[ShockV1.89]

Well, there's a difference between spam/flames and inappropriate content. If someone posts a link to something truly, truly offensive (porn, racists websites, etc) or cusses left and right, that certainly deserves moderation.

 

But flaming, a 10 year old probably either wont recognize, wont take the time to read, or wont care about arguments, as long as those arguments stay clean (ie, no swearing). Trust me, I work with that age group at my job. They see more in their own school than they could ever see here.

 

If you leaned off on the 'spam' and 'flames' a little bit, you probably wouldnt get much of a response. People might post a few more irrelavent things, arguments might continue a bit longer before burning themselves out (which they will, as was demonstrated in the new evolution thread).

 

We're not saying to ignore inappropriate content. By all means, if a thread has people posting pics of near naked women (happens something, MODS WAITED FOR 3 PAGES, mostly because mods were posting in it, I think...), then close it down. That could clearly be offensive to many people, as well as inappropriate for said 10-yr old to be looking at.

 

But dont close it down if you see a situation similar to "I dont agree with your opinion, and this is why, and I feel very strongly about it." Nothing flamey about that. Close it down if it turns into the example that GonkH8er named, or at least give warning...

 

Whatever, I probably wont be listened to on this anyway...

[C'jais]

Originally posted by obi-wan13

A lot of crap to catch up read, so I'm just going to say this:

 

 

Just because we don't like a thread, doesn't mean we can close it.

 

These forums are visited by many. Not just you guys, but many visit and do not register. Now, say we leaned off a bit on the 'spam' and 'flames' here. Now, say a person by the age of....oh.....say 10 manages to find this place. He/she comes in a sees all of this mishap. How would you feel if that had happened?

 

Said 10 year olds also think it's funny when someone says f***, or when he's sitting there, giggling and glowing to his lightsaber chopping off stormtrooper's heads. Trust me, most 10 year olds percieve that which parents deem "unappropriate" as downright funny and exciting.

 

(which they will, as was demonstrated in the new evolution thread).

 

Even though, IMVHO, the "new and improved" evolution thread never even bordered on flaming or name-calling, all things do end.

People had learnt not to flame, and I hold this thread as one of the shining examples of what this forum is evidently capable of.

[ShockV1.89]

This is true. I wasnt really involved in the old or new one, so I didnt know much. But I noticed the old one just sort of sank to the bottom of the page. Encouraging, if dissapointing that people seemed to take more interest in mindless tongue lashing than normal debate.

[Rogue Nine]

Seems to me nothing but an all out flame war would satisfy you. Might I point out that it's always been about you. "I don't mind flame wars." "I think they're good for the forums" "I think they're good debates" "I don't think that anyone gets offended."

 

Stop being so self-centered and assuming people's opinions are the same as yours.

 

What exactly do you propose then to solve this problem, eh?