Greetings all!

[Djinn]

Hello JPP -

I'm a staff member from Political Hotwire. I occasionally join other forums to get insights into how other forums are run with an eye toward improving our own processes and policies.

Also, I have a question for a staff member, but there seems to be a ten-post minimum for sending PMs. I've no interest in spamming nine posts to circumvent this, and would be grateful if someone might waive this understandable restriction.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Hello JPP -

I'm a staff member from Political Hotwire. I occasionally join other forums to get insights into how other forums are run with an eye toward improving our own processes and policies.

Also, I have a question for a staff member, but there seems to be a ten-post minimum for sending PMs. I've no interest in spamming nine posts to circumvent this, and would be grateful if someone might waive this understandable restriction.

No.

 

[PoliTalker]

Welcome.

Why don't you just give us your take a few subjects?

Or do you have no intention of being a regular here...

I wouldn't blame you.

It can be a pretty rough place with so few rules.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Filed Under: Entitlement.

 

[AProudLefty]

Hello JPP -

I'm a staff member from Political Hotwire. I occasionally join other forums to get insights into how other forums are run with an eye toward improving our own processes and policies.

Also, I have a question for a staff member, but there seems to be a ten-post minimum for sending PMs. I've no interest in spamming nine posts to circumvent this, and would be grateful if someone might waive this understandable restriction.

Just post in various threads.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Hello JPP -

I'm a staff member from Political Hotwire. I occasionally join other forums to get insights into how other forums are run with an eye toward improving our own processes and policies.

Also, I have a question for a staff member, but there seems to be a ten-post minimum for sending PMs. I've no interest in spamming nine posts to circumvent this, and would be grateful if someone might waive this understandable restriction.

Why not just ask your question here...rather than wanting to do it in a PM?

Maybe someone other than a staff member can answer it.

 

[PoliTalker]

PH must have some pretty strict moderation if it's been around since '05 and has such low volume.

It's a slippery slope. If there is excessive moderation, it results in low volume of posts. That makes it hard to build more participation.

If there is little moderation, it results in lots of trolling, but the volume of posts generated by flame wars makes a chat board pretty active.

Let's check it out...

Yup. Guessed it:

"You agree to not use this website to submit or link to any content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like, likely to offend, contains adult or objectionable content, ..."

That would rule out 95% of the posts at JPP and relegate it to being a similar low-volume site.

 

[AProudLefty]

PH must have some pretty strict moderation if it's been around since '05 and has such low volume.

It's a slippery slope. If there is excessive moderation, it results in low volume of posts. That makes it hard to build more participation.

If there is little moderation, it results in lots of trolling, but the volume of posts generated by flame wars makes a chat board pretty active.

Let's check it out...

Yup. Guessed it:

"You agree to not use this website to submit or link to any content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like, likely to offend, contains adult or objectionable content, ..."

That would rule out 95% of the posts at JPP and relegate it to being a similar low-volume site.

And yet Twitter thrives.

 

[Djinn]

Why not just ask your question here...rather than wanting to do it in a PM?

Maybe someone other than a staff member can answer it.

It involves naming other users, and is the sort of thing best not shared in public. If the ten-post thing can't be waived, that's fine... This isn't exactly an emergency issue, and I'll hit ten posts eventually.

Per PoliTalker's post, one of the downsides of PH is that when the site owner migrated the software from vBulletin to Xenoforo, staff lost a LOT of access - including the ability to update the official rules page. As such, the wording has been unchanged for years - despite the fact that we've made tweaks to the "rules supplements" which are editable. Yeah, it's not ideal, by a long shot.

Many thanks, all.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello AProudLefty,

And yet Twitter thrives.

Twitter is far more permissive than PH. And besides. It's a lot more than just politics.

 

[Djinn]

Quick question ... I just noticed that I was banned from this thread. This confuses me - because I'd never posted in that thread.

Under what circumstances can one be threadbanned from a thread in which one has not (yet) participated?

 

[Legion]

Quick question ... I just noticed that I was banned from this thread. This confuses me - because I'd never posted in that thread. Under what circumstances can one be threadbanned from a thread in which one has not (yet) participated?

Does this help?

It's one thing to thread ban habitual trolls.

I ban people.

Then I’m a coward and proud of it. I will ignore them and ban them.

Guess which Legion Troll gets banned from my threads from now on!

I often have a thread ban list when I start a thread.

It's a good way to cut down on trolls who only show up to start flame wars or derail the topic.

If you're trying to have a serious discussion, whether it's off-topic or about politics, there are some who just cannot act like adults and should be excluded.

I thread-ban the known trolls and the more virulent racists like TDAK, TOP, CFM, Legion, USF, H. Moron, etc. They exist only to hijack a discussion and turn it into a new segment of their ongoing vendettas with normal ppl.

I only ban obvious trolls and posters who blatantly engage in overt racism, misogyny, bigotry, libel, and slander. Those are not forms of "free speech" and they are not even remotely close to conventional political speech. The only reason anyone could make it onto my thread ban list is if they are either a troll, or they are a terrible human being.

The only people who ever get banned are racists, slanderous liars, and belligerent trolls. I have been here since 2006 and have put up with a vast litany of insults, toxic grudges, bogus innuendo, slander, and petty resentments. So you are going to have to work much harder to make the case I am thin-skinned.

Does not seem cowardly to me. Like other mature adults who respect social etiquette, it just makes sense to exclude known racists, belligerent bigots, girlish gossipers, and libelers from civilized conversation.

I don't allow racists, or haters in.

I thread banned his ass so he couldn't shit the place up with his stinking shit.

There are a handful of posters here who are such good-for-nothing trolls they don't deserve to be allowed to post in my threads. Or anyone else's either. Ergo, I ban only them from every thread I start.

JPP = filthy right wing toilet. Primarily because the JPP admin allows multiple accounts or "sock puppets", as well as unlimited thread banning by OP's. Congratulations. And before you Trumptard puke bags start flapping your chancre infected lips about the hypocrisy of me talking about thread banning in a thread where I banned every one of you I could think of, all I can say is.... enjoy the taste of your own medicine, shit bags.

It is every poster's option to ban as many others as he/she decides.

Banning all the idiots is the best first line of defense.

I've never put anybody on ' Ignore ' but my reserve thread ban serves useful purposes. Once you've been a member for some considerable time here you can anticipate the reaction of the forum trolls to any given topic. Sometimes you might want to investigate a topic with other reasonable members and so you post your ban to eliminate the dross from your thread

The trolls often derail the thread. I think banning trolls is fine.

If you want to have an off topic discussion here you normally have to ban a few out necessity.

There are trolls who trash threads. This is a way to enable rational discourse.

Not wanting asshole trolls is not censoring.

 

[Djinn]

Does this help?

Not especially. I've only been on the site for a day - not nearly long enough to have pissed of anyone significantly. And I don't think any of my posts qualify as trolling or "assholish."

Did I break some rule of which I was unaware?

 

[AProudLefty]

Who the hell saves posts over years?

 

[Djinn]

Hmm... I'm getting the sense that when one creates a thread, the thread originator has the ability to levy bans against individual members. Is this conclusion correct?

 

[Legion]

I don't think any of my posts qualify as trolling or "assholish."

Of course you don't.

 

[Legion]

Hmm... I'm getting the sense that when one creates a thread, the thread originator has the ability to levy bans against individual members. Is this conclusion correct?

Indeed it is.

 

[AProudLefty]

Hmm... I'm getting the sense that when one creates a thread, the thread originator has the ability to levy bans against individual members. Is this conclusion correct?

Yep.

BTW, Legion is our biggest troll here. So I wouldn't pay much attention to him.

 

[Djinn]

Yep.

BTW, Legion is our biggest troll here. So I wouldn't pay much attention to him.

Ah; warning appreciated. Thank you.

 

[Legion]

Several years ago, lefties on JPP were angry about conservatives ruining their threads with differing opinions.

Using the Ignore function wasn't enough for them.

They demanded a new mechanism that would allow them to block conservatives from their threads altogether.

JPP's Administrator, Damocles, came up with one.

So, a vote was held.

Quite a few lefties voted for the new functionality that we now call "thread banning".

I, and most conservatives voted against its implementation, but to no avail.

So Damocles allowed individual users to block anyone they want to from their threads.

Here's where it gets amusing.

Apparently, the lefties failed to realize that the same feature could be used to block them from conservative's threads, too. When it began happening, they started complaining again.

Finally, the moderation team had enough and another vote was held, and the usual suspects voted to keep the feature for a second time.

As you've probably figured out by now, what the lefties wanted was a mechanism that allowed them to block conservatives without letting the conservatives "return the favor", so to speak.