Is fornits better now that it's moderated?

[Ursus]

There are so many threads being hacked by posts being split off and plunked into OFFA, that I have a hard time keeping track of discussions.

[psy]

What was the moderation supposed to accomplish? I wasn't online during the period of time when said decision was made, so I have no clue what prompted this...

A lot of reasons.  The morgan situation, the drama.  The moderation is supposed to provide readers with an "opt out" for that kind of thing.  Fornits has always had a moderated section and an unmoderated one.  The only real difference here are the ratios.

[psy]

There are so many threads being hacked by posts being split off and plunked into OFFA, that I have a hard time keeping track of discussions.

Well.  There are so many threads that had shifted off-topic.  I figured it better off to split them into more appropriate chunks.  The new stuff will stil rise to the top of active topics and you'll still be able to search for those posts through the search feature.

[psy]

Guys.  Don't hate it just because Whooter likes it.  And you, Whooter.  You're ruining my image over here.  Quit with the cheerleading.
 :roflmao:

[Ursus]

What was the moderation supposed to accomplish? I wasn't online during the period of time when said decision was made, so I have no clue what prompted this...

A lot of reasons.  The morgan situation, the drama.  The moderation is supposed to provide readers with an "opt out" for that kind of thing.  Fornits has always had a moderated section and an unmoderated one.  The only real difference here are the ratios.

Well, no, I beg to differ. It's a LOT more than just "ratios." What's going on now is a whole different ball game than before.

[psy]

What was the moderation supposed to accomplish? I wasn't online during the period of time when said decision was made, so I have no clue what prompted this...

A lot of reasons.  The morgan situation, the drama.  The moderation is supposed to provide readers with an "opt out" for that kind of thing.  Fornits has always had a moderated section and an unmoderated one.  The only real difference here are the ratios.

Well, no, I beg to differ. It's a LOT more than just "ratios." What's going on now is a whole different ball game than before.

Ok.  Explain to me what you don't like and let's take a look at changing it.

[DannyB II]

What was the moderation supposed to accomplish? I wasn't online during the period of time when said decision was made, so I have no clue what prompted this...

A lot of reasons.  The morgan situation, the drama.  The moderation is supposed to provide readers with an "opt out" for that kind of thing.  Fornits has always had a moderated section and an unmoderated one.  The only real difference here are the ratios.

Well, no, I beg to differ. It's a LOT more than just "ratios." What's going on now is a whole different ball game than before.

Well, I guess it is called a "shift" of ...........?

[Ursus]

There are so many threads being hacked by posts being split off and plunked into OFFA, that I have a hard time keeping track of discussions.

Well.  There are so many threads that had shifted off-topic.  I figured it better off to split them into more appropriate chunks.  The new stuff will stil rise to the top of active topics and you'll still be able to search for those posts through the search feature.

I agree that it has been difficult with the sheer magnitude of off-topic derailing that's been going on. But it was still easier to follow than the current situation. 'Cuz even with the derailment, one could still sift through or skip ahead to where the meat of the thread continued.

Now... threads are chopped up, posts removed elsewhere sans their original context, those threads split off once again, some different threads recombined into yet another split-off with two different conversations superimposed on top of one another... What a mess.

How do propose that the "search" feature is supposed to sift through all that? Please.

Moreover, what you determine to be "off-topic" may not be what someone else feels is "off-topic." Yet you are imposing your interpretation and judgment of what people are discussing onto the whole of the forum. You are and have been generally pretty fair-minded, but you are not omnipotent and all-seeing. There are bound to be times when you may make an egregious mistake.

[psy]

There are so many threads being hacked by posts being split off and plunked into OFFA, that I have a hard time keeping track of discussions.

Well.  There are so many threads that had shifted off-topic.  I figured it better off to split them into more appropriate chunks.  The new stuff will stil rise to the top of active topics and you'll still be able to search for those posts through the search feature.

I agree that it has been difficult with the sheer magnitude of off-topic derailing that's been going on. But it was still easier to follow than the current situation. 'Cuz even with the derailment, one could still sift through or skip ahead to where the meat of the thread continued.

OK. I didn't split topics in two without regard. I selected posts that were on topic and left them.  If it was a thread about apples and somebody started talking about oranges, i'll select the orange related posts only and start a new thread with that content.  It's more organization than moderation (filing things in their appropriate place).

If a thread was unrecoverable (without extreme effort) as it was for the "dead insane in jail" thread, I cut off the on-topic beginning, leaving the rest.  I then label that (general discussion) and work backwards reading and selecting off-topic posts for split into a new thread. Here's the thread's beginning. I'm sure you've seen the one labeled general dicussion around.  Also, if I label something "general dicussion" it means that, within reason, the on-topic rule doesn't apply, but you probably figured that out by now since half of you would have gotten warnings.

Now... threads are chopped up, posts removed elsewhere sans their original context, those threads split off once again, some different threads recombined into yet another split-off with two different conversations superimposed on top of one another... What a mess.

heh heh.  You were watching. there is a method to it.

How do propose that the "search" feature is supposed to sift through all that? Please.

Becuase you can search for the old thread title and the results will show (because the title on each post is based on the original thread and is not changed after transfer to the new thread.

Moreover, what you determine to be "off-topic" may not be what someone else feels is "off-topic." Yet you are imposing your interpretation and judgment of what people are discussing onto the whole of the forum. You are and have been generally pretty fair-minded, but you are not omnipotent and all-seeing. There are bound to be times when you may make an egregious mistake.

Absolutely, but the situation before with the derailing was out of control and these rules were necessary.  I know full well i'm not perfect but just because the "law" isn't perfect doesn't mean we're better off without any "laws".

[Ursus]

Guys.  Don't hate it just because Whooter likes it.  And you, Whooter.  You're ruining my image over here.  Quit with the cheerleading.
 :roflmao:

Well, of course Whooter likes it. He doesn't care whether his posts get shifted here or there, as long as they are still on fornits somewhere. His style of propaganda doesn't rely on having a rational argument and being able to make one's point via the back and forth from A to Z. His modus operandi is to occupy a certain percentage of presence here with a pseudo-civil persona that he hopes will contrast nicely with the impassioned outbursts he's able to goad out of others.

In fact, getting posts hacked out of threads and placed elsewhere works to his advantage. Can't seem to follow Whooter's argument? Well, that's not Whooter's fault or lack of logic. It's 'cuz Psy deemed that part of the conversation to be "off-topic" and has moved it elsewhere. Oh, well...

[psy]

In fact, getting posts hacked out of threads and placed elsewhere works to his advantage. Can't seem to follow Whooter's argument? Well, that's not Whooter's fault or lack of logic. It's 'cuz Psy deemed that part of the conversation to be "off-topic" and has moved it elsewhere. Oh, well...

That's a fair criticism, but I do read the posts to make sure they're not relevant to the topic before i split.  If there is any relation to the original topic, i'll leave it. Otherwise, I split it so people who are looking for a Whooter argument can find it and people who want to read about what the topic says in the heading, can do so.

[Maximilian]

I just want to thank Psy for all his hard work maintaining fornits, which is a thankless job. Thank you Psy, I appreciate all your hard work and efforts here to improve fornits.  :notworthy:

[DannyB II]

Guys.  Don't hate it just because Whooter likes it.  And you, Whooter.  You're ruining my image over here.  Quit with the cheerleading.
 :roflmao:

Well, of course Whooter likes it. He doesn't care whether his posts get shifted here or there, as long as they are still on fornits somewhere. His style of propaganda doesn't rely on having a rational argument and being able to make one's point via the back and forth from A to Z. His modus operandi is to occupy a certain percentage of presence here with a pseudo-civil persona that he hopes will contrast nicely with the impassioned outbursts he's able to goad out of others.

In fact, getting posts hacked out of threads and placed elsewhere works to his advantage. Can't seem to follow Whooter's argument? Well, that's not Whooter's fault or lack of logic. It's 'cuz Psy deemed that part of the conversation to be "off-topic" and has moved it elsewhere. Oh, well...

WoW, here comes the all knowing condescending attitude, we all know and love from our great benevolent, "brother bear". My goodness, "Ursus", has spoken.  
I will say, I do not agree with Ursus at all, because the old way, Ursus, could circumvent a post with his loyal horde anyway he wanted to. Ursus could reek havoc on anyone through his manipulative antics (one liners or short phrases) and subtlety attack posters, always feigning passiveness (no it wasn't me).
This way (moderation) your out there "brother bear" all by yourself.
The only thing Psy is doing IMO is removing the minutia from threads and making it possible for folks to follow a thread conversation.
Fornits is changing, as any change it ruffles feathers but in the course of this modification I believe we will be better. Especially to parents, children and other folks who come around looking for information or help. All the sock puppetry is definitely a big plus to be rid of. This should be no surprise to anyone, this change resembles the change concerning guest posting.

[Ursus]

There are so many threads being hacked by posts being split off and plunked into OFFA, that I have a hard time keeping track of discussions.

Well.  There are so many threads that had shifted off-topic.  I figured it better off to split them into more appropriate chunks.  The new stuff will stil rise to the top of active topics and you'll still be able to search for those posts through the search feature.

I agree that it has been difficult with the sheer magnitude of off-topic derailing that's been going on. But it was still easier to follow than the current situation. 'Cuz even with the derailment, one could still sift through or skip ahead to where the meat of the thread continued.

OK. I didn't split topics in two without regard. I selected posts that were on topic and left them.  If it was a thread about apples and somebody started talking about oranges, i'll select the orange related posts only and start a new thread with that content.  It's more organization than moderation (filing things in their appropriate place).

If a thread was unrecoverable (without extreme effort) as it was for the "dead insane in jail" thread, I cut off the on-topic beginning, leaving the rest.  I then label that (general discussion) and work backwards reading and selecting off-topic posts for split into a new thread. Here's the thread's beginning. I'm sure you've seen the one labeled general dicussion around.  Also, if I label something "general dicussion" it means that, within reason, the on-topic rule doesn't apply, but you probably figured that out by now since half of you would have gotten warnings.

Now... threads are chopped up, posts removed elsewhere sans their original context, those threads split off once again, some different threads recombined into yet another split-off with two different conversations superimposed on top of one another... What a mess.

heh heh.  You were watching. there is a method to it.

How do propose that the "search" feature is supposed to sift through all that? Please.

Becuase you can search for the old thread title and the results will show (because the title on each post is based on the original thread and is not changed after transfer to the new thread.

Moreover, what you determine to be "off-topic" may not be what someone else feels is "off-topic." Yet you are imposing your interpretation and judgment of what people are discussing onto the whole of the forum. You are and have been generally pretty fair-minded, but you are not omnipotent and all-seeing. There are bound to be times when you may make an egregious mistake.

Absolutely, but the situation before with the derailing was out of control and these rules were necessary.  I know full well i'm not perfect but just because the "law" isn't perfect doesn't mean we're better off without any "laws".

Well... YOU may feel that you have been fair and read carefully before you go chop chop. And I'll grant you that you probably honestly do try to do the right thing. From my perspective, however, it doesn't feel like such a benign situation. I find it very difficult to follow threads now, and the concern that you will disrupt the discussion by hacking posts out of it does put a bit of a pall on my posting. Why even bother getting involved in a discussion that might get hacked to bits for being "off-topic?" Plus, no matter how careful you've been, there has been stuff that (I felt) was on-topic and pertinent which has been chopped out.

Incidentally, lots of very interesting and ultimately quite pertinent material has been posted by people on fornits over the years that would be considered "off-topic," in the stricter sense of the word. Some folks even have posting styles that only work that way. You could say that's how their brains are wired. You may be shutting down some valuable material by forcing such a literal and restrictive interpretation of thread titles.

[Ursus]

How do propose that the "search" feature is supposed to sift through all that? Please.

Becuase you can search for the old thread title and the results will show (because the title on each post is based on the original thread and is not changed after transfer to the new thread.

Nope. This does not work. Look at some of your "newly created" threads more carefully. I change the post title of more posts than I leave as is, and I am not the only one who does so. Those posts do not still carry the stamp of the original thread 'cuz they never did in the first place.