TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Locking threads that are nothing but an article
Pages (4): [1] 2 3 4 »

Locking threads that are nothing but an article

Lately there have been some complaints about threads being posted with no original content: sometimes, there isn't even an article, but just a link. Personally, I see no reason why the PDD should become a news feed. This is a place for debates, after all, not a bloody bookmark repository.

But, I think this should be discussed before any measure is taken. So, guys, tell me what you think

Aye

Aye. It will be useful to set a sort of standard though for what qualifies as a response. Is one line good enough? Should there be at least one argument? Or would writing anything be acceptable?

Absolutely; very annoying.

If I wanted to just read an article, I'd go to the website myself...

quote:

Originally posted by venomX Aye. It will be useful to set a sort of standard though for what qualifies as a response. Is one line good enough? Should there be at least one argument? Or would writing anything be acceptable?

Now this is a bit more difficult to enforce. One user, for example, started posting one-liners after the articles he pasted here. Does that really make any difference? Even if you limit to "one argument", he might just say something like "I think XXX is right/wrong because God/Nietzsche/the President says it is so", and that is an argument.

Got any ideas?

Big NO...I like when people share interesting stuff here. I don't visit dozens of websites so it's nice when someone posts a good story or editorial that could spark a debate.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Now this is a bit more difficult to enforce. One user, for example, started posting one-liners after the articles he pasted here. Does that really make any difference? Even if you limit to "one argument", he might just say something like "I think XXX is right/wrong because God/Nietzsche/the President says it is so", and that is an argument. Got any ideas?

I agree that this is where it gets tricky. Specially because the definition of a 'quality' argument can become very subjective, very quickly. I think that at least on opinion on whatever is posted can start off a debate, it needn't be a comprehensive argument. This is way it will be kept simple and people won't be put off by having to write a coherent well documented argument (which in all truth is a bit sad that most people are not willing to do this in a debate forum but alas its how it goes).

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Big NO...I like when people share interesting stuff here. I don't visit dozens of websites so it's nice when someone posts a good story or editorial that could spark a debate.

Isn't it even better when that interesting article is accompanied by some interesting arguments/opinions by the poster though? This is supposed to be a debating forum after all.

Re: Locking threads that are nothing but an article

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Lately there have been some complaints about threads being posted with no original content: sometimes, there isn't even an article, but just a link. Personally, I see no reason why the PDD should become a news feed. This is a place for debates, after all, not a bloody bookmark repository. But, I think this should be discussed before any measure is taken. So, guys, tell me what you think

Aye, of course. Couldn't agree more. As to a particular standard set at how much of an opinion needs to be said, I might agree to one but it should be a very minimal standard to be met. A couple of sentences, even one sentence depending on the article itself I suppose. An opinion of some sort related to the article/site should be given. That way a following responder will know where the thread starter stands on the issue he/she wishes to debate or discuss.

But to play devil's advocate, I'll have to admit that occasionally I'll post a question to the readers instead of my opinion. I've occasionally posted an article with a statement or two that didn't define my position just yet, and then ended the post by asking for the thoughts and opinions of others. Sometimes an article is newsworthy enough just in the content itself, and I may not have enough information to post my complete thoughts on the matter so I like leaving it open for others first. I'd like to think that's the exception for me rather than the rule.

If I had to lean one way or the other, I'd prefer a minimal standard of leaving an opinion of some sort alongside the article. I would also suggest that whatever is decided that it be added to the Simple Rules sticky thread, whenever possible.

Re: Locking threads that are nothing but an article

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Lately there have been some complaints about threads being posted with no original content: sometimes, there isn't even an article, but just a link. Personally, I see no reason why the PDD should become a news feed. This is a place for debates, after all, not a bloody bookmark repository. But, I think this should be discussed before any measure is taken. So, guys, tell me what you think

It's essentially part of the reason why I've withdrawn interaction with this part of the forum any more and probably will continue to not read it, it seems to be locked in the same circular process of-

*Domestic global news, which I've already read anyway and provided it's factual enough, doesn't need to be commented on. Fabricating a possibility of the information being invalid isn't really a debate, it's purely hypothetical.
*Endless threads about conspiracies which no one seems to be able to sway anyone else opinion and thus turns into slandering one another, possibly an amusing activity for some. But pointless.
*Local domestic political news. Even if it's political then I find it to be uninteresting, (no vested interest) but it's fair enough to comment for people who do.
*There is an inordinate amount of page space accorded to the US domestic affairs.
*The middle east... over and over... and over.

Which sort of leaves the rest of the world somewhat marginalised at best and usually completely ignored, even if it's global ramifications will be felt somewhere or held up to equal comparison.

In short, it gets dull really quickly.
I don't know if locking or sticky threads will solve anything though.

Mostly I find the place is a chore aside from the topic selection, simply because of the manner of the arguments which follow a linear progression of strawman fabrication/abuse and then comment by attrition, posting the same thing over and over. Which means the argument is little more than personal attack or an investment in time to get the last word in, it doesn't even mean you're correct/incorrect, it just means you've managed to either bore or offend anyone else into retracting their involvement.
You don't actually convince them of anything and you can't really 'win' a debate if the other side isn't bothered showing up.

adios

Aye, and the minimal standard should be this...

1. A thesis sentence of the thread starters opinion.

or

2. A thought provoking question.

how about a "Interesting new thread". Some people don't have time to write a few paragraphs about an article, and just would like to share information because it's important or interesting to them.

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Summers how about a "Interesting new thread". Some people don't have time to write a few paragraphs about an article, and just would like to share information because it's important or interesting to them.

I don't think its that hard to type out a simple thesis sentence..

The point of posting an article is to foster some kind of debate about the article. I see no reason why a thread should be locked for this reason, but not locked if the person simply adds a manufactured addendum of sorts.

How about this instead...

If someone posts an article, and doesn't reply to any responses to the article in a certain period of time, the post is deleted?

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby The point of posting an article is to foster some kind of debate about the article. I see no reason why a thread should be locked for this reason, but not locked if the person simply adds a manufactured addendum of sorts. How about this instead... If someone posts an article, and doesn't reply to any responses to the article in a certain period of time, the post is deleted?

You have a good point

Depends what you consider "empty". I'm with Krypton. I'll post an article with a one line statement or one paragraph statement that will establish my view. Then I'll simply wait to see if other people are willing to debate the topic. Why waste the time to back up your thesis statement if no one is willing to argue with you? However, posts that simply post an article with no establishment of views are worthless in my opinion. Why would I even want to read a thread that you post when you have absolutely no opinion about it? If you're conflicted than voice your confliction and explain why you're conflicted. At least I might get something out of the conversation. Simply gathering information about what others think about a topic is selfish. If that's your goal, create a news subforum of the pdd where poeple know not to respond to posts.

A thread about what some would consider interesting articles can be a good solution to this problem. Users can go into that specific thread, maybe stickied, to post an article, forcibly posting a sentence or two about it to prove that it was read.

Then again, forcing not-so-interesting articles into one thread would just leave space for those other threads that don't ever seem to go to the 2nd page.

Anyway, because thread starters should post something about what they're citing to, as I said earlier, prove they actually read the given material, the thread with nothing but an article should be locked. Deletion is also an option, isn't it?

I don't think that will meaningfully improve the situation because, frankly, I don't think that the people who routinely post "just an article" have any original thoughts to contribute at all. Even if they were to add some words of their own into the post, I doubt they would be anything more than the regurgitation of some foolish "talking points" or similar rubbish.

It's also important to consider that some articles lend themselves to discussion better than others, or even in different ways than others. An immediate response to the article by the author of the post does not necessarily improve the quality of the discussion; those responding to the thread may tailor their response more to the poster's ideas than the ideas in the article, which may result in alternative analyses of the article not being as well-developed as they might have been, and thus lead to a narrower discussion.

If some individual in particular is getting out of hand with posting articles that aren't generating any discussion, or that are highly redundant, then that's the sort of thing I think needs to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The proposed solution is administratively convenient (not that I'm suggesting that's its motivation) but I'm not sure it will really improve the quality of discussion, and in some rare cases may actually detract from it.

i agree with occ & krypton. first thing i do in a new thread is check out whether someone has put forward any opinion. hell, even i give my space threads a little one liner like "black holes are cool!" so people understand the context you are talking in.

Re: Re: Locking threads that are nothing but an article

Aye! I can't stand it when people just post an article and just an article!

Every new thread started should contain the OP's opinion, and that should be the start of the debate. I don't even like it when entire articles are posted at all - they take up space (and bandwidth which I assume TA has to pay for). I say just post a link, quote the main paragraph then add your opinion to it and let the fun begin (or if you're Lillith, just, erm, begin! )

this thread is a waste of bandwith

For the first time in all the forums that ive been a member of, and plenty, i have encounter this nonsense. I mean i dont mean to offend anyone, but people really dont create any threads worth discussing on. there are some exceptions ofcourse, i understand this section is not a news feed section. but come on, most of the times a story gets discussion from its members. so this is what i see, it is acceptable to create a thread denying the 9/11 attacks or any other conspiracy and propaganda, but its not acceptable to post a real story, atleast most of the times

oh and lira if they keep bitching and crying like little babies to you about a thread retrieved from a real story just tell them to ignore it, its not like the creator of that thread is going to force them to take part on it. if you dont like the headline of the thread move on to another one

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover this thread is a waste of bandwith For the first time in all the forums that ive been a member of, and plenty, i have encounter this nonsense. I mean i dont mean to offend anyone, but people really dont create any threads worth discussing on. there are some exceptions ofcourse, i understand this section is not a news feed section. but come on, most of the times a story gets discussion from its members. so this is what i see, it is acceptable to create a thread denying the 9/11 attacks or any other conspiracy and propaganda, but its not acceptable to post a real story, atleast most of the times

What on Earth are you talking about? This has got nothing to do with 9/11, I posted this poll after reading this thread and receiving a couple of pm's that had nothing to do with 9/11.

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover oh and lira if they keep bitching and crying like little babies to you about a thread retrieved from a real story just tell them to ignore it, its not like the creator of that thread is going to force them to take part on it. if you dont like the headline of the thread move on to another one

First of all, I am the moderator of this forum (along with Wicked Neo), and I'm here to help the users, not to judge them because of their opinions. If you haven't noticed, the majority voted for this, so this is not a complaint from one particular user or anything.

Also, no one came to me because of a thread (whatever thread it is that you're talking about), but because of a recent trend here. I actually tolerated this because I don't like to intervene that much, but such threads are really disrespectful, in a way that you can't even bother to state your opinion about a topic you're raising yourself.

Long story short, this is not about you: can you please give us a reason why such threads shouldn't be closed?

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover this thread is a waste of bandwith

Then why read and post here?

quote:

For the first time in all the forums that ive been a member of, and plenty,

With your incredible popularity and enlightening voice of reason, I can surely see why you're involved with so many.....

quote:

i have encounter this nonsense.

Speaking of nonsense, could you at least try to make a coherent statement every now and then, please?

quote:

I mean i dont mean to offend anyone,

That's a first.

quote:

but people really dont create any threads worth discussing on.

Gosh, that "you're not worthy of my time" theme of yours is getting quite old, don't you think?

Why the fuck are you even posting then? You just love living in contradiction, I suppose.

quote:

there are some exceptions ofcourse, i understand this section is not a news feed section.

Then why post all the fucking newsfeeds like you do, nitwit?

quote:

but come on, most of the times a story gets discussion from its members. so this is what i see, it is acceptable to create a thread denying the 9/11 attacks or any other conspiracy and propaganda, but its not acceptable to post a real story, atleast most of the times

Remind me to wash my brain out with soap for even trying to step in your shoes and see what you see..........

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover oh and lira if they keep bitching and crying like little babies to you about a thread retrieved from a real story just tell them to ignore it,

No one's cried to Lira about anything of the sort. We'd just prefer to have individuals such as yourself do more than copy/paste a story with no opinion and no link to that given story.

The only crying baby around here is you, child.

quote:

its not like the creator of that thread is going to force them to take part on it. if you dont like the headline of the thread move on to another one

The irony of this statement while you are posting here and complaining about the thread being a "waste of bandwidth" is most certainly not missed.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.