I'd like to think there's a difference as to what's expected/accepted by Hatrack the community, and what's expected/accepted by Hatrack the forum. I sincerely try to be as even-handed (and as hands-off) as I can be, though I'm certain not only that I have biases of which I'm unaware, but I also have some of which I am aware, and some of those I choose to apply and some I try not to. When I do intentionally apply such biases, it's usually in the direction opposite my actual inclination (much like when my dad was the cubmaster and was tougher on me and my brothers than on all the other cub scouts in the pack, or at least it seemed that way).
I'm sure there are people who consider me to use "double-standards." Yeah, probably, sometimes. And sometimes not. I've had people on both "sides" of an issue think that I was taking the other person's side, and I've made non-person-specific suggestions in threads and had each "side" think I was talking only to the other "side." Anyway, I'm doing my best (and no, I'm not asking for affirmation -- seems like someone throws some at me every time I post anything where I admit fault of any sort).
As to what's expected by the Hatrack community, I don't think it's my place to speak as a moderator.
As a member (and this informs my decisions as moderator, but doesn't dictate them, I don't think) I believe it's important (or at least healthy) for there to be a certain degree of disagreement, and sometimes with some energy behind it. Hatrack as a community is really good at working through such things and coming out better on the other side. Usually. And as long as the TOS aren't being tossed aside, I've found it best for the working through to be allowed to happen. I'll admit I wish more of it were worked out off-forum, and at times that people valued resolution more than "winning."
I don’t post much, but I read the Hatrack forum on a regular basis. It provides me with alternative news and views. Reading what Papa said in the “Spock/LDS” thread reminded me of what I have noticed about this forum’s tone over the last six years.
The forum has changed, and Papa’s quote describes the forums change: “Hatrack as a community is really good at working through such things and coming out better on the other side. Usually. And as long as the TOS aren't being tossed aside, I've found it best for the working through to be allowed to happen. I'll admit I wish more of it were worked out off-forum, and at times that people valued resolution more than "winning."
This forum is excellent. Usually the discussion is “is really good at working through [such] things and coming out better on the other side.” I have noticed, over the years, an increasing amount of nitpicking and fault-finding on very minor details and posters avoiding the overall discussion of threads to prove trivial and minor points. Many of the threads get bogged down in petty arguments that have nothing to do with the topics. Hundreds of Hatrackers have left the forum because of this. There are many mean spirited and ruthless forums on the net. I think OSC’s goal was to provide a forum to avoid this. It would be best for members of this forum to make an honest effort, as Papa said, to make a goal of “resolution more than "winning."
posted
I agree. It's nice to be reminded that the real reason we come to Hatrack is to have intelligent discussions about topics that are important to us. This can't be done if we merely focus on the nitpicky details.
Posts: 1789 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
However, it also can't be done if people insist that details important to one person in the discussion are really "nitpicky details."
Calling something a nitpicky detail is a way of saying "that's not important."
Often, it is the difference in what is considered important that leads to the differing conclusions about the topic at hand.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Frankly, I haven't seen any changes on Hatrack as you describe. Not that none of that doesn't happen. It is that it has always happened. There have been many people who have left over the years over what you have described.
As has been said at Hatrack before, the place goes in cycles. The real question is if the cycle has been stuck.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe we could all make an effort to be nicer about the details? Most of those discussions get so annoying, I have to just skip over posts in threads.
The Imus thread is a great example. I changed my opinion on the subject, but never said so because the thread had devolved to back and forth bickering by the time I got back. I miss when folks could have conversations that were polite long enough to uncover deep feelings and allow us to understand other views on tricky subjects.
I owe a lot to this forum. I've learned a lot here, and I'd like to keep learning. So let's all play nice, huh?
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Also, just because people don't comment on a post does not mean it's been ignored.
The trouble is that if you write a lengthy post with several different points, if all the replies are about one particular contraversial point then the thread will inevitably become about that point, and leave all the other issues in the dust. Then whoever comes in later to read that thread will read it over and forget about the good points, and mainly just focus on the one contraversial point that is being argued over. (Just look at the sunglasses thread - the price of the glasses was a very minor detail, but the thread ended up being almost entirely about that, rather than the original question being asked.) So, in truth, I think things that are not commented upon actually do end up ignored by the majority.
I suppose this is okay if the point in question is truly important, but I've often been in situations where I've offered an argument and found myself in a discussion over something that is not essential for the conclusion I am making. At that point, the original argument seems forgotten by almost everyone in the thread.
On the other hand, as has been mentioned, sometimes an import issue is written off unfair as a nitpicky detail. That can be just as bad!
So, I guess my suggestion would be to try to limit the number of side details you bring up if you are trying to make a certain point. That way it is more clear what the important issue is, and there is less for people to nitpick about. The down side is that I think sometimes that leads to less interesting posts.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I suppose this is okay if the point in question is truly important, but I've often been in situations where I've offered an argument and found myself in a discussion over something that is not essential for the conclusion I am making.
I don't buy this - just because you don't think it's essential doesn't mean it's not important. After all, you brought it up for a reason.
Nor does your conclusion get to determine what others find important. If you diverge from my way of seeing the issue at point 3, and not at the conclusion listed in point 10, then point 3 is what's important.
Moreover, one of the things I like about Hatrack is the way interesting topics can come up in the context of a different topic. Often, I'm only interested in one of those side topics, not the original topic in the thread.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
