Political threads/forum

[gourimoko]

How do we define shit post?

Reddit defines it as "low effort post"

I'm all for literally everything you just said. I just don't know how we get there

I would define it as an attempt to derail..

Here's the definition from Wikipedia:

Shitposting is the act of posting large amounts of content of "aggressively, ironically, and trollishly poor quality"[1] to an online forum or social network,[2][3][4][5] in some cases intended to derail discussions or otherwise make the site unusable to its regular visitors.[6]

In politics[edit]
In May 2016 The Daily Dot wrote that a shitpost is "a deliberate provocation designed for maximum impact with minimum effort."[7]

In September 2016 the alt-right group Nimble America received widespread media attention.[8][9][10] The Daily Beast described the group as "dedicated to “shitposting” and circulating internet memes maligning Hillary Clinton."[8]

In September 2016 The Independent wrote that shitposting is an apolitical "tool that can be put to a variety of effects."[11] However, posts such as these have appeared long before the 2016 US Presidential Election. Engineering & Technology magazine wrote that "Shitposting, whether from the left or right, is perilously close to delivering an online metastasis of Orwell's Two-minute Hate [sic]".[12]

In November 2016 Esquire magazine wrote that "Internet mockery was emerging as a legitimate political technique: shitposting. Maybe the 2020 election would be all shitposting."[13]

...

I would generally agree with this. We've seen it a lot in our past threads. Like, literally 20-30 pages would go by of single-lined retorts, circular arguments, and what couldn't possibly be more than just trolling...

You can actually find these sections of the old threads by searching for the Grandpa Simpson walking in and out of a bar gif... We.. should be trying to avoid that kind of derailment, especially since it almost universally leads to personal attacks.

And it's not that we all need to agree, we won't; but that if you don't have anything left to say, then you don't actually need to post anything at all. So again, I think these kinds of standards help.

It's how S34 used to be, and how many wish it would return to being.

 

[David.]

I would define it as an attempt to derail..

Here's the definition from Wikipedia:

Shitposting is the act of posting large amounts of content of "aggressively, ironically, and trollishly poor quality"[1] to an online forum or social network,[2][3][4][5] in some cases intended to derail discussions or otherwise make the site unusable to its regular visitors.[6]

In politics[edit]
In May 2016 The Daily Dot wrote that a shitpost is "a deliberate provocation designed for maximum impact with minimum effort."[7]

In September 2016 the alt-right group Nimble America received widespread media attention.[8][9][10] The Daily Beast described the group as "dedicated to “shitposting” and circulating internet memes maligning Hillary Clinton."[8]

In September 2016 The Independent wrote that shitposting is an apolitical "tool that can be put to a variety of effects."[11] However, posts such as these have appeared long before the 2016 US Presidential Election. Engineering & Technology magazine wrote that "Shitposting, whether from the left or right, is perilously close to delivering an online metastasis of Orwell's Two-minute Hate [sic]".[12]

In November 2016 Esquire magazine wrote that "Internet mockery was emerging as a legitimate political technique: shitposting. Maybe the 2020 election would be all shitposting."[13]

...

I would generally agree with this. We've seen it a lot in our past threads.

Shitposting derails conversations... And it's not that we all need to agree, we won't; but that if you don't have anything of substance to offer, you don't actually need to post anything at all. So again, these kinds of standards help.

It's how S34 used to be, and how many wish it would return to being.

I have and can continue to hold back some people. I could do better in the future too. Some people just don't seem to ever want to be on board with this idea and never will.

Are we talking about softly bringing these people into rationality? Ban?

 

[Cratylus]

Do we really want maximum post lengths? I mean... c'mon man, you're killing me..

But seriously, I've never seen an informative post that was too long..

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I would define it as an attempt to derail..[12]

Derail from...what? If someone has a particular narrative they wish to advance, one way to counter that is to point to other factors that are not being considered, or flawed assumptions, or potential unintended consequences, or that the narrative is ignoring a double-standard. etc.. That may have the effect of derailing the thread from the direction in which the poster tried to take it, and so the points the original poster wanted to debate are not addressed. But that doesn't make that "derailment" illegitimate.

It's how S34 used to be, and how many wish it would return to being.

If more people posted in Genpop, I suspect the quantity of posts in S34 would decline significantly....

 

[David.]

What about doing what we do now when stuff is redirected to continue in the poopflinging thread rather than s34

 

[FiveThous]

I'm definitely interested in this idea. Perhaps a small council of members that changes every month or so could be consulted if people are pushing the boundaries of what was originally agreed upon. I hope this forum happens, as politics has really been piquing my interest the last year or so, I'd hate to lose out on the wealth of ideas that have been shared between us.

 

[gourimoko]

I have and can continue to hold back some people. I could do better in the future too. Some people just don't seem to ever want to be on board with this idea and never will.

Are we talking about softly bringing these people into rationality? Ban?

To be clear, I'm specifically advocating a space for intellectual conversation -- and with that being said, I'll also say that I'm definitely not the sole arbiter of what that is, nor do I pretend to know the exact boundaries of that that entails. I enjoy difference of opinion; that's what makes this fun.

But suffice to say, we have failed as a group to police ourselves even after numerous pleas that we should lest the admins get involved.

So given the current state of affairs, I think some political conversation, under heavy self-moderation, is better than nothing at all. And to achieve that end, I think the "some people" you're referring to, those that require being "held back," don't really need to be given the continued opportunity to fuck things up for the rest of us.

So rather than walking someone into rationality; I'm personally not vested in that as much as I used to be. Instead, I would just prefer if people who can be civil and understand what is and isn't permissible have space to talk politics, otherwise yes, a soft-ban from the thread -- they can continue to use RCF, just not participate in the thread.

 

[gourimoko]

What about doing what we do now when stuff is redirected to continue in the poopflinging thread rather than s34

Perhaps that just creates more animosity?

I think we should really try to behave ourselves with much more civility, so I don't know that a thread to attack each other makes sense. I also don't think we'd want a thread that would require admins and mods to moderate what would surely be attacks on others.

 

[gourimoko]

Derail from...what? If someone has a particular narrative they wish to advance, one way to counter that is to point to other factors that are not being considered, or flawed assumptions, or potential unintended consequences, or that the narrative is ignoring a double-standard. etc.. That may have the effect of derailing the thread from the direction in which the poster tried to take it, and so the points the original poster wanted to debate are not addressed. But that doesn't make that "derailment" illegitimate.

Oh I totally agree with this.. I don't mean "derail" in that sense; as in, moving to a different destination; I mean derail in the sense of blowing the train completely off the tracks.

If someone wants to discuss a different topic, that's a perfectly fine form of "derailment."

If more people posted in Genpop, I suspect the quantity of posts in S34 would decline significantly....

Totally agree with you here. But if people could be more civil, more reasonable, then we wouldn't even be having this particular conversation though.

 

[David.]

Perhaps that just creates more animosity?

I think we should really try to behave ourselves with much more civility, so I don't know that a thread to attack each other makes sense. I also don't think we'd want a thread that would require admins and mods to moderate what would surely be attacks on others.

I call it poop fling but gen pop is a better concept.

Redirection would be a quick reminder they're fucking up and getting them into gen pop and away from the good stuff. Genpop would be like eayor, no moderation. P34 would be moderated

 

[Sebastian]

I'm definitely interested in this idea. Perhaps a small council of members that changes every month or so could be consulted if people are pushing the boundaries of what was originally agreed upon. I hope this forum happens, as politics has really been piquing my interest the last year or so, I'd hate to lose out on the wealth of ideas that have been shared between us.

I think a five-member Directory to adjudicate grave matters, like a borderline issues regarding what is truly bannable outside the normal offenses is an interesting idea.

Two lefties, two righties and a moderate in the middle?

 

[The Wizard of Moz]

Has this been discussed with Ben or just the 3 of you amongst yourselves?

 

[FiveThous]

I think a five-member Directory to adjudicate grave matters, like a borderline issues regarding what is truly bannable outside the normal offenses is an interesting idea.

Two lefties, two righties and a moderate in the middle?

Call me when you want a darwinist.

 

[Hydroponic3385]

Next time please post a beefy Scot in a kilt. Kthanx.

 

[Sebastian]

Has this been discussed with Ben or just the 3 of you amongst yourselves?

Initial conversations have occurred with an admin. We didn't want to go to Ben first without actually having:

1) A concrete proposal, and, more importantly,
2) Support and consensus from the board.

But, he has seen the thread so...