Danny Auto said:
So I feel that sometimes a lot of good threads, no even great threads succumb to big debates, now debates are fine however when a thread gets severely overtaken by ping pong posts back and fourth it heavily discourages continued discussion and it can be hard for members to actually post during said debate. There is also many occasions when debates get severely off topic again leading to the same consequences as I said before.
The issue is, we don't want to eliminate the element of debating all the way. Debating in itself is fine, and as long as it is done in a civilized manner, it should be deemed as acceptable. The problem is, we--that's the royal
we--are finding ourselves debating in threads that should not have anything of the sort occurring (for example: some threads, such as "Your Favorite Zelda Character" is asking for opinions, but not for them to be challenged). Not only this, but the manner in which some of us go about it, we aren't just challenging an opinion, we are hurting the person giving the opinion--which is not okay.
Danny Auto said:
This could even work for spam, troll posts etc. So how about system where a mod could have the power to ban someone from entering said thread, basically not allowing them to continue in that current discussion once it goes too far... If discussion returns and that person decides to resume with a good ol discussion then maybe they could be allowed back in.
Rutherfordium said:
This would certainly help a thread stay open instead of being locked because of an argument or going off topic. Most threads offer some really good discussion on the topic but a lot of them are locked and closed preventing any other members from discussing said topic. Barring certain members from the threads in question after warning would be a better alternative to the thread as a whole being locked.
While sometimes it seems like a certain member needs to be removed from a thread environment, I do not believe there is a way to just restrict his or her permissions from a single thread. The furthest down you can restrict, I believe, is a forum [sub]section, and I feel that should not be done unless by request of that particular member. I don't want our forums to be debate-free, I really don't. I just wish they wouldn't become so... violent in the aspect that we end up with a bunch of derailed discussions that initially had great potential.
Let me provide a quote from the old rules of the Zelda Dungeon Forums:
Remember, this is a community forum and there will always be different opinions. All members are entitled to their own opinion as long as it does not break any rules. (Rule #4, don't flame somebody for having a different opinion). Especially take this into account within the Theorizing area of the forums, as well as the Mature Discussion. In both cases, there are hardly ever any concrete answers and things can always be interpreted differently. Let's try to be fair towards all members while also be constructive.
The issue now, though, is that the person who makes a remark about someone's opinion isn't necessarily to blame for everything. Especially if it is done in a manner that would be viewed as non-offensive. Some members cannot stand being challenged, so they have the need to retaliate--whether it be because they dislike the person who challenged them or decide that no debating should exist whatsoever. This is a
forum, we are
supposed to
discuss things. Debating naturally comes as a part of that. If you take that away, we're going to have a crumbling foundation in every aspect of the message board.
Could we tone down the debating? Most-definitely. The issue is, when a moderator steps in and says "guys, let's get back on-topic" or something of the sort, some members are so deep into an argument that they totally disregard anything not related to the debate--including what the moderator had to say. This goes into how while members are to be treated equal, there seems to be a handful of people who treat the moderation staff as if they are powerless and that dominoes into a bunch of other forum issues that we've been having lately, as well.
I think the best thing at this point is probably re-writing a large chunk of the rule section to accommodate several arising issues. When the rules were rewritten back in 2010, it was a different community in the aspect of the way members presented themselves. We need to make rules for
this group of people--the ones present now--not back in 2010. And to be honest, I think anyone who uses this forum should be allowed to contribute to ideas to include on the new rules--if we are to actually revamp them. Why? Because we are all affected by the rules, and it would eliminate the need to complain about them. From there, we could deal with a method of dealing with the issue of debating and how to handle it when it goes too far... Of course, we wouldn't just go about adding stuff willy-nilly; rather, give and take. The forum staff would have to supervise the whole ordeal, of course.
Here is an example of a discussion where people should be allowed to comment on someones idea/opinion and critique and add to it. Ever hear of a
Socratic Seminar? I think we should go about doing this with the notion of that method in mind.
...Ideas? ...Opinions on this? Do I smell a major forum reformation in the process...re
forumation?