Policy Change Regarding Off Topic Comments

community
By:  @community, 3 weeks ago
Comments: 40 ..

Tags

Please be advised:


This is notification of a change in policy about "Off Topic" comments. If an author feels that a comment is off topic they may get a mod to evaluate it. If it is a post is clearly off topic or a continuous exchange of posts between two or more members, which goes off topic and/or are personal attacks resulting in the disruption of the article, the comment will be removed. As of late, too many of our article's discussions are being derail, and this quick response is meant to get everyone back on track. 

Perrie Halpern R.A.
link 03/08/17 03:28:48PM @perrie-halpern:

This is just an FYI. I will only be able to take limited comments due to personal issues. 

 
Pepe
link 03/08/17 03:52:41PM @pepe:

This is good News, I just had a member post 4 comments to troll on one of my articles. Thank you for removing John's comments.

 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link 03/08/17 04:03:44PM @perrie-halpern:

Let's keep the comments not personal. 

 
Pepe
link 03/08/17 04:09:05PM @pepe:

I was just thanking you for the tough job you do. I mean that was ridiculous and it's a shame you have to treat members like children.

 
JohnRussell
link 03/08/17 04:21:52PM @johnrussell:

if you want to have any credibility perrie, you should remove the off topic comments from this thread

 
Pepe
link 03/08/17 04:29:57PM @pepe:

This is a meta discussion and that is all we are discussing.

Whatadoodle it's Meta time!

 
Gunny
link 03/08/17 04:10:50PM @gunny:

I may be wrong, Perrie, but this seems not to be a change in policy, but only re-emphasing   of the current policy.

 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link 03/08/17 04:16:08PM @perrie-halpern:

Hi Gene,

Yes and no. The only real change is that the author before had to ask for the member to get back on topic before a mod would step in, but that lead to a whole derailing of the article's discussion. This way, it's swift and clean.  

 
Gunny
link 03/08/17 04:49:51PM @gunny:

Ok, so they do not have to warn those breaking the off topic rule anymore.

 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link 03/08/17 05:27:56PM @perrie-halpern:

Correct.

 
Gunny
link 03/08/17 05:31:21PM @gunny:

Chaos, I see chaos......................................laughing dude

 
Kavika
link 03/08/17 05:43:54PM @kavika:

I like the idea. If there is a topic, discuss the topic....If you don't like the topic, don't comment...

Members know when there off topic and they also know how to stay on topic.

Pretty simple.

 
Dean Moriarty
link 03/08/17 06:01:50PM @dean-moriarty:

It's just a trick to get us to spend more time online so we don't miss all the fun before it gets deleted. 

 
Dowser
link 03/16/17 02:05:03PM @dowser:

LOL, Dean!  

 
Randy
link 03/08/17 09:12:27PM @randy:

I like it too. As long as it is just the author that can complain that the thread is off topic. Some of the best conversations on NT have happened in some threads that were off topic of that thread. Mostly they were fun and consensual. So as I understand it, it would be up to the author of the article to make a complaint to a moderator, not just some third un-involved party?

 
Kavika
link 03/08/17 09:37:59PM @kavika:

I agree Randy, it should only be the author/seeder of the article that has the right to declare ''off topic''...Your also correct at times, if the author/seeder allowed it, seemingly off topic remarks can lead to interesting articles.

 

 
Buzz of the Orient
link 03/09/17 05:50:18AM @buzz-of-the-orient:

I feel the same way as Randy, and in fact I know damn well that I go way off topic lots of times and sometimes some real fun and/or interesting dialogues come up. A serious discussion can sometimes be a total drag unless some upbeat islands appear as an oasis now and then. I almost never stop an off-topic discussion on any of my articles/seeds unless they are insulting.  Anyway, as Churchy La Femme from Pogo said: "Don't take life too serious, son. It ain't nohow permanent."

 
Kavika
link 03/09/17 11:55:49AM @kavika:

 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link 03/09/17 01:08:28PM @perrie-halpern:

Re: Author making the call,

It is the author who gets the mod for an off topic comment and not other members. This way they keep control over it. The Mod makes the ultimate call, since this system could be used as silencing people who are on topic, to that this system can't be abused

 
Buzz of the Orient
link 03/09/17 08:42:09PM @buzz-of-the-orient:

Hey Kavika,

Although the image you posted was a reply to my comment, I can't open it. What is it?

 
Kavika
link 03/09/17 08:51:52PM @kavika:

A photo of Pogo, 1968 for president...Up the down escalator.Laugh

 
Buzz of the Orient
link 03/09/17 08:53:28PM @buzz-of-the-orient:

I know there are many on NT who would have preferred Pogo to Trump.

 
Randy
link 03/09/17 09:01:37PM @randy:

Count me among them. Back then comedian Pat Paulson used to run and many people wrote in Snoopy too. Ahhh for the good old days.

 
Krishna
link 03/09/17 09:21:31PM @krishna:

I know there are many on NT who would have preferred Pogo to Trump.

And some definitely wanted to "Drain The Swamp!" (To coin a phrase :^)

 
Randy
link 03/09/17 10:02:47PM @randy:

I wonder whatever happened to that old "drain the swamp" thing anyway?

 
Buzz of the Orient
link 03/09/17 10:29:09PM @buzz-of-the-orient:

Drain the Okeefenokee? Pogo would never allow it.

 
TTGA
link 03/09/17 10:19:14PM @ttga:

I'd go even farther than that.  The best discussions I've ever had on line have started on topic and, almost immediately skewed off into the wilderness.

 
Buzz of the Orient
link 03/09/17 10:31:54PM @buzz-of-the-orient:

Pogo and I both feel the same way.

 
Big_Brother
link 03/09/17 07:38:26AM @big-brother:

I have a new policy as well. 

 
Pepe
link 03/09/17 11:59:09AM @pepe:

Mmmmm yes New policies.....good....so good!

Whattadoodle....It's meta time!

 
Dowser
link 03/09/17 01:03:12PM @dowser:

Thanks, Perrie!  This should help!

 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link 03/09/17 02:52:14PM @perrie-halpern:

OK let's review the rules about this. If you get a mod for an off topic comment, it must truly off topic AND you must equally apply this to all comments, not just to people you don't want on your article. If you can't follow this simple rule, don't get a mod. The purpose of this was so that we could have better discussions, not spite contests. 

 
Bob Nelson
link 03/16/17 12:32:25PM @bob-nelson:

Perrie, 

The decision is still the Mod's, right? Not the author's? 

 

 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link 03/16/17 03:24:37PM @perrie-halpern:

Bob,

Unless you are using the RBR's, yes, the decision is the Mods. With the RBR's the author has final say.  

 
Bob Nelson
link 03/16/17 03:59:10PM @bob-nelson:

I'm not going to re-visit old events... but this is essential, and I'll save a copy for the future. 

Please confirm that if the author/seeder (me, for example!) announces Red Rules in the article and then in the first Comment, the Mod will simply execute the author / seeder's instructions. The Mod will not "disagree and therefore not execute". 

My Red Rules would be:

​-​ ​Be​ ​polite.​ ​No​ ​insults​ ​whatsoever.​ ​No​ ​insults​ ​to​ ​particular​ ​people,​ ​to​ ​groups​ ​of​ ​people,​ ​to​ ​ideas,​ ​...​ ​None!

-​ ​Stay on topic and be​ ​smart.​ ​Contribute​ ​substantive​ ​thought.​ ​Facts​ ​and/or​ ​reasoning.​ ​One-line​ ​zingers​ ​and​ ​bumper-sticker mantras​ ​are​ ​by​ ​definition​ ​off-topic,​ ​and​ ​will​ ​be​ ​deleted. 

Would a Mod delete whatever I decide is an insult or off-topic? 

Thank you. 

 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
link 03/16/17 05:18:32PM @perrie-halpern:

I am marking this in purple, so that it is official. Yes, if your article is an RBR article, any comment will be deleted. Just keep in mind, the fairness of the author's calls on comments will determine how much traction you get on your article. 

 
Bob Nelson
link 03/17/17 09:06:02AM @bob-nelson:

Excellent. I will "be coming back from vacation" shortly. (Not immediately -- personal issues! I hope yours resolve well.)

 

This is very important, too (from your initial post):

As of late, too many of our article's discussions are being derail, and this quick response is meant to get everyone back on track. 

If some members are determined to derail/destroy... they will simply carpet-bomb, knowing that the Mod will never be able to keep up. A "conversation" that consists mostly of "deleted" will die quickly. If you really want to stop derail/destroy behavior, you'll eventually have to sanction recidivists. But that's for tomorrow. For today, let's see how this new interpretation of the CoC works.

 
deepwaterdon
link 03/20/17 12:50:08AM @deepwaterdon:

So, if an article is put up that is probably false, and comments are made and replied to,that reinforce the probable out right falsehood, we cannot call out the lies or falsity of the article? The seeder of the article could call "off topic", and continue citing lies, falsehoods, and untruths at will.

 
Randy
link 03/20/17 01:07:08AM @randy:

Sadly, yes. Especially if they use RBR. I could put up an article that the Detriot Lions won last years Super Bowl (I wish!) and if anyone said different I could call on a moderator and say that their comments were off topic to the subject of the Lions having won the Super Bowl and their comments would have to be removed by the moderator as off topic. The only comments that would be on topic would be those that directly speak to the Lions victory in the Super Bowl.

 
deepwaterdon
link 03/20/17 06:32:51PM @deepwaterdon:

Thank you, my friend. And for my next act. I will be seeding, from my own shallow mind, and article that certain people here are fugitives from the law, the police authorities are looking for them, and they may be in arrears, or even guilty of not paying federal income taxes. All this will be because I have a civic duty to arrest unsavory, law breaking criminals and to help the Orange Peckerwood to 'Make America Great Again'. After all I should have near universal support from all RWNJs', helping to fulfill one of the planks of the Republikkkan platform.

Be advised: Red Box Rules will be strictly enforced on all comments.

 

Share This

Who is online












Visitors: 31