Soapbox - Open it up and moderate it?

[jonesy]

or you could just rename it ... Fight Club

I find all this rather depressing to be honest, why is 'debate' assumed to be synonymous with 'fight'? Cafe and Soapbox have complementary roles, Cafe for idle chat, Soapbox for arguing about things, but that doesn't mean Soapbox has to be a dumping ground for abuse. But putting up barriers to passers-by and effectively advertising it as a trouble spot is going to make sure that's what it becomes...

 

[Tim Bennet.]

I agree with mjones. I would prefer to see Soapbox renamed but absolutely NOT called Fightclub or anything like that. We could try 'Politics', or 'Contentious Issues', or anything that might be more explanatory but doesn't suggest that people can act in a less controlled manner than they would in any other part of the forum.

This whole issue over the last week or so has mystified me: Some people clamour for more 'regulation' whilst at the same time have contributing some of the more insensitive, or unpleasant postings on Soapbox or even other parts. Usually with the addendum: "this is my last contribution to this", but unfortunately proves rarely so.

I feel there's an easy criteria for an acceptable post, and that is whether you are attacking another poster personally or whether you are attacking their argument. Some of the responses on LLB's "If women rule the world" to me were clearly out of order as they contained a lamentable lack of regard for other forum members, and that was a thread in 'Cakestop'!

I belive it's only the subject matter that should be different in Soapbox. What is unacceptable elsewhere should be unacceptable there as well. If you can't win an argument without getting abusive, don't bother posting: You've already lost.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

That's a very simplistic argument, coming from you FM.

No, it is a simple observation. There is a difference - well, two differences!

And Tim Bennet has it right, I think.

Rename Soapbox, "Politics (etc.)", open it up, remind people that when we started this place we all promised to be excellent to each other, and stop shifting threads that are simply rude from other places into soapbox - put them in bunfights, and put bunfights someplace else...

 

[Fab Foodie]

I agree with mjones. I would prefer to see Soapbox renamed but absolutely NOT called Fightclub or anything like that. We could try 'Politics', or 'Contentious Issues', or anything that might be more explanatory but doesn't suggest that people can act in a less controlled manner than they would in any other part of the forum.

This whole issue over the last week or so has mystified me: Some people clamour for more 'regulation' whilst at the same time have contributing some of the more insensitive, or unpleasant postings on Soapbox or even other parts. Usually with the addendum: "this is my last contribution to this", but unfortunately proves rarely so.

I feel there's an easy criteria for an acceptable post, and that is whether you are attacking another poster personally or whether you are attacking their argument. Some of the responses on LLB's "If women rule the world" to me were clearly out of order as they contained a lamentable lack of regard for other forum members, and that was a thread in 'Cakestop'!

I belive it's only the subject matter that should be different in Soapbox. What is unacceptable elsewhere should be unacceptable there as well. If you can't win an argument without getting abusive, don't bother posting: You've already lost.

SPOT-ON Tim.

Frankly it's easy enough for anybody to flag unpleasant/abusive posts and they should be encouraged to do so. Either do it to Admin via a PM, or do it visibly in the post...the response is usually positive when people are told they've started to overstep the mark. Peer pressure can work. Apart from the odd Troll, most people here are pretty reasonable.

 

[Crackle]

I would agree with a rename as well. But, there has to some provision for ending plainly abusive posts, not tolerating any baiting threads and just generally keeping it a civil debate. Doing that might also bring in some more posters. Personally I'd still want an opt out of such a board for those 'quiet moments'.

 

[jonesy]

I would agree with a rename as well. But, there has to some provision for ending plainly abusive posts, not tolerating any baiting threads and just generally keeping it a civil debate. Doing that might also bring in some more posters. Personally I'd still want an opt out of such a board for those 'quiet moments'.

Sorry Crackle, but if you (and one or two other of the complainers) had never joined in 'baiting threads' yourself then your complaints might cut a bit more ice... and as for those 'quiet moments', why not just stay out? I don't need admin's help to ignore topics that don't interest me.

 

[Crackle]

I'm sorry you think that and I am not you so don't bother trying to project what you'd do onto me.

I've now been labelled a 'complainer' and a 'bleater' by people who up to now I'd thought better of.

 

[Chuffy]

Ok, so there's two issues. One is the question of being able to Ignore Soapbox, in the same way as the Ignore list works for people. Admin has already provided a compromise solution to that. Nothing in Soapbox has changed, everyone is free to take part if they want, what's to complain about? The only thing that's been taken away is that the audience has shrunk considerably and if all you want is to show off, well there are other places to go to.
The second issue is the way that Soapbox is perceived and run. FM, it was nicknamed Fightbox back in the C+ days. The whole premise was that it was 'robust' (full and accurate definition pending...) so you rolled up your sleeves and got stuck in. It's had a bad rep for a long, long time and the 'unmoderated' version on here has exacerbated that. My favoured solution, as I've said before, would be to close it down, drag the participants into the daylight and have any discussions/arguments/whatever in the Cafe with a concomitant expectation that the people actually discuss things, instead of endless Left/Right bull-moose bellowing and headbutting. No-one's going to go for that though. The headbangers in Soapbox want to carry on like stags in rut and no-one who habitually hangs out in Cafe wants them in there. So we're stuck with a separate section and it's either modded in full or it isn't. Full modding is a big ask for Shaun and the team, really it is.

Either do it to Admin via a PM, or do it visibly in the post...the response is usually positive when people are told they've started to overstep the mark. Peer pressure can work.

I wish that was the case. Crackle and I have a mutual friend.Talks a bit like this. I gave up trying to have any kind of sensible discussion with him a long time ago. There's no point, you just get a tirade of abuse in return. No, I didn't Flag him, it was in Soapbox and his behaviour seemed to be accepted, if not liked. After all, it's unmoderated, so if you don't like it, tough. I don't like walking away from a scrap, but unless you want to respond on equal terms then there's no option. That's the current ethic in there, you can practically smell the testosterone. I'd quite like to have a robust debate on a few things, but Soapbox, as it is and has been, isn't the place. Whenever I've tried, the same old same old happens and after a while you realise that half the people on the thread are on your Ignore list and it's a complete waste of everyone's time. I don't like Soapbox because of what it does to people, and that includes me. I'm not proud of that and I don't know how it can be changed, but at least it's a damn sight easier to stay away from it now and that's something I'm grateful for.

 

[Renard]

It would seem that Admin called it right judging by the poll results.

 

[Keith Oates]

Agree with that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Rhythm Thief]

I don't like Soapbox because of what it does to people, and that includes me. I'm not proud of that and I don't know how it can be changed, but at least it's a damn sight easier to stay away from it now and that's something I'm grateful for.

I don't know what it does to everyone else, but I for one am capable of posting in Soapbox without it turning me into a monster. I can read the more, er, extreme posts without feeling the need to emulate them too.

 

[Fab Foodie]

I don't know what it does to everyone else, but I for one am capable of posting in Soapbox without it turning me into a monster. I can read the more, er, extreme posts without feeling the need to emulate them too.

Agreed...must be short of Testosterone or summat

Lot of navel gazing going on...

 

[buggi]

to be honest, and on a more serious note, i was only joking about the fightclub name. Soapbox is more than an adequate name for it. i'm well thick sometimes, yet i got the difference between cycle chat and soapbox the minute i got on here. you know if you go in there you're up for a debate, it already says so under the name.

i think leaving it as it is, name and all, is fine, we do need a place to vent our frustrations or else things will start to spill over into cycle chat, so i would say leave it as it is and if things get really out of hand on there then just close the threads.

 

[buggi]

ps... do you think this thread should be moved to soapbox


also, just wanna say, this is one of the best forums i come on. yea, i know things get a bit heated over there, but usually that is where it is left, and soapbox seems to do its job, and mostly this is a friendly place to be.

 

[Dave5N]

It doesn't affect me either. I'd have had stalking pictures of Bonj plastered all over my bedroom wall anyway.

Bollocks. You're not fooling anyone. We all know those pin-ups of bonj were put up by your missus.