Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: New for Political Forum -- The Card Punch Rule (MUST READ)

  1. #1
    I feel sorry for the earth's population BSBH Prospect
    AmericanJesus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    19,922
    Rep Power
    403

    New for Political Forum -- The Card Punch Rule (MUST READ)

    Upon another suggestion regarding hockey-politics balance, we're announcing a new measure, starting now, that will apply exclusively to the Politics, Religion, Philosophy & News sub-forum the Card Punch Rule.

    All of our prior rules still stand.

    1. We still ask that you take debates/discussions seriously, argue earnestly, avoid hyper-partisanship, and do your best to always engage in good faith.
    2. We still ask that you properly source/link information, especially in an OP, or when asked to for verification by another user.
    3. We still ask that you avoid hyper-partisan media outlets and try only linking to mainstream/trustworthy organizations with minimal biases.
    4. Trolling, snide remarks, and divisive partisanship will still result in immediate infractions and/or thread bans.

    In the event that a user is determined to have repeatedly violate these terms, we're reserving the right punch your card to remove your ability to view or reply in this sub-forum at all as both a punitive measure and one to spare the rest of the forum's compliant users from having to deal with disrespectful users.

    This feature would, ideally, rarely need to be enacted, but in specific cases in which the Staff comes to a majority consensus, users can and will have their permissions to view and participate in this sub-forum permanently revoked. There is no mathematical formula we will be using to determine when the line is crossed. We'll know it when we see it, but suffice it to say, if you're racking up infractions and disciplinary warnings for your conduct in that sub-forum, you're on thin ice and at risk of having your wings clipped.

    Further to this, the list of users who've had their cards punched will not be made public or announced. Again, take heed of Staff warnings. If you don't, and your card is eventually punched as a result, do not cause a massive fuss. Especially publicly. Any attempt to martyr yourself won't be silenced, but granted, and you will be infracted for doing so or banned entirely depending on the severity of your outburst. This will be at the Staff's discretion.

    The good news is, this new feature will allow for a user who's political card gets punched to still be able to participate in any other forums, maintaining their account for what should be their primary purpose here to begin with hockey. I am also willing to accept "opt out" requests for anyone who wishes not to see political topics at all. This would be a one-time offer, however, not a revolving door, so if you "opt out" consider the request permanent once applied.

    If you have an earnest question about this, please ask it here. For anyone who wishes to opt out, you may also request so in this thread. Myself or Phil in Absentia will quote your request and notify you once it's been applied.

    Thanks,
    Staff
    Frisbeetarianism is the belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck. George Carlin

  2. #2
    Senior Member Squirt Division Capt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    325
    Rep Power
    13
    Yes I have a question. Considering this seems to be a new rule that came ou too nowhere, which seems to have ensnared me. I have been sending multiple messages to multiple mods asking why I cannot view new posts in the political threads for days. Today I read this still without a response from any of my prior messages to the mods explaining what happened. So fine I guess I'm banned from political talk. However just for facts, I was only infracted once since joining here, again once. I have consistently respectfully messaged you guys in private and attempted to make any changes to my behavior that you deemed necessary. To believe this is anything but censorship against people who have differing opinions from you is a ludicrous.

  3. #3
    I feel sorry for the earth's population BSBH Prospect
    AmericanJesus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    19,922
    Rep Power
    403
    Quote Originally Posted by Capt View Post
    Yes I have a question. Considering this seems to be a new rule that came ou too nowhere, which seems to have ensnared me. I have been sending multiple messages to multiple mods asking why I cannot view new posts in the political threads for days. Today I read this still without a response from any of my prior messages to the mods explaining what happened. So fine I guess I'm banned from political talk. However just for facts, I was only infracted once since joining here, again once. I have consistently respectfully messaged you guys in private and attempted to make any changes to my behavior that you deemed necessary. To believe this is anything but censorship against people who have differing opinions from you is a ludicrous.
    The new rule did not come out of nowhere. We've been talking about revisions to the political forum for years now and we've tried many different tweaks to get people to engage more thoughtfully, respectfully, and with a shared goal of good faith debate. We have been discussing this particular method for at least six months or longer. There were technical limitations that we have overcome, so now we've enacted this new policy.

    As to the bolded, we don't take this complaint seriously anymore. I can not talk about specific individual discipline, but I can point out that over the years there have been many who have disagreed strongly with the majority of the mods in that section on any number of topics and have had no discipline at all. They follow the rules and the spirit of the rules in that forum.

    There is only so much effort mods should be expected to put into getting users to follow the very clear instructions on proper behavior in that area. Those who post in there just to instigate argument or have proven to be incapable of conforming their posts to the rules will be excluded moving forward.
    Frisbeetarianism is the belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck. George Carlin

  4. #4
    (╯?□?)╯︵ ┻━┻ BSBH Prospect
    Keirik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    14,097
    Rep Power
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by Capt View Post
    Yes I have a question. Considering this seems to be a new rule that came ou too nowhere, which seems to have ensnared me. I have been sending multiple messages to multiple mods asking why I cannot view new posts in the political threads for days. Today I read this still without a response from any of my prior messages to the mods explaining what happened. So fine I guess I'm banned from political talk. However just for facts, I was only infracted once since joining here, again once. I have consistently respectfully messaged you guys in private and attempted to make any changes to my behavior that you deemed necessary. To believe this is anything but censorship against people who have differing opinions from you is a ludicrous.
    Just as a heads up, a lot of us have asked for changes to the political sub forum loooooong before you came to the site. Really, it’s a site that’s been around for over a decade. The political sub forum has been around since at least 2016. It really has nothing to do with you nor is this coming out of nowhere. There have been a few issues that are of contention for as long as it’s been around.

  5. #5
    (╯?□?)╯︵ ┻━┻ BSBH Prospect
    Keirik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    14,097
    Rep Power
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanJesus View Post
    Upon another suggestion regarding hockey-politics balance, we're announcing a new measure, starting now, that will apply exclusively to the Politics, Religion, Philosophy & News sub-forum — the Card Punch Rule.

    All of our prior rules still stand.

    1. We still ask that you take debates/discussions seriously, argue earnestly, avoid hyper-partisanship, and do your best to always engage in good faith.
    2. We still ask that you properly source/link information, especially in an OP, or when asked to for verification by another user.
    3. We still ask that you avoid hyper-partisan media outlets and try only linking to mainstream/trustworthy organizations with minimal biases.
    4. Trolling, snide remarks, and divisive partisanship will still result in immediate infractions and/or thread bans.

    In the event that a user is determined to have repeatedly violate these terms, we're reserving the right punch your card — to remove your ability to view or reply in this sub-forum at all as both a punitive measure and one to spare the rest of the forum's compliant users from having to deal with disrespectful users.

    This feature would, ideally, rarely need to be enacted, but in specific cases in which the Staff comes to a majority consensus, users can and will have their permissions to view and participate in this sub-forum permanently revoked. There is no mathematical formula we will be using to determine when the line is crossed. We'll know it when we see it, but suffice it to say, if you're racking up infractions and disciplinary warnings for your conduct in that sub-forum, you're on thin ice and at risk of having your wings clipped.

    Further to this, the list of users who've had their cards punched will not be made public or announced. Again, take heed of Staff warnings. If you don't, and your card is eventually punched as a result, do not cause a massive fuss. Especially publicly. Any attempt to martyr yourself won't be silenced, but granted, and you will be infracted for doing so or banned entirely depending on the severity of your outburst. This will be at the Staff's discretion.

    The good news is, this new feature will allow for a user who's political card gets punched to still be able to participate in any other forums, maintaining their account for what should be their primary purpose here to begin with — hockey. I am also willing to accept "opt out" requests for anyone who wishes not to see political topics at all. This would be a one-time offer, however, not a revolving door, so if you "opt out" consider the request permanent once applied.

    If you have an earnest question about this, please ask it here. For anyone who wishes to opt out, you may also request so in this thread. Myself or Phil in Absentia will quote your request and notify you once it's been applied.

    Thanks,
    Staff
    I think an important question to ask is to clarify this
    We still ask that you avoid hyper-partisan media outlets and try only linking to mainstream/trustworthy organizations with minimal biases.
    I can use so,e common sense but my common sense might not be what another person believes. We also probably are going to really differ in what we consider a bias or hyper. Obviously there is a slope to it. I also assume each time there is a further reset of sorts so if a guy like capt got previously banned, he might be given another shot and notification if there is some ratification that might make it easier to understand how not to violate a sub forum that is always going to teeter on the border of disaster given certain passionate topics? Just spitballing some thoughts.

  6. #6
    ContraQuinndicated BSBH Rookie
    G1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    20,747
    Rep Power
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by Keirik View Post
    I think an important question to ask is to clarify this


    I can use so,e common sense but my common sense might not be what another person believes. We also probably are going to really differ in what we consider a bias or hyper. Obviously there is a slope to it.
    Hey - thanks for asking this. I'm going to handle the first half of your post - the second involves a rule of the forum and this particular rule's evolution that I'd rather take back as feedback for the interim.

    It's a good question, and I'd almost always reference something like the AdFontes media bias chart here. AdFontes is an NGO non-profit dedicated to making news consumers smarter and news media better, and their methodology for assessing media bias and factual accuracy is both sound and published research. I also really like them because they differentiate written news and televised news where applicable - so it acknowledges that Fox News' website is far better at factual accuracy than their telecasts. There's also a trust we're embracing on media literacy - telling the difference between an article and an op-ed, for example.

    I'd make the recommendation that when working within news citation, stay in the green box, but of course some of the most interesting stuff we can discuss comes from editorial magazines like Slate, the Atlantic, and the National Review. For fringe cases, use your judgment - the National Review is probably the most "hyper partisan" source that we should be discussing on the right, and Slate is probably the left counterpoint. Both are storied, long-lasting publications that cater to a specific audience but ultimately care deeply about being factually accurate in spite of their partisanship, so they make for fantastic opinion discussion. I'd also add that there's never a consequence for an honest mistake - if you link from the American Thinker not knowing that it's an extreme-right wing largely non-factual outlet, you'll get called on it but there's not really a consequence if your intent was to have a thoughtful discussion about it.
    Hidden Content
    Blueshirts Brotherhood. We do what we must because we can - for the good of all Rangerkind

  7. #7
    Chitty chitty bang bang! BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    92,739
    Rep Power
    633

    New for Political Forum -- The Card Punch Rule (MUST READ)

    G1000's response is on point. I'd add, we're after a spirit of debate not a letter of the law, which is why these rules are somewhat open ended, or loose enough to allow for some leeway. The goal being, we're not demanding you only ever post from some preset of media, but that you do a little reflection in your own sourcing. If you're trying to have a conversation about immigration, for example, and all your references are to extreme left-wing blogs calling for the abolition of borders and nations or extreme right-wing sites calling for an end to all immigration, ask yourself if this is actually helpful or if it's so deeply partisan it's only going to force everyone into their corners.

    It's also helpful to source more than one media outlet.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you're a good loser, you're a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  8. #8
    Senior Member Midget Division
    Bugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    3,253
    Rep Power
    65
    As much as I may mix it up there would suggest that you get rid of the political threads altogether. Doesn't add much but rancor. There are many other places on the internet for it. Would rather we stick to whether Brendan Lemieux has a future here as a Matt Martin-type 4th line winger.

  9. #9
    Name a more iconic duo BSBH Rookie
    Morphinity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    29,370
    Rep Power
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by Bugg View Post
    As much as I may mix it up there would suggest that you get rid of the political threads altogether. Doesn't add much but rancor. There are many other places on the internet for it. Would rather we stick to whether Brendan Lemieux has a future here as a Matt Martin-type 4th line winger.
    You are welcome to opt out of the political forum, if you'd like:
    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanJesus View Post

    The good news is, this new feature will allow for a user who's political card gets punched to still be able to participate in any other forums, maintaining their account for what should be their primary purpose here to begin with — hockey. I am also willing to accept "opt out" requests for anyone who wishes not to see political topics at all. This would be a one-time offer, however, not a revolving door, so if you "opt out" consider the request permanent once applied.

    Thanks,
    Staff
    You won't ever see a political post again.

  10. #10
    Chitty chitty bang bang! BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    92,739
    Rep Power
    633
    There's no reason to punish respectful users when the opportunity to opt out is now available. Anyone who feels it's toxic to them, or their experience, is welcome to reject having to see it, and, as you said, debate whether or not Lemieux has a future as a Matt Martin-like fourth-line winger.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you're a good loser, you're a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  11. #11
    Senior Member Junior Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,335
    Rep Power
    294
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    There's no reason to punish respectful users when the opportunity to opt out is now available. Anyone who feels it's toxic to them, or their experience, is welcome to reject having to see it, and, as you said, debate whether or not Lemieux has a future as a Matt Martin-like fourth-line winger.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    They can opt out of this board altogether and join a Kings forum for that now.

  12. #12
    Chitty chitty bang bang! BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    92,739
    Rep Power
    633
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you're a good loser, you're a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  13. #13
    (╯?□?)╯︵ ┻━┻ BSBH Prospect
    Keirik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    14,097
    Rep Power
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by Bugg View Post
    As much as I may mix it up there would suggest that you get rid of the political threads altogether. Doesn't add much but rancor. There are many other places on the internet for it. Would rather we stick to whether Brendan Lemieux has a future here as a Matt Martin-type 4th line winger.
    Found Gortons burner account .....

  14. #14
    Senior Member Midget Division
    Bugg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    3,253
    Rep Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Keirik View Post
    Found Gortons burner account .....
    But wasn't that Nash trade GREAT? Trouba is gonna be a fuckin' rock star!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •