Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > > >

Notices

Politics version 7.0 more politics.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-17-2017, 03:25 PM   #1
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 33,195
Discussion about Discussion Thread

Thread is is for discussing the long running debate about how we engage in politcal discussion. Covers name calling, positive enegagement, divisiveness, 'racist' concern trolling etc etc


It' is not a thread for name calling or making an issue about other posters. Argue as to why that's a good thing if you wish but dont do it.

Last edited by chezlaw; 05-17-2017 at 03:42 PM.
chezlaw is online now  
Old 05-17-2017, 04:09 PM   #2
jalfrezi
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
jalfrezi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Long gone, long long gone
Posts: 6,611
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Re. name calling

It's important to be able to point out hypocrisy in posts when it happens, and it's far easier/quicker to paraphrase part of the miscreant's original post than to search for it to quote him, and even easier/quicker to call him a name that encapsulates it, so I have no problem with name calling if it's evidence-based.
jalfrezi is offline  
Old 05-17-2017, 04:19 PM   #3
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 73,356
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

"Evidence-Based Name Calling"

has a ring to it.

There should be only one rule of discussions: Post Well. You can Post Well while insulting someone, it just means the post should actually include some content, be relevant to the topic, timely, and not tediously repeated ad nauseum. In other words, a good post should be minimally interesting or informative, and worth someone's time to skim. It should betray some minimal level of sentience and thoughtfulness. Alternatively, it better be funny.
well named is offline  
Old 05-17-2017, 11:47 PM   #4
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 33,195
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
"Evidence-Based Name Calling"

has a ring to it.

There should be only one rule of discussions: Post Well. You can Post Well while insulting someone, it just means the post should actually include some content, be relevant to the topic, timely, and not tediously repeated ad nauseum. In other words, a good post should be minimally interesting or informative, and worth someone's time to skim. It should betray some minimal level of sentience and thoughtfulness. Alternatively, it better be funny.
The thread isn't really for how discussion should be modded although it's allowed as longs as it's not specific issues that belong in the moderation thread.

I have a lot of sympathy with your view and PC aside it's not far off what I think is best as well. There's a lot of detail in practice buried in your one simple rule that I wont delve into.

Except humour which is a very serious topic. I'm inclined to leave Foldn's post for example because he is imo being humorous. But that's because I know he has a high regard for you. If it was someone else then I might think they were just making a no content personal attack. In both cases I might be wrong and right or wrong, others might disagree.
chezlaw is online now  
Old 05-18-2017, 12:14 AM   #5
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 33,195
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by jalfrezi View Post
Re. name calling

It's important to be able to point out hypocrisy in posts when it happens, and it's far easier/quicker to paraphrase part of the miscreant's original post than to search for it to quote him, and even easier/quicker to call him a name that encapsulates it, so I have no problem with name calling if it's evidence-based.
Beyond the issue of threads degenerating or evidence being judged by the mods which is the primary reason we have the rules we do, there's pros and cons to constantly pointing out (perceived) hypocrisy.

As we started discussing in the trump thread, people change their views over time and maybe if someone now says something that hints at being more reasonable then they should be encouraged to move in that direction rather than try to tie them to something less progressive they said in the past.

Yes there can be value in pointing out hypocrisy but maybe it's overvalued because it's gratifying. Could also be that where it really has value is when pointing out the hypocrisy of public political figures - the people we give power over us.
chezlaw is online now  
Old 05-18-2017, 10:22 AM   #6
Gin 'n Tonic
Pooh-Bah
 
Gin 'n Tonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Reclining my seat
Posts: 5,926
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

The problem with both forums imo is that no-one is ever willing to argue in the abstract. There's no debating club.

If you offer a point of view then you are tarred with that particular brush and it is deemed to represent you thence forth.

Any little thing can be saved and stored up for future ammunition and name calling. If you want real debate then the insults should stop, and the scope of debate be limited only to what the individual has posted in that thread.
Gin 'n Tonic is online now  
Old 05-18-2017, 10:48 AM   #7
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 33,195
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

I try to sometimes but as you say it's difficult. There's also a related problem that far too much significance is placed on often very flimsy and highly contingent evidence.

Part of the problem it seems to me is that the culture has long been too much about doing politics rather than discussing politics. For the purposes of discussion it's best not to take sides.
chezlaw is online now  
Old 05-18-2017, 11:47 AM   #8
FlyWf
It's the other way
 
FlyWf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: [ ] REGARD FOR HUMAN LIFE
Posts: 55,184
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw View Post
The thread isn't really for how discussion should be modded although it's allowed as longs as it's not specific issues that belong in the moderation thread.

I have a lot of sympathy with your view and PC aside it's not far off what I think is best as well. There's a lot of detail in practice buried in your one simple rule that I wont delve into.

Except humour which is a very serious topic. I'm inclined to leave Foldn's post for example because he is imo being humorous. But that's because I know he has a high regard for you. If it was someone else then I might think they were just making a no content personal attack. In both cases I might be wrong and right or wrong, others might disagree.
That would be why you deleted MY post, which directly address the OP in a comprehensive way, right?
FlyWf is offline  
Old 05-18-2017, 11:57 AM   #9
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 33,195
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Because you flagrantly broke the rules Fly, you do know that don't you?

As I reminded people in the OP It' is not a thread for name calling or making an issue about other posters. Argue as to why that's a good thing if you wish but don't do it.

Your participation would be very welcome if you can manage that.
chezlaw is online now  
Old 05-18-2017, 12:00 PM   #10
Gin 'n Tonic
Pooh-Bah
 
Gin 'n Tonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Reclining my seat
Posts: 5,926
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw View Post
I try to sometimes but as you say it's difficult. There's also a related problem that far too much significance is placed on often very flimsy and highly contingent evidence.

Part of the problem it seems to me is that the culture has long been too much about doing politics rather than discussing politics. For the purposes of discussion it's best not to take sides.
For the purposes of debate it's sometimes best to try (be forced?) to argue for the opposing side.
Gin 'n Tonic is online now  
Old 05-18-2017, 12:16 PM   #11
Trolly McTrollson
Under your bridges
 
Trolly McTrollson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Winesburg, Ohio
Posts: 21,087
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

So racism is okay, but calling people racist is not.
Trolly McTrollson is offline  
Old 05-18-2017, 12:21 PM   #12
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 33,195
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gin 'n Tonic View Post
For the purposes of debate it's sometimes best to try (be forced?) to argue for the opposing side.
I'm not sure we can force it but I agree it's a very interesting exercise to do publicly and very helpful to do as a mental exercise.
chezlaw is online now  
Old 05-18-2017, 01:49 PM   #13
Tuma
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Tuma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not proving Mpethybridge wrong!
Posts: 8,974
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gin 'n Tonic View Post
The problem with both forums imo is that no-one is ever willing to argue in the abstract. There's no debating club.

If you offer a point of view then you are tarred with that particular brush and it is deemed to represent you thence forth.

Any little thing can be saved and stored up for future ammunition and name calling. If you want real debate then the insults should stop, and the scope of debate be limited only to what the individual has posted in that thread.
Politics could be run like euro soccer. Select posters can rover between P/v7.0, while others are exiled and re-admitted based on performance.
Tuma is offline  
Old 05-18-2017, 02:37 PM   #14
FoldnDark
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
FoldnDark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: St. Louie
Posts: 11,939
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw View Post
The thread isn't really for how discussion should be modded although it's allowed as longs as it's not specific issues that belong in the moderation thread.

I have a lot of sympathy with your view and PC aside it's not far off what I think is best as well. There's a lot of detail in practice buried in your one simple rule that I wont delve into.

Except humour which is a very serious topic. I'm inclined to leave Foldn's post for example because he is imo being humorous. But that's because I know he has a high regard for you. If it was someone else then I might think they were just making a no content personal attack. In both cases I might be wrong and right or wrong, others might disagree.
That comment was actually for you, and it gave me a nice chuckle. Hope you're doing well dude.
FoldnDark is offline  
Old 05-18-2017, 02:41 PM   #15
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 33,195
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Iit may not have got reported if they had known that
chezlaw is online now  
Old 05-18-2017, 06:21 PM   #16
5ive
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
5ive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Harvard, in a place like Africa
Posts: 6,751
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson View Post
So racism is okay, but calling people racist is not.
It is as long as it's directed towards The Real Racists(tm).
5ive is offline  
Old 05-18-2017, 06:38 PM   #17
AllCowsEatGrass
banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,840
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

I'm waiting for the discussion about discussion about discussion thread.
AllCowsEatGrass is offline  
Old 05-18-2017, 07:44 PM   #18
Jbrochu
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 15,336
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

So is this the thread where we can talk about whether or not we can talk about other posters talking about punching kids in the face?
Jbrochu is offline  
Old 05-18-2017, 08:17 PM   #19
Victor
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Victor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 57,821
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gin 'n Tonic View Post
For the purposes of debate it's sometimes best to try (be forced?) to argue for the opposing side.
not when one side is so utterly depraved and evil that their viewpoints should not even be considered in civil society.
Victor is offline  
Old 05-18-2017, 09:37 PM   #20
Gin 'n Tonic
Pooh-Bah
 
Gin 'n Tonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Reclining my seat
Posts: 5,926
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Victor View Post
not when one side is so utterly depraved and evil that their viewpoints should not even be considered in civil society.
Heh, imo one of the things that got Trump elected is the strident, evangelical, shout-down-and-shame, social justice warriors. Willing to be inclusive of everyone except those whose views or ideas they deem odious. And they are absolutely, almost religiously, certain that they are 100% correct.

Dissenters or those who hold views that don't conform will be branded racists, nazis, or homophobes, outed, shamed and shouted down.

Like some kind of inquisition, every phrase, every throwaway line must be examined for purity, for no hint of prejudice, malice or dissent is permitted.

It's really quite nauseating to watch.

Who the **** are you to define what a civil society is?
Gin 'n Tonic is online now  
Old 05-18-2017, 09:39 PM   #21
AllCowsEatGrass
banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,840
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jbrochu View Post
So is this the thread where we can talk about whether or not we can talk about other posters talking about punching kids in the face?

You're not supposed to talk about talking about that.
AllCowsEatGrass is offline  
Old 05-19-2017, 10:32 AM   #22
Shame Trolly !!!1!
Neo-Gorean
 
Shame Trolly !!!1!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Dhimmi EcoWarrior for ISIS
Posts: 4,634
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

A couple of points...

(1) There is always chatter about "productive" or "good" or etc. discussions. What there never is is discussion of what makes a conversation "productive", "good", etc. There needs to be a stepping back, and a meta-discussion needs to take place on this issue.

(2) If not mindlessly looping and derailing is determined to be a component of this "good", etc, then consider this:

The most destructive and recurring loop & derail is the never ending 'argument' about the proper use of the r-word. We have the two definitions: 'structural r-word-ism' -vs- 'secret heart r-word-ism'.

The worst case scenario is the status quo. As things are, if the OP uses the phrase 'structural r-word-ism', or the phrase 'secret heart r-word-ism', or simply uses the unqualified term 'r-word-ism'... well that opens the door to anyone else fatally looping y/o derailing the thread by changing the subject from the point at hand, into this mindless and never ending 'argument' about the one-true-only-official-definition of the r-word.

The following rules would both work 10000% better... (a) the r-word always means X, if you wanna use the other 'definition', you need to qualify. Note: it doesn't matter if X=='structural', or X=='secret heart'... it only matters that one is the default, and the other isn't. (b) the unqualified r-word is forbidden. Everyone needs to qualify.

Cliffs: if you mods flipped a coin, and made that side the default, this would be the greatest leap forward ever in Los Dos Politards.
Shame Trolly !!!1! is offline  
Old 05-19-2017, 10:51 AM   #23
Shame Trolly !!!1!
Neo-Gorean
 
Shame Trolly !!!1!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Dhimmi EcoWarrior for ISIS
Posts: 4,634
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by leavesofliberty View Post
Shame Trolly should really have nothing to add about productive discussion for obvious reasons... facebook bubble...I mean, really Shame Trolly, you really know nothing about good discussion.
LOL no. FYI: I don't do Facebook.

What I've just said above is very simple, and when we remove the highly emotional baggage surrounding the r-word, quite obvious.

Let's say were trying to have a "productive" discussion regarding various spectator sports. The most popular spectator sport in the world is sometimes called "Association Football", and typically called unqualified "football" by most of it's fans. However, in the US, the unqualified term "football" is typically referring to what is sometimes called "American Football", while Association Football is typically called "Soccer". In Australia, Association Football is also typically called "Soccer", American Football is often called "Gridiron", and unqualified "football", quite often shortened to "footy", usually refers to Australian Rules Football.

Let's further say we had a situation like we have here in Los Dos Politards regarding the two definitions if the r-word, and about 99% of the discussions regarding these various spectator sports were looped & derailed into an 'argument' about the one-true-and-only-official-definition of the word "football".

In this scenario, it should be obvious that picking one default definition for the word "football", even if it was picked at random, would be better than the 99% looping & derailing inherent in the status quo.
Shame Trolly !!!1! is offline  
Old 05-19-2017, 11:23 AM   #24
Shame Trolly !!!1!
Neo-Gorean
 
Shame Trolly !!!1!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Dhimmi EcoWarrior for ISIS
Posts: 4,634
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by leavesofliberty View Post
... No one should take any pointers about etiquette from you...
I'm not pointing out etiquette. WTF are you babbling about?

Anyways, what you are doing now is called "attacking the arguer", and not "engaging with the discussion". You seem to think you can damage my credibility to discuss discussions so as my suggestions will be rejected without consideration, and even perhaps trying to shame me out of the thread. LMFAO @U !!!1!
Shame Trolly !!!1! is offline  
Old 05-19-2017, 11:28 AM   #25
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 33,195
Re: Discussion about Discussion Thread

Deleted most of the squabbling.

If you want to participate in this thread then don't use it as a !!!thread. Otherwise expect to get timeouts.
chezlaw is online now  

 
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online