Search results

I don't know if there's any explicit changes to the rules being considered, but at the very least it's probably worth editing this post: http://www.the-sietch.com/index.php?threads/rules.41/post-5776 :unsure:

@LTR I get that's the way things have been, and I think it's even the best way to keep things going forward. Except in regards to politics. In that one regard, I think having some very specific lines that say Do Not Cross would be a very good thing, and having a very obvious and specific stick...

The idea for more curated debates? I saw that, and think that's good too. It also addresses the potential issue of dog-piling and like your other idea I think it's a clever way to work with the smaller site size to achieve a better result than can be had with larger ones. As for technical...

Well then, I feel the most obvious suggestion is a very strict standard of moderation in any political debate, with a larger and more clearly enumerated rule base specifically for politics. Attach specific point values to political infractions, with points escalating exponentially for...

I resent the implication of that second paragraph, though I do appreciate the civility and of course you're entitled to your opinion. Everything I have said has been a true representation of my opinions and thoughts on the subject at hand, and I believe every post has been pertinent to the...

Well, I can only speak to my own experience. Which has been that there's far more to worry about with the "right wing" users in terms of rule breaking, and that they're the ones who are effectively responsible for the stifling of political discussion because of it, and further that they're the...

No, because politics had to be locked. As I understand it, mostly because a group of (right wing) users were making comments that flirted with criminal activity?

As it stands, I understand they're not likely to find political debates period.

Uh huh, except there are plenty of people here who aren't right wing. There's long standing members who are avowed communists.

At the risk of antagonising, I hope you'll be quite clear when setting the bar for what counts as trolling. I think a perennial issue I've observed on this site is that it tried to enshrine both freedom of speech, and civil discourse. Quite bluntly, you can't have both. There's a reason why...

Well, I'm glad that despite our disagreement on the latter part we can at least be united in ridiculing Pauline Hanson. And I will agree to drop the derail, with apologies to all.

Lol. Yes, she is. But she's definitely not a leftist idiot. It was Pauline Hanson, who's best known for idiocy like "A truly multicultural country can never be strong or united." or "I can see in Donald Trump a lot of me and what I stand for in Australia" or there was the time she decided to...

Lol, no he didn't. You realise Australia and NZ are separate countries, right? Our PM is a right wing member of the hillsong Church, and the only time one of our MPs (NOT the PM!) has worn a burqa to parliament it was a racist idiot doing it to make a "point" about what a threat they are to our...