ATTENTION -- RF Member Survey

[exchemist]

This series of questions may influence forum-wide changes. Please answer them in as much detail as you can.

In this specific case, if moderation or interactions with a specific member or members are involved in your answer, please PM me the answer so that your answer doesn't violate Rule 2 or Rule 1, respectively.

- What brings you to RF?

- What, if anything, would discourage you from posting on RF or make you less likely to come here?

- What, if anything, would you like to see done differently, whether in regard to forum sections, member interactions, or moderation/the rules?

(Again, for answers related to the last quesion, please PM me the answer instead of posting it publicly, per Rule 2.)

- If you used to be less active but have become more active, what has caused this change?

- If you used to be more active but have become less active, what has caused this change?

Speak your mind as openly as you want and use PMs if need be (for the reasons clarified above). This survey is important. Your answers will be forwarded to the staff for consideration unless you explicitly request otherwise.

Thanks in advance.

1) Mainly the wish to show that religion and science need not be in conflict and to advocate versions of religion that do not create such conflict. But also to learn more about religions and science from items posted by others.

2) A growth in the number of loonies, cranks and obsessives, or by trolls trying to stir up hatred.

3) I will PM you.

4) and (5) not applicable as I do not feel my participation level has changed greatly.

 

[ChristineM]

What brings you to RF?

Usually my tablet computer but i am sure thats not what you want to know so... I was a long time member of another forum that blocked all none north American posters the day after trump took office (agenda??? Who knows). Looking for somewhere else to play i came across RF and liked it. I informed several members of the old forum who are now regular RF posters

What, if anything, would discourage you from posting on RF or make you less likely to come here?

Not a lot, as i said I like it, the interface is fairly good once used to it but was a little daunting at first. The way it is moderated is fair.

What, if anything, would you like to see done differently, whether in regard to forum sections, member interactions, or moderation/the rules?

More indication on specific forums as to rules. Some forums dont allow decent from the OP. I have been "warned" and had posts deleted for being me on a couple of forums.

If you used to be less active but have become more active, what has caused this change?

No comment

If you used to be more active but have become less active, what has caused this change?

No comment

 

[Kenny]

- What brings you to RF?

For debate. To see what other people are thinking. To strengthen my capacity to answer a wide variety of questions. And to learn.

- What, if anything, would discourage you from posting on RF or make you less likely to come here?

Excessive censoring would discourage me.

What, if anything, would you like to see done differently, whether in regard to forum sections, member interactions, or moderation/the rules?

What might help is that if I am being censored for replying to a person who was being offensive, the knowledge that the other person was censored too--might be helpful to know that it isn't one sided. (Perception). I assume it is but it would be better if I knew.

If I am absent from posting... it is only because there are other needs that took over.

As far as proselytizing - never understood when it is or isn't. IMV, anytime you are trying to convince someone of your positions -- in its essence -- it is proselytizing.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I can think of some bells and whistles:

Add a paper scissors rock function. You hit the button, it randomly returns paper, scissors or rock; and you can't delete the result.

Make a random post button that appears when a thread reaches a very long length. It randomly returns a post from somewhere in the thread. That might be fun for some of the game threads.

Advertise on steam and discord.

We've had a chat room before which did not see much action. People liked it though. The obstacle to getting the chat going was getting people to appear at the same time. What about a chat room which only opens during certain hours and is for members with a minimum number of posts. For example it might open at a certain hour and in one hour close unless there is active chatting.

Automatic thread styles. Some will like this and some not, but it doesn't cost the server any CPU cycles, and you can give readers the option of not seeing the styles. You go into your account and set a background color and text color, and a border style. From then on your posts have a style automatically added.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

We've had a chat room before which did not see much action. People liked it though. The obstacle to getting the chat going was getting people to appear at the same time. What about a chat room which only opens during certain hours and is for members with a minimum number of posts. For example it might open at a certain hour and in one hour close unless there is active chatting.

I like the idea of a 4 hour a day chatroom, as 24 hour chatrooms are hard to maintain for some pretty obvious reasons. Make the 4 hours at an hour slot where the most staff members tend to be logged in.

 

[Revoltingest]

Only thing with having political forums like DIR's is that it's going to be hard to define what each is.

RF already has political affiliation definitions, albeit with room
for improvement. Currently, some of us forget to check for
restricted forums when we see a thread we'd like to post in.
Then knuckles are rapped, & demerits are given.

In the DIRs, one signs up for where one has access.
Voila! No accidental posting where we don't belong.

I know I'm for America first, passing tough immigration laws and enforcing them and pretty much everything Trump stands for.

I don't there'll ever be a forum for your ilk.
(Management makes it clear you're evil.)

...But I'm socially liberal, I don't care much about the budget like most conservatives do and I don't mind tariffs, so some conservatives might consider me more socialist than them.

I don't think it's an impossible task to accomplish, but I do think it will take some effort to put it together in a functional way.

The best descriptor I can think of for you is "Republican".
Should we have political party affiliations as forums?
There are advantages to that.
For example, the Libertarian Only forum is well attended
by posters who oppose economic liberty, & would never
be at home in the Libertarian Party, either Ameristan's
or Canuckistans.


Example of political definitions needing improvement....
Capitalism: An economic system based on private ownership of capital, resources, production, and systems of distribution. It functions primarily through the use of competitive markets, wage labor, and private property rights. It is affected by the political system it operates under, and can be found in many models such as laissez-faire capitalism, state capitalism, and social-market capitalism.

Notice that "state capitalism" is included.
Ref...
State capitalism - Wikipedia
"State capitalism" is an oxymoron, which includes socialist countries.
Is there anyone who cannot post in Capitalist Only?

 

[sun rise]

This series of questions may influence forum-wide changes. Please answer them in as much detail as you can.

In this specific case, if moderation or interactions with a specific member or members are involved in your answer, please PM me the answer so that your answer doesn't violate Rule 2 or Rule 1, respectively.

- What brings you to RF?

- What, if anything, would discourage you from posting on RF or make you less likely to come here?

- What, if anything, would you like to see done differently, whether in regard to forum sections, member interactions, or moderation/the rules?

(Again, for answers related to the last quesion, please PM me the answer instead of posting it publicly, per Rule 2.)

- If you used to be less active but have become more active, what has caused this change?

- If you used to be more active but have become less active, what has caused this change?

Speak your mind as openly as you want and use PMs if need be (for the reasons clarified above). This survey is important. Your answers will be forwarded to the staff for consideration unless you explicitly request otherwise.

Thanks in advance.

What brings me is two silly threads- seriously. The last poster thread and the random, meaningless one. They are a place to just relax and have some mild fun along with the other humor threads.

And of course there are some occasionally interesting topics that I enjoy participating in.

Do differently? I liked the old color codes for restricted threads. As far as sections, there should be a more formal way to ask for a section on smaller religious and spiritual groups.

 

[Revoltingest]

-More focus on lighthearted discussion like hobbies, with more hobbies boards

That is up to us posters, ie, start threads, & participate in them.

-I did state there should be a firmer stance taken in the religious and political boards. In the case of the religious boards, I'm just going to agree with Landon Caeli about off-topic posting, I think that all it needs is stricter rules on off-topic posting and that's it. In the case of the political, I actually think Revoltingest's DIR idea will fix any problems I have with the political discussions.

Don't get too strict with off topic posting.
Meandering threads are often the most interesting.

 

[Cooky]

Don't get too strict with off topic posting.
Meandering threads are often the most interesting.

True, I've enjoyed a lot of humor in off-topic posts that I would miss if that came to a stop. It's when people go off topic and then throw a fit of rage when someone calls them out on it, which I've actually witnessed. But it's rare.

 

[Revoltingest]

True, I've enjoyed a lot of humor in off-topic posts that I would miss if that came to a stop. It's when people go off topic and then throw a fit of rage when someone calls them out on it, which I've actually witnessed. But it's rare.

I've noticed that one poster (staff) will let those who agree
with him go off topic. But if we less favored posters respond
to it, we get a stern rebuke. (Twitchy people are best avoided.)
Some people think this forum is their personal fiefdom, eh.
They're wrong...it's mine!

 

[LuisDantas]

This series of questions may influence forum-wide changes. Please answer them in as much detail as you can.

In this specific case, if moderation or interactions with a specific member or members are involved in your answer, please PM me the answer so that your answer doesn't violate Rule 2 or Rule 1, respectively.

- What brings you to RF?

Mainly a desire to discuss the nature, meaning and consequences of religion and religious belief.

This place is nearly unique in that regard. Far too much of the Internet is echo chambers that think nothing of insulting or just erasing any divergent thoughts that come their way. And truth be told, nearly nowhere we find comparable awareness of religious diversity.

- What, if anything, would discourage you from posting on RF or make you less likely to come here?

More emphasis on those darned DIRs! I don't think that they serve any useful purpose anymore. Internet "safe chambers" are about as self-defeating an idea as they come, particularly if there is any intent on discussing matters related to religion.

I also feel that it has become a bit too usual to insult people for the sake of insulting, for either belief or political reasons. That is rather immature and we could probably do with a lot less of that.

Unfortunately, that is hardly unique to RF. True respect has fallen out of favor, at least in the Internet.

- What, if anything, would you like to see done differently, whether in regard to forum sections, member interactions, or moderation/the rules?

The rules themselves are AFAIK only accessible now by way of the Forums section. That is a bit too hidden for my taste.

But mainly, there are the darned DIRs. I would like to see them phased out entirely, say in six months time. They are not worth their maintenance, and they end up reinforcing an assortment of vices, not least among those the very separation of creeds - which is unavoidably artificial and questionable.

We could probably benefit from adopting instead a more rigid system of responsibility for personal posts based on the Same Faith and One-on-one debates, where people are expected to carry the weight of the respect and accuracy of their posts unless threads are specifically marked (on the title or perhaps the OP) as some sort of NPL (No Person's Land).

That would be a traumatic change, particularly for the politically oriented content. But I feel that it is necessary. We have become too used to casual toxicity. It is mostly created outside of RF, but we nevertheless ought to take a stance towards it.

(Again, for answers related to the last question, please PM me the answer instead of posting it publicly, per Rule 2.)

- If you used to be more active but have become less active, what has caused this change?

I miss some of the old mainstays, and it has become harder to stand the amount of unashamed toxicity by some of those who remain.

Also, there has been an interesting lessening of actual fruitful discussion. Sometimes I feel like we keep repeating the same exercises of patience and repetition. And for some reason people are much more vicious and offensive these days.

That is actually a widespread phenomenon. I have seen it elsewhere, sometimes in much more vicious form. So much so that I am of half a mind to believing that there are actual organizations actively promoting that toxicity.

Interestingly, we also end up showing what appears at first glance to be undeserved amounts of patience towards mentally unbalanced people. I guess that dealing with insanity is part of the routine in these days of Brexit, Trump and Bolsonaro. That in turn leads to a need to be more direct and establish clearer parameters of discussion, if for no other reason to make it clear to others what we are and are not likely to take seriously (a very important achievement these days).

As an aside, I personally believe that we have globally been pushing the boundaries of etiquette and other protocols so much that I fully expect significant changes in the next ten years or so. People may well feel a clear need to state point blank that they have only limited time and patience for listening to statements that they have reason to believe will come unbalanced, unhinged or extremelly biased for some reason or another, and to signal to their interlocutors how best to mix directness, courtesy and detail in their interactions.

As things stand now, I feel that even parliamentary politicians that are elected specifically to discuss sensitive matters with others with comparable mandates and divergent stances are currently having a very hard time telling the difference between insults directed towards them and invitations for significant discussion and attempts at reaching some form of common ground and cooperation. It may well be that many politicians no longer even believe that their roles allow for such an activity. That is of course disgraceful and exceedingly dangerous, but transcends the scope of RF considerably.

Speak your mind as openly as you want and use PMs if need be (for the reasons clarified above). This survey is important. Your answers will be forwarded to the staff for consideration unless you explicitly request otherwise.

Thanks in advance.

You're welcome.

 

[Rival]

More emphasis on those darned DIRs! I don't think that they serve any useful purpose anymore. Internet "safe chambers" are about as self-defeating an idea as they come, particularly if there is any intent on discussing matters related to religion.

DIRs are there for people of a faith to discuss ideas a priori, without some atheist (as it usually is) coming along and saying 'First prove there's a god' over and over as usually happens. DIRs allow members to operate on a given assumption and discuss the minutiae of their religions without others derailing the thread with attacks. I think this is perfectly reasonable. Jews may want to discuss kashrus without others coming in and derailing the thread to how they wish kosher slaughter should be banned, or if Muslims want to discuss Muhammad without someone derailing the thread with 'Muhammad was evil'.

 

[LuisDantas]

DIRs are there for people of a faith to discuss ideas a priori, without some atheist (as it usually is) coming along and saying 'First prove there's a god' over and over as usually happens. DIRs allow members to operate on a given assumption and discuss the minutiae of their religions without others derailing the thread with attacks. I think this is perfectly reasonable. Jews may want to discuss kashrus without others coming in and derailing the thread to how they wish kosher slaughter should be banned, or if Muslims want to discuss Muhammad without someone derailing the thread with 'Muhammad was evil'.

If that is your experience, then so be it.

I think that I have been clear enough and I see no reason to reconsider what I just wrote.

Safe spaces have very limited applicability in the larger world and end up being demanded far too often, usually furthering the very situation that is used as justification for their existence.

I truly think that we are reproducing that vice in the current implementation of DIRs, and I think that we would overall have much better, more defensible results phasing them out entirely and emphasizing instead the personal responsibility of the posters themselves.

Ultimately, we all have a decision to make on which sort of experiences we want to reject, discourage, encourage and participate on. DIRs are one of several tools that may be used for that purpose. I feel that ultimately they are both too rigid and too fragile to be of much use on this day and age.

 

[LuisDantas]

Or some people think " whatever I say is the absolute truth and whatever my interlocutor says is absolutely wrong. A priori."

That is one extreme, albeit a common one.

The other one, which is perhaps even more toxic, is the self-given right to talk anything whatsoever, with no regard for logic, common sense, respect or sanity, and expect no consequence whatsoever. It has become something of a mainstay of what passes for political discussion currently.

I for one hope to see it curbed from our midst for good. The sooner, the better.

In RF, as in the wider world, people ought to learn to carry the weight of their own statements and claims. If for no other reason, because the alternative is to expect others to carry that weight for them. At some point they just will not.

 

[LuisDantas]

I disagree with you but I will defend your right to say it, to death


Voltaire

Surely you realize that this is a bit on the idealistic side, and not always something that you will want to do?

 

[Skwim]

As far as rules go, how about off-topic posting? I have experienced some off topic posting that has caused disruptive behavior, and I felt it was also unfair to the OP's point of creating a thread, which is rude IMO.

Of course, humor and good intentions should be something handled light-handedly, but someone wanting to hop on their soap box and preach something random, unrelated to the topic is disruptive behavior, if not just weird. IMO.

I've found that off-topic posts generally appear because either the original topic has run its course---people are no longer interested in it and move on to other issues---or the original topic has genuinely provoked a new issue. What should be kept in mind is that In both cases if people want to stay on topic they can, and those who do not can do whatever they wish, short of disruption of course. Disruptive behavior is never okay no matter where it occurs.

Personally, I simply ignore posts I have no interest in responding to whether it be the original topic or a new one. So because people are free to keep posting wherever they want, be it the original topic or a new one, an original post will die because of a lack of interest not because some other subject has interfered with it.


.

 

[nPeace]

This series of questions may influence forum-wide changes. Please answer them in as much detail as you can.

In this specific case, if moderation or interactions with a specific member or members are involved in your answer, please PM me the answer so that your answer doesn't violate Rule 2 or Rule 1, respectively.

- What brings you to RF?

The forum rules were inviting.

- What, if anything, would discourage you from posting on RF or make you less likely to come here?

Thinking about it...

- What, if anything, would you like to see done differently, whether in regard to forum sections, member interactions, or moderation/the rules?

(Again, for answers related to the last quesion, please PM me the answer instead of posting it publicly, per Rule 2.)

I'll PM you.

- If you used to be less active but have become more active, what has caused this change?

- If you used to be more active but have become less active, what has caused this change?

Thinking about it...

Speak your mind as openly as you want and use PMs if need be (for the reasons clarified above). This survey is important. Your answers will be forwarded to the staff for consideration unless you explicitly request otherwise.

Thanks in advance.

Thanks

 

[Dan From Smithville]

This series of questions may influence forum-wide changes. Please answer them in as much detail as you can.

In this specific case, if moderation or interactions with a specific member or members are involved in your answer, please PM me the answer so that your answer doesn't violate Rule 2 or Rule 1, respectively.

- What brings you to RF?

I am on RF to learn, to find entertainment, to discuss subjects with other knowledgeable people, to argue and to practice the creation of logical arguments.

- What, if anything, would discourage you from posting on RF or make you less likely to come here?

I am not sure. Repetition I suppose. I do note that some posters believe they are tough and following the courage of their convictions, but wilt and become childish and belligerent when confronted by facts. Though this does not discourage me.

While a negative button may have some limited value, I think the addition of one would be detrimental overall. The inclusion would impact participation, though I am not sure that it would completely discourage me.

- What, if anything, would you like to see done differently, whether in regard to forum sections, member interactions, or moderation/the rules?

(Again, for answers related to the last quesion, please PM me the answer instead of posting it publicly, per Rule 2.)

- If you used to be less active but have become more active, what has caused this change?

- If you used to be more active but have become less active, what has caused this change?

Speak your mind as openly as you want and use PMs if need be (for the reasons clarified above). This survey is important. Your answers will be forwarded to the staff for consideration unless you explicitly request otherwise.

Thanks in advance.

What about not only showing the quoted material a poster is responding to, but also the post number from which the quotes were drawn. I would find that useful for context and if there was material that was not included in the quote.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am on RF to learn, to find entertainment, to discuss subjects with other knowledgeable people, to argue and to practice the creation of logical arguments.
I am not sure. Repetition I suppose. I do note that some posters believe they are tough and following the courage of their convictions, but wilt and become childish and belligerent when confronted by facts. Though this does not discourage me.

While a negative button may have some limited value, I think the addition of one would be detrimental overall. The inclusion would impact participation, though I am not sure that it would completely discourage me.
What about not only showing the quoted material a poster is responding to, but also the post number from which the quotes were drawn. I would find that useful for context and if there was material that was not included in the quote.

The negative frubal button.....
It would be used against me with wild abandon.
And I'd retaliate with even greater gusto.
I won't be alone in this.
How'll that work out?

 

[columbus]

I've noticed that one poster (staff) will let those who agree
with him go off topic. But if we less favored posters respond
to it, we get a stern rebuke. (Twitchy people are best avoided.)
Some people think this forum is their personal fiefdom, eh.
They're wrong...it's mine!

Trumpish nonsense.

The offer to make it yours was made and you turned it down.
Tom