News Section Rules Discussion

[misteraven]

So I've been talking to the mods as well as a handful of members I talk to in real life about the need and plan to draft rules for the community, as well as for specific sections. Likewise, we've also been discussing moderating protocols as a part of that.

 

Anyhow, the community has seen steady growth, which is great. It ebbs and flows, but has been incrementally trending up since we relaunched it about two years ago or so. There's been a few spikes or exponential growth and there's a lot I'm trying to do outside the forum to build up budget to be able to take bigger steps with both the 12ozProphet brand and the forum.

 

That being said, we're also living in a highly charged environment, that seems to only evolve to entirely new levels of volatility. Seems almost all aspects of daily life quickly degrade into a shit storm of discussion across the internet and we've obviously seen our fair share of contentious debate, trolling and disrespect (intended or not). I'd like to believe at the end of the day we're all fairly smart individuals that care about our fellow man. That we all seek pretty much the same ultimate goal - a quality life for ourselves and our own, but simply disagree on the path to get to it.

 

In any case, as the world continues it's crazy spin and the forum continues to grow and evolve, I think we all could benefit from some basic ground rules to help keep topics clean, keep conversations respectful and keep the time spent on 12oz fun, if not an opportunity to learn, connect and grow. So to that end, I'd like to open the discussion up here in news section as this is probably the subsection that could benefit most from a sort of "12oz code of ethical discussion". I'd love to see references some of you might have to other areas online that have successfully addressed this issue, as well as hear suggestion and feedback so we can refine our own version.

 

Hopefully the various points of view and the hand in helping me assemble this will smooth the process along since I've dragged ass on it for far too long.

[KILZ FILLZ]

I propose limiting use of memes in this section to either:

 

a] political memes thread

b] first post of new thread

 

memes as response to another user comment off limits. 
 

aye?

[Kults]

i think the basic reddiquette rule set is a nice culmination of online forum moderation. i also like their 3 strike policy. 3 warnings leads to a temp suspension. repeat suspensions lead to a ban. 

 

i also firmly believe content you dont personally want to see is fair game and an online community such as 12oz lives and dies by people having unrestricted access and opportunity to post whatever they think is interesting content. i also think trolling is a part of the online landscape. i’m not in it to put the kiddy gloves on and turn this forum into a ‘safe space’ sometimes a good trolling is deserved. it’s what drew me to this place 2 decades ago and i like that no holds barred experience. 

 

i know if that was no longer the case i’d personally lose interest and go elsewhere. 

 

we’re all big boys here and if that bothers anyone i think they should grow a thicker skin or find a more padded experience elsewhere. 

 

my 2 cents

[Dirty_habiT]

12 minutes ago, KILZ FILLZ said:

I propose limiting use of memes in this section to either:

 

a] political memes thread

b] first post of new thread

 

memes as response to another user comment off limits. 
 

aye?

You get an aye from me for this one.  Definitely agree.

 

Agree with @Kultsabout trolling too.  I think maybe it doesn't belong too much in the "news" section as much as in Ch.0..... but the point remains that even if I don't agree with some of the peoples' views here, it doesn't mean we can't laugh at the same memes together.  We see that a lot actually, the meme thread on Ch.0 is the one that breaks down all barriers, everyone that disagrees can be seen liking memes there.  I think that is what makes us adults, the fact that we can have a disagreement and also drop it instead of just "hating" someone across all sections because of what they think on politics.

 

I don't dislike anyone I've disagreed with in any measure that would keep me from being friendly to them in real life..... this goes back to the "we could have a beer together" analogy.  As long as we don't talk politics right?  Everyone knows you don't talk politics with your friends or family.... because it divides and everyone thinks differently.  What I do appreciate is the fact that we can have these discussions and hear all sides and nobody is being silenced for what they think or believe here.  I think it should stay that way no matter what.... because the second we stray from that and start making people be careful about what they're saying is the second that we have limited free speech.

[abrasivesaint]

32 minutes ago, Kults said:

i think the basic reddiquette rule set is a nice culmination of online forum moderation.

For those of us that are reddit-impaired, what is this rule set exactly? 
 

I can’t speak for how things are conducted on other forums, as this is the only one i’ve truly engaged in, but.. 

I’m not good with rules. I don't believe in censorship. I think sometimes it’s just hard to have these discussions, and rules may not affect that at the core.

 

For instance, If someone thinks that information from one media source is lies just because of who reported it, and information from another source is scripture, then the conversation just isn’t going to go anywhere due to personal bias. 

Same as if they have no room for question in their ideology. While i have my own opinions on matters, i am open to a persuasive argument.  People here have directly effected my opinions on certain matters by showing me a different angle, or something i’m just outright missing. For example: Raven reminding me the Bill of Rights cannot be amended, (in reference to gun control.) If a person is not open to questioning their own opinions, and is just here to argue their point and thats that, the conversation won’t gain much ground.

 

While i do think trolling and shit can be funny, and definitely has a history here, and even if it’s directed at myself lets say, it can get to a point of total nonsense when people are trying to have legitimate discussions about real world shit. There’s a difference between trolling DAO photos and some of the shit that goes on in this section. While i don’t think this sort of shit should be censored, and i’ll say i’ve been a part of for the sake of the conversation, there’s a point of “ok... chill.”  
 

edit: aye on the memes thing. I’ll throw more ayes or nays around when i know what “reddiquette” is.
 

double edit: Reddiquette is apparently considered an actual word as it did not prompt spell check.. interesting.

Edited March 7, 2020 by abrasivesaint

[Dirty_habiT]

Someone here believed in censorship when the name of the "whistle blower" was released...... and didn't want them named on this forum.  That was definitely a censorship situation that happened here with no voting at all, one person went wild cowboy and did what they wanted to.  I would call that an abuse of power and that's what we should avoid.... we shouldn't be taking action as admins/moderators without everyone agreeing upon it.

 

Remember, despite what we think about politics we are still a hand picked team that Raven decided upon.... and we need to act as such.

[Kults]

15 minutes ago, abrasivesaint said:

For those of us that are reddit-impaired, what is this rule set exactly? 
 

I can’t speak for how things are conducted on other forums, as this is the only one i’ve truly engaged in, but.. 

I’m not good with rules. I don't believe in censorship. I think sometimes it’s just hard to have these discussions, and rules may not affect that at the core.

 

For instance, If someone thinks that information from one media source is lies just because of who reported it, and information from another source is scripture, then the conversation just isn’t going to go anywhere due to personal bias. 

Same as if they have no room for question in their ideology. While i have my own opinions on matters, i am open to a persuasive argument.  People here have directly effected my opinions on certain matters by showing me a different angle, or something i’m just outright missing. For example: Raven reminding me the Bill of Rights cannot be amended, (in reference to gun control.) If a person is not open to questioning their own opinions, and is just here to argue their point and thats that, the conversation won’t gain much ground.

 

While i do think trolling and shit can be funny, and definitely has a history here, and even if it’s directed at myself lets say, it can get to a point of total nonsense when people are trying to have legitimate discussions about real world shit. There’s a difference between trolling DAO photos and some of the shit that goes on in this section. While i don’t think this sort of shit should be censored, and i’ll say i’ve been a part of for the sake of the conversation, there’s a point of “ok... chill.”  
 

edit: aye on the memes thing. I’ll throw more ayes or nays around when i know what “reddiquette” is.
 

double edit: Reddiquette is apparently considered an actual word as it did not prompt spell check.. interesting.

it’s just a general be good to each other and don’t be a prick just because 

 

https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette

[Fist 666]

18 hours ago, Dirty_habiT said:

Someone here believed in censorship when the name of the "whistle blower" was released...... and didn't want them named on this forum.  That was definitely a censorship situation that happened here with no voting at all, one person went wild cowboy and did what they wanted to.  I would call that an abuse of power and that's what we should avoid.... we shouldn't be taking action as admins/moderators without everyone agreeing upon it.

 

Remember, despite what we think about politics we are still a hand picked team that Raven decided upon.... and we need to act as such.

We are collectively all in agreement that some censorship is good for the forum. We won't allow threads to flooded with hardcore porn and gore, and we aren't going to "vote" each time it happens.

 

If you want to rehash that whole situation I am more than willing--I was not wrong and will stand by my actions. I'm fine bringing the thread about it in the mod section to the public as it is relevant to this rules conversation. If you've got beef lets talk about it, don't do this "have a beer" bullshit if you've got something to get off your chest.

 

However, the way you and @Kultsreacted over that is why I started the other recent mod conversation.

 

 

 

[Kults]

16 minutes ago, Fist 666 said:

We are collectively all in agreement that some censorship is good for the forum. We won't allow threads to flooded with hardcore porn and gore, and we aren't going to "vote" each time it happens.

 

If you want to rehash that whole situation I am more than willing--I was not wrong and will stand by my actions. I'm fine bringing the thread about it in the mod section to the public as it is relevant to this rules conversation. If you've got beef lets talk about it, don't do this "have a beer" bullshit if you've got something to get off your chest.

 

However, the way you and @Kultsreacted over that is why I started the other recent mod conversation.

 

 

 

no we aren’t? what you pulled a few months back was the genesis to this discussion

 

sure, let’s talk about it. you could have responded to the PM id sent. it’s not and has never been a personal beef. you had no business deciding for the rest of us what would and would not be allowed. you single handedly decided for the entire forum what was acceptable and even went so far as to edit another mod’s post. raven ironed it out but if it was up to me that alone would have been enough to strip you of your mod status. 

 

the whistleblowers name was never private other than on left leaning outlets. you chose to apply that here. it wasn’t your place. 

[Fist 666]

 

I don't think a hard set of rules is necessary, self-policing is. That requires a level of fortitude and maturity that I'm pretty sure doesn't exist here,, but here are some general guidelines I think would be beneficial to this part of the forum:

 

1. Trolling is fine anywhere on this forum EXCEPT Crossfire. This is the one single part of the forum where "formal discussion" is supposed to happen. If you've got jokes, channel zero is just up the street.

 

2. If you post a link to an article, read it, the whole fucking thing. 

 

3. Have the decency to read links that support the counterarguments, if you won't go into an "argument" with that willingness to learn, you shouldn't be in the conversation to begin with. If its too much text for you, then you shouldn't be here--stick to memes and channel zero. Anything in here is a potential deep-dive, if you aren't willing to commit to learning, then you've already made up your mind and don't need to waste your time on here.

 

4. If you don't know anything about the subject at hand, read about it before you involve yourself, or just stay out of it. At least admit it to begin with.

 

5. Maybe there needs to be a thread that differentiates bias and bullshit. If you aren't sure if your source is bullshit or not, don't post it. If you're sure it isn't, but it turns out it is, own it.

 

6. Don't waste time with videos as arguments or counters. It's way harder to break a video down than it is to quote text from an article. Any respectable video source should be backed up by articles. If not, then you should be suspicious of your video. 

 

7. Memes in the memes thread, unless you're posting text along with the meme to clarify its relevance to the conversation or to trying to bring a giggle to deescalate a thread that is clearly heated. Half the memes in Crossfire are just candy-propaganda, if you're posting those in a "real conversation" its fair to assume you believe that meme and all its nuance. Back it up, or keep it in the memes thread.

 

8. Mod specific: Don't edit or delete your own posts after the fact (except spelling or similar errors). 

 

9. Editorials aren't sources.

 

10. If you're going to put a sincere effort in, get familiar with this list  It is nearly impossible to avoid them, we all do, but the more you know and practice, the better the conversation will be.

 

[Fist 666]

14 minutes ago, Kults said:

no we aren’t? 

We aren't? So gore and hardcore porn are good everywhere? 

Quote

what you pulled a few months back was the genesis to this discussion

Cool. Then let's have this discussion. 

 

 

11. Whistleblowers' names do not belong on this forum. period. no partisanship, no bias. It doesn't matter if you think he isn't a whistleblower because you think there is a conspiracy. 

[Kults]

^

 

1- To an extent, sure.

2- Ideally

3- Ironic and how would you gauge that. Nonsense.

4- Again, who decides that.. you?

5- See previous 

6- No.

7- Generally speaking I agree. However a good timely meme can help alleviate a discussion or bring humor

8- Usually an e: or Edit: is fine in this case. Sometimes you want to add to what you posted, so, no. Disagree

9- They can be depending on the context. I see a theme forming here. Who decides this? You?

10- Sure, agree

[Kults]

3 minutes ago, Fist 666 said:

11. Whistleblowers' names do not belong on this forum. period. no partisanship, no bias. It doesn't matter if you think he isn't a whistleblower because you think there is a conspiracy. 

Why? Cause you dont like it? I think short of kiddie porn or doxxing it should be a free space

 

E: yes, gore and HC porn should absolutely be allowed

[Fist 666]

Like I said, self policing is necessary, so the individual decides to acknowledge the "rules" or doesn't. There isn't a mod to do it for them, I'm not deciding a damn thing. Maybe if multiple people report disruptive or immature behavior, that person gets a time-out from crossfire?

 

If the individual doesn't have any intention of doing those things, then there is a key indicator that maybe they shouldn't be here. Especially not in a "leadership" position.

____________________________________________________________

 

Re whistle blowers. Yeah, cause I don't like it. Nor do many other people who value a free and progressive society. 12 is not 4chan. YOU have 4chan for 4chan shit, leave it there. This is a hard and fast line for me. If you're going to post the leaked name of every whistle blower that comes up and it's okay with everybody else on the mod team, then I'm 100% done here. This is a contentious issue, there was no consensus among the mods about it. 

_____________________________________________________________

 

And to be clear: I'm throwing out ideas on forum rules as this is the premise for the thread. I'm not saying it has to be this way, they are SUGGESTIONS for how to improved the behavior in crossfire and keep good, grown-up table conversations happening. You seem to have read every suggestion as if I am the forum god dictating these things on stone tablets. If you've got a problem with any suggestion, go back and read it as a self-policing guideline and say why. 

 

I'm also curious as to what you think was ironic, as I read every link you ever posted in the global warming thread--giving credence to a bad source is a different conversation.

 

 

[Kults]

46 minutes ago, Fist 666 said:

Like I said, self policing is necessary, so the individual decides to acknowledge the "rules" or doesn't. There isn't a mod to do it for them, I'm not deciding a damn thing. Maybe if multiple people report disruptive or immature behavior, that person gets a time-out from crossfire?

 

If the individual doesn't have any intention of doing those things, then there is a key indicator that maybe they shouldn't be here. Especially not in a "leadership" position.

____________________________________________________________

 

Re whistle blowers. Yeah, cause I don't like it. Nor do many other people who value a free and progressive society. 12 is not 4chan. YOU have 4chan for 4chan shit, leave it there. This is a hard and fast line for me. If you're going to post the leaked name of every whistle blower that comes up and it's okay with everybody else on the mod team, then I'm 100% done here. This is a contentious issue, there was no consensus among the mods about it. 

_____________________________________________________________

 

And to be clear: I'm throwing out ideas on forum rules as this is the premise for the thread. I'm not saying it has to be this way, they are SUGGESTIONS for how to improved the behavior in crossfire and keep good, grown-up table conversations happening. You seem to have read every suggestion as if I am the forum god dictating these things on stone tablets. If you've got a problem with any suggestion, go back and read it as a self-policing guideline and say why. 

 

I'm also curious as to what you think was ironic, as I read every link you ever posted in the global warming thread--giving credence to a bad source is a different conversation.

 

 

raven had said he didn’t mind it being here. i think you already got your answer on that one. i removed it cause you felt so strongly about it but didn’t have to, frankly if it comes up again, i’d post the new whislteblowers name if we were having that convo. if you choose to take the ‘ i’m taking my ball and going home’ approach because of that, so be it. 

 

not sure why you have a hard on for 4chan. there are multiple boards there, some you may not agree with but in general it’s just a wide open format with no leftist censorship. if that bothers you, cool but i personally don’t believe in online censorship and it’s one of the few mainstream places left that doesn’t have any. 

 

i feel you’re trying to instil that kind of left leaning censorship here and i’m not for it. 

 

you posting a snopes link to discredit sources doesn’t equate to you reading them.

 

E:  proposing suspending/banning people on a graffiti forum because some users thought the posted content was being 'immature' sounds downright ridiculous imo. 

[Fist 666]

@Kultsdefense of whistle blowers is leftist? Hilarious. 

 

4chan serves a purpose and serves a fairly specific demographic that I grew out of a long time ago, I'm not mad it exists, but the less 12oz is attractive the standard 4chan user the better. I don't know how to disparage it without making it come across as a personal attack on you, so I'm just gonna leave it at that. 

 

Again with the leftist accusation, what are you talking about? what censorship other than whistle blower's names am I proposing? If you aren't up for good-faith arguments then stop stepping into them.

 

quote this supposed snopes post--still no idea what you're talking about. I discredited your sources easily and  repeatedly, never used snopes to do so. Snopes has other uses, though. 

 

Not suspending/banning on a graffiti channel, but in the "formal conversation" part of the forum, you bet. Different channels have different vibes, crossfire has always been explicitly different from the rest of the forum. Are you proposing it shouldn't be? 

 

 

 

 

[misteraven]

Alright, seems this is starting to degrade. You guys are both mods so if you want to continue discussing between you two, split three comments off and move them to the mod area. 
 

Few things... 100% there’s going to eventually be a set of rules and protocols. I don’t care if parts of the internet are a free for all. I don’t care if there’s better places on the internet to do some of what we’re doing and trying to do. That doesn’t factor in my opinion. This is 12oz and we’re going to things our own way. You guys can think of it as yet another experiment in establishing a constitutional republic... There will be certain fundamental rules that stand above all else, and then we can add a layer of democracy below that. 
 

This being said, I suppose what I’m looking for more than actual rules, are a framework for intelligent debate. I realize this isn’t a college debate team competing for points in a moderated venue. But there is some basic structure we can establish to hopefully avoid the shot show we frequently see on here with discussions. I’m sure Reddit has some stuff worth looking at and perhaps we can actually look at some of how college and professional debate is structured and managed. Likely I won’t extend a rigid frame work to other sections and I’m betting even the structure in this section might have some hard edges softened but I will be implementing something. 
 

I’m asking for you guys to step up and assist in a constructive manner so you can be a part of the process and so I can consider alternate points of view. Hell, I’m sure you guys can touch on areas I haven’t even considered. But what I’m not interested in at all are very specific and opposing points that will be argued to death and never have the hope of consensus between you guys since shit is so fucked up that respectful conversation and agreement is very much the exception and very far from the norm. 
 

Likewise, we now have groups. I know most of you guys haven’t embraced them and many of you guys seem to not like them. I’m much more agnostic about what you guys do in groups, because that is much more along the lines of me sub letting a room in my building, than you guys showing up to the pool area to enjoy the party. 
 

So please... Throw your ideas out, pass along some links. Feel free to state why you think it’s a good idea or other context to back your position, but no more commenting and especially no more criticizing what other people suggest in this thread. We’re far from the point of chiming I’m on a body of ideas and clearly as a community, our track record for respectful cooperation amongst ourselves largely sucks. 

[Dirty_habiT]

12 hours ago, Fist 666 said:

We are collectively all in agreement that some censorship is good for the forum. We won't allow threads to flooded with hardcore porn and gore, and we aren't going to "vote" each time it happens.

 

If you want to rehash that whole situation I am more than willing--I was not wrong and will stand by my actions. I'm fine bringing the thread about it in the mod section to the public as it is relevant to this rules conversation. If you've got beef lets talk about it, don't do this "have a beer" bullshit if you've got something to get off your chest.

 

However, the way you and @Kultsreacted over that is why I started the other recent mod conversation.

 

 

 

Oh man, I wasn't going to name names and I don't even care that it happened but I know it rubbed the mod involved wrong.  Let's be up front about this, what we're talking about isn't gore or porn.  It was a political decision that was decided by one person that is supposed to be acting as a member of a team.  That is not a situation where "fast action" is needed.  In the future, in a situation like that..... where one person thinks they need to act immediately it would be better to hide the post and then vote on whether it should be unhidden or removed completely/left hidden.  I don't think editing someone's post is ok in most all circumstances.

 

If you want to know what I think about all of this..... we're on a graffiti forum.  "Try" moderating graffiti writers in the wild and see how that works out.  For this reason, I think the courteous thing to do is to warn with NSFW and then post away.... whatever you want.  If it's porn or gore, go for it.... who cares.  If it's too rich for your blood maybe you don't belong on a graffiti forum.  People that write graffiti do hard drugs and climb in dumpsters.... yes, I know, not all of them.... but I've known plenty.

 

If you can't make the discretionary choice to warn the forum before posting stuff that could get professionals in trouble at work then you may need to have a good talking to or take a break from the forum.

 

The incident I was speaking of where a moderator was moderated by another moderator was an unchecked abuse of power for biased reasons.  I don't care what side of the bias I'm on or the people involved were on.... it was not a fair use of moderation power and does not fit the criteria for "immediate action was needed."

[Dirty_habiT]

11 hours ago, Fist 666 said:

____________________________________________________________

 

Re whistle blowers. Yeah, cause I don't like it. Nor do many other people who value a free and progressive society. 12 is not 4chan. YOU have 4chan for 4chan shit, leave it there. This is a hard and fast line for me. If you're going to post the leaked name of every whistle blower that comes up and it's okay with everybody else on the mod team, then I'm 100% done here. This is a contentious issue, there was no consensus among the mods about it. 

_____________________________________________________________

In response to #4 above.... it only takes a few words to tell the truth.  If you want to post long texts, just give us the cliff notes and link the article.  We don't need to be glazed over by mind numbing bs from sources you've (or anyone else has) crowned as sincere and true.  We can choose to read on our own and don't need our threads junked up with b.s. that you didn't author yourself.

 

In regards to "people who value a progressive society".  That's one side of the fence and you don't get to decide for everyone else whether or not we "like progressive".  If you want to know what I think, I think progressives are faggy af.  I live in Austin, TX up to my eyeballs in these dipshit tool bags.  I hope that doesn't rub anyone's P.C. graffiti writin ass the wrong way.... or else I'd have to call them a pussy also.

[~KRYLON2~]

12oz is the THUNDERDOME OF THE INTERNET.

 

 

 

 

[morton]

My general rule of thumb is to not discuss politics on the internet, it has served me well and when I break the rule I am usually reminded promptly of its worth. 

 

Another forum I frequent has banned all political conversation for years and years, I do not miss it there, but the ban did drive some good users off. What was interesting to me with that forum before the ban was how much I could disagree with a users politics but agree with them on other matters and respect them as professionals. I know that some users at that forum got super butt hurt about being asked to follow rules and that is basically what lead to the ban.

 

I do not think that trolling should be off limits per se, but if you troll a conversation where the other parties are engaging in a good faith discussion then I think you can go piss up a rope and I will not take anything you have to say as earnest, ever. It is just too great a strain on patience especially in an arena where giving the other person the benefit of the doubt already takes some extension.

 

[WorldBench]

I'm going to say , from experience on this forum... the moderator selection and overall quality of content has gotten far better, and the taking care of troubled areas and problem children has gotten better. I don't see eye to eye with some of you guys nor would we sit down and have beers, but, for the most part you guys remain pretty capable of the job compared to the old moderators.  I know I've had my fair share of posts that have bordered and even crossed the line, and I've been banned and suspended for it, but I think overall Raven and the mods (minus 2 of them from the past) have been doing good. I can't imagine it's an easy gig.

 

I think also this is mainly in reference to CH0 type posts as the Graffiti section has been pretty tamed over the last few years (compared to the old LA, Detroit and PNW threads).

 

I think trolling is okay but there is a limit. The DAO trolling was amazing, but some of the trolling I've seen here has almost caused life and death instances. You have to remember at the end of the day this isn't Reddit, this is 12oz and the street's don't forget. And I think people need to remember, that unless 4Chan and Reddit, 12oz is a small world. I can't tell you how many people i've met off 12oz at parties, shows, stores, train yards, etc.

 

 

[misteraven]

At the end of the day, this is still the internet and people are people. Trolling will always exist and the chances and frequency will coincide with the size of the community. There's obviously ways to help keep it under control, but even that is a slippery slope. We've seen how on social media, their approach to regulating their community has turned into very obvious censorship and bias.

 

That being said, this community is still private and I doubt we'd ever grow to a situation where your ability to navigate the web in general is somehow tied to your 12oz account, as Facebook and Google have managed. When it reaches that point, I have a hard time acknowledging it as a free service that you can take or leave (as I've debated a few times with @Mercer and others).

 

At the end of the day, I'd like to think we can find a solid middle ground where people are free to explore topics and positions, however unpopular, and simply enjoy the process of logical and reasonable debate. Obviously I'd assume things will always be entertaining and we've all seen at various points how well you can occasionally network and connect in the real world. In hindsight, my regret is that we once had enough momentum to affect change in the real world with how many members of the community we've had, that was never harnessed. Its very much my hope that there will one day be a second chance at that. No idea how I had my head up my ass enough to not have realized this back in the heyday, but even at minimum, seeing how people are able to connect via various platforms to find jobs, apartments or rare items to sell, buy or trade, I think its possible to use this same network to inform, learn, teach and elevate our various positions. I look at the revolution unfolding right now with cryptocurrency or look at past surges with precious metals or real estate and realize that had we pooled our efforts and knowledge, many of us could have been millionaires right now. In any case, I do think as a community we have the power to elevate each other to one degree or another and the more people on here the wider our pool of knowledge, resources and connections, which only extend that potential.

 

Anyhow, kind of straying but thats my thought on this.

[KILZ FILLZ]

Came across this, may be a good framework to modify to fit our needs :

 

 

 

What is Neutral Politics?

Neutral Politics is a community dedicated to evenhanded, empirical discussion of political issues. It is a space to discuss policy and the tone of political debate.

 

Is this a subreddit for people who are politically neutral?

No - in fact we welcome and encourage any viewpoint to engage in discussion. The idea behind r/NeutralPolitics is to set up a neutral space where those of differing opinions can come together and rationally lay out their respective arguments. We are neutral in that no political opinion is favored here - only facts and logic.

Neutral Politics is strictly moderated.

Our full guidelines are here.

Comment Rules
We expect the following from all users:
1) Be courteous. Demeaning language, sarcasm, rudeness or hostility towards another user will get your comment removed. Repeated violations may result in a ban.

2) Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up by linking to a qualified source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed.

3) Be substantive. NeutralPolitics is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, low effort one-liner comments, jokes, memes, off topic replies, or pejorative name calling.

4) Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect.

Submission Rules
All posts are reviewed by the moderators for compliance with these rules prior to appearing online:

A) Ask a specific political question. We do not allow overly broad questions, solicitations of pure opinion, surveys, requests to explain public opinion or media coverage, posts about other subreddits, or meta posts.

B) Frame it in a neutral way. The post must not be inflammatory, editorialized, leading towards a particular answer, a statement of opinion, or a request to critique your theory.

C) Outline the issue well. Give more than just a headline. Provide some background information.

D) Provide sources. Statements of fact must cite qualified sources. Nothing is "common knowledge." Submissions that do not include sources will be rejected. (Sole exception: if you cannot find specific information after a thorough online search, you may post a request for sources.)

E) Propose a good starting point for discussion. The purpose of this forum is to discuss issues. We do not allow polls, surveys or requests for fact checking.

F) Title the post accurately. The title must match the contents.

G) No requests for speculation. If the question cannot be answered with facts — which includes any that are phrased in the future tense (What will/would/could happen?) — then it's not appropriate for NeutralPolitics.

[misteraven]

30 minutes ago, KILZ FILLZ said:

Came across this, may be a good framework to modify to fit our needs :

 

 

 

What is Neutral Politics?

Neutral Politics is a community dedicated to evenhanded, empirical discussion of political issues. It is a space to discuss policy and the tone of political debate.

 

Is this a subreddit for people who are politically neutral?

No - in fact we welcome and encourage any viewpoint to engage in discussion. The idea behind r/NeutralPolitics is to set up a neutral space where those of differing opinions can come together and rationally lay out their respective arguments. We are neutral in that no political opinion is favored here - only facts and logic.

Neutral Politics is strictly moderated.

Our full guidelines are here.

Comment Rules
We expect the following from all users:
1) Be courteous. Demeaning language, sarcasm, rudeness or hostility towards another user will get your comment removed. Repeated violations may result in a ban.

2) Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up by linking to a qualified source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed.

3) Be substantive. NeutralPolitics is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, low effort one-liner comments, jokes, memes, off topic replies, or pejorative name calling.

4) Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect.

Submission Rules
All posts are reviewed by the moderators for compliance with these rules prior to appearing online:

A) Ask a specific political question. We do not allow overly broad questions, solicitations of pure opinion, surveys, requests to explain public opinion or media coverage, posts about other subreddits, or meta posts.

B) Frame it in a neutral way. The post must not be inflammatory, editorialized, leading towards a particular answer, a statement of opinion, or a request to critique your theory.

C) Outline the issue well. Give more than just a headline. Provide some background information.

D) Provide sources. Statements of fact must cite qualified sources. Nothing is "common knowledge." Submissions that do not include sources will be rejected. (Sole exception: if you cannot find specific information after a thorough online search, you may post a request for sources.)

E) Propose a good starting point for discussion. The purpose of this forum is to discuss issues. We do not allow polls, surveys or requests for fact checking.

F) Title the post accurately. The title must match the contents.

G) No requests for speculation. If the question cannot be answered with facts — which includes any that are phrased in the future tense (What will/would/could happen?) — then it's not appropriate for NeutralPolitics.

Nice find... I do need to eventually put something like this together. Definitely a great reference as a starting point. Thanks.

[the.crooked]

I propose not positing dumbass personalized websites with clear agendas as "news" that just leads to people spouting off about whatever conspiracy de jour they are into that day.

[the.crooked]

Further, why is 3/4 of the first page of the "news" section not news? QAnon? A photo appreciation thread? ...

[Dark_Knight]

Format is all funky on my mobile now.

[KILZ FILLZ]

@misteravenand movement on getting us some guidelines to work within?

[LUGR]

On 12/3/2021 at 7:55 AM, CHANTICLEER said:

someone explain why I can't access my tresdias account on here, which I created back in 2004.  Either the password was hacked or moderators deleted the account due to inactivity!