Closed Obamacare thread. Really?

[noddin0ff]

A civil post about a current topic in the Off Topic forum...closed after OP? Really?

Obviously seems like the wrong place to look for Experts and, sure, people might get heated. But there's been no harm and no foul. Perhaps the concerned Mod(s) post could remind to be civil rather than shutting down on reflex?

The OP even asked replies to stick to the question. Are we really to the point where we're persecuting PreCrime...

[JohnMichael]

All our other threads with political overtones had faired so well in the past. It is a subject that there is an incredible amount of misinformation. I have asked members in the past to be respectful and it does not help. I felt there are better sources of information on the subject.

[Hyfi]

Noddin,

I tried to send you a PM but your box is full.

[noddin0ff]

All our other threads with political overtones had faired so well in the past. It is a subject that there is an incredible amount of misinformation. I have asked members in the past to be respectful and it does not help. I felt there are better sources of information on the subject.

I know, and knew, why you closed it. And I'm all for civility. I just don't think civility and heated and/or impassioned discussion are mutually exclusive. I think you've done well closing down/censoring threads where invectives have been hurled. I'm just registering my opinion that pre-judging is silly and offputting. One should assume the best but be ready for the worst.

I don't *think* that heavy moderation is killing the forums. I don't *think* the OP was trolling. To be honest, however, and it might just be me, I enjoy a good troll. I'd like to see longer leashes on trolls.

[JohnMichael]

Part of my thinking stems from ugly discussions amongst people in daily life and in politics. We have some members that enjoy a good verbal throw down but sadly it detracts from the purpose of the Forums. I see new members not getting questions answered because some black hole of a thread is drawing everyone's attention.

If I reopen the thread it would be in the Steel Cage, it would not be moderated and I do not want PM's saying are you going to let so and so talk to me this way? Yes as a matter of fact I am. Often the members that first cry for moderation are the ones who first must be moderated.

This type of thread is not tolerated on many non political sites. A non audio site I visit has recently stated no political threads. The members try some interesting tactics to skirt the rules. I cannot imagine this topic lasting on AK.

The civility we show people face to face is missing from many sites. I can imagine what might happen to someone who speaks the way they type when the are in arms reach of one another. Those are my thoughts.

[noddin0ff]

Part of my thinking stems from ugly discussions amongst people in daily life and in politics.

True. In the broader social context I'd say that it's only by running into opposition that one's opinions may change. I don't like the us vs. them hostilities, but I'd rather see participation than isolation. There's absolutely nothing wrong with telling someone that they're absolutely wrong, even if they aren't. The wrong is forgetting that they're people.

If I reopen the thread it would be in the Steel Cage, it would not be moderated and I do not want PM's saying are you going to let so and so talk to me this way? Yes as a matter of fact I am. Often the members that first cry for moderation are the ones who first must be moderated.

Fair enough. I don't think the original post topic is the one I would pick to resurrect, or fight for. I don't see a big harm in killing it as is. The OP doesn't seem to be following up. It was the rapidity of the shut down, not the topic, that I'm reacting to. ...Let me qualify that--I did feel that the post *might* contain a genuine call for advice that could affect necessary medical care (albeit one the forum is unlikely to provide an answer for) and I'd hate to shut it out. My thinking was if the OP was earnest, we'd find out quickly enough.

This type of thread is not tolerated on many non political sites. A non audio site I visit has recently stated no political threads. The members try some interesting tactics to skirt the rules. I cannot imagine this topic lasting on AK.

Yes, but. There's a community that builds up over time in a forum. The personalities of this forum are what they are. And, most people post off-topic knowing the crowd or looking to engage the known crowd. The topic seems might be secondary. Could be Obamacare, could be interconnects, could be pixie snot, could be dogs...why so many dog posts, we should ban dog posts and especially ban religious dog posts (wink). Could be facts. Could be unsubstantiated bullsh*t opinion. Largely, the dynamics are predictable. A lot of wild threads wandered way off topic, but they also often have substance in there too.

However, if the end goal is to shift the community, I guess you do what you need to do. Some will leave, some will come.

I can imagine what might happen to someone who speaks the way they type when the are in arms reach of one another. Those are my thoughts.

Heh heh. That's the whole point of typing into the internetz!

But seriously, I'd rather see an attempt to call out standards of conduct--rather than standards of content.

[ForeverAutumn]

But seriously, I'd rather see an attempt to call out standards of conduct--rather than standards of content.

I agree. However, it can be very difficult to separate the two. When a thread topic is posted that we pretty much know is going to go in an ugly direction it is often just easier to nip it in the bud.

As you mentioned, we've been around here long enough to know the personalities here. History and experience tells us that this type of topic will likely not stay civil for long. Why go through the process? Frankly, as a moderator, it's tiresome.

If you want it reopened in the Steel Cage as John suggests, we can move it.

[noddin0ff]

No. Not worth re-opening in my opinion--unless there's a tax expert in the house dying to chime in.

Just registering my one opinion that heated argument can be good, sincere questions should be asked, and that for the sake of entertainment the occasional troll fed. My sense of appropriate balance lays more on the wild side than is currently moderated and I prefer to let things run the wrong way more than others, even *assuming* that they go that way in the first place.

That said, the tone of the forums is better for the effort of the mods and I appreciate the effort.

[Hyfi]

Unfortunately, the one person who did taxes for a living and could have answered the OPs question was recently banned.
I understand the answer was pretty simple depending on a few things.

[ForeverAutumn]

The original question is still posted and available for viewing. If there is someone here who knows the answer and wants to help, they can post the answer in this thread. Otherwise, there's nothing to see here. Move along...

[Imran520]

It is a good decision to closed the thread of Obama care.

[TheHills44060]

If I reopen the thread it would be in the Steel Cage, it would not be moderated and I do not want PM's saying are you going to let so and so talk to me this way? Yes as a matter of fact I am. Often the members that first cry for moderation are the ones who first must be moderated.

Wow it blows my mind that someone would waste your time JM, let alone their own, to cry about a freaking internet forum. Those people seriously need to get out of the house and get a life.

[3LB]

To all those newer members out there in AR land who are thinking of posting a potentially controversial question or statment:

I too, like a good arguement but have to agree w/ JM that it would have eventually devolved into someone calling someone else names. It would involve the same two people it always does (well, maybe not now) and there is one member of this forum who is bullet proof and pushes the arguement way past civility and to respond in kind will get you suspended. This happens with nearly any subject.

All you have to do is google/bing the subject to get info. There are also several periodical data bases that are way more effective tools when researching a subject than doing a simple search on google or bing. These sites include access to data research articles, research papers, etc. If you still want to come back here and discuss the subject, then you'll need to do more than quote what you've heard on talk radio or TV because it will get broken off in your ass. One member here does just that on nearly every subject. He jets over to a site like ProQuest, does a quick search, picks the periodicals that support his "take" (note I didn't say opinion) and comes back to the thread and haughtily refutes, disputes and will eventually suggest that you're stupid to argue with him since he obviously is well read, more informed and accomplished than you or I.

For example, did you know that there are nearly as many research papers disputing global warming as there are papers that believe its happening? I didn't know that until I helped a friend do a paper for school. (no, I'm not saying yea or nay on global warming) Most scientific periodicals include more info than what you'll get in newspapers or magazines as well as info on how/who funded the study (usually very telling).

Its very easy to use the internet to arm yourself with info before opening a discussion because its easy to find info to backup any side of an argument.

[noddin0ff]

To all those newer members out there in AR land who are thinking of posting a potentially controversial question or statment:

I too, like a good arguement but have to agree w/ JM that it would have eventually devolved into someone calling someone else names. It would involve the same two people it always does (well, maybe not now) and there is one member of this forum who is bullet proof and pushes the arguement way past civility and to respond in kind will get you suspended. This happens with nearly any subject.

All you have to do is google/bing the subject to get info. There are also several periodical data bases that are way more effective tools when researching a subject than doing a simple search on google or bing. These sites include access to data research articles, research papers, etc. If you still want to come back here and discuss the subject, then you'll need to do more than quote what you've heard on talk radio or TV because it will get broken off in your ass. One member here does just that on nearly every subject. He jets over to a site like ProQuest, does a quick search, picks the periodicals that support his "take" (note I didn't say opinion) and comes back to the thread and haughtily refutes, disputes and will eventually suggest that you're stupid to argue with him since he obviously is well read, more informed and accomplished than you or I.

For example, did you know that there are nearly as many research papers disputing global warming as there are papers that believe its happening? I didn't know that until I helped a friend do a paper for school. (no, I'm not saying yea or nay on global warming) Most scientific periodicals include more info than what you'll get in newspapers or magazines as well as info on how/who funded the study (usually very telling).

Its very easy to use the internet to arm yourself with info before opening a discussion because its easy to find info to backup any side of an argument.

Oh yeah? Your mom wears combat boots. So there.