Option for OP to ban posters from a thread

Discussion in 'Feedback' started by studentofthemarkets, Oct 31, 2020.

Should the OP be allowed to block posts/posters?

  1. NO. Let the trolls continue and let admin take care of the worst problems.

    50.0%
  2. YES. Let the OP control their content.

    50.0%
  1. How about giving the OP the option to ban someone from posting on their thread? And/or ability to delete unwanted posts.

    By giving the OP the ability to manage the content of their own threads it should lessen the burden on ET administration to deal with trolls. I'm sure there are many threads where OPs have stopped posting due to unwanted content.

    The only downside I can see to this is that some people would be banned from posting for wrong reasons, perhaps simply stating an opposing view to the OP....but is this really a bad thing? If content is not wanted by the OP, it would be nice to be allowed to restrict it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2020
  2. Good1

    Good1

    https://theologyweb.com/campus/

    Here, i found a safe space for you, or an online home of sorts. It's a campus! For a fairly homogenous class of believers. Not sure the level of OP control over threads, but you'll find lots of backing from the admin with which to crack down on non-homogenous types that wander onto campus to disturb any of the flock, er, i mean students. The TOC is flexible, like Twitter, favoring interpretations that maintain the safe space you need to grow. They have a special place there where the admins will lock up anyone who really has a chance to influence any of the generally homogenous beliefs they are, a, cultivating there. In the special place, no one from the outside world can see what's going on. You need to be registered and be an upstanding member to be able to peek into those places, where the admins sort of let their hair down and say/do things to people that the average passerby might consider bigoted, if not downright mean. The object of isolation in those rooms is to ridicule the non-homogenous teacher (there's special ire dished out to anyone on campus who presumes to actually teach). For example, one room is called the Rubber Room. It's next to the Psych Ward, or something like that. Anyone from campus can come in and scoff, jab, poke, prod and generally insult. But the isolated non-homogenous teacher will not really be able to fight back verbally, as those areas too, can actually be censored. For example, the system might not recognize a login password anymore, even though access to the site may already be restricted to just these one or two rooms that the public cannot see (can't even see them on the list of forum sections).

    Are you suggesting the admins here carry some water for you, or, if not, facilitate your ability (intentions?) to make your threads more like TheologyWeb campus, so that you can teach without interference from any other teachers? ("Competition is a sin" ~ JD Rockefeller)

    Wait, is this an outreach mission from TheologyWeb? It would be great if you could evangelize here without any pushback. On the other hand, this is perhaps the free-est, most fair corner still existing on the internet. Check with your pastor one more time to see if that's the direction they have been guided for you to go.
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2020
  3. If someone wants to devote a thread here to a certain topic, if the topic is allowed, they should be free to start the thread. People who disagree are free to NOT READ THE THREAD.

    The question then becomes, what is the best approach in a forum like ET. Allow those who disagree with a topic to become a nuisance and disrupt the thread? Or keep dissenters from disrupting the thread but allow them to create their own threads where those likeminded can post and read all they want.

    Doesn't mean I want to exist in a protected bubble. What I'd prefer is to have threads where discussion could take place with respect given from both sides. But if I don't want to discuss some issues, I should have some say over that in my thread.

    It wasn't that I didn't want some rational discussion of thought on my threads, but you and someone else had their own agendas to push and I didn't want to engage in that kind of discussion.

    You already made up your own thread to contradict mine, and I thought that was a good idea. You could post what you wanted on your thread, and if I wanted to provide some response to it on mine, I could, without you putting your ideas on mine.

    But that wasn't enough for you, you had to come onto my thread and post things that were off topic, and pushing your opinions, even after I asked you to stop.

    Nothing particularly wrong with that in a forum that allows it, other than being rude, but because it IS disruptive, I have chosen to not continue with those threads.

    Just seems to me that if there was an option for the OP to control the content of their own thread, it would lead to more productive and peaceful threads without drama from someone who wants to disrupt the thread because it holds a view that they don't agree with.

    I'm not the only one who has a problem with unwanted content posted on their threads.
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2020
  4. wrbtrader

    wrbtrader

    That was heavily discussed before about the exact same topic...good points about why it would not work and why it would work.

    With that said, there actually is an option for banning people from the OP threads but the OP must contact Baron to do such.

    There's no guarantee that he'll ban someone but sometimes he has in fact done such although in my opinion doing it that way creates more work for Baron and tips the scale to "unfairness" especially if Baron is not aware of any bad history between individuals outside of that particular thread in question.

    Personally, I think there will be more trading related discussions if such an option was allowed to give OP of their own threads (education content) to ban problematic members in their threads or ban those that threaten to troll someone.

    Of course, Baron would obviously have the right to remove a ban if he determine its being abused against someone. Thus, the OP then loses the right to ban individuals from the thread as a consequence for abusing the self-moderating feature.

    wrbtrader
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2020
    studentofthemarkets likes this.
  5. Baron

    Baron ET Founder

    Or perhaps the OP himself would get banned from the site if he abused the feature. Just thinking out loud.
     
  6. Baron

    Baron ET Founder

    The core issue is simply this. The OP becomes the judge and the jury, which is not only a conflict of interest, but is a power that is easily abused. The inherent danger is that the OP can now ban people for posting anything he doesn't like. The whole point of a forum is to gather multiple perspectives on a subject, question or problem, not to squelch individuals that have different or opposing opinions. So although I actually like the suggestion in theory, I just don't know how well it would actually play out because every thread would have different moderation standards based upon how thick the OP's skin is.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2020
    xandman and vanzandt like this.
  7. vanzandt

    vanzandt

    You've got a village idiot like B1S2 that started the ES 2019 thread, except he is probably less than 1% of the posts there while the true market wisdom lies with the daily chit-chat between real traders. If Baron let that idiot call the shots on that thread... VZ would be a speck on the horizon.

    "There never was a pandemic"
    -@Buy1Sell2

    "Masks are for fools."
    --@Buy1Sell2

    And he still says this ignorant sh*t. Daily!

    Yeah---- NO.

    Threads are all fair game.
     
  8. wrbtrader

    wrbtrader

    I think those posts are outside the trading threads as in the Community Lounge.

    Regardless, to ensure there's no misunderstanding...I don't think people should be allowed to moderate ANY thread they create.

    In contrast, they should be allowed to moderate a specific thread only after getting approval from Baron.

    Anyone abusing their own thread via self-moderating...Baron can then remove their moderating priviledge of the thread, not allow them to moderate any other thread they may create in the future or in situations involving really bad abuse...ban the member.

    wrbtrader
     
  9. Baron

    Baron ET Founder

    Thanks for clearing that up, because that's a pretty big difference.
     
    wrbtrader likes this.
  10. Good1

    Good1

    Could you be more clear about "unwanted content"?
    Or, why a thread might be considered yours?

    https://theologyweb.com/campus/ seems to offer all the control you could be looking for. As a Judeo-Christian, the entire campus is yours, so-to-speak.

    I'm not kidding about the safe spaces! Here's the moderation heading in the "Pulpit" section of the "Chapel" sector of the "Campus".


    Persons of non-homogentisic persuasions, who don't fall within the sphere of identity considered Christian, are highly regulated as to where they can post into certain sectors of the campus. For example:

    So as you can see, there are several levels of moderation zones/sectors. Here is the most liberal sector:

    So as you can see, there are several degrees of safe spaces that you can call your online home. You don't have to go into the Apologetics section if you don't want to, or if your just not ready for that yet.

    If you've been guided by higher powers to reach out (beyond the Apologetics section of TheologyWeb) and to establish territory here, maybe you could ask Barron for an entire section where you and your compatriots would feel more comfortable, some place where the unwanted content can be more quickly dispatched without any actual debate. Merely state, in the heading, what content is wanted/unwanted, who can post, or not...you know, all the terms.

    Or maybe you could agree to start one thread, all your own, that you could call your thread. Maybe have your name in the title, and the terms of participation in the original post.

    This way, anyone who comes in there and suddenly disappears under the ban-hammer has only himself to blame.

    Here are some sample terms inspired by the website TheologyWeb that Barron may be willing to support you with:

    =============
    The Bible Is Totally True, No If's And's or Butt's, beware of mods
    This thread is open discussion between theists and a few other theists to agree their views on the bible is totally true. Please respect that this is a Christian-moderated thread moderated by real Christians, and refrain from gratuitous challenges because the bible is totally true. A slightly narrower leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation will get involved if you get off topic. Please keep this in mind, those atheists, or alpha theists who wish to interact with us regular theists in a way that does not seek to undermine our faith may participate here. Undermining out faith is off-topic because everybody knows every jot and tittle of the bible is totally true.

    ========

    I know i wouldn't be interested in posting there because i wouldn't want to lose any of the scriptures that are composed through my hand.

    But it wouldn't be fair to pick much more than one topic that you can completely own the ban-hammer over. Otherwise, you could pick all the topics available and get a monopoly over the entire Spiritual/Religion sphere. In summary, perhaps you could pick just one thread title, and just stay within that thread. If you have the ban-hammer in one thread, it may be best just to stay there and not wander off-topic into other threads.

    If you had to pick just one title to one thread, what would it be?
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2020
    #10     Nov 3, 2020