The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board

[Gengulphus]

That said I notice that my "number of posts" tally has declined a bit, which I assume can only happen when topics I contribute to are deleted. So maybe I was there and just have a thick skin for verbal abuse.

It will happen when one or more posts of yours are deleted. That could happen either as a result of the entire topic (thread) that it's in being deleted (the situation you're envisaging) or as a result of your specific post(s) being deleted.

Those aren't the only reasons why a post count can decline, or at least they weren't about 15.5 months ago when I posted viewtopic.php?p=255656#p255656 - it was clear then that whether I was in or out of the Polite Discussions group affected the post counts I could see for other people (quite possibly for myself as well, but I don't think I checked that at the time). So it might be that all the Polite Discussions posts are still there, just no longer visible. Indeed, the same can be true for deleted posts, as various comments made by moderators in the past indicate that posts can be "soft deleted", so that they're still there but no longer visible to non-moderators, or "hard deleted", so that they're really gone - the difference of course being that soft deletion can be reversed, hard deletion cannot.

Having said that, we've been told this is a legal matter. If it's got as far as demands that TLF takes down material, I suspect that only "hard deletion" will satisfy those demands - a complainant is unlikely to be satisfied with a resolution that says that the material they dislike might reappear at any time in the future... Furthermore, blanket deletion of everything that the complainant might dislike is likely to be quicker and easier than identifying the exact posts involved plus everything that quotes them and deleting only that material. So while there is a chance that the posts are still there but invisible until the legal matter has been dealt with, after which all or most of them will reappear, I wouldn't want to raise hopes that that's the case too high.

Gengulphus

[Gengulphus]

The one thing I would have thought immunised PD from such issues is that the "opt in" requirement means that topics there cannot be found via search functions, and even most Lemons cannot see them posts. I do not know how many Lemons have signed up for it but I find it hard to believe that it is more than a few dozen.

The number of TLF users signed up for the Polite Discussions board is currently 230, though obviously it might have changed by the time anyone reads this. The current count is easily checked by going to one's User Control Panel, selecting the "Usergroups" tab and clicking on the "Polite Discussion Group" link.

Gengulphus

[johnhemming]

Having said that, we've been told this is a legal matter. If it's got as far as demands that TLF takes down material, I suspect that only "hard deletion" will satisfy those demands - a complainant is unlikely to be satisfied with a resolution that says that the material they dislike might reappear at any time in the future...

I don't know what this refers to.

I do, however, have a lot of experience of litigation. I very often act as a Litigant in Person which means I do not instruct solicitors to act for me, but potentially working with others and potentially instructing barristers for hearings and advice, I produce the legal paperwork myself.

I do, in fact, have two high court cases live at the moment. One I was working on this morning (on what is called the Reply and Defence to Counterclaim).

Defamation is a technically complicated area of the law.

If there is a defamatory comment somewhere that someone is threatening proceedings about it is best deleted. I personally have a policy of suspending any postings that are alleged to be defamatory whilst investigating the issue. That does not prejudge the outcome.

Litigation in lockdown is quite different. I attended a strike out hearing last week and one the week before whilst sitting at home and I have applied to attend an application to commit next week (and I think they have agreed). Also there is now a system called "ce file" which enables the filing of court paperwork online without having to visit the RCJ. For someone who lives in Birmingham that is quite good. Although you could in the past file papers via post it tended to cause quite a bit of delay.

[tjh290633]

Just remember, Gents, that you are under no obligation to read every post on the site. I used to look at posts on PD that might have been of interest but, if I left it for 24 hours, there could be three pages of acrimonious tittle tattle that I just skipped over.

If you feel that you must stick your oar into what appears to be a 2 person squabble, that can escalate into a multiperson confrontation, with a number attacking the odd one or two who disagrees with them. Brexiteers and Remainers/Rejoiners, Lockdowners and those who would like their freedom back, and so on. Yorkists v. Lancastrians fortunately no longers falls into the Wars of the Roses, except on the cricket field.

Don't inflame rows.

TJH

[88V8]

I think on balance I would prefer that PD not return.

I realise that most fora have their version of PD.
If you want to see a really busy forum look at this one dedicated to TV and Hi-fi https://www.avforums.com/forums/ where down the bottom they have, yes, the Politics etc boards where posters get ratty with one another.

It was the same on a car forum I used to inhabit, on the technical boards all was sweetness and light, on the Social boards it often became unsociable. Eventually the offending boards were closed.

Otoh the grandmaster of car forums, Pistonheads has a very busy PD https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/forum.asp?h=0&f=205 in News Politics and Economics.
The difference is that PH and AV have revenue and staff, and can afford the policing.
As illustrated in the posts above, The Lemon does not and cannot.

In any case, I do not believe these boards are helpful.

First, they are routinely inhabited by the left/liberal - one need only look at the reception given to Lootman who staunchly stands up for the Right on our boards. They tend to become a left-wing echo-chamber. Perhaps that's just my perception, I'm definitely not awoke, especially in the morning.
But lefties read the Grauniad, right-thinkers the Torygraph, n'est ce pas? We consort where we feel comfortable.
So there is little balanced discussion.

Secondly, how often does anyone have their mind changed on an important topic by a post on a message board? I mean, is it not mostly about Transmit and only marginally about Receive?
Human nature, I'm afraid... including me.

Thirdly, the spats that erupt on PD must to an extent pollute posters' attitudes on the Financial boards. 'Huh, him, I'm not answering his posts'.
I mean, why are we here? Is it not for mutual assistance in enhancing our finances?
For that we do not need PD.

So on the whole, I would not be sorry to see the demise of PD. Those who enjoy controversy can go and post on Reddit, and as IAAG said, we can go back to discussing what we signed up for.

Perhaps if Stooz/Clariman are agreeable, we should have a poll?

V8

[XFool]

I don't see quite the same thing happening here as the modding is strict, but the overall effect is similar, in that allowing general politics to be discussed at all is turning out to be damaging the site.

I see your point. However...

Personally speaking, I'm not interested in getting tangled up discussing "general Politics" - WHICH IS WHY I DID NOT SUBSCRIBE TO PD.
Yet I have repeatedly been blamed/ticked off on TLF for starting "political discussions" outside PD.

But here is my problem: What exactly is "political discussion"?

If "politics" comes from how people think (it does!) then pretty well any and every disagreement or clash of opinions and views on any subject can be deemed "political discussion". And it is.

In other words, TLS's idea/definition of "political discussion" (PD?) is quite different from mine and possibly(?) other people's.

[johnhemming]

There is, of course, an argument to keep PD, but to require that anyone that subscribes to that provides sufficient information to TLF about who they are so that were there to be any legal questions then the website is protected.

This is the legislation that applies:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/20 ... /5/enacted

The existence of PD enables relatively forceful moderation so that if people wish to discuss issues such as the politics of "The Hydrogen Economy" as an extension to the science of it then that is possible.

[Gengulphus]

Secondly, how often does anyone have their mind changed on an important topic by a post on a message board? I mean, is it not mostly about Transmit and only marginally about Receive?
Human nature, I'm afraid... including me.

I haven't often seen someone's mind being changed by posts on discussion boards - but what I see on discussion boards is basically Transmissions, i.e. posts, not Receptions, i.e. people reading those posts (*). Furthermore, it's generally reckoned that there are far more lurkers on internet forums than active posters. So while it's observable that a high percentage of the active posters about controversial topics have made their minds up and are pretty resistant to having their minds changed, it might well be that there are a lot of lurkers who are quite open to having their minds changed. So I don't think the answer to your question "how often does anyone have their mind changed on an important topic by a post on a message board?" is at all clear.

A related point is that I find it's much easier to write posts about subjects I've made my mind up about than about those I haven't - if that experience is common, it's not surprising that a high proportion of posts are by people who have made their minds up on the subject. That's both at the straightforward ease-of-writing level - one only has to put forward one case rather than two or more and try to balance them against each other - and at the psychological level that one is exposing oneself to attacks from fewer sides. In particular, on controversial topics one rather too frequently encounters posters who see any mention of a case for the other side as implying that one is an enemy or a gullible idiot, and reply accordingly without bothering to read on and find out whether one ends up supporting that case, opposing it, or still undecided about it.

(*) There are 'recs'/'thanks' to give a bit of information about people reading the posts, but it's generally a very small amount of information and the little that they do give is highly ambiguous due to the large variety of reasons people might have for giving them.

Gengulphus

[Mike4]

I still find it hard to see any sense of proportion where anonymous posters see fit to to engage real life lawyers to protect their anonymous on-line reputations. But even so, that seems to be what happened.

(my bold above)
Not all posters and their associated reputations are anonymous though are they? Some members here are are readily identifiable and some have been on the receiving end of actionable slurs before. Were everyone fully anonymous I would agree with you, but that isn't the case on this forum. Perhaps if everyone were identifiable and realised they are responsible for their actions it would lessen some of the keyboard warrior antics.

True, a few here are publicly identifiable myself included.

But this sidesteps the point I was trying (and apparently failing) to make, which is, how can an anonymous profile be defamed at all, when no-one knows who it is?

[johnhemming]

So I don't think the answer to your question "how often does anyone have their mind changed on an important topic by a post on a message board?" is at all clear.

From my personal point of view I have learnt things which I think are important from reading posts on TLF. Hence even if I often don't learn anything it is a useful process for me personally because from time to time I do learn things.

At times I learn things from people I disagree with. That inherently has the effect of changing my view on issues as I base my opinions on the facts I am aware of.

[JohnB]

The artificial distinction of PD has always puzzled me. Why should it be hived off, and financial discussions about possible tax changes be forced into it. There are various topics I don't want to read here, HYP and jokes as well as politics, and it would be a lot more useful if I could choose which areas of the board are personally visible.

Standards of behaviour should be the same everywhere.

[johnhemming]

Standards of behaviour should be the same everywhere.

I agree with you about this. There is, however, an argument that either

a) The board needs sufficient information about all posters to provide legal protection under S5 DA2013 ... or
b) The board needs the same information about those posters posting in PD and anything materially contentious is handled there.

[AsleepInYorkshire]

Standards of behaviour should be the same everywhere.

I agree with you about this. There is, however, an argument that either

a) The board needs sufficient information about all posters to provide legal protection under S5 DA2013 ... or
b) The board needs the same information about those posters posting in PD and anything materially contentious is handled there.

c) Close the board down permanently?

AiY

[dealtn]

Standards of behaviour should be the same everywhere.

I agree with you about this. There is, however, an argument that either

a) The board needs sufficient information about all posters to provide legal protection under S5 DA2013 ... or
b) The board needs the same information about those posters posting in PD and anything materially contentious is handled there.

c) Close the board down permanently?

AiY

And moderate all other boards strictly so that we don't get PD, and the disruptive behaviour, creeping in "by the back door".

[XFool]

I agree with you about this. There is, however, an argument that either

a) The board needs sufficient information about all posters to provide legal protection under S5 DA2013 ... or
b) The board needs the same information about those posters posting in PD and anything materially contentious is handled there.

c) Close the board down permanently?

And moderate all other boards strictly so that we don't get PD, and the disruptive behaviour, creeping in "by the back door".

Fair enough.

However, if "disruptive behaviour" equates to having a contrary opinion to somebody else - and expressing it - then may as well close the site down, AFAICS.

[Mike4]

So I don't think the answer to your question "how often does anyone have their mind changed on an important topic by a post on a message board?" is at all clear.

From my personal point of view I have learnt things which I think are important from reading posts on TLF. Hence even if I often don't learn anything it is a useful process for me personally because from time to time I do learn things.

At times I learn things from people I disagree with. That inherently has the effect of changing my view on issues as I base my opinions on the facts I am aware of.

Same here. I certainly change my mind about things as a result of stuff I read on TLF, including political issues. Not very often, but it happens.

[redsturgeon]

I agree with you about this. There is, however, an argument that either

a) The board needs sufficient information about all posters to provide legal protection under S5 DA2013 ... or
b) The board needs the same information about those posters posting in PD and anything materially contentious is handled there.

c) Close the board down permanently?

AiY

And moderate all other boards strictly so that we don't get PD, and the disruptive behaviour, creeping in "by the back door".

And will you be volunteering as one of the extra moderators that we will need to do that?

John

[XFool]

I haven't often seen someone's mind being changed by posts on discussion boards - but what I see on discussion boards is basically Transmissions, i.e. posts, not Receptions, i.e. people reading those posts (*).

A related point is that I find it's much easier to write posts about subjects I've made my mind up about than about those I haven't - if that experience is common, it's not surprising that a high proportion of posts are by people who have made their minds up on the subject.

I can agree with that!

That's both at the straightforward ease-of-writing level - one only has to put forward one case rather than two or more and try to balance them against each other - and at the psychological level that one is exposing oneself to attacks from fewer sides. In particular, on controversial topics one rather too frequently encounters posters who see any mention of a case for the other side as implying that one is an enemy or a gullible idiot, and reply accordingly without bothering to read on and find out whether one ends up supporting that case, opposing it, or still undecided about it.

A further complication that I would note is this: posters are coming at subjects from different angles. I don't mean just the obvious one of either agreeing or disagreeing on a particular point, or of having different political stances (clearly important), but of having different interests or motivations for an interest, in a particular point or topic. This sometimes becomes visible, but is often obscure. It can mean people talking past each other and leading to misunderstanding. IMO.
(I think this could also be an issue wrt moderation)

(*) There are 'recs'/'thanks' to give a bit of information about people reading the posts, but it's generally a very small amount of information and the little that they do give is highly ambiguous due to the large variety of reasons people might have for giving them.

Absolutely!

[dealtn]

c) Close the board down permanently?

AiY

And moderate all other boards strictly so that we don't get PD, and the disruptive behaviour, creeping in "by the back door".

And will you be volunteering as one of the extra moderators that we will need to do that?

John

Well possibly, but I was thinking more of self-policing, reporting etc. (which I understand might lead to increased work for moderators). But I would expect a more than offset release of moderator time from closing PD. My understanding, which might not be correct, is that resource is disproportionately expended dealing with such there, so by extension if it was closed becomes available generally.

[AsleepInYorkshire]

c) Close the board down permanently?

AiY

And moderate all other boards strictly so that we don't get PD, and the disruptive behaviour, creeping in "by the back door".

And will you be volunteering as one of the extra moderators that we will need to do that?

John

Easy tiger [My bad ]

May I suggest if TLF needs additional volunteers to help with moderation issues that they put that request out there. I'd gladly offer to help with moderation but I'm probably not the right minded person to be objective. I'm a bit of a dinosaur to be honest.

However, that aside I wouldn't suggest PD stays open if there are more moderators. It's clearly a decision for Stooz and the moderators and looking in it does seem to be a lost cause. I think there are too many who feel they have an entitlement to have the PD board. Perhaps if they love to debate they should run for parliament or find another forum where debate of that nature is permitted. I've done an internet search and there appear to be a fair few out there.

But going back to your point about moderators. They are key to the existence of TLF. They can't be paid as TLF doesn't have the funds to do so. If the moderators feel a board should go I'm in full agreement.

Take care

AiY