Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators
Thanks to gpadsa,Steffers0,lansdown,Wasron,jfgw, for Donating to support the site
The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 7226
- Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
- Has thanked: 1676 times
- Been thanked: 3863 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
There is another dimension to this not yet discussed.
When I first joined, there wasn't much traffic here and I drifted away again. A forum needs a certain critical mass of chatter and society to attract people to visit regularly, to be available at all to see threads where their financial expertise and insights might be needed. The non financial sections (The Snug, DAK, Building and DIY, Legal etc) all contribute to this sense of community and lead to the forum achieving that critical mass that gets people visiting regularly, daily in fact, and perpetuates the site.
I find the argument "there are plenty of other places on the net to discuss politics if you want to" somewhat trite as this same argument also applies to the long list of non-finance boards on this forum too. Perhaps we should delete all those too as after all, there are better places to ask why your boiler won't work for example, or discuss beer, than here. The answer of course it because you want to discuss these things with people you feel you know, and so it goes with politics too. Going off somewhere else to discuss politics in the vacuum of a site where you are only allowed to discuss politics would be deeply unsatisfying, which is why people keep discussing it here.
Put another way, people in real life like to discuss all manner of things including politics with people they know, and so that need is echoed in forums. Similar rows flare up from time to time in "The Combustion Chamber" on DIYnot.com. DIY even has a board for politics but the gas engineers in The Combustion Chamber won't use it and persist in posting politics in The Combustion chamber. The reason is, I conclude, a proportion of people feel a primal need to express and articulate their politics specifically to people they know. Otherwise there is no point.
I don't suppose this helps at all......
When I first joined, there wasn't much traffic here and I drifted away again. A forum needs a certain critical mass of chatter and society to attract people to visit regularly, to be available at all to see threads where their financial expertise and insights might be needed. The non financial sections (The Snug, DAK, Building and DIY, Legal etc) all contribute to this sense of community and lead to the forum achieving that critical mass that gets people visiting regularly, daily in fact, and perpetuates the site.
I find the argument "there are plenty of other places on the net to discuss politics if you want to" somewhat trite as this same argument also applies to the long list of non-finance boards on this forum too. Perhaps we should delete all those too as after all, there are better places to ask why your boiler won't work for example, or discuss beer, than here. The answer of course it because you want to discuss these things with people you feel you know, and so it goes with politics too. Going off somewhere else to discuss politics in the vacuum of a site where you are only allowed to discuss politics would be deeply unsatisfying, which is why people keep discussing it here.
Put another way, people in real life like to discuss all manner of things including politics with people they know, and so that need is echoed in forums. Similar rows flare up from time to time in "The Combustion Chamber" on DIYnot.com. DIY even has a board for politics but the gas engineers in The Combustion Chamber won't use it and persist in posting politics in The Combustion chamber. The reason is, I conclude, a proportion of people feel a primal need to express and articulate their politics specifically to people they know. Otherwise there is no point.
I don't suppose this helps at all......
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3271
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:17 am
- Has thanked: 3087 times
- Been thanked: 1559 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
Mike4 wrote:There is another dimension to this not yet discussed.
When I first joined, there wasn't much traffic here and I drifted away again. A forum needs a certain critical mass of chatter and society to attract people to visit regularly, to be available at all to see threads where their financial expertise and insights might be needed. The non financial sections (The Snug, DAK, Building and DIY, Legal etc) all contribute to this sense of community and lead to the forum achieving that critical mass that gets people visiting regularly, daily in fact, and perpetuates the site.
I refer the honourable gentleman to my earlier statement to the house. https://lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f ... 00#p379236
Point taken ref politics discussions too. We will mull over everything.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 12636
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
- Been thanked: 2609 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
swill453 wrote:GoSeigen wrote:An important reason it existed on TMF was to have a place to banish politics to. If it weren't there the politically inclined would post all over the other boards.
Yes, any subjects have the potential for taking a political aspect. If PD ceases to exist, then there will need to be a decision as to whether politics is completely banned everywhere.
Take the pandemic for example. We have a whole slew of topics on it in a self-contained forum, plus one in PD for the political aspect. Discussion on the subject can naturally turn to why we are where we are. If the answer proposed is that it's because of, say, government failure, there may be nowhere to discuss this in a the absence of PD. This would seem an unnatural curtailment of discussion to me.
Exactly! This point seems not to be generally taken. What is the DEFINITION of "politics" that is to be used?
I'd go further than the above: even threads that have nothing to do with the "government", or any politician, or any political party, have been 'cancelled' (e.g. moved to PD) because they are designated "political discussion".
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 7226
- Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
- Has thanked: 1676 times
- Been thanked: 3863 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
Clariman wrote:Mike4 wrote:There is another dimension to this not yet discussed.
When I first joined, there wasn't much traffic here and I drifted away again. A forum needs a certain critical mass of chatter and society to attract people to visit regularly, to be available at all to see threads where their financial expertise and insights might be needed. The non financial sections (The Snug, DAK, Building and DIY, Legal etc) all contribute to this sense of community and lead to the forum achieving that critical mass that gets people visiting regularly, daily in fact, and perpetuates the site.
I refer the honourable gentleman to my earlier statement to the house. https://lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f ... 00#p379236
Point taken ref politics discussions too. We will mull over everything.
Odd, you posted that while I was composing my missive, but the usual thing where the forum draws my attention to intervening new content didn't happen!
But yes perhaps the difference is all the other peripheral boards are for constructive/helpful/educational/social/amusing content, while PD just isn't.
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 19022
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
- Has thanked: 642 times
- Been thanked: 6741 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
PinkDalek wrote:Lootman wrote:It looked to me that my count decremented by about 150. That seems too high to be the result of posts of mine being individually reported and deleted, at least overnight! But it is too little to indicate that every post I have ever made to PD has been removed.
That is why I concluded that some topics had been removed in their entirety, but not all. But of course I am just speculating here, and wondering if any other Lemon also had a decrease? (I am fairly certain I am not the culprit here).
I may be misunderstanding your 150 but if you look here memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=397 you see Total posts:8876
Clicking on Search user’s posts shows Search found 5483 matches.
The bulk of the difference no doubt having arisen from the (temporary?) closure of PD (other reasons would be as discussed in the previous thread G referenced).
The 150 I referred to was that the 8876 number you cited had been a little over 9,000 a few days ago. So I assumed a few topics had been erased this week.
The much larger difference between 5483 and 8876 is presumably due to the factors you mentioned.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6139
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
- Has thanked: 1589 times
- Been thanked: 1801 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
Lootman wrote:The 150 I referred to was that the 8876 number you cited had been a little over 9,000 a few days ago. So I assumed a few topics had been erased this week.
The much larger difference between 5483 and 8876 is presumably due to the factors you mentioned.
Got it, thanks, maybe the missing 150 is something to do with hard (rather than soft) deletes which have probably already been mentioned on this thread but I'm only guessing.
Good to note my late Edit may have been noticed, such that this topic's title has been amended with an improved version to boot, so thanks to whomsoever did the amending
Yours ever,
PD (not yet demised but quite probably otherwise)
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2369
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:46 pm
- Has thanked: 528 times
- Been thanked: 1013 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
As has been noted, all of us try to avoid moderating threads where we have posted. Where that is unavoidable, I think we are very aware of the need to be seen to be doing so impartially and objectively.
Posters may also not be aware that moderators generally can't moderate all areas of the site, which can occasionally lead to difficulties when moving topics. Mostly, I can only moderate the financial boards, for instance.
MDW1954
Posters may also not be aware that moderators generally can't moderate all areas of the site, which can occasionally lead to difficulties when moving topics. Mostly, I can only moderate the financial boards, for instance.
MDW1954
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 7917
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 3054 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
MDW1954 wrote:As has been noted, all of us try to avoid moderating threads where we have posted. Where that is unavoidable, I think we are very aware of the need to be seen to be doing so impartially and objectively.
Most of the times when I've reported a post it's been a "OT here, should be on the XXX board" type of report on the topic post.
On at least three occasions IIRC the report has just been closed, unactioned, by a mod who had posted in the thread. (To be clear, the topic post I reported was not by the mod, just one or more of the replies). That may sound minor and not be the kind of editing/deleting moderation you're thinking of, but it's still a mod handling a report on a thread they've posted to, and should have been left to another mod to pick up.
Incidentally, the last time the above happened the post actually did get moved a day or two after the posting mod had closed it, presumably 'cos someone else also reported it after that and a different mod picked up the second report....
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2369
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:46 pm
- Has thanked: 528 times
- Been thanked: 1013 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
mc2fool wrote:MDW1954 wrote:As has been noted, all of us try to avoid moderating threads where we have posted. Where that is unavoidable, I think we are very aware of the need to be seen to be doing so impartially and objectively.
Most of the times when I've reported a post it's been a "OT here, should be on the XXX board" type of report on the topic post.
On at least three occasions IIRC the report has just been closed, unactioned, by a mod who had posted in the thread. (To be clear, the topic post I reported was not by the mod, just one or more of the replies). That may sound minor and not be the kind of editing/deleting moderation you're thinking of, but it's still a mod handling a report on a thread they've posted to, and should have been left to another mod to pick up.
Incidentally, the last time the above happened the post actually did get moved a day or two after the posting mod had closed it, presumably 'cos someone else also reported it after that and a different mod picked up the second report....
The board I frequent most is HYP-P. To be "whiter than white", from a moderation point of view, I'd have to stop posting there. Same for TJH, I'm guessing. Maybe not csearle, but I'm not sure. And that's it: those are HYP-P's active mods, as far I recall.
I agree with your general point: If a mod has posted on a thread, they need to be very, very careful when modding it -- and preferably, don't do it at all. But sometimes, it is unavoidable.
That said, I don't want this to morph into a discussion of moderation. Happy to continue by PM, if the above doesn't assuage your concerns.
MDW1954
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 7917
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 3054 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
MDW1954 wrote:The board I frequent most is HYP-P. To be "whiter than white", from a moderation point of view, I'd have to stop posting there. Same for TJH, I'm guessing. Maybe not csearle, but I'm not sure. And that's it: those are HYP-P's active mods, as far I recall.
I agree with your general point: If a mod has posted on a thread, they need to be very, very careful when modding it -- and preferably, don't do it at all.
I don't follow HYP-P. Those particular cases I mentioned aren't a huge deal (if I'd felt they were I'd have raised them in Room 101), just a little off-putting, and I only brought them up 'cos the matter had been raised. Glad that you agree.
-
- Lemon Slice
- Posts: 363
- Joined: November 6th, 2016, 8:13 am
- Has thanked: 34 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
Mike4 wrote:Just starting a thread on this as authorised by Stooz recently. Hopefully this is the right place.
Stooz was all like "There were also several warnings that the discussions were getting out of control", and then it turned legal.
The thing is, I'm wondering if this is a permanent change i.e. political discussion is just too risky for the survival of TLF due to legal liabilities, or if it is a temporary moratorium while something behind the curtain gets resolved.
Politics has a huge effect on finance, so there must be a board where the politics can be discussed, and the Polite Discussion board was almost entirely politics, so let's have it back, please.
More moderation would be needed, perhaps, but so be it.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3858
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 609 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
wickham wrote:More moderation would be needed, perhaps, but so be it.
Legal risks in these fora arise from
a) Defamation
b) GDPR and
c) Harassment.
I think harassment is a really low risk. However, the above two risks are real risks. However, I would say that they arise on any board and require moderation that essentially handles debate in a similar manner to most oral debating chambers viz that people argue about the issue and don't make personal criticism.
I have more personal experience of the above legal processes than many. I don't mind giving a small amount of pro-bono advice although advice about individual cases cannot sensibly be done through a forum.
My general advice, however, is be nice to people and don't make personal attacks. I admit I can be terse and abrupt at times, but I try to ensure I don't personally attack people in online debates.
I personally would not wish to run a forum that allows people who I cannot identify to post things (because of a) and b) above). I accept that S5 in DA2013 gives some protection where sites delete things pretty quickly and hence people can continue posting without being identifiable and obtain some protection on a), but the same protection does not exist for b) and I know how expensive these things can get.
-
- Lemon Slice
- Posts: 363
- Joined: November 6th, 2016, 8:13 am
- Has thanked: 34 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
It appears that the forum has had an aggressive lawyer's letter. FWIW I was a moderator of a forum and we had a lawyer's letter threatening all sorts of legal action. We deleted the offending item and the problem went away. Lawyers' letters always are aggressive to put the frighteners on you.
We also had a big argument between a moderator and a member which made it difficult for other moderators. We had to calm things down but didn't want to lose or suspend one of the original moderators. Eventually things calmed down.
My advice would be to delete as many of the offending posts as possible, suspend one or two members who seem to be at the root of the problem for a week or two, notify the member or lawyer who has objected and with luck everything will return to normal.
We also had a big argument between a moderator and a member which made it difficult for other moderators. We had to calm things down but didn't want to lose or suspend one of the original moderators. Eventually things calmed down.
My advice would be to delete as many of the offending posts as possible, suspend one or two members who seem to be at the root of the problem for a week or two, notify the member or lawyer who has objected and with luck everything will return to normal.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 7992
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
- Has thanked: 993 times
- Been thanked: 3662 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
wickham wrote:It appears that the forum has had an aggressive lawyer's letter. FWIW I was a moderator of a forum and we had a lawyer's letter threatening all sorts of legal action. We deleted the offending item and the problem went away. Lawyers' letters always are aggressive to put the frighteners on you.
That's specifically not what stooz said. It's "an unrelated topic that I am investigating proactively rather than from a specific complaint".
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=27405&p=378998#p378998
Also "may I ask that there be no more speculation, as you will honestly not find any evidence".
Scott.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1278
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:42 am
- Has thanked: 236 times
- Been thanked: 417 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
Mike4 wrote:.....The reason is, I conclude, a proportion of people feel a primal need to express and articulate their politics specifically to people they know......
I agree to some extent. But that is the nub of the problem. I see no reason why TLF should give any house room to those who wish to inflict their political outlook on others. There is little chance of having a sensible discussion with an individual with such a 'primal need'.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2074
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:32 am
- Has thanked: 5432 times
- Been thanked: 2496 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
wickham wrote:Politics has a huge effect on finance, so there must be a board where the politics can be discussed, and the Polite Discussion board was almost entirely politics, so let's have it back, please.
On the investment / finance boards, political topics are often raised in the context of investment. The debate generally doesn't get heated unless some obsessive from Political Discussions turns up and decides that everyone who doesn't agree with them is wrong / evil (take your pick), or simply makes some snarky comment. Then the thread quickly descends into chaos.
If a poster can't discuss relevant political matters on the investment threads without starting a heated argument, why should those of us who can have to tolerate their disruption? There are plenty of sites which allow them to get their jollies, why should these trolls be allowed to wreck the investment threads for the rest of us just because they can't control themselves?
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3858
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 609 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
77ss wrote:I agree to some extent. But that is the nub of the problem. I see no reason why TLF should give any house room to those who wish to inflict their political outlook on others. There is little chance of having a sensible discussion with an individual with such a 'primal need'.
This comes down to the meaning of "politics". To me "politics" includes the impact of state subsidies on the use of Hydrogen as a storage system, the regulatory environment around finance and energy generation and whether companies such as Costain will make more or less profit over time.
Much that I have quite a bit of experience in electoral politics I was never a clone of my party leader and this is not the right environment to use to try to persuade people to support any one political party or not.
I don't think the issue of sovereign risk can be excluded sensibly from investment decisions.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3530
- Joined: November 19th, 2016, 2:02 pm
- Has thanked: 1208 times
- Been thanked: 1294 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
I made a similar point back here (key extract in bold type):
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=26989
I have to say that I have become increasingly disappointed by the increasing number of political discussions on LF over recent months, AND the apparent decline in the number of posts and discussions about investment matters and particularly Investment Trust matters.
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=26989
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 19022
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
- Has thanked: 642 times
- Been thanked: 6741 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
johnhemming wrote:Legal risks in these fora arise from
a) Defamation
b) GDPR and
c) Harassment.
I think harassment is a really low risk. However, the above two risks are real risks. However, I would say that they arise on any board and require moderation that essentially handles debate in a similar manner to most oral debating chambers viz that people argue about the issue and don't make personal criticism.
I have more personal experience of the above legal processes than many. I don't mind giving a small amount of pro-bono advice although advice about individual cases cannot sensibly be done through a forum.
My general advice, however, is be nice to people and don't make personal attacks. I admit I can be terse and abrupt at times, but I try to ensure I don't personally attack people in online debates.
I personally would not wish to run a forum that allows people who I cannot identify to post things (because of a) and b) above). I accept that S5 in DA2013 gives some protection where sites delete things pretty quickly and hence people can continue posting without being identifiable and obtain some protection on a), but the same protection does not exist for b) and I know how expensive these things can get.
Your statement that everyone who contributes here should be identified in real life is one that you have made before. But I feel fairly certain that a vast majority of Lemons have no desire to have their real-world identity known by anyone here, including the site sponsors.
The fact that you choose to use your real name here (as far as I know anyway) is noble, but it is the overwhelming exception here. And by doing so you do open yourself up to personal exposure in a manner that the rest of us do not. If instead you posted via a nom-de-plume then I cannot for the life of me see how you could be harmed by the words of another here.
And in fact many websites specifically advise subscribers NOT to use their real name nor provide anything that would identify them.
PS: I generally agree with many of the views you express here. Just not your desire for everyone here to be identifiable.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3858
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 609 times
Re: The demise (or otherwise) of The Polite Discussion Board
Lootman wrote:Your statement that everyone who contributes here should be identified in real life is one that you have made before.
But I feel fairly certain that a vast majority of Lemons have no desire to have their real-world identity known by anyone here, including the site sponsors.
I do understand that. I don't run the site myself and I can see the role for anonymity. However, what I am saying is that were I to be running the forum I would not wish to take the risk as I see it. However, I don't run the forum. There is a form of protection where the forum is reasonably fast to delete things. I allow comments on my blog, but people have to have a google account and it is pre-moderated. (and not at all active nowadays).
I can fully understand why people want to be able to comment with anonymity and I can see good reasons for that. I am not going to try to argue against that.
Return to “Room 102 - Site Issues, Complaints & General Chat”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests