Gee, missed that one.
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Bob_Robertson Sep 14, 2009 1:18 PM EDT |
After reading lots of things about the codebreaking efforts before/during WW2, including Neil Stephenson's _Cryptonomicon_, I would have been interested to see what those 14 prior posts were. |
| TxtEdMacs Sep 14, 2009 1:55 PM EDT |
Bob, I read most of them on Sunday before the thread was blanked. To me most were innocuous with all seeming to say it was good, albeit too late to reverse the harm. The latter seemed sentiment seemed to be the more extreme, but unarguable from my view. I too wonder why the tread was killed. Read as [serious] as you should detect in my tone. YBT |
| tuxchick Sep 14, 2009 1:57 PM EDT |
Serious??? Wow! |
| jdixon Sep 14, 2009 2:17 PM EDT |
The last post I read concerned a link Caitlyn had posted, which someone commented might be off topic/outside the TOS. Since it was only a link, I don't see how that triggered the closure of the thread, so I'm assuming things escalated from there. This seems to happen with Caitlyn's posts on occasion, but since neither Bob nor I were there, I'm not sure who was the other party in this case. |
| bigg Sep 14, 2009 2:23 PM EDT |
I've done some TOS complaining, but it wasn't me. I'm usually too busy on weekends to post here. |
| caitlyn Sep 14, 2009 3:04 PM EDT |
Someone, sometime back said a link couldn't violate the TOS. Up to that point the thread was tame. I didn't see anything that followed the link because it was gone. |
| caitlyn Sep 14, 2009 3:06 PM EDT |
Someone, sometime back said a link couldn't violate the TOS. Up to that point the thread was tame. I didn't see anything that followed the link because it was gone. FWIW, the link was political in nature. I asked how far we had come since Turing's time and the link was a case in point. |
| jdixon Sep 14, 2009 3:10 PM EDT |
> I didn't see anything that followed the link because it was gone. I saw someone suggesting that the link violated the TOS, but that was it. I have no idea what followed or if someone took exception to the link itself. I don't recommend reposting the link though, just in case. I personally have no problem with links to TOS violating material, as long as the fact is noted so it can be avoided by those who might object. |
| Scott_Ruecker Sep 14, 2009 3:29 PM EDT |
I closed the thread because I had a bad feeling it was going to swan dive into multiple TOS violations at any moment. The thread was on topic for the article but becoming not on topic for LXer, I have waited till it was to late too many times recently and decided to close it. If I was mistaken, as this thread seems to show, I am sorry. I have decided that if I am to err, it will be on the side of caution more often. |
| jdixon Sep 14, 2009 3:38 PM EDT |
> I had a bad feeling it was going to swan dive into multiple TOS violations at any moment. It did seem to be heading in that direction, so I can't really blame you. > If I was mistaken, as this thread seems to show, I am sorry. I have decided that if I am to err, it will be on the side of caution more often. You do a good job normally Scott. Don't worry too much about it. |
| gus3 Sep 14, 2009 3:58 PM EDT |
Feature request: Close the thread to new comments, but optionally leave the posted comments up for display. |
| caitlyn Sep 14, 2009 4:39 PM EDT |
I like gus3's suggestion, particularly the "optionally". I really feel it should be at moderator's discretion. Scott: I'm glad to hear that you feel no TOS violation had taken place as of yet. I know I certainly had no intention to comment further. |
| dinotrac Sep 14, 2009 8:09 PM EDT |
I'm the one who brought up the TOS. While I don't know what's gone on in all of the threads that have been closed -- maybe really terrible stuff, I fear that we have taken the life out of discussions. Caitlyn did indeed put up a political link -- and one that was appropriate to the topic and interesting in its own right, but... If you're going to fear the discussion, you shouldn't go there in the first place. Drains some life out of things, but people who can't tolerate diversity or figure out how to skip through posts need to be protected. Fortunately, the dailykos is still around for real political discussions. |
| jdixon Sep 14, 2009 9:08 PM EDT |
> Fortunately, the dailykos is still around for real political discussions. I'm suspect my opinions there would last even less time than a political discussion with Caitlyn here. :( |
| caitlyn Sep 14, 2009 9:15 PM EDT |
@jdixon: Without going into why I'll say that my views on an issue that is very near and dear to my heart are probably as unpopular on that site at anything you may write or say. |
| dinotrac Sep 14, 2009 9:19 PM EDT |
jdixon - I've been going there for over a year. It can be a fun place, but you do have to remember that it really is something of a Democratic party organ -- its stated purpose is to help elect more Democrats. Still, along with the expected wingnuts and kooks, there are a fair number of smart people who will disagree with you (and sometimes agree). Some of the diarists are especially good. One guy is a virtual "Dr. Flu" in terms of keeping up with flu -- and the new H1N1 variety. Very interesting. Good science stuff, including on the environment. I go there for three reasons: 1. Preaching to the choir is uninformative, 2. If I'm going to care about free speech as much as I do, and everybody's right to exercise it, I'd better darn well engage in some with people who's views...ummmm....don't exactly line up with mine, and 3. Like a lot of people these days, my positions on certain issues (human impact on the environment and the need to rationalize our health care mess) don't fit will with the folks who are more like me philosophically. Not for everyone, but everyone should try to find outlets that are more challenging than comfortable. A mind is a terrible thing to waste, or, for that matter, let wither into goo. |
| dinotrac Sep 14, 2009 9:23 PM EDT |
caitlyn -- Tis a funny thing. Just as Americans have become aghast at any mention of the "P" word, we also seem to be more independent in our thinking. So much to learn if only we could stand to talk to each other. |
| jdixon Sep 14, 2009 9:31 PM EDT |
> Without going into why I'll say that my views on an issue... No need Caitlyn, I think I know your basic (though not detailed) political positions halfway well by now, and about I'd guess that at least 25% or so won't jibe with the daily kos crowd. |
| jdixon Sep 14, 2009 9:37 PM EDT |
> 1. Preaching to the choir is uninformative, Agreed. > 2. If I'm going to care about free speech as much as I do, and everybody's right to exercise it, I'd better darn well engage in some with people who's views...ummmm....don't exactly line up with mine,,, Not really necessary. Live and let live is sufficient to allow for your beliefs. What you seem to be looking for is actually more of: > ...but everyone should try to find outlets that are more challenging than comfortable. A mind is a terrible thing to waste, or, for that matter, let wither into goo. At least, it seems that way to me. :) Which is completely understandable. But I've heard all the daily kos arguments years ago, and seen the results both in the history books and first hand. There are those I could discuss things with there, and even reach agreement with, but they're a small minority, and equally well represented in the FOSS world. In fact, the two seem to have a high correlation for some strange reason. |
| jdixon Sep 14, 2009 9:39 PM EDT |
> So much to learn if only we could stand to talk to each other. Oh, we talk to each other fine. It's listening and understanding that seem to be lacking. :( But i know that's actually what you meant. I'm merely picking nits. |
| tuxchick Sep 14, 2009 10:56 PM EDT |
Quoting: I fear that we have taken the life out of discussions. When I was a wee youngun, in the winter we could go to the city park and ice skate on the lake. Unless there was a hockey game, and then forget it because the game always sprawled all over the entire lake. They were having fun, too bad for the rest of us. When my lovely SO invites her fellow firefighters over for a barbecue, most of the men always, and I mean always every single time, engage in the exact same political arguments they have every single time they get together. They're 99% wrong and stupid, just hot air and baseless opinions, and they don't even try to engage in any other conversations, such as hi how are you and what have you been up to, and so on. So I always shoo them off into their own corner and the rest of us can have an actual conversation. I am plagued by religious people who like to come to my door and start yapping about their beliefs and why I should believe them too. They never bother to inquire as to what I already know or believe. You love-to-combat political arguers brought this on yourselves. A little bit of self-control, and maybe we could actually discuss policy as it pertains to Linux, FOSS, and tech. But no. I can't recall a single discussion here that addressed specifics or anything pertinent to the topic; it always degrades into pet political philosophies. Israel, anarchy, libertarianism, conservative, liberal, this blah and that blah and other convenient but useless labels, and it's just another team sport, us vs. them, and who gives a rip? What good is it? None is what. I don't like recreational arguing. Most of us unwashed masses have given considerable thought and study to various political ideas and philosophies. Nothing is new under the sun, and I don't see any point in listening to rehashes of the same old gunk. IMO unfettered political "discussion" sucks the life out of discussions. I find plenty of thrills and chills in Linux, tech, and FOSS, and not nearly enough people who care to discuss them knowledgeably. Thank goodness for Lxer and Linux Today and the good commentary, and if you folks want Lxer to be the DailyKos you're welcome to it. |
| gus3 Sep 15, 2009 12:12 AM EDT |
TC: Tell her I said "thanks." It's said more now that it used to be, but it's still hard to say it too often. The last time people showed up on my property, wanting to talk about "that stuff," I stood between their car and the road, and kept talking... and they couldn't drive away without driving over me. My property, my terms. If you don't like it, stay off my property. Same goes for LXer. Whitinger's property, Whitinger's terms. |
| dinotrac Sep 15, 2009 1:10 AM EDT |
TC - So, I guess the world is a better place where those firefighters are told to shut up, we don't want any of that stuff here. Better yet, don't come around. We don't need your kind of stupidity. Seems to be the new American way. |
| gus3 Sep 15, 2009 1:13 AM EDT |
Quoting:I guess the world is a better place where those firefighters are told to shut upNot "shut up," just "take it somewhere else, it isn't appropriate here." |
| dinotrac Sep 15, 2009 6:38 AM EDT |
That's another way to tell them "Go away." After all, what's the fun of being in church everywhere you go? |
| bigg Sep 15, 2009 7:34 AM EDT |
I don't have a problem with discussion. I do not think it is good for LXer to have (a) threads relevant to the article hijacked to discuss broad political philosophy that is at best only mildly related to the article, or (b) any mention of health care or whatever is the political fight tomorrow. The first shuts down discussion of FOSS, which is why LXer exists, and the second quickly becomes a cable news shouting match in an attempt to spout political talking points. I don't watch cable news, and even though I care deeply about a few political issues, I have little interest in politics. Those discussions wouldn't bother me if there were a separate area for "off topic" discussions, because I could ignore them. What is frustrating is getting down to the fifth post of an interesting thread and some joker has started talking politics. |
| dinotrac Sep 15, 2009 7:49 AM EDT |
I guess they don't teach how to stop reading and skip to the next post these days. |
| tracyanne Sep 15, 2009 8:24 AM EDT |
If there's a link follow it, like Alice. |
| jdixon Sep 15, 2009 9:00 AM EDT |
> (a) threads relevant to the article hijacked to discuss broad political philosophy that is at best only mildly related to the article ... The first shuts down discussion of FOSS, And yet FOSS is a "broad political philosophy". Or at least the direct result of one. Funny how that works. |
| bigg Sep 15, 2009 9:35 AM EDT |
> And yet FOSS is a "broad political philosophy". But most broad political philosophies have nothing to do with FOSS. I don't recall anyone complaining about discussions of software licensing or open source business models being TOS violations. > I guess they don't teach how to stop reading and skip to the next post these days. If I go to the library, I don't look at books on makeup, or books on biology, or books on a lot of topics. I go to the section that is of interest at that time. Otherwise why even bother having threads with names? Everyone can just post in one big thread and if something is not of interest, just skip to the next post. |
| tuxchick Sep 15, 2009 9:43 AM EDT |
dino, I guess you missed the parts about: 1. The so-called political discussions are almost never relevant to the topic, and they shut down the real discussions. Like the hockey games of my youth, like the rude one-note firefighters who don't even try to engage with the other guests, they trample over everything and shut out the other discussions. There are no other posts to skip to. 2. They're boring, stupid, and off-topic. I don't consider the shouting of one's pet political beliefs to be speech, but noise. I thought that you at least would understand the difference between discussing actual policy, and the same old non-specific non-relevant shouting matches. I would love good wonky policy discussions. But that never happens. 3. It is not fun to have good tech discussions hijacked by yet another idiotic political 'discussion.' You want a brawl, fine, go have a brawl. Do please have the courtesy to not spoil the party for those of us who don't. I'm sorry Lxer isn't Jerry Springer enough for you. No wait, I'm not sorry. Thanks gus3, they're very dedicated. They're all unpaid volunteers, and still have to have the same training and qualifications as the big city paid firefighters. |
| Bob_Robertson Sep 15, 2009 10:19 AM EDT |
I'll third Gus' "close posting but leave readable" suggestion. I believe the ability to look back and see what gets shut down is important to learning the limits. Personally, I'm pleased to see a general respect for private property being shown. From that all civil discourse can follow. May I also suggest, in echoing Dino 07:49, that provocative posts get ignored? (yeah, something I need to work on myself) > same training and qualifications as the big city paid firefighters. When I moved to a place that had a volunteer fire department, volunteering was one of the first things I did. "Defense of self and others" is one of the primary motivations for having a community in the first place, and fire is as common a threat as there can be. (common as in commons, not common as in happens often) |
| softwarejanitor Sep 15, 2009 11:16 AM EDT |
I also think the option to close a thread but leave it readable would be an excellent improvement to the site. |
| caitlyn Sep 15, 2009 11:59 AM EDT |
Quoting:I also think the option to close a thread but leave it readable would be an excellent improvement to the site. I did at first but I think it may also encourage the off topic and inflammatory post, with the the person (or people) who willfully violate the TOS knowing that responses will be blocked. I think the way it is now is fine. |
| softwarejanitor Sep 15, 2009 1:08 PM EDT |
@caitlyn The moderator could delete or edit the off topic or otherwise TOS violating posts and leave the rest in that case I would think. |
| caitlyn Sep 15, 2009 2:38 PM EDT |
@swj: So long as they have that feature and use it I'd be fine with the result. |
| softwarejanitor Sep 15, 2009 3:17 PM EDT |
@caitlyn I think they already have the ability to edit or delete individual posts in a thread. They'd just have to judiciously use it. |
| hkwint Sep 15, 2009 4:46 PM EDT |
Quoting:I think they already have the ability to edit or delete individual posts in a thread. They'd just have to judiciously use it. Although I have no moderator rights (I can only change articles, not discussion threads), I'm not aware of the existence of such LXer functionality. But I'll ask Scott. BTW: I'd like to invite anyone participating in the discussion about what LXer does / shouldn't do to start a thread in the LXer forum, because the discussion of how TOS-violations are 'taken care of' by the "LXer moderators" 1) Isn't really related to Mr. Turing 2) If people are looking for discussions like this (in the future, for reference maybe), it would be logical to search in the LXer forum. |
| hkwint Sep 15, 2009 4:50 PM EDT |
Quoting:May I also suggest, in echoing Dino 07:49, that provocative posts get ignored? Bob: Beware, those times are time zone dependent. It's an LXer feature. For me it shows up at 01:49 PM CEST. If Dino is really posting at 7:49 AM, kudos to him; cause to me that looks kinda early in the morning. |
| gus3 Sep 15, 2009 5:21 PM EDT |
EST/EDT: the One True Time Zone. |
| TxtEdMacs Sep 15, 2009 5:44 PM EDT |
Quoting:EST/EDT: the One True Time Zone.I would trade it for Pacific* without either hesitation or compunction. If I only could ... sigh. YBT * Northwest Quadrant |
| gus3 Sep 15, 2009 6:02 PM EDT |
Quoting:* Northwest QuadrantNo true Trekkie would call it anything other than the "Beta quadrant." Turn in your communicator badge immediately. |
| bigg Sep 15, 2009 6:20 PM EDT |
> No true Trekkie would call it anything other than the "Beta quadrant." We need to add Star Trek talk to the TOS as well. |
| TxtEdMacs Sep 15, 2009 9:04 PM EDT |
Never liked Star Trek, The Terminator, Sarah Connors Chronicles is more to my taste, though portions enraged me. Many humans were as brutal as the murderous robots and some were supposedly part of the heroic family fighting humanity's battles. Towards its untimely termination it became obvious the writers did not see the good and evil as so clear cut. Season three had promise, much better than the 100Mil plus movie that came out this past Summer. YBT PS Never, never imply I am a Trekkie or ... * * Unfortunately I cannot complete the implied threat or the thread will be terminated. |
| gus3 Sep 15, 2009 9:30 PM EDT |
@Txt: It doesn't involve tennis balls, does it? |
| TxtEdMacs Sep 15, 2009 9:49 PM EDT |
No, I was actually thinking of something more lethal, but if that is your choice - I am game. You are talking guns, right? When I tried to play tennis I could not keep the ball within the lines, so you will kill me if that is your plan. What about the paint guns, never used those. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!