• Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Should ASF ban people from threads?

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by CanOz, Aug 2, 2017.

Should ASF ban people from threads?

  1. Yes

    5 vote(s)
    17.9%
  2. No

    13 vote(s)
    46.4%
  3. Maybe

    10 vote(s)
    35.7%
  1. CanOz

    CanOz Home runs feel good, but base hits pay bills!

    Posts:
    10,729
    Likes Received:
    214
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    The only way forward for ASF is too ban people from threads....that becomes the first warning. Three thread bans and you're out. Joe, time to get real....this is not a f@@@ing democracy here.
     
    captain black likes this.
  2. Joe Blow

    Joe Blow Administrator

    Posts:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    203
    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    I note CanOz's suggestion above and was wondering if people agreed with this approach to thread management?

    If so, what grounds would you consider good reason for banning someone from participating in a thread?

    While I'm interested in keeping threads on topic and constructive, I think that this would be a measure of last resort and would need to be based on serious misconduct such as harassment, personal attacks, or consistently and deliberately taking a thread off topic.

    Am interested in any feedback.
     
  3. CanOz

    CanOz Home runs feel good, but base hits pay bills!

    Posts:
    10,729
    Likes Received:
    214
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Hi Joe, hope the holiday is going well!

    Maybe add a poll here?
     
  4. SirRumpole

    SirRumpole

    Posts:
    8,672
    Likes Received:
    406
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Reasons for banning;

    * personal abuse of another poster.

    * trolling, continually linking to "fake news" websites.

    * continual use of obscenities(or facsimilies of, eg the OP ;))

    Frankly I don't see that this forum has much to worry about, most people here can carry on a reasonable conversation while disagreeing.

    I think this is part of a campaign to do away with the General Chat forum as this is the area where some personal disagreements are likely to arise that give rise to lively discussions. ;)
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2017
    Value Collector likes this.
  5. Joe Blow

    Joe Blow Administrator

    Posts:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    203
    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Holiday is going well thanks.

    I added a poll but don't think this is a simple yes or no answer. I'm interested in the grounds for such a ban. Ban someone from a thread for disagreeing? For winding others up? For suggesting others are wrong? For chest beating?
     
  6. systematic

    systematic

    Posts:
    513
    Likes Received:
    37
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    How about not sticking to the actual topic!

    It's probably a judgement call like the art vs porn saying, 'I know it when I see it'
     
  7. captain black

    captain black

    Posts:
    1,049
    Likes Received:
    95
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Joe I've been a member of the Whirpool tech forum for as long as I've been on ASF and if you're looking for a "template" for moderation then the way Whirpool does things is a good place to start, particularly this:

    http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/wp_religiousdebates

     
    Trembling Hand, Skate, pixel and 2 others like this.
  8. noirua

    noirua

    Posts:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    11
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Everyone is entitled to a a view and providing it does not break the Laws of Australia they should be heard.
    Modern flat Earth societies date from the middle of the 20th century; some adherents are serious and some are not. These organizations are based on the belief that the Earth is flat. Some adherents appear to be motivated by pseudoscience and some by religious literalism.[3]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_flat_Earth_societies

    Moderation of threads is one of the very good aspects of ASF.

    If someone believes that Martians regularly visit Australia, fair enough. Or that god lives in an outer Galaxy. Or that Earth has only existed 6,000 years.

    It is very easy to kill off a thread if the majority posting keep it going by being off topic.
     
  9. SirRumpole

    SirRumpole

    Posts:
    8,672
    Likes Received:
    406
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    So, that can apply to anything ? Ban people for expressing views on anything that "can't be proven" In who's opinion ?

    Just about anything can't be proven. We can't prove that corporate tax cuts will create employment in 20 years or that reducing negative gearing will improve housing affordability, but arguments for both of these and a lot more besides can be put and disagreed with.

    If people want to drivel on and you don't like what they say, then don't read it.
     
  10. Joe Blow

    Joe Blow Administrator

    Posts:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    203
    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    Thanks Captain! That's a well thought out approach to those kind of discussions. I just wonder how it actually works in practice? Can you imagine me jumping into a TA vs. FA debate and moderating on the basis that it is impossible to prove which methodology is superior? While I absolutely agree with the part of that policy that you put in bold font, I wonder if discussions are regularly moderated on this basis and are moderators accused of bias and censorship as a result? Perhaps you or some other Whirlpool members here at ASF could shed some light on how this approach works in practice? (i.e. do people get shut down for simply being too dogmatic and unwilling to listen to others?)
     
  11. PZ99

    PZ99 ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    Posts:
    779
    Likes Received:
    143
    Joined:
    May 13, 2015
    IMO Whirlpool is over moderated and if that type of moderation applied here you will end up with no posters. Banning posters from threads sounds nice but it tends to spread bad karma onto other threads. So I voted "maybe" only because it hasn't been done before.

    For the record, ASF is nowhere near as hostile as many other forums I've posted in - and that's probably because it's lightly moderated compared to others including whirlpool and HC.

    My 2 cents is to leave things as they are but simply delete posts containing trolling, name calling, baiting, profanity etc. Maybe an infraction system might be better for those who might have had a few before posting.
     
  12. qldfrog

    qldfrog

    Posts:
    1,760
    Likes Received:
    30
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    My own view: as we can ignore people we consider outside of any rational thinking, I do not really see the point of a ban;
    My limit would maybe be ramping of stocks, personal abuse..but in that case i would just ignore.
    About religion for example, where do you put the limit, islam is interlocked with a culture and in my opinion with a global war with serious economic implications and potential catastrophic consequences on the stock market (remember 9/11).Should it be a taboo? I do not think so; profanity ..where do you put the limit,
    Probably anything which could put Joe in trouble law wise, that is basically all i would restrict;Am I too liberal (in noble meaning of this abused word)? anyway, that is the way i see things
     
    SirRumpole likes this.
  13. Joe Blow

    Joe Blow Administrator

    Posts:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    203
    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    I will share this. I can honestly say that "Hell hath no fury like a forum user moderated." I can't tell you the amount of horrific names I have been called for moderating someone's post. Many people really do react with a furious outrage that is hard to deal with. A small minority are genuinely apologetic.

    CanOz has met me, so he knows that I am a pretty laid back person and I do not seek out or relish confrontations. That is not to say that I don't act when I feel it is warranted, but I avoid being too overzealous simply because it can cause more problems than it solves.
     
    pixel, systematic, PZ99 and 1 other person like this.
  14. Joe Blow

    Joe Blow Administrator

    Posts:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    203
    Joined:
    May 28, 2004
    I will also say this. I think that the biggest problem at ASF is that some - a small minority - have a real intolerance for other people's views and people they don't like generally. This often results in conflict that has its origins in personal slights and subtle digs that get blown up unnecessarily.

    However, the idea that ASF is filled with conflict is simply not grounded in reality. The vast majority of threads here are fine, but sadly the small amount of conflict that does exist tends to be more noticeable and distracts from the majority of topics that are being discussed in a civil and constructive way. It's a real shame because this place is, for the most part, filled with intelligent, knowledgeable people participating in thoughtful, constructive debates and discussions.
     
    rb250660 likes this.
  15. nulla nulla

    nulla nulla Positive Expectancy

    Posts:
    3,443
    Likes Received:
    36
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    I think you answered your own question Joe. So a couple of prima donnas have a slanging match, one has a track record of leaving and returning, the other has now threatened to leave. No doubt he will return, the appetite for expression of personal opinion and confrontation with others will need to be sated. Take a nip of Johnny Walker Black and keep it in perspective. :cool:
     
    rb250660 likes this.
  16. Gringotts Bank

    Gringotts Bank

    Posts:
    5,457
    Likes Received:
    84
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Anything Canoz doesn't like would be grounds for a ban. No political discussion, no religion, no general discussion and now a thread ban. A bit like North Korea, or China. It's not a democracy, apparently. Trading only, and only in a state-approved way. Don't step out of line - it's for the good of the people.

    Canoz have you ever considered that NO ONE is stopping you posting a million threads on trading? So go ahead! Go for it. Make 100 posts per day if that's how you want ASF to be. Stop trying to control everyone else.
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2017
  17. pixel

    pixel DIY Trader

    Posts:
    5,044
    Likes Received:
    261
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    I have also subscribed to whirlpool, but I only visit there when I have a question, so my opinion is probably not based on a very broad base. What I did notice though:
    • People there tend to stick to the topic.
    • Rarely have I seen that differences of opinion are carried on ad infinitum, but that could lie in the nature of threads I've visited.
    • It's hard to tell whether the above is due to moderation or something WP-specific.
    The one thing that irks me most about so many of the General Chat topics, and which drives me away from participating more, is the observation that the same arguments are repeated over and over by their respective proponents. As nothing new is added to the discussion, it becomes a tedious waste of my time to read the same "you're wrong and I'm right" - "No, YOU are wrong!".

    Should the "usual suspects" be banned from their pet threads?
    Maybe as a last resort. But it would probably be easier if threads were simply locked once nothing new - in the Moderator's view - has been added for the last xx (10? 20?) posts.
     
    CanOz likes this.
  18. skc

    skc Goldmember

    Posts:
    8,254
    Likes Received:
    269
    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    My suggestion re: general chat
     
    kid hustlr and mcgrath111 like this.
  19. SirRumpole

    SirRumpole

    Posts:
    8,672
    Likes Received:
    406
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    I got the impression that site revenue depended, directly or indirectly on the number of posts, so maybe locking threads is not a good idea income wise, but I agree that threads can become tiresome if they are just a pillow fight between a couple of people with fixed ideas.
     
  20. Smurf1976

    Smurf1976

    Posts:
    7,244
    Likes Received:
    193
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Strongly agreed there.

    I've seen a similar dynamic play out in the offline world as well as online. If someone calls a meeting to discuss something then they have to expect that from time to time others are going to simply not agree. Getting such a response is, of course, the point of having a meeting in the first place although I've come across a few who struggle with that concept.

    If those who disagree are slapped down often enough then before too long they decide it's all too hard and just keep their mouths shut. Been there, seen that play out first hand and it doesn't end well to have a group of people with only one of them in practice doing any thinking whilst others remain silent. Sooner or later they stuff up and nobody says a word, instead just staying silent and watching it unfold rather than getting into yet another argument. That approach works pretty well until it fails spectacularly.

    Hostility toward differing opinions is a sure fire way to lose all bar a very few voices and those left will be those driven by ego and politics first and foremost with any knowledge or ability being largely coincidental and a secondary consideration. Once that happens it's all over pretty quickly since nobody else is going to be attracted to something where that is the culture.

    The only problem I see with ASF in terms of the content of threads is the tendency of those focused on trading methods in particular to end up as a personal crusade. Everything else seems pretty much OK to me. Sure, some threads go a bit off topic but generally get back on topic of their own accord.

    As an example, if the thread is about Wesfarmers then I see no problem with someone mentioning what Woolworths are up to since that's a competing business of major relevance. Technically some may say it's off topic but there's more to investing than lines on a chart and it's of relevance definitely. On the other hand, it's way too far off topic if someone starts going on about Donald Trump or climate change unless they've got a definite point as to how that relates to the business of Wesfarmers. Etc.

    If the overly personal focused posts in various threads weren't there then everything else is fine in my view. :2twocents
     
Loading...

Share This Page