Goodwin's Law states: Many message boards have implemented a rule where any comparison to Nazi's or Hitler causes a thread to be locked by the mods, ending all debate, with the understanding that whoever made the comparison is considered to have admitted defeat. This poll is to gauge interest in such a law here in FHOP - it would help keep some threads from going on quite so long, as well as help keep individuals on topic and keep these ridiculous comparisons to a minimum. How does everyone feel? *Sorry for the double post, screwed up the poll on the other one*
As distasteful as I find comparisons to Hitler/Nazis to be, locking the thread can stop a good discussion that other folks are having just because of the stupidity of one jerk. And I trust the moderators on PC to deal with these issues on a case-by-case basis. Also, since Mystery Squid seems to have disappeared(?), the probability of Godwin's Law (note spelling) of being invoked has dramatically decreased.
Just don't feed the trolls and the threads won't devolve into that crap. The trolls spew fearmongering, use race baiting, and constantly state how every but them hates America. They clearly are not going to be swayed to reality and due to the inflamatory nature of their posts, they are not even interested in convincing those that bite on their bait. Hence they are trolls. Merely looking to get a rise out of people. (Though I reserve the possibility of them recieving monetary benefit from them spewing their inflamatory BS.) Don't feed the trolls! Please note Eagle, in that thread you got annoyed with Desynch, you were the only one feeding him the attention he was fishing for. When no one replies to stupid posts, they continue to look stupid. When people are baiting into useless arguments like that, it gives their thread life and a sense of legitimacy.
Any implementation of additional rules or actions only makes more work for me and tag and Evan and Danny. Therefore, I'm against it. Usually, when someone makes some Hitler remark, it is they who are painting themselves as the unintelligent poster. It's a well-understood argumentative tactic that when you have no solid facts or logical arguments you attempt to discredit the other person's character. So when I see a personal attack or insult, I know that person has no tact, facts, or respect. Additionally, if Hitler and Nazi references automatically gets a thread locked, then people will make the reference just to get a thread locked. And why stop with Germans? We could make a whole list of offensive words, references, and concepts that should get threads locked just as quickly as German references. If we implement one we should implement them all. But per paragraph one, I don't want that. Basically, I tell people that PriusChat is mostly mature, intelligent adults though some of them occasionally prove me wrong.
I wish there was a forum header something like: "desynch and the doc stroking each other with delicious glee. Enter at your own risk." We could move those kinds of posts into that forum. And I'm with Tony. As a poster, just throw a flag. Offsides. No need for administration.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Mar 22 2007, 01:33 PM) [snapback]410297[/snapback]</div> Do Nazi's abuse apostrophe's? :lol: On topic, I agree with Tony. He's a mostly mature, intelligent adult.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Mar 22 2007, 02:12 PM) [snapback]410326[/snapback]</div> Thanks for the visual. <_< I'm not going to be able to sleep for a week now!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Mar 22 2007, 03:25 PM) [snapback]410336[/snapback]</div> Sorry. It's the visual I get whenever they double-team a thread. Oh no, did I do it again? :huh:
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving anything you might imagine (alcoholic dogs, green rain, clocks that run backwards, etc.) increases. And I see nothing wrong with long threads. When they begin to bore me I stop looking at them. A thread will end when nobody wants to participate in it, and there is no reason to force it to end earlier, unless the mods feel it's objectionable, and they are perfectly capable of doing that without Godwin's rule. Strict enforcement of the proposed rule would allow anybody who wanted to close a thread to do so just by mentioning one of the prohibited words. However, I don't mind if someone wants to post "You Lose" at anyone who does so.
The real irony here is that were that law enforced this thread would have had to have been locked before anyone could reply to it. Other than that (and it pains me greatly to say this), I agree with Tony..... must run take a bath now....
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Mar 22 2007, 02:12 PM) [snapback]410378[/snapback]</div> Yeah. I hear ya. I feel dirty when I agree with Tony too!
In my fantasy world, the one doing the inciting would suddenly be transported to meet face to face with the ones he is attacking. I'm thinking the probably result would be akin to a worker that sent an over the top flame and has to answer to the recepient(s) and supervisor. I don't mind if occasionally a moderator asks the flame-thower what they are smoking.
This law is just the sort of thing Hitler and the Nazis would have done; in fact, anyone even suggesting such an idea is probably a Nazi! Tom
There needs to be a way on forums to simulate the collective stare when one person in a big meeting says something REALLY OUTRAGOUS
I was thinking about this on the way home this evening. Some people have already discovered that we have put in place "filters" that replace most words "not cable-ready" with *s. Would it make people happy if we implemented a similar filter to replace "Hitler" with "Mr. Snuggle-Bunny" and "Nazis" with "Lover Muffins"?
Maybe rather than something as ambiguous as "Mr. Snuggle-Bunny," which clearly would make no sense to the uninitiated, replace "Hitler" with "my dearly departed friend and Fuhrer." That way we'd all know who they were talking about, but it would also discourage using his name (except for people who really like Hitler).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Mar 23 2007, 09:11 AM) [snapback]410813[/snapback]</div> But "Lover Muffins" is okay?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Mar 22 2007, 10:39 PM) [snapback]410646[/snapback]</div> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Mar 23 2007, 09:25 AM) [snapback]410821[/snapback]</div> I'm fine with Lover Muffins. I would gladly join the Lover Muffin party (note: I'm actually referring to muffins, not Nazis). Just make sure the filter doesn't go backwards. That would make some of the other threads with muffin talk a lot more, um, German.
