Should General Chat (Off - Topic) forum be closed?

[MikeG.]

it seems a long time ago (correct me if I'm wrong) that a thread was closed down for whatever reason.

Twice in the last three days!!!

 

[wizer]

I think it's fair enough for a thread to get heated. It's when the thread is started with that intention...

 

[Smudger]

I think it's fair enough for a thread to get heated. It's when the thread is started with that intention...

Or contains comments like

"Pay no heed Pete, as DT, quoted, a couple of months ago, You have just encountered the village silly person."

or

"Well I'm sorry Sammie, your wasting your time on this forum with all the left wing do gooders,"

 

[Shadowfax]

"No" from me too.
There is nothing wrong with a sensible argument.
What I find somewhat irritating is the persistance of one or two members who cannot let go of a particular fragment of the conversation. They then carp on, ad nauseum, on their own little trip.
It's boring and rather childish.
Please will those people recognise when a topic , or part of it, is dead and stop trying to give it the kiss of life.
It is only a conversation, after all. It's not a battle that must be won.
I think the off topic forum is great, actually. It can be very useful and it can be very entertaining too.
Long may it remain.

SF

 

[Losos]

But where would you have posted the question if the "Off Topic" didn't exist?

PS... I voted NO.

Good point LN

I voted NO as well. I must admit I've not been onhere as much as I once was so I completely missed the 'Krenov' thing. I did follow the thread which went on about a certain magazine and resulted in a breakaway (This must have been nearly two years ago now)

TBH I haven't noticed any particulary argumentative threads of late but I don't now read everything.

I must say that UKW has always seemed to me to be a very polite and helpful site. There is one person who I don't much like but I can easily avoid him. Everyone else (That I've read) has been OK and while I don't always agree with everyone I don't think it would be good to delete this forum.

 

[Waka]

it seems a long time ago (correct me if I'm wrong) that a thread was closed down for whatever reason.

Twice in the last three days!!!

I stand corrected, shows how observant I am in my dotage :wink:

 

[Woodmagnet]

"No" from me too.
There is nothing wrong with a sensible argument.
What I find somewhat irritating is the persistance of one or two members who cannot let go of a particular fragment of the conversation. They then carp on, ad nauseum, on their own little trip.
It's boring and rather childish.
Please will those people recognise when a topic , or part of it, is dead and stop trying to give it the kiss of life.
It is only a conversation, after all. It's not a battle that must be won.
I think the off topic forum is great, actually. It can be very useful and it can be very entertaining too.
Long may it remain.

SF

Well said SF.

 

[Peter T]

"No" from me too.
There is nothing wrong with a sensible argument.
What I find somewhat irritating is the persistance of one or two members who cannot let go of a particular fragment of the conversation. They then carp on, ad nauseum, on their own little trip.
It's boring and rather childish.
Please will those people recognise when a topic , or part of it, is dead and stop trying to give it the kiss of life.
It is only a conversation, after all. It's not a battle that must be won.
I think the off topic forum is great, actually. It can be very useful and it can be very entertaining too.
Long may it remain.

SF

To quote another current thread.............."Here here".

 

[Smudger]

That's all well and good.

But what do you do when people are making outrageous statements - such as girls who are sexually assaulted bring it on themselves? Do you leave rubbish like that unchallenged - especially when their response is "I knew that would wind you up".

Or people who make ridiculous statements and then refuse to back them up or retract them? People who insult other posters as 'village idiots' for having different political views?

OK, it's possible to ignore them. But they posted these comments for us to read and respond to. Then they don't like the responses.

It's actually a form of bullying, or would be if it was effective. Why give in to ignorance?

 

[Peter T]

That's all well and good.

But what do you do when people are making outrageous statements - such as girls who are sexually assaulted bring it on themselves? Do you leave rubbish like that unchallenged - especially when their response is "I knew that would wind you up".

Or people who make ridiculous statements and then refuse to back them up or retract them? People who insult other posters as 'village idiots' for having different political views?

OK, it's possible to ignore them. But they posted these comments for us to read and respond to. Then they don't like the responses.

It's actually a form of bullying, or would be if it was effective. Why give in to ignorance?

............or people who ridicule other posters for having a "Poxy job".

When the comments reach this level it's better, IMHO, to bow out gracefully.

Have a nice day,

 

[Jake]

I think there's a difference between people who like venting because it does something for them, and people who are interested in exploring whether something is true.

The first type likes to make broad sweeping statements, preferably condemning the percieved failings of a swathe of people with whom the poster does not identify. The other type tends to think that the people who are being condemned aren't likely to be much different from you and me, and wonder whether there is any justification for the statement. That takes some exploration for the basis of the statement, which the first type finds antagonistic and probably boring. In the end, there usually isn't enough evidence to support the broad statement, so the first type ends up getting upset about the dissection of what they said.

The first type are rubbish people.

(that's a joke OK,think about it. I say that because there seems to be a considerable correlation between (i) a propensity for sense of humour failures and (ii) believing the world and everyone in it (apart from "me",and possibly those who agree with "me") is rubbish and must induce indignation and rage, sometimes even in bold capital letters!)

 

[BradNaylor]

............or people who ridicule other posters for having a "Poxy job".

No-one ever ridiculed you for having a poxy job.

You were ridiculed for making the outrageous and frankly offensive assertion that increased numbers of deaths though wars were a price worth paying if it kept you in employment.

Cheers
Dan

 

[Peter T]

I think there's a difference between people who like venting because it does something for them, and people who are interested in exploring whether something is true.

The first type likes to make broad sweeping statements, preferably condemning the percieved failings of a swathe of people with whom the poster does not identify. The other type tends to think that the people who are being condemned aren't likely to be much different from you and me, and wonder whether there is any justification for the statement. That takes some exploration for the basis of the statement, which the first type finds antagonistic and probably boring. In the end, there usually isn't enough evidence to support the broad statement, so the first type ends up getting upset about the dissection of what they said.

The first type are rubbish people.

(that's a joke OK,think about it. I say that because there seems to be a considerable correlation between (i) a propensity for sense of humour failures and (ii) believing the world and everyone in it (apart from "me",and possibly those who agree with "me") is rubbish and must induce indignation and rage, sometimes even in bold capital letters!)

Here here, again.

I'm off to try to improve my meagre woodworking skills. Don't wait up!!

 

[MikeG.]

Jake,

I completely agree with you, and had thought that one way of achieving a more enlightened and equable set of discussions here would be to have a break. The argumentative so-and-sos would probably head off elsewhere to have their regular arguments, and when we re-opened those that remained might be generally a little more circumspect before falling into old traps.

However, I am a democrat, and can see that this idea is not popular.

Instead........

How about a button somewhere on the site that enabled one to block-out another individual's posts? If individuals couldn't stop falling out, they could press a "members I am ignoring" button and thereafter not see the other member's posts. It may help keep the temperature down......

Mike

 

[wizer]

How about a button somewhere on the site that enabled one to block-out another individual's posts?

Easier said than done. I don't think you can do that with the forum software we have. As we don't pay for access, we can't complain about that. Self control is the only option. I find that usually these annoying members eventually get bored or get more response to their bait else where and leave.

 

[newt]

I have had some valuable solutions for non woodworking problems and find it generally very useful. I voted no. If it gives you a problem dont go there.

 

[Paul Chapman]

If it gives you a problem dont go there.

Well said, Pete. Trouble is too many people just have to have the last word - a bit like you get in a school playground.......

Cheers :wink:

Paul

 

[Losos]

Twice in the last three days!!!

I stand corrected, shows how observant I am in my dotage :wink:[/quote]

Not only you Waka, I had no idea two threads had been closed in three days. Still, as i said I'm not onhere as much as I once was due to other commitments.

 

[Peter T]

On another forum that I'm a member of they have a "Who p***ed you off today" section.

This is clearly labelled as containing bad language etc. etc. It's used by members to rant and rave about anything that's annoyed them although this does not usually take the form of verbal abuse about other members.

Be that as it may, I think this could be useful here. Rather than turning a topic into a slanging match the aggrieved parties move to the "Who p***ed you off today" section where they can have a knock down, drag out bust up if they so choose. Anyone of a nervous disposition, or those who are not interested simply stay away.

This way the majority can have a normal discussion about the issues of the day while the minority can slug it out without fear of offending anyone else.

 

[Shadowfax]

On another forum that I'm a member of they have a "Who p***ed you off today" section.

This is clearly labelled as containing bad language etc. etc. It's used by members to rant and rave about anything that's annoyed them although this does not usually take the form of verbal abuse about other members.

Be that as it may, I think this could be useful here. Rather than turning a topic into a slanging match the aggrieved parties move to the "Who p***ed you off today" section where they can have a knock down, drag out bust up if they so choose. Anyone of a nervous disposition, or those who are not interested simply stay away.

This way the majority can have a normal discussion about the issues of the day while the minority can slug it out without fear of offending anyone else.

And just how grown up is that?
What does that say about a civilised venue for conversation that it needs a padded room for those who can't get on?
If people want a scrap they should bu**er of somewhere else, a long way away, and do it!

SF