Is the Forum on Life Support??? (1 Viewer)

[ChristopherG]

I think part of the reason for the slow down includes moderators who seem too vested in proving they are right....it turns folks off to have their nose wacked with a rolled up newspaper in public.

 

 

[Rob FM]

.

 

[Eric_L]

What I used to like about after hours lounge was that there was a diverse group of highly intelligent and knowledgeable people. I always felt there was no question that couldn't be answered by someone here. Astro-physics, physiology, electronics, whatever - someone had the answer. It was this forum which encouraged me to build my first PC and coached me along the way almost 10 years ago. I totally appreciate that.


Many years ago it was decided to tone-down the topics in AHL. Politics was always banned, but it was decided that topics of a personal nature would also be prohibited. It was then that the AHL participation started to decline. Certainly there were some people who went a bit too far - but it was certainly interesting and I'm not sure that it helped to let it go. It was a membership draw and anchor.

I've also wondered if there might be a way to have an 'anonymous' room where any topic can be discussed. This way members cannot hold a grudge in the official forum, yet it could be a draw to people who might be interested in discussing (within reason) anything. I do sorta miss people posting for relationship advice and other salacious stuff. The advice was usually just as good as in official forums - with a few crackpots thrown in to keep it interesting.

 

[Sam Posten]

Yeah, that exists... It's called /b/


It's far weirder than you can imagine.

 

[Cees Alons]

Originally Posted by Eric_L

(...........)


Many years ago it was decided to tone-down the topics in AHL. Politics was always banned, but it was decided that topics of a personal nature would also be prohibited. It was then that the AHL participation started to decline. Certainly there were some people who went a bit too far - but it was certainly interesting and I'm not sure that it helped to let it go. It was a membership draw and anchor.

(.....)

(Emphasis added by me.)


Eric,


I'm not aware of a restriction like that.

And it's certainly not in the rules of this forum (see link in my signature to read those rules).


Occasionally, we have felt a need to caution a member not to reveal too much personal information on-line and we have asked one or two members kindly to clean-up their language. We also forbid personal attacks and other disturbing behaviour.


But topics? Apart from politics and religion, I don't know any restrictions, or even the sort of restrictions you seem to refer to. As far as I know there aren't any, unless there's something really escaping me now.



Cees

 

[DaveF]

Eric, you seem to have missed the "Xenia" thread. That's about as personal as it gets.


Even 10 years ago, I remember politics and religion being verboten. I don't know that the forum history goes back that far anymore, so it may be uncheckable.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Dave, very early on, when the World Wide Web was young, politics used to be discussed at Home Theater Forum. When the Web's Wild West nature expanded (as did HTF), it was decided to "ban" political or religious talk. There were many rude people who haunted this environ way back then.


Now, with HTF really seeming to fade somewhat, I wonder if perhaps political discussion might be appropriate. And this is coming from a former admin here.


Cees, what do you think? Imagine a carefully moderated political discussion occurring here. It could happen; it has at other moderated discussion boards.


What's to lose?

 

[DaveF]

Right. I joined in 2001, and my -- perhaps incorrect -- recollection was that ban was in place at that time. But Eric, who joined a year after me, recalls things differently. So I don't know.


(That "gentlemen's club" atmosphere was part of what attracted me, compared to the banality of e.g. Slashdot, which I also read from time to time.)

 

[Adam Gregorich]

Originally Posted by Cees Alons

(Emphasis added by me.)


Eric,


I'm not aware of a restriction like that.

And it's certainly not in the rules of this forum (see link in my signature to read those rules).


Occasionally, we have felt a need to caution a member not to reveal too much personal information on-line and we have asked one or two members kindly to clean-up their language. We also forbid personal attacks and other disturbing behavior.


But topics? Apart from politics and religion, I don't know any restrictions, or even the sort of restrictions you seem to refer to. As far as I know there aren't any, unless there's something really escaping me now.



Cees

Cees has actually been here longer than I have, but for as long as I can remember and more importantly as of today there are only three things that are not allowed to be discussed on HTF: politics, religion and bootlegging. Other than those things you can share whatever you want. As Cees pointed out we don't allow personal attacks, but you can post your disagreement with anyone or any opinion here and occasionally we caution people from sharing too much, but that is more from a common sense perspective. A good example is I see people leaving their email address and phone numbers in the classifieds section. I usually erase those and suggest they be exchanged via PMs.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Originally Posted by Adam Gregorich



Cees has actually been here longer than I have, but for as long as I can remember and more importantly as of today there are only three things that are not allowed to be discussed on HTF: politics, religion and bootlegging. Other than those things you can share whatever you want.

Just to clarify: Under HTF Rule 5, it's not so much "bootlegging" (although that's included) as it is any copyright violation. Which is why, when the Rule is enforced to prevent discussion of defeating copy protection on DVDs and Blu-ray to make "personal" backups, there's no suggestion that the people doing such things are "bootleggers".

 

[Charles Smith]

Good lord, I love that these particular rules are here, and are enforced. It lets HTF be not only informative and stimulating, but a safe haven of sorts. None of that is needed or missed.

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Michael Reuben

Just to clarify: Under HTF Rule 5, it's not so much "bootlegging" (although that's included) as it is any copyright violation. Which is why, when the Rule is enforced to prevent discussion of defeating copy protection on DVDs and Blu-ray to make "personal" backups, there's no suggestion that the people doing such things are "bootleggers".

Which is a constantly annoying rule to me. I buy DVDs and Blu-rays. And then I to watch at my convenience.

How shall I put this...on this matter I'd wish for great forum independence from the studios to allow practical conversations about how we use what we legitimately purchase.

 

[Greg_S_H]

Good lord, I love that these particular rules are here, and are enforced. It lets HTF be not only informative and stimulating, but a safe haven of sorts. None of that is needed or missed.

Agreed. There's not one facet of modern life that isn't infected with politics, and it has become increasingly hyperpartisan, bitter and ugly out there. Except here. Here, we can just be friends enjoying the common interests that bring us together. Sometimes we slip up (and I'm sure there are some who see my name and think, "Oh, not this f'in' guy."). But, thanks to the mods, that gets reined in pretty quick. I like it, and don't miss not talking about how much of an idiot politician A is, and whatnot.

 

[Cees Alons]

Indeed I forgot to mention illegal topics and the promotion thereof as topics we don't allow here (as I didn't consider those specific). But indeed they are prohibited (except, under conditions, when discussed in direct relation with movies specifically being about such subjects).


I think we will still be hesitant to relax restrictions on those three (politics, religion, unlawful) categories. This is a Home Theater forum and the preservation of the opportunities to discuss HT matters freely here, and in a relaxed atmosphere, is our main goal when setting and enforcing "the rules". In my sincere opinion, it would only lead to unhealthy, difficult and confusing situations in many cases when we would try to allow some of those no-no subjects "to a degree".


And (Jack may remember that as well, as a former moderator ), we're not particularly waiting to further complicate our policing jobs and/or increase the private discussions with members who either feel unjustly reigned-in when starting or entering a particular discussion or on the other hand think someone else went too far and should be halted.


Increasing the traffic on the forum only to the extent of what basically are off-topic subjects will never be our goal, I guess. Nor take more chances to scare away members who came here in the first place to participate and take their pleasure in discussing the on-topic ones.



Cees

 

[RickER]

You know its slow when you find this fascinating reading.


But then again, i am easily entertained sometimes.

 

[Steve Christou]

 

[Jeff Gatie]

If Steve Christou is still posting, then the reports of this forum's demise have been greatly exaggerated.

 

[Rob FM]

.

 

[Steve Christou]

 

[Dheiner]

Hush