timschochet
Footballguy
Do you really believe that a minority viewpoint in a political forum should be compared to racial and ethnic minorities in society at large?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Saving the PSF - How can we, as a community, make this place better (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Koya
- Start date
KCitons
Footballguy
toshiba
Footballguy
In the way in which he means it, by listening before judging, I think it is a great idea!
timschochet
Footballguy
GoBirds
Footballguy
It is all the same. People are people. All people want their points to be acknowledged.
This is a difficult part. How do you point out when people violate MT's list? If you report it, it will be quite excessive. If you ignore it, nothing changes.
cosjobs
Footballguy
dgreen
Footballguy
cosjobs
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
TheMagus
Footballguy
I do have a suggestion and this is something that's been on my mind for a while.... the great place Trump 2020 thread - why don't the anti-Trump people just stay out of there? I've never opened it myself but I see the last poster on the home page and it is often people that I know are less than enthused about Trump winning in 2020. Why not just let his supporters have a thread? There are dozens of threads on this board to talk about what we find troubling about his presidency, so I think it's fair to have ONE thread where his supporters can talk without a debate.
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
KCitons
Footballguy
At the same time, should Trump supporters stay out of any of the Democratic candidate threads. None of them are going to vote for those candidates. So, why not just leave those supporters alone?
supermike80
Footballguy
Because many here feel Trump supporters are devoid of character and horrible people and must be stopped.
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
Not sure why it would. It is basically just being open minded. A little more of that here would go a long way.
It comes down to the fundamental difference between between how liberals and conservatives apply their value. Liberals tend to explain why you should treat someone well or even special is because of all the abuses that group has taken over the years (ie. Social Justice), which BTW is usually at the hands of the white male.Da Guru said:
Conservatives tend to view things through the eyes of equality and would explain why you should treat someone that way is because it is the right thing to do as their status as a human being.
So when I reach the conclusion I did based on equality and make the comparison to that is similar to how a minority feels in a situation where their viewpoint is drowned out, ignored and even piled on by the majority, it offends Tim. I am not part of an identified minority so I am not allowed to feel that way so don't you dare use such analogy.
Look just above when @supermike80 talks about feeling basically subhuman. Many white males hate liberalism because they are basically low man on the totem pole (ironic expression but I will roll with it). This hatred of liberalism has little to do with racism, it has to do with being made to feel inferior.
Just recently I was called a 'woman' on this forum. When @krista4said she was insulted by the reference, everyone chimed in how horrible the insult was. Did one person feel bad I was insulted, after all the insult was directed at me? No, not that I could tell. I am suppose to have 'thicker skin' because I am a white male.
krista4
Footballguy
I think you need a better example to make your point here. In the instance you reference, several people had commented negatively on the post before I did; in fact my response was a direct response to KCitons. And I never said I was personally insulted, because I wasn’t.
ETA: The leap you make in your final sentence is huge. There’s no evidence that anyone thinks you should have “thicker skin” because you’re a white male. If anything, I’d expect that people don’t stand up for you because your complaints about mistreatment are constant. I’m certain some of the complaints are valid, but I suspect there’s a “boy who cried wolf” aspect in some people’s minds. I see, though, that you vowed in Maurile’s thread to do less of it. I hope that will happen and that people will also be more thoughtful (and not insulting) in their responses to you.
Last edited by a moderator:
roadkill1292
Footballguy
I have little sympathy for white males feeling as though they're on the bottom of the totem pole. Because of centuries of privilege, we are indeed now asked to have "thicker skins." Most of us are handling it pretty well, reaching a new understanding of what it has been like to be a minority in this country but some appear to translate greater equality as oppression. That's pretty unfortunate and the older generations are probably not going to be able to deal with societal change but the next generations are handling it pretty well.
mcintyre1
Footballguy
On the whole I agree, but sadly there is a notably large group of young white men that are radicalized online around just this victimhood mentality. It is definitely seen as a wedge through which far right and white supremacist groups have been recruiting online in the last decade.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Yeah, that's a pretty scary development. But by and large, the two newest generations of voters have far fewer "old white guy privilege sympathizers" than us older generations. The guys bemoaning their new status of something other than on top will be finding fewer and fewer sympathetic ears as the years pass by.
mcintyre1
Footballguy
Yeah, definitely heading in the right direction for society. I think a mistake that a lot of left-leaning people like me made in the Obama years was expecting that a shift leftward was inevitable due to demographics. I think if demographics alone get to determine our politics that'd be true, but we've seen enough hands on the scales now that I'm a lot more wary of that notion than I was as a fresh eyed college student.
I kind of skipped through the thread, so I am not sure if this has been covered or discussed. This is ultimately a fantasy football forum, yet often people appear and post 200 times in the politics forum in a weekend, while having no posts elsewhere on the forum. I feel like that is almost always either proselytization or trolling, and it lowers the discourse of the board. To me it seems obvious which accounts are these, and I am always surprised at the length of leash they are given before getting (or not getting) suspended. I realize that many people have retired from fantasy football and don't have much to discuss about it, and those people should be grandfathered in, but I don't see why new accounts that come in with a blaze of hyper-partisan posts shouldn't be given the boot to find a forum on a politics site, not a football site.
Last edited by a moderator:
Caesar
Footballguy
Something just struck me that I heard when I was younger. I can't quote the source, or even the exact wording, but it went something like this:
Intelligent people discuss ideas
Average people discuss events
Idiots discuss other people (I am not calling anyone an idiot, specifically)
Decide which one you want to be viewed as and go from there. I think it might apply to making this forum better.
Intelligent people discuss ideas
Average people discuss events
Idiots discuss other people (I am not calling anyone an idiot, specifically)
Decide which one you want to be viewed as and go from there. I think it might apply to making this forum better.
SWC
Bromigo
i tried putting myself on ignore but it did not work so i guess get rudnarski on it and then bam the ole swcer will ignore himself and all will be at peace take that to the bank bromigo
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
I saw a recently banned poster on social media offering $10 for a new login. Thought I would pop-diddly-op-op in to see what all the hubbub was about. Could be a new revenue stream for FBGs.
I like these new rules.
I like these new rules.
OrtonToOlsen
Footballguy
I'd sell access to HeavyMatt for $5I saw a recently banned poster on social media offering $10 for a new login. Thought I would pop-diddly-op-op in to see what all the hubbub was about. Could be a new revenue stream for FBGs.
I like these new rules.
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
The General
Footballguy
A little SWC injection is what the place needed.
I think there's lots of truth there.
That's a lot of where my "keep it about the topic and not other posters" requests come from.
identikit
Footballguy
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.
-- Eleanor Roosevelt
Last edited by a moderator:
Workhorse
Footballguy
This piece is written largely about Twitter as the set and setting for "The Discourse" but I think it can also be applied here. Lots of truths to be found in this article and it certainly makes me think more deeply about how I engage others in the online political sphere, particularly the PSF:
https://newrepublic.com/article/155266/online-discourse-age-trump
https://newrepublic.com/article/155266/online-discourse-age-trump
Thanks. That looks interesting and I'll try to get to that soon. Thanks for sharing.
Caesar
Footballguy
Thank you for this. I knew I was way off on the specifics, but the idea of it has always stuck with me.
SWC
Bromigo
and the ole swcer discussed four barrel carbeurators bam another riddle solved by the ole swcer take that to the bank bromigos
ShamrockPride
Footballguy
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
Ficticious Threads from Russian Bots
"Tried this borscht recipe for the first time..."
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
These types of drive by posts in the Trump thread serve no purpose. They are off subject and have historically just caused a bunch of snarky back and forth.
GoBirds
Footballguy
Totally agree, was surprised to see other suspensions handed out but swipes like this in the Trump thread didn’t get the same.
I agree. And thanks for posting your comment in this thread instead of that one.
Summer Wheat
Footballguy
Is has been a little better but the snark is slowly slipping back in.
Koya
Footballguy
@Maurile Tremblayquestion/clarification
In the Trump thread where we went off topic onto wealth (yesterday I think, long before the timeouts and I believe before it got to be an insulting ### for tat), a poster early in that digression pointed out that we had gone off topic. Did it politely and it worked (for me at least).
I thought it was a positive way for us to “self moderate” but could technically been seen as commenting on moderation which isn’t generally allowed.
Just curious how we should handle that. As it was done respectfully and had a good purpose (can’t speak for others but I realized he was correct and then stopped commenting on the non-topic related wealth issue... could always make a thread for that) it seems like a positive way for us to self regulate and nip something in the bud before it gets out of hand.
Is that acceptable (I’d hope so because I think it takes the burden off you but it’s real close to the line of don’t comment unless it’s topical).
Much appreciated.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks. Asking a poster to stay on topic and / or drop the jabs at another poster is a helpful thing.
And that brings a good point. If this thing is going to be better, it's going to be because of YOU folks. Not some fear of a moderator or a suspension. Self moderating and other people from the board encouraging other posters to be cool or keep it on the topic or drop the condescending snark will be how it survives.
KCitons
Footballguy
I was under the impression that @Maurile Tremblay didn't want posters correcting other posters (board cop) when things went off the rails. I could be mistaken.
