Mods shutting down threads for threadcrapping

[Umbran]

I think some people are afraid that if they are too argumentative in a (+) thread, they'll get in trouble.

But... they will. That's the point.

If you start a (+) thread about making a less racist Hadozee, and someone comes in arguing that the Hadozee aren't racist... they are supposed to get in trouble.

 

[beancounter]

That knife cuts both ways.

If one sees a thread about what some people consider racism, coming in to just deny the problem exists is not a productive way to engage in the topic either. And, to be perfectly honest, you'd need to make a pretty amazing argument to support the idea that folks don't generally know this will turn out badly.

What do you call a person who comes in, and engages in behavior they know will be disruptive but not constructive?

Where did I say or imply that racism doesn't exist or isn't a problem?

I genuinely had no ideas that offering a real solution would be considered thread crapping. I figured some people would disagree, or wouldn't think it was effective, but accusing me (in a passive aggressive ) way of being a troll is a bit reactionary.

 

[AnotherGuy]

As a general thought, I think that people using (+) threads more often would be helpful.

I've noticed a trend lately where (+) threads seem to get less posts than other threads. I think some people are afraid that if they are too argumentative in a (+) thread, they'll get in trouble. IMNSHO, the only way to change that ideology is for (+) threads to become more normalized.

+threads are great for pooling minds creatively for mechanics or fluff.
I suppose they could be used for topics such as these, but I don't know. I wouldn't want to make too many things a +thread. I enjoyed the sparring in the Arneson thread as I learnt things I didn't know about the history of D&D from both sides.

 

[Umbran]

When such collaborations are derailed and shut down, that can't actually happen.

With all due respect, the thread in question wasn't a collaboration organizing response to the issue. It was about the content of the issue.

We haven't seen anyone post, saying,

"Okay, folks, it is time for everyone to make a twitter account, a facebook account, an instagram account, and a tiktok account. Here are the relevant WotC handles and e-mail addresses to send to. Thursday morning, between 9 and 12 AM PDT, we will be messaging WotC about this issue via all these channels. Here's a draft of the message you can send. We intend to this once a week until such time as WotC at least speaks to the issue. Please tell your friends to join with us..."

 

[payn]

As a general thought, I think that people using (+) threads more often would be helpful.

I've noticed a trend lately where (+) threads seem to get less posts than other threads. I think some people are afraid that if they are too argumentative in a (+) thread, they'll get in trouble. IMNSHO, the only way to change that ideology is for (+) threads to become more normalized.

I think if you have a deliberate purpose and are approaching a particularly incendiary topic, + threads can be helpful. Though they tend to limit conversation in ways that I don't think would benefit the community overall for them to become regular and or popular.

 

[Irlo]

Where did I say or imply that racism doesn't exist or isn't a problem?

You didn't. Others in the recent Hazodee thread were very dismissive of the concerns shared there. It's those posters that Umbran is referring to.

 

[Umbran]

Where did I say or imply that racism doesn't exist or isn't a problem?

Where did I say I was speaking about you, specifically? I was intentionally non-specific. I was addressing the general dynamic of threads, not you, in particular.

 

[Gradine]

With all due respect, the thread in question wasn't a collaboration organizing response to the issue. It was about the content of the issue.

We haven't seen anyone post, saying,

"Okay, folks, it is time for everyone to make a twitter account, a facebook account, an instagram account, and a tiktok account. Here are the relevant WotC handles and e-mail addresses to send to. Thursday morning, between 9 and 12 AM PDT, we will be messaging WotC about this issue via all these channels. Here's a draft of the message you can send. We intend to this once a week until such time as WotC at least speaks to the issue. Please tell your friends to join with us..."

A fair point, and one that clears up my concerns. Thank you

 

[payn]

I understand the frustration. These topics never get to blossom beyond breaking news and opinions phase. Might have to let the topic open up organically, and later start a new convo on specifics later.

 

[Morrus]

This what gets me, and why I started this thread, because I know you and the other mods are entirely sympathetic to this point. My question then becomes why shuttering threads has become the answer to deliberately disruptive behavior?

I think the answer to that one is mainly a practical/logistics one -- the alternative is babysitting the thread, which is incredibly intensive and time-consuming (and upsetting). I close a thread earlier because it was generating a deluge of thread reports, and I simply wasn't available to monitor it. It was a choice between closing it or just ignoring it and letting it do what it does, and I feel I chose the lesser evil.

Maybe the answer is more moderators. But moderators do burn out pretty quickly.