THE CLOSING DOWN OF THREADS

[Grumpy Cat]

Howdy. Grumpy Cat here. The reason I started this thread is because of something that happened this morning in one of Penguins threads in which I, in my opinion, regard as a highly sensitive topic. The thread was closed down after a comment that I made which I do not think was a bad comment as I was just stating something on my mind in what I thought was in a respectful manner. My apologies to you Penguin as my intentions were not to get your thread shut down, but to bring out a point that was bothering me.

Which brings me to the reason of starting this thread. I believe that the Site should come up with better, more clear cut rules of how threads get shut down. I totally believe in freedom of speech and for everyone to have a say of what is on their mind. I, too, have had one of my threads shut down when a disagreement started. I don't think a thread should ever be shut down until all other routes of clearing up the situation have been exhausted with these being:

1) Posting the topic is sensitive
2) Posting in the thread that someone will be banned soon if the argument continues (and an email should be sent to the appropriate party(ies)
3) Banning the party from the thread who is causing the problem

Taking this topic further, I actually do not believe a thread should ever be closed at all unless the topic is completely inappropriate in the first place. If the topic is deemed to be totally inappropriate, then the entire thread should be deleted before it has a chance to even get started.

The members here are adults and should be able to have disagreements at times and say what is on their minds without worrying that a thread will be closed down. And saying that the thread can continue with PM is not appropriate as some members lock out incoming PM's (I was one of these people and just recently reopened my incoming emails to all members and thankfully I did because I received a very nice email from Penguin explaining his views about what happened). I also believe that closing a thread leaves the thread "unfinished" and with no chance of a disagreement being reconciled between members.

What I'm trying to say is that there should be a better way for the Site to control disagreements among its members without having to silence everyone as a whole.

Would the rest of you please post your thoughts on this subject. If there is positive feedback, I would like for the Site to consider re-opening all closed threads that a member shows an interest in re-opening. Thank you.

 

[The Penguin]

No worries. I think the staff might was concern the thread might get out of hand which is why they closed my thread.

Anyhow, I agree with Grumpy Cat

 

[Judge]

I've been a part of Internet Forums since the advent of the Internet itself. In every forum as wide-open as "Dodge City", they ALL eventually "go to hell in a handbasket" usually via discussion of certain current events. Where typical polarized points of view puts otherwise relatively friendly people at odds with each other, creating hard feelings that may linger beyond one thread.

There are simply more important things to openly discuss here central to being on the spectrum of autism and maintaining a friendly and cordial community than to insist on freedom of speech just to inadvertently turn this place into a common slaughterhouse you can find in virtually any other Internet forum.

For many of us Aspies, this place remains a refuge from a VERY hostile world. The absence of negative, polarized dirt-common social dynamics is what makes this place unique. I say let's keep it that way.

Thank you Admins and Mods for perpetuating such policies.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

I've been a part of Internet Forums since the advent of the Internet itself. In every forum as wide-open as "Dodge City", they ALL eventually "go to hell in a handbasket" usually via discussion of certain current events. Where typical polarized points of view puts otherwise relatively friendly people at odds with each other, creating hard feelings that may linger beyond one thread.

There are simply more important things to openly discuss here central to being on the spectrum of autism and maintaining a friendly and cordial community than to insist on freedom of speech just to inadvertently turn this place into a common slaughterhouse you can find in virtually any other Internet forum.

For many of us Aspies, this place remains a refuge from a VERY hostile world. The absence of negative, polarized dirt-common social dynamics is what makes this place unique. I say let's keep it that way.

Thank you Admins and Mods for perpetuating such policies.

I disagree, Judge, that is if Penguin (or any of us) would like to have the rights to post any thread he likes regarding any subject he likes. If things were kept as you would like them, constantly friendly, then any controversial issues would never come up. Frankly, that's one of the reasons I have stayed here because Aspies talk about interesting subjects. We shouldn't be afraid about speaking our minds to each other and having some quarrels. Even the closest of families have disagreements. It's those kind if disagreements that can bring people closer together IF they are adult enough to talk out their differences.

That is what the "sensitive" sign is for to let one know if you decide to read beyond that point, you are making the decision to do so and shouldn't be afraid if a disagreement arises.

 

[Judge]

We shouldn't be afraid about speaking our minds to each other and having some quarrels.

Remember why you made yourself anonymous here? How soon you forget...

Truly. You have no idea of the pandora's box you want to open. Or have you simply forgotten?

 

[The Penguin]

I didn't felt my post was getting out of hand yet. Despite I didn't agree with Sylar , I was nice enough to answer his question on how to tag people in a post. So I didn't cut him off entirely. Even though I might not agree with some people, if they want help, I will help them out such as this example.

 

[Judge]

Personally I believe most any highly polarized issue will inevitably create a hostile environment. It happens even here almost in every case. No matter how "civil" people pretend to be.

Precisely why it's prudent for the mods to preemptively shut such threads down. Before they get out of hand. They can see them coming. But someone already pissed off in such an argument is likely to be too angry to notice.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

Remember why you made yourself anonymous here? How soon you forget...

Truly. You have no idea of the pandora's box you want to open. Or have you simply forgotten?

What do you mean? I'm still anonymous as long as my name isn't out in the open. Are you speaking about me getting fired?

 

[clg114]

I saw the thread late last night and thought about it while I was going to sleep. I was surprised when I couldn't find it this morning. Then I saw Angela's post and found out that the thread was closed. So I'll put my two cents worth in this thread. Racism is indeed a very sensitive subject. I think that everybody here at AC knows Penguin to be upstanding and honorable man. But the police do not know that at first sight. It really distress's me that so many people have such a bad attitude toward the police. I know that some police officers are prejudice and worse, but think the majority are committed to upholding the law. Remember, these men and women risk their lives every day to protect us.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

Personally I believe most any highly polarized issue will inevitably create a hostile environment. It happens even here almost in every case. No matter how "civil" people pretend to be.

Precisely why it's prudent for the mods to preemptively shut such threads down. Before they get out of hand. They can see them coming. But someone already pissed off in such an argument is likely to be too angry to notice.

Then that person should be barred from the thread and not everyone else penalized.

 

[The Penguin]

We have to also remember my post https://www.aspiescentral.com/threads/racism.9368/ did turned out well. There was a lot of replies and the thread is still open.

 

[Judge]

What do you mean? I'm still anonymous as long as my name isn't out in the open. Are you speaking about me getting fired?

As I recall you were concerned about certain people here harrassing you. So you didn't want them to know when you were online here. I suspect that persistently expressing polarized/ideological points of view will likely increase this exposure for you.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

Case in point. Mr. Clg114 chose to branch out beyond the topic of this thread, and I respect that. That's why the other thread should have been kept open.

This thread is also about a controversial issue, but its important to me and therefore, I hope it doesn't get shut down too. That's what having free speech is all about, Judge. I also want the same for you (for Penguin, for Mr. Clg114) to be able to discuss what's on your mind without worry that a topic is off limits. If a person is "out of control" then deal with that person and not penalize the community as a whole.

Right now, Judge, you and I are in a disagreement in this thread, but if it were to be shut down we could never iron out our differences. Is that not right?

 

[Grumpy Cat]

As I recall you were concerned about certain people here harrassing you. So you didn't want them to know when you were online here. I suspect that persistently expressing polarized/ideological points of view will likely increase this exposure for you.

Certain people here can't harass me if I block them and that is why all of my info has been deleted and I even stopped myself from getting any emails from people here, until someone wanted to send me something and I reopened it. That's why I had mentioned that the PM wouldn't work because some members here do block any PM from getting through.

What happened to me though, has no bearings on whether people should have the right to speak about any subject they choose. A topic should be open for discussion until the community decides as a whole (or several members complain) the topic should be off limits.

 

[Judge]

Certain people here can't harass me if I block them and that is why all of my info has been deleted and I even stopped myself from getting any emails from people here, until someone wanted to send me something and I reopened it. That's why I had mentioned that the PM wouldn't work because some members here do block any PM from getting through.

What happened to me though, has no bearings on whether people should have the right to speak about any subject they choose. A topic should be open for discussion until the community decides as a whole (or several members complain) the topic should be off limits.

This is a private domain within the Internet. It isn't a democracy. Something so many just don't seem to grasp. Socially, legally or otherwise.

In my case I simply believe in what the owner of this domain is doing. To the contrary, if it's to be just another typical NT social portal, I'm gone in a heartbeat. If I want to wage aggressive and angry arguments, there are plenty of other domains to do that in.

 

[SignOfLazarus]

So... I only read the first post here because I really just wanted to give my take.

...I helped run a very large, very active board for about 8ish years. 5 of those years I was an admin.
The user base and the board itself was much larger than AC.

It was very much a "wild west" kind of place, in that we certainly had moderators but also ran by a similar idea to what you said, Grumpy Cat:

The members here are adults and should be able to have disagreements at times and say what is on their minds...

...to a point.

While we would do anything possible to avoid closing a thread [while I was on staff], we also realized it was at times necessary. In theory there is a difference between squabbling children and debating adults and [wait for it] most of the time that is true in practice. However, as human beings we are all faltered. We simply are not able to completely self regulate, regardless of intention. If there were a policy to never close threads it would be utter mayhem because your suggested consequences only would hold ONE person [or two, a minority regardless] responsible for a end result of group actions.

As follows:

2) Posting in the thread that someone will be banned soon if the argument continues (and an email should be sent to the appropriate party(ies)
3) Banning the party from the thread who is causing the problem

I understand that the goal is to encourage open and respectful discourse without fear of repercussions.
2- If there are constant warnings/threats of bans, that is not a safe space. That does not encourage open and respectful discourse. It causes alienation, scapegoating, aggravation, divisiveness. I have seen this in action and it is how we came to the policy we did at the board I used to work on.
3- Same thing. It also encourages bickering. And you alienate people and eventually threads don't get shut down by the moderators, they get shut down because members exclude other members who they start to regard as a "problem". Say I have gotten involved in a thread with Mr Person several times and a couple of those times for whatever reason it was determined that I was ALSO at fault so I was shut out of the thread. I'm going to avoid being involved in threads with Mr Person because instead of feeling like we have the option to work it out OR start over again if it starts to get dicey [moderators will just close the thread]- I will be worried I just get shut out.
This can be a pattern and divide the user base. It's how cliques develop.

Personally, I know that a moderating staff can often have a different perspective than the user base. I don't know if that is the case on this board as the staff is a bit smaller than I am used to. But moderators are often chosen because they have a feel for the board, they care about it and their intention is to maintain the atmosphere that is conducive to the board's "health". Because they are familiar with the board they will have a good sense of when to take action.

Some times they are wrong, because human.

But, it's the nature of the internet and the nature of a community such as this.

This is a very peaceful community. I like that. I imagine that is why people hang out here. To maintain that things need to be run a certain way. My opinion is that an important factor is group responsibility for how a thread goes. Instead of blaming one person or another, everyone contributes to the direction of a conversation. I mean, that is the reality. So yes, everyone is cut off.

To delete the entire thread, though would mean that no one learns anything from the experience, so people get cut off again and again instead of being able to give it another shot and succeed at the next attempt.

I know this was super long, and obviously I don't speak for anyone but myself. Just, you know, my point of view.

I think the way things are run here is frankly, pretty impressive. To mess with it too much would destroy what is so great about it.

 

[Judge]

This thread is also about a controversial issue, but its important to me and therefore, I hope it doesn't get shut down too.

It really wouldn't matter to me if it does get shut down. Because I don't expect the policy to change to accommodate you.

For some Aspies, aggressive arguments are like alcohol to alcoholics. Encouraging such an environment so easily found elsewhere amounts to a form of enabling. I like to think of this is a place as one of understanding and healing. Something some NTs may simply not be capable of grasping. Please don't take this away from us.

 

[Aspergirl4hire]

I'm pretty much signed on to Judge's position. A few points do matter enough to me that I would like to exercise the privilege of stating them.

This is not a "democracy." People spent years building this place up, in part because of what goes on at other sites with policies that allow far too much leeway, according to a moderator here.

Their house, their rules. If you've seen my new thread about choirs, I take exactly the same position there as I am here.

I find the statement "Police Cause Discrimination" just as offensive as the position that "all Muslims are terrorists." I did not Report the thread, but I am relieved that someone closed it, because sooner or later, I would have to rise to the blanket stereotyping.

We're anonymous here, with a reported membership in the ten-thousands and a daily activity in the hundreds. One of the things that means is that any blanket statement about any group will hit someone.

So mind how you go.

 

[Spiller]

There are occasionally small disagreements or misunderstandings here, even amongst the regulars.. and there always will be as that's human nature, but we move on, usually and hopefully with no hard feelings, because we respect one another and what this site stands for: community, respect, socialisation.
There's a saying I think applies here "If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it!"

 

[Ste11aeres]

This is a private domain within the Internet.

By analogy, free speech might mean I have the right to post a yard sign stating my views. Free speech doesn't mean that if someone invites me to their house as a guest, I necessarily have a right to post that sign in their yard.