Forum Decorum | Feedback Please

[The Computer Audiophile]

When I dread reading my own AS emails in the morning and feel a sense of ease reading the Album of the Evening notifications in my inbox, things have gone off the rails. I know that if I'm fed up with arguments and incivility, the members of the community must be well beyond this. Something must change. 

 

Over the last week or so, I've exchanged emails with several members of the AS community about how to curtail undesirable discussions. The feedback has been excellent and from all sides of the issue. With this post, I'm asking for feedback from the community about proposed rule / feature changes to the site. 

 

The goal of these changes is to increase people's enjoyment of this wonderful HiFi hobby. To do this the changes should curtail incivility, encourage lurkers to post, stop "thread-crapping", and separate discussions that generate unwanted comments and arguments. I wish I could just ask everyone to be a decent human being, but that just doesn't seem to work. We all have different definitions of decency. 

 

I want to stop subjective threads from receiving unwanted comments. 

I want to stop objective threads from receiving unwanted comments. 

I want to encourage people to post both types of comments in threads where this is wanted. 

I want to stop posts that are made for the sport of online arguing.

 

Here are some proposals. Please provide feedback.

 

1. Be polite. I could literally stop here and 99% of the people on AS would have no problem following the rule.

2. Avoid defamatory statements, personal attacks, name-calling, insults, trolling, thread crapping, and thread-derailing topics. It's often not what you say, but how you say it.

3a. If what you want to post includes words/phrases like "placebo," "expectation bias," "ABX," "blind testing," "snake oil" etc., please post it in the XXXXXXXXXXXX forum (a to-be created sub-forum). 

3b. If there's an existing forum thread in which you'd like to discuss that mentioned above in 3a, you must start your own thread about the subject in forum XXXXXXXXXXXX. Optionally you can post a link to your newly started thread, in the existing thread where your comments aren't allowed. This insures all points of view have space here on Audiophile Style. Separating these topics also enables more focused discussions and enables members of the community to read each point of view if they so chose. 

The above is probably the most controversial proposed rule change. It presupposed all threads are subjective, given our overwhelming majority of subjective leaning members. This proposed rule is used on Head-Fi, but may need massaging here on AS.

4. A daily cap on the number of posts by each member.

5. Make it clearer that OPs can have moderation rights to their threads. This includes removing posts and asking other members to stop posting in the threads. 

6. Enable the site feature that blocks members from specific threads. This is only a reactive method and would require a PM to the moderator. 

7. Bring back the down vote feature for comments.

8. Anonymize the up/down vote feature. This will resolve the sophomoric issue we've had in the past of down vote retaliation. 

9. Consequences for not following the rules will include bans from topics, temporary and permanent bans from the site. 

 

 

Again, these are proposals. All rules / features have unintended consequences. Please provide feedback and any other proposals you see fit. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

what sets this site apart is that engineers and scientists post here

 

there are lots and lots of sites where crazy notions are posted with the veneer of science slapped over them - if CC wants to sanitize his site form science and make it safe for any sort of irrational claim he can, but IMO it would lose its value

 

the problem lies with people who so badly want a free fire zone for those types of claims (maybe because no one in the real world will listen to them)

There is no current proposal to sanitize the site. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Richard Dale said:

Under Chris's proposals you can post you views to forum XXXXXXXXXXXX, and if people find the discussions there more helpful and interesting than the more subjective discussion in the other forums, then forum XXXXXXXXXXXX will expand.

Yes, this is my free market type of approach. Separate the discussions that lead to bickering and problems. Both discussions can succeed this way and they should thrive if there's interest. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

9 minutes ago, austinpop said:

The current AS platform allows topic moderators to both DELETE and HIDE posts. The former appears permanent (I don't know what the code actually does), while the latter is reversible, subject to appeal. In the spirit of checks and balances, OP moderators should perhaps only be allowed to HIDE posts, leaving DELETE decisions to Chris.

 

HIDE still serves the purpose of removing the post from view, but does preserve the content.

Delete puts the posts in a 30 day trash before removing them. I have to go through the trash to retrieve them rather than a moderator. hide is much better. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

I’ve received a couple messages from people expressing displeasure for OP moderating powers. I just want to add this to the comments to make their voices heard. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

I also received a message about enabling a reaction (that’s the official name of the upvote, like, etc... button)  so people can mark comments are aren’t civil or comments that are undesirable in a thread. 
 

Just adding this to the proposals. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, gmgraves said:

In theory, this is a great idea. But the reality would be quite different. I’m specifically talking here about the two proposals where subjective and objective threads are enjoined from having unwanted comments. This would encourage, in my estimation, threads that are merely “preaching to the choir”. Can you imagine, for instance a Presidential debate where everyone on either side of the political line agree 100% of the time on every issue? Actually this would apply to any debate. It would be incredibly boring. No one would watch such a debate, because it wouldn’t be a debate, it would just be a mutual admiration society, and who would want to read that? No; the essence of a forum such as this one is the free exchange of ideas. Without that, this forum would become lifeless, devoid of interest, and totally stagnate.

I used to contribute to a moderated audio forum on Usenet, and I found it to be a pain in the neck. The reason is that the moderators saw themselves as little Napoleons, with absolute power over what got posted. This power was colored by the moderator’s own ideas of what they, themselves wanted to see posted. They heavily censored those posters who’s point of view with which they did not agree, and they allowed practically anything to get posted from those contributors with whom they did agree. I’m all for a forum that is “a kinder, gentler forum”. But I would hate to see it turn into a moderated forum where every post had to be approved before showing up on the thread. Not only is that a recipe for stagnation,

censorship and partisanism, but more importantly, it’s a recipe for a downward spiral into boredom. My advice is to tread here carefully.

HI George - Fortunately, there is a proposal for threads containing all sides of issues as well and this isn't a Presidential debate. There's a reason why cable news networks skew toward one side or the other, people have preference and like to listen to others who think along the same lines. Same with genres. People don't want a Country track mixed into the Classical playlist. 

 

That said, I hear what you're saying and hope, if we go down this route, that most posts will contain information from everyone. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 I agree in general with what John has said in his post, but also wonder about the need for Section 3 if members follow the spirit of the changes.

Hi Alex - I think this is a belt and suspenders type of thing and it makes sure there is a place for everything here on AS. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, mansr said:

A while ago, I suggested adding an Echo Chamber section where disagreeing with the OP of any thread would be forbidden. Why not do it and see what happens?

I believe we got to where we are because of people pestering others with frequent comments in many threads. If everyone was polite and respectful we'd have no need for any of this. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

 Chris

 I am also concerned about what George has said about Preaching to the Choir type threads.

 By their very nature, the vast majority of them are not destined to become more than short threads before ending up diverging way off topic to keep them alive. 

 There is nothing stopping members from starting a Blog on any subject .

 

Alex.

The data doesn't backup your concern. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

While I hear what you are saying, and agree that when a subject is controversial, people like to hear their side of the controversy supported by some authority such as a news network. But that’s because these news people are thought of as “authorities” and people gather comfort from knowing that there are authorities on the subject that agree with them. This is a forum of peers, and while many contributors here are authorities in their respective fields, they do not post here from any exalted position. They’re merely fellow enthusiasts and can be debated with. You and I can’t debate the celebrities on the cable news channels, so instead, we pick the cable news channel that best represents our point of view. That doesn’t apply on a public Internet forum. And, finally, my use of a presidential debate was not intended as parallel example to this situation, but rather to express the point that what makes these debates interesting is that the participants have, often, wildly different points of view on the same subjects, and the way each responds to the other’s ideas is what makes them fascinating and entertaining.

 

Thanks George. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

What I suggested is basically your #3 but applied only to that section. If the proposed name offends you, feel free to call it Civility Corner or Snowflake Sanctuary instead.

 

Just now, sandyk said:

 This kind of remark is exactly why we have so many problems already .

 

it certainly doesn't help.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

I'll just say that I left the Hoffman forum years ago because of Hoffman's unabashed bias towards "subjectivists" (to use the forum vernacular).

 

While @The Computer Audiophile hasn't said so explicitly, I'm getting a strong feeling that "subjectivists" are over-represented in the sampling of email that he talks about dreading in the OP.

 

I'd just like to say that this forum is a big reason for all the current skepticism around MQA (one example).  And we got there through no small measure of pearl clutching and vitriol.

 

I'm just going to watch the hammer fall and see what's left.  Hopefully, the forum will still be useful.

Thanks for the post. The emails I dread are my notifications and reported posts from threads that have gone off the rails. I think to myself, come on people, do grown adults really act this way? 

 

You have point about MQA, but it really irks me when people try to use AS a soapbox for their own agenda. A few people love to argue for sport. That isn't OK. A few people love to belittle subjectivists with short quips that do nothing but cause problems. That isn't OK. A few people like to YELL at objectivists for not having an open mind. That isn't OK. 

 

If you, or anyone, wants to make AS the front line on the war against HiFi, then you're in the wrong place. If not, great.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

since that sort of thing already exists, how will a new proposal alter things?

It alone doesn't work good enough. More seems necessary.

[The Computer Audiophile]

35 minutes ago, mansr said:

There's the rub. What attracted me here originally was the relative balance of views being expressed and tolerated. Many other forums swing too far in whichever is their direction. It's ok to simply say you did X and heard Y without doing a study worthy of a scientific journal. At the same time, it should be ok to respond that X causing Y seems unlikely and perhaps there's something else going on. This forum has thus far tolerated both. Lately, however, I have sensed a crackdown on science and reason when this rubs someone the wrong way. Perhaps the more subjectively minded feel similarly offended; I do not know. Regardless, this increasing polarisation is not something I like.

 

In order to keep this place both friendly and educational, I urge everybody, whichever "side" they may be on, to think twice before engaging with those who irk them. I say this while admitting that I too am guilty of saying things better left unspoken.

 

The hands-off approach taken by Chris is what has allowed this forum to flourish. I fear that with stricter rules and heavier moderation, the easy exchange of information and experiences will be replaced by a culture of reporting and fear of being reported. In the end, everybody will lose.

 

So please, next time you feel your dearly held views insulted, let it slide. For the benefit of us all.

Hell has frozen over. 
 

Only kidding. Thanks for the post. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

I know we’ve been down this road in the past, but perhaps adding moderators to hide comments that are clearly in violation of forum rules and clearly against the spirit of discussion in a specific thread, is necessary. 
 

If posts that add nothing and will likely lead to endless arguments are hidden, we may avoid more aggressive methods. 
 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, photonman said:

Set the rules and enforce them with your proposed item 9.  I would avoid too many rules that require granular management by yourself or your designees.  Everyone here knows how to conduct themselves and should not need too many do's and do-not's.  To help manage the site can you assign additional forum moderators (after an exhaustive selection process of course) perhaps from different world time zones so the site has good 7/24 moderator coverage so you don't wake up to site crisis.

Wow, what timing. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

As I've had many conversations via email and PM this week, something really stood out to me. The fact that 99.999% of the members of this community are really nice, logical, and well intentioned people who'd all likely get along at the local pub (before several beverages). Even the people with polar opposite audio views express similar opinions to me about forum decorum and their wishes for AS. 

 

Heck, one member of the community is sending me a sampler of tea from a local tea shop, even though we've gone at it in the forum recently. Just when you think everything has gone to hell in a hand basket, another side of people comes out. 

 

We are all human. We all can get worked up over things and our behaviors can be affected by the fact that many people are watching. 

 

P.S. If anyone is interested in my favorite tea that also happens to be from a cool company, check out the Organic Nepali Golden Black from Young Mountain Tea.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just a reminder that off-topic posts are removed. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, esldude said:

While some of the proposals from Chris may have merit, the entire premise of the thread necessarily means Chris has decided a division is needed as the two camps can't peacefully coexist.

No decisions have been made.

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, wgscott said:

Also, I hope current forum users, regardless of their country of residence, will be allowed the rights that residents of EU states have -- including the right to be forgotten, and to have their blogs, photographs, and identifying information deleted.

This is an important but off topic issue. For now I’m only following US law. There are too many international laws which no doubt contradict each other. When Iran says it’s citizens must like mid-fi, I’ll kindly ignore it (extreme example I know). 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Guys - I just received this via PM and want to paste it in here so the opinion is heard and here for feedback. If the person who sent it reads it, please know it's anonymized. 

 

"Chris, the need for this whole 9-point plan or moderators is pretty much entirely due to half a dozen people who can't contain themselves.

 

I hate to see you need to spend your valuable time and resources on making changes to accommodate this gang.  Kudos to you for trying.  

 

These guys keep saying that others don't want to hear their views because they disagree with them.  That simply isn't true.  I don't want to hear from them because their attitude sucks."

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, John Dyson said:

I don't understand intensity on the forum -- I have invested a LOT of time into audio stuff, but don't get intensely angry when people disagree...  Why the rancor, why the intensity?   This is NOT religion, but at most a very serious hobby -- or for some, a vocation.

 

If someone is nice enough to provide the resources for this forum, than we visitors and especially those who contribute, should treat the forum, the providers and each other with some level of mutual respect, and maybe even kindness.

 

I *almost* feel like I am visiting someones house when participating in the forum -- and it seems a good idea to be happy about the welcome.

 

Vehement disagrement seems to become too personal.  Geesh, I have private discussions with someone where we are on edge of disagreement much of the time, but it is not DISAGREEABLE, because there is a modicum of mutual respect.  It is not helpful to have excess negative emotions.

 

Proving side A or side B is the 'correct side' is sometimes not going to happen.  Mutual respect allows agreement to disagree, or to accept that there are areas where there can be some disagreement.  Sometimes, eventually there can be a movement towards agreement -- but it shouldn't need to be a 'crusade' to convince when it isn't really necessary.   BTW -- I am NOT a flower child and can be aggressive in the european sense (which isn't a good thing) -- but there are situations where being very assertive is a good thing.

 

Remotely, over a forum like this, it is seldom beneficial to be very aggressively assertive.  Sometimes best to recognize that there are things and people that none of us can control.   There are actually people who think differently -- and slightly different reality.  Doesn't make it bad -- just different.

 

John

 

Agree 100%.

 

There has to be an underlying reason for the intensity.