• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Mature Discussion Member Feedback Thread

Smelnick

Creeping On You
V.I.P.
Hi Guys, your friendly MD moderator here.

I've noticed over the last little while via discussions with some MD posters through pm's, reps(negs hehe) and IM and such, that some people have complaints about MD and aren't happy with some of the things that happen in MD.

So, I decided to start a thread for you guys to express your grievances.

This thread is for you to post about things that annoy you about MD, things you like about MD. Maybe there are some rules you don't neccesarily agree with etc etc. Maybe there is a style of debate tactics that you don't neccesarily like to run into. Anything goes really.

However, the forum rules must be followed and I have just a couple other guidelines for you to follow to keep this thread positive, and achieve the goal intended.

(The intended goal by the way is for Wade and I as the moderators to get an idea of how members are responding to our moderating. Also, it's a great way for members to see how others view their debating techniques. All around, I'm hoping this thread can help everyone to enjoy MD without getting frusterated as much.)

So, some guidelines

-No mentioning specific infractions. If you have an issue with a specific infraction that Wade or I have given you, that's still to be discussed in private. However, talking about infractions in general, or how we respond to your responses to infractions is welcome.

-No mentioning names. If there is a certain member who's style of debating, tactics etc annoys you, don't say 'So and so does this'. Say something instead along the lines of 'I've seen such and such happening in MD...' etc. The idea isn't to single out members.

-Keep it positive and constructive. A negative statement would be something like this "The modding sucks!". A positive statement expressing the same thing, but less likely to anger would be "I really feel that the modding is lacking. They really could do a better job"



Alrighty. That's all I can think of really right now. General Forum rules apply of course. No flaming, No spamming, stay on topic etc.

Wade and I both reserve the right to add in a guideline as the discussions progress if we see things getting out of hand. Also, we reserve the right to close the thread if it goes horribly wrong.

I'll to respond here and there as the thread progresses, adding my own thoughts, and I'm sure Wade will as well.


Thanks guys, and happy discussing. Let 'er rip.
 

Merc

Problematic Shitlord
V.I.P.
Label-tossing needs to be something people can get warned for.

I'm guilty of it here and there but some people just can't resist using political labels like insults.
 

Smelnick

Creeping On You
V.I.P.
In the rules for MD, there is an item touching on partisan/labelling arguments. So saying 'oh your argument doesn't mean anything cause you're a dirty liberal' or 'oh, you're catholic, what do you know about the islamic faith' kind of stuff IS warnable and infractable. However, I rarely see such clear cut examples. It's difficult modding MD sometimes because of this. On person labels someone in a discreet manner by covering it with big words and verbosity. The labelee then reports it because he actually understood or interpreted it as such. Then I gotta go in and decide if it actually DOES break the rules or not.


Also, bump. And I stickied this so it doesn't get lost.
 

EllyDicious

made of AMBIGUITY
V.I.P.
For what I've noticed MD is just fine. People are free to discuss their point of views even if they are extremists about it, as long as they don't insult other people. Sometimes the debate gets heated but that's normal.
I haven't noticed anything utterly wrong around here.

p.s. Though I NEVER visit the Law and Politics forum so I'm not sure what really goes on there.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I agree with Elly, it's fine by me. In fact, I think there should be looser rules than there already are so long as it doesn't get too out of hand, but maybe that's just me.:p

I agree, debates getting heated is normal, they're not always going to stay pleasant.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
I agree with Elly, it's fine by me. In fact, I think there should be looser rules than there already are so long as it doesn't get too out of hand, but maybe that's just me.:p

I agree, debates getting heated is normal, they're not always going to stay pleasant.
Looser rules.

The only MD thing that really pisses me off is in the middle of a discussion some dufus steps in and says:
"This is why I never post in MD, because there's nothing but arguing" and then says nothing at all about the topic.
Smel and Wade should know what I'm talking about because I flag every comment I see like that. :lol:

Hey dufus, go to sub talk with all of the perverts talking about their private parts.
 
Last edited:

Bananas

Endangered Species
I think too many discussions stray from the topic as two or members end up in a relentless debate about some pedantic and rather meaningless detail that has little relevance to the OP. I think it should be down to the Author of the article to keep their discussion on course and if the thread is hijacked then the mods should try and steer it back on course. Discussions should be organic and stray into all boundaries but more often than not that boundary is either smashed completely or the focus of attention gets so detailed it goes out of context to the larger subject. (eg if were talking about cars its fine to talk about wheel nuts, but lets remember we are still talking about cars).

I also think people need to realise the difference between an opinion and the supporting argument. Not all arguments are reflective of the opinion, and not all opinions will have the argument that people assume, it is often this assumption where debates fall down.
 
Last edited:

AnitaKnapp

It's not me, it's you.
V.I.P.
The thing that I dislike about MD is that most of the discussions seem to dissolve into mud slinging and flames. However, I believe that insinuating someone is unintelligent or turning a debate into "oh, well you must think that way because (fill in the blank) is flaming. I don't believe that anyone should have the right to insinuate anything personally about anyone. Debate the topic/issues.
 

Ilus_Unistus

Registered Member
The thing that I dislike about MD is that most of the discussions seem to dissolve into mud slinging and flames. However, I believe that insinuating someone is unintelligent or turning a debate into "oh, well you must think that way because (fill in the blank) is flaming. I don't believe that anyone should have the right to insinuate anything personally about anyone. Debate the topic/issues.
This to me is the only rule I think should be enforced in MD. When someone takes the debate to personal level with who they are debating with such things as personal insults then this is the time for warnings/infractions. Other than that and staying with the topic, even if you are debating only 1 portion of the topic like if the topic is WW2 and there is debate as to what individual countries stood for during WW2, (as has happened) then this to me is on topic so should be allowed, not closed because The favored GF member(s) loses an argument/debate about it.

Also I do not believe in this "baiting" warning/infraction. If a person feels a personal insult or threat has been made about them then it is up to this person to report it, not respond with his/her own insults then the first person ONLY receives an infraction for "baiting" and caused the other to respond with insults in reply with no infractions... If it is Mature Discussion, then be mature even if you feel you have been insulted to take proper steps, it may just be you misunderstood or perhaps the first person did not use the English in correct manner by mistake.
 

Major

4 legs good 2 legs bad
V.I.P.
Also I do not believe in this "baiting" warning/infraction. If a person feels a personal insult or threat has been made about them then it is up to this person to report it, not respond with his/her own insults then the first person ONLY receives an infraction for "baiting" and caused the other to respond with insults in reply with no infractions.
Just to clarify, both members would receive infractions in that example. Retaliation is just as bad as the initial baiting.
 
Top