soapbox

[jonesy]

I was caught out by this last night!

When I tried to have a look in Soapbox, all it allowed me to see were the 3 soapbox threads that I had posted, which had in their time become if not outright bunfights, a bit leary.

Securing Soapbox from the prying eyes of the uninitiated and of perousing non members is a positive move by Shaun.
For all it's raw humour and jaw dropping rants it is not a pretty sight when in full flight and this new 'padded cell' rather suits it!

I'm afraid I disagree. The 'padded cell' as you put it will simply further marginalise it and make it more likely to be dominated by the sort of behaviour you don't like. There is a beneficial self-moderation effect you get from wider participation that is lost by locking it away. I'd prefer to have gone the other way- i.e. bring it back into the fold, available to all, but with moderation, just like all the other boards. And people that still don't like it can ignore it...

 

[BentMikey]

This could be a sad day for democracy, liberty etc.........

We don't have any of that here, this is Shaun's place, so everything is at his tolerance.

FWIW I think the new setup is a good idea, and I hope it works for Shaun.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

I'd rather see it as a sad day for the people who feel the need to be needlessly and repeatedly abusive and offensive. Alas, they'll just opt in.

Frankly, I'd get rid of soapbox and delete anyone who started soapbox type tactics in any other section, but it's not my forum, it's Shaun's and all he's done is follow up a request form some people who felt they needed to have help to ignore Soapbox - why they can't just not click on it, I don't know...

i think, like me, you look at the whole forum and then look for threads in the café, commuting or wherever that interests you. so in that way, yes you only go into soapbox if you want to. so to us, ain't no different.

on the other hand, some folk browse by looking at a list of the latest posts, so it's easy to click on something that sounds interesting but actually ends up being a sweary discussion of the tv license fee. thus, folk who aren't interested in soapboxery can browse the new posts relaxed in the knowledge that they will find more or less what they expect to find.

 

[Crackle]

Sorry but I have to disagree with the those comments guys. Soapbox is unmoderated and because of that is sometimes unsavoury, especially recently. You can't help but notice it once you're aware of it.

The options are to do away with it or just allow people to choose not to see it. The latter is the 'off' button and that's all that's been done.

Now if you move to a position where it's moderated then you open the discussion more but it isn't and I therefore prefer not to see the usual style of thread titles, started by the usual protagonists. I can't see that's going to make it worse or better and clearly in some respects it's already failed because there are those of us who prefer not to go there anymore but by the same token don't wish to deprive those who do: I see this as a good compromise.

 

[Tim Bennet.]

thus, folk who aren't interested in soapboxery can browse the new posts relaxed in the knowledge that they will find more or less what they expect to find.

What a lovely picture of Utopia. I hope in turn they will find somewhere that they can only meet people with compatible views, read books with happy endings, find food that can be guaranteed to be without any unusual tastes or textures and travel to foreign lands that they are certain are neither too hot, too cold or even full of unintelligible people.

 

[jonesy]

Spot on Tim...

 

[Canrider]

Given that's precisely the attitude underlying every human social grouping impulse ever, though, why should CC be any different?

Edit: Not that I necessarily agree, but what is human society if not an attempt to create exactly the Utopia Tim has described?

 

[rich p]

Given that's precisely the attitude underlying every human social grouping impulse ever, though, why should CC be any different?

Edit: Not that I necessarily agree, but what is human society if not an attempt to create exactly the Utopia Tim has described?

Is that an exam question?

 

[TheDoctor]

It's only an 'off' button. It's not censorship or the end of the world as we know it. And quite frankly, I come here for the friendly, helpful atmosphere, and to natter with mates - some of whom I've met in real life, some not. I can live without seeing the latest rantfest kicking off in Soapbox. I have no problem with views that don't coincide with mine, but some of the sheer venom going on is less than welcome. To continue Tim's analogy, I don't need to go to Zimbabwe to know that it's in a bit of a state. And i don't really want to see Soapbox.

 

[Maz]

The anonymity of cyberspace allows people to say stuff in Soapbox they wouldn't even dream of saying to them face-to-face.
I bet if I ever met some of the main protagonists, they'd be nothing like their online persona.

 

[Tim Bennet.]

Without overstated the significance of an internet forum, it does have some relevance to a trend in the wider world.

With increasing choice in everything, does come the opportunity for us to ignore aspects of life we don't like. We can live in gated communities, watch only programs that we preselect to our digital boxes, only get our news from sources that 'slant it' to our taste, etc.

But none of this alters the reality about what is going on. Things you disagree with will only change if you stand up and say "I don't like it". There is much about some people's behaviour (as opposed to their views) in Soapbox about which I disagree. I would rather they behaved differently and am prepared to tell them so. I think Soapbox and Cycling Chat in general will be better if these things are aired and resolutions attempted.

Bundling them off and pretending it doesn't exist has signalled the complete opposite: "We are happy for you to behave exactly how you like as long as we don't have to see or hear you". Bit like the underclass in society in general. As long as they kidnap / abuse / shoot their own, who cares? As long as they don't so it in my back yard.

 

[Shaun]

Soapbox has been ring-fenced because of it's content.

I've maintained (as best as I can) an unmoderated stance on Soapbox and as a result the content of some threads is not to the taste of a good number of CC members.

I have received many complaints about Soapbox and far from simply closing it I wanted to try and find a solution that both allow the unmoderated state to persist and also sheilded it from people who didn't want to see it (I don't think that's too unreasonable?).

I think the optional sign-up offers that compromise.

The alternatives are to introduce moderation into Soapbox or close it completely, both of which I believe would be much more contentious than what I've done (although it may also be the case that people would feel these options would be a better improvement?).

I'm more than happy to take ideas from people about Soapbox and how we could improve things, but I'm not prepared to lose forum members because of it!!!

Cheers,
Shaun

 

[jonesy]

...
The alternatives are to introduce moderation into Soapbox or close it completely, both of which I believe would be much more contentious than what I've done (although it may also be the case that people would feel these options would be a better improvement?).

I'm more than happy to take ideas from people about Soapbox and how we could improve things, but I'm not prepared to lose forum members because of it!!!

Cheers,
Shaun

THanks Shaun, as I've suggested in the feedback board, can we set up a discussion about the different options? As I've said, I'd prefer moderation and normal access (and swear word filtering) but clearly there are other views that need to be considered.

 

[Tim Bennet.]

To continue Tim's analogy, I don't need to go to Zimbabwe to know that it's in a bit of a state.

But if any news of Zimbabwe was filtered out by your 'ignore' function, you would have no knowledge of it at all. Now that would be Mugabe's idea of 'utopia'.

The analogy is that we must know about Zimbabwe and if you don't like what you see, be prepared to say 'enough is enough'. You can't do this if you have you filters set to 'ignore'. Conversely it doesn't mean you have to visit the place and hang out there for any length of time to know some things are just not right.

 

[Cycling Naturalist]

What a lovely picture of Utopia. I hope in turn they will find somewhere that they can only meet people with compatible views, read books with happy endings, find food that can be guaranteed to be without any unusual tastes or textures and travel to foreign lands that they are certain are neither too hot, too cold or even full of unintelligible people.

Well put. I'm not overly impressed by those who claim to be offended all the time and only want to mingle in a small circle of like minded people.