The World Forgotten: A Quarterly Review

[Nessus]

We've only been active for a sixth, not a quarter, but fuck you.

This site is currently: Utter shit.

The blog over which such high passions were spent is inactive and retarded. The only half-decent post was what, well over four times over the word limit set by our marketing-oriented overlord? The rest is limp and stunted, and as a consequence no one can be bothered to try anymore. Out of the few who were willing to begin with, mind you.

The forum itself, oh boy. Debate and Discourse, the "serious" part of the forum, is a cess-pool. I count approximately five people (Dread Fussy Low-key Randy Hazir) trying to have talks about economics or politics or whatever dumb shit they care about, while jabbering idiots post incessantly around them, making a pretty piss-poor signal to noise ratio. I'm certainly not the only one who has noted the destructive role played by Being, Alpha Romeo et al.

The "casual" segment fares marginally better, because the level of discourse is at such an abysmal low. "I farted when we shagged", "I'm stalking a girl", "This is where I buy vidja-games!", no one gives a fucking shit except the people posting. Obvious corollary, nothing significant is said. Nothing lost and nothing gained.

After the high tides raised over at you know where, and the subsequent flurry of activity to move here, I suppose I'm somewhat crass to say this. Heavens know the more capital-inclined morons of our merry little asylum went into over-drive when poor Wraithy had to shell out money (can you believe it, actual fucking MONEY) to create this place, and keep it running. Content bought and paid for is always fuck-awesome, and who am I to critique it anyway? While the motion for transparency didn't pass, the self-same capital-inclined 'tards are free to point out that I did not shell a single dime for this enterprise, and dismiss this out of hand.

I do realize that while it is a popular idea to start banning for stupid, it's a slippery slope. I don't think it's feasible to start popularity votes (and that's a fucking understatement) about whom to keep. Nor would anyone be happy with a dictatorship of some arbitrary forumbyro. There doesn't seem to be any solutions to the problems. But it does strike me as somewhat odd that the administration part of the site opted to go in the polar opposite route and foster a thread-based blog of a person almost certainly cataloguing the daily developments of their deep-seated mental illness. How does that reflect on the precious image of the site?

The bottom line is that I have little interest in even trying to post in the serious sub-forum (to the delight of many, I'm sure), and I have the impression I'm not alone in this.

[littlelolligagged]

I don't know that I entirely agree with your assessment, although I do think it would be nice if dear Icky could actually create a blog post since it was his wankfest to begin with.

My big problem is in debate and discussion as well. Every serious topic in there seems to be turned into a blahblah spamfest by a couple of posters, and there are numerous topics in there that belong in general discussion.

I'm still not past barely functional yet this morning.

[Loki]

What exactly did you expect? As far as I could tell, we're actually getting more substantive posts here than we did at Atari. Did you expect the number to increase exponentially, despite having roughly the same number of people contributing? Regarding the blog, sure it hasn't taken off, but I don't see how that affects the forum part of the site. Instead of complaining, you should be contributing yourself. I've been so swamped with work that I've had maybe 5 hours this entire week when I was home and not working on something that was due in the near future. That should hopefully change in the next 4 days or so, but I really don't see why you would attack others for not coming up with articles when you haven't done a single one yourself.

Regarding the sub-par posters you mention, they existed in Atari, and the ignore button exists for a reason.

Lastly, I find it slightly suspicious that you're making this post immediately after you run-in with Hazir. Perhaps you should whine about him instead of the site in general.

[Nessus]

What exactly did you expect? As far as I could tell, we're actually getting more substantive posts here than we did at Atari. Did you expect the number to increase exponentially, despite having roughly the same number of people contributing? Regarding the blog, sure it hasn't taken off, but I don't see how that affects the forum part of the site. Instead of complaining, you should be contributing yourself. I've been so swamped with work that I've had maybe 5 hours this entire week when I was home and not working on something that was due in the near future. That should hopefully change in the next 4 days or so, but I really don't see why you would attack others for not coming up with articles when you haven't done a single one yourself.

Regarding the sub-part posters you mention, they existed in Atari, and the ignore button exists for a reason.

Lastly, I find it slightly suspicious that you're making this post immediately after you run-in with Hazir. Perhaps you should whine about him instead of the site in general.

It saddens me that I have to explain this, but my post had nothing to do with Hazzy's little temper-tantrum; you can look at the time stamps and evaluate how much time it took me to write the OP.

I'm not attacking anyone for not writing for the blog and it says loads about you that you interpreted my writing in that way; I'm saying it was a fore-gone conclusion to start with. And if you think you've been busy lately, I would invite you to spend a week in my boots and tell me how that feels. But Finagle knows I cannot be as productive and good as the ever-bombastic and base Low-key.

I do not see how you can claim we're getting substantive posts. We're not, mostly. The signal to noise ratio might be a foreign notion to a humanities student such as yourself, but in layman's terms it means your precious good posts are lost in the sea of useless trash written by the dullards.

And if we have to resort to ignore functions we have already lost. Fuzzy's myopic stance of the world notwithstanding, it is a sad state of affairs when the "decent" posters have to shout at each other over the droning of the idiots. And many of the "decent" posters are liable to begin to add each other to their ignore lists due to ideological differences.

[Loki]

Can you honestly say that the situation here isn't an improvement over the one at Atari? And is your suggestion that the posters in question be banned?

[Nessus]

Can you honestly say that the situation here isn't an improvement over the one at Atari?

I believe I did not address that dichotomy in my OP

And is your suggestion that the posters in question be banned?

This I did address in my OP, and said it was not feasible. Do they teach you selective reading in your field, or is this a personal flaw?

[Loki]

Then what exactly did you expect? Complaining is fun and all, but were you really expecting something substantially different? Why would you possibly think that having the same people over here would result in a dramatic difference in the number of decent posts/threads?

[Nessus]

Then what exactly did you expect? Complaining is fun and all, but were you really expecting something substantially different? Why would you possibly thing that having the same people over here would result in a dramatic difference in the number of decent posts/threads?

I'm not sure I did "thing" that. Throwing one's hands in the air and saying there it is is one thing, but improving things is another. At least I lifted the cat on the table, so we can discuss it. Instead of ignoring the problems and slowly getting sick of the shit being posted.

We had no way of changing things over at Atari, but we do here. This is done by us, for us, instead of some dumb corporation.

[Loki]

Ok, so what are your suggestions?

[Nessus]

Ok, so what are your suggestions?

There's that selective reading again!

You eggheads all seem to think you're far better than I, so you come up with something. The paint's on the wall already, you're not being any smarter trying to ignore it (and are insulting the rest of us by seemingly thinking we can't see it)

[Loki]

By "you", you mean Hazir? I'll pass along the note to my fellow Zionist-Dutch conspirators.

[Nessus]

By "you", you mean Hazir? I'll pass along the note to my fellow Zionist-Dutch conspirators.

Don't insult me, Loki. We both know you think you're far smarter than I; I am frankly dumb-founded at the idea that you think I should've written something for your blog. The economist clique certainly finds me far beneath their time, as evidenced by your behaviour, Hazzy's latest tantrum, Fussy's admission that he will put me on his ignore list when the stars align, and so on.

[Loki]

Don't insult me, Loki. We both know you think you're far smarter than I; I am frankly dumb-founded at the idea that you think I should've written something for your blog. The economist clique certainly finds me far beneath their time, as evidenced by your behaviour, Hazzy's latest tantrum, Fussy's admission that he will put me on his ignore list when the stars align, and so on.

Maybe you shouldn't assume that everyone is like you? I don't go around thinking "gee, I'm smarter than this person". And in case it's not obvious, the reason for what Hazir and Fuzzy said was your behavior, not your intelligence.

[littlelolligagged]

And in the time Icky has spent bitching about your complaints, he could have produced a quality article for the blog.

[Loki]

And in the time Icky has spent bitching about your complaints, he could have produced a quality article for the blog.

Loki is simultaneously trying to figure out how to run an ordered logit and what the implications of the results would be on his theory.

[Nessus]

Maybe you shouldn't assume that everyone is like you? I don't go around thinking "gee, I'm smarter than this person". And in case it's not obvious, the reason for what Haziar and Fuzzy said was your behavior, not your intelligence.

Spare me your condescension. You yourself are quite ready to jump at the easiest Freudian explanation for someone's behaviour, yet you claim I'm judging people based on how they measure up to myself? Please.

My behaviour is a response to my environment. I'm caustic because I loathe the forum atmosphere, here as well as on Atari. I'd like the atmosphere to change, you apparently want to keep shouting over the rooftops. I suppose the easy solution is for me to stop hitting f5.

[Loki]

Then offer some suggestions. We can't read your mind.

[Nessus]

Then offer some suggestions. We can't read your mind.

This is your little hospice, you fix it. Or do you think this is a good place for a fruitful exchange of ideas?

[Loki]

No, I think there's a shortage of good posts/threads, but that was expected as long as we didn't get new members, which we're not getting, partly because the blog isn't getting that much material. It's one thing to diagnose a problem and quite another to provide some realistic solutions.

[Nessus]

No, I think there's a shortage of good posts/threads, but that was expected as long as we didn't get new members, which we're not getting, partly because the blog isn't getting that much material. It's one thing to diagnose a problem and quite another to provide some realistic solutions.

And you reckon new members would make for worthwhile discussion?

[Loki]

And you reckon new members would make for worthwhile discussion?

Assuming the new members actually came here for worthwhile discussion, I don't see why not. That's why it's important to have threads and blog posts that would attract such people. We're not trying to attract DBZers here. Plus, as has been stated numerous times in the past, a large part of the reason for the lack of new threads is that people already know what everyone else will say. If there's significant new blood, then things will becoming more interesting, and even oldbies will have an added incentive to contribute.

The only short-term solutions I can think of is for people here to start decent threads and make blog posts. Once that occurs, we can try promoting the site somehow. I'm somewhat tempted to have some kind of a reputation system, not to show people who's popular, but to show people who's really, really unpopular (i.e. people who are idiots or trolls), so new people can save themselves the trouble of reading their posts and don't assume that everyone is like those people.

[Nessus]

Assuming the new members actually came here for worthwhile discussion, I don't see why not. That's why it's important to have threads and blog posts that would attract such people. We're not trying to attract DBZers here. Plus, as has been stated numerous times in the past, a large part of the reason for the lack of new threads is that people already know what everyone else will say. If there's significant new blood, then things will becoming more interesting, and even oldbies will have an added incentive to contribute.

The only short-term solutions I can think of is for people here to start decent threads and make blog posts. Once that occurs, we can try promoting the site somehow. I'm somewhat tempted to have some kind of a reputation system, not to show people who's popular, but to show people who's really, really unpopular (i.e. people who are idiots or trolls), so new people can save themselves the trouble of reading their posts and don't assume that everyone is like those people.

Again, that kind of system would lead to people rating people by their views, not objective intellectual merit.

[Loki]

Again, that kind of system would lead to people rating people by their views, not objective intellectual merit.

I've seen this system elsewhere. People who have the highest reputation are those with the most friends and refuse to say anything controversial, but people with the lowest reputation are idiots and trolls. So it doesn't work on the higher end, but does work on the lower end. I think one way of solving this is capping the positive reputation at a pretty low level, so everyone who's not an idiot or a troll would quickly reach the maximum. If we only allow negative reputation, then the people who post the most would get the worst reputation.

[Nessus]

I've seen this system elsewhere. People who have the highest reputation are those with the most friends and refuse to say anything controversial, but people with the lowest reputation are idiots and trolls. So it doesn't work on the higher end, but does work on the lower end. I think one way of solving this is capping the positive reputation at a pretty low level, so everyone who's not an idiot or a troll would quickly reach the maximum. If we only allow negative reputation, then the people who post the most would get the worst reputation.

Well, this is your sandbox, let's do that, I can see how it'll work already but you seem far more idealistic

[Loki]

Wraith is the programmer.

I do think starting good threads/making good blog posts is more important, and there's no reason why you can't contribute to that.

[Nessus]

Wraith is the programmer.

I do think starting good threads/making good blog posts is more important, and there's no reason why you can't contribute to that.

*sigh*

The point of my post was, there exists a myriad of reasons why I feel I can't post in the "serious" forum.

[Loki]

Your main one seemed to be the prevalence of idiots. For now, put them on ignore and make serious posts. After all, 6 is better than 5. And once there's a critical mass of people making decent posts, the lurkers might even decide to participate. So again, there is no way to resolve the problems you mentioned without first improving the quality of the discussion, and there's no reason why you can't be a part of the solution.

[Nessus]

Your main one seemed to be the prevalence of idiots. For now, put them on ignore and make serious posts. After all, 6 is better than 5. And once there's a critical mass of people making decent posts, the lurkers might even decide to participate. So again, there is no way to resolve the problems you mentioned without first improving the quality of the discussion, and there's no reason why you can't be a part of the solution.

You say this with a straight face, seemingly oblivious to your little tirade in the "free willy" thread? Jesus wept

[Loki]

We both know that you're capable of contributing - you've done so in the past. You choose not do it recently, and there's no reason why you can't change that.

[LittleFuzzy]

Don't insult me, Loki. We both know you think you're far smarter than I; I am frankly dumb-founded at the idea that you think I should've written something for your blog. The economist clique certainly finds me far beneath their time, as evidenced by your behaviour, Hazzy's latest tantrum, Fussy's admission that he will put me on his ignore list when the stars align, and so on.

It has nothing at all to do with your intelligence. You and I quickly start just jabbing at each other, making more of that pointless, self-destructive noise you were just griping about. Well, and there was that one time I found the nihilism you were spouting so depressing that it was bringing me down, but that was a temp ignore. That sort of response, which you don't like, IS the only available solution *or band-aid, as the case may be* to the problem you raised.