Lets jettison the insane asylum!

[Bob Hubbard]

You'll notice that my participation has greatly decreased in The Study. It's a combination of time, caring, and it not being 'fun' anymore, for all the reasons previously posted.

I'm considering locking it January 1st for a month. I've had numerous requests over the years to shut it down, spin it off, put various restrictions in place, and so forth. I don't have the time myself, and lack the staff who want to wade through yet another 'dead horse' to weed out the bs.

So, options as I see them are:
1- let it go as is, and it will continue to unbalance as people tire of the redundancy, resulting in a reputation for 1 sided extremism to continue to grow.
2- get more involved and try to rebalance it. No time, and not enough 'passion in the tank' these days. (My FB friends will have noted the decline in political postings by me)
3- shut it down and lose about 8% of content and 5-10 active members.
4- spin it off and let it run unmoderated (to a limit)
5- Make it a "Premium" section. Pay to play as it were.
6- ??

My original idea for the area was to discuss world events in great detail. It's become a political cess pool, with most arguments being repeats of old arguments under a new heading, with none of the prior discussion noted. Meaning, for example any debate on gay marriage, must, absolutely must, require all parties to repeat all prior links postings, facts, disinformation, and heated argument, no matter what. Any discussion of Obama must include every previous claim about his birth, schooling, and what not, along with the same 42 links to fact check sites. Any discussion on terrorism must include at least 10 references to waterboarding and 500 to various arguments about torture. Any discussion about England must have at least 1 angry exchange concerning who can reply, between the same 3-4 people. Grab 10 threads from last year, look at 10 from this past month. Wow. 8 repeats.

And yes, I've 'helped' make a bunch of repeats.

I don't really want to spin it off. Updating vBulletin sites are a pain in the *** these days, and I've got my hands full with PetLoversTalk.com's launch. (shameless plug, sign up and talk pets) Launching a political forum in the middle of one of the ugliest US elections in recent history isn't on my 'fun wow' todo list. I'd rather motorboat Ron Jeremy, and I don't 'swing that way'.

Right now, it's all talk on what we do. I'll let y'all hash it out a bit. Nothings changing today, or tomorrow.

 

[billc]

Yes, if you don't like what is posted for a thread, or on someones post...get rid of the whole thing. Very big of all the people supporting that option. Very brave as well. Been through this conversation before, the people who could simply not read those threads can't live with that, so ban it all. Having been slagged repeatedly, by many different people, and kept moving forward there is very little respect from me for those who seek that option. Whatever Bob wants to do, he has my support and respect.

 

[Sukerkin]

Ultimately, you're right if the only consideration is simply the administration of the site. There are other considerations. For example, is the Study what this site wants to be known for? Does the activity in the Study reflect positively or negatively on the rest of the site? Do the conversations in the Study positively or negatively impact the entire community?

It would be different if there were debate in the Study, but I disagree with you. There is very little actual debate occurring in the Study. What occurs in the study, on both sides, isn't debate. It's not even discussion. It's two parallel rants that seldom intersect. There's no exchange of ideas. It's about two things: who can yell loudest, and who can yell longest.

Hasn't always been that way, and it doesn't really need to be that way now. Suggesting that it's something that people should just ignore is like saying that there's a tumor growing on your arm, but just ignore it and use the other one. Like a cancer, it needs to be addressed. Whether that's to get it under control or to excise it completely is a matter to discuss. But, IMO, ignoring it is not an option.

I've said this quite a few times myself, aye. Indeed, I think I made a bit of a pest of myself when I was a Mod, bringing such reasoning up when the Study boiled over {soto voce}yet again[/soto voce}.

 

[Tgace]

I find it a bit funny when people who want to legalize drugs lead the charge to ban opinions.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[billc]

The get rid of it option does come from one particular side of the left/right divide and it isn't the right, at least on the study.

 

[shesulsa]

The get rid of it option does come from one particular side of the left/right divide and it isn't the right, at least on the study.

Let's not turn this thread into a left -v- right rant too.

Sent from my MB886 using Tapatalk 2

 

[pgsmith]

It's not even discussion. It's two parallel rants that seldom intersect. There's no exchange of ideas. It's about two things: who can yell loudest, and who can yell longest.

Hasn't always been that way, and it doesn't really need to be that way now.

That sounds amazingly like the current state of politics in the U.S.

Sorry Bob, but it doesn't sound like anything you do will make everyone happy. So, do what ever you feel works best for you and the site.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Paul, I learned a long time ago, no matter what I do here I'll make someone unhappy, lol. It's why I get paid the big aspirin.

 

[Steve]

Billcihak, I'm all for cutting out the tumor, and I consider myself to be conservative. I know I don't meet your definition of the term, but then, you don't meet my definition of the term, either.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

ok, some stats:

August 2012 activity
MT : 499 topics / 6,867 posts
The Study: 42 topics / 1,065 posts ( 8.41% / 15.5%)
TKD: 40 / 1,382 ( 8.01% / 20.13%)
General MA: 31 / 718 (6.21% / 10.46%)

So in August it was pretty busy, and averages about 10-12% of our monthly post count.

So here's the questions:

1- is it a negative or positive for the site?
2- will removing it boost traffic in other areas, or just hurt overall traffic and as a result membership and ad revenues?
3- If we keep it, and make it pay-access, will that hurt the site as a whole?


The bigger question is, how can we boost traffic and activity in the art areas to balance the site better? I'm fine with 1,000 posts a month in the Study. How do we get 1,000 PPM in JMA, CMA, KMA and FMA to balance the site?

 

[elder999]

So here's the questions:

1- is it a negative or positive for the site?

A troublesome mostly positive-some good discussions take place there, but there also a few who don't know what that word means: discussion.

2- will removing it boost traffic in other areas, or just hurt overall traffic and as a result membership and ad revenues?

I don't see it's removal boosting traffic, or hurting any but overall traffic. You'll still ahve the same things going on in the tae kwon do forum, for instance....

3- If we keep it, and make it pay-access, will that hurt the site as a whole?

No, I don't think so. Please consider my option, though-it wouldn't be limiting speech, but-I think- making all of us consider what's really important enough and worthy of discussion, bringing only our best to the table, knowing we were limited to starting 2 or 5 threads per month.

Then it could still be available to all who are interested.

The bigger question is, how can we boost traffic and activity in the art areas to balance the site better? I'm fine with 1,000 posts a month in the Study. How do we get 1,000 PPM in JMA, CMA, KMA and FMA to balance the site?

Except for affiliating with other sites, I couldnt tell ya-it's part of why I've never even nibbled at those offers to sell the site.

 

[Tgace]

So instead of Left/Right politics you'd prefer TKD/FMA/Ninjutsu/etc politics?

 

[J W]

You know... This topic comes up every now and then and I even brought it up a few times myself and I even had the study hidden from my view as well at one point.

How do you hide a forum? Is that something I can do with a free account? Like Tez, I usually check the new posts section when I visit this site. I get tired of having to sort through all the silly "liberals hate America" threads and whatnot in order to find the actual martial arts threads.

I have no interest in the Study, since it seems to be what most online political "discussion" is: partisans calling each other names. If I could hide it from my view, the problem would be solved as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Tgace]

So looking at the thread titles is "offensive" or do you actually read them? If you are reading them than who is really to blame for being "offended"?

 

[Xue Sheng]

How do you hide a forum? Is that something I can do with a free account? Like Tez, I usually check the new posts section when I visit this site. I get tired of having to sort through all the silly "liberals hate America" threads and whatnot in order to find the actual martial arts threads.

I have no interest in the Study, since it seems to be what most online political "discussion" is: partisans calling each other names. If I could hide it from my view, the problem would be solved as far as I'm concerned.

Use to be you had to contact Bob and he would do that for you.

 

[Tgace]

A troublesome mostly positive-some good discussions take place there, but there also a few who don't know what that word means: discussion.

 

[J W]

So looking at the thread titles is "offensive" or do you actually read them? If you are reading them than who is really to blame for being "offended"?

Never said I was offended, just gunks up the list of new threads with a bunch of non-MA junk.

Use to be you had to contact Bob and he would do that for you.

Bob, if you could hide the Study for me, that would be great. (If you only do that sort of thing for paying members, though, that's fine, I'll understand.)

 

[Xue Sheng]

ok, some stats:

August 2012 activity
MT : 499 topics / 6,867 posts
The Study: 42 topics / 1,065 posts ( 8.41% / 15.5%)
TKD: 40 / 1,382 ( 8.01% / 20.13%)
General MA: 31 / 718 (6.21% / 10.46%)

So in August it was pretty busy, and averages about 10-12% of our monthly post count.

So here's the questions:

1- is it a negative or positive for the site?
2- will removing it boost traffic in other areas, or just hurt overall traffic and as a result membership and ad revenues?
3- If we keep it, and make it pay-access, will that hurt the site as a whole?


The bigger question is, how can we boost traffic and activity in the art areas to balance the site better? I'm fine with 1,000 posts a month in the Study. How do we get 1,000 PPM in JMA, CMA, KMA and FMA to balance the site?

Why not just repalce the heading of the study from

The Study

For the serious and non-serious discussion, argument, silliness and general mayhem of non-martial arts topics including world events, social and political issues, or other items not covered in the other forums. Topics in here should stay focused on their topic, with new threads created where topics split. And as always Do not argue with an idiot they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

To

The Study

Martial Arts Talk would like to apologize to everyone in the world for the Study. it was disgusting and bad and thoroughly disobedient and please don't bother to phone up because we know it was very tasteless, but they didn't really mean it and they do all come from broken homes and have very unhappy personal lives, especially bob. anyway, they're really very nice people underneath and very warm in the traditional martial arts way and please don't write in either because Martial Arts Talk is going through an unhappy phase at the moment -- what with its father dying and the mortgage and MT 2 going out with men.'

And after you open it

have a sticky at the top that says

Martial Arts Talk would like to deny the last apology. it is very happy at home and MT 2 is bound to go through this phase, so from all of us here good night, sleep well, and have an absolutely super day tomorrow, kiss, kiss.'


There now no one is happy... everyone is insulted.... problem solved

That or just rename the whole damn thing "Argument Clinic"

 

[pgsmith]

No, I don't think so. Please consider my option, though-it wouldn't be limiting speech, but-I think- making all of us consider what's really important enough and worthy of discussion, bringing only our best to the table, knowing we were limited to starting 2 or 5 threads per month.

While I think that's a pretty good idea, how much effort does that involve for our beleaguered admin? Can it be easily and automatically programmed in, or does someone need to keep count and block further threads manually?

That or just rename the whole damn thing "Argument Clinic"

It is not!

 

[elder999]

While I think that's a pretty good idea, how much effort does that involve for our beleaguered admin? Can it be easily and automatically programmed in, or does someone need to keep count and block further threads manually?

I don't really know, but I would think it could be automatically programmed in (easily?)-I wouldn't ask otherwise, with someone needing to count. I'd imagine it would be no different than the rep function, though, that tells us how we need to spread it around before we can rep a certain individual again-likewise, a poster trying to start a thread could be told that he'd reached his limit for the month, and would have to wait until then to start another thread. They'd still be able to post to threads that had already started, and reply to threads that get started, they just wouldn't be able to start another thread until their time was up......this would at least cut down on the duplication that Bob spoke of.....

It is not!

Is too! :lfao: