Zone1 Top down control or individual liberty?

[Orangecat]

I've been thinking about this Zone1 stuff and why it gets on my nerves.
I'm definitely not for top-down control in any form of governance when personal liberty can accomplish the same outcome.
Bear with me here, and I'll get to my poll question.
The ownership or moderation team here (as is their right) has come up with their solution to the incessant bickering and verbal food-fighting here by using a top-down approach of applying Zone1 designations to select categories.
I would assume this is because some do not care for the aforementioned conflicts.
But why not just use the ignore feature on an individual basis? That way, those who do not want to see the conflicts will be sheltered via a personally defined censorship of other members. That, to me, is the individual liberty solution, much like "change the channel if you don't like the content".
The Zone1 solution is a top-down, "we decide for everyone what is acceptable" approach.
There is no right or wrong answer, just personal opinion.
Hopefully no moderators take this as an attack. I'm just curious to see where we all stand regarding such things.
7 day poll, so vote if you care to have your opinion on record.
So here is my poll question:
As a member of USMB, would you rather have the top-down control so everyone is constrained by the blanket rules, or the more individualistic route of customizing your experience via eliminating content you don't want to see via the ignore function?

 

[1srelluc]

I thought that "Zone 1" was explained by a mod to be a "glitch in the matrix" and to just ignore it.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

I thought that "Zone 1" was explained by a mod to be a "glitch in the matrix" and to just ignore it.

Well, I've already gotten several of my posts deleted for "Glitch Violations".

 

[White 6]

I thought that "Zone 1" was explained by a mod to be a "glitch in the matrix" and to just ignore it.

Did you see that cat?

 

[KissMy]

Please explain why we have "zone 1" in one or 2 simple sentences.

 

[pknopp]

Well, I've already gotten several of my posts deleted for "Glitch Violations".

Or maybe they were actual violations?

 

[Oddball]

I've been thinking about this Zone1 stuff and why it gets on my nerves.
I'm definitely not for top-down control in any form of governance when personal liberty can accomplish the same outcome.
Bear with me here, and I'll get to my poll question.
The ownership or moderation team here (as is their right) has come up with their solution to the incessant bickering and verbal food-fighting here by using a top-down approach of applying Zone1 designations to select categories.
I would assume this is because some do not care for the aforementioned conflicts.
But why not just use the ignore feature on an individual basis? That way, those who do not want to see the conflicts will be sheltered via a personally defined censorship of other members. That, to me, is the individual liberty solution, much like "change the channel if you don't like the content".
The Zone1 solution is a top-down, "we decide for everyone what is acceptable" approach.
There is no right or wrong answer, just personal opinion.
Hopefully no moderators take this as an attack. I'm just curious to see where we all stand regarding such things.
7 day poll, so vote if you care to have your opinion on record.
So here is my poll question:
As a member of USMB, would you rather have the top-down control so everyone is constrained by the blanket rules, or the more individualistic route of customizing your experience via eliminating content you don't want to see via the ignore function?

The whole "zones" regime is a total mes, has been so since its inception, and nobody with any power behind the scenes has the stones and/or intellectual honesty to admit it.

It's a microcosm of the current politics scene: no matter how shitty the program is, the powers that be will always try to polish the turd rather than admitting failure as failure.

 

[Orangecat]

Well, I've already gotten several of my posts deleted for "Glitch Violations".

Me, too. One was just a slightly off-color joke.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Me, too. One was just a slightly off-color joke.

I am unaware of why my posts went away, due to the ambiguous wording of the message informing me that my posts were deleted.

 

[1srelluc]

Did you see that cat?
View attachment 665634

LOL....OK then.

 

[occupied]

The people who can't quit running afoul of the mods are the same people who go to the grocery store and get in fights with people in line.

 

[Orangecat]

Did you see that cat?
View attachment 665634

Wrong color...

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

The people who can't quit running afoul of the mods are the same people who go to the grocery store and get in fights with people in line.

Wrong. I have had several posts deleted for Zone 1 violations and I would never consider getting into a fight with another person in any line, anywhere.

 

[Oddball]

Please explain why we have "zone 1" in one or 2 simple sentences.

Because a pig-headed Admin, who is long departed, decided to impose them, despite nearly universal disagreement from the rest of the staff at the time.....He then appointed a power drunk maude to act as the "hanging judge", to ban anyone and everyone that they didn't like.

Board traffic has never recovered.

 

[1srelluc]

The people who can't quit running afoul of the mods are the same people who go to the grocery store and get in fights with people in line.

Plausible.

 

[task0778]

There was a time when this forum was an internet version of the wild west, with deeply personal attacks and insults were flying thick and fast and it was difficult at times to discuss anything without some asshole derailing the thread. The result was that the USMB lost a lot of new members that decided this wasn't the place for them and they quit and a lot of existing members got tired of the abuse and they quit too.

So - the management tried to clean things up and make it more tolerable, and it is a better place than it used to be. But that means a certain curtailment of what you say and how you say it. Don't like it? Tough shit. The rules are not that ambiguous; true there is some subjectiveness involved cuz the mods are people too, but that's the way it is. But you know what the bottom line really is? Play nice or go somewhere else. If that's too hard for you to do, go somewhere else.

 

[Lastamender]

The people who can't quit running afoul of the mods are the same people who go to the grocery store and get in fights with people in line.

Pics, or it didn't happen.

 

[Orangecat]

There was a time when this forum was an internet version of the wild west, with deeply personal attacks and insults were flying thick and fast and it was difficult at times to discuss anything without some asshole derailing the thread. The result was that the USMB lost a lot of new members that decided this wasn't the place for them and they quit and a lot of existing members got tired of the abuse and they quit too.

So - the management tried to clean things up and make it more tolerable, and it is a better place than it used to be. But that means a certain curtailment of what you say and how you say it. Don't like it? Tough shit. The rules are not that ambiguous; true there is some subjectiveness involved cuz the mods are people too, but that's the way it is. But you know what the bottom line really is? Play nice or go somewhere else. If that's too hard for you to do, go somewhere else.

How would this not also be solved by placing people whose posts you dislike on ignore? Then, those who are a bit less couth in their style wouldn't be seen by those who get offended by such. The "ignore" feature is genius in that regard. You control who you interact with, and others are free to do the same.

 

[task0778]

How would this not also be solved by placing people whose posts you dislike on ignore? Then, those who are a bit less couth in their style wouldn't be seen by those who get offended by such. The "ignore" feature is genius in that regard. You control who you interact with, and others are free to do the same.

Agreed, the Ignore button is a very useful tool and I use it very liberally. I have no interest in trading insults and invective, and we do seem to have a lot of people who resort to that type of communication quite often. I don't come here for that crap, I'd probably be gone by now if I couldn't turn those people off. Which is kinda sad really, cuz everyone should have a voice but if a person can't speak their piece in a courteous and respectful manner then pizonya.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

How would this not also be solved by placing people whose posts you dislike on ignore? Then, those who are a bit less couth in their style wouldn't be seen by those who get offended by such. The "ignore" feature is genius in that regard. You control who you interact with, and others are free to do the same.

But dear, there are those who cannot quite fathom the idea that the ignore button works that way, and one of them has demanded that I PUT THEM ON IGNORE!

Some are teachable. Others are hopeless.