Zone1 Top down control or individual liberty?

[Natural Citizen]

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.

Top-down isn't really a meaningful factor.

Ownership isn't involved in any way with the day to day function/operation of the platform, and doesn't seem to be interested in the slightest.

So think of it as if the King being away on a permanent vacation and the Sheriff of Nottingham and his henchmen doing the governing.

But anyway. Placing that bit of humor aside, the reality is that there's no meaningful sitewide goal. There's no meaningful web site mission statement or goal that would stimulate synergy among the serfs.

So you get what you get...

 

[Orangecat]

So think of it as if the King being away on a permanent vacation and the Sheriff of Nottingham and his henchmen doing the governing.

Kinda like the deep state calling the shots for a senile POTUS, that. Lol.

 

[Orangecat]

The "ignores" have it at 62+% thus far.
Zoners are wallowing at a Biden-like 25% approval.

 

[night_son]

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?

My only real complaint has to do with the inability to put moderators on ignore. Otherwise, the ignore function, when used generously, can make the USMB experience a much more therapeutic one. I tend to ignore fellow members who troll relentlessly or regurgitate the same baiting banter over and over and over again. Unfortunately, certain moderators fall into those aforementioned categories and one cannot streamline them out of the USMB experience by any available means.

 

[Natural Citizen]

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.

Hey! Do you see a box up here anywhere? Hm? Do ya?

 

[Natural Citizen]

My only real complaint has to do with the inability to put moderators on ignore. Otherwise, the ignore function, when used generously, can make the USMB experience a much more therapeutic one. I tend to ignore fellow members who troll relentlessly or regurgitate the same baiting banter over and over and over again. Unfortunately, certain moderators fall into those aforementioned categories and one cannot streamline them out of the USMB experience by any available means.

The software won't allow that.

I don't really have a problem with the mods to, be honest. Collectively speaking. There's only one that plucks me, but that's nothing personal, just my natural annoyance for the poor judgment of delegating a fox to guard the hen house. While it would be nice to ignore the fox, it isn't really wise to ignore the fox. That just emboldens the fox. And you really can't blame the fox for being a fox. Think I've only received 9 trivial mod actions in all the years I've been runnning my pie hole on here. That's nothing.

Though I did get a week long stint in the hole for contempt of the fox once. Heh heh.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Kinda like the deep state calling the shots for a senile POTUS, that. Lol.

I was just kind of half joking there.

As I'd mentioned, there's no mission statement. There's no defined goal. There's not even an "About'' page as far as I can tell. So all you're really gonna do (give or take) is draw in customers looking for a bar brawl anyway. Duh. lol.

Really, their only meaningful job is to cool the bar fights. And, so, you get the designated speech zones representing where you can and can't. lol. It's really all they can do. Kind of a crappy job, really. One would have to have a certain predisposition for control to wanna take on that role. Around here anyway, where, as I said, there's just no meaningful, stated goal except to argue. lol.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Ah well. Looks like the sun's coming back out anyway. No sense blowing time behind a screen.

Have a good 4th, everyone!

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

i would prefer a total free for all food fight
if a person is offended, they should use the ignore function

 

[Oddball]

Top-down isn't really a meaningful factor.

Ownership isn't involved in any way with the day to day function/operation of the platform, and doesn't seem to be interested in the slightest.

So think of it as if the King being away on a permanent vacation and the Sheriff of Nottingham and his henchmen doing the governing.

But anyway. Placing that bit of humor aside, the reality is that there's no meaningful sitewide goal. There's no meaningful web site mission statement or goal that would stimulate synergy among the serfs.

So you get what you get...

You're too stupid to have fun!

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

My only real complaint has to do with the inability to put moderators on ignore. Otherwise, the ignore function, when used generously, can make the USMB experience a much more therapeutic one. I tend to ignore fellow members who troll relentlessly or regurgitate the same baiting banter over and over and over again. Unfortunately, certain moderators fall into those aforementioned categories and one cannot streamline them out of the USMB experience by any available means.

It's easy to put mods on ignore.

 

[Natural Citizen]

You're too stupid to have fun!

Heh heh. That was a good scene. "Damn good fight." And that little red checkered dress there at the end of it? Lord have mercy...

 

[1srelluc]

Just wait till the site is bought out, then you would wish for the present circumstances.

 

[Orangecat]

Hmmm, only 10 votes. Maybe no one really cares much. Lol.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

My only real complaint has to do with the inability to put moderators on ignore.

That

 

[Hurricanelover]

i would prefer a total free for all food fight
if a person is offended, they should use the ignore function

I agree. This is the way a street protest works so why shouldn't be done this way on political board?

 

[EvMetro]

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?

Redundant subforums will fix everything. One racism forum where everybody posts honestly, and then a Z1 racism forum where you have to beat around the bush to say what you want to say and admins go around deleting your posts and threads. Members post in the one they feel more comfortable with. This way flacaltenn can have a nice place for nice utopian discussion, and we could still have a place to discuss politics using standard political discourse.

 

[EvMetro]

Just wait till the site is bought out, then you would wish for the present circumstances.

Lol, this is the first time I've ever agreed with you on anything!

 

[EvMetro]

The "ignores" have it at 62+% thus far.
Zoners are wallowing at a Biden-like 25% approval.

Everybody on this site, including the admins, knows that the zone stuff is a disaster.

 

[Orangecat]

Everybody on this site, including the admins, knows that the zone stuff is a disaster.

If you stifle free voices, free voices will go away.
Maybe that's the endgame.