Open Discussion the current events and politics forum

[alasdairm]

the current events and politics forum has been a source of drama, personal spats, conflict and frustration - for both bluelighters and staff - for some time now. over the years, different things have been tried and different approaches taken and the problem seems to remain.

it's inevitable, given the subject matter, that the forum will discuss contentious and controversial subjects. sadly, a number of ce&p participants seem incapable of participating in a civil, respectful manner, free from personal attacks, insults and abuse.

there's a growing recognition that its costs outweigh its benefits.

there have been a number of suggestions for how to move forward: remove the forum permanently; make it invisible and 'opt-in'; focus the subject matter more tightly; etc.

we recognise that discussion of drugs and drug policy is inherently political. we further recognise that removing the forum may cause the discussion to just reappear elsewhere.

in short, we don't know what the long-term future of the forum is but we know that something needs to change and we - bluelighters and staff - need a break.

so here is what we're doing:

- as of today, the forum (actually the whole category, which includes both the ce&p forum and the dive) has been removed. at this point, for a month. maybe two.

- current events and political topics which fall under a list of subjects which includes, but is not limited to, harm reduction, drug use and abuse, recovery, drug culture and the legality or otherwise of drugs, may be posted in an appropriate thread in an appropriate forum (e.g. drug policy and media coverage or drug culture)

- current events and politics threads, which attempt to skirt round the closure, by appearing in social forums like the lounge or regional forums will just be closed.

feedback, questions and complaints in this thread please.

thanks.

alasdair

 

[mal3volent]

I think everyone would respect the decision more if you guys were just transparent about why you're doing it. The primary goal is to remove opinions you find problematic. Otherwise you'd make it opt in and be done with it. Let the people who want to be there be there, and when people make personal insults, kick them out. Pretty simple. But you can't do that because the opinions you don't like would still be visible to some, and that makes Bluelight "liable".

You should have just deleted it when you did the purge, if this was the path you were going to take.

Mere weeks ago, we had one of the best CEP moderating teams in place. Maybe the most professional, ideologically balanced, and good faith mods to ever have done the job in @tryptakid and @-=SS=- , with @Cheshire_Kat overseeing things . Everything had been going just fine.

I assume the politics section on discord has been removed as well, correct?
(Edit: it's still there... lol. Surprise, surprise...)

P.S. if I'm wrong and totally off base (if this isn't about purging wrongthink), why not leave an archive up and disable posting so all the years of threads won't be permanently lost to us? The archive is already there from when I did the last restructuring. All you have to do is do a batch update and move the rest of the threads there.

 

[alasdairm]

The primary goal is to remove opinions you find problematic.

that's not the case mal.

You should have just deleted it when you did the purge, if this was the path you were going to take.

as i said, this is a temporary move. the final decision has not been made.

f I'm wrong and totally off base (if this isn't about purging wrongthink), why not leave an archive up and disable posting so all the years of threads won't be permanently lost to us?

again, this is temporary. regardless of what happens, the content will not be permanently lost.

Mere weeks ago, we had one of the best CEP moderating teams in place. Maybe the most professional, ideologically balanced, and good faith mods to ever have done the job in @tryptakid and @-=SS=- , with @Cheshire_Kat overseeing things .

i agree. i can't speak for them but neither tryptakid nor -=SS=- wish to moderate that forum.

alasdair

 

[Quasimoto]

For the best. In retrospect, I believe this site would have avoided the downfall, staff drama and related purge if CEPS was removed earlier. Too little, too late perhaps. But I doubt you will see any complaints regarding this, other than from some newer or returning members.

 

[Quasimoto]

that's not the case mal.

Why else was it removed if not for problematic opinions and related discourse?

I am not saying it was removed because staff is against me, or mal, or anyone... but it was removed because of problematic discourse for sure, of what Monica wants removed from this site.

BL owner wants to change what this website has been for the last 25 years. That's their prerogative. But let's not dance around that and call it what it isn't.

 

[Quasimoto]

Bodybuilding.com recently killed their world renowned forum a couple years ago, because they felt it was too trollish. They wanted to focus on their business of selling supplements.

Same thing is happening here, except BL wants to focus on their "harm reduction mission"... but the big difference is BL doesn't sell anything. It's not a business. It's a database of knowledge, provided by the users themselves. Harm reduction will always be anecdotal in nature.. and the best anecdotes come from people who have been down that rabbit hole and survived to guide the next generation. God forbid those people giving their knowledge have a few mental problems themselves.

Feels like an art gallery who denounced the artists but continue displaying their works for benefit of the gallery.

 

[Fire&Water]

The universe divided
as the heart and mind collided
with the people left unguided
for so many troubled years
In a cloud of doubts and fears
their world was torn asunder into hollow hemispheres

 

[TheLoveBandit]

There was a similar thread posted in here not even a month ago by @deficiT : The future of CEPS

I worked up a reply to that one, but it got closed before I could respond. My thoughts at that time:

Personally, I'd like to see it kept in some form. Tighter moderation, to me, means foremost any personal attacks are addressed quickly; and secondly (if possible) threads are split/merged for content as needed.

Does it serve BL's purpose? No, not in my opinion, not directly. The supposition that older members are kept around and pitch in on critical forums isn't proven one way or another. Indirectly, it keeps a lot of noise out of the Drug Policy and Media Coverage, which is where people would start launching such discussions. I havent looked if that forum is locked for members to start threads or not. If not, you'd basically see the CEPS content recreated/relocated. If it is locked from members starting threads, well, they'll just shove the CEPS content into existing threads whether it fits or not. At least, that's my take.

I've not heard or considered an opt-in, but I struggle to see how effective that concept would be. The forum is currently blocked from non-members, they can't even see it. Of those that can, they have the personal choice to go in or not. Like the ignore fuction, people have that personal power already, the software redundancy is ... well, I don't believe it should be required, but here we are.

Personally, I use it for a chance to share ideas and discussion. Akin to what has historically been a big draw for me is that BL is a great hub of different minds, experiences, opinions, and it is a chance to be exposed to those ideas different from mine. Civility and respect is required, but for the most part such discussions are educational and beneficial for everyone, including lurkers that don't participate directly. BL is a tremendous networking hub for people of all countries, all backgrounds. From that, I've always gained a lot through discussions, regardless of the topic. What time I can spend here would likely be focused on CEPS, or it's equivalent, as politics are a bigger part of my thinking time these days; and the types of other ideas I can interact with here would be hard for me to find elsewhere. It's possible, but this is much more comfortable, so long as things don't get personal and trolling/attacks aren't permitted.

(later)
The ony suggestions that come to mind after thinking further on how it could survive

• If it is open, it needs 2+ mods. Either they are non-political themselves and can apply an even hand, or they offset eachother and have enough respect to balance a response to a situation. That's hardly ever been the case, as it has been traditionally liberal heavy and/or very heavy hands applied unevenly.
• Rules can be kept to a minimum - clear and concise. I can go over what's there now and see if I can whittle to 3-5 bullets (ha! me, brief?!?!). Enforcement is swift and unequivacle against those rules. Traditional escalation of edits/public warning then temp bans of increasing length. As for appeals, fat chance.

Right now, I just gotta figure out what to do about my mega-quote-posting


PS -

Looking at some of the replies here, I can state with historical confidence that an echo chamber is not, and has not, been the goal. There have been periods where CEPS has been overrun with leftist voices, and overlapping those members with left leaning moderation. However, an undercurrent of right leaning voices remained. Always. But those counter opinions haven't always been from sane or logical minds. More often, those voices were 'way out there', which also does not lend to healthful discussion, even when they could be reigned in from the fringe conspiracies. It has been difficult to have moderation seen as an attempt to quell personal attacks and off-topic screeching (or on-topic, for that matter) in an even handed manner, given how passionately many members hold their ground. But if there had been an attempt to snuff out opposing views, it would have been done long ago and sustained since. Instead, we see a change over at times of who particpates, but that desire to have civil discourse remained. HOW to do so has always been the issue, which depends primarily on the members. This isn't an area many are willing to take on as moderators given how heated things can become.

I do support leaving the content as an archive if there is a decision to shut it down as an active area of the site. Though, thinking about it further, I'd see a closed, or erased, CEPS section as a statement that the members here are unable to maintain a civil discourse on the subject. Yes, it's a staff decision, but it is one the staff have wrestled with since inception, and it remains a product of what the members put forth for discussion. To me it would be a gravemarker, a sad one.

 

[alasdairm]

For the best. In retrospect, I believe this site would have avoided the downfall, staff drama and related purge if CEPS was removed earlier.

very possibly. but hindsight is 20/20 as they say.

a lot of bluelighters and staff have tried to create a forum where civil, respectful discussion can take place and that effort has been perpetually challenged by other s who can't participate without insults and abuse.

Too little, too late perhaps.

again, the current situation is temporary. closing the forum permanently is one option. if it happens, it may be late but it won't be little.

Why else was it removed if not for problematic opinions and related discourse?
...

but it was removed because of problematic discourse for sure,

the forum has been removed temporarily to give the staff and the community a break from the abuse in there.

as i said in my first message: "a number of ce&p participants seem incapable of participating in a civil, respectful manner, free from personal attacks, insults and abuse."

i.e. it is about problematic discourse but the problem is not a difference of political opinion.

for example, tlb and i frequently disagree on political issues but i have never had to remove a post of his telling me to go fuck myself, to have him turn around and cry oppression.

BL owner wants to change what this website has been for the last 25 years. That's their prerogative. But let's not dance around that and call it what it isn't.

bluelight exists in a different reality now and some things have to change.

but the big difference is BL doesn't sell anything. It's not a business.

and there's a flipside to that, right? bl doesn't have a revenue stream from sales. it relies on other sources of income. if you or i had a few spare thousands lying around we could pay for the site costs and we could do what we want. but we don't so things have changed. these issues are existential.

Though, thinking about it further, I'd see a closed, or erased, CEPS section as a statement that the members here are unable to maintain a civil discourse on the subject.

likewise.

To me it would be a gravemarker, a sad one.

i agree.

@Quasimoto @TheLoveBandit thanks for posting your comments and feedback, respectfully, in this thread. it's appreciated.

alasdair

 

[Cream Gravy?]

I don't see why we can't work this out. Politics are part of life, for all of humankind. I think about politics sometimes when I'm tripping balls even. You see a film or hear a song about a time and a place and your mind wanders you know?

The site has been so slowly butchered and CEP was one of the last highly active forums I feel. Would be a true, damn shame if were to go away completely and indeed it would spill out elsewhere, by necessity.

 

[mal3volent]

I just don't buy the "we deleted one of the most active forums on the site because staff needed a break from personal insults" thing.

When we restructured cep the last time we made it very clear that there is zero tolerance for personal insults. I created a new ban specifically to keep those people out without keeping them from the hr areas of the site.

It takes two seconds to do this...

Why not simply enforce the rules rather than deleting the forum unless there are additional motives?
There is a mechanism in place for you to hit a button and remove the people making insults.

Also...

 

[Electrum1]

So it was actually an attack on our democracy

 

[alasdairm]

I don't see why we can't work this out.

me neither.

Would be a true, damn shame if were to go away completely

i agree.

and indeed it would spill out elsewhere, by necessity.

why by necessity? i'm a member of 3 other online boards. one of them is all about audis (the car). they have over 400,000 members and over 40 forums and none of them are about politics.

When we restructured cep the last time we made it very clear that there is zero tolerance for personal insults.

indeed. the theory and the reality unfortunately diverged.

Why not simply enforce the rules rather than deleting the forum unless there are additional motives?

that is one option.

So it was actually an attack on our democracy

it would have been if bluelight was a democracy. which it's not. so it wasn't.

thanks for the thoughts.

alasdair

 

[ions]

A black market is created when there's a demand for something and it's made illegal.

 

[mal3volent]

it would have been if bluelight was a democracy. which it's not. so it wasn't.

Then why did admin create a poll about it in the first place?

 

[alasdairm]

because a poll informs decision making but does not 100% control it.

alasdair

 

[mal3volent]

because a poll informs decision making but does not 100% control it.

alasdair

In what ways does a poll inform a decision that goes directly against the overwhelming sentiment of said poll?

 

[alasdairm]

long term, the forum may be opt-in and the moderation may be tighter, per the sentiment of that poll.

right now, the forum is closed temporarily. i've said it 5 times

alasdair

 

[mal3volent]

long term, the forum may be opt-in and the moderation may be tighter, per the sentiment of that poll.

right now, the forum is closed temporarily. i've said it 5 times

alasdair

Oh okay, so the poll overwhelmingly said opt in/tighter moderation. As a result, the losing option gets implemented temporarily for up to 2 months and the winning option "may" get considered at some point in the future.

Perhaps the more "informed" logical solution would have been to trial run the more popular idea (an opt in system with tighter moderation) for two months instead, and utilize the built in CEP-only warning system to alleviate the personal insult issue? Then if that doesn't work, consider removing it completely?

 

[alasdairm]

hundreds of users have posted in ce&p in the past couple of years. i wouldn't call any result from a poll to which only 16 people responded "overwhelming". but the "opt-in" option did win by a little under 2-1 which is meaningful.

As a result, the losing option gets implemented temporarily for up to 2 months and the winning option "may" get considered at some point in the future.

yes.

Perhaps the more "informed" logical solution would have been to trial run the more popular idea (an opt in system with tighter moderation) for two months instead, and utilize the built in CEP-only warning system to alleviate the personal insult issue? Then if that doesn't work, consider removing it completely?

we may still do that.

thanks mal.

alasdair