Dear friends,
We've had several off-topic discussions flagged in the last couple days. While I share deep skepticism about
Zero Hedge as a source (not particularly because of their investment perspective), I don't have the authority to eliminate posts based on their point-of-view. My best understanding from our lawyer is that
section 230 of the Communications Decency Act gives the owners of forums such as this legal protection so long as we're not responsible for the content of the board. Even given that authority, I wouldn't want to spend my days acting as Arbiter of Idiocy.
The options that occur to me:
1. I can shut down off-topic until January 2021. I would never do that unilaterally but would listen for consensus on it.
2. I can encourage folks to avoid "rage scrolling" by focusing on the other two boards: mutual funds and other investing.
3. I can encourage folks to reflect on why they're posting about a particular topic. If it's to express outrage or "rally the base," then they might reasonably anticipate - and accept as part of the price of admission - that others will do likewise. If it's to change minds, that might call for a less confrontative rhetoric.
All of which is your call. It is, after all, your community. You built it. You sustain it. And, as the fate of other boards shows (members of a certain age will remember the fight between Rob Brill and Salil Gangal that pretty much killed the MFI discussion board which was, until then, the web's most active), you can end it.
That's not an attempt to be apocalyptic. It's just a reminder of the truism, "words have consequences." (The cooler rendition of the idea is James Andrews' "a choice of words is a choice of worlds," a phrase which also gave rise to the title of his book on rhetorical criticism.)
David
Comments
3 and otherwise leave it alone
we are all big kids, and the rightwingers here deserve to be called out on whatever they choose to post
It's one thing to feel strongly, as many of us do, that the United States is at a very critical juncture with respect to the future of our democracy as envisioned by the founders.
But surely it's possible to express our opinions without also emulating the disrespect introduced and favored by the current occupant of the White House. We do ourselves no favors by lowering ourselves to his level.
If post about Trump continue I in return will continue to put up post related to Biden. The only thing I have done in taking equal time is to present opposing views and perspectives, via links, that counters those posted about Trump. Seems the Biden supporters cant stand this and have now claimed foul with my posted links concerning Biden. This seems to be the practices of a typical liberal democrat.
I'm feeling the Trump "Off Topic" post will continue ... then ... I'll counter with "Off Topic" post concerning Biden; and, again, David you will be back to where you are now. Pondering what to do?
This is an Investment Board ... So, shutdown "Off Topic" and Ban Political Post.
I am, Old_Skeet
If that were the only thing you were doing, you would get more support, perhaps not for your perspectives but for your participation. However that's not all that you're doing.
You are carpet bombing the board with threads citing only opinion pieces. These are automatically suspect - a point I have raised in response to posts by several people across the spectrum. It's one thing to cite an opinion piece to say "this is my thinking", and another to use it as the sole source of "facts".
By virtually single sourcing, you're damaging your credibility. If your objective is to shout into the wind, please do it somewhere else. If your objective is to inform or persuade, you are hurting yourself.
For example, you just started a thread on polling with a (rare) link to something other than Zero Hedge. Given your recent track record, and the intentionally controversial title, it's going to be viewed as trash, regardless of its substance. And the replies in the thread reflect that.
In fact, while the piece that you cited is IMHO way off in its analysis, it does give a reasonable description of the polling process and some of the more basic concerns in doing polling well. But people won't see that.
Try instead referencing writers and sites with a little more cred. For example, Nate Silver has a good analysis of the 2016 polling results. He discusses how most of the bottom line reporting that year was wrong but the polls were "slightly closer to the mark than they were in 2012."
And from Nate just a week ago: "In this article — partly as a corrective against what I see as overconfident assessments elsewhere — I’m mostly focused on the reasons why Trump’s chances are higher than they might appear."
That's a long winded way of saying that I agree with the Professor's option (3), and suggest to others that they refrain from commenting on many of these threads. That way they'll just wind up in the OT Bullpen.
I enjoy writing out my thoughts. It helps me think. I like conversations. I learn things. I don't need converts. I don't need to score points over someone that disagrees with me. Umm . . . most of the time.
I understand that some people enjoy "debate." But I am pretty sure that there are rules for that to keep it from looking like the primate house at the zoo. Your suggestions seem like a reasonable baseline.
If people are bored, maybe they need to find something else to chat about in the off topic forum. Gardening. Cooking. Baking. You couldn't hardly find flour for a while there. What are people baking?
Yet I believe there is a reasonable and relatively simple solution to this problem here. Add another layer of hyperlinks to the Discussions board. Instead of having a general Discussions board where you can turn off the "Off-Topic" links as there is currently, requiring an extra step for the user to see fund links only, have the Discussions link lead to a list of sub-links for discussion categories. That would require one additional step for the users who want to discuss any topic, say, politics or how politics intersect with economics and investing. So there is a "Discussions" tab link at the top, and clicking on that link, leads not to a general discussion board but to a few different sub-links--Fund Investing, Investing Other, Off Topic, ESG Investing, Politics, Economics, etc. That way anyone who wants to discuss politics has to click on another link to do so and if they do, they can't complain if the politics is not to their liking. They have made a decision to enter a political forum. Those routinely posting the wrong subjects in the wrong categories can be banned for trolling.
Regarding Old_Skeet's remarks: "This is an Investment Board ... So, shutdown "Off Topic" and Ban Political Post." To me that is an indication he isn't really interested in politics and is actually making fake news political posts from a known Russian asset fake news site--confirmed by three different real news sources--to promote censorship. This is actually the goal of fake news really in general, to drown out the factual truth, so no one knows what's real anymore. To allow politics to be banned from this site would thus be a victory for censorship and fake news in my view because the Old_Skeet's of the world don't care about politics anyway. He just wants to silence those who do care.
I come here largely to escape that turmoil. Sure, I’m deeply concerned about the choices I and my fellow citizens will make in November. But I haven’t been living inside a sealed test-tube resting on a lab shelf somewhere for the past four years. I suspect 99% of folks here, just like myself, have already made up their mind regarding the Presidential race. And those few Americans outside the forum who are still in a quandary aren’t likely to visit a mutual fund forum seeking political answers. At this stage of the game with emotions running at “red alert” what your getting mostly I fear is more “... sound and fury”.
The nice thing about numbers is that they don’t lie. Unlike people, politicians and tropical storms numbers are reliable. Numbers are trustworthy. 2+2 always equals 4. Compound interest can be calculated out to 25 or 100 years with accuracy to the exact decimal point. That’s part of the beauty of following the investment world. Numbers are stable. Numbers provide a grip on reality that no politician or cable news anchor can even approach. So, why should we at a time of great national upheaval diminish that singularity unique attribute owned by a site devoted to financial matters by injecting even more sound and fury than we already encounter in our daily lives?
Some folks think facebook killed off forums. But I think the politics just grinds folks down till it's mostly one side or another.
We tried what Lewis suggested about moving it a click down. Didn't change much. What worked slightly better was establishing a trash bin into which threads were tossed if people couldn't keep the personal attacks to a dull roar.
The site is still running under other management. But it's down to a few hardy souls that have known each other since the late 90's. The game threads are still decent. And it's a good place to catch up on transactions, and other baseball whatnot. But it's pretty funny to watch the same 4-5 people chasing their tails over what they saw on their favorite cable station or blog that day.
When my brother went off his meds in 2016 he fixated on politics. Really, he could have fixated on anything. I didn't know he suffered from severe depression. I thought his anguished emails were meant to be satirical.
And then he shot himself. Fortunately he was the bachelor brother. Considering the world we live in, I'm happy he didn't make a cop do it, or take anybody else with him.
In the old days people used to keep secrets about things like depression and suicide. It wasn't until my brother shot himself that I learned that a great uncle cut his throat with a strait razor. My brother had a folder dedicated to the guy among his possessions.
Anguish is not a good place to be in for any length of time. I don't know what your specific situation is. But when I see people use certain words in certain ways I tell my story. I guess this is what people mean about needing to be open and honest about depression and suicide.
/endofstory
Thanks for this metaphor, it's the most hilarious thing I've read in months!!
My sincere condolences in the loss of your brother.
May you find peace and comfort in your memories of him.
In the Spirit of Faith, Hope & Charity,
Old_Skeet
OTOH. Two of my brothers were aware of his condition. Apparently he had a long running fascination with suicide before the depression kicked in. I think it has been harder for them to process for keeping it secret. Which is why I just pull the bandaid off. Sort of like saying: "Yeah my brother didn't look both ways before crossing the street. That didn't work out well."
Just to try to stay a little on topic from time to time: I will say that the whole experience has influenced my thinking about politics, and the way I express myself when I do get around to typing on the subject. But it probably just pushed me further in the direction I've been going all along.
I have long been leery of the way the media manipulate us for their own ends. I haven't watched network news since I saw Network.
These days it is easy enough to detect the clickbait (flamebait really) headlines from the cable companies that want us tuned to their stations 24 hours a day. They all do.
These days it's easy enough to tap into a growing body of knowledge that shaming doesn't convince anyone of anything. It's what we should know it is: A crummy way to make yourself feel better.
On the internet the rule is: First the shibboleth. And woe unto the Ephraimites. Or, as David would say: "Rally the base."
I still don’t think the board should be used for political debate. And for the benefit of a few, please know that when you criticize others harshly for their political choices or engage in name calling of their candidate of choice all you do is back them into a corner, arouse their natural defenses, and make them even more likely to vote for that candidate. And it doesn’t stop there. Others of similar persuasion reading the board are likewise hardened in their view. So you’re harming the very cause you claim to be supporting through that approach.