More Fun with Serious Discussion

[PsychoYoshi]

Because of the continued crappy quality of most posts in Serious Discussion, the staff has decided to turn moderated mode on for all posts. Thus, any posts submitted to SD will now have to be approved by a staff member.

We are certainly not blaming all of you. Some posts have met (and occasionally, even exceeded!!) the standards we've put forth recently. However, the vast majority aren't anywhere close to what we'd expect from high school students, let alone adults.

Over the next week or so, I will personally be going through the posts in Serious Discussion and committing mass genocide on posts and threads that aren't up to snuff.

Regarding complaints about how we're repressing your freedom of speech: the First Amendment applies to the public sphere, not a private forum, and according to our rules, it's a privilege--one that is forfeited by acting immature. Also, rest assured that the staff will approve posts that conflict with our own personal views provided that they are well-written, cited, and professional.

If you consistently post in a respectable manner, we may develop a special (secondary) rank that allows people to freely post on the forum.

Feel free to ninny in this thread all you want.

[…]

Cool, but couldn't you just delete the posts that suck because it seems like it would be about the same amount of trouble. That way the users can also be somewhat sure about what y'all are letting through too. Although I don't spend anytime there now so I don't really care either way.

Actually none of it really matters anyway since it's not all that active.

[Lotos]

None of my posts will get through ::)

[Dog Food]

Seems reasonable enough. It's true that place isn't too active, but we don't need what does get posted to be absolute bullpoop. It's called Serious Discussion, so let one place on this forum to be serious. Gives a place for serious debaters and people with strong beliefs to go and duke it out. We don't need people looking for +1's or just going in with the intent to start flaming/trolling.

Good idea.

[Macawmoses]

It's a better option than what I voted for. Honestly, I still believe the best course of action would be to remove the board entirely for a month.

[HTA!]

Eh...
A good idea, but it also turns away most discussion. D:

[JrDude]

Cool, so now I'm not the only one.

[Macawmoses]

Eh...
A good idea, but it also turns away most discussion. D:

I wouldn't say that. It just promotes a different kind of it.

[Beatnik]

I hate this. I think we should change it so that you can post normally if you can behave, but if you consistantly post garbage you get banned from SD forever.

[Macawmoses]

I hate this. I think we should change it so that you can post normally if you can behave, but if you consistantly post garbage you get banned from SD forever.

To be quite honest, Peter, I do believe you were a major factor as to the shutting down of the board. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the sentiment, but it did in fact exist.

[Beatnik]

I didn't think I was breaking any rules. If anybody had a problem with what I was saying in SD, they could have just asked me to tone it down. It doesn't make sense to intercourse  it up for everybody as a reaction to something a small percentage of the posters did.