Draft Day! wrote:
So you’re defending LRC’s position of anonymity by arguing that users shouldn’t post anonymously?
lol
I am arguing that people who complain about anonymity should not post anonymously.
Show some conviction.
My defense of LRC’s position of anonymity is that even posters like Draft Day feel the need to post anonymously while arguing against its use.
And using an unregistered name just opens the gates to people impersonating others to confuse everyone of that person't point of view.
Star wrote:
Draft Day! wrote:
So you’re defending LRC’s position of anonymity by arguing that users shouldn’t post anonymously?
lol
I am arguing that people who complain about anonymity should not post anonymously.
Show some conviction.
My defense of LRC’s position of anonymity is that even posters like Draft Day feel the need to post anonymously while arguing against its use.
He posts anonymously because he can. He doesn't register because he doesn't have to. You registering is your choice. It's not a demonstration of character. Conviction is a matter of perspective. My conviction is to follow the site's rules, not YOUR rules.
alt-right posts wrote:
All of which have been suggested and rebuffed.
Maybe we should start tracking how long a post is reported to how long it gets deleted.
There are a few issues. 1) Offensive posts are up for too long 2) Some people don't like viewing content they disagree with. Just based on the screen-name of the poster above I think he's probably not going to want some of the debate that we allow on here. Generally I'm for discussion of even controversial topics as long as it is civil.
Generally we are not going to remove #2. Now many posters may disagree with what is offensive content but I think the #1 thing we can do is remove content quicker. Does anyone else agree?
LetsRun is so central to the running world that people is that their reaction to offensive stuff is different than on other platform. When I read something shitty on twitter I don't think "Twitter is a cess pool" I think it sort of comes with the territory.
And then there are more personal connections in the running world. Des Linden gave a $50 tip to our podcast and was our guest on it this week. She gets what sports fans are about and we were asking her about the sportsradio, the forums, etc. There is a thread on here about the podcast and someone says it's a great interview. The next poster says she's boring. No one thinks anything if Kim Kardashian is called boring or whatever, but when it's someone like Des I think people are going to take more offense. Not that this is the worst anyone is called on here but a post like that generally is going to be left up and also not even reported. But if someone used more offensive language I think the question becomes how quickly is it deleted.
But if someone wants to make the point that there should not be anonymous postings, their point would be much stronger if they did not do it anonymously.
All you are doing is proving why it's so great to allow anonymity here.
tank girl wrote:
Soprano wrote:
Anonymity is actually the standard with online forums, not the exception.
so basically it's okay because, "everyone else is doing it!"
That's not what I said at all. Anonymity is okay because it is okay. I wouldn't be posting on Reddit if I was somehow forced to post under Steve Soprano. I don't think most other people would either. I don't post anything bad at all, but I just wouldn't feel comfortable having open discussions with strangers if it was all under my real name.
Draft Day! wrote:
Soprano, you do realize that by arguing for the ease of creating registered usernames that you’re refuting Wejo’s position that anonymity helps whistle blowers, right?
Anonymity does help whistle blowers; of course it does. Where did Weldon say that not requiring registration helps whistle blowers? If he did, then I'll let Weldon explain what he meant. But I'm re-reading the Outside article and he didn't say that anywhere in there. His quote doesn't even mention whistle blowers, the author adds that in as his own example. And again, it's all in reference to anonymity, not registration.
Star wrote:
But if someone wants to make the point that there should not be anonymous postings, their point would be much stronger if they did not do it anonymously.
All you are doing is proving why it's so great to allow anonymity here.
on the contrary, if I ruin a thread as an anonymous user, it only proves my point that registration would be beneficial.
(am i the original tank girl? am I a new one? am I Draft Day! posting as tank girl? am I someone else completely?)
reddit user wrote:I was responding to your flippancy that "reddit allows anonymity so why shouldn't we" with all the systems they have in place to make it a good, engaging, clean experience.
If that was your takeaway from my initial post, then you missed my point. My main point was that I didn't like the way the author framed the discussion. A second point though is that I think being able to post anonymously is a good thing. Reddit was just an example, but the same could be said for any of the millions of online forums that exist. Years ago when I made an account on the WeddingWire forums to ask advice on engagement rings, I did it under a username. I didn't register under Steve Soprano.
So what's the point in shitting on reddit?
I'll just agree to disagree about some of your other statements, but I have to ask, how am I shitting on Reddit? I said in the very first section that I love Reddit and want us to emulate it in many ways.
tank girl wrote:
on the contrary, if I ruin a thread as an anonymous user, it only proves my point that registration would be beneficial.
(am i the original tank girl? am I a new one? am I Draft Day! posting as tank girl? am I someone else completely?)
I see that point but you need to try harder to ruin this thread then.
Years ago there was a guy, Jason Meyeroff, who ruined threads all of the time and everyone knew who he was.
He'd get banned now and then.
I think the 2 main bad things on LRC are:
1) terrible politics posts, many borderline racist, often started by presumably the same 5 people. You can tell this by their fixations on very specific things.
2) Way-too-far discussion on young athletes physical appearance
Most of the outright bullying seems to get cleaned up well by the mods.
Suggestions:
1) separate politics board that doesn't show on the main forum index
2) more moderation -- which I've already noticed has improved
As a side note, I think it's fine to talk negatively about pro athletes as long as it relates to their performance. 10,000 people say Lebron is "washed" every day. Part of being an athlete is that people critique your performance. It's pretty clear when it crosses the line, though.
When Rojo uses white men being slandered as an analogous situation to women and people of color getting slandered, I’m very curious about the intent here. Because intent matters.
Is it bad when anyone, white men included, are slandered, for any reason, including for being white men? Yes.
Rojo COULD use that example of slander to have empathy for other groups of people being slandered, that everyone being slandered only proves that more and better moderation or registration is needed.
Instead, he seems to come at this point from a defensive position, that it white men are slandered, that other groups being slandered is the balance, and there is nothing to be done about any of it.
This, my friends, is ignorant, nihilistic, and racist.
P.S. Has Baltimore jumped the shark?
People have complained about the message board forever, but the specific criticisms are different now.
In the old days, it was about how there aren't any more great training threads, too many non-running threads, people being too mean and scaring away the (running) celebrity posters. Now, the dominant criticisms are about racism, sexism, facism, etc.
I have to say, I don't see it. Sure, there are sexist or racist things posted, both now and back in the day. But it's certainly not pervasive, and it's not even clear how much of it is earnest vs. trolling. It strikes me that it's no more than you would expect on a large platform with anonymous users from around the world. Most people on LR seem to be pretty decent.
It seems to me that there are only two ways you can make the case for LR being a cesspool of racism and sexism.
First, you can take the position that ANY amount of overt sexism or racism is so utterly unacceptable on a message board that it simply must be removed within minutes. That seems unreasonable. In my experience the complaint based system works pretty well, and the moderators are responsive.
Second, you can define racism or sexism in extremely broad terms, such as someone expressing opposition to affirmative action. But even if you think that such views are racist, at the very least they aren't so OVERTLY racist that it would be fair to judge any forum where such views are expressed as a cesspool.
New to this site but I used to frequent a poker forum years ago that was “no holds barred”. That site doesn’t exist anymore. LR isn’t on the same level but it isn’t that far off.
800 dude wrote:
People have complained about the message board forever, but the specific criticisms are different now.
In the old days, it was about how there aren't any more great training threads, too many non-running threads, people being too mean and scaring away the (running) celebrity posters. Now, the dominant criticisms are about racism, sexism, facism, etc.
You have a point about the running celebrities not posting here anymore under their real name.
I'm sure they lurk but won't officially comment.
Lol have you seen how people reply to Sage??
Draft Day!
What I can't understand is your opposition to this place being The Wild West. Why is that a problem? Why does it "have to be fixed?" Is it even broken? And not just because you say so, is it really BROKEN? The answer, to me is no.
The thing that is broken is that not enough people have the "take it, or leave it" mentality that you need to have to navigate anywhere on the internet.
People can't just say, "Meh, that's his opinion" and move on, or even, "Wow, that person is crazy, but it doesn't affect me!" It(content on here) doesn't stop me from running, competing, or doing what I am going to do. Instead, we have people on here that become incensed and want to shut someone down, control how people say things, make people step lightly, and why?
Are we really that at the mercy of some words on a small, very specific website, that in all reality deals with a very mundane subject matter for the rest of the world? We can't be that weak?
I for one, refuse to believe that there are a bunch of crumbled and devastated people out there in therapy because they visited this site. At least that hasn't been my experience.
I made my original points about reddit because it seemed from your commentary that you were just apples-to-apples comparing the two. I wanted to point out that reddit's system of moderation/user interface are wildly different.
When I made that point about shitting on reddit, what I meant was that all of a sudden we were nitpicking the downsides of reddit's moderation scheme, which seemed to be drifting away from the topic of LRC's very real image problem (where we started).
I think I, and a good chunk of other commenters, are peeved at the scattered way things are done. A bad article comes out, and then the real work begins - LRC employees appear in the forum and become defend themselves/the site over the things in the article, or over things people are saying in the forums. It's reactionary, and it doesn't give the impression that there is a lot of momentum to actually tackle these problems - only to get the bad press to stop. Was the agreement to be interviewed by Outside part of this PR campaign?
Bottom line - I think LRC should be handling these issues in a coherent way, then doing something akin to a press release about what they have done to fix them. Not by reactively taking to the forums when something pops up and responding to individuals defensively.
Imagine someone who learns about LRC from negative press. They check out the forums and...likely find an example of what the bad press was talking about. What if that person now wanted to find out how LRC is even moderated...would they be able to find a static resource on this site that talks about the standard moderation policy? Or would they have to stumble across a thread in which one of the founders is defensively (and vaguely) describing the site's policies?
I'll keep wading through the garbage on this site, because there is good info here. I'm describing my appraisal of the larger issue of letsrun's moderation and site design. And I think those issues are existential threats to the forum.
wejo wrote:
[quote]alt-right posts wrote:
All of which have been suggested and rebuffed.
Maybe we should start tracking how long a post is reported to how long it gets deleted.
There are a few issues. 1) Offensive posts are up for too long 2) Some people don't like viewing content they disagree with. Just based on the screen-name of the poster above I think he's probably not going to want some of the debate that we allow on here. Generally I'm for discussion of even controversial topics as long as it is civil.
Generally we are not going to remove #2. Now many posters may disagree with what is offensive content but I think the #1 thing we can do is remove content quicker. Does anyone else agree?
None of this addresses a single thing in my post. Which is that posters have made helpful, concrete ways to improve the moderation of the message boards and your response is "we aren't going to do any of those things." Go back and read it again if you want to.
This is a nice attempt to change the subject and deflect criticism. The problem isn't "controversial topics." The problem is racism. You are perfectly fine leaving racist statements up.
Cleveland browns head coach wrote:
Yeah, if you ignore all the running posts and cherry pick troll threads that will obviously anger you, then that's entirely your problem. Idiots. I also like how they back up their claims of racism and misogyny with a single quote. On a site with millions of threads.
Yeah right. Racism and misogyny is quite rare on Letsrun.
One would have to cherrypick comments to say otherwise.
Or, one could put on a blindfold and pick out a single comment pin the tail on the donkey style and have a 50/50 chance of finding some racist nonsense.
