Watercooler v political forum

It would be interesting to keep a score of the percentage of helpful posts in the technical forums vs the number of political and water cooler posts. It should highlight the trolls that lurk here causing mischief.
I know this is aimed at me, thank you. To save you time, I never post in the technical forums, and to be honest, I've been retired for so long, I probably couldn't write a database now, and rapidly approaching 80 years old I wouldn't want to.
During the early 2000's I did post alot to help people in the technical area. Given that I only post now in the watercooler, if you feel the need to ban me because of my non posts in the technical then so be it.
Col
 
For the record, I've moved another bunch of posts. My criteria for moving out of the Watercooler are (a) posts were purely political or (b) posts were started based on current events with political overtones.

I review each candidate thread, at least spot-checking it. A couple of threads were, I thought, borderline so I erred on the side of caution and left them as-is. I'll also suggest that if the thread is older than a year or two it probably isn't worth moving.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jon
It would be interesting to keep a score of the percentage of helpful posts in the technical forums vs the number of political and water cooler posts. It should highlight the trolls that lurk here causing mischief.
Oh dear, if you did that Pat I'm afraid I would be labeled as your troll. I rarely answer technical questions anymore I'm just on here for the social media aspect of it.
But is there something wrong with that?
 
Based on my reading of Jon's stated preferences as noted in the moderator discussions, I would have to say that lurkers and folks who don't post technically are still welcome. The main rule remains that we must consider how carefully or poorly you treat others. I.e. even for non-religious folks like me, the Golden Rule does have significance.

But then, I have always known that interpersonal relationships are reflections. What's that old Biblical phrase? You reap what you sow.
 
Uncle G., you know you ARE a moderator, don't you? If you really want to ban someone for a day or two, just to get it off your chest, you have that level of authority. Of course, it may not be for the best reason, but you know Jon's policy on the subject of bans.
 
If I had my way it would be like an old fashioned Gentleman's Club and politics and religion would be totally banned!:sleep:

What me? Old fashioned?
That sounds like a good name for a forum section: The Gentleman's Club. And of course, one for women too.
 
I'm hoping that you could see that Uncle was teasing one of our trolls unless you've caught the liberal's disease of being unable to see irony or humor.

What can I say? Sometimes I see it, sometimes I don't. Chalk up another property of being fairly close to human.
 
Exactly why I didn't clobber Aziz Razul during his series of Qur'an posts where he called me a liar.
 
If I had my way it would be like an old fashioned Gentleman's Club and politics and religion would be totally banned!:sleep:

What me? Old fashioned?
In true old-fashioned scenarios with the old guy sitting on the Italian street corners, politics was just about all they talked about. It's certainly wasn't banned
 
In true old-fashioned scenarios with the old guy sitting on the Italian street corners, politics was just about all they talked about. It's certainly wasn't banned
That's why Gentleman's Clubs were so useful: nothing wrong with discussions about politics and religion but in the correct place: the pub (street corners etc) and church (chapel, temple, mosque etc... ), but one needs sanctuaries.
 
And the USA? Are there bits of the USA which should be returned? Parts of Texas? The Black hills? Hawaii? . . The trouble is, most countries are composed of bits and pieces of other countries - where do you stop?
Northern Ireland has been fighting for their independence for over 100 years.
 
The primary rule (currently) is civility to other members, i.e. avoidance of vulgarities or direct insults. Frequency of posting is not an issue. Fortunately for me, being long-winded in a post is legal. Yes, I admit to getting on a "soapbox" now and then. Though brevity is the soul of wit, even the US Congress allows long-winded speeches as a delaying tactic. For our UK friends, this tactic is the meaning of the word "filibuster" - which we might mention and some non-USA members might not understand.

Strictly speaking, for this forum, the specific topic isn't an issue. The REAL problem is whether it is inflammatory. Even the USA, which has a "Freedom of Speech" clause in the first amendment to the U.S. constitution, has laws against certain types of hate speech and speech that might incite to panic or riot. The forum doesn't have a "moderator of moderators" yet - but we DO have moderators in general.
 
Discussing politics in The Watercooler instead of the (now closed) Politics section leads to the same risk. It's not rocket science.
 
There is a complaints procedure already, where you click Report to report a specific post.
 
I consider my posts to be constructive and respectful. If I cannot even express my views in that manner, then what's the sense in even having non- Access related forums?
Maybe just take a breath . You've been here 6 mo., your post count is going exponentially. Step back, take a breather get a feel for things from observation for a bit.
 
I posted like 3 or 4 posts mentioning King Charles, Ireland, etc. in this and another thread. Do you consider them to be respectful and constructive? Do you think UK would consider them a violation of OSA?
Whether or not it complies, the politics section was removed to reduce risk. Those users who continuing to discuss politics here means they are a risk if they remain members.
 
I disagree. Membership length does not give more rights to post than other members with less time. The only rule here is to reach 100 posts before being allowed to post links.
......And you replied within seconds.
Less coffee, less something, I dunno man - just a friendly piece of advice
 
I personally feel the UK should return Northern Ireland to the Irish. That would end the animosity. The Irish have a right to self_determination. The UK has granted independence to many other former colonies, so why not them?

I was surprised the Scots voted against independence.
The trouble is that the USA has no idea about the UK.
Before you roll out the rubbish about "giving Northern Ireland back to Ireland" why not ask the people in NI what they want instead of telling them what is good for them? Ask many in NI what they are and they'll say they are British.
This is just not so simple and involves religion. If the Catholics become a majority they may well force a vote but the effect will probably be protestants moving to England or Scotland. One problem is money and Ireland probably cannot afford to fund NI, so the last thing they want is to merge. Which is probably why Ireland doesn't ask to merge with NI. Even though the EU imagined it would happen at Brexit, clueless.

Scotland independence is a joke. As is Wales. Both have populations lower than Yorkshire. Both do not earn enough money to exist. The combined populations of both is lower than London. And they both think they can be independent countries. Scotland is simply a huge financial drain on England. A millstone around our neck and a real pity they didn't vote independence, that would have saved us a fortune year on year.
Scotland became a part of the UK in 1707 because it had bankrupted itself with a crackpot investment in South America. It had to come cap in hand for English money back then. Even today as a country it is incapable of understanding macro economics. The dream was to be independent and join the EU and adopt the Euro as currency. Unfortunately for them the EU refused to stump up to support Scotland.
The main politician for independence had to resign due to dodgy financial schemes. Whether she gave back the camper van bought with donations intended for for independence I do not know. Scotland has one of the highest drug and alcohol dependencies in Europe with their
so called government being the main employer and as country is unable to survive without huge subsidies from England. Every time an SNP politician opens their mouth all they shout is "give us more money". Basically that is all the fish wife Sturgeon ever said.

Wales is similar and is allowed like Scotland to manage its budgets but again only with huge amounts of subsidies.

NI, Scotland and Wales are not the simple naughty England took them over and won't give them independence rubbish story we hear from the USA and Europe. In fact as far as NI is concerned just when did you hear that they themselves requested to leave the UK? Was it actually never?

So many Americans have this fairy tale Ireland/Irish image in their minds, Biden, Bluespruce and @Pat included it does appear.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom