Perhaps there is a criterion moderators should consider when deciding if a thread is going off the rails. Instead of waiting for a violation of the terms of service to occur before stepping in, a simple reminder to the passionate that posts need to be actionable could be effective.
actionable
adjective1 : subject to or affording ground for an action or suit at law
2 : capable of being acted on, actionable information
The first definition is what worries rockedge and should be of the highest priority.
It is the second definition which is offered for consideration as a moderating approach. It may take a bit of learning by the forumites to develop better habits, but in the long run....
example
stemsee wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:26 amwiak wrote: ↑Mon Jan 15, 2024 12:20 amI totally object in the strongest terms to the further posting of religious propaganda.
I insist such behaviour stops now. Such behaviour is against forum standards of behaviour which involves acts of incitement, attempted persecution of individuals, and serious animosity.Quoting the most published, read and quoted book in the history of mankind is hardly religious propaganda. Any edit:"reputable and trustworthy" academic will know the importance of reference & bibliography. I could instead reference Greek, Latin and modern classics
neither post has anything to do with the concerns of the OP. except to prove his point. I read his concern as
we have water in the holds and the engines are sputtering here at Puppy Linux and we are down to 1 maybe 2 developers but blah blah blah about a topic none of us will EVER FIX.
Perhaps if wiak opend a thead proposing a new policy of acceptable signature lines, stemsees response would be relevant or actionable, but if the discussion at hand is antithetical
to rockedges opening post., it should be considered non-actionable.
when discussion goes off topic and the bickering begins, a reminder of keeping it actionable is a simple objective criteria for moderation, without the moderator having to appear punitive or favoring sides in the discussion at hand.
Here is how actionability is defined at another forum:
Non-actionable or Trolling Topics
If readers can't do anything with the content of a topic other than argue about it, it does not belong here. Examples include:
US or world economic, political, tax, health care and climate policies
conspiracy theories of any type
discussions of the crimes, shortcomings or stupidity of other people, whether they be political figures, celebrities, CEOs, Fed chairmen, subprime mortgage borrowers, lottery winners, federal "bailout" recipients, poor people, rich people, etc. Of course, you are welcome to talk about the stupid financial things you have done.
puppylinux.com of course can define actionability in any way it sees fit.
what subjects are appropiate for puppy linux in any particular section, is of course a different discussion
