I have noticed that out of large numbers of registered users only a small number comment on discussion topics yet the names that appear on article comments tend to be different ...see the responders to Peter Sellicks’ piece on atheism. One could/should wonder why. One of the reasons may be found in the nature/direction of some of the discussions.

e.g. In a recent topic, the original question was supposably about “An Aboriginal Nation State”. Yet it appeared as the topic has been hijacked to an all too common theme of a divisive race argument. Usually these arguments are aggravated by half truths, miss use (probable deliberate misunderstanding) of stats/facts for emotional axe grinding purposes and confrontational even ad hominem stances by some.
In reality 3-4 of the site rules were breached in this topic.
Posts are also wasted by defences or trying to reign in unacceptable excesses of some. Consequentially the list of actual commenters to these topics tends to be somewhat more limited.
Having a passionate opinion is one thing but addressing the topic/a fellow commenter as though as though our opinion is either holy writ/crusade or we have a right to be deliberately abrasive (insulting/rude) is more than PC it adversely affects all of us and the site.
The rules clearly tell us
• Keep responses on topic. In the above thread this rule is clearly ignored. I too wandered off on non-confrontational aside (inappropriate). Start a new question; give others a chance to contribute. Perhaps a new hijack rule or addition.
• Do not flame. Disagree by all means, but personal attacks deter others from contributing. Perhaps this rule should be tightened.
• Do not “shout” (use capital letters excessively). Perhaps “*” before and after might be appropriate to emphasize.
• Do not post the same message across multiple threads. Add “…message *or theme unless directly applicable*…”
• Do not attempt to circumvent suspensions.
• Observe copyright and defamation laws. Iwould add vilification...continual posting of the same theme to multiple threads.

We all need to police these rules as they affect all of us.
Comments?

What is needed is a policy which seeks to recognise attempts to disrupt discussions and action against that disruption.

Perhaps the problem is too difficult to solve given the finances and business model that OLO is forced to operate under, however ...

As an example, read the following on the "9/11 Truth" forum I started back in September 2008:

"That the topic is shite just means that I'm not disrupting any kind of serious discussion." (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166&page=10#46389)

In spite of his own acknowledgement that he was disrupting the discussion and intended to continue doing so, this was not prevented in spite of several complaints I made myself to the moderator in which I also cited complaints from other contributors.

As I and others have pointed out, the prevalence of such anti-social conduct causes the value of a good many OLO forums to be ruined. People who what to understand the issue are forced to wade through post after post of personal attacks and responses to find useful material.

It seems as if I have learnt how to handle such attempted disruption, so the problem doesn't bother me as much as it used to, but it is a skill that doesn't come naturally for many people.

I know for a fact that as a consequence, many people simply don't bother to contribute to OLO.

From time to time I think about giving up on this site altogether because of these problems. There are, after all, plenty of alternatives where people manage to have civilised discussions over even the most emotive issues. Why can't that happen here?

This was the first discussion site I ever participated in, so I stay around more for sentimental reasons than anything else, but even that's getting a bit thin.

If people aren't observing the current rules, why would they observe new ones? If there's no penalty for breaking rules there's no point inventing more.

I'm curious to know whether others are thinking the same way, whether the problems are getting worse or is it just me, whether people use the Recommend This Comment For Deletion button, what happens if you do?

It's not only the fault of people bending the rules or failure to enforce them, it's also people taking troll bait that derails threads and reduces them to bickering matches. If nothing else, could we at least come to some agreement among ourselves about how to handle this? Or is the only solution to give up and go elsewhere?

examinator

I agree broadly with the points you've outlined. You're right I think about the articles discussions and the general discussions attracting two different types of posters.

I think a lot of professional people or those with a specialist interest cherrypick the articles in their field and stick with them, and possibly look down their nose or don't have the time or inclination for the more generalized discussions.

Then there are those like myself, who don't have any one particular area of expertise, but are broadly interested in a range of issues, and who enjoy the cut and thrust of posting in a group where you've got to know the views of other regular posters.

As for keeping on topic, I wouldn't like to see this become too hard and fast. Some of the best threads do a bit of meandering, which I think can be very worthwhile at times, even though it may have departed somewhat from the original topic. The current Sea Kittens thread is I think a good example of this.

Personal attack is another area where the right balance needs to be struck. I agree, blatant flaming and continuous carping detracts from the quality of debate. But a certain element of the personal dig can add colour and life to the thread. I think if you did away with it completely, there's a risk the discussion could end up somewhat sterile and flat.

I think the majority of posters here have got the balance right and reserve their odd sarcastic shot for those whose views are very different to their own, or as is more likely the case whose attitude they find unacceptably arrogant and dismissive of others. There are some posters here though who haven't achieved or even tried for the right balance, and as much as they infuriate me at times, I still wouldn't like to see them go or see their particular style of posting changed completely.

It's not an easy balance for the moderators to achieve.

Dear examinator,

Thank You for this thread.

It puts things in perspective and I fully agree with
the rule changes that you recommend for OLO.

I know what it feels like to be personally accused
of something that is totally abhorrent to me, (and not
in my nature).

Instead of sticking to the topic of
the thread I had posted, this person chose to go
on a hate-filled rampage, which continued for the
entire thread. No matter what I said, and explained
the purpose of the thread - several unsavoury accusations
were made, including my having a hidden agenda.
(Obviously they had one of their own). It was a devastating
experience that frankly I would prefer not to go through again.

So, yes, we do need rules enforced so that people
stick to the topic of the thread (they can meander as Bronwyn
suggested - within reason), but personal labeling and
attacks should not be allowed.

The bar needs to be raised, and things need to be kept
civilized. If posters are not capable of adhering to these
rules, they should not be posting in the first place. Because
obviously they are deeply disturbed.

Dear Chainsmoker,

Your suggestion to fix things amongst ourselves is not
a bad one. We can all join forces and simply ignore
"troll" threads by not responding to them.

The same goes for posters that regularly post their
hate-filled same subject (sometimes under different
guises - but we all know who they are) on different
threads of OLO.

As CJ has pointed out in the past "don't feed the trolls."
They thrive in responding to whatever reasoned arguments
are presented. We give them a "platform."

It's time we joined forces and stopped.
Without an 'audience' they will either pull up their
socks, or leave.

At least it wouldn't hurt to try.