I've been too busy getting on with my real life and I haven't been posting on OLO much lately. Recent visits suggest that I haven't been missing much. Particular topics, such as AGW, Israel or Australian party politics seem to quickly degenerate into name calling and ad hominem. The recent thread on Viscount Monckton's article http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=9906 is a particularly ripe example, but the pre-emptive strike seems to have become standard operating procedure by many posters.

Many posters seem more interested in riding their personal hobbyhorses than in actually engaging with the issues. Comparing the OLO thread on Peter Spencer with the one on Larvatus Prodeo was profoundly dispiriting. The General Discussion section seems more civilised (and more varied in topic) than the Articles section.

I don't mind a robust debate, but this stuff isn't my idea of a debate (robust or otherwise). Do others agree or am I being an oversensitive petal?

Have debates on OLO degenerated into name-calling and hatred?

No, they haven’t degenerated, they’ve always been that way! ( :>|

Yes at times it is pretty bad. But I wouldn’t have thought that the Peter Spencer thread is particularly off-putting.

I’m having a good discussion with my former arch ‘ad-hominem’ enemy, CJ M, by making sure that all that sort of stuff is kept right out of it.

It is easy to not get embroiled in it and to keep focused, if that is what you want to do.

I guess with other forums everywhere these days, OLO is really in a competitive market. So if there are enough people out there expressing concern about the quality of discussion here compared to elsewhere then something needs to be done.

But currently OLO appears to be doing well. So I wouldn’t worry too much about it.

I guess that some people would be put off in other forums if they are too restricted in their expression. One thing that OLO's got going for it is the freedom of expression that you can ...er...express!

Good to raise the subject. Thanks Johnj. It’ll be interesting to get peoples’ opinions.

I have to agree with Ludwig. Just same-old, same-old.

The response to the Monckton article seemed about right. I imagine it is what Monckton wanted and expected, as he seems to go out of his way to attract notoriety. I suspect he revels in it.

I was a bit surprised by GrahamY's saying the discussion was getting out of hand, and in particular de-crying the personal attacks on Monckton. Given he chose to publicly clash swords right here on OLO with both Clive Hamilton and Robyn Williams in articles that could hardly be considered anything other than public attacks on those persona's I thought his statement bordered on hypocritical.

The other thing about GrahamY's de-crying the personal attacks is Monckton had already set the tone in the article, where he engaged in personal attacks on some scientists. Consider:

"a tiny handful of malevolent, radicalised scientists highly placed in various Western meteorological organisations. ... You will be struck - as I was - by just how nasty these fraudsters are. If you want to know which scientific frauds each of these wretches committed ..."

As it happens, as few of the posters on that article were scientists. How would you feel if your friends and colleges who you thought were innocent were described in that way?

So no, there was nothing new in the tone here, and certainly nothing outstandingly nasty in the Monckton thread. Mind you, by the time I saw it GrahamY had already deleted the worst posts and he moderates with a very light hand, so perhaps there was something worthy of comment in the deleted ones. Even so, here on OLO the rule seems to be if it is legal it stays. I think that is a good thing. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

Johnj,

I have to agree that some debates do in fact degenerate into the depths of the proverbial "outhouse" but, I would draw a very strong line at saying debates in general are on the decline.

IMO Ludwig is fairly correct is his quip that they've always been that way. Some are good and some are as previously described.

I guess the issue there is that some individuals have limited tool with which to argue and consequently rapidly turn to attack, obfuscation and pack mentality etc.

To me the most salient point is the structure of the set out doesn't readily lead to following a thread and one can get tangled up in side issues, gamesmanship etc and a meaningful thread or comment can be lost.

To that end I have suggested progressive indenting as seen on a number of US sites and specifically on 'Unleashed'.
This would aid continuity to the topic but allow readers to more readily deal with the side issues/dross.

GrahamY Does well dealing with the various types who 'contribute'
I do think some times he does tend to allow second rate authors/axe grinders to thrash topics on the Articles section. If I were to offer gratuitous advice on that score , mindful of the limited pool, I would opt for more objective pieces for the article section.
I would make the general section the placement for some of the more 'focused' pieces. In this way a general topic starter could argue a case and the level of the Article section would improve to that of a reasonable on line read.

I think you are all a pack of %&$*#)@#_@'s for starting such a ludicrous thread.

In case you didn't guess, I agree totally. It definitely frustrates me that by page 2 of any thread you might as well stop participating because from then on it's just name calling.

As I've posted a few times, play the ball and not the man.

As sometimes is the case, I agree with Ludwig.

However, Ludwig and I often disagree.

Yet Ludwig has never attacked my right to hold the views which I espouse and as such, we have successfully disagreed with one another, repeatedly, over the years.

Dear JJ,

Have debates on OLO degenerated into
name-calling and hatred?

No and yes!

Perhaps hatred is too strong a word -
but I would have to agree that
name-calling has been a part and parcel
of this Public Forum - and that's to be
expected. If the right buttons are
pushed, people do react. Myself
included. People often forget to attack
the argument not the arguer.

Constructive debating is an art.
On a public Forum such as OLO -
not everyone is going to be practising
the art. Not everyone is going to be
informed on the issues or acquainted
with alternative points of view.

Not everyone reads the post to which
they're responding or is
open to learning. Not every one treats
people as individuals and certainly not
everyone is polite.

Some people use emotionally charged words and
sentences such as "Have you stopped beating
your wife?" And many make wrong assumptions about others -
for example - not everyone who's anti-gun is also
pro-choice and so on.

Also using various terms which can be interpreted
differently by different posters adds to the
reactions of people. Words such as "Krudd" "Mad Monk"
"Rodent" "Weasel" "Leftists" "Righteous Right,"
"Socialists" "Conservatives" "Baby killers,"
and so on. And racial, ethnic or religious hate
words have no place in rational debating.

Personal attacks on another poster is an
admission of intellectual bankruptcy.

However, having said all that - were we all to
strictly adhere to the rules of constructive debating -
OLO would become so dull and boring that
no one would want to be a member. Therefore, much as
name-calling can hurt at times (and be frustrating)
it is worth keeping the uniqueness that makes OLO
the popular discussion Forum that it has become.

Graham Y, as far as I can tell is quite even handed
in his dealing with OLO posters, and doesn't allow
things to get out of hand.

'Personal attacks on another poster is an
admission of intellectual bankruptcy.'

Haha. The mistake you make is that OLO is necessarily an intellectual pursuit. You confirm my long held belief that to some, OLO is some sort of competition to prove who can sound the most intelligent.

I think posters such as The Pied Piper showed much more intelligence than the pontificators (in the general use of the term, although of course including the prime pontificator) of OLO.

For those in it for fun, with nothing to prove, a personal attack is an merely an admission that the reactions of the posters is more interesting than the supposed 'intellectual' ideas and issues being discussed.

In fact I find a distinct lack of original thought in most of the topics. They're comfortably predictable like a SOAP operah. I'm not saying I could do better, but I would have no desire improve this aspect even if I had the intellect. As I said, that's not what I'm here for.

There are some posters that come out with some cool stuff, but they are generally derided for the majority of their posts being rubbish.
The forever derided Antispetic is one example. I'm sure he derides people out of a mere sense of trained antagonism and volatile nature rather than any supposed 'intellectual bankruptcy'.

Dear Houellie,

Happy New Year!

Welcome back!

Keep on stirring!

You're soooo good at it!

None of us could ever accuse you
of attacking the arguer instead of
the argument.

You're always so attention-centred on the
topic itself.

This idea that only the facts to be debated is a fallacy. This is on line OPINION. Whatever side you take on GW, if only scientifically qualified people were allowed a say the comments area might add up to 2.
We already have national broadcasters who are closed minded and bigoted in their selective dogmas. At least OLO gives everyone a go. A sincere congratulations to GrahamY and team.

"On Line Opinion"
or OLO
is Australia's e-journal of
social and political debate.

I have upset Ludwig and recently two others.
And I am aware I had no need to, but that is how I would have reacted in real life.
I constantly remind myself to do better, but fail sometimes.
Of interest before lashing out in two cases, not Ludwig's, I read recent post history of my opponents, both insulted some one in all recent posts.
Do we want to be able to debate, tell it like we see it? or just as we may do in our private life say things we do not believe just for peace sake?
OLO has always been boisterous, it always will be.

Foxy,

I would be pleased if the tone was raised a notch or three at which point I would promise to not call "The Mad Monk", "the Mad Monk".
:).

Ok, the naughty corner for me :(...again.

Dear Examinator,

As I've said in my earlier post -
if we played by the rules consistently, OLO would
become extremely dull.

To raise the bar on any discusion is up to the
individual to do.
I admire posters like yourself, Pericles, Bronwyn, Pelican,
and Belly, - (just to name a few) -
for their ability to stay focused.

Of course that's not to say that I don't enjoy
jousting with challenging posters like Col Rouge,
Antiseptic, and Houellie - (again, just to name a few),
all of whom can surprise .

I'm a great fan of OLO and in all honesty - I wouldn't
really change anything about it!

Recently I had a post deleted and was threatened with suspension. Thats ok but now I find myself self censoring and even not posting. I have written three posts in recent days that I have not posted for fear of offending and getting into trouble again.

One of the problems for me is if an article is boring or staid I am not that likely to get fired up to post a reply. It is the "flaming" type of articles (like lord moncktons) that get me fired up enough to post and then it is likely I will say things that could be construed to be offensive and hostile. Should it be allowed for authors to "flame" away but not posters? I have seen quite a few articles here that could be considered "flaming" and plenty of posts that reply to them in kind.

This forum has always been pretty robust and thats the way I like it. We all have different views and I like to hear other peoples thoughts on things. I dont mind if people disagree with me or even call me names etc. It shows they are passionate and thats a good thing even if you dont agree with me.

One thing that was mentioned is that there is a dearth of female readers/posters apparently and some feel this may be due to the "flaming" that regularly goes on here. What do the females who do post here think? Is this too much like a boys locker room for you? Does the flaming that goes on put anyone off and why?

Dear mikk,

I'm sorry to hear about your recent experiences -
and trust that you're now OK?

I think that on the whole OLO is pretty balanced
gender wise. There seems to be a pretty even
mix - of males and females.

Flaming does occur from time to time - but that's
to be expected on any discussion Forum. It's
the anonymity in internet posting that gives
some people sheer pleasure to deliberately cause
offense by personal attacks and insults even though
they know nothing about the people they're attacking,
and they wouldn't do it in a face-to-face situation.

Some people think its funny and entertaining to annoy
or anger people and provoke emotional responses.
I've learned the best way to react is to not respond.
If they don't get a reaction - they usually move on.

It can be very difficult at times - I've been brought
to tears by some of the nastiness I've encountered in
the past - and it's during those moments that I've had to
take a break - and leave for a while.

On the whole however, I try to keep discussions centred on
the subject as much as I can. And not fall into being
provoked. But as I've said before - it's not always that
simple or easy.

Anyway, I hope that you're feeling better - and know that
you are a poster who's highly respected!

Johnj,
[1] For once I agree with Col - divergent views keep us thinking and maybe changing our minds .

[2]Graham probably does a good job with the delete button.

[3] Swearing and abuse belong somewhere else .

Foxy and Mikk,

Keep on Posting .

I reckon most men don't mind combative female opinion on different subjects .

Hairy armpits or perfume - I personally like a usually different, thoughtfull female perspective to a fairly predictable and sometimes abusive male response .

mikk: <"One thing that was mentioned is that there is a dearth of female readers/posters apparently and some feel this may be due to the "flaming" that regularly goes on here. What do the females who do post here think? Is this too much like a boys locker room for you? Does the flaming that goes on put anyone off and why?">

No locker room as such doesn't worry me. In fact, I think these boards are pretty tame on the whole, though there are some really silly and nasty posts at times.

(Mikk I am sorry to hear about that; damned rugged. I would be mortified too. Hope you are ok.)

Runner is mistaken.

I, for one, am scientifically qualified. Multiply.

I gather from terminology alone that numerous others on OLO are at least similarly or more highly qualified. Some just as clearly are not.

Restricting comments to the "scientifically qualified" might well exclude runner, yet still run to double figures on many posts.

I'll take the chance.


Rusty

"Have debates on OLO degenerated into name-calling and hatred?"

I don't think so!

Though there are a few too many that treat the site like it's some kind of Articulate Olympics, they're quite boring really. A simple f.... you goes a long way to saving bandwidth and time and achieves the same result. It's the PC morons that get under my skin, but not too much, I can handle it :)

The old saying, "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen", should be practiced more often around here I reckon :)

Thanks all, this has been an interesting discussion. I would agree that OLO has always been a fairly "robust" forum and I've dished it out myself, though I've probably copped more than my fair share in return ( thanks very much, you'll get yours in the end). Most posters put up with it, perhaps the more delicate have gone elsewhere?

But looking at the Monckton thread "viciously emotive language, irrelevant hyperbole and hysteria", "hogwash", "strident hand flapping and irrational claptrap", "lying is a way of life", "propagandists", "lambasted here by the usual suspects", "immoral international wealth redistribution scam", I mean really? Granted, Monckton's piece was an inflammatory diatribe, but this isn't a debate, is it? Especially seeing the REALLY offensive posts were deleted. Guess I'm just not inventive enough to post on a thread like that.

Seems to me that its easier to sling an insult (or a cliche like "can't stand the heat") than to put together a well-reasoned argument with some hard evidence to back it up.

Oh I see Rusty 'the science is settled'.

runner: "Oh I see Rusty 'the science is settled'"

Why would you care whether the science is settled or not? The basic principles of evolution are most definitely settled and accepted by all scientists who work in the area (and most who don't), yet you regard it hog wash.

Besides, I don't see any climate scientists saying their science is settled. Come to that, Rusty didn't say it either. The one thing most climate scientists do seem to agree on is their computer models do a "reasonable" job of predicting the climate, and they are the best thing tool they have for doing that right now. That is not what I would call settled. I doubt any scientist would call it settled when compared to say Newtons laws of motion.

mikk

<< What do the females who do post here think? >>

Personally, I've never felt OLO to be a boy's locker room environment. I'd soon be out of here if I felt that.

There are some male posters who have a tendency to patronize at times but they are a definite minority.

I agree with Foxy. I think OLO has got the balance right. A little bit of argy bargy and the odd angry shot or passionate outburst all add colour to the site. It would soon become very boring if we were all totally controlled and even handed in our responses.

Having said that, I don't usually hang around on threads which have degenerated into abusive slanging matches, but I don't seem to come across many of those. Perhaps my female intuition helps me avoid them. :)

Thanks for the support everyone it means a lot.

Im still going to try to be a bit nicer in my posts but its gunna be hard with the likes of runner and col rogue.

And I think I will still give it to authors like lord monckey when their articles are filled with bile and insults. Hopefully the new standards will apply to the articles here as well as the posters.

Happy new year Foxy. Have you bought your EsE2c calandar yet? Updated the subscription to crochet weekly?

I cant believe you cried about some nobody posting crap on a web site. Hope it wasn't me. 90% of the time I'm posting on OLO I have a massive grin on my face. I cant stop laughing on the way home from work sometimes after one of my posts. I crack myself up.

Bronny,

'Having said that, I don't usually hang around on threads which have degenerated into abusive slanging matches, but I don't seem to come across many of those. '

Oh I search them out. I'm a storm chaser. The most fun can be had on gender war threads. I often look at antiseptic and pynchme and those guys posting history to see what they are posting on so I can more quickly find the fun threads.

I still believe pynchme's actually just a wind up. Nobody in real life could possibly embrace all that feminist doctrine and regurgitate it ad nausium like she does.

I also follow Col of course. His prose and wit are a level above the rest of the posters. The way he times his lines with breaks and pauses, Socialism by Stealth, and turning peoples words around against them cracks me up. He plays to the audience brilliantly.

It's fun to back the unpopular too. Never gets dull.

Just for foxy and Brony
Colour argybargy outburst and passion...and merriment.
BLOODY BURPLE YOU FASCIST BLONK, HUMANITY RULES OK ;-)heh heh

Dear Houellie,

Have I bought my EsE2c calendar yet?

I haven't bought a calendar in years.
I don't have to.
I get so many beautiful hand made ones
given to me at the end of each year -
from the kids in my Library Storytime Sessions,
and Youth Book Clubs.

Have I updated the subscription to crochet
weekly?

Sadly, I'm not as domesticated as your
partner.

However, I don't need to pay for any magazines.
The Library Staff get first dibs on all tne
new mags that come in - which is a fantastic
saving especially for mags like - National Geographic,
Time, Bulletin, and of course - my favourite -
Vanity Fair.

You're suprised that I cried?

I'm a very passionate person - who cares
deeply about things - and as I told another
poster who sarcastically
accused me of having 'a heart of gold.'
" Nah, mine actually beats".
(His does as well, - on Thursdays!).

I'm not at all suprised to hear that you find
OLO entertaining and fun. It certainly can be
all of that and much more. And there are many
"laughable" moments - it's true.

Seeing as you seem to be a bit obsessed with
large print and crocheting - I've got a
joke that you may enjoy. It's taken from
David Smiedt's book, "From Russia With Lunch." :

Morris had turned sixty, so he went to see Dr Myers
for a full medical check-up. When he had finished,
Dr Myers said, "Relax, Morris, you're in very good
shape. I can't find anything wrong with you. You'll
probably live till you're a hundred. So how old was
your father when he died?"

Morris replied, "Did I say he was dead?"

Dr Myers then asked, "How old is your father, is he
still active?"

"He's eighty-three and goes jogging and Israeli
dancing every week," Morris replied.

cont'd ...

cont'd ...

Dr Myers was very surprised. "How old was your
grandfather when he died?"

Morris again answered, "Did I say he was dead,
doctor?"

Dr Myers was astonished. "You mean to tell me that
you are sixty years old and both your father and
grand-father are alive? Is your grandfather active?"

Morris replied, "He goes swimming twice a week,
and plays a full round of golf every Sunday,
weather permitting. Not only that, he is 107 years old
and next month he is getting married again."

Dr Myers said, "If he's 107 years old, why on earth
would your grandfather want to get married?"

Morris looked Dr Myers in the eye and said,
"Did I say he wanted to?"

I think if you take this stuff too seriously there's a malfunction in your head.

In one thread I can totally "depise" someone, and in the next they are spot on and I couldn't agree more. If you carry grudges from topic to another then this stuff may not be for you.

Pseudo-politeness (IMO) is worse than calling a dog a dog. It creates an on-going venom and ruins the experience for some.

Get it out of your system, and move on to the next. Or take a teaspoon of concrete and harden up princess.

Runner,

The science may never be settled, my guess is it will never be assisted by the likes of you. It has already exceeded you by decades if not centuries on some topics. You and your boilerplate are impediments.

Rusty

ah Houlle "I also follow Col of course. His prose and wit are a level above the rest of the posters. The way he times his lines with breaks and pauses, Socialism by Stealth, and turning peoples words around against them cracks me up. He plays to the audience brilliantly."

hey, thank you again, Houlle

I made response on Squeers "radical females" thread following your praise of my efforts, so willnot repeat myself here.

However, I am unaccustomed to such positive commentary that I now ponder, did I ever meet your mother?

Are you, in fact, my long lost love child, the product of some delightful dalliance in my distant past?

Dear StG,

I get it - what you're saying is that:

if men can't get attention by their admirable
qualities the least they can do is be a nuisance.

I get it!

>>if men can't get attention by their admirable qualities the least they can do is be a nuisance. I get it!<<

Foxy, I think I'm getting what you're getting too.

On another point, coming across like a princess on a site as robust as this shows a *profound* strength of character (IMO), actually. The fact that you can have a range of views shows a versatility and ability to accommodate a variety of views.

I hope, by saying this, I'm not making anyone puke in a bag, but it's true.

Dear RobP,

Happy New Year!

You've been missed.

Your informed opinion on the issues and your
constructive arguments have always added that
extra something to the discussions on OLO.

You've always treated people as individuals and
stayed open to opposing views.

I'm glad you're back!

This site is pretty tame all up and most of the posters debate or give their opinions without personal insult. But if a poster is of that ilk then they are easy enought to ignore or draw into debate - our own responses are always a personal choice.

Climate change does seem to bring out the passion on both sides. Perhaps the level of personal attacks on this issue goes to the very heart of the confusion and conflicting information about climate change. Each side clinging to the hope that they have made the right call and just in case we will throw around a few insults to the opposition for good measure - good distraction technique.

Sometimes I do wonder why some posters come to OLO - it is an opinion site afterall and some seem to delight only in giving opinions about other posters while rarely addressing the thrux of the conversation.

I often wonder if there are some hoax IDs on OLO to get some robust debate going - particularly the anti-female posts - they are too off the chart at times in terms of bitterness. There does not seem to be too many anti-male posters by contrast so maybe the editors feel that women are more likely to rise to the bait.

Only Graham or SusanP can confirm one way or the other if those sorts of IDs are used.

pelican while I do not think GY or Susan would be behind it you are by no means the only one to often think about some posters.
Mostly we do come to debate, a few .just see posting history, come to insult.
You have the right answer for them.
Mostly it is harmless fun and mostly we do debate.
Climate change? well it remains a heated issue, on both sides extremes are just not believable.
But most agree it may well be happening, it is in my view, the cause is the conflict maker.
my views are talking the issue to death will take place for a long time.