Can we make MN more hostile?

[Josh]

I was thinking a start would be a feature to “downvote” posts plus an automatic RSS feed from WorldNetDaily and Daily Kos populating the Current Events subforum.

[Judas Maccabeus]

I was thinking a start would be a feature to “downvote” posts plus an automatic RSS feed from WorldNetDaily and Daily Kos populating the Current Events subforum.

Maybe the "Workers World Weekly" to balance things out?

J.M.

[ohio jones]

I was thinking a start would be a feature to “downvote” posts plus an automatic RSS feed from WorldNetDaily and Daily Kos populating the Current Events subforum.

Maybe the "Workers World Weekly" to balance things out?

While it's doubtful a weekly would balance out two dailies, we could let the automatic feeds fight it out with each other while the rest of us engage in more profitable conversation, still maintaining the overall quota of bickering on the site.

[Judas Maccabeus]

I was thinking a start would be a feature to “downvote” posts plus an automatic RSS feed from WorldNetDaily and Daily Kos populating the Current Events subforum.

Maybe the "Workers World Weekly" to balance things out?

While it's doubtful a weekly would balance out two dailies, we could let the automatic feeds fight it out with each other while the rest of us engage in more profitable conversation, still maintaining the overall quota of bickering on the site.

Can we develop an algorithm to do that for us?

J.M.

[Pelerin]

1. Automated Personalization. Every post automatically has “[Reader’s Name]:” inserted at the top. Everything really is directed at you.

2. In-Between-the-Lines-Reader. All posts are scanned for the words, “So what you’re really saying is…”, the contents of which are then culled and algorithmicly inserted into posts to clarify what the author really thinks.

Mostly because you’re too dumb to catch the nuances, so you need it spelled out for you.

3. Mormons. Combining the discussion-generating power of the One True Church with an assortment of unusual rituals, Mormons will bring all the controversies into the same topic.

It’s OK, I’ll just be rebaptisés on your behalf after you’re dead.

4. Fundamentalist Mormons. Contributions to discussions on plainness are a bonus, but what Fundamentalist Mormons really bring to the table is a unique perspective on divorce and remarriage.

[Bootstrap]

In the spirit of the "Can we make MN more hostile" thread:

Look, it's not me, it's you. The reason I won't take the time to understand what you are saying and weigh the facts you present is that you are completely unable to see how biased you are. I don't want to talk about your subject, I want to talk about something else that will probably annoy you in your thread instead. Let's not talk about facts, let's talk about people, how people like me are good and people like you are bad.

Here, let me make up some slogans that sound sort of like something you said and pretend you said them, then hammer on them to make you look like a fool. Let's not be on the same side, trying to figure out what is true, this is all about me proving that my side is right and your side is wrong.

(Please keep in mind that this is irony. I don't believe this or want to talk like this. This is simply what I think "more hostile" looks like.)

[MaxPC]

1. Automated Personalization. Every post automatically has “[Reader’s Name]:” inserted at the top. Everything really is directed at you.

2. In-Between-the-Lines-Reader. All posts are scanned for the words, “So what you’re really saying is…”, the contents of which are then culled and algorithmicly inserted into posts to clarify what the author really thinks.

Mostly because you’re too dumb to catch the nuances, so you need it spelled out for you.

3. Mormons. Combining the discussion-generating power of the One True Church with an assortment of unusual rituals, Mormons will bring all the controversies into the same topic.

It’s OK, I’ll just be rebaptisés on your behalf after you’re dead.

4. Fundamentalist Mormons. Contributions to discussions on plainness are a bonus, but what Fundamentalist Mormons really bring to the table is a unique perspective on divorce and remarriage.

[Judas Maccabeus]

1. Automated Personalization. Every post automatically has “[Reader’s Name]:” inserted at the top. Everything really is directed at you.

2. In-Between-the-Lines-Reader. All posts are scanned for the words, “So what you’re really saying is…”, the contents of which are then culled and algorithmicly inserted into posts to clarify what the author really thinks.

Mostly because you’re too dumb to catch the nuances, so you need it spelled out for you.

3. Mormons. Combining the discussion-generating power of the One True Church with an assortment of unusual rituals, Mormons will bring all the controversies into the same topic.

It’s OK, I’ll just be rebaptisés on your behalf after you’re dead.

4. Fundamentalist Mormons. Contributions to discussions on plainness are a bonus, but what Fundamentalist Mormons really bring to the table is a unique perspective on divorce and remarriage.

They also have a unique view of “Full Quiver” that would get some interesting response. We could maybe add the daily news from their settlements near St. George, Utah, for an even more interesting result. Adding the “Community of Christ” aka the RLDS, could provide an interesting contrast.

When can we start testing? Anyone who wants conterversey could tune into this channel.

J.M.