Forum Discussion v5 - Imagine if you used Ignore List. - General

FiveThirtyEight has a solid reputation for data-driven opinions, I would think they should be generally allowed

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52870926]I mean that's the problem, a lot of opinion pieces are well sourced. But what'd count as well-sourced enough?[/QUOTE] Maybe being a piece of research in and of itself. If it has tons of self-found statistics it basically counts as a primary source. If the Enquirer was the first to discover that Trump *is* in fact an alien, and the rest of the reputable news outlets show live coverage of a UFO over the White House, then it should be acceptable. Super bizarre example, but you get the idea. Primary sources should be fine, such as the occasional developing stories of stuff that happens on Twitter that doesn't yet have an article that get posted every now and then. [editline]9th November 2017[/editline] Also, 538 isn't even far leaning and is quite reputable; even if it has opinion pieces they're hardly separated from reality.

What exactly is a "shitpost"defined as? Or is it one those situational context things?

Imo it doesn't matter much how reputable a source of opinion articles is, that's just not what SH/Polidicks is really supposed to be for, it's a news forum first and foremost. If we were to allow opinion articles, they should probably be posted in some sorta dedicated debate forum.

in the case of that 538 article i feel like "this is what the polls and political fundamentals seem to indicate about the midterms in 2018" qualifies as news imo though

[QUOTE=Mezzokoko;52871886]Imo it doesn't matter much how reputable a source of opinion articles is, that's just not what SH/Polidicks is really supposed to be for, it's a news forum first and foremost. If we were to allow opinion articles, they should probably be posted in some sorta dedicated debate forum.[/QUOTE] I posted about it in the past but I tend to agree with this, that allowing some but not all opinion pieces is a slippery slope where we have to decide who has valid opinions and who doesn't It's easier to keep the boards to facts and news, and keep opinions pieces in the replies (or possibly as a compromise, as supplementary information in the OP)

I have a question regarding newnewpunch; is it possible to see which users are online? (As well as mods?)

[QUOTE=Viper123_SWE;52872129]I have a question regarding newnewpunch; is it possible to see which users are online? (As well as mods?)[/QUOTE] Other than the underline under their names, not really currently.

An opinion article that says "Thing/Person X is bad and this is why" should not be allowed. An opinion article that says "Based on our statistical models, I believe Y election/future event will pan out in this way" I think should be allowed, as long as they aren't overpopulating SH or Polidicks. FiveThirtyEight has some of both, but they're better known for the latter.

[QUOTE=Pascall;52871008]At the moment, we don't allow opinion pieces since they can kind of be all over the place. But that 538 article doesn't really read like an opinion piece to me, so I'd say it's okay? Another mod may disagree though.[/QUOTE] Then why do we allow opinion videos in the video section?

ok bois i decided to edit wikipunch a little, so suggest me what to change/add/remove

[QUOTE=EddieLTU;52872225]ok bois i decided to edit wikipunch a little, so suggest me what to change/add/remove[/QUOTE]Mention how Orkel likes to talk out of his ass on VR chat

[QUOTE=EddieLTU;52872225]ok bois i decided to edit wikipunch a little, so suggest me what to change/add/remove[/QUOTE] Well obviously the Great Garry Avatar Change of 2017 is needed ASAP.

Isn't there a wikipunch thread in GD? EDIT: Ignore this. Didn't see you post in Wikipunch thread.

I never realized we had so many Aussies here

[QUOTE=Ignhelper;52872316]I never realized we had so many Aussies here[/QUOTE] Where do you think all the non-banned shitposts come from?

[QUOTE=EddieLTU;52872225]ok bois i decided to edit wikipunch a little, so suggest me what to change/add/remove[/QUOTE]Moderator list could probably do with some updating, perhaps an article on Labpunch/Newpunch, the Great Flagdog Holocaust of 2017 etc.

[QUOTE=Mifil;52872332]Where do you think all the non-banned shitposts come from?[/QUOTE] Nice bait but we will not bite.

I hope we can get 😬 as a rating on the new forum

[QUOTE=Erfly;52872529]I hope we can get 😬 as a rating on the new forum[/QUOTE] The new forum will change it but i honestly like the current rating system because some of the ratings have evolved to have multiple meaning, would be a big fat mess if we had more ratings with each having their own specific meaning.

[QUOTE=Robman8908;52872270]Well obviously the Great Garry Avatar Change of 2017 is needed ASAP.[/QUOTE] already mentioned in reagy's entry

[QUOTE=EddieLTU;52872706]already mentioned in reagy's entry[/QUOTE] Introduction thread [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1584597[/url]

vnl was still a mod???

[QUOTE=freaka;52872918]Introduction thread [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1584597[/url][/QUOTE] all done

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/Vz5pQOF.png[/IMG] why do mods sometimes include the name of the main acc and other times don't? is there a protocol?

[QUOTE=EddieLTU;52873551]all done[/QUOTE] Was it ever confirmed he was a troll and not actually 40-something?

[QUOTE=prinner;52874347][IMG]https://i.imgur.com/Vz5pQOF.png[/IMG] why do mods sometimes include the name of the main acc and other times don't? is there a protocol?[/QUOTE] It's dependent on the user/alt. Some people have gone so far as to make literal dozens of alts, to which at that point there's no longer a real reason to reference whichever may have been the original. Others do not get mentioned for various reasons that typically involve something serious or spam.

[QUOTE=Ott;52874455]Was it ever confirmed he was a troll and not actually 40-something?[/QUOTE] didnt he post a picture and later ask how to post pictures?

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;52874456]It's dependent on the user/alt. Some people have gone so far as to make literal dozens of alts, to which at that point there's no longer a real reason to reference whichever may have been the original. Others do not get mentioned for various reasons that typically involve something serious or spam.[/QUOTE] mystlight comes to mind with his 500+ alts

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52874461]didnt he post a picture and later ask how to post pictures?[/QUOTE] He copy pasted a link ending in jpg which auto tagged, then later on asked how he could get pictures from his computer to the forum. I think it was a different question.