The soapbox has a pretty bad reputation of trolling and mudslinging. We never know who's serious and who's not, or who's sarcastic or not. The soapbox should be reserved for serious discussion only (even if they are conspiracy theories)
We know two things are certain: You can't count on Moderation and There will be people who break rules on purpose.

So how do we improve the quality of the Soapbox?

We should build a soapbox constitution that we can all agree on and sign our names.

Right now, we are in the development phase. Everyone should discuss, revise, and edit the following blockquote text until everyone agrees. After everyone agrees, we will call to officially sign our names to the final draft.

Quote :

" In order to form a more perfect soapbox, run by the people and for the people, we should set up a compromised set of guidelines: 1) All text written in the soapbox should be serious. Using sarcasm is forbidden. If you want to use sarcasm, make a thread in Chit Chat. 2) No name calling or insults. If you want to call someone names or insult them on their intelligence level, start a thread in Chit Chat. The soapbox is a place were people should be free to ask questions, no matter how silly they may seem. Sometimes all it takes is a simple answer to get things to click. Calling someone an idiot or moron has never been productive. Ever. 3) No grammar Nazis. Do not comment on people's spelling errors unless it's to correct them in a polite manner. 4)Amendments to these rules will require 2/3rds vote after final draft is signed. "

Again:
This is only the development phase. Everyone should discuss, revise, add, subtract, and edit the following blockquote text until everyone agrees. We shall allot 15 days for this phase. Hopefully we can come to a peaceful compromise.

[Edited on July 27, 2012 at 2:26 PM. Reason : .]

7/27/2012 2:25:27 PM

If you're at all serious, get rid of the conspiracy theory shit

And #3.

If you want this to be serious then you should be serious enough to take your time and proof the shit you post. (This goes for everyone, not just you in particular)

[Edited on July 27, 2012 at 2:30 PM. Reason : ]

7/27/2012 2:30:20 PM

I, for one, am not perfect. If I type 'you're' instead of 'your', you know what I mean and you know I know the difference. It's infantile to call someone out on it unless they consistently make the same error repeatedly throughout the text.

Of course, you're allowed to correct someone's grammar. Just don't be a Nazi about it. Be polite about correcting someone's grammar and use it only when you ABSOLUTELY HAVE to.

Pointing out typos is distracting to a conversation.

[Edited on July 27, 2012 at 2:37 PM. Reason : .]

7/27/2012 2:36:37 PM

fair enough

7/27/2012 2:38:36 PM

If it's not supported by moderation, then how do you enforce this?

I'd be completely fine with stealing PA's Debate and Discourse rules:
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/145693/the-rules

But if it's not backed by moderation it's pointless. This is pointless.

7/27/2012 2:41:41 PM

The only weapon I can think of is excommunication.

Whenever someone violates the rules, you post this thread and stop discussion with them immediately.


I would love to be a moderator personally, but you know that would never happen. I would be fair as possible and would moderate according to the constitution rather than by personal feelings.

7/27/2012 2:45:54 PM

yeah...I just don't see theDuke866 agreeing to 1) this and 2) making you a mod.

those with power are loathe to give it up to the masses

and....I'm back.

[Edited on July 27, 2012 at 4:08 PM. Reason : like a poltergeist]

7/27/2012 4:08:25 PM

what does "are loathe" mean?

and this is silly, and wouldn't work anyways. how about everyone just try to be rationale and refrain from getting too personal and name-calling. and when people ask you simple questions about your position, how about you answer them, instead of trolling people along (i'm looking at you, geniusboy). and stop posting irrelevant memes as your repsonses.

7/27/2012 4:26:05 PM

Quote :

"instead of trolling people along (i'm looking at you, geniusboy)."

Bullet, you're a smart guy and I know that figuring people out is your forte, but this is the kind of personal insults we don't need. Sometimes you must concede to the fact that I'm not trolling. Maybe it's the best way I know how to communicate a point? Whatever the case may be, I will promise not to troll in this section. If I do troll, you may put me in my place. Although it's easy to ask somebody to "stop posting irrelevant memes", what is relevant and irrelevant is questionable. If it pertains to the heading of the thread, it is certainly allowable to an extent. If the frequency is intolerable then suggest a possible solution to make both parties happy. It is clear that "stop posting irrelevant memes" is a suggestion that benefits you 100% and me 0%... try to work on a 50%/50% solution.

7/27/2012 5:40:16 PM

5. All discussion must have an irrelevant picture associated with it.

7/27/2012 6:52:44 PM

^ I violently concur !!!

7/27/2012 7:41:17 PM

No you don't.

7/27/2012 8:23:56 PM

This is without a doubt the greatest soapbox idea of all time.

7/27/2012 9:49:08 PM

The whole sarcasm thing has gotten a real strong start.

7/28/2012 12:15:00 AM

Quote :

"This is only the development phase. Everyone should discuss, revise, add, subtract, and edit the following blockquote text until everyone agrees. We shall allot 15 days for this phase. Hopefully we can come to a peaceful compromise."

Who is 'we'?

What authority do you have to speak for 'we'?

When did 'we' decide that TSB even needs such a document?

Who determined the content of the rough draft and the timeline for adoption?

7/28/2012 4:10:49 PM

Who is 'we'?
Me and You and All Other Members of the Soapbox that participate in the next 13 days.
What authority do you have to speak for 'we'?
I'm one of we.
When did 'we' decide that TSB even needs such a document?
Since I put the idea in motion and it was seconded.
Who determined the content of the rough draft and the timeline for adoption?
I wrote the blueprint, but it can be changed within the time period I allotted if the idea is put into motion and it is seconded.
I nominated myself as the chairman, but if you put into motion a change of chairmen, you can change the chairman with a plurality vote.


Motion 1: There is a motion to use disco_stu's idea of stealing Penny Arcade's Debate and Discussion rules.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/145693/the-rules


All in favor say Motion 1: Yea or Motion 1: Nay.

I guess we will give approximately 24 hours to voice your vote.
You may change your vote, but only the last vote before closing counts.
Options available:
You can call "Point of Order" on anyone who tries to put forth a motion while a motion is in session.
You can call for "Discussion" and we can delay to vote while you discuss the motion.
once discussion is called, you may ask a clarifying question to the person that brought the motion.


One thing that worries me is that not everyone uses this forum everyday so time and availability of the participants is a real variable. If someone can come up with a way to eliminate time as a variable, I'd like to hear your ideas.

7/28/2012 4:52:38 PM

Motion 1: Yea

But as I said before, theDuke866 will never go for it.

He loses too much power.

7/28/2012 5:05:27 PM

Wait, who seconded?

7/28/2012 5:42:30 PM

Quote :

"All text written in the soapbox should be serious. Using sarcasm is forbidden. If you want to use sarcasm, make a thread in Chit Chat."

Sarcasm is fine if not overdone... making a valid point while inserting a bit of sarcasm is fine IMO. People being sardonic to other people's points is something more worthy of Chit Chat though.

Just my two cents as I only have two cents in my pocket.

7/28/2012 5:52:41 PM

^^^ I won't go for this because it's fucking stupid. If someone is a half-witted moron, I'm going to treat them as such. I think that my own posts show that you can diverge from every one of these proposed rules, while still being a valuable contributor to discussion.

The problem isn't sarcasm or grammar nazis. The problem is stupid input from uninformed people with undeveloped critical thinking skills, and you can't fix that with any rule.

7/28/2012 7:20:13 PM

^ winner

7/28/2012 7:45:16 PM

Quote :

" I won't go for this because it's fucking stupid. If someone is a half-witted moron, I'm going to treat them as such. I think that my own posts show that you can diverge from every one of these proposed rules, while still being a valuable contributor to discussion. The problem isn't sarcasm or grammar nazis. The problem is stupid input from uninformed people with undeveloped critical thinking skills, and you can't fix that with any rule. "

TheDuke866, by default, won't like this thread. But this isn't about TheDuke866. We are the people of this forum and we run this. Not TheDuke866. I, for one, am sick of the discrimination, the power trip, and the biased moderator who doesn't do his job. The moderator himself claims that our input is stupid and uninformed, when, ironically, we are here to voice our stupidities and become informed.

What we need is this forum is a little encouragement to ask questions, not insults that inhibit questions. I know many soapbox users are afraid to voice their own opinions because they'll be torn apart, called stupid and troll, and nothing is accomplished. Nobody was educated and nobody was informed.

If you enjoy things the way they are, feel free to side with theDuke866.
If you want change from an authoritarian that believes democracy is stupid, let's keep this moving.



[Edited on July 28, 2012 at 7:54 PM. Reason : .]

7/28/2012 7:52:08 PM

I would like to bring Motion 4.2 to the floor: Nominating IMStoned420 as chairman.

7/28/2012 8:00:12 PM

Point of Order: We must close Motion 1 first before we can call to Motion 4.2.




Motion 1: There is a motion to use disco_stu's idea of stealing Penny Arcade's Debate and Discussion rules.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/145693/the-rules


All in favor say Motion 1: Yea or Motion 1: Nay.



In favor: GeniuSxBoY, kdogg(c), disco_stu
Object: theDuke866, jaZon

This motion will close July 29 at 5pm.

7/28/2012 9:57:43 PM

Point of Order: As theDuke866 is a moderator of TSB, I recommend that all of his votes be stricken, either in the negative or affirmative.

7/28/2012 10:28:56 PM

"Point of order" just means it's out of proper order.

The order is to finish this motion, first. Second, as soon as the motion finishes tomorrow at 5pm, the first person to call a motion and it's seconded, then that motion carries.

I will say, however, although some of us do not like TheDuke866, he is a real person and he is entitled to his equal and fair vote in this fair and just system.

[Edited on July 29, 2012 at 12:31 AM. Reason : .]

7/29/2012 12:30:47 AM

Quote :

"Who is 'we'? Me and You and All Other Members of the Soapbox that participate in the next 13 days. What authority do you have to speak for 'we'? I'm one of we. When did 'we' decide that TSB even needs such a document? Since I put the idea in motion and it was seconded. Who determined the content of the rough draft and the timeline for adoption? I wrote the blueprint, but it can be changed within the time period I allotted if the idea is put into motion and it is seconded. I nominated myself as the chairman, but if you put into motion a change of chairmen, you can change the chairman with a plurality vote."

What happens to those who don't participate?

Who seconded?

You wrote the blueprint, you've nominated yourself as chairman, you've decided the rules for choosing a new chairman...masturbate much?

Quote :

"If you want change from an authoritarian that believes democracy is stupid, let's keep this moving."

Authoritarian? This forum exists at qntmfred's pleasure and cost.

How are you going to change that?

7/29/2012 3:29:16 AM

Quote :

"TheDuke866, he is a real person and he is entitled to his equal and fair vote in this fair and just system."

False. I have good reason to believe that theDuke866 is, in fact, the Decepticon Starscream as he has hacked TheWolfWeb to gain control of it. I also believe him to be in the 5th stage of implementing the SkyNet, although this is just a hunch.

I urge you to cede all authority and power to me as I am the only one who can stop him. I promise to release any power I acquire once my task is completed.

7/29/2012 4:04:26 AM

^ HEY NOW! Sarcasm isn't allowed anymore in the Soap Box so you can get on out! We don't like your types up on around here (in the voice of a South Park hill billy character).

7/29/2012 10:32:03 AM

I don't think anyone knows how serious I truly am.

7/29/2012 11:05:37 AM

As of right now, the new rules aren't in place. If you'd like to repeal the sarcasm rule, you can all vote on it. But if you do repeal it, we will have more examples of IMstone's post within a serious conversation. It will ultimately distract us from a productive conversation like it's doing right now.

------------

Motion 1: There is a motion to use disco_stu's idea of stealing Penny Arcade's Debate and Discussion rules.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/145693/the-rules


All in favor say Motion 1: Yea or Motion 1: Nay.



In favor: GeniuSxBoY, kdogg(c), disco_stu
Object: theDuke866, jaZon

This motion will close July 29 at 5pm.

The changes will stick even if you don't vote, so vote while you can.

[Edited on July 29, 2012 at 1:56 PM. Reason : .]

7/29/2012 1:56:05 PM

Quote :

"The changes will stick even if you don't vote, so vote while you can."

(No they won't)


Also:

Authoritarian? This forum exists at qntmfred's pleasure and cost.

How are you going to change that?

7/29/2012 3:01:38 PM

Quote :

" Authoritarian? This forum exists at qntmfred's pleasure and cost. How are you going to change that?"

The master of this website has abandoned this section of his site. While he visits and maintains (all) the other forums of this site (under one price tag), he rarely cares or touches this section. The absence of the master only means we have to govern ourselves. We have Theduke866, but we all know he is the wrong person for the job to promote and environment for healthy discussion.

A forum without rules is an anarchist's website. Everyone is doing what they want and when you stand back and look at the soapbox as an entity, it is often seen as the "shithole" of tww. The good news is that it can only get better from here if we are civil with each other and treat each other with respect.

We can govern ourselves and try to form and maintain this constitution of integrity, creating an environment where philosophy and discussion can thrive, or we can continue to pollute our conversation with sarcasm and insults. The integrity of this constitution is only as strong as its member's integrity. If there is no integrity, the constitution will fail. You can build a house of bricks or a house of cards. What shall we build this constitution with?

[Edited on July 29, 2012 at 4:45 PM. Reason : .]

7/29/2012 4:44:14 PM

Quote :

"The master of this website has abandoned this section of his site. While he visits and maintains (all) the other forums of this site (under one price tag), he rarely cares or touches this section. The absence of the master only means we have to govern ourselves."

No, he hasn't. The mere fact TSB exists is evidence he has not abandoned it. theDuke866's continued presence as the owner's representative is additional evidence this section has not been abandoned.

Quote :

"We have Theduke866, but we all know he is the wrong person for the job to promote and environment for healthy discussion."

There you go again, presuming to speak for others.

Quote :

"You can build a house of bricks or a house of cards. What shall we build this constitution with?"

Looks like you're building it out of stupid.

7/29/2012 4:59:07 PM

Quote :

" No, he hasn't. The mere fact TSB exists is evidence he has not abandoned it. theDuke866's continued presence as the owner's representative is additional evidence this section has not been abandoned."

a·ban·doned
adjective
1.
forsaken or desertedn.
2.
unrestrained or uncontrolled; uninhibited
3.
utterly lacking in moral restraints; shameless

None of these definitions say that a forum has to be deleted in order for one's master to abandon it.
Therefore the mere fact that this section exists is NOT evidence that he has not abandoned it.

There is much more evidence showing that he has abandoned this section by lack of participation.

Quote :

"There you go again, presuming to speak for others."

I am not speaking for others. The state the soapbox is in is not an environment healthy for conversation without needless condescending remarks that have no inherent value.

Quote :

"Looks like you're building it out of stupid."

This is a great example of a needless condescending remark that starves oxygen from any thriving conversation.

[Edited on July 29, 2012 at 5:10 PM. Reason : .]

7/29/2012 5:08:44 PM

Quote :

"There is much more evidence showing that he has abandoned this section by lack of participation."

Bullshit. The owner takes active action to maintain this website, through both the periodic expenditure of funds and the appointment of a representative. Is real estate abandoned because the owner hires a property manager to landlord?

Quote :

"I am not speaking for others"

Really? I'll have to keep in mind that when you say "We all know" it really means "It's my belief".

Quote :

"This is a great example of a needless condescending remark that starves oxygen from any thriving conversation."

My use of condescension is, in fact, an exercise of speech. Speech that tells you exactly what I think of your idea for TSB: A New Republic.

7/29/2012 5:20:50 PM

Your condescension is duly noted.

Now, the reason I don't want you to be condescending is because it affects the emotions of the person receiving those comments negatively. It takes a fair amount of tolerance and obedience to restrain oneself from being equally condescending in return.

Freedom of speech says you're allowed to walk up to your mother and tell her how bad of a mother was while using swear words between every word. Hopefully, you wouldn't do that because you have a level of respect for yourself AND for her.

In order to raise the respect level on these forums we should start treating each other with respect.

I understand you don't like someone to speak for you and I recognize your point. On the other hand, 'we' must start acting like a team in order to make change to this section. The only way we are going to have any mutual respect for each other is by pledging to respect each other.


[Edited on July 29, 2012 at 5:37 PM. Reason : .]

7/29/2012 5:36:51 PM

Motion 1: There is a motion to use disco_stu's idea of stealing Penny Arcade's Debate and Discussion rules.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/145693/the-rules


All in favor say Motion 1: Yea or Motion 1: Nay.



In favor: GeniuSxBoY, kdogg(c), disco_stu
Object: theDuke866, jaZon

This motion is closed and Penny Arcade's Debate and Discussion rules have replaced the original rules posted in the OP.

7/29/2012 5:45:11 PM

Will discussion about zombies and the impending zombie-pocalypse also be allowed?

Ah rats... I just broke the sarcasm rule.

7/29/2012 6:08:20 PM

^^^ As evidenced by your silence on the matter, I take it you have conceded that the owner of this site has, in fact, not abandoned TSB.

7/29/2012 6:43:52 PM

Six posts up, kind sir.

7/29/2012 8:43:30 PM

I would like to bring Motion 4.2 to the floor: Nominating IMStoned420 as chairman.

7/29/2012 10:48:37 PM

^^ In response to that post:

Quote :

"Bullshit. The owner takes active action to maintain this website, through both the periodic expenditure of funds and the appointment of a representative. Is real estate abandoned because the owner hires a property manager to landlord?"

...to which you've not responded (hence the 'by your silence' comment).

Quote :

"In favor: GeniuSxBoY, kdogg(c), disco_stu Object: theDuke866, jaZon"

I count only one yea or nay on the whole page. Where are these votes?

Also--as asked jaZon earlier--who seconded your motions?

You?

This whole thread reeks of jerk-off trolling.

7/29/2012 10:54:10 PM

Quote :

"Is real estate abandoned because the owner hires a property manager to landlord?"

What if the property manager is aggressive and rude to the customers, the owner knows about that, and does nothing? Yes, abandoned would be the right word.

[That's what he is saying... I am explaining for him]

[Actually, he already explained... you are just not reading it: "We have Theduke866, but we all know he is the wrong person for the job to promote and environment for healthy discussion." AND ALSO, the relevant meaning of "abandoned" in this context: "unrestrained or uncontrolled; uninhibited"]

7/29/2012 10:59:03 PM

Vote for me as chairman and I will make all of your wildest dreams come true.

7/30/2012 12:10:37 AM

Quote :

"There is much more evidence showing that he has abandoned this section by lack of participation."

probably because morons have made TSB unbearable to read or post in

7/30/2012 1:36:19 AM

Point of order: We are on motion #2. In order to keep things simple, we will count in ascending order.


There has been a motion made to make IMStoned420 the chairman. Do we have a second to this motion?

We will have until 7/30 5pm to second the motion. If another motion is motioned and seconded before IMstoned420's motion is seconded, that motion shall come first. If there is no second to the motion, the motion will be dropped.

7/30/2012 1:44:12 AM

Quote :

"Six posts up, kind sir."

....

Quote :

"Bullshit. The owner takes active action to maintain this website, through both the periodic expenditure of funds and the appointment of a representative. Is real estate abandoned because the owner hires a property manager to landlord?"

...to which you've not responded (hence the 'by your silence' comment).

Quote :

"In favor: GeniuSxBoY, kdogg(c), disco_stu Object: theDuke866, jaZon"

I count only one yea or nay on the whole page. Where are these votes?

Also--as asked jaZon earlier--who seconded your motions?

You?

This whole thread reeks of jerk-off trolling.

7/30/2012 2:01:39 AM

^ he responded to you before you made the post by you which you are quoting.

see my post.

7/30/2012 2:10:28 AM

Quote :

"I count only one yea or nay on the whole page. Where are these votes? Also--as asked jaZon earlier--who seconded your motions? You?"

The chair reserves the right to second a motion. Although, I did not explicitly second the motion, I implied a second by signing my name to the motion.

The delegate who set forth the motion is always a 'Yea', unless in extraordinary conditions in which he retracts his motion by explicitly voting "Nay".

By the text in TheDuke866's post against the motion could not be perceived as a 'Yea' by any means. Therefore he received a 'Nay' by the chair. Jazon agreed with TheDuke866, therefore I assigned him a 'Nay', also.

If you'd like to make a motion to add a rule about only counting votes that are explicitly stated by a word or phase. Example: "Motion X: Yea" or "Yea". Please do.

I would like to make a motion to handle multiple motions at the same time in order to save time. Do I have a second ?

7/30/2012 3:07:59 AM