I too find the modern idea of "safe spaces" fascistic. Surely the whole point of having a General forum is that a great variety of non-technical things can be discussed there. I would expect the language and atmosphere in the General forum to be different from that in the technical fora.

In Linux Forums politics and religion are banned in all fora including the Coffee Lounge (General). That includes signatures too. This is not the same as a "safe space", because those allow the free expression of politically correct opinions but censor politically incorrect ones. A uniform ban on all politics and religion is different and there is a case to be made for it. Personally I rather like the freer atmosphere here and I always read the political threads and the faith megathread and often post to them.

If there is a widespread view that the General Forum is becoming too politicised, we can have a Back Yard for those sort of discussions, and people who are annoyed by flames needn't visit it. Discussions in General could be transferred to the Back Yard by Jeremy if enough people complained about a particular thread.

Religious and political signatures that appear in technical threads are a different issue. We all know who is being referred to here. I happen largely to share his religious views but I don't think technical fora are the place for evangelism. I know that would have put me right off the Christian faith (probably for good) in the days when I was still an atheist. It probably puts off quite a few newbies too.

Erm. Could not. And he won't. I consider all such solutions, “safe spaces”, Back Yards and my own idea, terribly complicated and superfluous. In the context of this current thread, they look as if we just want to put a cover over a boiling pot. Everybody does alike, these days. And the phenomenon is never age-related senility, just the revelation of the lies, that our societies based on for much too long.

Other ideas may come up, but I fear that the question of the General-forum needs specific addressing. We should consider dividing up the the thread and handle the “friendlier LQ” topic separately. As an LQ member I am a youngster, pardon my frank approach. I still feel hypocrite in retaining much of my opinions, for simple absence of confidence in my language skills.

from my point of view:
I do not care about the forum(s), is it general or specific, if I can add something I will try, otherwise I will only read...

You appear to have been able to add something, here. Can you help? Jeremy has published a very elaborate inquiry which merits some consideration. Sorry to say, but what everybody currently does, will not advance us towards a conclusion.

Oh. You mean I might have had to send Jeremy my observations privately, instead of posting them? Actually, I don't see a problem with that at all.

I'm a newbie here, like Danny, and I also turned off sigs within a few days. I have more than a belly full of religious and political points of view in the rest of my life and don't need it here, where I come for technical knowledge and insights. With sigs, I feel a rather simple solution is that they be disabled for new members rather than enabled. If the member later discovers the setting and wants to enable it, a warning could be given that the sig content of some members could be found offensive or distasteful (and does not represent LQ itself). For those who provide valuable technical content or instructions in their sigs, use a copy/paste file and insert into your posts manually. Yes, more work... sorry. But if your content is valuable and you're taking the personal time to type a response, a copy/paste is not that much more of your time. However, an evangelist or political person would be violating the rules to copy/paste religious or political content, right?

I have mixed feelings about General from your discussion (not from personal evaluation), but I also lean more toward freedom of expression and keeping it open (with moderation for civility). Just like surfing television channels, I find it very easy to keep surfing when I stumble onto things that are of no interest to me. I might enjoy some topics in General, others are easily passed over. And this is where the sigs are different in the technical fora, if if were not for the ability to turn them off. A more perfect solution might be the ability to turn off individual sigs so the valuable technical content could remain from other individuals. That may be too difficult to achieve, but it would put the responsibility on me instead of nudging others to the copy/paste solution I suggest.

I find all of you a very thoughtful, well-spoken, and incredibly knowledgeable group of people. I appreciate being here and a part of this community. Happy New Year!

Stan

To clarify, your assertion is that a two line .sig from a member in the intro forum is tantamount to having that position shoved down your throat? Would .sig being completely disabled in the intro forum impact how they're thought of in the context of this thread for anyone?

We don't allow avatars and other items that many fora do, so .sigs have been the place where members can express their opinions and add a little personality to what is otherwise a very technical place.

You should never hesitate to post honest constructive feedback here at LQ, regardless of how long you've been a member. It's something we encourage, and to be frank, something we rely on.

--jeremy

Thanks for the continued feedback, please keep it coming. Based on the discussion so far:

* We do not plan to completely close General. While we have no plans to ban specific topics at this time we will increase moderation. Flame wars, personal attacks, hostility, insults and behavior of that nature will not be tolerated. Differing opinions are one of the things that make this site great, but to benefit from differing opinions the discourse must happen respectfully and thoughtfully... without insult and personal attack. Members who are unable or unwilling to participate in General under those parameters will not be permitted to do so. If you see behavior of this nature please report it.

* We will move ahead with a volunteer group to patrol new threads and on-board members whose initial threads are not of high quality in a friendly and constructive manner. If you're interested in being part of this group please contact me.

* I'm still interested feedback on disabling .sigs in the Intro forum and disabling .sig by default for new members. One concern I have with the latter is users being able to discover the functionality, as most members do not explore the UserCP or settings.

--jeremy

5 members found this post helpful.

I think signatures should be allowed, however treat the content for signatures no different from thread posts.

I do not agree with blocking members or disabling viewing signatures. I feel that adds to divisiveness versus better judgement on everyone's part.

Turning an indifferent eye towards certain misbehaviors is not helpful to the forum.

3 members found this post helpful.

As a matter of fact I do. If I want to see peoples religious views, political views or social views there are many places I can go to find them. Life seems to be full of them and hard to escape from. When I'm reading a technical forum I find it insulting that an individual took advantage of this forum and pushed their view on me. It's tantamount to being spammed. If I don't ask for your view I more than likely don't wish to hear it.

As I said, I don't care what people believe in or do in their private lives. I just don't appreciate it when they start pushing it on me when I'm just trying to read a technical forum. Keeping these topics in General seems to work well. In my view, a user by user basis for disabling sigs would be a perfect solution. I don't want to block users comments, just a few inconsiderate users sigs.

I know I'm preaching to the choir as you said clearly you aren't going to do anything about this, but you "asked" for opinions and I'm giving you mine. I'll continue to keep all sigs turned off as that is my only option to avoid the few that feel their views should be my views.

Happy New Year to all.

1 members found this post helpful.

I don't think disabling sigs is a good idea, maybe perhaps this same group of volunteers will monitor the sigs as well as posts? Any offensive sigs to be handled the same as such posts in the techincal forum? Perhaps that is a better solution.

My thoughts:

I disable general in my profile so I don't see new posts. I do pop in occasionally, I sometimes see a post that raises the hackles and I just can't resist commenting. That is a matter for my self discipline though. I don't have a problem with that forum itself

Religion. I appreciate that part of being an active religious person is to spread your particular gospel. (To interested parties?) But there is a demarcation between technical and general and we do have the "faith and religion mega thread". Interested parties may find some food for thought there.

Irritating posts. I haven't paid for support help me/my computer doesn't work, fix it/do my homework for me. There are a number of times I have felt like posting in response to these but I like to think I have advanced the thread rather than just posted a brick wall. Getting people to intercept these is a top idea which I am considering myself.

I hope this is of some value.

Cheers and happy new year to all

Isn't this a core part of the problem: people (especially new members) do not read the Rules, the Site Howto, the FAQ, and other guidelines to help them learn to participate "the LQ way". Then after posting a question, they may be subject to rather rough treatment if they don't quickly comply. I can see where this is not very welcoming, and it can happen quickly, perhaps causing them to never return. If .sigs are disabled for new members and it takes some time before they discover the setting in UserCP (because they don't read or learn), at least they are not alienated by those few who choose to "personalize" their signature in such a fashion, and they could be warned of such content if/when they find the setting and activate it.

On the other hand...

This would seem to solve the .sig problem for me. If implemented, I would gladly turn .sigs on again to see how it works out.

I'll leave judgment to the moderators; there seem to be plenty who are active, and you already know best where the problems are and who is most responsible. I realize I have my own shortcomings from "the LQ way" and I'll try to work on those as I spend more time here. But I will certainly "turn an indifferent eye" towards a political or religious discussion, if I encounter one. Someone else will have to read those and judge their civility, not me.

Thanks to the Members Choice Awards today for the opportunity to drop the Newbie moniker from my identity.

Cheers!

1 members found this post helpful.

Thanks for the feedback. I'm still trying to understand this issue better, so additional data and perspectives really help. For clarification: those members who have indicated that they feel a .sig is insulting or is shoving something down your throat, if you walked into a LUG meeting and someone had on a political button or religious t-shirt, would you feel the same way? Why or why not?

--jeremy

I don't think so, because it's an unmoderated event. I may, on the other hand, avoid a discussion with the individual wearing the t-shirt or button if I find them offensive.

Sigs just get under my craw. It's like a Jehovah Witness knocking on my door or the Indian Call Centers constantly calling my phone with faked numbers. It's an invasion of my space. I come to a forum like this for technical issues and stay in the technical forums. Sigs have the ability to invade that space which I'm trying to avoid by not going into General, etc. I quit social media for these same reasons.

Thanks for allowing us to give our input before making any final decisions. Either way, your board, your rules and I'm fine with that.