|
Post by Ian1732 on Sept 3, 2009 17:13:36 GMT -5
I personally think that we should go through all the quotes and give them words to tag to the feelings they bring up. Like "funny/facepalm" quotes, and "rage" quotes, for example. Of course, it'd be a lot of work...
|
|
|
Post by Lady Renae on Sept 3, 2009 18:52:11 GMT -5
Building on Ian's thought, what if we went a little further and actually separated the types of quote? The main Fundies can be a place for humor, entertainment, and mind boggling not unlike quote sites like Not Always Right. Then we have what we call The Dark Side of 'Fundies', where we keep all the pure hatred, bigotry, and other such quotes.
We could also have a Troll Cage or Troll Petting Zoo or what have you where we keep track of the known poe submissions, things that were proven to be poe after they arrived, and the various troll posts. We could also use that section to keep a sort of profile on the 'heavy hitters', or the Most Valuable/Vitriolic Fundies (MVF)... or maybe a Encyclopedia Trollmatica down the road if we get enough of them.
Could be fun?
They're just partial ideas... I just thought of them and haven't had time to flesh them out yet, but I wanted to share.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Sept 3, 2009 19:00:55 GMT -5
Interesting concept. How much work is that on you & Distind? I like it because people know what they're getting.
|
|
|
Post by Lady Renae on Sept 3, 2009 19:49:26 GMT -5
Honestly I don't know how much work it is, but even if we go with it, it'll only be concept sketches and sample sheets for a while... Distind has too much on his plate at the moment, and I don't start learning code until next semester if I'm lucky, which puts me a year off at best before I'm comfortable getting any serious work done on it. I could do it faster if I bought a program, but I'd rather build it properly from the ground up than have to go back and patch sixty holes in the code that could have been easily avoided later down the road.
I'm stubborn like that. Some would even call me a snob. ^-^
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Sept 3, 2009 23:27:19 GMT -5
Well, Vene, I think we SHOULD remove RSTDT & CTSTDT. I mean, what's the point? Not as much attention is paid to them, 99.9% of the time their quotes are "Fundie" even though they aren't "religious," & personally, I don't want FSTDT sectioned off into a billion little categories. Some Fundies are; mysoginistic, racist, homophobic, conspiracy theorists, religious, non-religious, &/or more. Do we HONESTLY need a section for all of them? I know we don't have that, but people HAVE pushed for separate sections, in addition to the current 3. I just don't see the point. Why not put all of the quotes together, maybe label what they entail, maybe not? I can't be alone in this opinion...right? I've seen a lot of posts to the effect that we shouldn't get rid of them because some people like them, but I haven't seen a whole lot about keeping the sections separate. Honestly, why should we do that? They're all different flavors of Fundie. Lithp, that's what I was trying to say in my rambling.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Sept 4, 2009 0:26:51 GMT -5
Well, Vene, I think we SHOULD remove RSTDT & CTSTDT. I mean, what's the point? Not as much attention is paid to them, 99.9% of the time their quotes are "Fundie" even though they aren't "religious," & personally, I don't want FSTDT sectioned off into a billion little categories. Some Fundies are; mysoginistic, racist, homophobic, conspiracy theorists, religious, non-religious, &/or more. Do we HONESTLY need a section for all of them? I know we don't have that, but people HAVE pushed for separate sections, in addition to the current 3. I just don't see the point. Why not put all of the quotes together, maybe label what they entail, maybe not? I can't be alone in this opinion...right? I've seen a lot of posts to the effect that we shouldn't get rid of them because some people like them, but I haven't seen a whole lot about keeping the sections separate. Honestly, why should we do that? They're all different flavors of Fundie. Lithp, that's what I was trying to say in my rambling. Hooray, I'm not alone in that opinion!
|
|
|
Post by RavynousHunter on Sept 4, 2009 4:04:41 GMT -5
Honestly I don't know how much work it is, but even if we go with it, it'll only be concept sketches and sample sheets for a while... Distind has too much on his plate at the moment, and I don't start learning code until next semester if I'm lucky, which puts me a year off at best before I'm comfortable getting any serious work done on it. I could do it faster if I bought a program, but I'd rather build it properly from the ground up than have to go back and patch sixty holes in the code that could have been easily avoided later down the road. I'm stubborn like that. Some would even call me a snob. ^-^ You guys are using ASP.Net for the mainpage, right? If I remember correctly, that's scripted with C#, which I'm fairly well-versed in. If ya need my help, I'd be glad to give whatever assistance I could offer.
|
|
D Laurier
Full Member
Paying for cable (or satalite) TV, is like hiring sombody to projectile poop all over your brain
Posts: 196
|
Post by D Laurier on Sept 12, 2009 9:34:47 GMT -5
Just because racist trolls can infest a section of the site doesn't warrant a shut-down of that particular section though. If fundamentalists infested FSTDT that wouldn't mean we'd shut that down, we'd just ban the trolls. Secondly, I find RSTDT and FSTDT equally funny/infuriating at times. The only one that kinda bores me is CTSTDT. Of course this is just going by what I personally find amusing. Third, if we put CTSTDT and RSTDT into FSTDT we'd get even more people saying stupid things like, "Not fundie" or "Where's the religion/fundie in this quote? I don't see it." That's more annoying to me than racist trolls.... I cannot force myself to agree with ANYTHING this bag of shit says. However its post does, by strange coincidence only, strongly resemble common sense. I cannot imagine this being intentional.
|
|
D Laurier
Full Member
Paying for cable (or satalite) TV, is like hiring sombody to projectile poop all over your brain
Posts: 196
|
Post by D Laurier on Sept 12, 2009 9:47:08 GMT -5
May I ask a question? Why do we need to have a racism section at all? We dont. But it is a nice thing to have. The concept of "race" is utterly absurd, yet people buy into it without a thought for how idiotic it is. How does one define a "race"? I explain it like this.... An englishman and a dutchman are in a room. They are both "the white race". An irishman in the room with them is NOT "the white race".... Untill an italian walks in. Then suddenly the irishman becomes "the white race" too.... This is how "race" works. Totaly arbitrary exclusion based on superficial (or imaginary) differences. We dont NEED a racism section... But we do sometimes find it usefull to have. Lets keep it.
|
|
|
Post by yertul on Oct 6, 2009 16:42:13 GMT -5
I say we keep. I usually go to that section, and have submitted a couple quotes. Without it, I would not visit this website.
|
|
|
Post by shykid on Oct 7, 2009 10:02:17 GMT -5
I voted No. I don't want to see the racist quotes go, but I wouldn't mind having the section removed.
I'd like a tagging system similar to what someone else suggested, where there's one section with everything in it and each quote can have multiple tags, like "religious fundie", "homophobe", "conspiracy theorist", "poe", "wingnut", "just plain batshit", and so on. That way, when you get "twofers" and "trifectas", they can be tagged as everything they are, and you can also have more than three main categories for quotes without branching FSTDT out into a million little sub-sites. It's a compromise of sorts.
I know that'd be quite a bit of work to implement, though, and it'd require some fairly major reshuffling of the site's database and code. When I can find the time (being a full-time student and a part-time teacher eats up a lot of my time), I'd be glad to help out however I can. I'm somewhat familiar with ASP.NET, VB, and MS SQL--but I've never done any actual, real-world Web development work before, so it might take me a little while to get the full hang of things, but I'm a fast learner and not afraid to get my hands dirty.
|
|
|
Post by Distind on Oct 7, 2009 11:31:06 GMT -5
Honestly, the tagging part's easy, I've had it figured for a while and it wouldn't be terribly difficult to setup, my annoyance has been in how to do the interface.
I was mostly thinking something along the lines of a set of relatively small images which each correspond to a predefined word/phrase.
Then I get to the issue of what the hell should the images be....
Tagging, easy, Obviously Racist, Conspiracy and Fundie would be tags. Slap those on the existing quotes based on the archive they came from. Coming up with the rest of the tags and suitable images, there's the fun.
Edit: And on top of that, how far should the tagging go? Only when submitted, When passing through public admin? Or should it be a system open to modification to any registered user(I am NOT letting that be anon, and yes, I'd open registration back up before I launched that).
|
|
|
Post by shykid on Oct 8, 2009 20:40:21 GMT -5
Yeah, I see what you mean about drawing the lines with the tags. If you let anybody do it, you'd have tag soup. I'd let the submitter suggest tags, and then pub admin can add more or delete them--and of course a mod can override all of that.
I don't like the idea of letting just anyone--even registered commenters--edit tags. I could see there being "tagging wars" kind of like edit wars on Wikipedia. Plus, if you let the even pub admin and submitters create tags, that's a whole other mess. There's no real objective line to separate appropriate tags from inappropriate tags--yeah, tags like "racist", "religious fundie", "wingnut", "conspiracy theorist", and "persecution complex" could be game... but then you get to things such as "types like a lolcat", "needs meds", etc.
You could have a fixed list of tags, and let members on the forum vote or decide what the tags should be and when new ones should be added or old ones removed. That's also kinda weird, though.
Guess each system has its advantages and disadvantages.
|
|
|
Post by jrandomlurker on Nov 24, 2009 19:06:39 GMT -5
As other posters have noted, I do think RSTDT has a purpose in showing some of these racist and bigoted quotes. The trolls can be quite a problem and make the section more difficult to read, however, I've seen where quite a few comments have ended up in the section on their own.
On the one hand, it would be doing a disservice (in my honest opinion) to take it down. On the other hand, the troll problem can be thrown out of hand. I am not sure about the capabilities of the main page, but perhaps a fix might be to require an account to comment on RSTDT quotes?
|
|
|
Post by Distind on Nov 24, 2009 20:17:40 GMT -5
I'm still up in the air a bit on the details of how to use it, but I've nailed down the implementation details completely. The problem? I have to re-write every interaction with the data on the site.
I'm most likely going to bring back main page registration along with comments being tacked onto a user account, if I'm re-writing everything, may as well toss some more on the pile. Once I finish my dinner I'm going to start tossing together a list of tags, give me a day or two and I'll toss it up here on the boards for picking and expanding.
I've tracked down most of the major components I'd need, and I have a few other features I'm looking at bringing back, as well as possibly a few more site performance improvements. So, progress is being made, just not terribly visibly.
|
|