Terms and Conditions-15g, a Question

Read the T&C for the first time today (yea, I know. I'm lazy).

15g.) Political Baiting: You will not engage in politically-charged rhetoric, politically-inspired name-calling, and related right-versus-left political bickering while Posting in any topical forum or discussion thread on the Websites. You will not alter political candidate names or party affiliations in order to insult or deride the opposition.

Can anyone explain to me the origins and history of this rule? Maybe I'm misinterpreting the definition of 'politically charged rhetoric and right versus left bickering,' but it seems like this rule is constantly violated.

This is an honest question. Not an insult to users or moderators. I, myself, spend upwards of 1/3 of my time on the political threads and for the most part, egregious violations are taken care of pretty swiftly, but still, what gives?

Either this rule has never been applied by its straight meaning, or its eroded with time. Is there anyone who's been around a while who cares to comment?

reply to post by snusfanatic


I think it's quite self explanatory.

Here at ats we have become used to a certain level of decorum when debating subjects. As I’m sure you are aware people fight hard about their political views. This is allowed on ATS so long as it doesn't spiral into distasteful bickering.

If your politically opposed to a members views debating the detail is healthy so long as there is a mutual respect between members.

Unfortunately, in the past members have looked to make a fight and point score instead of actually debating ideas.

Hence the rule 15g.

Hope this helps,

Korg.

Very good question.

I spend probably 60% of my ATS time in the political forums and I see what I determine to be some level of political baiting nearly every day. I have seen fairly light baiting get called out by mods and I've also seen stuff that gets my hackles up ignored, even after I report it. So there doesn't seem to be a real clear feel or consensus among moderators of what is acceptable or where the rhetoric crosses the line.

My thought on this is, when you have 25 or so different moderators, with different minds, judgments, opinions and interpretations of the T&C, you're going to have different levels of application of same. That's totally understandable. My personal opinion is that #15g is there so that when someone violates the rule and gets dinged for it, there is something for staff to point to, to say, 'this is the rule you violated'.

In my experience, the staff likes to moderate with the lightest hand possible, allowing members to self-moderate as much as possible. They WANT to treat us like the adults that we are. So, they sometimes err on the side of lenience. But every once in a while, when a thread gets out of hand and starts spiraling downward because of political rhetoric of a right vs left nature, then they have #15g to refer to, to stop the thread from deteriorating altogether.

There are also cycles of political passion on ATS, depending on what is going on in the world. So, during the more fevered times, (just before an election, for example) when the intensity of the rhetoric spikes sky high, #15g is there to nip it in the bud before it gets completely out of hand.

This is just the opinion of one member who doesn't really know what she's talking about. But it's what I tell myself when I see political baiting that goes unmoderated. And I would MUCH rather staff have a light hand in moderation than come down on every tiny infraction, causing us to be overly cautious and hesitant when we post about passionate subjects, like politics.