Memorial Threads

[Flagg]

Since a minor spat in the Pearl Harbor Memorial thread took place today I figured I'd post my thoughts on memorial threads themselves (rather than etiquette pertaining to them). My opinion is that they are a useless spamfest of +1 me too posts with no real redeeming value except for an occasional discussion upon which time someone starts throwing a hissy fit over the fact that *gasp* not everyone is posting +1 me too comments, or even worse the insipid "...".

Any thoughts from the rest of the peanut gallery?

[Losonti Tokash]

We already have the Poppy Thread sticky in N&P for that sort of junk.

[Samuel]

I can't really say anything without it being a "me too", but given that it is people posting something they consider sacred... in a board dedicated to taking apart the sacred...

Basically like the Gary Larson cartoons, it is an accident waiting to happen.

Edit: Losonti is right. Mod?

[General Zod]

I think they're generally useless, or should at least be relegated to testing. If nothing else they should not be considered sacred in any fashion, because you'll inevitably have some chucklefucks jump you if you dare do anything but say nice things about whoever's dead for some stupid reason. Even if they've been dead for years.

[Mr. Coffee]

I think they're generally useless, or should at least be relegated to testing. If nothing else they should not be considered sacred in any fashion, because you'll inevitably have some chucklefucks jump you if you dare do anything but say nice things about whoever's dead for some stupid reason. Even if they've been dead for years.

Or you get the reverse happening because people have some sort of grudge against whoever or whatever the memorial is for.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Clearly there's a perception they should be "special" threads and exempt from usual board policy, and if so, that should be clarified and stated. If not, we need to clarify that too, because everytime one occurs, it ends up being a bunch of drama because the memorializing consensus thinks that should be binding on everyone else. And if it was specified that memorial threads were not safe, then we will not shitpits like the John Paul II thread.

[Ender]

Getting into in a memorial thready is pretty tasteless imho. You can always start another thread without gunking up the first.

Think of it like a funeral. You don't go on a tear about what a jerk the deceased was there. You do it a few days later while sorting through the will or discussing why you missed work.

[Mr. Coffee]

Oh, but that would stifle their free speech and right to debate freely, Ender. Can't have useless things like common courtesy and respect getting in the way of that, now can we.

[Rye]

Memorial threads, to be fair, are de facto sad birthday threads. I think they should go to testing and people can supply all the ellipses their hearts can submit, to be auto-deleted later, much as it is in the popular consciousness. Having a proper thread to discuss a controversial point of view about Pearl Harbour, 9/11 or the blitz or whatever separately, on the board proper, seems like a good idea. People then can go to whichever thread they want to post dots or polemics.

[Illuminatus Primus]

It has been this way forever. Now we can keep doing this every time, or we can clarify the rules so there are a.) no memorial threads, b.) nothing but memorializing in memorial threads, c.) parallel memorial only and discussion/comment threads, or d.) clarify that memorial threads are free-for-alls and no one should expect anything. We can chase our tail, or clarify the rules pragmatically and officially. Would you rather something get done and make things work better, or simply complain that people 'ought' to know better? I go for what might make a difference. Does anyone endorse the rule-change options above? Anyone want to put them to a vote?

[Mr. Coffee]

I could get behind option C.

[Flagg]

It has been this way forever. Now we can keep doing this every time, or we can clarify the rules so there are a.) no memorial threads, b.) nothing but memorializing in memorial threads, c.) parallel memorial only and discussion/comment threads, or d.) clarify that memorial threads are free-for-alls and no one should expect anything. We can chase our tail, or clarify the rules pragmatically and officially. Would you rather something get done and make things work better, or simply complain that people 'ought' to know better? I go for what might make a difference. Does anyone endorse the rule-change options above? Anyone want to put them to a vote?

I think the threads belong in testing with the rest of the spam, frankly. If someone wants to start a discussion thread about an event being memorialized in OT or N&P then fine, but the "respectful" (aka unless you're me too'ing then STFU) threads belong with the rest of the garbage. That would be my suggestion.

[General Zod]

Getting into in a memorial thready is pretty tasteless imho. You can always start another thread without gunking up the first.

Think of it like a funeral. You don't go on a tear about what a jerk the deceased was there. You do it a few days later while sorting through the will or discussing why you missed work.

By the same token, there's no reason to gloss over all the acts of douchebaggery someone might have committed just because they died and focus solely on the good (if any) things about them. If a politician had died and someone put up a memorial thread for them, but they were well known for suppressing gay and transgender rights, I can imagine a lot of people on the board being outraged over someone wanting to memorialize them. In such a case, why limit the thread?

[Flagg]

Getting into in a memorial thready is pretty tasteless imho. You can always start another thread without gunking up the first.

Think of it like a funeral. You don't go on a tear about what a jerk the deceased was there. You do it a few days later while sorting through the will or discussing why you missed work.

By the same token, there's no reason to gloss over all the acts of douchebaggery someone might have committed just because they died and focus solely on the good (if any) things about them. If a politician had died and someone put up a memorial thread for them, but they were well known for suppressing gay and transgender rights, I can imagine a lot of people on the board being outraged over someone wanting to memorialize them. In such a case, why limit the thread?

Hell, when Eval Knieval died, I flat out said good riddance in the thread due to his being a drunken wifebeating cunt and no one batted an eyebrow.

This situation has to do with the fact that we're dealing with a sacred cow event.

[Ace Pace]

Colfax brought this up in another thread:

I'm going to let this thread remain here for now due to the discussion, but if there's much more bullshit, this goes to the HoS. And next year the fucker who starts a remembrance thread for this or any other event that generally garners remembrance threads will do so in fucking Testing where these threads are supposed to be posted. Just like birthday threads and similar +1 postcount threads.

I get why that would be necessary, but it seems that you're kind of lessening the significance of the event by doing so. I wouldn't want to be the guy that posted a 9/11 thread in testing.

From my prespective, if you don't feel like you can post that in testing, don't post it.

[erik_t]

Memorial threads, to be fair, are de facto sad birthday threads. I think they should go to testing and people can supply all the ellipses their hearts can submit, to be auto-deleted later, much as it is in the popular consciousness. Having a proper thread to discuss a controversial point of view about Pearl Harbour, 9/11 or the blitz or whatever separately, on the board proper, seems like a good idea. People then can go to whichever thread they want to post dots or polemics.

I strongly agree with this sentiment.

[Stark]

I dislike them due to the whole 'omg this is holy' 'na uh it'd dumb you noob' 'wtf you stoopid it's some old guy' etc etc nonsense.

[Edi]

There was discussion sometime back in 2004 or 2005 that memorial threads should go to Testing, since otherwise they crop up every year and it's always the same thing: Posts with "..." or "RIP" or whatever and they only serve as postcount padding. Post them in Testing, where they get an acknowledgment for a while and then go away.

Otherwise it's going to turn into pissing contests about how many memorial threads should be posted and for what events. I could start posting memorials for every significant event and miliatry victory or defeat in Finland's history and why would they be any less worthy than Pearl Harbor or whatever other such ones?

[The Romulan Republic]

First, to those who seem to think we should ban memorial threads, please no. Their is nothing wrong with showing respect for or taking a moment to remember those who died in a past tragedy. Yes, they can turn into flame wars, but that's the fault of those who feel the need to piss on someone else's rememberence of the dead.

I'm not saying you shouldn't correct someone if they say something dumb in a memorial thread, but if someone says something you disagree with in a memorial thread, is it so fucking hard to wait a minute to take it to a different thread? We have existing rules against thread highjacking, and isn't that what this is here?

God damn it, don't people get tired of this same shit over and over again? It just seems like the same old dance all over again: somebody says something that annoys/offends someone else, thread gets turned into an ugly flame war, everyone calls for more rules that will likely serve to further stifle discourse on this forum, and no one seems to notice that the problem could probably be solved perfectly well by simply enforcing the existing rules. In short, the same old shit that is slowly killing SDN.

[General Zod]

First, to those who seem to think we should ban memorial threads, please no. Their is nothing wrong with showing respect for or taking a moment to remember those who died in a past tragedy. Yes, they can turn into flame wars, but that's the fault of those who feel the need to piss on someone's rememberence of the dead.

We don't need memorial threads for every freaking tragedy in the world when they're nothing more than cheap +1 posts. Personally I'd be happy if they all got auto-flushed to testing where I can safely ignore them. As far as pissing on the dead, so what? Just because someone died doesn't mean their actions in life were any less than that of a total douchebag.

[The Romulan Republic]

We don't need memorial threads for every freaking tragedy in the world when they're nothing more than cheap +1 posts. Personally I'd be happy if they all got auto-flushed to testing where I can safely ignore them. As far as pissing on the dead, so what? Just because someone died doesn't mean their actions in life were any less than that of a total douchebag.

Yes, but as has already been said, you don't go to a funeral and pull this shit. I admit its not an exact analogy by any stretch, but I think the basic point is a reasonable one.

And the "+1 posts" crap is pissing me off. I don't think its fair to suggest that those who post in memorial threads are doing so exclusively to pad their post count. As it occured to you that maybe some people actually might want to show give their respects for reasons other than "cheap +1 posts"? But then, I'm just not that cynical I guess.

I can see the argument for restricting them to testing simply for practical purposes of not filling up the board. But isn't that already the rule? As for the flame wars that appear in them, doesn't that fall under existing rules about thread highjacking? Isn't this just another case of people suggesting new rules when the existing ones, evenly and swiftly enforced by the moderators, would solve the bulk of the problmes?

[Tiriol]

I would support moving all memorial threads into Testing; it is not a big deal for a moderator to move such thread into a more fitting place should actual discussion arise instead of several, basically empty posts. While I freely admit that I have posted at least one memorial thread (over a year ago, the Finnish Independence Day celebration thread) in Off-Topic, it would actually be more prudent to make sure all memorial threads would start out in Testing; it would remove some of the confusion about the implementation of the rules and it would also ensure that no one could artificially inflate their post count (although that is hardly a grave concern as long as the post count doesn't matter but rather the quality of the posting).

[Stark]

God damn it, don't people get tired of this same shit over and over again? It just seems like the same old dance all over again: somebody says something that annoys/offends someone else, thread gets turned into an ugly flame war, everyone calls for more rules that will likely serve to further stifle discourse on this forum, and no one seems to notice that the problem could probably be solved perfectly well by simply enforcing the existing rules. In short, the same old shit that is slowly killing SDN.

How does it 'stifle discourse' to prevent people saying zero content shit like '50 years ago a hamster died' and 'RIP' and '...' and 'omg if the hamster had a M-673 flame toaster...'? It doesn't. If someone started a memorial themed-discussion, nobody would care, but 'IN CASE YOU FORGOT SOMETHING THAT YOU PROBABLY DON'T CARE ABOUT HAPPENED PLEASE +1 THIS THREAD' is lame and stupid.

Frankly, fuck off with this idea that 'respects to the dead' deserves special protection.

[General Zod]

Yes, but as has already been said, you don't go to a funeral and pull this shit. I admit its not an exact analogy by any stretch, but I think the basic point is a reasonable one.

You don't do a lot of things in real life that you do on the board. So what?

And the "+1 posts" crap is pissing me off. I don't think its fair to suggest that those who post in memorial threads are doing so exclusively to pad their post count. As it occured to you that maybe some people actually might want to show give their respects for reasons other than "cheap +1 posts"? But then, I'm just not that cynical I guess.

If they're not adding anything worth discussing, it's a +1. Why should that change just because it's a memorial? Especially for an event that happened years ago, or before they were even born?

I can see the argument for restricting them to testing simply for practical purposes of not filling up the board. But isn't that already the rule? As for the flame wars that appear in them, doesn't that fall under existing rules about thread highjacking? Isn't this just another case of people suggesting new rules when the existing ones, evenly and swiftly enforced by the moderators, would solve the bulk of the problmes?

It's hardly evenly or swiftly enforced. Especially when someone posts a memorial thread that's guaranteed to be controversial. In that case why the hell should people be expected to stay polite?

[Turin]

I'm not saying you shouldn't correct someone if they say something dumb in a memorial thread, but if someone says something you disagree with in a memorial thread, is it so fucking hard to wait a minute to take it to a different thread? We have existing rules against thread highjacking, and isn't that what this is here?

So in other words, you want a memorial thread to be just another location for +1 spam, and have a whole other thread for actual discussion (useful or not TBD). So why shouldn't the memorial thread just be flushed to Testing then? And if it's in Testing and someone decides to be a dick, it'll get locked and forgotten by the time it gets to 3 pages anyway, and that will limit how many pairs of panties will get knotted over it.

In short, the same old shit that is slowly killing SDN.

Melodramatic much?