What Would Happen if We Didn't Engage with "Controversial" Forum Posts?

barge-in hunter on 06/09/2022 - 11:54
Last edited 06/09/2022 - 21:56

Over the past 2-ish years, we've all noticed a lot more OzBargain forum posts that usually push theories or points of view that are questionable/controversial - often based on research from less reputable sources (but not always).

These forum posts can be viewed in two ways:

1) they appear to be deliberately inflamatory (based on previous reactions from the OzBargain community), and contain what many people consider as misinformation

2) on the flip side "deliberately inflamatory" can also be considered as encouraging people to challenge their thinking, with more positive intentions from the posters

I began wondering what would happen if the broader community didn't engage with these forum posts; would the true intentions behind them come to light?

If they're designed to be inflamatory but nobody responded, would the posters just get bored and leave? If the intention is to create an environment where people challenge their internal norms and question their beliefs, would the lack of engagement actually make a difference to the posters' (somewhat more) noble intentions?

So as the title says…

What if We Didn't Engage with "Controversial" Forum Posts?

UPDATE:. https://youtu.be/FONN-0uoTHI

Poll Options expired

  • 26
    I think these posts would stop - because the posters will lose interest
  • 7
    I think these posts would continue - because the posters just want you to challenge your thinking
  • 156
    I think these posts will never stop - because we can't help but react to controversial topics
  • 18
    I think these posts will never stop - because under it all, we enjoy them too much
  • 3
    I think these posts would stop - for a different reason
  • 10
    I think these posts would continue - for a different reason
Site Discussion

Comments

                    • franco cozzo on 06/09/2022 - 19:24

                      @SBOB: those subs are constantly being reported by users and admin takes far too long to act on them
                      there are subs dedicated just to highlighting the problem because admin/mods often wont act even after repeated reports
                      & reddit even banned the term 'groomer' recently because of the 'negative connotations' against the lgbt community
                      reddit censors whenever it sees fit and pomotes a specific type of group-think…this is fact.

                  • Ghost47 on 06/09/2022 - 19:25
                    +2

                    @franco cozzo: Guy ran child porn sub, guy got charged, subreddit got banned. What's your point? That everyone who uses reddit and loves it is automatically a paedophile? That is seriously some radicalised thinking.

                    On reddit, you are able to create a subreddit about a topic of your choosing. Sadly, a small minority of people on reddit look for that kind of thing, just like in real life. Just because reddit hosted that subreddit and didn't ban it immediately doesn't at all mean it's a site where everyone is "predditor" like you're disturbingly suggesting.

                    • franco cozzo on 06/09/2022 - 19:28

                      @Ghost47: …theres a lot of sickness on that site. its not really a big secret

                    • SlavOz on 08/09/2022 - 09:14

                      @Ghost47: The point is, Reddit doesn't do nearly enough to combat these types of harmful, illegal, or radical activities on their site. Admittedly it's very difficult to keep shit like that off but if they spent half as much as effort moderating it as they do moderating the use of pronouns or any speak of election integrity, they could keep it off their sites permanently.

                      The simple fact is, it's not a priority for them. They're more interested in ensuring their website pushes a political ideology than they are ensuring that it doesn't push a dangerous one. And anyone who uses it supports that kind of approach.

                      You are giving money and empowering a platform that is and will be used by terrorists, groomers, and dictators. Reddit doesn't mind the occasional one getting through, but they certainly do mind (and prevent) even a single right wing conservative talking point that debunks their narrative getting through.

                      • Ghost47 on 08/09/2022 - 12:10
                        -1

                        @SlavOz: Life ain't fair is it SlavOz?

                      • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 12:37

                        @SlavOz: you're so right slav, i heard reddit even refuses to ban the taliban and hamas!

                      • smartazz104 on 08/09/2022 - 14:34

                        @SlavOz: Oh no those poor oppressed right-wingers.

                      • lordriffington on 09/09/2022 - 10:45

                        @SlavOz: Show me one single example where reddit admins (the people who actually work for the company, not individual subreddit mods) ever took any moderation action regarding the use of pronouns.

    • p1 ama on 06/09/2022 - 23:07
      -2

      Ozbargain would just turn into Reddit or Twitter where you need to program your brain to think within alternative truths every time you post, otherwise you get banned for questioning the corporate autocracy (most of the time by accident because you didn't make it clear enough that you support XYZ)

      Yes, but I think what is worth addressing here is why we need to get into controversy on a bargain forum?

      As much as I enjoy having "political" discussions where necessary, I do think that the way politics and political affiliation have permeated into every facet of our lives simply toxic.

      On the topic of Reddit / Twitter banning / deplatforming people, let's not kid ourselves that people who have been banned have often wanted to be banned as a way of victimising themselves or showcasing a particular political affiliation. Nobody has gotten banned from Reddit or Twitter advocating for lower taxes. Let's not pretend that people who get banned are going out of their way to get banned, not to engage in any discourse about serious policy.

      • SlavOz on 06/09/2022 - 23:29
        +4

        On the topic of Reddit / Twitter banning / deplatforming people, let's not kid ourselves that people who have been banned have often wanted to be banned

        I see what you're trying to imply here and it's not going to work because of one simple fact - big tech platforms banned Donald Trump and other popular conservatives, yet they have still not banned The Taliban, HAMAS, and other radical dictator figures who maintain a presence on the site.

        Sorry, there can be no discussion about right-wingers deserving to be banned because they refused to use your pronouns, while regimes that literally skin gay people alive are allowed to use the site freely.

        • [Deactivated] on 06/09/2022 - 23:49

          hey mr oz can you please share the twitter pages for the taliban and hamas? it's weird because i just searched for them and can't seem to find them despite your assertion that i would.

          do you make up the things you say on your own, are you just regurgitating everything you hear from right wing grifters, or is it a 50/50 split?

          • SlavOz on 07/09/2022 - 00:06
            +4

            @[Deactivated]: I will do you one better. Here is a study examining the use of social media by Isis and other extremist groups.

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711025/

            As a bonus, here is a depiction of the President of the United States being beheaded, which Twitter did not ban the popular verified user for.

            https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/524681-kat…

            "fighting hate speech" right?

            • [Deactivated] on 07/09/2022 - 00:37
              +1

              @SlavOz: i asked you for the twitter pages of the taliban and hamas because you said

              yet they have still not banned The Taliban, HAMAS

              and you have now sent me links that aren't to the not banned twitter pages of taliban and hamas.

              where are the links Mr. Oz?

              don't try changing the subject. you made a statement, now back it up. prove you can do it once, at least Mr. Oz

              • SBOB on 07/09/2022 - 06:22
                +6

                @[Deactivated]:

                you made a statement, now back it up.

                SlavOz standard post format is to make definitive statements, claim them as fact, yet they or google is unable to support those "facts" . Wouldn't want reality to get in the way of their firmly held world view.

                • [Deactivated] on 07/09/2022 - 10:34
                  +3

                  @SBOB: it's pretty crazy how every assertion Mr. Oz makes crumbles by just asking him for evidence or sources to back it up.

              • Ughhh on 07/09/2022 - 11:43

                @[Deactivated]: I think you scared @SlavOz away.

              • SlavOz on 07/09/2022 - 13:43

                @[Deactivated]: Did you read the study and associated implications?

                These groups operate under countless different names and are hard to track down, although HAMAS and Taliban have been well known players on Twitter. Why are you defending this? I don't use the platform and it's not my job to track them down, but I've done the cursory research for you.

                Any concerns about Twitter allowing a Trump beheading depiction, or still not banning the countless Arab sheiks who torture gays in their regions?

                • [Deactivated] on 07/09/2022 - 14:21

                  @SlavOz: Yep, I read it - did you? because it doesn't prove your claim at all. and before I begin I just want to know - do you think HAMAS, the taliban and ISIS are all the same organisation? Because you talk about HAMAS and the taliban, but the study you linked is about ISIS. I guess to you they're all just Muslims, right?

                  Anyway, here is an excerpt from the study:

                  Twitter now systematically identifies and suspends user accounts associated with the group. In fact, Twitter has initiated a systematic campaign to neutralize ISIS’ use of the site and announced in March of 2016 the suspension of over 125,000 ISIS supporting accounts in a six month period.

                  So the study itself says that twitter bans terrorist activity from its platform, something which you said they do not do when you said "they have still not banned The Taliban, HAMAS". This study was only made to find an improved way to detect terrorist propaganda and accounts on Twitter, and doesn't prove anything you're saying.

                  Now onto the cartoon of Trump beheaded. The person (no idea who she even is by the way) who shared that photo wasn't banned off twitter, most likely for the same reason that House Representative Paul Gosar wasn't banned of twitter after sharing an edit of attack on titan of him and Marjory Titan Green killing a titan version of AOC. Maybe because they're stupid cartoons that obviously aren't representative of real life. I don't care about the Trump beheading tweet or the Gosar titan tweet and see them as stupid but ultimately harmless.

                  It's funny that you're advocating for people to be banned off twitter for essentially harmless, but in bad taste, tweets.

                  and now onto your new false claim

                  still not banning the countless Arab sheiks who torture gays in their regions

                  give us some evidence MR.OZ

                  also, still waiting for your proof that the covid vaccine has killed thousands to millions of people

            • HelpMeiCantSee on 07/09/2022 - 09:26

              @SlavOz: Twitter is a cesspit.

        • p1 ama on 07/09/2022 - 00:53
          -1

          Sorry, there can be no discussion about right-wingers deserving to be banned because they refused to use your pronouns, while regimes that literally skin gay people alive are allowed to use the site freely.

          You just gotta make it personal don't ya? What do you mean by "your" pronouns? When have I ever said anything about pronouns?

          You are also implying that somehow I support the banning of Trump and others, which I never said. I actually agree completely that he should not have been banned. I don't think anyone should be banned, however, I think it is also true that there are those who purposefully try to get themselves banned as a mark of social honour. It is what it is.

          Sad that you care more about cheap politicking. Maybe ease off wearing your preconceived beliefs on your sleeve so much and purposefully being disagreeable.

      • franco cozzo on 07/09/2022 - 04:06
        +2

        On the topic of Reddit / Twitter banning / deplatforming people, let's not kid ourselves that people who have been banned have often wanted to be banned as a way of victimising themselves or showcasing a particular political affiliation.

        have you forgotten… when twitter was banning users for stating that the vaccinated could still spread covid???

        One of the most notable changes to this “COVID-19 misleading information policy” the reclaimthenet site noticed is related to claims about whether vaccinated people can spread the coronavirus. The policy now states that Twitter will label tweets with “corrective information” and give users a strike if they:
        - Post what Twitter describes as “false or misleading claims that people who have received the vaccine can spread or shed the virus (or symptoms, or immunity) to unvaccinated people.”

        • [Deactivated] on 07/09/2022 - 14:32
          +1

          hey frank, it's interesting that the article doesn't give even one example of someone being banned for saying that the vaccinated still spread covid. so in essence you've shared an article made to rile up reactionary right-wingers. good job

  • Geekomatic on 06/09/2022 - 23:04
    +1

    You're talking about letting trolls sh*t-stir vs. free speech. It's lousy, but we have to go for the latter. As for whether anyone should "feed the trolls", I try not to. I decided to get a better herb & veg garden going IRL. Rather than waste time with people who aren't simply expressing, "matter of opinion", but are rather trying to mayhem because they can- I disengaged. With those, I agree— don't feed the trolls.

  • Geekomatic on 07/09/2022 - 01:40
    +3

    I'll just share this because I think that a lot of people aren't well-versed in how it happened that what we once had as "journalists/journalism" and it's fair reporting, was summarily shot in the head by Ronald Reagan, due to Rupert Murdoch. Additionally, note that Roy Cohn, in the article, was also the same Roy Cohn who worked with Joseph McCarthy on his RED "witch-hunts" in the 50's. Cohn worked to have both parents (Ethel wasn't originally going to be executed) executed. Cohn went on to build the Trumpenstein monster.
    Murdoch used that time to build his BS media empire. PS: Murdoch decided to become a US citizen when dual nationality wasn't allowed, so he renounced his AU citizenship. Once it was allowed, he NEVER attempted to regain his AU citizenship. Murdoch, Reagan, and Cohn are simply a bunch of traitorous scumbags. tRump, is their lovechild.

    https://johnmenadue.com/how-reagan-and-us-agencies-made-murd…

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/donald-trump-roy-coh…

  • iCandy on 07/09/2022 - 08:18
    +3

    I enjoy a good debate. The people on here who say they remain civil are usually the ones name calling and insulting others. I usually try to start off civil, but others immediately launch into childish behaviour, so then I play by their rules. And they don’t like that.

  • HelpMeiCantSee on 07/09/2022 - 09:25

    Can’t leave slavoz or Pam to do all of the work.

    Personally, I love seeing the pigheadedness and inability to empathise or contemplate another point of view the “controversial” posts bring out. Quite often it’s not the op that is the true clown.

    Plus, got to vent some emotion somewhere. AND vegans suck. Xoxo

  • curtturtle on 07/09/2022 - 14:09
    +3

    If we didn't have people, who thought their weird perspective on life is the norm, posting here we would miss legendary threads like old mate who was cooking on the BBQ in the park out the back of his house.

  • shadowfangz on 07/09/2022 - 14:20

    Why Would You Say Something So Controversial Yet So Brave?

  • outlander on 07/09/2022 - 14:36

    I look at them like garbage traps. People who are avoiding doing something more productive post there, the thread fills up, and then in a week it's consigned to oblivion as people get bored and move on. Ultimately it effects nothing

    The only real pain I have with them is that they fill up the live feed. That kind of sucks

    • ozhunter on 07/09/2022 - 15:18

      People who are avoiding doing something more productive post there, the thread fills up

      Fills up with other people who could be doing something more productive :D

      • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 15:50

        Yeah, it's totally useless unless you are using it for a certain scenario. I've been using some posts on whirlpool to gather information to help improve the ethics module in my bots.

        Everyone else just thinks it's business as usual, as they don't realise what is going on. lol.

        It wastes their time, but it helps improve artificial intelligence.

  • OzzyOzbourne on 07/09/2022 - 15:21

    Perhaps controversially….If we follow the UK (and possibly the USA soon), then we won't be able to freely comment on anything, controversial or not. You can be arrested in the UK for doing, saying, posting anything that could cause any anxiety to a group of protected people if they happen to become aware of it (which is pretty much anyone except white straight men… you can say or do whatever you want to those evil patriarchs).

  • Herbse on 07/09/2022 - 17:18

    We should all be allowed to say what we want.

    It should also be mandatory to use our real names on social media and websites so if you have a comment or a point of view, you say it out loud with complete transparency about who you are and not hiding behind a private avatar or multiple avatars with the sole aim of skewing the conversation.

    • 2025 on 07/09/2022 - 17:53
      +2

      That would, of course, be ideal.

      But after seeing the hatred directed at people for the type of phone they use, the hatred for their sexuality, the hatred for their race, I believe it would probably instil fear and silence many voices from expressing their own point of view. This would skew the conversation too :(

      • Herbse on 07/09/2022 - 17:57
        +1

        Yes but the people dishing out that hate would think twice before posting knowing their friends, family, workplace, news can link it back to them.

        Just like in real life, people should be held accountable for their actions online imo

  • DiscoJango on 07/09/2022 - 18:15

    Just create a topic like: I hate feminists and love eating meat…

    Shit successfully stirred!

  • syousef on 07/09/2022 - 18:38
    +1

    The question is moot. You'll never predict, much less manage to control the behaviour of all Internet users or even all Ozbargain users.

  • baskinghobo on 07/09/2022 - 18:50
    +1

    It's because Ozbargain's highlighted discussion topic just shows the threads with the most comments. I prefer a voting system like reddit but even that has it's issues such as astroturfing.

  • justgooddeals on 07/09/2022 - 20:45

    Don’t feed the Trolls. Best way to beat them is to let them starve. Ignore the ignoramuses.

  • Willy Beamish on 07/09/2022 - 23:05
    +2

    If you're that scared of other peoples opinions then what are you doing on the internet…

    You people, yes, you people, need to realise that you don't have to have an opinion about everything.

  • Autonomic on 08/09/2022 - 15:33
    +1

    It's only a select few trolls that want to spread their lies and conspiracy theories. If you leave it unchallenged it just means people will fall for it.

    Mods should just ban these users when it's clear they're just trolling. Or just ban the topic entirely. This isn't a bastion of free speech, it's a bargain platform and there's no "right" to be able to peddle conspiracy theories here.

    • spackbace on 08/09/2022 - 15:41

      Many of them have spent time in the Penalty Box

      • Autonomic on 08/09/2022 - 15:54
        +1

        Enough strikes = perma ban,

        • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 15:58

          You can only fight misinformation by debunking it. However, most people try to do debunking with old information that is outdated or source trump, biden, morrison, albanese or something which is a political figure rather than actual data. Worst of all, some people source alex jones as a source!!!

          The whole vaccine argument was blown out of proportion, a lot of people still don't understand the math behind the trials. The data literally has been dumped to the public but very few are able to analyse it properly.

          The trials definitely show it was never 99% safe and effective. Now why we had the media portray it like that… I don't know. Heck, the media never sources their information.

          • spackbace on 08/09/2022 - 16:01

            @[Deactivated]: That was random…vaccines weren't even mentioned, yet you felt the need to discuss them.

            • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 19:37

              @spackbace: Clearly it is synonymous, especially the reference to alex jones…

              It's the main issue right now, so I doubt you thought we would just ignore it.

              Conspiracy and censorship in the past few years has all been vaccines and as I wrote below, unless someone has been living under a rock, it's a given.

              Is the OP not referring to these controversial threads/comments? I'm fairly certain the whole thread is a personal attack on anyone who tries to come out as a whistleblower.

              • spackbace on 08/09/2022 - 19:41

                @[Deactivated]: Where in this comment was a reference to Alex Jones?

                • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 19:42
                  +1

                  @spackbace: It's a given, he is the biggest conspiracy theorist. Did you not see the court case? Or am I meant to somehow debunk that?

                  It's only a select few trolls that want to spread their lies and conspiracy theories. If you leave it unchallenged it just means people will fall for it.

                  Therefore, we need to actually debunk those to ensure it does not remain unchallenged.

                  There is a difference between a scientist and an antivaxxer and also a conspiracy theorist.

                  • spackbace on 08/09/2022 - 19:44

                    @[Deactivated]:

                    especially the reference to alex jones…

                    Do you struggle to answer my question? Where in the comments that you've responded to is this reference to Alex Jones? You can't just say there is one, then just say "it's a given". Either there's a reference, or there isn't. Which is it?

                    • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 19:45
                      +1

                      @spackbace: It's in his statement

                      "If you leave it unchallenged it just means people will fall for it."

                      Stop trying to dance around it man. Gee. It's a relevant reply. It's in the context of debunking/challenging the conspiracy theories. This will undoubtedly bring up the topic of alex jones in some manner. Are you even reading what the original request was?

                      I also believe there should be no place for conspiracy theories here. We should point it out.

                      This isn't a bastion of free speech, it's a bargain platform and there's no "right" to be able to peddle conspiracy theories here.

                      • spackbace on 08/09/2022 - 19:49

                        @[Deactivated]:

                        This will undoubtedly bring up the topic of alex jones in some manner.

                        But, it hasn't… yet you clearly stated:

                        especially the reference to alex jones…

                        When you were the only person to reference him lol

                        Worst of all, some people source alex jones as a source!!!

                        Can you not actually read and respond to what's written on the page? Or do you have to bring your bias to some imaginary gap in the words?

                        • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 20:05

                          @spackbace: Please read the rest of the words written on the post. I think I already checkedmated you below though.

                          You need to look at the whole context of the post. Read it carefully, note that there are references to debunking conspiracy theories. Do you agree? Or not?

                          The Alex Jones reference is something I added in response to that. It is a suitable response.. Duh!

              • spackbace on 08/09/2022 - 19:47

                @[Deactivated]:

                Is the OP not referring to these controversial threads/comments? I'm fairly certain the whole thread is a personal attack on anyone who tries to come out as a whistleblower.

                Whistleblower to what exactly?

                If you look at OP's comments over the last 30 days for example, the controversial forum posts are titled:

                Should our Higher Education system be more like America's?
                Should Maternity Leave Be Paid for 12 Months?
                What Are Your Thoughts on The WEF & The Great Reset?

                1 covid post out of the 3 'controversial' posts… Is that enough for you to try to summarise what this whole post is about?

                • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 19:54
                  -1

                  @spackbace: Yeah, where are you pulling that from? I do note the OP barely even replies in any meaningful manner. That's all I can state, and I have no idea if he really means the stuff he writes but if he does then I can't argue against that. I wouldn't call those topics you linked controversial though as they are very common boring topics.

                  However, if you state those are controversial, I'm not arguing against that. If you see that the OP does not seem to want to engage in any meaningful discussion, then I think we agree it is pointless to reply to this topic.

                  Maybe it is supposed to bring up some further discussion. Who knows?

                  Literally the comments are like:

                  I have no thoughts on this, or your link-farm post

                  Is he actually trying to tell us that the mods are doing nothing to remove him? Well, the mods don't have to remove him. There isn't anything controversial about his comments, except they add no value. The OP himself is the one who is creating the controversies.. lol. I think I delved too deep into this.

                  Note he writes this in his post:

                  These forum posts can be viewed in two ways:

                  1) they appear to be deliberately inflamatory (based on previous reactions from the OzBargain community), and contain what many people consider as misinformation

                  2) on the flip side "deliberately inflamatory" can also be considered as encouraging people to challenge their thinking, with more positive intentions from the posters

                  So, what type are the comments he writes?

                • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 20:12
                  -1

                  @spackbace: Do you not think people concerned about the education system/great reset/maternity leave are whistleblowers of some type?

                  Of course this would depend on the material being tendered to the discussion. Maybe that word whistleblower is not quite correct to describe it, but that was the first thing that came to my mind. Maybe you could provide some input on a more appropriate word?

                  Is there one? I'm sure there is. (Concerned citizen doesn't quite describe it - I think you can agree with that.)

                  I literally drafted papers involving the Great Reset. So, I know what I'm talking about. lol. It's nothing like the conspiracies that you spaceback might be projecting sadly….. Oh, but maybe you were defending alex jones… Right I get it, you probably think I'm one of those information warriors….

                  Good one. Laughable.

                  This right:

                  https://www.infowars.com/posts/wef-is-hiring-thousands-of-in…

                  lol.

    • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 19:58

      Yo, I get what you mean now Autonomic. I just saw the OP's posts and figured it out. Upvoted! Nice one.

  • [Deactivated] on 08/09/2022 - 15:46

    Seems like someone has been living under a rock for the last few years.

    cough lmao

  • Vote for Pedro on 12/09/2022 - 19:09
    -1

    Seriously? OzB actively encourages those that spread hate and division because it drives engagement and we all, me included, fall for it.

    When I tell a Nazi to eff off, I get dumped in a penalty box for being rude to a Nazi. That says everything you need to know.

    Also, nice to be out of the penalty box. I give it until the next Nazi I see and I'll get my permanent ban.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join