Some observations and statistics about this subforum

Miragememories, you've been posting here since January, 2007. I am unaware of you swaying a single "debunker" towards your version of the truth (or of you getting any significant claim right). Likewise, you've shown shown no sign of being swayed by us. Is it rational to continue debating when,

A) You have nothing new to offer; and,
B) You know you have no chance of swaying your opponent?

I direct the same questions to the debunkers, as I did in the OP. If Miragememories doesn't have anything new to offer, and his positions are intractable, isn't the sensible thing to do to ignore him?

Excellent post Gravy!
My handler sent me a new MP3 player and a Santa Claus jello mold since you mentioned me twice.
Thanks!

A W Smith said:

You cant? really? after we have asked you for seven years?

Click to expand...

And already someone takes the bait.

all it takes is to show us something, anything. us so called 'believers' get wrong. You have been asked repeatedly for a hypotheses or physical evidence but at this point have scurried away safely into the dark protective cave of non committal, Vague semantics, quote mining, arguments from incredulity, No hypothesis, No physical evidence.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure we need to keep telling them this, A W Smith. I've seen a lot of people constantly pointing this out to truthers (I've probably been guilty myself). They've heard it plenty of times. There's no point in saying it over and over and over again. It doesn't lead anywhere.

Miragememories said:

There should be no timetable for ending 9/11 discussion.

Click to expand...

And no one is saying there should be.

The point being made here is that "discussion" has come to a grinding halt. It's devolved to truthers reposting the same, tired claims over and over again, and debunkers mocking them with barely concealed contempt.

If you or any truther had something new to add or expressed interest in engaging in open and honest discussion, I'm sure there would be many takers from the debunker side willing to engage.

I just hope someplace else is found for Horatius' genius to have a home...

Gravy said:

These days I'm only interested in doing post-mortem examinations of the truth movement. Most media outlets are looking for current controversy or conflict. When does providing information outweigh giving attention to a dying movement of surpassing idiocy but successful methods? What control do I have over what is education and what is entertainment? In one case I initially accepted an invitation to be interviewed on a respected Toronto TV program on Sept. 9, then rejected it when it turned out they wanted a debate that merely dredged up long-debunked garbage: if flight 77 hit the Pentagon, cell phones, were the hijackers on the planes, etc. I turned down another interview request last week, for a TV documentary that's being produced for a channel known for its sensationalistic "reality" programming.

Click to expand...

The fortunes of the 9/11 Truth Movement, like many other things, largely depends on how much cover it receives from the mainstream media. Starting from November of 2005, when Steven Jones first appeared on Tucker Carlson's show, to the fifth anniversary in 2006 there were quite a few Truthers appearing on mainstream media outlets. This was also the time when Loose Change 2nd edition was popular and Popular Mechanics published their book, Debunking 9/11 Myths. In 2007 mainstream coverage of the 9/11 Truth Movement died down.

There is a large difference between current events/issues that someone must learn about on their own and news that comes to you whether you are interested or not. For instance, compare the amount of news coverage Britney Spears received when she shaved her head to the collapse of WTC7. The break up of Brad and Jen received more coverage than the break up between Kosovo and Serbia. Practically everyone knew about the Britney Spears incident and the Brad and Jen break up. Only certain subsets of the population knew about the latter events.

As Uncle Kracker said on another subject, "Cuz as long as no one knows than nobody can care."

Nevertheless, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has surpassed 500 members at this point. The Truth marches on, while the debunkers seek solace in ignorance.

I say put the whole forum on pseudo-moderated status.

Find someone to volunteer to peruse potential new topics in this sub-forum. If they are legitimately new, and not based on flawed reasoning, misinterpretation or ignorance, then let them be posted. Otherwise, let them vanish unread into the mysterious internet ether.

I predict a very quiet sub-forum.

Miragememories said:

Posting disapproval about the fact that members are still engaging in discussion about what you consider to be a dying story, only legitimizes my concerns about this subforum being bullied into total suppression of free and open discussion.

There should be no timetable for ending 9/11 discussion.

Click to expand...

It's not so much that there is an arbitrary timetable. It's rather that once a given theory, or piece of evidence, has been sufficiently discussed the odds of anything new and significant being said drops to close to zero. Both sides will end up repeating themselves, which serves no purpose.

Walter Ego said:

Mark, keep in mind that not all of us “non-truthers” are debunkers...

Click to expand...

That's why I used the term "non-truthers."

...and that not all of us have been active on this forum for the years and years as some of you “hard fact” types have. For myself, I was blissfully unaware of the truth movement until December of last year.

Having gone out of my way last February to meet some real life truthers (all three of them) in Savannah, I really don’t have any desire to engage anymore of them in debate, and if I did it would not be online. Of late I just make silly little, mostly satirical, videos that I put up on YouTube.

(I’ve also made serious videos and videos of truther/debunker debates and started a video blog to collect debunking and factual videos about 9/11 in one place on the internet.)

Click to expand...

I respect and appreciate your work. The video debunking blog is a good idea.

Honestly, at this late stage in the game, what is there left to do but laugh at truthers?

Click to expand...

But that's my point. When the discussion is over and the only thing left to do is laugh, you've won.

No forum can be all things to all people. You obviously believe this forum is important (and it is) but for many of us it’s a part-time internet activity and is not life or death (and given the almost total failure of the truthers and their “movement,” why should it be?)

While agreeing with you about not feeding the trolls and not wasting time bringing up old already debunked topics, I wish you (and the mods) would be less anal-retentive about what “belongs” on this forum.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your comments, Walter. I don't know if it'll help, but I'll try to explain myself a bit better.

I almost posted essentially the same OP in February, when I announced that I wouldn't be posting here any more. I had done all the research and written most of the post. But then I decided against it:

Gravy said:

I was going to share with you a study (mostly a time study) I did of truther-rationalist interaction on this forum, but I've decided against it. How people choose to spend their time here is their own business. I will point out that in the past month these 10 people have made 80% of the truther posts...

Click to expand...

So, I refrained from making that post in part to not be so anal-retentive (in fact, in a fit of anal looseness, I deleted all the February stats except the one I used in the OP).

I think it was a mistake not to make that post. I was assuming that activity here would naturally drop way off through 2008. I was wrong.

You wound up at the top of the thread starter list not because I was trying to single you out, but because that's how the list looks. I wasn't making a judgment about your posts. My judgment comes after looking at all the top thread starters, seeing that a high percentage of threads are frivolous and a low percentage are educational, and thinking that's not a good thing when this forum has been promoted as a place to come for people who want answers about serious issues.

But the problem is not that there are so many frivolous threads these days: anyone who helps with the forum index project will learn that's always been the case. I've started quite a few of them myself. The problem is that there are so few educational threads, and that the overall quality of discussion continues to decline. Add to that the current high percentage of trollish truthers who crave attention, and it seems to me that giving them any unnecessary attention is unwise. We may be prolonging their dying movement, and by doing so this forum is subjected to their extremely unpleasant wheezing and death spasms. As I said above, if all that's left to do is laugh, the game's over. Why not go home before dinner gets cold?

No, I don't expect many people to take this as seriously as I do. I would have laughed until I turned blue if in 2005 someone had predicted that I'd be spending a huge chunk of my life on 9/11 conspiracy claims. But if someone had phrased it that I would be spending that time countering a massive, concerted, aggressive attempt to falsely revise history, I would have said that's something I can see signing on to.

I only wish I had started earlier. When I got involved, MikeW's 911myths.com was pretty much the lone debunker voice in a rising tide of truther lies. The truthers haven't "almost totally failed," as you say above. They failed at their main stated goal: a new, "independent" investigation. But they have succeded magnificently at spreading their lies and ignorance.

REUTERS Sep 10, 2008
Seven years after the Sept. 11 attacks, there is no consensus outside the United States that Islamist militants from al Qaeda were responsible, according to an international poll published Wednesday.

The survey of 16,063 people in 17 nations found majorities in only nine countries believe al Qaeda was behind the attacks on New York and Washington that killed about 3,000 people in 2001.

...Respondents in the Middle East were especially likely to name a perpetrator other than al Qaeda, the poll found.

Israel was behind the attacks, said 43 percent of people in Egypt, 31 percent in Jordan and 19 percent in the Palestinian Territories. The U.S. government was blamed by 36 percent of Turks and 27 percent of Palestinians.

Click to expand...

Many people in those countries would hold those beliefs if there had never been a "truth" movement in the U.S. But 200 Muslim clerics didn't march on the U.S. embassy in Malaysia, protesting U.S. involvement in 9/11, in 2001 or 2002. They did that in 2006, after 9/11 hero William Rodriguez visited and Jimmy Walter got some crackpot videos prime-time play on Malaysia's national TV. Malaysia's national news service didn't say that the minds of Malaysians had been changed forever about 9/11 before those videos aired: that happened afterwards.

Prominent Muslim speakers in other countries surely spoke to large Muslim crowds and accused America and Israel of perpetrating the attacks before there was a "truth" movement. But before then they didn't have the work of American scientists like Steven Jones and the "Scholars" to cite, or the compelling "evidence" put forth by American filmmakers like Dylan Avery.

When the newly-converted Muslim, 9/11 hero, and American William Rodriguez acts as an accuser of the U.S. government and an apologist for the terrorists who murdered his friends, it isn't just the saddest thing I've ever seen in my life, it's potentially endangering other lives around the world.

Many of my neighbors and family friends were murdered on 9/11. Everyone working at my local fire house, a block away, was murdered. So, yes, the big picture is that this is a matter of life and death to me. Had the attacks happened in your hometown, it's possible that you'd feel the same way.

..

tanabear said:

The fortunes of the 9/11 Truth Movement, like many other things, largely depends on how much cover it receives from the mainstream media. Starting from November of 2005, when Steven Jones first appeared on Tucker Carlson's show, to the fifth anniversary in 2006 there were quite a few Truthers appearing on mainstream media outlets. This was also the time when Loose Change 2nd edition was popular and Popular Mechanics published their book, Debunking 9/11 Myths. In 2007 mainstream coverage of the 9/11 Truth Movement died down.

There is a large difference between current events/issues that someone must learn about on their own and news that comes to you whether you are interested or not. For instance, compare the amount of news coverage Britney Spears received when she shaved her head to the collapse of WTC7. The break up of Brad and Jen received more coverage than the break up between Kosovo and Serbia. Practically everyone knew about the Britney Spears incident and the Brad and Jen break up. Only certain subsets of the population knew about the latter events.

As Uncle Kracker said on another subject, "Cuz as long as no one knows than nobody can care."

Nevertheless, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has surpassed 500 members at this point. The Truth marches on, while the debunkers seek solace in ignorance.

Click to expand...

I know it is a little off topic, but I believe a point in here must be addressed, as it is related to the downturn in posting in this forum.

The truth movement, like anything does get ASSISTANCE from the MSM. However, it is a cheap, cowardice scapegoat to use as THE reason for the demise of the movement.

If this were the case, would the civil rights movement have taken off? would women's rights have come to pass?

Now forgive me sane people, for I am not comparing in any significant way, these movements, to the truth "movement", with this exception...

The reason those movement took off were because (A) Their cause was valid, (B) the protestors/members BELIEVED IN THEIR CAUSE, and (C) They took it upon themselves TO FORCE the media, and then everyone else, to pay attention.

The truth movement has seen neither of those three hold for their group, nor will they ever, to any significant degree.

TAM

Gravy said:

Many of my neighbors and family friends were murdered on 9/11. Everyone working at my local fire house, a block away, was murdered. So, yes, the big picture is that this is a matter of life and death to me. Had the attacks happened in your hometown, it's possible that you'd feel the same way.

Click to expand...

By “not life or death” I meant the quality of this forum, not your or anyone else’s commitment to countering the lies and nonsense of the truth movement and please don’t think 9/11 didn’t effect those of us who do not live in New York or who didn’t personally know people who died on that day.

I agree that this forum could be better but “better” will mean different things to different people. I’ve participated on discussions forums, moderated and not moderated, since I went online in 1997. All such forums have their up and downs and the problem of “quality” is endemic to all of them.

As someone who arrived about the time you began your hiatus (and, if I read your OP correctly, this forum began it‘s decline), I have learned a tremendous amount about what happened on 9/11. Even as a non “hard fact” non debunker, I’m better informed that the average American (not to say the average truther!) about 9/11.

While I support your effort to get this place to “shape up,” could we allow that this forum also serves a social function and that maybe cracking a few stupid truther jokes and posting some dumb videos does not constitute aiding and abetting the “enemy” (if that is indeed what the truthers are)?

EvilBiker said:

Could this possibly be stickied? It would be a good front door sanity check for this subforum.

Click to expand...

I will support that this thread should be stickied. Or that a more generalized version of the OP together with the excellent flowchart is stickied as single post.

Some interesting statistics and points, Gravy. I do have one criticism, which is that I feel you may have come to your conclusion prematurely. Or, at least, the evidence presented here is insufficient.

The above post points out that there's poor discourse in this particular subforum, however before being alarmed or wanting this addressed, I'd like to see this compared to other subforums here, and I'd like it compared by overall volume.

How does the signal to noise ratio compare in the Politics or Religion/Philosophy subforums? My experience in those subforums is that threads there are just as likely to break down into pointless irrelevancies.

Also, for statistics such as prevalence in the Abandon All Hope subforum, or volume of banning and suspensions, how does this compare with overall activity? If, for argument's sake, 50% of all forum activity is in the 9/11 Sub Forum, it would not be significant if 50% of suspensions and banning occurred there.

I am concerned that there is an assumption that the 9/11 Subforum is worse. I would like to see a bit more analysis before I could agree with any drastic measures to address perceived problems.

gumboot said:

Some interesting statistics and points, Gravy. I do have one criticism, which is that I feel you may have come to your conclusion prematurely. Or, at least, the evidence presented here is insufficient.

The above post points out that there's poor discourse in this particular subforum, however before being alarmed or wanting this addressed, I'd like to see this compared to other subforums here, and I'd like it compared by overall volume.

How does the signal to noise ratio compare in the Politics or Religion/Philosophy subforums? My experience in those subforums is that threads there are just as likely to break down into pointless irrelevancies.

Click to expand...

My intent was to document the changes in this subforum. If other subforums have gone down the crapper, that's for the people who spend time there to worry about.

Also, for statistics such as prevalence in the Abandon All Hope subforum, or volume of banning and suspensions, how does this compare with overall activity? If, for argument's sake, 50% of all forum activity is in the 9/11 Sub Forum, it would not be significant if 50% of suspensions and banning occurred there.

Click to expand...

I'm confident in my assumption that the AAH splits, bans, and suspensions are grossly disproportionate in the 9/11 CT area. If anyone wants to look into that further, they're welcome to do so. But again, it's the trend that I'm most concerned about.

I am concerned that there is an assumption that the 9/11 Subforum is worse.

Click to expand...

It is worse than it was. I haven't seen a single person argue that it hasn't declined, and discussions in forum management and community show that many people think there's a problem that needs to be addressed. As a subjective participant, I'm not surprised by the statistics at all. Many times in recent months I've clicked on one 9/11 CT thread after another and said to myself, "Wow, this place has become a cesspool."

I think the cause Gravy is because all the major issues have been discussed. There haven't been any new 9/11 issues. And once all the real issues have been addressed over and over and people don't want to agree with facts, it just becomes a personal argument along the lines of "I know you are, but what am I?" etc.

How can there not be these problems when everything has been covered? It's no different than the end of a successful TV series. It starts out with a bang, but after a couple years when every plot has been used up, they start to recycle plots and everyone involved is a bit less enthusastic. And then eventually they bring in some new child start to the cast in an attempt to get another season, but inevitably it all becomes crap.

While there will always be cult fans of the sitcom, I think the 9/11 series is on the verge of being cancelled.

Jonnyclueless said:

I think the cause Gravy is because all the major issues have been discussed. There haven't been any new 9/11 issues. And once all the real issues have been addressed over and over and people don't want to agree with facts, it just becomes a personal argument along the lines of "I know you are, but what am I?" etc.

How can there not be these problems when everything has been covered? It's no different than the end of a successful TV series. It starts out with a bang, but after a couple years when every plot has been used up, they start to recycle plots and everyone involved is a bit less enthusastic. And then eventually they bring in some new child start to the cast in an attempt to get another season, but inevitably it all becomes crap.

While there will always be cult fans of the sitcom, I think the 9/11 series is on the verge of being cancelled.

Click to expand...

I like your analogy, and that's where this subforum differs from the politics subforum. Even if people there are as difficult as they are here, in politics there will always be new players, events, and policies to discuss.

This subforum reminds me of the cartoon in which Wile E. Coyote and the sheepdog show up at work together each day looking tired and bored, and punch the clock.
"Morning, Sam."
"Morning, Ralph."
Then they spend the rest of the day trying to outwit and harm each other, punch the clock again when the whistle blows, and do it all over again the next day.

Or it's as if Fonzie jumped the shark in the first episode of Happy Days, and people said, "What a peculiar show. Was it produced by Surrealists? Is it even a comedy? Will there be more and zanier stunts? I think I'll tune in next week and see where this goes."


...and unfortunately, that turned out to be as good as it got.

gumboot said:

How does the signal to noise ratio compare in the Politics or Religion/Philosophy subforums? My experience in those subforums is that threads there are just as likely to break down into pointless irrelevancies.

Click to expand...

I don't frequent Politics and have little interest in religion but I have participated in a long thread about abortion in R&P (I think we can all agree that's a contentious topic) and though there were strong opinions and lots of disagreement, there's no way that there was anything resembling the level of rubbish -- trolling, bickering, piling-on and pointless one line posts -- that is commonplace on this sub-forum.

Here's some statistics of mine...

This thread was my attempt to break free of the nonsense and hold a polite, factual conversation. I put forth the conditions simply, promised to behave myself, and did so throughout the thread. I even cleared my entire Ignore List first.

The experiment was not altogether unsuccessful. It was by far my most popular thread, and I received many good questions from a number of Truth Movement folks, including those who had proven troublesome in the past. This proves that, if they put their minds to it, they are perfectly capable of a rational conversation. I am proud of these, and hope others found them useful as well.

The thread has now gone to 30 pages, a total of 1180 posts. This is plenty for some good statistics. I tallied the number of posts according to the following approximate guidelines:

• Legitimate Question/Answer: Posts responsive to the OP, intelligently stated, useful
• Challenge or Clarification: The OP and similar requests for discourse, along with discussion of the OP itself
• Off-Topic Posts: A broad category -- posts that do not advance the OP, but are not obnoxious or particularly unwelcome either
• Bickering: Posts with little or no useful content, including slights against other posters, and unconstructive responses, from any and all parties
• Requests for Calm: Attempts to regain the upper hand, everything from polite reminders to active moderation
• Insults: Only considers posts actionable under the Members' Agreement, not lesser barbs

The categories overlap slightly, so the tally below should be considered approximate. Nonetheless, the pattern is consistent, albeit shifting slightly under the influence of one or two particularly odious posters. The totals are as follows:

• Legitimate Question/Answer: 330
• Challenge or Clarification: 34
• Off-Topic Posts: 218
• Bickering: 563
• Requests for Calm: 24
• Insults: 11

These totals also do not include the two splits to new threads, and one split to AAH, that occurred in the meantime. In other words, in this thread -- the absolute best I can craft, and one in which I absorbed considerable abuse, turning the other cheek numerous times -- scored a mere 30% useful content. Over 48% of posts were totally useless, and inflammatory to a given degree.

Now, I understand that the Internet is not the best place for a polite discussion, but these statistics are terrible.

Whose fault is it? Who cares? There is plenty of blame to go around. I was forced to report both Truthers and non-Truthers on several occasions. And I hardly ever report anyone.

It is clear, however, that some of the participants here are absolutely uncontrollable. Here is a sampling of the replies I received, again despite my absolute best efforts to take the high road:

Tippit said:

In spite of your massive ego, there isn't going to be any closure coming from you, and there isn't going to be any closure at all. The simple fact of the matter is, you don't know what happened on September 11th. You only think you do. And what you think you know is limited by what you've been told, and who you've decided to trust. Most people can't live with uncertainty. You are one of those people.

Click to expand...

roundhead said:

I have come to the conclusion you are out of your mind, no matter your credentials or education.

Click to expand...

bwinwright said:

Those who passionately attempt to protect the criminals actually responsible for this crime, like Mackey, are traitors who should be behind bars. He's far too intelligent to honestly believe the crap he's trying to sell. It's beyond ludicrous! [...] You'd better hope reincarnation is just a lie too because, if not, folks like Mackey will come back with club feet, hair lips, and really bad breath.

Click to expand...

So, in closing, let me make the following brief observations:

First, it is possible to have a calm, rational, factual discussion about September 11^th. Even with folks in the Truth Movement. Some of these discussions are even interesting.

Second, with very, very few exceptions, the particular people here -- Truth Movement and otherwise -- are simply not willing to have this discussion. Why this is, and whether this is representative of the larger populations beyond the JREF Forums, is beyond my ability to estimate.

Third, there hasn't been any truly new discussion for a long time. The last big event was the NIST WTC 7 report. It came up in my thread, but only peripherally. While some of the questions I was asked were good ones and led to productive discussions, hardly any were "new." I didn't have to spend much time hunting for answers.

Based on these statistics, you all will understand why I have little to contribute these days. Most of what is going on now is just crap, and most people still asking questions are simply stubbornly resisting the answers. I know there are a few exceptions out there, and I keep my door open for open-minded new posters and good ideas, but as time goes by those become ever more scarce.

Perhaps, in some small way, this is evidence of a job well done, of facts and education and skeptical thinking passed on. There will always be those we cannot reach. But they are not so numerous as I once feared. Take sockpuppets out of the equation, and they are a mere handful.

Perhaps this is how the Truth Movement ends, not with a bang, but with a whimper, and a lot of name-calling besides. If so, let me know when you all get it out of your system, and drinks will be at my place.

Magenta said:

I don't frequent Politics and have little interest in religion but I have participated in a long thread about abortion in R&P (I think we can all agree that's a contentious topic) and though there were strong opinions and lots of disagreement, there's no way that there was anything resembling the level of rubbish -- trolling, bickering, piling-on and pointless one line posts -- that is commonplace on this sub-forum.

Click to expand...

Oh I don't know, the thread on abortion that I partook in was pretty bad.

Bear in mind the criticism of the 9/11 Forum is a pretty broad brush - it's not only trolling, bickering, or pointless one line posts that are being criticised, but also irrelevant or pointless threads, in particular the "Guess what the Truth Movement is up to now?" variety.

However, these "current affairs", "check out these idiots" type threads are much, much more common in forums such as Current Events, Politics, Religion and Philosophy, General Skepticism, and so forth. Indeed, without these sorts of threads most of those subforums would shrivel up and die.

I don't see why it's acceptable to offer commentary on one particular topic, and not on another. I don't approve of different rules being applied to different topics.

The simple fact is that all of the things criticised in the 9/11 Sub Forum also occur in substantial quantity in these other forums. There are numerous threads "calling out" other people. Numerous "point and laugh" threads doing nothing other than presenting amusing or distressing information about the doings of one group of people or another. Endless off-topic quips and one liners. Bickering. Insults.

I mean, heck, the Forum Management Sub Forum is one of the worst! Half the threads created in there are nothing more than parodies of other threads, and barely a post isn't some sort of bickering or mockery. It has become one of my favourite sub forums to read simply because it's so entertaining.

I don't buy that there's anything peculiar about the 9/11 Sub Forum. It's no different than any other Sub Forum here.

gumboot said:

Oh I don't know, the thread on abortion that I partook in was pretty bad.

Bear in mind the criticism of the 9/11 Forum is a pretty broad brush - it's not only trolling, bickering, or pointless one line posts that are being criticised, but also irrelevant or pointless threads, in particular the "Guess what the Truth Movement is up to now?" variety.

However, these "current affairs", "check out these idiots" type threads are much, much more common in forums such as Current Events, Politics, Religion and Philosophy, General Skepticism, and so forth. Indeed, without these sorts of threads most of those subforums would shrivel up and die.

Click to expand...

Yes, but those threads cover a wide variety of subjects. It's the monotony of the same type of thread about the same people that I take issue with here.

I don't see why it's acceptable to offer commentary on one particular topic, and not on another. I don't approve of different rules being applied to different topics.

The simple fact is that all of the things criticised in the 9/11 Sub Forum also occur in substantial quantity in these other forums. There are numerous threads "calling out" other people. Numerous "point and laugh" threads doing nothing other than presenting amusing or distressing information about the doings of one group of people or another. Endless off-topic quips and one liners. Bickering. Insults.

Click to expand...

Because it's done elsewhere doesn't make it a good idea here. Again, if people think there's a problem in other subfora, there's nothing stopping them from trying to do something about it. Clearly, many people do think there's a problem here. Turn the question around: if a large percentage of members think there's a problem with one subform that needs to be fixed, is it fair or necessary to apply the solution to all subfora?

I mean, heck, the Forum Management Sub Forum is one of the worst! Half the threads created in there are nothing more than parodies of other threads, and barely a post isn't some sort of bickering or mockery. It has become one of my favourite sub forums to read simply because it's so entertaining.

Click to expand...

If the admins and mods didn't allow the complaining and venting they'd certainly be charged with elitism, fascism, racism, sexism, etc. Oh, wait, they're charged with that anyway. Nevermind. The parody threads, on the other hand....

I don't buy that there's anything peculiar about the 9/11 Sub Forum. It's no different than any other Sub Forum here.

Click to expand...

I disagree. I think it's clear that people are less willing or able to control themselves in this subforum, in order to stay within the MA, than elsewhere.

Yesterday you asked,

gumboot said:

Also, for statistics such as prevalence in the Abandon All Hope subforum, or volume of banning and suspensions, how does this compare with overall activity? If, for argument's sake, 50% of all forum activity is in the 9/11 Sub Forum, it would not be significant if 50% of suspensions and banning occurred there.

Click to expand...

I kept track of all forum posts since my reply. The 9/11 subforum accounted for 8%. In recent months 50% of all AAH actions and 38% of all bannings and suspensions have come from here.