RallyPoint
RallyPoint
Posted on Dec 19, 2015
Do Rallypoint participants think that questions/answers should not be "a place to debate politics, or current affairs"?
6.54K
9
8
4
4
0
UPDATE: This question is a bit moot now, and the reasons behind it are being more extensively discussed under a question posted by CPT (Join to see) (which is linked to below).
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/why-are-some-subject-posts-being-removed?
============================================================
This afternoon, a RallyPoint administrator deleted a question I had posted. Admittedly, the question was pointed and intended to spark a discussion about values (specifically, why people are so quick to endorse the notion that somebody was wrongfully denied a medal). When I asked for an explanation of what rules or policies my question violated, the administrator replied:
"Questions should be very specific and be used as a tool to crowd source a definitive answer to a particular problem or issue.
"Just because the post has a question mark does not mean it should be posted as a 'Question.' Please do not share a link or make a statement followed by general question like ‘Why is it?’ ‘Have you seen?’ ‘Have you heard?’ ‘Thoughts?’ ‘Opinions?’ ‘What do you think?’ ‘Did you know?’ ‘Are you aware of…?’ etc. This content should be shared by using the new update or link options. If there is a link to support a question, such as a link to a recent story announcing a policy change, you can share it. However if the content is entirely based on a link, it belongs as a link.
"Keep in mind, questions are permanent and intended to help both the poster and readers in the future, so please consider this when choosing the method of posting. If a question is really just getting something off your chest or the title of an article and not intended to answer a question for future readers, it should be posted as an update or link, not a question. Think of the new 'Questions/Answers' as a knowledge base for future generations, not as a place to debate politics, or current affairs."
I'm far from the most active participant on RallyPoint, but this sounds like a rather significant (and stifling) change from the free-wheeling discussions I've seen so far. So I'd like to hear what other RallyPointers think about this administrator's interpretation of what should be discussed here.
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/why-are-some-subject-posts-being-removed?
============================================================
This afternoon, a RallyPoint administrator deleted a question I had posted. Admittedly, the question was pointed and intended to spark a discussion about values (specifically, why people are so quick to endorse the notion that somebody was wrongfully denied a medal). When I asked for an explanation of what rules or policies my question violated, the administrator replied:
"Questions should be very specific and be used as a tool to crowd source a definitive answer to a particular problem or issue.
"Just because the post has a question mark does not mean it should be posted as a 'Question.' Please do not share a link or make a statement followed by general question like ‘Why is it?’ ‘Have you seen?’ ‘Have you heard?’ ‘Thoughts?’ ‘Opinions?’ ‘What do you think?’ ‘Did you know?’ ‘Are you aware of…?’ etc. This content should be shared by using the new update or link options. If there is a link to support a question, such as a link to a recent story announcing a policy change, you can share it. However if the content is entirely based on a link, it belongs as a link.
"Keep in mind, questions are permanent and intended to help both the poster and readers in the future, so please consider this when choosing the method of posting. If a question is really just getting something off your chest or the title of an article and not intended to answer a question for future readers, it should be posted as an update or link, not a question. Think of the new 'Questions/Answers' as a knowledge base for future generations, not as a place to debate politics, or current affairs."
I'm far from the most active participant on RallyPoint, but this sounds like a rather significant (and stifling) change from the free-wheeling discussions I've seen so far. So I'd like to hear what other RallyPointers think about this administrator's interpretation of what should be discussed here.
Posted in these groups: 
RallyPoint
Policy
RallyPoint Policy
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 4
2
2
0
Speaking as a member not an admin, I wonder if this was to address the issue of many folks leaving and the many nasty posts involving religion and politics? I'm not speaking for anyone other than myself, but I miss the early days of RP before it got contentious and nasty.
(2)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
PV2 (Join to see) there are still quite a few places (and people) on RallyPoint where it is *politely* (or at least mostly respectfully) contentious. Unfortunately, there are equally wide swaths where there basically the participants are taking turns accusing and denouncing and being unruly, but never really reading each other's posts or trying to understand their differences. :-(
I've learned to be much more disciplined about how readily I allow myself to get drawn into a dogfight.
I've learned to be much more disciplined about how readily I allow myself to get drawn into a dogfight.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I think the issue you are referring to may seem a little uneven due to the update to the function of the website. Whereas now you can categorize your post into an update, link, or question and before you couldn't I believe the admin, based on his or her response, is just trying to clean up the execution of the post rather than censoring your question. But, I didn't see the original post and so my comments are based in the information given in this post.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google