Discussion of DEFCON Level (Split from Emergency meeting called for deployment of troops immediately to Ukraine.)

N

novaB

Guest
That is kind of what the OSI categories are for. In theory, they are supposed to be "Just the Facts, no analysis". Humans, being humans, do engage in discussions.
But what I (unregistered, because mostly just a reader) would like to suggest is a new rule for the forums:

NO discussion about the DEFCON-level in the threads (those are allowed ONLY in a dedicated thread).

Big parts of the "Ukraine April 2021" thread are cluttered a.f. with discussions if the DWS-staff chose the appropriate DEFCON-level or it they didn't and why it is appropriate or why it is not appropriate and if those who think it is are naive or those who think it's not are fearmongers, and so on and so on...
Those endless junk posts are shitting full pages after pages with pointless and uninteresting (because basically offtopic) back and forth; completly useless for everyone reading out of interest for the actual topic of that thread.

I think it is very easy: DWS has its staff and *they* chose the DEFCON-level.
Don't like it and / or the chosen level? You're free to leave or at least ignore it.
Like it? Fine then.
But either way: It's absolutly boring and NOT interesting what you think about the decision of the DWS staff - at least for everyone who just wants to read about the actual topic of the thread, which is - to stay in that example mentioned above - the situation in the Ukraine in April 2021 and NOT a discussion about the DWS staff decisions.
Those discussions could be shifted to a separate thread where everyone interested in endlessly talking about if the DWS' staff assessment of the current situation is a good one or not can post about this without cluttering the ontopic threads with this stuff.
 

RiffRaff

Deputy Director
Staff member
We would appreciate it if comments like that were kept out of the main discussion threads, but the purpose of the primary thread is to post information and analyze it. It is extremely difficult to switch back and forth between two threads, not to mention the redundancy of data that would eat up this site's disk storage space.
 
N

novaB

Guest
Yes, of course I'm not referring to discussing the information posted in order to analyze it.
What I am referring to are posts that don't analyze but just say sth. like "yeah, now it's really irresponsable to stay at this low DEFCON level" - "no it isn't" - "yes it is" - "you're are fearmonger" - "you're keeping the level ridicously low until hell freezes over" - "wrong" - "right" - "yes" - "no" - "yes" - "no" - "Oh!"... That's fitting for a Louis de Funes movie but not that much when you're visiting a thread for both the informations gathered AND the analysis of them but NOT the discussion if the DWS-staff picked the "correct" DEFCON-level.
 

RiffRaff

Deputy Director
Staff member
Yes, of course I'm not referring to discussing the information posted in order to analyze it.
What I am referring to are posts that don't analyze but just say sth. like "yeah, now it's really irresponsable to stay at this low DEFCON level" - "no it isn't" - "yes it is" - "you're are fearmonger" - "you're keeping the level ridicously low until hell freezes over" - "wrong" - "right" - "yes" - "no" - "yes" - "no" - "Oh!"... That's fitting for a Louis de Funes movie but not that much when you're visiting a thread for both the informations gathered AND the analysis of them but NOT the discussion if the DWS-staff picked the "correct" DEFCON-level.
I can't speak for the other staff members, but I'm going to be less tolerant of such posts during any future crisis and moving them out of the crisis thread to Suggestions & Comments.
 
N

novaB

Guest
I can't speak for the other staff members, but I'm going to be less tolerant of such posts during any future crisis and moving them out of the crisis thread to Suggestions & Comments.
Thank you, I really appreciate that!
 
Top