horror forum - to get the "shock porn" threads off of OT

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Where is the line between a legitimate news story that belongs in one of the current forums and a "horror" story that would need to be posted in a new forum?

Baby flushed down sewer pipe
dad rapes children
grandson rapes grandmother
pedophilia is a growing problem in our society
Growing trend of child abuse

Which of these are shock topics? Well, you can tell by the prurient nature of the headline.

I think this illustrates the problem here. I don't see "Baby flushed down sewer pipe" as being in the "horror" category at all. The baby lived and the father claimed it was an accident. It's more of a "News of the Weird" type of story. At least two people mentioned the story to me in real life. What about the grandmother that threw her grandchild off the walkway at Tysons? Is that a horror story or a news story since it happened where many of our posters shop?

I think this is very much an "eye of the beholder" situation. It is different than the distinction between "explicit" and "non-explicit" topics because we have all socialized rules for making that distinction. That distinction exists throughout American culture. I can see this being one big argument about what should go where. And, that doesn't address the "Recent Topics" issue. If I create a horror forum and leave it out of "Recent Topics" I expect there will be resistance to using it.

We can try to get users to be more sensitive about the topics they choose. I doubt it will have much effect, but we can try. But, here is where you can help. I need one line to go in the subject of a sticky post. Can you suggest language for that line?

Is the possibility of misplacing the "baby flushed down the sewer pipe" thread really too high a price to pay? I don't think it is. I don't find my day ruined by the horror threads but I don't appreciate them and wouldn't mind if they were off in their own thread. It's similar to the explicit threads. We're all adults but a lot of people just don't want to see that.

[Anonymous]

I agree. If I wanted to read that type of news story, I'd go to a news website. Perhaps something like: no graphic language in thread titles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree. If I wanted to read that type of news story, I'd go to a news website. Perhaps something like: no graphic language in thread titles.

It's funny but people are pretty good about self-policing spoilers for tv shows or something like that "SPOILER: Did anyone see last night's Modern Family episode?", rather than posting the plot in the subject line.

Why is it so hard to post "GRAPHIC: Horrible story of abuse in MD" instead of somethign more explicit.

Those interested in learning more will read the thread.

[Anonymous]

I don't particularly love reading about people eating placenta and any other gross, graphic story that pops up every now and then in the "Expecting" forum. Skim and skip.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. If I wanted to read that type of news story, I'd go to a news website. Perhaps something like: no graphic language in thread titles.

It's funny but people are pretty good about self-policing spoilers for tv shows or something like that "SPOILER: Did anyone see last night's Modern Family episode?", rather than posting the plot in the subject line.

Why is it so hard to post "GRAPHIC: Horrible story of abuse in MD" instead of somethign more explicit.

Those interested in learning more will read the thread.

Actually, one of the more common complaints I get is about spoilers that are not clearly labeled as such. I think what you have witnessed is less poster self-policing and more posters reporting spoilers and me removing them (frequently only to see them reposted and re-removed).

Regarding the post above asking whether the person would miss the story about China, I don't know. What I do know is that I wouldn't look forward to the squabbling that would result from moving or removing such a post.

We already have a significant number of users who absolutely refuse to post in any but the most popular forums because "nobody uses the others". The forum being proposed probably really would be one that nobody uses because I don't believe there are more than one or two posts that belong there on any given day. The arguments about a subjective issue like what is graphic and what is not will be endless.

One step those of you who don't like graphic posts can take is to stop posting to such threads yourself. Every time you post on the Maryland abuse thread in order to complain to the OP, you bump that thread right up to the top and make sure everyone gets to see it. Ignoring the thread will be a better strategy.

[Anonymous]

Out of curiousity, have you looked to see whether this rash of rather graphic threads are all by the same one or two OPs or is this now a broader segment of the DCUM readership?

Would it make a difference to you?

Not being combative, just curious.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Out of curiousity, have you looked to see whether this rash of rather graphic threads are all by the same one or two OPs or is this now a broader segment of the DCUM readership?

Would it make a difference to you?

Not being combative, just curious.

I have checked a couple of times and I haven't seen a pattern. The posts seem to come from a number of posters. I personally have no strong feelings about the topics in question and, therefore, would have no strong feelings about the poster if it were one poster doing it. That might make it easier to stop, but wouldn't otherwise be something that made a difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:tell that to cnn.com homepage

God, right? So I don't read them anymore. After that incident in London they had the picture of that loser with his bloody hands up there forever. Complete crap "journalism."

[Anonymous]

If the stories are in the news media and not on a specialized "horror" site, then I do not see how that is so damaging to most readers. The "baby in a storm drain" story has been in the popular press for decades (different babies, of course). I think if a story could be found in People magazine, CNN, or WaPO then it is probably all right. No one forces you to read this. You could read Garden Web instead.

[Anonymous]

I'm happy to see other people talking about this, and to have Jeff taking it seriously.

I'm somewhat bothered by the shock porn threads, and find that I can barely resist clicking on them and reading, and they inevitably end up making me feel depressed and dirty afterwards. No one really benefits from reading about them, they just satisfy everyone's prurient, morbid, dark side. But I can see how Jeff would say, how do you draw the line, and still have the 'freedom of expression' that makes this forum so great.

The fact is that you see a new thread popping up on the General Parenting forum almost every day about someone's crippling anxiety or depression, with dozens of people saying they feel the same way, and a lot of it seems to be related to fears of what could happen to your children, and sadness about all of the tragedy and horror around us. My opinion is that this culture of fear and anxiety is created by, in part, things like obsessive posting of sick topics on the Off topic forum, and then people reading over and over again about the way your kids can be tortured, raped etc. I'm NOT blaming society's ills on the Off topic forum. I'm just saying that in some way, I think that reading about and being surrounded by 'shock porn' stories makes us all more anxious, more sad, more fearful.

I don't really know what to do about it but I agree w/ Jeff that the easiest thing to do is ignore the topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the stories are in the news media and not on a specialized "horror" site, then I do not see how that is so damaging to most readers. The "baby in a storm drain" story has been in the popular press for decades (different babies, of course). I think if a story could be found in People magazine, CNN, or WaPO then it is probably all right. No one forces you to read this. You could read Garden Web instead.

I'm the PP here. I think it is pretty clearly documented that reading about these things has a demonstrated, measurable, negative impact on people in terms of their outlook and perception. It is ignorant to say that it is not damaging at all. For example, we all suffered some minor (or major) psychic damage from having read about what happened to those kids in Newtown. You think it just has no impact whatsover on people and their lives? Totally stupid.

[Anonymous]

How about a news or current events forum. Don't put it in recent topics. Those who want the news can read it there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about a news or current events forum. Don't put it in recent topics. Those who want the news can read it there.

I like this idea. This is a good compromise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the stories are in the news media and not on a specialized "horror" site, then I do not see how that is so damaging to most readers. The "baby in a storm drain" story has been in the popular press for decades (different babies, of course). I think if a story could be found in People magazine, CNN, or WaPO then it is probably all right. No one forces you to read this. You could read Garden Web instead.

I'm the PP here. I think it is pretty clearly documented that reading about these things has a demonstrated, measurable, negative impact on people in terms of their outlook and perception. It is ignorant to say that it is not damaging at all. For example, we all suffered some minor (or major) psychic damage from having read about what happened to those kids in Newtown. You think it just has no impact whatsover on people and their lives? Totally stupid.

I think the point was that it was on the front page of the Post website, for example, as well as other sites. It's not like you could avoid it. And if you expect the OT forum to be a place where it's all sunshine and rainbows, I think you're goin to be disappointed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree. If I wanted to read that type of news story, I'd go to a news website. Perhaps something like: no graphic language in thread titles.

It's funny but people are pretty good about self-policing spoilers for tv shows or something like that "SPOILER: Did anyone see last night's Modern Family episode?", rather than posting the plot in the subject line.

Why is it so hard to post "GRAPHIC: Horrible story of abuse in MD" instead of somethign more explicit.

Those interested in learning more will read the thread.

Why is that necessary? The point of a subject is to give a brief overview of discussion within. If reading a title is so traumatic for you, I don't really know what to say. Is not clicking within really that challenging for you? Just overlook it. We're all adults here.