What's new

An idea to address forum toxicity in VI-C

Status
Not open for further replies.
several members have mentioned to me if it continues they will not be active anymore and I agree 100% with that sentiment.
My thoughts exactly - would be great if there's a better way, but if not, I look forward to leaving and joining Christian's hub (or Daniel's Twitch!). Hopefully, this forum can be turned around; it can be great at times and really helpful and informative, and at others, it can be no different to every other comments section or chat forum - the pits of the earth.
 
Last edited:
"Boy, you gotta carry that weight
Carry that weight a long time
Boy, you gotta carry that weight
You're gonna carry that weight along time"
 
Last edited:
This just isn't a good idea.

Like others have said, it is impractical.

What about those who do not speak English well, or are simply uncomfortable speaking it? Are they no longer allowed to voice their opinion?

What about people like me who are simply not super comfortable speaking at all? Do I now have to overcome my own insecurities just to make a post on a music forum?

There are other reasons why this is simply not a good idea, but I think I got my point across.

The "solution" to the toxicity seems pretty obvious to me. Have some form of moderation. The lack of moderation on this forum has baffled me for years. A thread like the recent HZS threads would have been shut down and locked the moment they got derailed into personal attacks on any other forum I've ever visited, music or otherwise. Yet here, thread like that are allowed to exist days an days beyond the point of reasonable imo.

I simple lock alongside a post saying why a thread was locked can do wonders to a derailed topic.
Agree, it won't suit everyone, and for those it doesn't, well you can't please everyone all of the time. So yes, if it's an English-speaking forum, and you don't speak English, it does mean you can't participate directly - unfortunately, it's difficult to do anything about that, but I'm not sure its sufficient reason not to think if it could work. It doesn't of course mean that non-English speakers can't continue to use a text-based forum, such as this, so for someone like you, it would mean exactly zero change - you continue to use what have been doing in the past.
 
We had great casualties already... Verta, gone. Piet, gone. Guy, gone. Carles, gone.
Interesting that (for the first time?), Christian didn't post his vlog here on Vi-C; perhaps an oversight or delay, or that may mean Christian gone too?
 
Fair enough Garry. I just brought that up an example of one thing that's driving toxicity now. It's certainly not the first time we've had 20+ page posts of people chasing in circles though. I agree with @Jimmy Hellfire that at some point a moderator needs to say "Okay everybody had their say, we're done." When people start entering the conversation purely for entertainment value, to get their kicks in at the protagonists, etc. that is a good sign that productive conversation is done. When things get personal that's a sign that the party is way over.

Regarding the idea of a hub, I like VIC despite all of its flaws because it isn't run in the interests of any one company. I again agree with Jimmy that developers taking criticism (even unfair, uninformed criticism) is just part of the deal. I think developers should not be so scared of this because people build up "reputational profiles" already e.g. do you trust my advice based on what I've posted and what music I've shared, etc.
Yes, I'm not proposing this on behalf of developers. Again, I'm separating out what Christian might do with HIS hub, and what COULD be done here on VI-C. 2 different things. The discussion is useful and helpful, but not if it's had in the tribalistic way that recent discussions have been. So how do we improve that, so that we continue to get the best from the community, but avoid the conversation degenerating to name calling and taking sides. If people's comments are made via video, and they are identifiable by the comments, I think the standard of discussion would quickly be raised. I could be wrong.
 
Would not be the first time they left tbh. Maybe the 4th ?

Christian's temper has gotten him taken off the help desk, and banished to Scotland.

And to call the environment toxic here and give his camera a dirty look is a insult to all the members that spend time helping people and not flogging product like some childhood actors.

Interesting that (for the first time?), Christian didn't post his vlog here on Vi-C; perhaps an oversight or delay, or that may mean Christian gone too?
 
Last edited:
Long live VIC. I am not so interested in new forums. People come and go here and not just because they don't like certain threads. If people want to bash it out and beat a dead horse I think it is fine. Agree however that maybe the threads we are talking about should possibly be locked at this point or in the near future.
 
If Christian is talking about a hub for his videos so he can maintain those discussions and comments for historical reasons like he mentioned in his vlog I am 100% behind him. Its a great idea, and a great way to engage directly with your audience, without having to deal with people who for some reason don't like it yet watch and complain afterwards. He has amazing content and his community really gets involved, I see no issue with him creating an enviroment for those people to chat with his vlogs being the centre of it all.

It he is suggesting a Vi-Control alternate where dissenting views, or views that don't agree with the moderators personal opinion or removed in the name of 'toxicity' then I am against it. The problem with a new hub like that is you have to have really unbiased people in charge, because who decides what is toxic and what is just a dissenting view. Like as others have mentioned, the HZS threads got really into it discussing a product. If this new 'hub' was ran by Spitfire then I would have been banned most likely, and possibly those who tried to agree....however if there was discussion on a competitors product, lets say Orchestral Tools release something...would the comments against them be regarded as 'toxic' so quickly. Also how and who determines to what degree a personal attack becomes toxic, like if someone thinks Christian isn't a very good vlogger, is that toxic? what if one member starts criticising another reviewers style or ability to do videos, is that more or less toxic than doing it to the forum owner.

I think VI Control is one of the most open and free places to discuss all things music creation focused. This place has its moments of negativity but very rarley would I use the word Toxic. And the speed at which people these days actually reach for that word 'Toxic' to describe it worries me about how much freedom would be permitted if they had control.

-DJ
 
The most civil forum I participate in is also the most heavily moderated. There's still room for engaging discussion, but ad hominem attacks are absolutely not allowed.

Best,

Geoff
 
I have an idea. An 'ignore threads' feature. As much as we'd like to think we have the will power to not get dragged into certain threads where all hell is breaking loose, a feature like that would go a long way to reducing traffic to such threads. You click ignore on the thread and it disappears from view unless you disable that feature.

By the way, is there a feature like that already and I just can't find it??
 
There are over 66,000 threads in this forum and 866,700 posts. Sometimes a few threads and posts—which probably make up less than 1% of all the threads at VIC—slip into drama for a few days and afterwards everyone will forget it, or it will become a running joke on the forum.

People are getting worked up over random posts by random people about random products in a random forum in a random corner of the internet? If you're that weak-minded, you have major psychological problems and do not belong anywhere on the internet. No one is being forced to participate in any thread. You can't jump into the snake pit willingly and claim you've been pushed in.

The very notion of "toxicity" is so vague that it could mean anything. It is usually the case that the people screaming about toxicity are the most toxic elements in the discussion. "Addressing forum toxicity" is nothing more than a call for censorship disguised as some kind of moral/ethical imperative.
 
Last edited:
There is. It is called 'Ignore Thread'. Open the thread you want to ignore, and at the top right there is a button 'Thread Tools'. That's where to find it.

Amazeballs. Thanks, muk!

Does everyone know about this already?o_O I feel like it would solve so many problems.
 
This has got to be the LEAST TOXIC forum bar none in my experience. It rarely gets out of control and your skin is a little TOO thin if you can't handle the latest HZS controversy. The anonymity of the internet has people saying things without regard of consequences sometimes that they would never say to someone in person, that's the nature of the beast. YouTube is really the absolute lowest...
 
Block user (not thread) would be a means to sort a lot of this out with a button at the foot of each comment.

Not sure if ignore user is the same? Probably is but never used it. It should be more prominent and accessible on every comment.

No-one gets hurt, trolls and idiots hate it.
 
If Christian is talking about a hub for his videos so he can maintain those discussions and comments for historical reasons like he mentioned in his vlog I am 100% behind him. Its a great idea, and a great way to engage directly with your audience, without having to deal with people who for some reason don't like it yet watch and complain afterwards. He has amazing content and his community really gets involved, I see no issue with him creating an enviroment for those people to chat with his vlogs being the centre of it all.

It he is suggesting a Vi-Control alternate where dissenting views, or views that don't agree with the moderators personal opinion or removed in the name of 'toxicity' then I am against it. The problem with a new hub like that is you have to have really unbiased people in charge, because who decides what is toxic and what is just a dissenting view. Like as others have mentioned, the HZS threads got really into it discussing a product. If this new 'hub' was ran by Spitfire then I would have been banned most likely, and possibly those who tried to agree....however if there was discussion on a competitors product, lets say Orchestral Tools release something...would the comments against them be regarded as 'toxic' so quickly. Also how and who determines to what degree a personal attack becomes toxic, like if someone thinks Christian isn't a very good vlogger, is that toxic? what if one member starts criticising another reviewers style or ability to do videos, is that more or less toxic than doing it to the forum owner.

I think VI Control is one of the most open and free places to discuss all things music creation focused. This place has its moments of negativity but very rarley would I use the word Toxic. And the speed at which people these days actually reach for that word 'Toxic' to describe it worries me about how much freedom would be permitted if they had control.

-DJ


I don't think Christian was aiming to squash all dissent - I think we should in general avoid trying to attribute mental states and infer intentions to people all the time, when none such were stated; he just said he was thinking of creating a hub, and asking for feedback as to whether that would be welcome. He was clearly also exasperated, and I get his frustration. There is no doubt, to me at least, Christian and Paul are decent people, who try to create decent products for a community and industry they care deeply about. They have definitely made mistakes with their latest one, both with the product itself, and its rollout, no doubt. But none of this was done with mal intent. He was simply asking the question if there is a way of capturing the conversation in a format which is less toxic. I don't object to the word 'toxic': it's clear what he means: the number of posts who clearly just revel in the name-calling, and are ecstatic when a conversation turns ugly, because they see it as entertainment, and get out the popcorn. I despise this. People can call me thin skinned all they like, but if that's what people come here for, and find it acceptable, then I disagree. It doesn't mean I have psychological issues (see how quick people were to start throwing insults - this thread itself is an indication of how much a problem there is) if I see the childish behaviour of some as unproductive, even from our more famous VI-C members.

I do agree with you Daniel that the value of such a hub would depend how it is run, and how dissent is addressed (I say this in my 'Comment' part of the opening post. Indeed, this is why I would be more interested in a VI-C approach if my suggestion were to be adopted of using video-based, rather than text-based contributions. If a company owns it, it is hard to see how it wouldn't become too restrictive, particularly when their customers have genuine grievances that they want to express. In my mind, this new suggested hub in the first instance would be the same structure and premise as VI-C, just accepting video-only input, not text.

But the video suggestion was just that, a suggestion, to open up discussion about how to raise the quality of debate here, so that we don't have to wade through 20+ pages, >70% of which is, yes, toxic, to get to the remaining parts which are useful information, whether or not they're supportive to a particular product or developer. I think there's mileage in it, but if people have better suggestions, it would be great to share them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom