About Moderation (old original thread)

[jmakin]

251 unread posts while ive been out today

Please someone cliffs me. Is the place on fire?

[NotBruceZ]

Feels more like people around a campfire reminiscing about the bad old days.

[MrWookie]

At the very least I think we need some slow mode up in here, up in here.

[Rexx]

I knew this day would come.

[jmakin]

@microbet

A ton of people have less than one like per post.

On what subjects and where people post makes a big difference in this.

And ignores? No one on this site is ignored by more than like 5% of regular posters.

I’m still catching up but I really wanna fact check you on this one. Because I have a suspicion.

ETA: why the fuck is this at 1 hour per post. you’re really tempting me to circumvent this with superuser powers. But nay, I will resist.

ETA: I can still edit my post. I will look into that. When did you start noticing a performance issue?

[microbet]

I just hit an hour. I looked up the report and iirc it was about 10 people ignoring the most ignored user. Right now the report is ridiculously slow, which happens a lot…Mr. Admin.

eta: It’s a little cheating, but you can edit.

eta: You beat me to that…can’t say pony anymore

also, forever. I was shocked that one time that a report actually worked.

[R.C]

@NotBruceZ

People whine about personal attacks, but it’s hard to talk about politics without getting into people’s personal motivations.

I’ve been thinking about this a bit since my last post on the subject, and why I don’t really post in politics here. (Someone said I “want to live in a bubble”: I’m an anti-capitalist in America; it’s impossible for me to live in a bubble.) My politics come from my most strongly held moral values and from the material conditions I observe in the world and the decisions made to get us here. I’m happy to talk those with people who are curious about what I think and why. But when people respond with a knee-jerk insult as though my politics are self-evidently ridiculous, or dismiss them as from a psychological motivation, then no, I’m not going to want to get into the details with them. Life is short enough and full of argument enough without engaging in arguments with people who already are signaling they don’t respect me enough to take me seriously.

None of this is a call to change anything here; I enjoy burns and dunks as much as anyone, and they do come with the territory in politics. I think it speaks more to the exhaustion I have with years and years of that type of dismissiveness, given my politics and where they fit (or more accurately don’t) in mainstream America. I try to pick my fights where I think they’ll make a difference.

I’m not really sure why I posted this other than it’s something I’ve been thinking about after the last few meta-politics discussions in the About forum. Maybe there’s something people can take from it or relate to, I don’t know.

[Crunchyblack]

Galactic take right there

[Yuv]

basically each fly post was contradictive of a previous one because he didn’t really hold any real opinions. micro was pretty good at pointing it out.

[j8i3h289dn3x7]

@zarapochka

If we apply the same standards for everyone, should you too have been banned as you went for jal’s head? And, please, please please please… Don’t pretend that you didn’t. Don’t make me dig the posts out as you did.

If you’ll recall, I was tempbanned, and neither blew a gasket nor complained about it.

[eyebooger]

You need to wait an hour between posts in this topic

To whoever did this: Thank you.

[Trolly]

Crossnerd being Skalnsky’s friend kind of gives the game away.

[jmakin]

So I was out the last few days. took a mini vacation.

Largely caught up, I guess, but where do we stand on these things:

1. Pocketchads as mod (I think it’s been a week?)
2. Binding poll resolutions
3. This thread being at 1 post/hour

[whosnext]

Isn’t the “proposed” vote sequence:

• RFC thread/vote on RFC process (vote under way, open for six more days?)
• Binding vote on RFC process (open for seven days)
• RFC thread/vote on mod selection/terms/etc. (open for three days)
• Binding vote on mod selection/terms/etc. (open for seven days)
• Mod selection thread(s)/vote(s) (open for seven days)

So, if all of this is correct, if we follow this, and if all of this is done in “sequence”, it will be a month before any new mod could be elected.

Perhaps we could do some of those steps “in parallel”. Perhaps PocketChads could “replace” microbet when microbet steps down (which he plans to do when his term is up).

eta: I am 100% in favor of making PocketChads a mod as soon as makes sense.

eta2: JFC – did I skip a step/vote in actually voting for bringing the mod stuff to a binding vote??

[j8i3h289dn3x7]

You need a cloture vote and a vote to suspend the rules in there.

[jmakin]

is this a joke or is this real

[RegretS]

Agreeing on how to make rules before making changes seems pretty slamdunk to me but not the end of the world if there is a new mod whom has a high acceptance.

@jmakin Cliffs:

[goreo]

No joke

@MrWookie

That is a pretty fast timeline, all things considered. We got about 5 days until the internal RFC vote closes, and then another week long vote for ratification. Although I do expect hammering out and eventually ratifying a mod rule would take at least two weeks given the desire to leave votes open long enough for everyone to participate, I suppose we could start an RFC thread now for mod election and re-election that would conform to the process that we expect to be ratified even before the RFC process is ratified to speed things up. Do you think that is reasonable, and if so, would you be interested in at least posting the OP? I think I and others would like to see other people spearheading sitewide rule stuff.

[jmakin]

I mean, that’s fine, if that’s what the people want. I’m assuming these events will not be super common. But maybe we can have some kind of way to expedite things in the case of emergency.

Like say I step down tomorrow. You really gonna take a month+ to decide on a replacement?

[NotBruceZ]

I think we should give mods the power to decide on interim appointments to critical positions.