This is gibberish.
3 Likes
Marty is from the UK right? This is one of the things where I mentioned this might be cultural. My guess is this type of language/post is considered more acceptable there.
I PMed him about one of his posts yesterday and he said it was meant as a joke but he agreed to delete it when I explained that others would read it as offensive. I know he also was able to end an argument with Wichita after making some similar posts.
My point is I think this is fixable when we setup clear user guidelines that set a community standard that this type of post isnât acceptable even if meant as a joke.
I mean this is a nice thought in a sense, quite conciliatory, but I disagree that we need to ban rudeness or start (it would be starting) to do mid-term bans for outbursts of rudeness. I think that firstly because weâre all adults and losing our shit over being told to fuck off is, frankly, beneath us, and secondly because it doesnât work. Iâll say it again and Iâll keep saying it until it begins to transcend rudeness and becomes very personal: temp-bans do not fucking work!*
I also think itâs kind of weird that youâre effectively saying: Maybe this is a cultural thing, welp, all we have to do is ban the culture and problem solved. That doesnât seem a little odd to you?
*This claim is predicated on the assumption that âworkingâ here means âtending to discourage the behaviour in questionâ. It may not hold true for other definitions of âworkingâ.
2 Likes
Of course temp-ban work. Youâre upset precisely for that reason.
1 Like
For what definition of âworkâ?
Youâre upset precisely for that reason.
This is (attempted) trolling(!!!) and would risk mod action if posted by eg marty (this is not a request for mod action).
6 Likes
Iâve been critical of calling it âcommunity ownershipâ of the site since before its inception, primarily because it is a fiction, the people with the passwords who pay the bills own the site. Now I think itâs inappropriate because it hides the work Greg and Z did to make this place work but more importantly because the community is incapable of voting its way out of a paper sack. As we are now the only thing preventing a group of coordinated individuals from taking over the site is the incredible inertia there is in getting anything voted on.
Maybe in a perfect world community leaders would emerge in such a system and there would be some semblances of leadership, but that hasnât happened. There are occasional flashes of it, but usually they get pulled back down into constant shit flinging. Some of 22âs biggest threads were always about how 22 was run or who sucked the most and we havenât escaped it, but we lack the rule structure to keep those threads in check.
You asked me up thread what Iâm doing to make these changes? Iâm making suggestions hoping the stick and someone with more social capital on this board carries them forward.
I think Greg and Z should declare themselves owners and publish the starting set of rules, roles and guidelines for how the site is going to be run. Having the site be owned doesnât keep us from being community driven or preclude any of the Moderation ideas that have been presented. What it allows us to do is get something concrete laid out as a starting point for the community to build off of.
And yet you were able to disagree with me without telling me to fuck myself. 2 points for Slytherin.
Marty and I had a perfectly friendly PM exchange after all that fwiw.
9 Likes
They pay the bills with money I and others provide.
I was able and you werenât. Iâm not sure Hufflepuff will be taking the House Cup this year.
4 Likes
Temp bans work in a couple of different ways. First, if someone is posting in such a way to disrupt a thread their temp ban stops that disruption. Second, if someone is continually being temp banned for their posting style that should be a clue for them that they should change their posting style. In a perfect world they would have been asked to change their style to match the forumâs norms before the temp bans started, but if someone isnât going to change their posting because of temp bans why would we expect them to change their posting after just being asked nicely?
I donât agree with this at all. No one is âaboveâ being upset by being treated rudely. Itâs intentionally disrespectful and people find that upsetting.
4 Likes
And you get right to the edge of âTherefore, temp-bans do not workâ and just⌠stop, and go back to where you started, with temp-bans being this amazing panacea that Stops Bad Posting. But youâve just outlined that it doesnât!
2 Likes
How upsetting, though? Is there a limit to how credibly upset someone can be at reading the words âFuck offâ?
1 Like
And yet yesterday you were unable to engage with me without calling me a cock. And I wonder why you felt like you were at no risk for a temp ban when doing it? Would you support a temp ban of marty if he called you or somebody else a cock?
3 Likes
Of course thereâs a limit. In a narrow sense, I guess I agree with you that people shouldnât âlose their shitâ about being treated rudely, but that doesnât really support the position that we shouldnât temp ban someone for being disrespectful to others. The reason for the ban isnât because someone lost their shit or to prevent someone from losing their shit, itâs to promote a healthy culture of respectful discussion and debate.
1 Like
How many bad posts do temp banned posters make? Youâre confusing short term and long term in your dislike of temp bans. In the short term temp bans are 100% effective at stopping bad posters.
Long term temp bans require some self awareness and a willingness to change on the part of the bad poster in order for them to change or the cycle just repeats itself until the temp bans are permanent.
What is your replacement for temp bans that are as effective in the short term and more effective in the long term?
Unfortunately, you donât get to tell someone how to feel about the posts they read.
Yes, and it doesnât work. Did you read this post (you donât strike me as a habitual French BBV browser)? Any thoughts?
I donât have a replacement for them and I donât need to have one to point out that the claims being made about them simply arenât true; they do not foster a culture of blah.
Unfortunately, you donât get to tell someone how to feel about the posts they read.
I donât have to take them at their word, either, or to pretend I do.
2 Likes
Yeah, I knew that was over the line and was willing to eat a ban because I thought you were being a jerk and because I thought adding a k to the Captainâs acronym was funny. If those guys were called the Junior High School Vice Principals like they deserve I wouldnât have been able to make that joke.
My underbaked theory is that this all relates to honor vs dignity cultures. What weâre seeing in this forum (or so the underbaked theory goes) is a dynamic where thereâs no solid social consensus that all posters should be treated with some basic level of respect. Since itâs important to everyone to be respected by the community, no oneâs willing to let perceived slights or misunderstandings go, since thereâs no basis to presume good faith. People fracture into cliques and try to raise their status within their clique by dunking on their group enemies.
7 Likes