About Moderation (old original thread)

[otatop]

There are some underused mod tools that I’ve been considering using, including staff notes.

I’m not planning on being all that ban happy but I’ll try to remember to quote or link to a post that gets someone banned/silenced, assuming they weren’t banned/silenced for a post bad enough to be deleted.

[otatop]

You’re all a bunch of stupid jerks!

[NotBruceZ]

RFCs have been suggested a billion times to require mods to do stuff and none of the masses ever want to do it.

[Trolly]

Can a mod be so ban-happy that he bans himself?

[otatop]

I made this post just to demonstrate the staff notice, only a few of you are jerks.

[Jalfrezi]

Look at your own past behaviour. Unless you think the contrived bullying you hitched your wagons to was genuine lol.

[anon10387340]

@CaffeineNeeded

based on a paper that he knew had been updated and corrected as we have already discussed that paper.

Maybe he was on one of his long bans for disagreeing with you and missed the follow-up discussion?

[anon10387340]

@Trolly

Can a mod be so ban-happy that he bans himself?

We can always hope.

[MrWookie]

That wasn’t the PM thread. That was a new PM thread for your new side forum. And I never forbade you from mentioning it. You made that up. And there were still people you fully intended to keep out.

[MrWookie]

Well, I know it’s much more fun to just imagine that CN isn’t giving churchill the benefit of the doubt here, but we also have written record that the subsequent study was shown to him while he was unbanned and posting about it:

@spidercrab

@Churchill

The comment refers to a second report - I can’t find no second report so the comment is like any other other facebook comment where I come from.

Are you just trolling now? You posted this:

@Churchill

lol, i just have :/

for the record…

checking another commenter presently

and you are saying that you can’t find the report that is literally linked in the comment that you took a screenshot of?

[NotBruceZ]

Could churchill just be dumb instead of trolling?

[cassette]

@MrWookie

And I never forbade you from mentioning it. You made that up.

Go back and look at our PMs. You aren’t remembering this accurately.

But it doesn’t really matter. Your argument seems to be:

1. Wookie is allowed to other people because cassette othered people. Evidence: cassette didn’t invite me to the PM thread.

This is a bad argument for many reasons, the most obvious being that I explicitly DID invite you and the other 500 users of this site to a PM thread that would have been the PM thread if you hadn’t stamped out my effort at including as many people as possible.

Stop othering people.

[MrWookie]

@cassette

Go back and look at our PMs. You aren’t remembering this accurately.

I read it, and I stand by my assessment. The prohibition is something you made up.

@cassette

I explicitly DID invite you and the other 500 users of this site to a PM thread that would have been the PM thread if you hadn’t stamped out my effort at including as many people as possible.

Stop othering people.

What you told me at the time was that that PM thread was for putting together a proposal for the side forum and how it’d work. It was never an invitation to your private club where you talk shit about the posters here you don’t like.

[NotBruceZ]

Private clubs for talking shit about other posters should be perfectly acceptable.

[MrWookie]

I’m not saying they should be banned. I’m pointing out the flagrant hypocrisy of the guy accusing me of “othering” people when he happily talks shit about “other” people with his in group. It’s absurd to behave as a clique and then take offense when you get described as one.

[Aofrantic]

We’re at the 500th instance of blatant hypocrisy in these threads, we should stop acting like it’s in good faith.

[Jalfrezi]

@MrWookie

It was never an invitation to your private club where you talk shit about the posters here you don’t like.

No one wanted to hurt your feelings.

[anon10387340]

@Aofrantic

We’re at the 500th instance of blatant hypocrisy in these threads

[NotBruceZ]

Flagrant hypocrisy should be perfectly acceptable.

[Nononocantsleep]

I think moderation transparency is important so I’ll just be up front about my thought process re: this issue.

1. I definitely think we can afford to be kinder to each other in the COVID thread. I am concerned that there are well-intentioned people (e.g., JT) who I suspect have requested self-bans due to their treatment in that thread.
2. Given that CN spends his days watching misinformation quite literally kill people, I can empathize somewhat if he’s pretty reactive to said misinfo (or his perception of such). But point #1 also stands. I would never want to post in a way that dissuades people from the Mental Health thread, for example - though I recognize that’s not a perfect comparison.
3. I believe Churchill has an especially short leash given past posts that could arguably contribute to vaccine hesitancy. I may be wrong about this, that’s just my understanding.
4. I think there are still way too many people who are bitter, seeing the worst in each other, and thinking “this person is mal-intentioned” vs. “this person genuinely has a different understanding” That extends across multiple threads and is not specific to Churchill (who may or may not be trolling, I haven’t paid enough attention).

I’ll end with a final encouragement to be empathic site-wide. I don’t mind using mod tools if “that’s a stupid idea!” morphs more obviously into “you’re a stupid person!”