Not that you can’t change your mind and your persepective, but you voted against more moderation in the big vote. It’s not just a democracy, it’s a community owned site. Watevs is an owner of the site. imo.
It is surprising that you think I have a problem with you. I’ve repeatedly said that I don’t and that I like you. We can’t disagree without having it out for each other? Am I threatening to ban you?
Think about that and then put yourself in the recently banned shoes. Wouldn’t it seem like people chatting about whether or not they should get a perma (or how many bans = perma) are out to get them? Does that seem welcoming? Or does it seem like priming the action for more trouble when they get back? Is that much different than fighting with them in this thread?
I have heavily moderated a couple of people for 18 years and I can tell you how a time-out goes. For whatever reason you decide a time-out is merited. During the time-out you all chill. You do not sit in the other room talking about how bad the person is. When the time-out is over you let it be over and you put on a good face hoping that all will be well.
You come across as passive-aggressive here. (Or are you just being Canadian?) You seem to be agitating to permanently ban watevs, but you seem reluctant to outright say it or advocate directly for it.
What is the practical difference? You had no intention of furthering the discussion and yet, all of your arguments were firmly held and sound as the pound?
Maybe it’s time we stop letting these kind of bullshit excuses delay taking action? Reducing the back and forth over something this ridiculous would improve the signal to noise ratio some.
There is nothing passive about it. I’ve said many times he should be banned. If I was dictator he would have been banned a while ago. In fact, until the recent kerfuffle with the euros he was the only person on here I’ve suggested should be banned. Nevertheless, I’m not dictator. Nobody else seems to agree.
I’ll just sit back and see how many bans it’s takes or if there is even a number. Because it’s 100% absolute lock there will be many many many more.
I didn’t go posting in that thread thinking “my posts will make the site a better place” or “my posts will make others happy”. I assume those would be “good intentions”. As such, my intentions we probably neutral. When I ended up in a contretemps with other posters, I did post in a way to insult or offend them. Call those posts made with “bad intentions” if you will. None of what I have described above is bad faith posting.
It would be a community vote rather than my own judgment, but yes, if you’re just here with openly bad intentions, I’m not sure why anyone would want you around in any thread, even if you think you’re coloring inside the lines of your own definition of “bad faith.” This isn’t a game where the object is to find out how to troll to the maximal extent possible without getting banned, and the mods have no interest in letting you play that game. Post better, and with good intentions, or don’t post at all.
This forum is a lot less enjoyable than it once was. It’s gone through periods. I assume it will again. Cycles.
Ban folks posting in bad faith, ban people trolling, ban people who can’t abide by the rules. Ban people who make personal attacks. I’d be fine if we just banned all profanity.
A serious discussion of forum rules is not the place to barge in and take over a thread with “neutral” intentions.
I don’t know what your personal definition of “bad faith” is, and you refuse to spell it out, but the mods are in uniform agreement that your posting crossed ours.
I’ve said my piece and you’ve said yours, and if we continue this, we’re just going to end up going round in circles. I’m not even posting in that thread any more (which, incidentally, is totally dead since I stopped posting in it).
And d2, your descriptions of your intentions give me even more pause. Wtf.
Please, let us end this topic or see it disappear into the ether of PMs. Shake hands (uhhhh…). I think we are quite clear on what each of you is trying to say.
I will try to keep this about ideas and not about specific posters. I don’t think the notion of this site needing to have some minimal types of rules and some system of enforcing those rules is inconsistent with the political viewpoint of the site or the proposition that the members are responsible adults and should be treated as such.
Nearly all of organizations that I been involved in (such as my workplace, my children’s school system, scout troops, former churches, etc.) have some form of rules and enforcement. Some have mentioned informal social groups as a counterexample. I don’t think that’s a great analogy to our forum for a few reasons. First, as has already been mentioned, the nature of real life interaction is very different than online interaction. Second, informal friend groups tend to be fairly small in size. This forum has roughly 100 active users and hundreds of other less frequent users. Third, even informal groups have informal enforcement mechanisms for their norms, such as ostracism.
I’m not advocating for heavy-handed moderation. In the spirit of brainstorming, I’ve made a few suggestions in this thread and others that probably aren’t the best ideas.
I would suggest two concrete proposals for the community to consider.
First, the forum guidelines posted here were ratified by the users. We should try to do a better job of living up to these ideals, and I think part of that will involve more active moderation, which is already happening.
Second, @spidercrab mentioned the rules from the SE forum at 2p2 as an example of lightweight moderation that has worked in the past. If the community thinks that those rules are consistent with our values and would provide some additional enforcement mechanisms they would be worth adopting.
My understanding of the community we are trying to build here is that none of the things you just mentioned are welcome here. Do you intend to continue posting in that manner?
And trying to take credit for keeping a thread alive because you’re purposefully pissing people off is not as good a look for you as you think.
