Always good to include an example, so thanks for that. You’re fine with that post, moderation wise, because you have only implied the moderator and certain members are too stupid to be persuaded by sound reasoning
We talked yesterday about moderation. Out of curiosity what else would you allow? Threats of doxxing?
Yes. You should be able to say that ideas are stupid. Saying that someone holds a stupid idea implies that someone might be stupid, but there’s plausible deniability that you might just think they are a non-stupid person with a stupid option on a particular issue. If we say you can’t label their ideas, then how can we criticize anyone’s point of view on anything? You might as well include a “no sarcasm” rule if you want to tone police to that extent.
I’d would much rather have the moderation policy to be to ask people to say “your idea is stupid because_____” and temp-ban them if they can’t/won’t fill in the blank to cut down on the drive-by dunking on each other. Instead of banning bring up old drama, I’d have a “cite or ban” policy and make people take the time to do the work of digging up old posts and quoting them.
1 Like
I don’t keep track of everyone’s ban and posting history in a giant spreadsheet but from what you’re telling me now I guess you think doxxing is ok?
Don’t you mean you’d fruitlessly try to motivate others to act obnoxiously
1 Like
1 Like
Has Cactus ever raised this as an issue? Most of the moderation actions I have taken have been the result of people who were directly affected by the behavior making a complaint. On the other hand, there were many instances where posts were flagged by someone not involved in the discussion where I and other mods took no action, as Yuv mentioned earlier.
I realize that it doesn’t make sense to always require the aggrieved party to complain because that can create an environment that is so harmful for certain users that they don’t even feel like showing up. However, in cases like the post we are talking about which, in my admittedly subjective view, is borderline, I think it makes sense to consider the feelings of those directly involved.
did anyone say this? like anything remotely like this?
Jman and goofy liked my post sarcastically to show they disagree. That’s, at least, remotely similar.
1 Like
Go ahead and state why you liked it and prove me wrong.
1 Like
I can see why you might be hesitant to respond given the choices. Either you agree with my post or, like I posited, you disagree with it and liked it sarcastically, or you just click like on a lot of my posts as a sort of …
of calling me a moron.
2 Likes
He has when I tried to contain him because he was posting in bad faith but I don’t know of any recent complaints.
I guess the Wednesday before Thanksgiving is the new Friday. Thread title should be reverted to “Don’t take the bait.”
2 Likes
3 Likes
For the sake of clarity I will point out that when I make posts here like the one in question, my desire is not for more moderation, it’s for more consistent moderation. As I have stated before, my preference is for less moderation and fewer/shorter bans in particular. If banning is the way it’s going to go, as it presently is, it should be consistent.
As to the main point of your post, considering the feeling of those directly involved should carry the most weight, but it shouldn’t be a necessary condition.
That’s an incorrect interpretation of what my desires are based on that post. I don’t desire to fight about things I’m correct on, but that’s what happens. I would obviously prefer to be given a fair audience instead of a bunch of crap like “Friday” and “usual suspects” and “he’s badgering the mods” and being banned for 4 days and so on.
I believe this is just a factor of your trust level because this is a new account. If you continue using this account for a while to make posts and engage in other activity (liking posts, having your posts liked, etc), then your trust level should increase pretty quickly. The “newbie” trust level is one of the downsides of having your account deleted and coming back on an alternate account.
Edit: I went ahead and liked your post to try to help you out!
How is it even “arguably borderline?” Cactus made a post something to the effecti of “our democracy has begun it’s descent into” [something bad]. My response was a hyperbolic example of how we’re actually already at something bad. Maxcut’s attempt to frame that as some kind of personal attack or trolling or pig-piling of cactus is a pretty transparent attempt to stir up shit for the sake of stirring up shit. The target of the shit-stirring wasn’t even me, it was CW, because he admitted he laughed at my post.
unless you’re me, who is permanently at tl1 because i’m a risk for “destroying the site.”
how i’d do that, not too sure
1 Like
I had a nice walk today in my cute new neighborhood with everything you could ever neer within a quarter mile walk