Agree have fun. Everyone could use a little break in all this.
1 Like
You don’t democratically vote on objective reality.
Is this the same “here” where a number of posters have repeatedly stated how other forums have solved the problems of how to deal with “trolls” and inappropriate words and what not?
point me where to start
I’m probably the average user in that I haven’t configured any settings, and popular threads from lots of the subforums pop to the top of my general feed… We should probably just change the settings so that ATF threads don’t pop to the top of users feeds unless they actively select that setting. I think that would solve a lot of problems with shitty ATF threads bumping quality content down.
1 Like
Just generally still very annoyed we’re settling obvious stuff with what has to be low dozens by now of polls. We’re acting like the solution to this situation is to be flatter and ask for ever more input on matters of governance from the community, even though it’s already failing because we’re doing too much of that.
I wish the people who constantly advocate for ever more watered down rules enforcement would just admit that the site they want has no rules. I also wish they would stop pretending like the reason they didn’t want rules was anything other than they see trolling people on this site as a god given right that cannot be abridged. Except micro, he’s just an idealist the trolls are exploiting. That’s not a compliment, he’s literally too stupid to know he’s being used.
Totally ready to get temp banned a second time for 100% good faith posting. Let’s do it.
This whole situation just reeks of losing money on every sale and telling investors that you’ll make it up with volume.
2 Likes
But that’s wrong.
Yeah when it comes to the few I want banned it’s really not. All they actually do here is fuck with people. Everyone who is against banning them either enjoys watching them fuck with people (which makes you a shitty person IMO sorry) or has some ideology based reason for wanting it to be without moderation (that’s micro and micro alone).
Gatekeeping, multiple threads, and multiple polls can certainly be frustrating, annoying, slow, and inefficient. But it seems to be the way the forum has chosen to proceed. And, permit me to say, people on “both sides” appear to be on board.
Sure, everybody wants what they want right away. That’s a given. But, alas, not everybody wants the same things so processes need to be established/followed to facilitate identifying and striving for community goals. Polls, though a pain, are the main way that community views are expressed around here.
And, regarding trolling, I have not seen trolling be a significant factor in these discussions. As far as I can tell, with minimal exceptions, everybody has been posting in good faith and trying to reach some sort of consensus. For that I am very happy despite my occasional piques of annoyance and frustration with our current process.
8 Likes
Why do you alone realise this, iyo?
I am kind of against site-wide blanket bans. What I think is a good idea is banning people on a case-by-case basis. For instance, one poster can be a terrific poster in one set of threads and a horrific one in another. Like churchill for instance, IMO, is a bad poster in the covid thread. If it ever got out of control, you could just ban them from a thread or set of threads.
I have seen this a lot. I hate one poster’s sports posting, but he is good to read in politics general. Site wide bans should be reserved for people who have shown consistent abuse and disrespect to the forum and its community or are causing such a disruption that we are losing content.
1 Like
What mod has second most bans enacted on this site and by far the most per time as a mod?
3 Likes
This is a terrible argument. Literally the same structure as ‘I could use some global warming right about now…’ after a snowstorm.
I’m mad at you for the structure of the site and you know that. The structure of the site is causing 2-3 specific posters to have the power to significantly impact the overall quality level of the content posted here, and that is being made even worse by the same structure that enables them forcing the whole forum to square up and have straight up parliamentary debates about moderation.
You know why I’m mad. Stop posting bullshit arguments that have nothing to do with why I’m mad. Nobody here is dumb enough to fall for it. Jalfrezi, watevs, and churchill still post here despite pretty significantly degrading the overall quality of the site. That’s on the people who think an actually enforced no personal attacks rule would ruin the site or something.
Just because I don’t agree with the Stalinist ideas that you want, but were too afraid to enact doesn’t mean I don’t agree with not enforcing personal attacks. I think I abstained on that vote. I’m ambivalent about it. If it’s what the majority wants, I’m fine with it. And it’s something I’ve done.
It’s not him alone.
How come you and he alone realise this?
It’s not us alone.
Who numbers among your ranks? Show yourselves!
You know man, I don’t want to pass judgement on any specific posters because few of them have I had enough interaction with to know the history of this and thats with individuals. But therein lies the problem that for forum regulars trolling across different threads with a lot of history, for casual readers it is difficult to differentiate between trolling and a fair airing of grievances.
That said, I can certainly say that I dislike prolonged back and forth of personal attacks and the same shitstorm in every thread. Do you think that personal attacks should be allowed? Do you think that edgelording (read baiting someone else into personal attacks) should be allowed? Do you think a poster should be allowed to take a position strictly for the purpose of pissing other people off, whether or not they believe this position? This shouldn’t be a complicated choice so I’m not really sure what kind of response you are looking for here.
2 Likes