The real abuse is you two realizing/believing that your Dodge Stratus driving status,
makes you behave one way (and it should! sort ofā¦) whilst not extrapolating that to all other forum behavior. You think Churchill keeps/kept posting dumb shit, therefore he deserves to be treated in any way, rules be damned! Stop me when you see it.
And before you think this,
understand that it reinforces not refutes my point. If you canāt see why then maybe your paygrade is just leaving and making your own Covid Forum.
Is that a non-stick frying pan? Iām intrigued, tell me more.
So yeah, this shit makes me pretty upset. Iām ok with that. That 30 year old is one of about 10 stories I cycle through sometimes. I think about this quote a lot, āEvery surgeon carries within himself a small cemetery, where from time to time he goes to pray-a place of bitterness and regret, where he must look for an explanation for his failuresā. Iāve learned from those times though.
I also think how fucking pathetic it is that you defend churchill not because you actually think he was right because youāre too smart for that, but because someone said something mean to you online or banned you a few days. Like fucking hell how pathetic is that?
āAnd this is why,ā Ikestoys concluded, āI am exempt from The Rules.ā
Like dog, Iāve talked LGBTQ+ kids down from suicide, you donāt really want to go toe-to-toe with people about whoās made the world better or worse through word and deed.
I heard Churchill was banned for drafting Silent Night in the Worst Christmas Songs draft
I heard Churchill was banned for drafting Silent Night in the Worst Christmas Songs draft
You fucked this forum up so thoroughly that it legit took me a second to realize this wasnāt true and you were just trying to make some point with a corny joke.
Heh,
some point
that point being what weāve tried to explain going on three years.
Well shit, that was anticlimactic.
So now that thatās out of the way, what now?
Consider this a first warning (lol hella lenient but eh)? Then a ban, or quarantine, for MrWookie and Ikes to the Covid Thread (and maybe include soccer also if weāre not monsters) if they keep shitposting?
Reminder up front that Iām voting no. Idgaf if the shitpost all over as long as other people are allowed to style on them back, shitpost style or otherwise. But When In Rome.
Iāve been holding off on working my way through the posts in this thread that I missed during my timeout.
Everyone fucked up because they didnāt understand how the Discourse software can be used. This software was designed for community moderation.
The way moderation is supposed to work in Discourse is that users flag posts. A sufficient number of flags, determined by trust level of the flagger and flag accuracy (how often moderators agree with the flags), automatically hide a post.
Everybody should be entitled to make a bad post every once in a while. People have bad days. Someone makes a bad post, other users flag it as problematic. If enough posters flag a post so it gets hidden, it eventually gets deleted automatically if not edited by the user. No action by a moderator is required for this process to happen.
This sort of moderation should have been good enough for almost every bad post. My recollection is that some posters complained about simply having their posts being hidden without any temp bans being handed out because even that minimal amount of moderation was somehow too onerous.
In my ideal moderator scheme, mods would mostly accept the community decisions on flags, even those they disagree with, but would step in to overturn flags that are blatantly unfair, acting as an appeals court if people are trying to use flags punitively in forum wars. If a poster canāt accept that the community has chosen to hide their posts and doubles down on the bad posting, then maybe a mod can give them the night off. If this behavior becomes repetitive over multiple days in a short span or if they waste time with non-constructive whining about having posts being hidden or temp-banned for a day or if they try to circumvent the ban, then maybe we can talk about a longer ban.
For anything worse, including offenses worthy of a permanent ban, I think we should have a community discussion and vote on whether to ostracize a poster.
I suppose in some way, this scheme caters to the lowest common denominator, since a minority can hold the forum hostage by enforcing their view of what is acceptable, but maybe in a functional democracy where everyone is participating in good faith, the majority should take some steps to be conciliatory towards the minority. Instead of pure majoritarian smashmouth politics, I think this idea is how many of us would like democracy to function.
Is it too late to implement this? Maybe. Is anyone willing to try?
Does anyone care anymore? Maybe. Really? No.
donāt bump this thread and tl:dr
Itās massively too late. Trust is fundamentally broken after what happened.
Things have seemed pretty chill recently
Things have seemed pretty chill recently
Yes, but I think only because this thread hasnāt been bumped in a few days.
Iām sorry for actually sitting out for a week while banned instead of making a second account to post in AM. Iām a bad Unstucker.
The way moderation is supposed to work in Discourse is that users flag posts. A sufficient number of flags, determined by trust level of the flagger and flag accuracy (how often moderators agree with the flags), automatically hide a post.
wait, is this how it actually works? I had no idea and thought the flag just brought it to the mods attention. Not sure if Iāve ever pushed the flag button tbh.
Trust is fundamentally broken after what happened
another case of me missing all the drama, what happened?
Literally not allowed to talk about it!
wait, is this how it actually works?
During the time Iāve been a mod I can remember fewer than 5 times where a post was hidden by flags and not by moderators agreeing with a flag and selecting the āhide postā option, so it is a Discourse feature but the vast majority of posts that have been hidden here have been hidden manually.