Moderation rules

I look forward to his replacement, the curiously named cu–uh, ccuse.

I agree with your initial objection. The committee needs to make these decisions. The democratic portion comes from the committee being open to anyone participating in the forum. If you don’t participate in the committee, was a poll going to get your attention? We’ll be waiting forever for a true consensus that will never come.

SensiblePerson noted a fair concern that this can lead to the loudest voices being the only voices, but I don’t know of a way to avoid this, only to temper it by working to create an environment where the quietest among us feel empowered to speak if they have anything to add.

I’ll pull a few things from the link JT gave us above. I’m also edited out dumb stuff like no swearing.

AVATARS

Avatars and profile pictures are governed by the same rules regarding other content.

ADULT CONTENT AND GRAPHIC IMAGES

Don’t post nudity, porn, or excessively graphic images.

RACIAL, ETHNIC, HOMOPHOBIC, GENDER-BASED SLURS

Any post or image that is a slur against any such group is not permitted.

1 Like

How about 1 rule, “don’t be a dick”
And 1 process, “all mod actions must be validated by those users who care enough to vote”
Any action not validated is repealed. This requires all mod actions be reported in a public place and fits with membership.

3 Likes

That’s a good point.

There could instead be community standards for certain threads. Like a LC thread that is politics free. That’s maybe a bad example since I don’t think anyone on Unstuck didn’t come for our scalding hot politakes, so I guess just like that, I’ve talked myself out of it. Let politics reign across Unstuck!

Works for me.

We’re either smart, or we’re not.

Isn’t this exactly what we’re doing now? It isn’t working.

1 Like

Yeah, good point. We soldier on.

The truth is the truth, there’s a nexus of people with responsibility on the site. They’re welcoming input but they ultimately make the rules. Fortunately, the rules they’re making are to make rules with input from anyone willing, that the mods then have as marching orders.

We’re looking to establish common law basically. They could retain power but they don’t have the will of the people to rule with absolute power (or at least the stomach for it). We’re the middle men.

I was largely agreeing with kerowo taking it as we should trust mods to use their judgement with the caveat that their authority can be stripped, not so much that each decision needs to have input solicited in a public way.

Like hard and fast rules are to govern those that can’t govern themselves. I think we’re largely good there, cuse seems to be growing into his position as a mod. He’s an emotional guy, you take the good with the bad. His heart is in the right place and he’s complained about two things afaict: nbz and people trolling him over an issue that’s been addressed itt (and he was going to deal with people individually otherwise).

An issue came up, he brought it up to us. And we’re talking about it. I don’t think we need to reinvent the wheel.

2 Likes

Well, it’s less of an issue with my view that we really need to address the single issue we have at hand.

It’s not like we have a litany of things that are problems that need straightening out.

1 Like

That’s corporate and not family tho.

Okay I’m just lazy.

Sounds good, outside of if we want to deal with invoking violent imagery.

The problem with rules is that the easy ones are dumb “don’t be racist” and the hard ones make stupid rules “don’t use this word”

And you’ll never get away from someone making the rule about them. If someone is going to quit if a ruling isn’t changed or a thing isn’t done then let em quit. And if it’s one of the owners congratulate them on their keen management style and hope they don’t ban you for your impertinence…

2 Likes

Yes, I spent a year or so co-modding Politics Unchained (“Politics v7.0”) after kerowo stepped down. During that time I spent innumerable hours discussing forum rules both in private conversations with the co-mod as well as in public moderation/rules threads. (I am sure nobody cares but I am currently and have been for several years an NVG mod.)

I’d be happy to join this committee.

3 Likes

I can PM something, but going from the rules in JT’s first link

RULES:

  1. ENGLISH IS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF THIS WEBSITE

We warmly welcome members from all over the world, and value their insights and perspectives. And, we understand that communicating in English can be difficult for people who did not grow up speaking the language. Nevertheless, we ask that people post their public messages in English so that everyone can understand them, and that material linked on Youtube or other websites also be in English.

Ich werde in jeder beliebigen Sprache sprechen, Herr Evolutionsbreme.

2. PERSONAL ATTACKS AND INSULTS

Personal attacks and insults are not tolerated here. When replying to a post, your own post must be about the post to which you are replying, not the poster themselves. Any personal remark about another poster that - in the judgment of a moderator or administrator - could reasonably be regarded as an intentional insult in the context of that discussion will be subject to infraction. Please also keep in mind that simply saying something that’s not very nice is not necessarily an insult, nor does the fact that you are offended necessarily mean that you have been insulted.

The rules regarding personal attacks extend not only to individual posters, but to groups as well. For example, calling all Republicans idiots is the same as calling every Republican on the board an idiot, and will not be tolerated. A certain amount of latitude may be granted in discussing the policies and the practices of a political party or other political organization, but posters should be advised that this is thin ice, and be cautious about making remarks that personally insult the members of such parties or organizations. And again, simply saying, “I hate Republicans” does not constitute an attack or an insult against Republicans. “I hate Republicans because they are corrupt” is an attack, because it is attacking the character of all Republicans.

Attacks against public officials, political figures, celebrities, etc, are allowed, as long as they do not violate the guidelines concerning threats or incitement to violence (see below.)

All Republicans are idiots. Moving on since we don’t see to have a problem with out of line personal attacks?

  1. FLAMEBAITING

Posts or images that, in the judgment of a moderator or administrator, are specifically intended to provoke emotional responses or personal attacks from other posters, rather than civil discussion, will be considered flamebaiting.

  1. HARRASSMENT, BAITING, TAUNTING

Stalking or harassing other members is forbidden, whether in the public forums, through PMs, or in social groups or albums. If you don’t like someone, leave them alone or put them on ignore. Any attempts to bait or taunt another poster will be considered infractions, including posters who are banned from the forum or banned from a thread, and thus unable to reply. This includes quoting other members in your signature without permission, or mischaracterizing their statements by quoting them and changing the quotes. Disclosing personal or confidential information about other posters or staff - including but not limited to personal identities - or disclosing confidential communications may be considered harassment.

We have the rule already but be draconian with respect to enforcing no doxxing, some of this can be handled by ignore or PMing a mod, again not a problem I’ve seen so far.

  1. TROLLING OR DERAILING A DISCUSSION

If you don’t want to discuss the topic, stay out of the thread. Posts that are, in the judgment of moderators or administrators, intended to disrupt a discussion rather than actually contribute to it will be considered trolling.

Uh, good rule that would effectively ban everyone here instantly.

  1. THREATS OR INCITEMENT TO VIOLENCE

Any post that expresses a direct, indirect, or veiled threat to anyone - whether it be another member, some other individual, or a group in general - or an incitement to violence will be dealt with severely, may result in an immediate permanent banning, and may be reported to the appropriate law enforcement agency. This includes (but is not limited to) what are known as “indirect threats,” such as (for example) wishing that public officials or police officers come to harm, or expressing a desire for armed insurrection against the government.

This is what we need to talk about.

  1. RACIAL, ETHNIC, HOMOPHOBIC, GENDER, OR RELIGIOUS SLURS

Any post or image that is - in the judgment of a moderator or administrator - a slur against any such group will be subject to infraction.

LDO

  1. ATTACKING OR CALLING OUT STAFF OR ADMINISTRATION

Moderators, Advisors, and Greeters are volunteers who work very hard and make a number of personal sacrifices to make the community as welcoming as possible. They may not always be right, because they’re human - but they will always act in good faith and with the best of intentions, and this forum would not be possible without their efforts. When they’re posting on the forums, feel free to debate and argue with them just as you would any other poster, but attacking or calling out a staff member who is acting in their official capacity is against the rules.

We welcome constructive criticism or complaints, but the public forums are not an appropriate venue for criticizing the staff, administration, or ownership of the site. If you have questions about a specific moderator decision, feel free to send a PM to that moderator, an administrator, or the site owner. Or, alternatively, members can always start threads in the Feedback forum to ask the entire staff questions about specific moderator actions or general questions about forum rules. Please be aware that the rules prohibiting personal attacks against staff also apply in the Feedback and Disputing Banning Resolutions forums.

Obviously mods are fair game and are liable to any nature of derision our imaginations are capable of inflicting upon them.

There are more rules below but again we have most of them covered alreadyf and I need to go mow the lawn.

3 Likes

The “English is our Official Language” bit makes us seem like MAGA chuds and I have no idea why we even need a rule like that. If people want to start a thread in German, I got no problem with that.

6 Likes

I hate the tone of all of those rules as well as their specificity

3 Likes

If we fail to get an outcome, we can always adopt the moderation rules stated on this political forum nobody here has ever seen, or ever posted in, or has any opinions about.

1 Like

Hi my name is whosnext, and I enjoy suffering and pain.

2 Likes

I don’t have any faith in this process because the primary disagreement here is not whether posts condoning violence should be allowed, I think 99% of us are in agreement that they shouldn’t be. The issue is a disagreement about whether specific posts actually condoned violence. Especially in the context of the thread. (Some looked a lot worse out of the context of the thread.)

Not sure how making up some rules solves that unless we can agree on something that is apparently a little more slippery to get our hands around.

2 Likes

Ya’ll might want to start by reading the FAQ we already have so you’re not reinventing the wheel.

https://unstuckpolitics.com/faq

That comes with the forum software and it’s a really good baseline imo.

1 Like