You are a good poster and I like you
ETA: Hey guys the filter is working great!
2 Likes
Fuck you.
You are a good poster and I like you very much.
ETA: Nope.
1 Like
1 Like
If we could filter profanity to Full House gifs, I’d support it.
2 Likes
Cut. It. Out.
2 Likes
1 Like
What is the poll going to look like?
And would suggest the word “excessive” be removed from the first item. It’s not defined and think as little subjective vocabulary as possible is a good thing.
2 Likes
I would like to change this to:
Discussions of violence. Posts that entertain the demise or serious harming of a specific person or political groups for any purpose (whether it is to express anger, incite a rebellion, or to troll people) are subject to heavy moderation starting with deletion, warnings, temporary bans, up to permanent exile. If your post contains a violent scenario (or a scenario designed to create an opportunity for violence) in which a person or groups end up dead or seriously injured, make it as fantastical and preposterous as possible, post it at most once in a while, but ultimately, consider not posting it at all.
I don’t want to see arguments like “I said they should be shot, not killed,” or “I just hypothesized about a scenario in which somebody else could maybe do something, I didn’t actually hypothesize about a violent scenario.”
I would also add to #9 that other users can call for a citation to be made and can report a lack thereof to mods, and escalating bans may be handed out if those requests are ignored and it follows a pattern of behavior.
1 Like
Some other suggestions:
For item 4, could we delete the second sentence and rewrite the first to include PMs? For clarity mebbe. Something like:
For item 5, should “gore” be added to that list? Don’t exactly remember if the community had a position on this.
And would suggest that items 6 and 7 be tabled for further discussion.
This is kind of the entire reason we’re doing this now, LOL at tabling it. Everyone was welcome to join in to set up the rules, I even specifically encouraged people who disagreed with me to join in.
This sentence means the Trump thread’s gotta go.
It makes sense that you’re fearful of a good faith discussion on the issue. There’s hardly a consensus on what violence means in this context and so there’s a risk of this work going nowhere because of it. Don’t be afraid.
Can you clarify what we are voting on? Most of the rules were in effect already and will be adopted without any nays. The only controversial rule is rule 7. Are you putting rule 7 up for a vote already? As the one who wrote it up, I was clear in saying it was a draft of a rule meant to start a discussion. It’s not something ready to be voted on, except I suppose we can vote on whether something like rule 7 is even worth discussing.
edit: nm jt you ponied me by 2 minutes, I like the way you put in the options, generally approve, although I still think a sustained discussion on it would be helpful even if most people do not want the rule.
1 Like
One other suggestion about the poll that might not be popular. When the rule goes up, allow 48? hours to discuss before a vote actually happens? This way option 3 on the poll could (maybe) be eliminated.
I know this slows things down and zik was worried about voter fatigue but would argue that this should take some time to be done (sort of) right.
Edit: was this just added? Anyway. This is certainly another viable approach
Come on, dude. Tone it down. Let’s at least start with the idea we are all on the same team here.
2 Likes
Isn’t this a committee vote and then there will be a site wide vote?
Does this mean that one cannot support a (presumably just) war? Will it be impermissible to advocate the droning of someone like Assad?
This number seems high imo. If the discussion came first then it might be reasonable to just go with a simple majority afterwards. Having a talk after it doesn’t meet this threshold might make things worse. No one ever changes their mind…
Not sure what, if anything, we can do about gimmicks voting. NBZ has another account. I’m sure many others do as well. I guess we let WellNamed vote? He’s been voting in other polls. It’s annoying to think about this stuff, but we should try to head off any claims about illegitimacy of the vote ahead of time.
1 Like