Animosity in this forum has clearly been on the rise for some time. I liked this place a lot better when it was more horizontally moderated and would like to open a new subforum with that style of moderation. Anyone can see that the moderation philosophy has shifted from more horizontal to much, much more vertical as time goes on. So, just like OOT and The Lounge had separate moderators and posting guidelines, our new subforum would have separate moderators and posting guidelines.
Were we to open this new subform, the posters who buy into this philosophy of posting and moderation will create a horizontal system to encourage whatever posting guidelines we set up. And this way people who want vertical moderation can have that, and people who want more horizontal moderation can have a place for that. And with it being on the same site you can get crossover between the places and people can post in one and read both, or post in both being mindful of the different moderation schemes, whatever. If you donât like our subforum you can mute the whole thing and never see a thread or post from it.
I donât want to get into specifically what sort of posting guidelines we might adopt, but they would be designed to encourage the feeling of positivity, diffuse responsibility, and comradeship that characterized the early forum. Thatâs the sort of environment weâre hoping to encourage and sustain, and the future posting guidelines will be drawn up to foster that.
I think that Bobman had a really nice quote recently:
To summarize, this idea is about trying to find a way to facilitate that sort of cultural change.
Do you propose this subforum â aside from having a different moderation policy â would be a normal subforum like âPolitics & News,â âSundy Chitcat,â etc.?
Or would it be more like âFrench BBVâ in the sense that it is only viewable by a certain set of posters, perhaps on an opt-in or opt-out basis?
It is not clear to me what the terms âhorizontalâ and âverticalâ moderation actually mean, can you elaborate on that a bit more for clarity? I havenât followed much of the recent (or past) issues with the forum members other than at a very high level, so please direct me to a place that defines them more clearly if that already exists somewhere.
Itâs OK to have polls in the OP. The purpose is to start conversation and work on building consensus around the wording of the proposal that will ultimately be voted on.
Fair enough, itâs just weird that there are going to be 50 people voting before anything is discussed but, alright, letâs see where this goes I guess.
Itâs fine, even a best practice, to have a straw poll in the OP, and more later, so everyone can assess community sentiment. Later, there can be a final vote about what if anything goes up to the broader community for a final vote based on what is synthesized here.
Splitting the forum because some people canât get along is exactly what happened multiple times at our old home. It worked exactly zero times. Once the current group of people the Captains are attempting to otherize arenât participating anymore then they will turn on each other and the place will implode. That literally happened every time. Do we really have to repeat this exercise again.
Also we generally had the same group asking for the favor of their own little clubhouse mock, belittle and treat the rest of us like shit. There has been zero remorse, zero apology. Itâs literally still ongoing. Our response to that is to literally just give them what they want?
How would cross-poking be managed? I.e. if the less moderated forum is writing about posters/posts in the more moderated forum? Or vice versa? I.e. breaking the rules of one forum but sidestepping them by posting in the other forum.
I.e. main forum. Two posters get into an argument. One is banned for personal attacks. But then steps over to the new forum and repeats the same personal attack?
Or vice versa. Main forum is constant quotes and potshots at what is happening in the new sub?
Sure. To me, a vertical moderation style is you elect the moderator, he does the moderating as he sees fit with no discussion or community involvement. killa from OOT might be the best example. Monarch of the forum. Horizontal moderation, in my mind, would be characterized by consensus, openness to criticism and feedback, and rotating responsibility.
If you all need a divorce Iâd prefer you donât live in my guest bedroom. If you want to reconcile then lets do it but there has been zero indication of that.
I thought this was the idea when I proposed SOG and became the initial moderator of it. Yuv and I butted heads a bit and I didnât feel comfortable with the role at the time, but regardless I felt like the precedent was set via the prior precedent at 2p2 that each forum could have itâs own moderation. I thought Risky lorded over Sundry (or A&E, watev â I nominated that forum too) in a way that Wookie didnât.
I think the main issue is that the lines have been drawn virulently instead of subtly, if the politics area was granted to Wookie from the get-go and was addressed in a different, less confrontational manner then youâd probably easily have what youâre seeking. The issue, tbh, is that what is sought (by many of the cohort) also addresses Wookieâs tenureship. So address it one way or the other in the open: Are you okay with Wookie being mod forever? (Or do you want to address that?) Or do you really only want your own area free of his reign, which again (imo), you couldâve had from the beginning if the real issue isnât other grievances.
Iâm buzzed and rambling, watev. Itâs clear that âthe other factionâ is a mix of malcontents and legit members of the family tho. They need to parse themselves out, I think leaving is a de facto sign tho (as itâs not like Wookie is actually bad).
I donât think you did either. Itâs a shame you couldnât have proposed this outside of that conversation. I would have honestly probably been for it. After seeing the level of vitriol by some in the PM thread I am now opposed.
I would personally not like anyone to leave this site. Letâs build lots of projects that keep people energized, whether thatâs a subforum or a podcast, or whatever other content anyone wants to build.
I think youâre analogy is rather rude and honestly, if your solution is telling 20 or 30 or however many people to leave the site, maybe, respectfully, you are the one who should leave instead. Letâs keep the family together.