|
Probably Magic posted:A politics admin would be good because past admin actions in the politics forums have been... less than pacifying. Someone who actively wants to read politics posts seems like the last person you want doing that though? Which goes back to the ideas of neutrality. I mean, the magical wand solution is for Jeff to hire someone to admin the politics forums, QCS, and other areas that generate a lot of reports and problems. I agree that you ideally want someone who is actually neutral, but it's unreasonable to force current admins to read the massive volume of politics posting if they don't want to. I usually spend a couple hours a day reading SA and I can barely keep up with a few big threads. Most of the reason I don't post in CSPAM is it moves too fast, I read a few threads there but the volume is too much for me to keep up with. And I'm really not much for shitposting these days. You need someone who spends a lot of time reading D&D/CSPAM so they're familiar with the dynamics of each. It takes a lot of energy to post seriously about politics because political stuff is very loving real and high stakes. Posting in Games or about your hobbies or whatever is chill and much less pressure imo.
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 09:34 |
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:If you put it in these terms, then you give the users opposed to functional moderation an opportunity to sabotage any candidate suggested. You're right. I worded that like a moron. I'm not looking for TRUE NEUTRAL mods or people with no political affiliations. Just people that understand arguments are going to happen here, and that's fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:It takes a lot of energy to post seriously about politics because political stuff is very loving real and high stakes. Posting in Games or about your hobbies or whatever is chill and much less pressure imo. Path of Exile build wars to the contrary
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:A politics admin would be good because past admin actions in the politics forums have been... less than pacifying. Someone who actively wants to read politics posts seems like the last person you want doing that though? Which goes back to the ideas of neutrality. and that userbase will subsequently be hounded off the forums entirely
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
and I suppose at that point Herstory will post somewhere about the lack of people left to complain about it as evidence that it was a good idea
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:32
|
|
|
I think that the biggest problem with DnD is that people take politics very personally, and that's pretty natural. Politics are personal. However, this results in people going beyond "I disagree with your opinion" and into "and you're a terrible person for believing it" which makes DnD a particularly aggressive forum. I don't know how to fix this or even if this can be fixed. There is a surprising amount of aggro, but that's the internet for yah! I also don't think it's possible to find anyone capable of modding anything without applying their own opinions on the subject. Perhaps we should try aligning specific threads along certain ideologies and mod with those in mind instead of trying to apply a blank ideological framework. For example, one thread could be about cheering on the Democratic party achievements modded by a regular Dem voter, and another could be about criticizing the Democrats modded by someone very critical of the party.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:37
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:bear in mind that if there is a politics admin they will 1000% be from d&d and not the other politics forum, despite the other politics forum having over double the userbase SA really needs two, one each for D&D and CSPAM. They don't have to be 100% dedicated to that sub but having an admin who is actively reading and the go-to for each would be ideal. I don't know if it's humanly possible for one person to read a good amount of both subs. I mean it is, that's just a hell of a lot of posting. Even though D&D has a smaller userbase recently, it's supposed to be the serious effortpost pedant subforum. It takes a lot of time and energy to seriously read D&D and I imagine doubly so if you're modding it. CSPAM has more users and more posts but a lot of it is shitposting that doesn't need close attention.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:38
|
|
|
Over the years that I've been here, I don't recall any mod before Handsome Ralph being quite as blatant in wielding their buttons in the service of political teamsports. The ones before him at least had the grace to be personally posting in the arguments they buttoned up, instead of acting as a goalie for their entire posting clique.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:40
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL take 2 days off this thread. It will probably still be open then, you can come back then refreshed and ready to go. Go do something you enjoy for a while please.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:42
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:bear in mind that if there is a politics admin they will 1000% be from d&d and not the other politics forum, despite the other politics forum having over double the userbase I dunno, is Ardennes still a D&D mod? They're alright.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:and I suppose at that point Herstory will post somewhere about the lack of people left to complain about it as evidence that it was a good idea lol that neither greyjoy, ralph, nor myself has literally ever given you a single probation despite all of us having been/being supposedly diehard ideologues out to get people like you
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:44
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:Which part here? The general perception is D&D mods abuse their power in a personal and targeted fashion. Giving them the power and authority of an admin is perceived to be a mistake.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:46
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:SA really needs two, one each for D&D and CSPAM. They don't have to be 100% dedicated to that sub but having an admin who is actively reading and the go-to for each would be ideal. I mean ffs when they made 500B a mod they actively encouraged them to go hand out a sixer for a random post in CSPAM as their first moderator action, as a joke. MSDOS KAPITAL fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Sep 3, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:46
|
|
|
oh how did 500B work out as a mod, by the way e - just seeing this: Athanatos posted:MSDOS KAPITAL take 2 days off this thread. It will probably still be open then, you can come back then refreshed and ready to go. Go do something you enjoy for a while please.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:47
|
|
|
Ornedan posted:Over the years that I've been here, I don't recall any mod before Handsome Ralph being quite as blatant in wielding their buttons in the service of political teamsports. The ones before him at least had the grace to be personally posting in the arguments they buttoned up, instead of acting as a goalie for their entire posting clique. Nah, that's pretty usual. McCaine in particular would go to some embarrassing lengths to defend some truly embarrassing posters when they got caught out on a limb, Vilerat had him a temper if you dared suggest colonial conquests weren't an unequivocal good, and Evilweasel got very, very pissy any time someone suggested Obama wasn't doing the best he possibly could. It's an internet forum about politics, moderated by people who care enough about an internet forum about politics that they volunteer to moderate it. The job does not select for people who do not let their ideology inform their administration, or people who do not hold grudges. You could take someone who was living in a cave for the past ten years, put them in this position, and by the end of the month they are going to have a nice new set of axes to grind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:47
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:oh how did 500B work out as a mod, by the way He was an Ik and he was made one in cspam has part of their round robin, who probed someone who made a really bad joke post about him, a comedy 6er. Subsequently he then had an insane thread made about him screaming insane bullshit. Make up better poo poo to rage about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:49
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:He was an Ik and he was made one in cspam has part of their round robin, who probed someone who made a really bad joke post about him, a comedy 6er. Subsequently he then had an insane thread made about him screaming insane bullshit. Make up better poo poo to rage about. He did argue that Mexicans congenitally crave a strongman to rule over them, which is a position I feel even D+D in its current configuration does not endorse. Picking a mod based on their being in good standing with the current moderation clique has had some swings and misses, to put it lightly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:50
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:I dunno, is Ardennes still a D&D mod? They're alright. Ardennes is great, and I'd wholeheartedly back him as an admin. Ornedan posted:Over the years that I've been here, I don't recall any mod before Handsome Ralph being quite as blatant in wielding their buttons in the service of political teamsports. The ones before him at least had the grace to be personally posting in the arguments they buttoned up, instead of acting as a goalie for their entire posting clique. my rap sheet would like to respectfully disagree. the icky-rodent mod days were some bullshit. eta: that's not to say that HR doesn't suck; he just sucks slightly less than the rodents who were modding when epg was adminning the forum. Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Sep 3, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:52
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I am not suggesting that these users are assholes; an established pattern of trolling or bad faith is not the same as just "being an rear end in a top hat". I am saying that they are trying to manipulate the discussion of moderation so that moderation is made more difficult and/or amenable to their forms of abuse, and in pursuing this, they're going to be deeply disingenuous. If they seem like they have a good idea, it means you need to apply a lot of scrutiny to why it seems like a good idea, and what other motives they may have. I really think that people need to start being more explicit about what they consider "trolling," "bad faith," or "forms of abuse" (pretty baffled at this last one). As best I can tell, this is just shorthand for a combination of "posting an opinion in a thread where you know that the opinion is unpopular with a significant number of people in the thread" and "posting an opinion in a tone that isn't deferential and polite towards the people they're disagreeing with." I get how people can end up thinking this way. "This person definitely knows that their post will rile people up, so clearly they're just trolling." It's a sentiment that very conveniently ensures that opinions stay uniform; after all, by simple virtue of being in the minority and disagreeing, you're probably aware that your opinion will rile people up!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:53
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Ardennes is great, and I'd wholeheartedly back him as an admin. Ardennes barely bothers to moderate D&D, what makes you think they would be an active enough admin and bother to stay on top of the day-to-day happenings in both forums?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:55
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Ardennes barely bothers to moderate D&D, what makes you think they would be an active enough admin and bother to stay on top of the day-to-day happenings in both forums? then just make him the dnd admin bc a light touch & being impervious to crybabies = good adminning imo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:57
|
|
|
The funny thing about 500 Bees is that, even though he was (a) the poster I was thinking of earlier when I was talking to Herstory, and (b) had that pretty horrendous post about latinos, they still nonetheless had a better temperament for moderation than many of the people suggested so far for D&D or, since he's come up so much, Handsome Ralph. Temperament is pretty important, and that's the tough thing. I remember when Athanatos was first made mod and everyone was like, "Oh, yeah, I have no qualm with him." And the same could be repeated with most TFF mods. Much harder to replicate that in a forum where everyone has some axe to grind against each other, though it's funny to think the sports forums have less enmity than the politics forums that exclude an entire spectrum of conservative ideology.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2021 23:59
|
|
|
Ardennes hasn’t posted here more than a dozen times in the last two years, and only takes mod actions every six months so that no one asks any “what happened to Ardennes” posts. People saying they like his style are just really saying they don’t want mods at all, because they want to say whatever they want and abuse whomever they want, like YMB making up lies about 700B, or the number of aren’t you a rape apologist posts that get made whenever someone disagrees with them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:04
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:then just make him the dnd admin bc a light touch & being impervious to crybabies = good adminning imo. This. ^ Dude I dislike the hyperbolic rage posting as well, but you're doing a similar thing of ridiculous exaggeration. fart_man_69 fucked around with this message at 00:08 on Sep 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:04
|
|
|
A D&D mod should be both passionate enough about a politics forum to pay attention and also able to oversee debate without their politics coloring what they see as the problem. As this is basically never going to happen, you get lovely one-sided moderation that drives down readership and creates a worthless echo chamber. D&D is a failed experiment, it's fine, just close it and let the refugees find new forums to post in. Ardennes is being praised as an excellent D&D mod and they are entirely absent, enforce no rules and posts in CSPAM. Hm.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:06
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Ardennes barely bothers to moderate D&D, what makes you think they would be an active enough admin and bother to stay on top of the day-to-day happenings in both forums? I just looked up Ardenne's post history, because yeah I couldn't remember the last time I saw him post or mod in D&D. He made a few posts in the China thread a couple weeks ago, then the last time he made a single post in D&D was a month before that. A single post. Every single other post is in C-SPAM. I'm honestly curious why the guy is still a D&D mod at all. Not that it really matters if he's not reading or engaging with D&D at all, no harm no foul, but it is a little perplexing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:06
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I really think that people need to start being more explicit about what they consider "trolling," "bad faith," or "forms of abuse" (pretty baffled at this last one). That's funny to hear you asking what "trolling" and "bad faith" and "forms of abuse" are, considering you wrote this playbook on how to do those very things and get away with it. I mean, when you're telling people things like "don't directly insult people but it's okay if you condescendingly imply things, and don't stick around after one or two posts" one really wonders whether you really are confused about the definitions of trolling and bad faith, or if you're just doing more of what you usually do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:10
|
|
|
As opposed to whatever this is, why don't you guys nominate a D&D mod instead. Ardennes probably won't take the admin job, it's just they haven't been enmeshed in any conflagrations as a result, thus why I recommended them for admin. Any other D&D or CSPAM mod is going to get outcry from the opposing side.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:13
|
|
|
I'm not adding an admin right now, nor am I looking for one in this thread. I'm also not closing D&D. Don't waste your limited keyboard presses in life suggesting it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:16
|
|
|
who is ardennes?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:17
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:That's funny to hear you asking what "trolling" and "bad faith" and "forms of abuse" are, considering you wrote this playbook on how to do those very things and get away with it. I mean, when you're telling people things like "don't directly insult people but it's okay if you condescendingly imply things, and don't stick around after one or two posts" one really wonders whether you really are confused about the definitions of trolling and bad faith, or if you're just doing more of what you usually do. That post accurately describes how to post in D&D. Advice like "don't directly insult people or get overly invested in your responses" is exactly what allows Ytlaya to be a better poster in both D&D and CSPAM than, say, you. Ytlaya and joepinetree made excellent posts in D&D that properly fit how D&D describes itself. Of course, they were driven out anyway because their opinions no longer fit the status quo and wildly hostile responses like, say, yours are much easier to dismiss with (and deserving of!) an insulting CSPAM-style response than their careful well thought-out input. Either of them would be a great mod fwiw
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:21
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:I'm not adding an admin right now, nor am I looking for one in this thread. just have the coupon mod do it. no pick could possibly please both groups so may as well pick someone that just has everyone scratching their heads in confusion
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:23
|
|
|
any new mod absolutely should not come from the american politics threads. i admittedly don't read d&d as widely as i used to, but it's insane how bad the current moderation is for actually enabling discussion. the immigration thread essentially died following mod actions – there are a bunch of terrible probes on the linked page, after which it slowed down to like 1-2 posts a day. same thing basically happened to the media criticism thread (more threats to drop stuff than probations tho). in both cases, the small group of posters who strangle discussion stop posting in the thread once the people they disagree with have been probated (i assume they're also doing the reporting). they're clearly not interested in the actual topic, so why do they keep being enabled?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:28
|
|
|
There's definitely some element of "people posting in a thread because they know other people in the thread will disagree with what they post," but...I don't really see what's wrong with this as long as the posts in question reflect the person's genuine beliefs. Some people seem to conflate "knowingly conflicting with someone you think is wrong" with "trolling" or "posting in bad faith." It isn't inherently trolling to make a post that you know some people will yell at you about. The main thing that makes something trolling or bad faith is when someone makes opinions with zero effort to actually justify or explain those opinions. If someone posted in a thread with a general pro-Democrats tone and repeatedly posted variants of "I hope Biden loses in 2024  " with zero elaboration, that would be bad faith trolling because there is obviously zero point to it other than riling people up. But if someone makes posts where they explain their opinion or frequently posts about a specific topic and replies to other posters, that is not "bad faith" - it's just "a person with strong opinions about a topic." Ironically, posting multiple times about something and replying to multiple people seems to be what makes you more likely to get probated, though (see: the situation that lead to VitalSign's thread ban). Broadly speaking, if someone is getting riled up about something themselves, they are probably not posting in "bad faith." In fact, that is pretty much the opposite of bad faith. Sometimes it still needs to be probated (like if a conflict between several posters is growing out of hand), but that's a completely different situation.One other source of "bad faith" accusations is when someone believes that another person is not properly defending their claims, but this often stems from a disagreement in base assumptions. For example, someone might post that they think Democrats won't do X or don't care about doing X. Another poster then responds saying that this poster hasn't provided any evidence supporting their claims. When the first person doesn't provide said evidence, they are then perceived as acting in bad faith. But what's actually happening here is that the first person has different assumptions about the Democratic Party (or the politician in question). To the first person, the default assumption is that the politician(s) in question don't have good intentions and the burden is on others to prove otherwise (and often nothing short of the politician(s) in question actually doing the thing in question would suffice as proof). I'm not really sure if anything can be done about the second issue, since it usually just results in people talking around each other due to holding fundamentally different assumptions about the topic in question. It's probably not something anyone should be probated for, though. Cpt_Obvious posted:Perhaps we should try aligning specific threads along certain ideologies and mod with those in mind instead of trying to apply a blank ideological framework. For example, one thread could be about cheering on the Democratic party achievements modded by a regular Dem voter, and another could be about criticizing the Democrats modded by someone very critical of the party. This probably wouldn't work because people would just read and post in both threads. My unironic suggestion for improving this somewhat would to take what is currently the USNews thread (and in the past USPol and Trump threads) and make it something along the lines of a "Republicans" thread. I think this would accomplish the goal of keeping the topic limited to things that regulars are more comfortable with (and people could always go slightly off-topic if they wanted). You'd still have some issues, but it'd avoid the problems associated with having a thread titled something as generic as "USNews" or "USPol" (namely people completely reasonably assuming that it should be okay to talk about the topics in question). If someone starts posting their opinions about Democrats in the "Republicans" thread, there's at least a good excuse to probate them for being off-topic that people probably wouldn't protest much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:33
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:For all that I clearly disagree with Paineframe on a great many things, he nailed it when he laid out why this is a doomed exercise. This is a forum for venting about politics, for people who are not comfortable in C-SPAM for one reason or another. As such, the job of its moderators is to preserve it as a space people are comfortable to vent, and nothing makes venting more uncomfortable than someone who disagrees with the premise about which you are venting, or argues the thing you are venting about is somehow less important than their preferred topic. skeleton warrior posted:Yeah, this is the essential problem. I agree completely with both of these posts It's a really well-put way of describing the fundamental clash here in US politics threads though I'd also add that this friction tends to lead to incredible levels of ideological hatred and grudges, and over a year of banning "posting about posters" has done little to bring that down which in turn means that there are very few potential mod candidates acceptable to the majority of people here. the people who don't participate in the constant fighting and hate have largely been driven away by the constant fighting and hate
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:36
|
|
|
exmarx posted:any new mod absolutely should not come from the american politics threads. I nominated like 6 or 7 non-uspol people last ik hunt and literally none of them accepted 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:38
|
|
|
Ytlaya seems like a smart guy with good posts and sounds like a great candidate for D&D moderator.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:38
|
|
|
Maybe bring back effort posting rules all around? I remember when I started reading D&D that drive-by poo poo-posting (EDIT: Regardless of which "side" you were on) was stomped on, and maybe we could bring that back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:39
|
|
|
Agents are GO! posted:Maybe bring back effort posting rules all around? I remember when I started reading D&D that drive-by poo poo-posting was stomped on, and maybe we could bring that back. The problem is that when you have moderators with such strong ideological convictions, they often only give the benefit of the doubt to those they agree with, and selective enforcement of the rules reigns. Adding more rules on top of that broken system just gives them more tools to discipline their posting enemies, which has already resulted in a greater degree of "echo chamber" in D&D which should either be embraced at a more fundamental level (in which case I doubt you'll need such a rule like you've proposed) or should have work done to make that less of an issue. I don't mind more strict rules about poo poo-posting or drive-by's, but given the current set of problems that D&D has with its moderation team, I don't see how strengthening these terms would materially effect positive change in the behaviors of the posters who spend their time here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 09:34 |
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:the number of aren’t you a rape apologist posts that get made whenever someone disagrees with them. It's actually incredibly easy to avoid having this happen to you but first you have to not do rape apologetics
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2021 00:47
|
|
