|
fool of sound posted:If people think mods posting MOD HAT at the top of mod voice posts would help clear up these sorts of misunderstandings I'm willing to talk to the others and maybe give it a shot.
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 14:24 |
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:If you have moderation powers, you do not get to pretend that you don’t have them. You are never not wearing the hat. The threat is always implicit. Yep, when Majoran either deliberately misrepresents what someone is saying, or hasn’t bothered reading the context of the discussion and gets called out for asking stupid questions, they’re response is that they’re “just clarifying as an IK  “.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 19:20
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:Yep, when Majoran either deliberately misrepresents what someone is saying, or hasn’t bothered reading the context of the discussion and gets called out for asking stupid questions, they’re* response is that they’re “just clarifying as an IK *their
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 19:21
|
|
|
I'm okay with moderators and IKs participating in conversations if they are posting insightfully and knowledgeably, adding value and demonstrating that they are actually willing to be convinced they may be wrong or misinformed. For example, when Greyjoy Bastard posts, I don't get the sense that he is taking sides or otherwise posting with the implicit threat of probating those who disagree or push back; his "don't do this" warnings are always explicit. Majorian's posting, though, does not give that impression; he gets way too involved, deliberately misrepresents what his opponents are saying and pushes his own political ideology as if it is widely accepted if not self-evident, and either uses his own buttons or tag-teams with the_steve (with whom he aligns politically) to clamp down on arguments he disagrees with. It does not come across as good faith moderation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 19:28
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:If you have moderation powers, you do not get to pretend that you don’t have them. You are never not wearing the hat. The threat is always implicit. Mods and especially IKs are allowed to participate in discussions and that's not going to change. What can potentially change is to ask IKs to not moderate discussions they are participating in, though they've been better about that and have an active inter-IK dialogue to help with that sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 19:30
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I'm okay with moderators and IKs participating in conversations if they are posting insightfully and knowledgeably, adding value and demonstrating that they are actually willing to be convinced they may be wrong or misinformed. For example, when Greyjoy Bastard posts, I don't get the sense that he is taking sides or otherwise posting with the implicit threat of probating those who disagree or push back; his "don't do this" warnings are always explicit.  It's a small thing no doubt but saying something like "mod hat on" clears up any ambiguity. It's basic courtesy. It strikes me as incredibly unrealistic to have IK/Mods not participate in discussions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 19:39
|
|
|
This is in no way unique to USPol but mod posts like "don't do this" "post better" "don't post like this" "enough of this" "stop doing this" etc are absolutely going to lead to tension since it's not clear what they are telling people not to do. Then, if they are followed up on with a probe/ban you're going to have a QCS thread about what "this" was and how it's easily, perhaps intentionally some might say, misinterpretable IMO if a mod is going to make the effort to make a threatening warning post, they should make a tiny bit more effort to be clear what they are actually saying should stop. For everyone's sake.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 19:40
|
|
|
I know people are busy waging IK wars: Saga Sixteen but could someone please probe/ban the OP of the republican honeypot troll thread https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3955743&pagenumber=6
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 19:53
|
|
|
Mods are like the cops in Watchmen and should have "secret" identities.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 20:40
|
|
|
Then you still get people talking about moderator bias, you just don't know who's running the account. So everyone gets screamed at instead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 21:02
|
|
|
When there were anonymous mod accounts in QCS there was a whole conspiracy theory about how they were all sockpuppets run by a single mod or admin, invariably the one that hated the complaining poster the most.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 21:03
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:When there were anonymous mod accounts in QCS there was a whole conspiracy theory about how they were all sockpuppets run by a single mod or admin, invariably the one that hated the complaining poster the most. These are just forums, any theorizing isn't conspiratorial. I'd presume it's likely true considering how loving stupid you people are. 🐍 (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
These would be known. But it makes it easier to tell when a mod is speaking vs some idiot with bad opinions
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 21:28
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:These would be known. But it makes it easier to tell when a mod is speaking vs some idiot with bad opinions This could just as easily be achieved with an emoji as suggested upthread. Really this is a general tech improvement to the forums that could be done someday in the future, but any mod making a non-mod post would be treated as any regular rear end in a top hat unless they used the mod emoji  at the top of their post in which case they should only make a moderation post and not a content postIt's no panacea but it's easy
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 21:31
|
|
|
I just wandered back in here after taking a couple months off from D&D (aside from CanPol, which I still follow and post in). And here I see that people are still arguing over the same poo poo. That people are still getting multiple day probations for absolutely no good loving reason. Frankly, the problem is that the mods are poo poo and their inconsistent and inappropriate probations has led to a complete mistrust. I got more probations here last year than I had on the whole site in the prior two loving decades. I got a multi-day probation for asking an IK their position on an issue. When I appealed, it was reduced, but I was told that it seemed "aggressive". Asking someone "okay, so if you are voting for a person who opposes this policy you support, then what is your plan for seeing that policy come to pass?" was called aggro and got me multiple days? If you can't be a mod without becoming so oversensitive that you can't even be asked to state your position, then don't be a mod. Every probation I got, I had people in my PMs telling me that probe was bullshit. That's also very different from my previous decades on this site. Before this last year, when I got a probation nobody told me it sucked. Why? Because the mods were doing a good job. Because there is trust in the mods in the other parts of this site where I post. There is no trust here because the mods have been acting like assholes for over a year and everyone is pissed off about it. How are we supposed to make good posts when we're afraid some idiot IK is going to twist our words and willfully misinterpret us in order to give us a probation? When refs make bad calls, sports get out of hand and then the refs have to make a lot more calls. The threads are bad and full of probations because the mods made bad calls. Admins, the solution is to fire the mods and get a new team. The ones you have are not up to the job, full stop. But failing that, tell them this. Before giving a probation reason like "you told people to go get shot by cops" they must ask the poster "are you telling people to get shot by cops?" Because when I said people should take their time off for July 4th to go protest and try to shut down the concentration camps, I wasn't telling anyone to do a suicide by cop, despite what the mod wrote in the probation reason. And nobody reading my post in good faith would have thought that I was. I'm not just bitching here. I have been reading this dumb website pretty much since it was first founded. I lurked for a couple of years as a teen before I got an account. For most of those 2 decades, I was able to read USpol and occasionally participate without seeing this bullshit. I want it to go back to that. This crop of mods has hosed things up badly and I don't have any confidence that they can fix it. We have some of them in this thread saying things like "maybe we might consider not having mods moderate discussions while they participate" and acknowledging that there is a problem. But what we haven't had is the mods actually apologizing for it and taking responsibility. It seems like they all think that it was the other mods who were maybe doing bad things. If you're a mod reading this and have been modding USpol or the election threads, then it's you. You owe some posters an apology and owe the forum an apology. And for fucks sake if someone says something you think is dumb but the post is vague or ambiguous, just ask for clarification and actually, you know, discuss, rather than just taking the worst possible interpretation and then writing your fevered imaginations in the probation reason. Any mod who argues via probation text should be banned. Period.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 21:55
|
|
|
I suggest you contact one or more admins about the probations you have an issue with jimbo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 22:13
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I just wandered back in here after taking a couple months off from D&D (aside from CanPol, which I still follow and post in). Well that's quite the claim, thankfully it was pretty easy to find so we can look at the context. It appears you were harassing Herstory, along with an entire brigade of familiar faces doing the same (seriously follow the quote link and read the page itself, it's a primo example of what was discussed earlier in this thread about harassing IKs who dare do their job). The probation doesn't appear to have anything to do with you "asking an IK their position" so much as you refusing to stop posting the exact thing you were told not to. Herstory Begins Now posted:alright this is done, either pm me if you have further input on it or talk about it in qcs Jimbozig posted:Herstory, I have a few questions for you specifically. Jimbozig posted:Every probation I got, I had people in my PMs telling me that probe was bullshit. That's also very different from my previous decades on this site. Before this last year, when I got a probation nobody told me it sucked. Why? Because the mods were doing a good job. Because there is trust in the mods in the other parts of this site where I post. This one is harder because you have multiple probations for telling people to "go protest", but since you mentioned the fourth I'm assuming you mean the first of these: Jimbozig posted:So back in late 2017 or early 2018 some people were saying that comparing Trump to Hitler and Republicans to Nazis was wrong. I posted that Hitler didn't immediately start murdering Jewish Germans in his first year in power and pointed out similarities between Hitler and Trump's first year. I was told I was being hyperbolic. Jimbozig posted:Darkcrawler, you post pages and pages of stuff but it's all based on premises like "Maduro is hosed up." The rest of these "bullshit" probes are more of these sorts of high-quality contributions, my favorite part is you explicitly mentioning how you've been told to stop posting exactly what you're posting in the post you get probed for posting it in: Jimbozig posted:Rape Jimbozig posted:What the actual gently caress. Jimbozig posted:No one is pretending he is as bad as Trump. Obviously Trump is worse. But he and his kind are responsible for Trump. And he doesn't need you defending him. Why do I bother digging these up? Because it's a perfect example of the sort of bad-faith engagement that happens in every one of these feedback threads. Jarmak fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Jan 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 22:25
|
|
|
I apologize if this has been pitched before, I have only read about half the thread- A way to bring back USnews without the problem of it basically being only one or two posters and no engagement would be to instead instate more of a "USPOL Highlights" thread. My thought is, it's a thread for emptyquoting, not posting itself- when a news story lands in USPOL or an interesting topic starts up, a user emptyquotes it over to the Highlights. It would not have to be the OP who dropped the big tweet or made a good effortpost or whatever, it can be anyone. This would mean that people who can't keep up with the thread daily (most people, really) can read the Highlights thread to see what's been going on. If a quoted post interests them, they can click the link to go to the original in USPOL and read the discussion onwards from there. This would hopefully help with the problem of people not wanting to backread 5+ pages before dropping something in the thread, and eliminate double posts of tweets or news stories. It'd also serve as a slower version of the thread for people who would like to use it as a current events source. Only solves one of the USPOL problems, really, but it'd help. Maybe it would also be useful to highlight when people have spun a discussion off into its own thread, too, and encourage taking derails elsewhere?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 22:34
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:I suggest you contact one or more admins about the probations you have an issue with jimbo. I did. I got a couple of them reversed or shortened because the admins agreed you guys were fuckups. Jarmak posted:Well that's quite the claim, thankfully it was pretty easy to find so we can look at the context. It appears you were harassing Herstory, along with an entire brigade of familiar faces doing the same (seriously follow the quote link and read the page itself, it's a primo example of what was discussed earlier in this thread about harassing IKs who dare do their job). The probation doesn't appear to have anything to do with you "asking an IK their position" so much as you refusing to stop posting the exact thing you were told not to. Like, maybe I was mistaken and Herstory was actually saying "stop posting about politics so we can continue to post about that probation from earlier" but somehow I doubt it! If she meant anything other than "stop talking about mod decisions in the thread" then she probably should have said so before giving out a multi-day probe for someone who loving agreed and tried to get things back on track! quote:This one is harder because you have multiple probations for telling people to "go protest", but since you mentioned the fourth I'm assuming you mean the first of these: Yes, the first one. About the 4th of July. I think taking the 4th of July to go protest was a good idea. I wanted to get Americans to go do that. It was a good idea and you should have done it. You guys still have those camps, you know. But it's a good thing you have mods to tone police how angry we are allowed to be about literal concentration camps. As for the ones about Biden being a rapist, yeah, the first one you quoted I got on purpose. And the third was borderline - I certainly didn't go PMing any mods about it. But the second was absolutely bullshit. My post was completely apprpriate in context. If somebody posted that they still like Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein because "it's clear his heart is in the right place," what is an appropriate response? In that context, doesn't "what the gently caress? He's a rapist!" seem like the only reasonable response? Jimbozig fucked around with this message at 22:50 on Jan 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 22:45
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:What the gently caress, no it wasn't. The thing Herstory said to stop was the people bitching about an earlier probation of some other poster. I was in favor of that and took the opportunity to get the thread back on topic. You will note that I was not one of the people bitching about that probation or harassing Herstory about it. At all. It's weird how you were "just asking questions" about Herstory's political positions on the exact content of the post that was probed that everyone else was harassing them over and demanding answers to the same questions. What a horrible coincidence that you just happened to ask these straightforward innocent questions in the spirit of open discussion at the exact same time everyone was using them to dogpile on an IK after being told not to, again. I'm glad the admins were able to rectify this misunderstanding.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:06
|
|
|
You know what, I'm not interested in re-litigating my probations. I shouldn't have even bothered replying to Jarmak's nitpicky after-the-fact bullshit without the context of the threads in question. That's not why I posted. I posted because I'm interested in USPol being a readable thread that people can actually post in without fear or arbitrary mod bullshit. I haven't posted or read USPol in months because I was sick of seeing it happening to other people, too. I won't feel happy posting there until the problem is fixed. I'm posting here in order to help fix the problem. The mods are wondering what needs to change and I'm telling them. They need to stop loving up so much and they need to apologize for their fuckups. Like, I appealed to the admins and got the probation Herstory gave me cancelled, but Herstory never admitted fault or apologized. That's like the minimum thing that needs to happen to regain the trust of people in the forum. Taking some accountability for their bad calls when they make them. Like if Herstory said "Sorry Jim, I was upset because of all the other posters bitching about the probation and probated you without actually reading your post properly and seeing that you weren't one of them," I would accept that without hesitation. Getting validation from the admins was nice and I got my posting privileges back, but there was no indication that Herstory actually learned anything or even acknowledged that it was in error. There are a LOT of people who are owed an apology like that. And it's going to be very hard to see less rancor until there is some indication of accountability. As long as people get probations for saying what they actually think, they will continue to post passive-aggressive bullshit. Jimbozig fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Jan 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:11
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I did. I got a couple of them reversed or shortened because the admins agreed you guys were fuckups. Sometimes probations are adjusted, a mod or IK can have a conversation with an Admin and change things, to frame it like the admins agree with your dumbshit opinions is false. You are not special, and nobody on the admin team thinks the D&D Mods and IKs are fuckups. If you would like to discuss this over PM instead of making GBS threads all over this thread, feel free. Getting 1 (not a couple) probation timer reduced a BIT (not removed), does not give you clearance to be an asshat at all times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
Hey, can we: a) not publicly relitigate individual probations here? b) not dig through the rapsheets of anyone who complains that they've been probated or otherwise had issues with moderation? Can we try and keep this focused on feedback here? Just because you don't agree with someone's complaints doesn't mean you should go digging through their history trying to humiliate them and drive them out of the thread
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
The problem overall feels like if people want to talk about bad moderation but we aren't allowed to discuss those points of moderation how are we supposed to figure anything out. At this point it's everyone posting blind accusations but no one is allowed to put forth evidence in either direction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
^^^I can't decide if a thread specifically about bad moderation and discussions of examples of same might be incredibly valuable, or an absolute shitshow. Potentially both, I guess, but I don't envy whoever would have to moderate it. This thread has had a fairly solid amount of good discussion (combined with the inevitable bits of poop, yes) over the last 32 pages. There has been some thoughtful analysis of various points of concern, various possible solutions, and some really good feedback from a lot of people (part of that including that moderation could improve). You Kramering in on page 32 with the white-hot simplistic take of "The mods are poo poo." and asking for a personal apology in the middle of a discussion thread is pretty laughable. This is not the way to help.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:23
|
|
|
aas Bandit posted:This thread has had a fairly solid amount of good discussion (combined with the inevitable bits of poop, yes) over the last 32 pages. There has been some thoughtful analysis of various points of concern, various possible solutions, and some really good feedback from a lot of people (part of that including that moderation could improve).
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:24
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Hey, can we: Hey I'll take my lumps for getting a hair across my rear end and maybe going in a little harder than was necessary to make my point, but honest question: How are we supposed to respond when someone comes in making disingenuous, hyperbolic claims about specific events that can be falsified by looking them up? I'm not trying to be a wise-rear end to you, I'm honestly asking because I think it's a regular feature of these threads that posters come in here and dishonestly frame old events to make their point. I can totally see the sort of slap fights that relitigating old controversies encourages and why you'd want to avoid it in this thread, but also how do you address the disingenuous narrative being sold without dragging the original source back up to point out "no, that's not what happened at all"?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:28
|
|
|
aas Bandit posted:^^^I can't decide if a thread specifically about bad moderation and discussions of examples of same might be incredibly valuable, or an absolute shitshow. Potentially both, I guess, but I don't envy whoever would have to moderate it. There must be a thread where we debate and finally sort out once and for all if the mods are biased in favor of the NoJoes or the ProJoes by meticulously cataloguing the bullshit probes, and posts that should have been probed but werent, on each side, including 6ers. Only then can the healing begin.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
Better yet I think a thread dedicated to various ways to slam our dicks in a door would be more productive then anything but that goddamn idea
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:34
|
|
|
Athanatos posted:You are not special, and nobody on the admin team thinks the D&D Mods and IKs are fuckups. And yet here we are, having this thread about what can be done to fix USPol. Why? Is it because things have been going so well? The mods and IKs have been doing such a bangup job that we need to have yet another thread trying to sort out what to do about the threads continuing to be bad? If they weren't fuckups, why is it so hosed up? It was not always like this. We all agree that the threads were/are bad. We all agree that what the mods and IKs have been doing is not working. If it was working we wouldn't be here. Obviously. You just don't like the way I'm phrasing it. You can take the position that what the mods and IKs have been doing for the past year has obviously not been working but that they don't owe anyone an apology for it. That's fine if that's your stance. This thread's existence is already a tacit admission of their failure, but I think an explicit acknowledgement that their methods have failed and taking responsibility would be helpful. Look, I'm here on page 32 because I just happened onto this thread when it was already on page 32. If I had seen it earlier I'd have been posting in it earlier. Because this is something I care about. D&D is one of the forums that brought me to SA in the first place. I've been avoiding it (other than Canpol which is still a good and chill thread) because it's just endless fights over moderation. The other parts of SA don't devolve into endless fighting over moderation. Even the other threads in D&D don't. It's just these threads. Obviously there is a massive problem with the moderation! This seems like a thread where we can maybe actually talk about that problem and try to take steps to solve it. My take is: if the moderation is bad, it might be because the mods are bad and you should try different mods. I have nothing against the mods personally! I post with some of them over in trad games and I like them there. Everything I've seen makes it seem like the mods are good people. They might even be good mods in a different context. Maybe they would do a good job modding other threads. But they're not doing a good job modding the USpol threads. I think that trying a different moderation team in those threads is worth a shot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
Reading his screed is making me want to slam my dick in a vice. It be more productive then relitigating his opinion that he's unjustly probed for questioning. (Questions that aren't meant to be answered but instead own the mod team)
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 23:45
|
|
|
Flying-PCP posted:There must be a thread where we debate and finally sort out once and for all if the mods are biased in favor of the NoJoes or the ProJoes by meticulously cataloguing the bullshit probes, and posts that should have been probed but werent, on each side, including 6ers. Only then can the healing begin. UCS Hellmaker posted:Better yet I think a thread dedicated to various ways to slam our dicks in a door would be more productive then anything but that goddamn idea Both of you made me lol irl. Thank you! (You think close analysis of live hand grenades covered in poop might not help? Cowards.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 00:33
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Hey, can we: It is never productive to discuss these types of issues in a vacuum or in the abstract. Yes, people tend to get defensive and play the victim when idiotic posts they've made in the past are brought up, but that's precisely why rap sheets and post histories exist in the first place: so that everyone can see what kind of poster they are engaging with. If that poster happens to have a solid track record showing they repeatedly cause or perpetuate the very issues they happen to be complaining about, people will naturally point that out, not to humiliate them, but as a way of saying "hey guy/gal, maybe you're being disingenuous and making your criticisms in bad faith." If we didn't look at people's rap sheets and provide examples from them, anyone could make literally any claim, and complain about literally any issue, and we collectively would have no way of objectively determining whether those issues are real, perceived or outright fabricated. We would be left with relying on our subjective judgments instead, and that would get us absolutely nowhere. Thorn Wishes Talon fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Jan 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 00:42
|
|
|
quote:^^^I can't decide if a thread specifically about bad moderation and discussions of examples of same might be incredibly valuable, or an absolute shitshow. Potentially both, I guess, but I don't envy whoever would have to moderate it.  ^^^ Not really relevant as a response, but I have nowhere else to post that beautiful loving screenshot so it's going here. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 00:42
|
|
|
Jimbozig, you said yourself- you're from Tradgames. Where there are literally rules in place about which threads are allowed to talk about which editions of D&D (the tabletop role playing game, not the forum here), because the Edition Wars are a thing. C-SPAM and FYAD apparently had some kind of holy war/crusade at some point that is still churning out endless sniping in QCS. This kinda stuff absolutely happens elsewhere on SA, just not in the same ways at the same times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
Coincidentally the endless edition warring in TradGames has/had a lot to do with a tiny number of posters from the overall group and mods not doing much besides blanket banning discussion of certain topics in threads and acting like that solves the problem. Sound familiar?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 01:13
|
|
|
^^^if it's a tiny number of bad posters, just threadban them. I haven't been in the thread for a couple of months so I don't know who is causing issues these days or if it's the same people as during the election.ElegantFugue posted:Jimbozig, you said yourself- you're from Tradgames. Where there are literally rules in place about which threads are allowed to talk about which editions of D&D (the tabletop role playing game, not the forum here), because the Edition Wars are a thing. I do not remember any time when there were so many fights over the modding in trad games. We do have those rules because threads do get out of hand and it makes sense to split up topics to prevent endless bickering. And it might well make sense to have a split in these USPol threads. But it just never was like this in TG as long as I posted there - never was there so much hostility and lines being drawn and working the refs. Not under Winson, not under Ettin, not now. (I only started posting in TG when Winson was mod, so if it was worse before then, I wouldn't know.) I agree with you that even in tradgames, poo poo will spark up occasionally. But there the mods split the threads that needed splitting and got poo poo settled down. They did their jobs and it worked. The D&D mods have tried splitting the USPol thread, have tried re-splitting in different ways, etc. It hasn't worked. One thing worth considering is that the way this forum is modded, you can get probations for posts that are not against any rules and the application of the subjective guidelines is very inconsistent. People know that if they hit the report button, there's a decent chance they can get their posting enemies probated just for posting bad opinions. So what happens is predictable - people see a post they don't like and they mash that report button. And then the mods have to deal with so many reports that it's impossible to do their jobs well. The solution to this is to probate mostly for rules violations. The rules can have a subjective element, but the subjective element should be fairly clear to all involved. It's important that people posting should know when they're over the line. Obviously we need mods to be able to probate people who are doing bad poo poo that isn't explicitly against the rules, but that should be rare and should be obvious. If someone makes a post that seems unproductive but is not obviously terrible, the appropriate response is a mod warning. That way, if they persist, the eventual probation will be inarguably fair. (I'm not saying give the same consistently bad poster endless warnings. If they keep on loving up, you can point back to the first warning when you probe them every time they do that thing you warned about.) If the majority of probations are for things that are not against any rule and are not obvious shittery and come without warning, then you develop a culture of line-toeing and snitching. The report button should be for when someone breaks the rules, not for when your posting enemy makes a post. If people use the report button to report posts that are not against the rules, even if those posts are "bad" - they should get a probation. I was just looking back through an old canpol thread and saw someone get probated and the reason was something like "the report button is not for when people are dunking on you" or something like that. That's great! If people report others for calling them a liberal or a tankie, give them a probation and tell them to stop reporting for bullshit. (Unless you want to make calling people liberal or tankie against the rules - in that case, those would be appropriate uses of the report button.) Jimbozig fucked around with this message at 01:48 on Jan 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 01:38
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Hey I'll take my lumps for getting a hair across my rear end and maybe going in a little harder than was necessary to make my point, but honest question: How are we supposed to respond when someone comes in making disingenuous, hyperbolic claims about specific events that can be falsified by looking them up? Don't? Jarmak posted:I'm not trying to be a wise-rear end to you, I'm honestly asking because I think it's a regular feature of these threads that posters come in here and dishonestly frame old events to make their point. I can totally see the sort of slap fights that relitigating old controversies encourages and why you'd want to avoid it in this thread, but also how do you address the disingenuous narrative being sold without dragging the original source back up to point out "no, that's not what happened at all"? Just ignore it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 02:12
|
|
|
I'm not sure how one starts at "splitting the thread and training subjects away from a news thread is bad because banning subjects wont work" and arrives at "just punish people talking about subjects I dont like for too long harder" without considering if that approach would not invoke similar friction. How well did punishing people for talking about editions in tradgames work out, honest question?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 02:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 14:24 |
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:It is never productive to discuss these types of issues in a vacuum or in the abstract. Yes, people tend to get defensive and play the victim when idiotic posts they've made in the past are brought up, but that's precisely why rap sheets and post histories exist in the first place: so that everyone can see what kind of poster they are engaging with. If that poster happens to have a solid track record showing they repeatedly cause or perpetuate the very issues they happen to be complaining about, people will naturally point that out, not to humiliate them, but as a way of saying "hey guy/gal, maybe you're being disingenuous and making your criticisms in bad faith." I want this to be reiterated. It is an incredibly bad call for the moderation to punish or threaten to punish posters for pointing out posters with a history of poo poo posting or whatever. Poster's calling this out helps other posters ignore or not respond to obvious bait or whatever. There have been some good changes in USpol lately like the cracking down on people posting clickbait tweets or overreacting about an article they never even read. However the way the no posting about poster rule is being implimented is in my mind one of the worst changes. Also for the love of god be more free with threadbans, it's one thread on one subforum on one website. They could literally post in a different thread or subforum. In fact you should encourage them to, because if they are able to do so for a sufficient length of time and not be an rear end in a top hat then you have a good reason to grant a reprieve. Telsa Cola fucked around with this message at 02:39 on Jan 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 02:32
|
|
