|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:A weeklong probe is not a ban, and ironic shitposting is not something we should have to tolerate at all. pssst, check the rap sheet
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 10:41 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:A weeklong probe is not a ban, and ironic shitposting is not something we should have to tolerate at all. He's on perma-probation my dude. You likely won't have to tolerate him anymore, ever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:02
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:That's fine but it will inevitably lead to every criticism of Dems being described as being that. We've done a quarantine thread before, and it didn't really solve any issues. I like seeing the viewpoints I don't agree with, but I don't appreciate the moralizing or judgments that often come with it. There's a certain threshold for being defensive, or snarky, and I know I am guilty of it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
Also if you think that dude was ever representative of the CSPAM hivemind you uh... don't read CSPAM that close.. Like, I think you do have valid criticism for "why didn't he ever get hit that hard in D&D and it took the poo poo post politics to do it?".
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
Majorian posted:He's on perma-probation my dude. You likely won't have to tolerate him anymore, ever. Gumball Gumption posted:pssst, check the rap sheet the system works! Gumball Gumption posted:Also if you think that dude was ever representative of the CSPAM hivemind you uh... don't read CSPAM that close.. I read it plenty, I don't think being dismissive of my viewpoint is helpful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:04
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:We've done a quarantine tread before, and it didn't really solve any issues. I like seeing the viewpoints I don't agree with, but I don't appreciate the moralizing or judgments that often come with it. There's a certain threshold for being defensive, or snarky, and I know I am guilty of it. Like I pointed out, cspam trends towards being extremely shitposty first and foremost, which means it doesn't always satisfy my desire for a srs back and forth
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:04
|
|
|
Can we literally not get a loving cspam derail in here because nothing productive will happen from it. DND is not cspam, dnd mods have no power in cspam and bringing it up will just lead to endless circlejerks that drown out everything and lead to koos closing the thread because everyone checks out while screaming past each other posters come in
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:06
|
|
|
Kalit posted:The one thing that could be improved is maybe lowering the threshold of bad faith posting, especially when it comes to topics that tend to bring out a lot of bigots. I don't really know if there's a formulaic way to lower that threshold, but I felt like probes should have happened a little sooner in that trans athlete thread. Lowering the threshold for bad faith is something I've thought about a lot, but it seems very difficult to do fairly because of how it involves intent and specific positions. I would welcome more discussion in this thread about this topic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:07
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Lowering the threshold for bad faith is something I've thought about a lot, but it seems very difficult to do fairly because of how it involves intent and specific positions. I would welcome more discussion in this thread about this topic. Koos, have you thought more about why people found extending good faith towards people advocating anti trans positions intolerable?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:09
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Like I pointed out, cspam trends towards being extremely shitposty first and foremost, which means it doesn't always satisfy my desire for a srs back and forth I think this is part if it. I am getting old  and I don't need to want to deal with the black-pilled irony poisoned shitposting that is cspam. having the viewpoints that culminate from that sort of mindset constantly repeated ad nausea really just does not encourage a good discussion on anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:09
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:US Pol is full of probes that don't often make sense and/or aren't explained at all. It's not even clear what the ground rules are anymore. The effort is meaningless because it hasn't discouraged any of the posting it is apparently meant to address. To be frank, I'm desperate enough to improve USCE that I would give a try to combining these things, by starting to hand out three day probes to posters that have been probed in USCE multiple times before, while also giving very detailed explanations of what rule they broke. Something similar was actually suggested by one of my mods. Sodomy Hussein posted:I'm also hopeful under newer moderation that feedback threads will be listened to, instead of ignored while the mods do what they were always going to do. I'm certainly reading every post in the thread and considering them, and am open to changes to policy if they're convincing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:11
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I think this is part if it. I am getting old I honestly think you would be pleasantly surprised by the eagerness of people in cspam to have a discussion, but you do absolutely need to learn to shrug off very acerbic attitudes to get to the point those discussions occur
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:12
|
|
|
I also forgot to say that I do feel that Koos, Fritz, and others are doing a good job overall. I appreciate the effort, and the effort it takes to keep this forum less of a flaming dumpster than the rest of the internet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:13
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:I am at a loss of how to fix this, but d&d has become an utterly terrible place to actually debate and discuss opposing positions. The Ukraine war thread is especially egregious, but this pattern extends far and wide. Unfortunately, you need to go to cspam to talk about opposing viewpoints, and sometimes I want a discussion that ain't shitposty. It's saddening and also a bit confusing to hear this, as I've gotten a lot of praise for how cinci handles the thread. Could you point to specific instances where opposing viewpoints were squashed for being such?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:14
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Koos, have you thought more about why people found extending good faith towards people advocating anti trans positions intolerable? Yes, and that's one of the reasons why the thread was closed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:16
|
|
|
I had a question about a probation: I saw you probated a poster for saying that they're happy about something the Biden administration did because it'll personally help them. Why is sharing how something effects you personally against the rules? Lived experienced, and how that lived experience shapes your viewpoint on events, seems to be central to any sort of debate.A big flaming stink posted:I'm going to be honest, I bailed from that thread in the early days when my position of hoping that the outcome of the war minimized civilian casualties regardless of who "won" was absolutely castigated as yellow-bellied appeasement. It left an extremely sour taste in my mouth. I'm not sure what the opposing position to "Russia is killing civilians and this is bad" is... Upgrade fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Apr 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:17
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:It's saddening and also a bit confusing to hear this, as I've gotten a lot of praise for how cinci handles the thread. Could you point to specific instances where opposing viewpoints were squashed for being such? I'm going to be honest, I bailed from that thread in the early days when my position of hoping that the outcome of the war minimized civilian casualties regardless of who "won" was absolutely castigated as yellow-bellied appeasement. It left an extremely sour taste in my mouth.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:18
|
|
|
Upgrade posted:I had a question about a probation: I saw you probated a poster for saying that they're happy about something the Biden administration did because it'll personally help them. Why is sharing has something effects you personally against the rules? Lived experienced, and how that lived experience shapes your viewpoint on events, seems to be central to any sort of debate. It's not giving us any new information. We were already aware that some people had been helped by the policy, and presumably those people were happy about it. It's part of a general de-emphasis on poster personalities in D&D, in favor of reliable sources and arguments. Also he said "Thank you, President Biden!" with the exclamation point and everything, which I found obnoxious, lol.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:21
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:It's not giving us any new information. We were already aware that some people had been helped by the policy, and presumably those people were happy about it. It's part of a general de-emphasis on poster personalities in D&D, in favor of reliable sources and arguments. Also he said "Thank you, President Biden!" with the exclamation point and everything, which I found obnoxious, lol. Is there a blanket ban of sharing how a policy will positively or negatively impact you personally, because it can be assumed that any policy will impact people in general in positive and negative ways? It just seems very ticky tacky.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:24
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:It's not giving us any new information. We were already aware that some people had been helped by the policy, and presumably those people were happy about it. It's part of a general de-emphasis on poster personalities in D&D, in favor of reliable sources and arguments. Also he said "Thank you, President Biden!" with the exclamation point and everything, which I found obnoxious, lol. Yeah that probe felt unreasonable given the content, but ultimately it was a short probe and not something to worry about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:26
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:It's not giving us any new information. We were already aware that some people had been helped by the policy, and presumably those people were happy about it. It's part of a general de-emphasis on poster personalities in D&D, in favor of reliable sources and arguments. Also he said "Thank you, President Biden!" with the exclamation point and everything, which I found obnoxious, lol. Thank you, Moderator Koos Group!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:28
|
|
|
Upgrade posted:Is there a blanket ban of sharing how a policy will positively or negatively impact you personally, because it can be assumed that any policy will impact people in general in positive and negative ways? It depends. If the policy affected you personally in a perverse or unexpected way, that would be interesting. Such as if a policy that was supposed to help you actually hurt you, or if a policy that helped you lead to something else changing in your life that also has political implications and was not the express intent of the policy. Or even if you gave us a biographical portrait for a case study of how this policy can affect someone given the rest of their life, even that could be interesting, despite being very personal. But simply saying "it did what it was designed to do and I like it/don't like it" does not seem interesting to people who don't know you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:30
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:It depends. If the policy affected you personally in a perverse or unexpected way, that would be interesting. Such as if a policy that was supposed to help you actually hurt you, or if a policy that helped you lead to something else changing in your life that also has political implications and was not the express intent of the policy. Or even if you gave us a biographical portrait for a case study of how this policy can affect someone given the rest of their life, even that could be interesting, despite being very personal. But simply saying "it did what it was designed to do and I like it/don't like it" does not seem interesting to people who don't know you. I share this as someone who doesn't really post in CE/US Pol but reads the thread: there has been a lot of research about how social media favores negative vs. positive disengagement, and I've noticed that over the last few years the general US News/discussion thread has moved towards that same format. This isn't about praising Biden/not praising Biden (I don't care if you make it a rule that nobody is allowed to share happiness about anything Biden does), but about the thread in general. It sometimes seems that posts criticizing a subject are given far more leeway than those defending or praising it. Again, this is about any topic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:40
|
|
|
I do agree that it is not a place that positive news is taken well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:41
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Lowering the threshold for bad faith is something I've thought about a lot, but it seems very difficult to do fairly because of how it involves intent and specific positions. I would welcome more discussion in this thread about this topic. There is always going to be some Overton window for what’s acceptable. There are posts that are not allowed even if the poster is being horrible in good faith. You are already drawing some lines and can continue to have a bias towards a wider Overton window for this subforum than other places but there are never no lines. I think some of how you can think about this is less as a free speech issue and more of a quality of debate issue. I’m trying to find a good summary of Sarah Jeong’s 2015 book The Internet of Garbage but she suggests that some kinds of online comms are better understood and treated like spam than like a marketplace of ideas. “Should women have the vote?” was once a rich and controversial topic. Lots of ink was spilled on the question. Today, I do not think it would be a good addition to the D&D debate circuit. It’s essentially spam. Similarly, I think that topics or posts that ask us to re-litigate the basic humanity of minorities are essentially spam. Those debates are settled (or they should be in an environment like this).
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:43
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Yes, and that's one of the reasons why the thread was closed. Have you given more thought about the idea of special rules regarding the discussion of trans people/topics?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:44
|
|
|
While I do think the new moderation style of not moderating arguments has ultimately worked out well, having read the thread, things like open bigotry, genocide denial, or cheerleading crimes against humanity, and so on still seem like they shouldn't be accepted, just from a general "don't be a piece of poo poo" position.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:52
|
|
|
I'll end with this, I don't think D&D is substantially different today than it was six months ago or a year ago. USPol/CE is the same 25 posters yelling at each other. Sure more of them seem to get probated (although the probations are shorter), but the actual content of the discussion, or the topics of the discussion, aren't really different. Whatever the current news is gets shared, people form sides and yell about it until they get a 6 hour probation for being rude to their fellow D&D poster, the thread quiets down until the probations time out, and then the cycle continues the next day. The biggest "driver" of D&D looking different today is that Trump isn't president anymore, so fewer people are as invested in politics. Not any moderation changes. If you want to D&D to be different, you actually need to describe what you want the forum to be. These threads always dissolve into lists of what posters don't like (yes, irony, turn on your monitor, etc.) but at no point has there been a clear vision from the moderation team of what they want the forum to look like. And I'll leave with this: if you want D&D to be different, you're going to need to create an environment which new and different people actually want to post in, not just change the way in which you moderate the same people who posted under every other previous moderation scheme. Upgrade fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Apr 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 22:58
|
|
|
Blatantly rule breaking posts by people who have a habit of such should be met with longer probes than sixers in general. If someone is consistently a hostile condescending jerk, a sixer isn't going to get them alter their behavior. At the least they should be getting a three day or week, and quickly ramping from there into an eventual ban if they don't cut that poo poo out. Related thought here: from the tech side, it seems like it might be useful for poster's rap sheets to include a stat of "median time between probes" that excludes time they've been on probation in the calculation. Koos Group posted:It's not giving us any new information. We were already aware that some people had been helped by the policy, and presumably those people were happy about it. It's part of a general de-emphasis on poster personalities in D&D, in favor of reliable sources and arguments. Also he said "Thank you, President Biden!" with the exclamation point and everything, which I found obnoxious, lol.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:14
|
|
|
If sounds like we need more poll threads so posters can express more otherwise contentless up or down assessments of political actions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:24
|
|
|
I think the mods are doing fine as far as dealing with the number of probations. Your flagship policy has been overall pretty good and I support it. It's a shame the transgender athletes thread crashed and burned, but we sometimes need to be reminded that there are in fact topics goons can't handle. In the past that was circumcision and isreal/palestine, today it's transgender issues. The only real complaint I have is that we need more transparency in which topics are not allowed, or at least which topics are so sensitive that probations are more likely to happen and with exceptional reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:25
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Related thought here: from the tech side, it seems like it might be useful for poster's rap sheets to include a stat of "median time between probes" that excludes time they've been on probation in the calculation. Why exactly would this be useful
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:27
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:That's because your post was reported, and the original wasn't. If it had been, I probably would have hit it. Here's a suggestion: if you're going to probe someone for not meeting effort with effort or whatever maybe just read the post they were responding to before you do? I mean especially if they quoted it in the post you hit them for, it can't be that much more work
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:30
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Lowering the threshold for bad faith is something I've thought about a lot, but it seems very difficult to do fairly because of how it involves intent and specific positions. I would welcome more discussion in this thread about this topic. you've created a safe space for bigots and called it fairness
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:32
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Why exactly would this be useful Sixers are fine in the average case where someone just needs to be told to knock it off and then they'll behave, but obviously that's not enough for some posters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:36
|
|
|
Rules on things like "no genocide denialism" is a lot trickier to implement than "no transphobia" due to the fact that some things are, in fact, not genocide, and the standard that must be reached to qualify something as "genocide" is going to vary from person to person. there are always going to be clear cut cases, but inevitably you will have an edge case, or a situation where the determining evidence of a genocide occurring is prone to misrepresentation by a group or government in order to advance their own agenda Everyone can see that right? So my suggestion is to not implement a ban on "genocide denialism" unless the moderator staff is prepared to start making declarative statements on individual instances of possible genocide and enforce that line accordingly. I wouldn't be opposed to that approach. Edit: also, the determination should never result in "this is NOT a genocide," and instead would simply allow debate to continue on the topic. The only time debate is halted would be if there is a determination in the positive. whiggles fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Apr 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:37
|
|
|
Cicero posted:This is absolutely a bizarre reason to give a probation. Of the problems D&D has, "people post too much about their positive personal experiences" ain't one of them. What if that's that poster's gimmick and they have a long rap sheet for it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:38
|
|
|
We don't need to go back to mods banning people for overly long rap sheets and it turning out half the probes were ironic and no one bothered looking.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:40
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:We don't need to go back to mods banning people for overly long rap sheets and it turning out half the probes were ironic and no one bothered looking. Purges in general aren't a good idea. Majorian posted:What if that's that poster's gimmick and they have a long rap sheet for it? Just because you don't like it doesn't make it a gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 10:41 |
|
|
If you post so badly that multiple people think you're a gimmick and you've been probed for being a gimmick maybe you're not hitting the standards mods are setting for D&D.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2022 23:46
|
|