|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 09:58 |
|
|
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 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'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
|
|
|
Can you all shut up about Ukraine in the feedback thread
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2022 00:52
|
|
|
To approach this from another angle: you could just change the rule you arbitrarily adopted a few months ago. You should do this for two reasons: 1. Ideally forum moderation is reflective of the desires of the forum itself, and you have heard loud and clear from many D&D posters that they would like some limits on the types of questions which can be debated. 2. Your inability to find consensus around some controversial issues does not mean that you cannot find consensus around every controversial issue. You are letting a problem in the general prevent you from finding solutions in the particular. To make it even easier, this is how you could type it up: "To help encourage debate and discussion we do not generally moderate on the content of your argument, just how do you present it. There are a few exceptions to this rule, though, where we see there is no meaningful debate or discussion to had around issues, or where that debate is offensive to marginalized members of our community. Those topics include: the validity of trans rights, Holocaust denial, scientific arguments for racism, and gender equality. If you are concerned that your post may violate these rules, contact a moderator first."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2022 13:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 09:58 |
|
|
It is extremely weird that apparently the goal of this iteration of D&D in 2022 is to educate bigots, and therefore we must give bigots a space to peddle their ideas so they have the opportunity to be educated. I do appreciate Koos making this goal extremely clear, because it lets anyone not interested in engaging with people within that framework just not participate in the forum anymore. I guess my earlier suggestion that the mods make their vision for the forum clear isn't necessary, because it has been made very clear. It's just not something I'd ever want to be a part of, and I'm not sure who would.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2022 23:16
|
|