|
What's the standard for when bans are considered? There are a handful of posters here who've had dozens and dozens of probes just this year alone. I agree we need to give people a chance to improve their posting style, especially on such a slippery and subjective board. But after the 30th probe in as many weeks, does that poster deserve any more good faith? I would argue that a small handful of posters contribute the majority of the unproductive arguments in USCE and other hotspot threads. It's not that their arguments are just so bad that we can't allow them. You can have a reasoned discussion of even the most tired topic, and it's even helpful to do so in many cases, because it helps us refine our arguments so that we can talk to the real people in our physical lives who really do believe these things. But to allow that kind of atmosphere, you'd have to start actually banning people who make a habit of unproductive posting. People can be banned from just one board, right?
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2022 09:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 08:15 |
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Where do people keep getting this from? Vox gets probed all the time, more than you for certain, why is there a group of people seemingly obsessed with him getting punished and have seemed to create their own canon about him. deffo, this worked great for 4chan
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2022 17:53
|
|
|
speng31b posted:Well, right now it's interesting, but mostly as a game of chance to figure out whether you'll be able to post here on some topic without eating a probe, or respond to someone espousing a bigoted viewpoint without eating a probe. To be fair I think the probes overwhelmingly target poo poo posts, but the net also catches people who are just trying to break into a topic, and whether that's a worthwhile tradeoff is a matter of perspective. There is another side to all this. I started posting again in D&D this year after avoiding it for several years, and I'll agree with feeling unsure about what topics are okay, and individual threads feeling like a minefield. That can encourage people to just leave, or come in and make a post and get bopped and leave. But, if you're not one of those, it can also encourage new posters to spend a few days/weeks/months mostly lurking and gradually getting used to the tone of the board, and encourage them to spend time carefully weighing their arguments or whether they even need to make a post at all. If those things are priorities to the mod staff, then this environment actually makes sense. Like, OH NO, you have to actually consider whether your post is a bunch of poo poo before posting. Yeah, it's applied subjectively and unevenly but that's gonna happen when you have a human mod team staffed by volunteers. I think it's not as bad as it seems. The only change I'd argue is that if you're gonna admit that some infractions, like making jokes or stale arguments, are never going to cause enough harm to D&D to warrant bans, then they don't warrant probes, either. Koos said they'd generally only ban a decent poster if they really messed up. How about, you only punish people at all if they actually do something that causes a problem. If it's not a problem, why should it be against the rules? Am I taking what Koos said out of context, or does this make sense? Like... if someone can continually run up against the vague stale arguments rules, but never become such a big problem that it necessitates their removal from the board... doesn't that indicate that violation of that rule doesn't actually make a post harmful? And if it's not harmful, again, why would we need to regulate it?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2022 19:31
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Ahh, so you just fundamentally fail to understand the complaint. The issue is not whether disagreeing with people is okay, it's whether you should be able to turn any thread into a thread about your pet issue because people are sick of hearing about it and don't want to come to your thread on the topic. you are just misreading a pronoun World Famous W posted:it's kinda funny that there are posters saying 'there are posters who just want to yell at others for not agreeing with em' and immediately follow that by complaining about their political beliefs "their" means the complainers, not the yellers
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2022 21:16
|
|