|
So something I’ve brought up over the years I’ll bring up again. Strict restrictions to a topic aren’t always a good thing because it’s on the margins between topics that new ideas happen. Unfortunately sometimes strict restrictions to the thread topic are also the only thing that keeps some threads topics readable. A good example where the strict moderation style has worked and worked well is the Ukraine thread. That topic in general is a poo poo show on the forums and that thread has remained readable and informative even as some folks from diverse sides have actively tried to disrupt it. But not every topic benefits from that style. Where topics do not benefit I think threads run into a tension between subject matter experts and other folks. There are some rough categories of how that plays outs. 1. The most common is the subject naive conversations interacting with the subject matter experts. 2. The interaction between domains looking at other domains, different ways of thinking looking at each other. 3. The interaction of the subject specific topic within a broader analysis that is at odds with the subject specific conclusions. 4. Folks that want specific lines of subject matter experts thought to not happen at all, ie. intentional disruption of the conversation. I think that all four happen in conversations here. 1,4 drive subject matter experts nuts. But the problem is so do 2 and 3. Differentiation between which is happening can also be problematic. Strict moderation can then become a cudgel in discussions and it’s one that has driven many folks away from D&D. As all of the different things categories are happening (1,2,3,4 ) at the same time they get conflated. And both real anger and performative anger (often coming from 4) are probably showing up in your reports and driving y’all nuts. So that’s what I see is the problem. The strict approach is something that has to has happen on some topics. On other topics it plays into discussions in a way that in unhealthy for the forum, because of inherent underlying tensions that are just naturally present in many topics. I don’t know how to solve this. I also think it’s a larger cultural dynamic occurring. It’s also being exacerbated in the larger culture from all side intentionally.
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 16:41 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:If someone is discussing with even the most basic effort but also being a dick, that should be fine. This, it’s okay if we get angry with each other. That happens anytime folks really truly care about a topic. Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Some of the best discussions on this site have come from two complete assholes going at each other for twenty pages. And some of those exact interactions have made it out into the larger culture in very serious ways. It’s not just that it’s some of the most interesting content.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2023 19:41
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Is about Neoplatonists, as presented, as a group of people, from a conversation between me and Bar Ran Dun, which stemmed out of me talking to gurragadon. Yes, (as one) Neoplatonists are crazy but it’s a part of the conversation. There is a segment of the AI / tech folks that are very definitely Neoplatonists. It’s part of the public discourse on the subject. Even if I agree with you that in this ChatGPT context it is definitely crazy. But my point was that many very basic assumptions even like “Math is real” are Neoplatonist. It’s not something that can be blanket excluded from a discussion on the topic.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2023 20:01
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:nicely demonstrates the “inconsistent moderation is weaponized against moderation” thesis I mentioned before. Most of the recent moderators have been pretty good. This is going to happen to anyone who remains a participant in the conversations they moderate, even if they moderate perfectly.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2023 16:54
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:So my biggest pieces of feedback is, get more mods and get them soon. Thinking about this post and the upcoming… This is probably spot on and a really good idea.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2023 02:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 16:41 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:D&D (of the past) was where minimal effort and poo poo posting from all viewpoints was allowed. The unofficial rule was being a dick was fine if it was funny. Some of My first posts in D&D were about Iran and nuclear reactors. I was just out of the Academy with a fresh marine engineering systems major, nuclear systems minor. Got into pretty hard with Cefte over very technical proliferation stuff. He was quoting papers, I was quoting Nuclear Reactor Engineering. Ultimately he was correct. I’ve always been able to count on this forum to tell me I’m wrong, often angrily. I think you are mischaracterizing it. The D&D tone wasn’t about being funny dicks.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2023 02:31
|
|