- Discendo Vox
- Mar 21, 2013
-
We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.
|
From last October:
I understand that avatar change visibility is a difficult task and won't be accomplished for some time. In that interval, would it not make sense to close off the "change other's avatar" action?
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2023 04:44
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2024 15:07
|
|
- Discendo Vox
- Mar 21, 2013
-
We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.
|
but anyway, i think most goons misinterpret the main point i was getting at, which isnt to throw your hands up and not implement any measures to make it more inconvenient, but that the real solution is to just not have the info out there at all. This is not chastising ppl for slipping up, im just begging you for your sanity and safety to not let it happen to you in the first place, because these technological implementations are not solutions for a social problem.
I appreciate the sentiment, but large swathes of the forum stop becoming useable if that's taken to the degree necessary to prevent doxxing. This state of affairs is likely a contributing factor in userbase declines and population shifts.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2023 23:15
|
|
- Discendo Vox
- Mar 21, 2013
-
We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.
|
Take an incremental approach. You're not going to stop all doxxing, but each layer of defense is going to make harassment harder, and making incremental improvements demonstrates commitment to addressing the problem and acknowledging the community's concern.
A good first candidate seems to be putting av purchases behind the paywall. Prevent av purchases if your account is banned or permabanned. Is this perfect? No. It doesn't need to be. It just needs to be an improvement.
It ties a purchase to an account that can be banned, and it raises the barrier to entry for this form of harassment.
Keep it simple and put that type of change in, observe what happens, learn from it, and then take another step if it's still a problem. For example, if you needed to add another layer, the next increment could be requiring some minimum account life for av purchases. Essentially stick on a probationary period of something like 90 or 180 days before being able to buy others avatars by checking the account age when they go to purchase someone else an av. Is your account 45 days old? Tough poo poo, you can't buy someone else an av yet.
Personally, I'd recommend against admin/mod queues until other means have been exhausted, there are other seemingly low lift solutions that can make the type of targeted harassment being discussed a pain in the rear end without requiring manual overhead or changing payment systems, etc.
Apologies if this comes across as uninformed by presuming that something that would be hard to do is simple, I'm not familiar with the site's backend or what dumb as poo poo decisions over the years would need to be unwound to do something seemingly simple.
This is reasonable, but bear in mind that a stepwise approach can also have the effect of socializing adaptation to and circumvention of the barriers. Hitting the people abusing the system with several obstacles at once can both drive socialization against the practice and "catch" a larger number of infringing users.
Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Aug 24, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2023 03:54
|
|
- Discendo Vox
- Mar 21, 2013
-
We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.
|
Yes, but several obstacles released at once require more technical decisions to be made, longer lead time to putting *any* improvements into place, and a higher risk of nothing actually being done due to various issues that may arise.
I don't disagree with your assertion here, but my suggestion is motivated by thinking that one of the larger problems here, even aside from the root issue of harassment, is indecision and inaction in putting in solutions to address it. Making any improvement, even if small, can overcome the stasis we're at right now with this problem.
Perhaps you're wrong, and just putting one easy incremental layer of defense in place is sufficient. Or maybe you're right! Either way, harassers working through the swiss cheese and still doing harassment is going to happen. We don't know how much it would be tapered down though, and maybe it becomes a much rarer event with some simpler gates put into place. This is an issue raised by the community, so feedback from the community after action is taken and first solutions are put into place would be an essential piece to addressing this form of harassment and doxxing. We don't know what the broader consensus may look like when it comes to what is a tolerable level of this taking place. We're not sure what the consensus would be as far as if we have taken sufficient steps in trying to prevent this behavior. Maybe the fever pitch dies down with just a gate or two added, but we can't know that either without the site leaders taking that first step and seeing the resulting feedback.
We do know that the broader consensus of goons finds the current state of affairs to be unacceptable, and there also seems to be broad consensus regarding frustration towards the inaction/indecision and lack of communication regarding the problem.
I can see myself being on the other side of things and being overwhelmed by analysis paralysis or being unsatisfied with the lack of a perfect solution or even necessarily a satisfying one. I'm optimistic that taking a small step with an imperfect yet meaningful improvement could help grease the wheels there and maybe deflate a little bit of the pressure on that side as well.
Ultimately, I think putting any improvement into place will change the conversation, and everyone will be better informed. The community will feel acknowledged and heard, the site leadership can point to a meaningful (if not flawed) improvement, both groups can learn more, and doxxers/harassers can have a harder time and gently caress off
Fully agreed- I think the answer (which, again, I’ve been asking for since last October) is to just remove the function until the tech debt is paid.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2023 14:08
|
|
- Discendo Vox
- Mar 21, 2013
-
We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.
|
What is the timeline for requiring someone to be logged in to purchase an avatar for another user?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2023 22:09
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2023 04:44
