Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

I say we need the media literacy thread back, if we are for god knows what reason turning this place into high school debate club a huge part of that is being able to properly cite sources.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Discendo Vox posted:

It would be useful to hold you accountable for actually resolving the issues being repeatedly brought to your attention.

Yeah might as well get to the point, DV having a group of people that hate and harass them doesn't mean we shouldn't have a media literacy thread. It means people trolling that thread because they view being asked to be critical of media as a crime against them should be actually moderated.


Following politics can be depressing so I get some leeway on despair posting, but when that's your entire posting persona it can get very grating.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Koos Group posted:


The reason feedback threads aren't continuously open is that having them as events encourages more new feedback and prevents them from becoming hangouts. The reason they're only every 3-4 months is because they take a significant amount of my time and energy. The reason they aren't scheduled far in advance is because I like to have them on weekends where I'm mostly free, and I don't always know if that will be the case in advance.



If you don't have the time or energy to do feedback threads and don't really post here in D&D all that often have you considered just finding someone else that's more active in the community that has the desire and free time to mod it?

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Stringent posted:

I wouldn't describe the schism around media literacy/criticism so much as "baggage and grudges", but rather a sincere disagreement over what media literacy/criticism consists of. There seems to be roughly two major schools of thought in DnD, one which focuses on the vetting of sources, and another which places less emphasis on the source and instead focuses on a close read of the content.

Sorry to single DV out here, but they're probably the most vocal and coherent exponent of the "vetting the source" school of thought. For example, I was brought to task for posting a video from an Iranian state media aligned account which posted a video of the Houthi Prime Minister:

I'm not posting this to decry the position that DV and a lot of other posters here follow, but just to illustrate that a schism does exist, and if a media literacy/criticism thread is created it should be created with the expectation that the majority of debate is going to be centered around this schism, and that debate has the potential to get pretty acrimonious at times.

I'm sorry this is nonsense there is not a group of posters on this site that think reading the content is a bad idea, the idea is so ridiculous that it has to be some sort of performative attack right?

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

DeadlyMuffin posted:

There are other sub forums on this website that I don't post in, in large part because I expect if I did post there that a disagreement with the core thread cohort would result in me being called stupid or presented with two year old forum quotes to argue about by people with a grudge, as has happened in this very thread.

I don't think "everyone on the site should want to post here" is a good goal for a sub forum. It certainly isn't one that I expect from any other sub forum.

I don't post in AI either, because I find talking about cars boring. That's okay.

Exactly if you didn't like AI but still spent all your time posting about AI in other subforum where 90% of your posts mention "the bad thread" that would be weird and creepy.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

James Garfield posted:

Weak and fallacious rhetoric like suggesting that a poster who kept getting probed for trolling the thread with "Kyiv is encircled and about to fall" and "What about HamAzov" while posting "Flatten Mariupol" elsewhere on the site might support Russia?

Yeah there was plenty of pro-russian posting, the people doing it didn't even deny it, it's weird to try to pretend it never happened. Hell if you took half the Pro-Russian posts and replaced "Ukraine should just surrender and give into Russias demands it would save more lives" or "Ukraine asked for this because they considered joining Nato" and replaced Ukraine with Gaza and Russia with Israel I'm sure people would be lining up to call those posts "pro-Israel"

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Victar posted:

I have no comment on the rest of what you say, but I do have something to say about dogpiling.

As far as I can tell, dogpiling itself isn't against the D&D rules as listed, and IMO it shouldn't be. As long as dogpilers follow the rules, including the overall rule of "each post should say something interesting, informative, or funny", then it doesn't mean that anything about how D&D works is wrong or bad, it just means that an opinion is unpopular and needs to be defended or conceded.

A dogpile post that's nothing but "me too" or a flame is worthless, against D&D rules, and deserves a probe. But if the dogpile post logically examines and/or rebuts part or all of an argument, then it's a good post.

A dogpile post that accuses someone of supporting genocide had better justify such an extreme accusation. But if the dogpile post does make an accusation and successfully justify it, then it's a good post.

A dogpile post that has something interesting, informative, or funny to say is a good post. Determining whether something is interesting, informative, or funny can be subjective and difficult. That's why being a mod, or even an IK, is hard.

All true, a good example of this is that once in a blue moon actual Trump Voter that shows up and everyone piles in to question their sanity. It's not organized or anything it's just everyone wants a piece, which is a hard thing to moderate I guess.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Killer robot posted:

This is basically the history of the Libertarians thread. Mostly it's a quiet "Check out this dumbass Libertarian poo poo that happened" but true believers would periodically show up to make a stand and get chewed up by the mob, not because of a conspiracy or rule-breaking but because they made bad arguments that were easy to pick apart with interesting and informative posts.

Yeah, they eventually stopped showing up.

Ha there was a time D&D had a huge libertarian population, it was uh gross.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Cinci certainly went too far a lot but it was at least different to have a super engaged D&D mod vs one that checks in every few weeks to do a probe wave, I think we can agree as with all things politics "the truth is in the middle"

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

TheDisreputableDog posted:

Not only that, per Koos’ earlier comment, refusing to participate in the dogpile is now punishable. Even better news for those who find a real spectrum of ideas in their Debate forum “gross”.

I’d love to hear some additional policy details: does every member of the dogpile need to be responded to, or just a certain percentage or ratio? How much time do you have to respond before being probed? Do ignored users count? Etc

Yes I find the spectrum of ideas that libertarianism includes very gross, unsure why this would be an issue for you.

Also no one has ever or will ever be probed for "not participating in a dogpile" that's just silly.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Raenir Salazar posted:

Lots of stuff

Yes patterns like this are quite obvious and intentional, the problem is when you don't have enough mods that are active in the thread/community to notice it, it's a very tuned form of trolling that has been working because people who engage with them end up getting probed.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Marenghi posted:

The derails tend to come from new posters who kramer into the thread to deny something that was already confirmed, or repeat debunked propaganda. You don't need martial law to manage that, just the mods should be more cautious of new posters who post hasbara talking points.

Yeah at the very least might as well alt check those people right off the bat.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Dreylad posted:

As far back as I can recall pretty much every heated argument in D&D ended up with someone probated (or just banned if you go back far enough pre-probation) so I'm not sure there is a solution to the problem because internet arguments almost always escalate toward eventually breaching debate rules, unless someone disengages. Most people (including myself!) have a hard time disengaging and giving someone else the last word.

listen all yall it's a sabotage

Yeah and that's not the worst thing, probes aren't that big of a deal as long as they aren't like months long. Like I got probed yesterday or the day before for continuing a derail and I deserved it and probing me help get the thread back on track.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Discendo Vox posted:

Conversely, for the users who are breaking the rules deliberately to sabotage discussion or harass other users (like B B as mentioned earlier), short probations are explicitly not a disincentive because their goals are still being accomplished.

This is true, some people are obsessive about loving with D&D and 6 hours is not a hurdle to that.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Raenir Salazar posted:

That DV was harassed in the past isn't in doubt and in context isn't hard to see the ways B B was deliberately trying to push DV's buttons and clearly DV is just using it as a recent example. No one replied because IIRC it got probed surprisingly quickly.

In general this is a good example of the mods doing their job, by correctly identify a attempt in context at bad faith trolling and responding adequately.

Yeah B B is a good example, he used to send PMs when you'd fall for his trap and get probed.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Staluigi posted:

probably good news overall that metacommentary on d&d is getting so dreadfully repetitive or eyes-glazed-over'ing

kinda means there's not a lot of actual ongoing problems

That's true, it's basically the same one long problem it's been since what 2016ish?

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Blue Footed Booby posted:

The dude wanders into USCE every few days to post some random poll with a zero-thought one liner like "This seems bad for the Democrats." Anyone who falls for it deserves it, but it's also the kind of posting that only looks sus if you actually follow the thread.

Honestly I'd recommend just ignoring people like that, but I've seen people get probed for not responding to arguments so I'm not sure how that would work.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Raenir Salazar posted:

You can say you disagree with my posts but please don't make up what I've said about them.

Yeah this is why posting in the I/P thread is dangerous and exhausting, it doesn't matter what you say really, even trying to understand the basics of what's happening sometimes will get you labeled a genocide supporter, by the same people spend their time defending the Russian and Chinese genocides. You end up spending so much time trying to correct people imagining poo poo you are saying that you get off on a tangent and never discuss the original point, which probably is their goal to derail the "bad thread"

At this point only active moderation by people engaged with D&D can turn things around but I don't think you could get most of the regulars who have left back and I don't think that is the goal of the admin team either.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

hooman posted:

I would agree regarding snitching, I felt that way as well, and have previously not tended to hit report on anything but the most egregious poo poo.

However terrible posts that are clearly rulebreaking being unreported (and thus not acted on) while posts that are much less clearly rulebreaking getting probes (due to reports) gives the unfair impression that the modding is biased, when the bias actually lays with the people who are willing to hit report. Which is not something I have any ideas on how to fix.

I agree that ideally, we'd report less posts, which would reduce load on the mod team and then get faster action and turnaround on the dire poo poo, but given the tone of the discussion in this feedback thread I don't think that people are likely to do that.

Making a lot of assumptions here about who's doing the reporting.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply