Note: Suspension

[Puget]

No to "no double posting" as a general rule.  Double-posting is not always bad, and such a rule would make it harder to enforce the "use an existing thread rather than start a new thread" rule, and it would probably also have collateral damage for relatively uncontroversial threads like "Look! A bird!"

The thing to keep in mind is that one single rule  by itself would allow the community to self-moderate with no intervention by administrators. For the non-controversial threads, anyone simply *acknowledging another person's post would allow the original poster to continue. That seems like a pretty easy way to deal with the restriction.

(* Just like many posts now that quote and then simply add "+1".)

This still doesn't seem like a good way to do it.

I don't think double posting is a good filter, because usually someone else will engage, if only to call them out on bad behavior. DNFTT doesn't seem enforceable -- as others have noted on this thread, people find it hard to avoid engaging, and it isn't always good practice to not respond to a post you strongly disagree with, since others are reading (including potentially new members who don't know the context/history).

Double posting is also sometimes used to bump a thread that has gone dormant but can be usefully resurrected, including when the OP was the last to post and comes back later with an update on how things turned out (e.g., "I got the job, thanks everyone" type posts)-- we wouldn't want to ban those.

I don't think the goal here should be to come up with a way to fully automate this-- we will need some human mods involved. As long as the rules are fairly limited, simple and unambiguous I wouldn't anticipate too many problems with this. 

[dr_evil]

I'd like to add another voice to complement the hard work of the moderators. I suppose whether or not we have more strict moderation depends on what new rules will be added.  I think stronger enforcement against personal attacks would be perfectly fine, but I'm not so sure about the rule against double-posting. What if one forgets something they meant to add, for example.

(And related to the off-topic reference to Twitter, I too am thinking of leaving there. I haven't been active for years anyway.)

[Langue_doc]

I'd like to add another voice to complement the hard work of the moderators. I suppose whether or not we have more strict moderation depends on what new rules will be added.  I think stronger enforcement against personal attacks would be perfectly fine, but I'm not so sure about the rule against double-posting. What if one forgets something they meant to add, for example.

+1 to the bolded.

Double-posting would and should be legit in threads such as the NYT Spelling Bee, Look a bird, and RIP.

[marshwiggle]

Double-posting would and should be legit in threads such as the NYT Spelling Bee, Look a bird, and RIP.

Question for those in the know:

Are the questionable posts restricted to certain threads and/or topics, and if so, is there an *objective way to identify threads prone to them? (For instance, does a high rate of activity for a thread suggest it's in danger of getting inflammatory? Or does it start to happen typically after the thread reaches a certain length, etc.?)


(FWIW As I've discussed in other threads, I like to use things like checklists for grading because I like to minimize the effects of my own subjectivity. I like auto-graded quizzes for the same reason.)

[Wahoo Redux]

This is a very small forum with unusually intelligent, articulate, informed and considerate commentary, even when things get snarky or heated.  Truly offensive posts are fairly rare.  And while I don't know any of you (at least I don't think I do), I feel like I know most of you and I enjoy and respect all of you----even those I frequently disagree with. The current level of moderation is appropriate and very appreciated.  The mods are greatly appreciated.

I fear that the poster in question has some devolving mental health issues and I truly hope hu gets some help.

Thanks to the mods for all their work.

[Puget]

Double-posting would and should be legit in threads such as the NYT Spelling Bee, Look a bird, and RIP.

Question for those in the know:

Are the questionable posts restricted to certain threads and/or topics, and if so, is there an *objective way to identify threads prone to them? (For instance, does a high rate of activity for a thread suggest it's in danger of getting inflammatory? Or does it start to happen typically after the thread reaches a certain length, etc.?)


(FWIW As I've discussed in other threads, I like to use things like checklists for grading because I like to minimize the effects of my own subjectivity. I like auto-graded quizzes for the same reason.)

I don't think so-- the longest and most active threads tend to be things like games and the monthly research threads where people post daily goals and progress.

I'm all for objectivity too when it can reasonably go achieved, but I don't think there is a way to automate this-- it has to be done by looking the actual content and the pattern of behavior across posts. Just like using a grading rubric does not, alas, spare us from having to actually read and grade the papers.

[mamselle]

Now there's an idea....place the rubric gently on the paper and let the comments osmose through....

Sorry...I got lost in the wonder of it all...

Yes. I think the more inflammatory threads have tended to focus around current political issues for which there are indeed very nuanced ideas, differences, and proffered solutions (like this one...we're already at, what, 4 pages now?) and if those can stay sane and considerate, they provide some very interesting cross-currents for reading and thinking about.

Too much so. I have work to do!!!!!!

More later--M.

[ciao_yall]

This is a very small forum with unusually intelligent, articulate, informed and considerate commentary, even when things get snarky or heated.  Truly offensive posts are fairly rare.  And while I don't know any of you (at least I don't think I do), I feel like I know most of you and I enjoy and respect all of you----even those I frequently disagree with. The current level of moderation is appropriate and very appreciated.  The mods are greatly appreciated.

I fear that the poster in question has some devolving mental health issues and I truly hope hu gets some help.

Thanks to the mods for all their work.

^^^ What Wahoo said.

This is not about a troll. This is about a member of our community who is probably really struggling. This person has alluded to mental health issues in the past.

I generally ignore that poster and while I appreciate that the conversation seems to have taken a much healthier turn overall since they are not posting, I still am worried.

[Caracal]

This is a very small forum with unusually intelligent, articulate, informed and considerate commentary, even when things get snarky or heated.  Truly offensive posts are fairly rare.  And while I don't know any of you (at least I don't think I do), I feel like I know most of you and I enjoy and respect all of you----even those I frequently disagree with. The current level of moderation is appropriate and very appreciated.  The mods are greatly appreciated.

I fear that the poster in question has some devolving mental health issues and I truly hope hu gets some help.

Thanks to the mods for all their work.

^^^ What Wahoo said.

This is not about a troll. This is about a member of our community who is probably really struggling. This person has alluded to mental health issues in the past.

I generally ignore that poster and while I appreciate that the conversation seems to have taken a much healthier turn overall since they are not posting, I still am worried.

I hope not. At the moment a lot of what is basically mainstream political discourse is pretty unbalanced. If you hang around in certain corners of the Internet some crazy things can start seeming normal. Sometimes, the rest of life does bleed over onto here. Looking back at my silly fights with Poly, a lot of that was happening during the worst parts of the pandemic and I was feeling pretty stressed and someone saying mean things to me on a forum felt like a mortal threat.

[marshwiggle]

I hope not. At the moment a lot of what is basically mainstream political discourse is pretty unbalanced.

In what way?

[Anselm]

I served a 24 hour sentence in Facebook jail and came out as a better  and reformed man.

[Istiblennius]

Yes, for the most part there were some threads that were kind of designed to be a churn of frustration. But I can recall (would need to look up) at least a couple of threads - there was one on student mental health and another on late work policies where the pet conspiracy theories popped up. That is the kind of thing I think could be addressed. Maybe even with a gentle community standard - this thread is about student mental health. Please post this topic in the thread you already started for that. And then the post can be moderated.

[lightning]

This is a very small forum with unusually intelligent, articulate, informed and considerate commentary, even when things get snarky or heated.  Truly offensive posts are fairly rare.  And while I don't know any of you (at least I don't think I do), I feel like I know most of you and I enjoy and respect all of you----even those I frequently disagree with. The current level of moderation is appropriate and very appreciated.  The mods are greatly appreciated.

I fear that the poster in question has some devolving mental health issues and I truly hope hu gets some help.

Thanks to the mods for all their work.

^^^ What Wahoo said.

This is not about a troll. This is about a member of our community who is probably really struggling. This person has alluded to mental health issues in the past.

I generally ignore that poster and while I appreciate that the conversation seems to have taken a much healthier turn overall since they are not posting, I still am worried.

Y'all are way too kind.

Patience, empathy, and compassion are where we should always err as a community, but too much of it can embolden those that have no patience, empathy, and compassion themselves.

[glowdart]

 I just returned after an extended break. I left for reasons I think some would hope moderation would help, but really, I just couldn't handle another attempt at actual conversation being derailed by our colleagues who need to weigh in on every situation at every type of institution with affected authority despite significantly limited actual experience. Those posters are unlikely to be moderated, but those posters are the ones who end up sending people off with lousy information or advice and they starkly limit actual conversation and overwhelm the people who are positioned to speak to the questions people raise. I don't know how you moderate that.

Prolonged personal attacks? Yes. Moderate. But community-killing behavior is more pernicious than that.

[downer]

I just returned after an extended break. I left for reasons I think some would hope moderation would help, but really, I just couldn't handle another attempt at actual conversation being derailed by our colleagues who need to weigh in on every situation at every type of institution with affected authority despite significantly limited actual experience. Those posters are unlikely to be moderated, but those posters are the ones who end up sending people off with lousy information or advice and they starkly limit actual conversation and overwhelm the people who are positioned to speak to the questions people raise. I don't know how you moderate that.

Prolonged personal attacks? Yes. Moderate. But community-killing behavior is more pernicious than that.

The "ignore" function helps a lot with that.