Polly's Thoughts on Future of Our Community

[Caracal]

I guess this is what I mean. Some people seem to assume that a detailed set of rules is going to lead to unlimited power for mods and uneven enforcement. That doesn't really make sense. Right now, we have a very vague set of rules. If they were so inclined, the mods could choose to interpret rules like "no personal attacks," and "no bringing baggage from other threads," much more broadly. They aren't because they don't want to impose broad interpretations without a consensus.

That actually puts moderators in a position where they have to make more subjective calls. Para and Eigen can correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression is that they mostly only intervene when a thread is clearly spinning out of control and in those cases may take a slightly broader view of what is outside the bounds. If someone is sticking a toe over the line and everyone ignores the provocation, nothing happens. If someone gets angry and writes something clearly out of bounds, they may go back and give a warning to the toe sticker outer too.

We could actually make the mods calls less subjective with a clearer set of rules and I really think it wouldn't be that hard to craft rules that allowed for open and vigorous debate while curtailing bad behavior.

::Edited out a HUGE amount of white space. Eigen::

[Sun_Worshiper]

And volunteers can put it on their CV: Fora moderator policy working group (ad hoc)

[eigen]

I guess this is what I mean. Some people seem to assume that a detailed set of rules is going to lead to unlimited power for mods and uneven enforcement. That doesn't really make sense. Right now, we have a very vague set of rules. If they were so inclined, the mods could choose to interpret rules like "no personal attacks," and "no bringing baggage from other threads," much more broadly. They aren't because they don't want to impose broad interpretations without a consensus.

That actually puts moderators in a position where they have to make more subjective calls. Para and Eigen can correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression is that they mostly only intervene when a thread is clearly spinning out of control and in those cases may take a slightly broader view of what is outside the bounds. If someone is sticking a toe over the line and everyone ignores the provocation, nothing happens. If someone gets angry and writes something clearly out of bounds, they may go back and give a warning to the toe sticker outer too.

We could actually make the mods calls less subjective with a clearer set of rules and I really think it wouldn't be that hard to craft rules that allowed for open and vigorous debate while curtailing bad behavior.

::Edited out a HUGE amount of white space. Eigen::

I pretty much only step in when there's a report, and only at that point if it seems like it's egregious.

Our policy currently is that unless there is something that we really think needs to be handled immediately, that we discuss how to handle it so it's not a single person making the call.

We do very little "moderation", honestly.

[Caracal]

::Edited out a HUGE amount of white space. Eigen::

See, free speech is being stifled!

[eigen]

::Edited out a HUGE amount of white space. Eigen::

See, free speech is being stifled!

Oh no! I'm caught.

[dr_codex]

::Edited out a HUGE amount of white space. Eigen::

See, free speech is being stifled!

Oh no! I'm caught.

Music is the space between the notes.

[Ruralguy]

Until very recently, I think there was a lot of baggage carried over from other threads. I would prefer to see that stopped in its tracks, but I suppose we the people can exert pressure when we see it.

[mleok]

there's an "ignore" function

Wait, there's an ignore function? How do you activate it?

[Puget]

there's an "ignore" function[/li][/list]

Wait, there's an ignore function? How do you activate it?

Not intuitive--
Profile (click on it, not anything in its menu)-->Modify Profile menu--> Buddies/Ignore List.

[Caracal]

there's an "ignore" function[/li][/list]

Wait, there's an ignore function? How do you activate it?

Not intuitive--
Profile (click on it, not anything in its menu)-->Modify Profile menu--> Buddies/Ignore List.

I still wish there was a way to modify it so you actually didn't even see that a person had posted in a thread. As it is, its like a little voice saying "don't you want to just see what terrible thing that person wrote? Don't you?"

[mleok]

there's an "ignore" function[/li][/list]

Wait, there's an ignore function? How do you activate it?

Not intuitive--
Profile (click on it, not anything in its menu)-->Modify Profile menu--> Buddies/Ignore List.

Okay, thanks. On some other forums, there is an option to add a person to the ignore list when you click on their profile.

[mamselle]

Or, you can just...ignore them.

Don't open threads they start.
Scroll past their moniker whenever you see it.
Don't ever engage with them (or very, very rarely)
Don't answer their posts.
Abandon threads they take over, even if they're threads you started.

Ignore them, unless there's a true cry for help, an honest effort to confront their own issues, or a noteworthy, generous, genuinely empathic response on their part to someone in pain.

Reinforce those.

But otherwise, avoid them the way you'd avoid you ex when  you realize they've turned up at a wedding you didn't know they'd been invited to.

You're done with them. Nothing left to say. Move on.

M.

[mahagonny]

Or, you can just...ignore them.

Don't open threads they start.
Scroll past their moniker whenever you see it.
Don't ever engage with them (or very, very rarely)
Don't answer their posts.
Abandon threads they take over, even if they're threads you started.

Ignore them, unless there's a true cry for help, an honest effort to confront their own issues, or a noteworthy, generous, genuinely empathic response on their part to someone in pain.

Reinforce those.

But otherwise, avoid them the way you'd avoid you ex when  you realize they've turned up at a wedding you didn't know they'd been invited to.

You're done with them. Nothing left to say. Move on.

M.

But...if I ignore them then I can't complain about them. Why can't I have both?

[lightning]

Or, you can just...ignore them.

Don't open threads they start.
Scroll past their moniker whenever you see it.
Don't ever engage with them (or very, very rarely)
Don't answer their posts.
Abandon threads they take over, even if they're threads you started.

Ignore them, unless there's a true cry for help, an honest effort to confront their own issues, or a noteworthy, generous, genuinely empathic response on their part to someone in pain.

Reinforce those.

But otherwise, avoid them the way you'd avoid you ex when  you realize they've turned up at a wedding you didn't know they'd been invited to.

You're done with them. Nothing left to say. Move on.

M.

This works, and it can be entertaining to see their agonized follow-up posts when no one is engaging with them, as the only agency that they have in their pathetic world has been stripped from them.

Unfortunately, this only makes some of them say things that are even more stupid and more outlandish in order to get any engagement--saying stuff that is so outlandish that no one could possibly sit back and allow the poster to go unchallenged.

When a moronic poster is obviously at this point of saying outlandish stuff just to get an engagement, I don't think it's inappropriate to boot someone like that from the fora, for the sake of the fora itself.

[mahagonny]

When you get your own forum, Lightning, you can make these judgments for the whole group. Big splash.