Moderation Questions and General Chat Thread
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic failed, and it became a general discussion thread with almost no moderation related posts at all. And those that were posted were so buried in non-mod posts that it became a huge time drain on the mods to sort through them. Then, when off topic posts were deleted posters complained about that.
This led to the closing of the mod discussion thread, replaced by the post report/pm approach. This has filtered out lots of noise, but has resulted at times in the General Discussion Thread turning into a quasi-mod thread. This is not desirable, but going back to the old mod thread is also not a workable option.
Therefore, I have created this new moderation thread, but with a different purpose and ground rules than previous mod threads. The purpose of this thread is to provide a place for posters to pose questions to the mods about how policies are applied; to bring to the mods attention posts they think are inappropriate and reach the level of requiring mod action; and for mods to communicate to posters things like changes or clarifications to policies, bannings, etc.
Now let me tell you what this thread is NOT a place for. It is not for nonmoderation related posts, even if the discussion originates from a comment in in a mod related post. It is not for posters to post their opinions about other posters or whether a poster should be banned. It is not to rehash past grievances about mod decisions from months or years ago. The focus of this thread will be recent posts that require action now. Or questions about current policies and enforcement.
So basically, this is a thread to ask mods questions. Which means, pretty much that only mods should be answering those questions. If a poster asks why a particular post was deleted or allowed, only a mod can answer that. Everyone else who wants to jump in with their opinion or their mod war story needs to stay out of it. It just increases the noise to signal ratio and does nothing to answer the question.
Everyone needs to understand that this thread has very different rules than the old mod thread and any other thread. Any non-moderation post will be deleted on sight. Not moved to the appropriate thread, just deleted. So don't waste your time crafting a masterpiece post about wars or transgender issues or the presidential election and then post it in this thread. It will be gone. Also, this isnt a thread for general commentary about our mods performance. Posting "browser sucks as a mod" or any such posts that don't actually ask about a policy or request a mod action will be deleted. Everyone is entitled to their opinion about the moderation of this forum. But this thread isnt for complaining about mods. You are free to go to the ATF forum and make your concerns about modding in this forum there.
So with that intro, this thread is open for those who need to bring questions about mod policies or bring inappropriate posts to the mods attention. Again, it is NOT a thread for group discussions about other posters or for other posters to answer questions directed to mods.
We'll see how this goes. If you have what you feel is an open issue raised in the General Discussion Thread, please copy that post or otherwise reintroduce the issue here.
Thanks.
I think that was a piece of very poorly constructed irony from PW rather than slander but he should have realised the potential for confusion and stayed away from it.
Who could know. I’ve lost track of all the baseless accusations, and I’m tired of one side attempting to make this very personal when I am committed to keeping it about my positions and facts.
Ftr, I have undeleted the post in that thread that Boids claims is so terrible. He may quote it here if he’d like.
For reference, this is how Boids greeted me to the I/P thread:
The I/P thread is modded to a different standard than the rest of the forum. I think we let most things go in most threads, but when the topic repeatedly brings out problems, then we clamp down in that thread. I don't know if this is the best way, but it's how we've been operating (and to be clear, there was no discussion or directive to mod this way, it's just a description of the situation).
1 - if something is unaccessible in that thread, it should be in all threads.
2 - Victor posted far more terrible things in the IP thread than Mets ever did.
If JD Vance were gay and casually reading this thread, he would probably read this post and think that is an excellent point and say I wonder why none of those arguing on Mets behalf seem interested in addressing it in their arguments.
I addressed it, pointing out that it was not true.
You are not privy to the actual complaint made by the person it was directed toward, who very much called it sexual harassment and made it clear she never wanted to post in a thread with him ever again. This is evidenced in his user notes. It is significantly worse than how you are summarizing it here. It caused real harm.
I have said (and done) the same thing about Victor because he has harassed me repeatedly. But no one does anything about it. It's clear that for other users, you are fine losing the posters who are harassed and leaving the harassers to continue.
Never heard of a fascist being dysfunctional enough to be guilty of sexual harassment before. They're usually so respectful of women.
If it boiled down to the victim saying she didn't want to post here any more because Mets' presence was making her feel threatened, and him being banned, I think he should have been "asked to leave".
I have said the same thing about Victor, several times.
You should show some examples rather than making unsubstantiated claims
We could just all settle down and stop badgering the mod over petty bullshit for a few hours.
Just scroll backwards in this thread and all will be revealed.
Or maybe it's in the old mod thread I dk if that's still accessible. Regardless, I'm sure you remember it well, I wasn't the only one complaining about being told I supported genocide and baby killing.
So do I because it’s all screen shotted in his user notes. I think it’s reasonable that the person did not say the exact same thing to you as she privately confided in another female mod about how she truly felt about it. It was upsetting to read.
So, can I have a male mod to privately confide in about how I feel when being attacked by Trolly and Victor?
Would that actually matter?
If you mean the word "unaccessible," then I don't understand what you mean here. Regardless, I disagree that all threads should be modded the same. Some will need a heavier hand if the topic is more emotionally charged. Others can handle some naughtiness without getting out of control.
Just scroll backwards in this thread and all will be revealed.
Or maybe it's in the old mod thread I dk if that's still accessible. Regardless, I'm sure you remember it well, I wasn't the only one complaining about being told I supported genocide and baby killing.
so you are whining about something from months and years ago?
Comparing your issue with Victor to actually being harmed by sexual harassment isn’t the look you think it is, Rob
Comparing your issue with Victor to actually being harmed by sexual harassment isn’t the look you think it is, Rob
You're talking about posts on the internet. One received by her, 100 by me. I don't know what 'actual harm' was suffered by her, but you don't care at all what actual harm may have been suffered by me.
If you mean the word "unaccessible," then I don't understand what you mean here. Regardless, I disagree that all threads should be modded the same. Some will need a heavier hand if the topic is more emotionally charged. Others can handle some naughtiness without getting out of control.
Typo, unacceptable.
If you mean the word "unaccessible," then I don't understand what you mean here. Regardless, I disagree that all threads should be modded the same. Some will need a heavier hand if the topic is more emotionally charged. Others can handle some naughtiness without getting out of control.
It just hit me -- the word was "unacceptable."
Idiots
