I wonder how long THIS thread is going to stay up?
Why wouldn’t it stay up? This thread is a feature request. One I think would be great to have, too.
Because this latest thread only exists because of yesterday’s thread regarding banned poster modusoperandi, and bb pulled that thread yesterday.
Not from my perspective. Reading the OP’s post, he’s proposed a useful feature that I, as a moderator, would very likely make use of in specific instances. You are, of course, welcome to interpret it any way you wish.
It would serve us both well if you show me exactly where I said that this particular thread is not useful. Then we can go from there without misinterpreting each other.
“not useful”? Now you’re reading into my comments, too - I said no such thing. I do notice, though, that you’re speaking for the OP, by implying that you “know” why this topic exists, despite them saying nothing of the sort in this thread.
Either way, you’re now risking derailing what is otherwise a useful conversation on alternatives mods can consider or features that could be added to Discourse.
As a ‘wise’ man once said, (see above).
I’m not sure what you’re trying to accomplish here, other than derailing an otherwise productive thread.
What exactly happens if the answer to your question is “yes”? Does that somehow invalidate the discussion on mod tools?
I’m giving you a lot of latitude here, but this is coming awfully close to trolling in my mind.
At this point, if I respond to you at all about this (as I am now), would you consider that something that would contribute to ‘derailing’ and also – now – trolling, because I’m talking about it in response to you post? Honestly? I merely posted once about the apparent connection between the OP and yesterday’s very unusual thread re MO. You responded to that, and asked the question “Why wouldn’t it stay up?” So I answered that (in case you did not know about yesterday’s pulled thread), i.e., trying to be helpful. That was all. And here we are.
I consider the incident clasic derailing, yes - no one had mentioned the banning until you did, at which point you tried to imply that a discussion about mod tools may not “stay up” (despite the fact that AFAIK no topics were “taken down”). I’m not going to get into an argument about it with you, but here you go, you now have your own thread to air your issues without anyone declaring it “offtopic”.
At times, the chance of calling ‘offtopic’ is directly proportional to both “taking it personally” and “not agreeing with the other party”. Will banning come next?
Since their comments have been scrubbed, could you please let us know exactly what Modusoperandi and OtherMichael wrote, so we’re clear about where the red line is?
Best I can do is refer you to the community guidelines.
Our rules aren’t “hard and fast” because language isn’t static, either - it’s open to interpretation. Mods don’t work as one, and the mods (or the Authors/Editors/Mutants) have their own interpretations as well (as one would expect - it’s their space). I’m happy to explain my interpretation of “derailing” a thread, but it’s not a hard and fast rule, and other mods may have different interpretations.
In many ways, this is a reflection of Boing Boing itself - the Authors don’t check with each other before posting. Their voices independently craft a whole that is greater than the sum of it’s parts, IMHO.
An offtopic comment on its’ own may be innocuous, but if it drags discussion away from the primary topic, then it’s detrimental to that topic, and if the discussion has merit on its’ own, then I’m often inclined to spin it off into its’ own thread so the discussion can continue uninterrupted. But this isn’t a hard and fast rule, but persistent offtopic posts repeatedly take away from the conversation, not add to it, and we’ve removed members from our community for that very reason (often at the behest of other members who are tired of having discussions continually dragged off in a specific direction).
I try to air on the “light touch” side of moderation because I believe that, generally, the community is pretty good at self-policing, and step in only when needed. I’d have to do that a lot less if you folks would flag more, so that the community itself handled moderation directly (an awesome feature of Discourse).
Despite being employed by BB, moderating here isn’t part of my job - I choose to volunteer my time to help make BBS a better place because I care about civil discourse on the internet, and in the hope that this leaves the Authors free to post mostly wonderful things for us.
My opinion on this is that suspensions of well known regulars in particular should be short, as they have proven themselves.
(Now if a regular goes off the rails and posts some wildly racist rant, fine, suspend them forever, but I am assuming this was more of a procedural faux pas or misunderstanding?)
To be clear I have absolutely been suspended at times from other forums I participate on. And I deserved it. I was close to self-suspending myself from here on BBS for causing unnecessary moderator drama once. The point is to say “yep, I screwed up, I apologize and I will try again”. Everyone is human, everyone messes up, but regulars in particular (barring xtra crazy badness) should be given a bit more rope to hang themselves. I think they’ve earned it.
I feel like friends, true friends, can forgive each other.
Ok I looked further and this … this is all over the freaking St. Elsewhere snow globe ending? Are you guys kidding me?
Every editor has their own approach and jlw is strict. I thought everyone knew not to derail jlw’s topics? Well, now you know double plus good not to do so.
(That said, still not a fan of very long suspensions on regulars.)
At least I know what threads to avoid participating in.
That is indeed a way to look at it. Redundant: I still not agree on draconian measures, how banning for a long while of well known regulars feels to me. It’s a interesting view.
As we all (!) are part of this group, community(?), and some/mosts are guests, I can see your point of view. Can be recognizable too.
Everybody, for sure around these mutants, maybe they are self one, has somebody, or more people, in there family/friends who has some special way’s to deal with. And take care of that. In the positive and negative way. Does and dont’s, if somebody provokes aunt x and gets into trouble; “They should have known what could happen”.
If somebody is not nice, and careful, around vulnerable uncle y, and he starts drinking and crying. Yep. the same.
Does that not relieve aunt x and uncle y from there personal responsibility, I like to think about people to be responsible for there behaviour and acts.
However, there is nothing wrong to take in account some quirks and behaviour, and to be kind. And when not possible, avoid.
"Oh dear, did somebody say mattress to Mr Lambert?"
I agree with what you’re saying. Was @othermichael in jlw’s thread though? I thought he opened his own to protest the ban on m-o and that got him TEN years
Since from this vantage we see the bottom of boots when we complain, perhaps other, cooler, heads could meditate on this.
I’ve been accessing online forums since the mid 80’s, and if there’s one thing I know, it’s that BBS moderation sometimes brings out the inner-authoritarian in some people. Sysops get to control their electronic fiefdoms any way they choose, and some choose to do it with an iron fist.