Thank you, I’ve wanted confirmation of (something to) that (effect) for a long time.
Why do you delete whole sections of threads when something objectionable pops up, instead of just what’s objectionable?
Do not meddle in the ways of dragons, for they are subtle and quick to anger.
…And you taste good with ketchup?
Is that how it went?
When there are replies to the post and the original post is taken away, the replies tend to not make sense. I have the option to delete replies, 99% of the time I take it.
Are you talking about a particular someone or incident?
I was asking specifically about @shaddack above.
My concern is that I could make a mistake like his…not outside the rules but encroaching an invisible line anyway.
I’d like to avoid that.
I get very confused by a lot of what goes on here RE: arguments/deletions/bans - obvious trolls are one thing, but some people delight in having the same arguments, with the same people, over and over again. Which frustrates me, because I think all the regulars here are almost always hoopy froods.
Not that I think we should really be talking about specific people in this here thread anyway.
There is also a rubbernecking issue where certain participants take a bit too much glee in the explaining and justification and meta-commentary that goes along with detailed explanations for moderator actions.
Generalized explanations of common mod events that can be added to the bbs guidelines are always good.
As I said I think this process should be biased toward the regulars since they have the most stake in what is happening versus, say, some hot button issue drive-by rando that demands a mod explanation.
Respectfully, this thread was created in part due to my concerns, and I have a concern that invisible rules are at play.
That has an impact on all of us.
I was talking about stuff modded out of the questions thread. I’m not sure what happened with shaddack but he got warned twice for something by the looks of it.
I know I’m one of those people who gets into the same argument fairly regularly. There’s a few people on the BBS who I should just not even bother reading because if I do, I’m going to have a tedious day, since I can’t stop myself from taking the bait.
There’s your reasoning from the founder of the thing. The devout users deserve a little leeway.
That’s fine, but please look again and see if a warning or a three-day timeout would have been far more fitting than a month+ ban.
As somebody who is pretty quick on the flag-hammer, I would like to note that 1) I flag in the questions thread, but usually only anoles who have no interest in participating in the game, not for violations of the rules (take it from me, that is a listing strategy) and 2) I did no flagging today.
Loss of comments is confusing, but I don’t know if a better alternative. Hidden from public view, but viable by original writer? If we “own” our data, that seems fair. Context is gone, but or text remains (with us). ?
As I recall, if we download all of our posts, the deleted posts spring forth again like new-minted Lazari.
Oh, well then, that’s awesome!
I have fared well lately with regards to posts being eaten. I was sad to recently see that a post in defense of ritual sex was flagged and deleted. My only upset about posts being deleted is that it is almost always because people disagree with my opinions, rather than any incivility. I think that people should be encouraged to voice their disagreements rather than delete what they disagree with, because it reduces the “echo chamber” effect. Debate which is (reasonably) open seems more robust to me than deliberately curating it towards a preferred spin.
I suspect that far-out opinions seem like concern-trolling to many people, which probably cannot be helped. All I can do really is live by example.
Since we’re talking about moderation, here’s my opinion:
I’ve said before that the BBS has a bit of a tendency towards Groupthink. I haven’t seen all of the deleted posts (because …well… they’re deleted), but what I have seen is that the rules seem to be applied unevenly. There are people who appear to be able to be as obnoxious as they like and be in little or no danger of post deletion or dragon chompings, while other regulars get banhammered for much less.
We’re understandably harsh on drive-by idiots or one-shot trolls, but I think those with mod powers need to look at what they’re doing a bit more objectively. The delete key isn’t a really strong form of “I disagree”, and people on your “side” can’t get a free pass.
TBH, I find I react more to people that I really want to agree with and just disagree fairly strongly on one point. Funnily enough, it turns out that they have strong opinions on that issue too… As far as I know, I’ve only had comments deleted once where I knew it was about me and not the other person. The way I see it, it’s not necessarily terrible to stick to the Overton window of the site you’re on, while holding opinions out of it - I may think something’s being unjustly assumed, but if people generally want to take that as accepted I can leave the discussion rather than stalling it. That feeds into the groupthink to some extent, but it’s also OK for people to discuss stuff without being challenged on every point, every time. In general though, I think people are pretty open minded when they see differing opinions that are honestly held.