Why don't you flag?

Continuing the discussion from Four years of BBS :calendar_spiral::

@codinghorror suggested I fork this off. Specifically, my suggestion for getting more feedback from the moderators about posts getting deleted and the results of flagging. However, I think thatā€™s putting the cart before the horse. We already have 1, 2, 3, 4, [5] (No notifications on deleted posts?) meta topics on ā€œgetting more feedback from the mods;ā€ we donā€™t need a sixth, especially if thatā€™s not the problem weā€™re trying to solve.

The line that started that whole discussion was:

Iā€™ve explained my own reasons for not flagging in the parent topic:

So, in short, my reasons for not flagging are the trio of ā€œlack of feedback,ā€ ā€œunpredictabilityā€ and ā€œcollateral damage.ā€

But those arenā€™t necessarily the problem. The problem is that there is a general lack of flagging, not that there is a lack of @nimelennar flagging.

So, the first thing we need to do is determine why there isnā€™t more flagging. Is it for the same reasons I gave, or is it for other reasons? If itā€™s the former, then we can start discussing ways of tweaking the Discourse moderation system in order to make it easier for the mods to give us feedback. If Iā€™m the exception, not the rule, then, once we determine what the actual issue preventing flagging is, then we can start fixing it.

Iā€™m going to make this post a wiki. Add your own reasons, and then Iā€™ll make a poll out of it once we have a long-ish list.

#Reasons Boingers donā€™t flag:

  • lack of feedback (added by nimelennar)
  • unpredictability (added by nimelennar)
  • collateral damage (added by nimelennar)
  • already flagged into oblivion (added by JemmieDuffs, multiple concurrences)
  • new members get flagged/punished more than regulars for same bad behavior (added by JemmieDuffs, multiple concurrences)
  • benefit of the doubt (added by wisconsinplatt)
  • skimming through/avoiding hot topics (added by wisconsinplatt/Purplecat)
  • restricting flags to people who arenā€™t sticking around (added by Phrenological)
  • live and let live (added by stinkinbadgers)
  • donā€™t see anything that bad (added by stinkinbadgers, multiple concurrences)
  • staying out of direct arguments (added by lamaranagram)
  • doesnā€™t change the assholes (added by lamaranagram)
  • canā€™t remember post history to put comment in context (added by lamaranagram)
  • leaving the wrongness be as a memorial to wrongness (added by Snowlark)
  • lack of reading comprehension is not a flaggable offense (added by stinkinbadgers, who hopes everyone realizes was mocking himself)
  • difficulty in determining if something is genuinely flag-worthy vs. something I find personably objectionable. (added by @nothingfuture)
  • the vast majority of everything posted doesnā€™t bother me enough to flag, and Iā€™d always rather err on the side of letting things devolve into flamewars (well, not quite) rather than sit at a dreary tea-party of rigid ideological conformity (added by, of all people, @Donald_Petersen who doesnā€™t really want to watch the world burn)
  • no action is ever taken (added by Israel_B)
  • disagreement with the actions taken as a result of previous flags (added by FerrisWheeler/fiddlingfrog)
  • snitches get stitches (added by SenorSchaffer)
  • I just figure arguing is how some people have to come to an understanding (added by critter)
  • donā€™t want to disrupt the wonderfully wandering nature of conversation here (added by critter)
  • even some odious posts are actually teachable moments (added by AP)
  • If I am not immediately compelled to flag it for gross abuses, Iā€™ll usually just keep scrolling (added by AP)
  • It gets threads shut down and victims banned for fighting back. (added by OtherMichael)
13 Likes

A general lack of flagging among Discourse users in general or just the BB community? I ask because tolerance towards unsavory comments can vary between online discussion communities.

8 Likes

I read the FAQ before commenting on this topic. I have flagged exactly thrice, for obvious violation of the Terms of Use and for obviously decade-old zombie content. I donā€™t flag more often because:

  1. More timely users have already flagged an egregious violation into oblivion thanks to mass notification.

  2. ā€œFlag the bad, and avoid contentless comments.ā€ I read ā€˜badā€™ as a violation of Rule 1 in the FAQ: Be cool. Donā€™t post insulting, bullying, victim-blaming, racist, sexist, or homophobic remarks, and 'But, remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

    • Name-calling.
    • Ad hominem attacks.
    • Responding to a postā€™s tone instead of its actual content.
    • Knee-jerk contradiction.
  3. Instead, provide reasoned counter-arguments that improve the conversation.ā€™ When I see a poster I recognize engage in name-calling, knee-jerk contradiction, ad hominem attacks, responding to the tone of a post rather than its actual content, I wonder if thereā€™s some ā€˜rules for thee, but none for meā€™ going on.

  4. Unpredictability is a ā€˜featureā€™ here: ā€˜Enforcement may be lax or draconian as befits the whims of the Entity. The rude will be eaten first.ā€™

8 Likes

i tend to only flag the egregious, blatantly offensive stuff when I see it. heck half the time it has been hidden already.

17 Likes

I tend to err on the side of caution. Are they Trollinā€™ to be Trollinā€™? Or are they provoking.

Most of the hot topics where the flags are flying, Iā€™m usually just skimming and donā€™t actually see the flaggable comment.

If I see something pointing out a questionable comment, Iā€™ll take a look and make my call, but still I go back to erring on the not flagging.

5 Likes

I tend do restrict my flags to shit-n-run posters, Gamergate brand trollies, etc.

Iā€™m not generally worried about lack of feedback (those cases usually get a reply)

Interpersonal arguments usually occur within ā€œrulesā€ bounds even if I find someoneā€™s approach tiring.

I sometimes donā€™t see a difference with persons who take an inciteful approach, but I still err on the side of ā€œUGHā€ than I do flagging someone for their shtick.

6 Likes

@JemmieDuffs brings up a good point.

We canā€™t say we werenā€™t warned, per the official FAQ

9 Likes

I notice none of the options are ā€œI believe in live and let liveā€ or ā€œI rarely see anything that bothers me that muchā€

The few times Iā€™ve caught a flagged post before it disappeared or a thread locked-due-to-flagging before it disappeared past the bottom of the page into oblivion, Iā€™m usually honestly baffled as to the reason.

3 Likes

The post is a Wiki, people. Anyone can edit it. My three reasons are supposed to be the start of the list, not its entirety. The polling happens later.

If people donā€™t feel comfortable editing, Iā€™ll do it, but I feel much more comfortable when people summarize their own ideas in point-form than when I do it for them.

1 Like

Some reasons on my part:
1 - Iā€™m not easily offended.
2 - Anything over the top I often assume is sarcasm
3 - I donā€™t get into arguments here.
4 - When I come across an argument here I donā€™t get involved ā€“ itā€™s not interesting to me.
5 - Most of the time others get to flag it first
6 - I assume some % of people will be assholes if you flag them or not
7 - I suck at remembering post history - so I donā€™t know offhand if itā€™s a repeat offender or nt.

9 Likes

Ah, I see, my bad! :flushed:

/lack of reading comprehension should be a flaggable offense

1 Like

As an aside editing the wiki seems like a super lousy experience on mobile (iOS Safari). The editing textbox was scrolling all over the place and could go completely offscreen and I couldnā€™t see any replies. Maybe this is just a lesser used feature that isnā€™t optimized for mobile use or maybe I was just hitting a bug.

Cc @codinghorror

1 Like

Some more reasons from me:

  1. Time zone strangeness- Trolls tend not to keep my hours, so itā€™s rare that other people havenā€™t got to them first.
  2. Inconsistent responses. The same bad behaviour sometimes gets a pat on the head or a ban-hammer, depending on Reasons. Sometimes the mods side with the perpetrator, so whatā€™s the use.
  3. Self-selection. Except when curiosity gets the better of me, (okay, thatā€™s actually way too often) I can see where a thread is going and have noped out before the luck dragon gets there. Sometimes Iā€™ll help things along with a flag on the thread to say ā€œlock this down, or itā€™s heading off a cliff. on fire.ā€
  4. Actually, this is a pretty nice place, and doesnā€™t require too much intervention. My grumbles aside, itā€™s usually a civil enough place here, so it doesnā€™t need much moderation. Thatā€™s one of the reasons I stick around.

EDIT- Okay, scratch #4. Weā€™re apparently a cantankerous bunch, today.

8 Likes

Other than being a first post (with title, category) itā€™s no different than any other editing scenario. But on mobile space is at a premium, so those extra required fields hurt.

Ah! I wonder if the visual and behavioral strangeness is because itā€™s a ā€œfirst post.ā€ It felt uncharacteristically busted to me but then again I donā€™t create new posts very often as a point of comparison.

Everything @lamaranagram said, plus:

  • leaving alone a racist/sexist/*ist comment so that it might serve as an example of the sort of thinking affecting a particular ā€˜national dialogueā€™.

It should go without saying but this kind of abstention also entails not frigginā€™ responding to said comment. Remember that scene in 12 Angry Men where everyone slowly walks away from or turns their back towards the overt racist? Thatā€™s all such comments deserve.

ETA: The really nasty ones should still be flagged into oblivion. By ā€˜nasty oneā€™ I mean both the comment and the commenter.

1 Like

Okay, Iā€™ve got the list in the topic up-to-date. If you disagree with my summary of your position, or if I skipped one that I shouldnā€™t have because I thought it was too close to something that had already been said, you can either let me know and Iā€™ll fix it, or you can fix it yourself.

I will echo @Donald_Petersen about not wanting to contribute to the formation of echo chambersā€¦ :stuck_out_tongue:

9 Likes

This. I flag sometimes; I donā€™t know if thatā€™s enough, too much or not enough. If Iā€™m not flagging enough, someoneā€™s going to have to tell me what I should be flagging that Iā€™m not.

5 Likes

To be honest, that contribution of mine does not 100% coincide with my actual opinion on echo chambers, or whether this BBS is in any actual danger of becoming one. I do think out-and-out lies should be called out, and I think abuse should be stifled. I think incorrectness and ignorance have a right to be aired in hopes of them being corrected by the illumination of the congregation.

But I also feel pretty strongly that there should be plenty of room for disagreement, and even for a little heat. The consensus view could often stand to be challenged and hopefully upgraded; weā€™re not that much smarter than Pope Urban VIII and his Inquisition.

By Sailko - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31258181

6 Likes