Monitoring the Forums

[Beth Macbain]

... peeks in after avoiding the forums for the weekend...

I’m not always (or ever) the kindest person, but it’s absolutely hilarious that some of the most hateful people here are suddenly cheering for some sort of (en) forced genteel civility. 

Model the behavior you wish to see and perhaps someone might believe your words.

🙄😂

Not you, Pamela. This was a nice gesture but I wouldn’t hold my breath (though I know some wish I would).

 

 

[Pamela Galli]

21 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

Not you, Pamela. This was a nice gesture but I wouldn’t hold my breath

Maybe if before I report, I post the specific part of the CG violated,, so they will be forewarned, and can have a chance to edit, that will encourage ppl to read and heed the Guidelines — I mean, it’s one page. 
 

I don’t have much sympathy for those who are abusive from their first post, or those who repeatedly violate and get banned. 

[Evah Baxton]

"Freedom of speech, just watch what you say."

[Tolya Ugajin]

5 hours ago, Pussycat Catnap said:

and several folks who have gone on racist tirades against me

 

I'm confused.

What race is a cat?

[Pussycat Catnap]

Everything is toxic when your definition of toxic is any contrary opinion and anything that is critical, debates, disagrees with, or calls into question the service or anything you espouse or like...

There is a difference between doing those things, and doing those things with hostility, discord, and disdain...

But when the definition of toxic gets so widened, debate and even discussion become impossible.

 

Pretty much everyone who had a major problem with veering into hostility, discord, and disdain is no longer here...

 

People who STRONGLY DISAGREE remain, but that is VERY different.

 

Edited January 27, 2020 by Pussycat Catnap

[Pamela Galli]

10 minutes ago, Evah Baxton said:

"Freedom of speech, just watch what you say."

IF IT IS SPEECH—IS THE GOVERNMENT CENSORING OR PUNISHING IT?

The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It applies to federal, state, and local government actors. This is a broad category that includes not only lawmakers and elected officials, but also public schools and universities, courts, and police officers.  It does not include private citizens, businesses, and organizations. This means that:

• A private school can suspend students for criticizing a school policy;
• A private business can fire an employee for expressing political views on the job; and
• A private media company can refuse to publish or broadcast opinions it disagrees with

[Evah Baxton]

Just now, Pamela Galli said:

IF IT IS SPEECH—IS THE GOVERNMENT CENSORING OR PUNISHING IT?

The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It applies to federal, state, and local government actors. This is a broad category that includes not only lawmakers and elected officials, but also public schools and universities, courts, and police officers.  It does not include private citizens, businesses, and organizations. This means that:

• A private school can suspend students for criticizing a school policy;
• A private business can fire an employee for expressing political views on the job; and
• A private media company can refuse to publish or broadcast opinions it disagrees with

This isn't news to me. In fact, I love this. It's amazing what corporations will be able to get away with in the near future. However, that doesn't mean I won't point it out. Want to make sure everybody knows what they are getting into.

[Tolya Ugajin]

12 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

IF IT IS SPEECH—IS THE GOVERNMENT CENSORING OR PUNISHING IT?

The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It applies to federal, state, and local government actors. This is a broad category that includes not only lawmakers and elected officials, but also public schools and universities, courts, and police officers.  It does not include private citizens, businesses, and organizations. This means that:

• A private school can suspend students for criticizing a school policy;
• A private business can fire an employee for expressing political views on the job; and
• A private media company can refuse to publish or broadcast opinions it disagrees with

Not sure what the point of this is?  Anyone with a passing familiarity with the First Amendment (which, BTW, only applies to the US) understands this.

Despite the fact that the First Amendment only applies to the government (in the US) it's not a bad thing to aspire to even outside those limitations.  If Farcebook or LL or whatever choose to censor content on their platforms, the fact that the First Amendment does not apply does not make their action any less ignoble.  It simply makes them legal.  Similarly, they, or the government, may simple seize your land (virtual or real) - on a whim, as it turns out (although at least the government is required to compensate you, at whatever they deem "fair").  Being able to do something does not make it a good thing to do.

[Tolya Ugajin]

2 hours ago, Pamela Galli said:

Well seriously Solar, how would you deal with moderation to make it more consistent? Do you have some algorithm or something else that would obviate fallible human judgment?  
 

I mentioned Forum Feedback because that’s where it has been discussed before. 

Myself, I'd deal with moderation by informing people they have the ability to ignore people or mute them and not have moderators.  That would indeed be more consistent than deciding some terms for male genitalia are permissible but others not, as is currently the case.

[Fauve Aeon]

6 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

I know a couple people in recent months who left this forum because of getting reported and they weren't any worse than anybody else.

But if they weren’t doing things against the rules then there would have been no reprimands...someone can report a person all day and they aren’t even going to get notified as long as they are following the rules. So this doesn’t hold water for me. If they kept breaking rules and kept getting busted and *then* left, well...I mostly consider that just a flounce. Regardless of ‘who else’ was breaking rules. 

[Pamela Galli]

3 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Not sure what the point of this is?  Anyone with a passing familiarity with the First Amendment (which, BTW, only applies to the US) understands this.

Despite the fact that the First Amendment only applies to the government (in the US) it's not a bad thing to aspire to even outside those limitations.  If Farcebook or LL or whatever choose to censor content on their platforms, the fact that the First Amendment does not apply does not make their action any less ignoble.  It simply makes them legal.  Similarly, they, or the government, may simple seize your land (virtual or real) - on a whim, as it turns out (although at least the government is required to compensate you, at whatever they deem "fair").  Being able to do something does not make it a good thing to do.

It’s because with depressing regularity people come in here to claim their right of free speech was violated because they got banned from someone’s sim. 

[Tolya Ugajin]

1 minute ago, Pamela Galli said:

It’s because with depressing regularity people come in here to claim their right of free speech was violated because they got banned from someone’s sim. 

LOL OK fair enough, but surely you know you cannot fix stupid 😛

[Pamela Galli]

2 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

3 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Myself, I'd deal with moderation by informing people they have the ability to ignore people or mute them and not have moderators.  That would indeed be more consistent than deciding some terms for male genitalia are permissible but others not, as is currently the case.

You would but for what? Do you mean if you had a forum of your own and got to make up the rules?

I believe the original forum was full of interesting people but almost completely unmoderated and so toxic many just avoided it altogether. Those of us here now have worked together to create a generally upbeat  and minimally rancorous community. Not all of us but most of us who are here regularly year after year. 

Seriously, those of you who have ideas on how to improve moderation and by extension this community, lets hear them. 

[Pamela Galli]

9 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

LOL OK fair enough, but surely you know you cannot fix stupid 😛

 I surely do. And that’s why I support the Guidelines. Just because they don’t understand the concept of free speech and private property doesn’t mean they get to clog up the forum with their ignorance, or insult everyone who informs them that they can’t share IMs etc. 

[Tolya Ugajin]

Just now, Pamela Galli said:

 

I just gave you my idea for improving moderation.  Get rid of it.  Require adults to follow the advice they got as children - ignore the mean kids.  LL could reallocate their obviously scarce resources to something more important and useful then.

[Evah Baxton]

15 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

It’s because with depressing regularity people come in here to claim their right of free speech was violated because they got banned from someone’s sim. 

I definitely believe in the power to get people off your property (digital or otherwise) for whatever reason. The forums are more like a public square.

[Luna Bliss]

5 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

I surely do. And that’s why I support the Guidelines. Just because they don’t understand the concept of free speech and private property doesn’t mean they get to clog up the forum with their ignorance, or insult everyone who informs them that they can’t share IMs etc.

I often observe some forum members seeming to relish a person such as you've described coming along. They devote much attention to it. I think it creates a kind of bonding for the group...for those participating in defending against this outsider who doesn't know the rules.

*Anymore, when I see that type of thread I just roll my eyes and depart as quickly as possible...

Edited January 27, 2020 by Luna Bliss

[Pussycat Catnap]

2 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

I believe the original forum was full of interesting people but almost completely unmoderated and so toxic many just avoided it altogether. Those of us here now have worked together to create a generally upbeat  and minimally rancorous community. Not all of us but most of us who are here regularly year after year. 

One of the lasting impacts of those days is... as a result of toxic folks and trolls back than inserting themselves into heated debates - and turning those debates into flame wars...

Many of us still here were often on opposite sides of those conflicts. Many of us here started the original topic that became a flame war or where the launching point a troll or toxic individual used to 'ensnare' folks into spinning out of control...

And as such... many still harbor 'old wounds' that flair up from time to time...

Thankfully as time goes on, it's hopeful we can see that with the trolling types and toxic posters vetted out, those who remain can learn to get along despite disagreement.

 

Read something last year that Political Scientists have found that liberals and conservatives in the USA agree on roughly 80% of things when you 'remove the framing / slanted language / etc' that politicians use.

Internet trolls basically work the same way - reframe an argument in such a way that people split further apart... and where they might have eventually agreed or reached a civil impasse of some kind, now it's a blood feud...

Politicians and trolls alike need discord and fighting in order to survive...

 

The rest of us end up the foot soldiers fighting it out, and then resenting each other long after it's all over...

I made a judgement call near the end of last year to wipe out my block lists inworld and here, and see 'what's going on'... and so far... while I've had some disagreements and spotted some who clearly dislike me, nothing has spun out of control... and most of the time things have been 'sociable' even with people I had thought it couldn't be...
- which is slowly making me rethink how much I may have been trolled into a fight or managed to even self-troll myself in the past... and at least, likely futilely, that I can spot it next time before biting the bait.

 

[Pussycat Catnap]

3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I often observe some forum members seeming to relish a person such as you've described coming along. They devote much attention to it. I think it creates a kind of bonding for the group...for those participating in defending against this outsider who doesn't know the rules.

Sometimes I catch myself in one of those threads having made a post or having already made it... Trying to catch myself faster more often... but it still happens...

 

[Pamela Galli]

7 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

I just gave you my idea for improving moderation.  Get rid of it.  Require adults to follow the advice they got as children - ignore the mean kids.  LL could reallocate their obviously scarce resources to something more important and useful then.

And I recalled what the pre moderated forum was like.

I spent years on Usenet in unmoderated forums. Never again.

i can’t believe anyone thinks relying on forum members to moderate themselves would improve what we now have. But no skin off my personal nose. 

[Luna Bliss]

It sounds like the forum was really bad back then. Maybe I just don't understand how bad it was. Were you around then, Tolya?

[Tolya Ugajin]

1 minute ago, Pamela Galli said:

And I recalled what the pre moderated forum was like.

I spent years on Usenet in unmoderated forums. Never again.

i can’t believe anyone thinks relying on forum members to moderate themselves would improve what we now have. But no skin off my personal nose. 

It is a cute nose

[Pamela Galli]

The bottom line, as we are now daily reminded, is that freedom isn’t free.

There is no freedom if there are no rules. Being overrun with spam, trolls, and flame wars is not freedom. 
 

The price of being free from the intrusions of trolls and spammers — is rules, and moderation. 

[Tolya Ugajin]

1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

It sounds like the forum was really bad back then. Maybe I just don't understand how bad it was. Were you around then, Tolya?

I was - and Pam is mistaken if she believes it was unmoderated back then.  I also don't believe it was significantly more nasty than it is now.  For instance, my recent spat with Amina was easily as rough as anything that I saw back then, and let's not forget the fun back and forth about socialism.

The only reason there seems to be less of that is because the majority of the forum threads today seem to be so innocuous (what are you listening to) or simple question and answer types, whereas years ago the subjects were far more broad.  That's probably just my impression, since I stick to GD and many of the flame wars then were on more adult topics, like Gor and BDSM, or were about subjects long since talked out, like how evil it was when I created an alt to test the "Forum clique" myth (and told people I had done so - my what a kerfuffle that was).  I do believe the number of regular contributors was higher, and the diversity of opinions was greater, than today, but, other than that (and the loss of Pep's grammar nazi routine) it seems about the same.

As far as I can tell, the only difference in moderation is the use of algorithms to *** out words.

[Bree Giffen]

"You may also not post regarding subjects that do not relate to Second Life except in the General forum discussion board."

Whoah... did I just read that in the guidelines?