Forum Advice

[Coffee Pancake]

7 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

if anything they end up winning in the end when a mod steps in.

Baiting people into a position where they are vulnerable to moderation seems to be a primary game on these forums.

This actually used to be a game in world back when swearing on G rated land came with a ban.

[Ceka Cianci]

11 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Baiting people into a position where they are vulnerable to moderation seems to be a primary game on these forums.

This actually used to be a game in world back when swearing on G rated land came with a ban.

Ya, I let it happen to me the other day. I didn't get a warning, but was advised as how to handle things better when someone tries doing that.. I misunderstood it as a warning, but after reading again seen I misunderstood the message.. That's kind of left me feeling even more the fool today.. hehehe

[Scylla Rhiadra]

22 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

Ya, I let it happen to me the other day. I didn't get a warning, but was advised as how to handle things better when someone tries doing that.. I misunderstood it as a warning, but after reading again seen I misunderstood the message.. That's kind of left me feeling even more the fool today.. hehehe

That's something you aren't, Ceka.

We're all feeling our way through this. I'm not very happy with my response to the bait last night either. 

We learn.

[Istelathis]

7 hours ago, diamond Marchant said:

I was disappointed that A clean break and a rebranding for Linden Lab?

It was an interesting topic, and I too was disappointed to see it locked away.  I can not say with certainty if there was bait involved, my own bias toward certain topics cloud any such judgment and leaves more of a gut feeling than anything of substance.  It is why actual baiting is so successful, there is no real evidence behind it, what might be seen as an intention to derail a thread into political banter, might not be the intent behind the poster and the mods are probably left with nothing in their arsenals to combat them.  

The post that I believe to be  in question raised some interesting points, but unfortunately, was done in a manner that invited controversy. 

[Solar Legion]

Hmm yes ... of course a few of the Usual suspects will use Bait.

Report, move on, perhaps even put them on Ignore.

 

[Coffee Pancake]

6 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Hmm yes ... of course a few of the Usual suspects will use Bait.

Report, move on, perhaps even put them on Ignore.

The problem is that bait isn't technically against any rules, recognizing bait is a contextual skill and taking it is now a punishable offence.

[Dafadilia Wayfarer]

One of the things I've learned is to not get too far into any topic. I will share my thoughts. I will perhaps reply to an extent, but I will force myself to stop. Especially if the topic is one that I feel deeply about. I'm perhaps awkward the way in which I bow out of a conversation, but I don't care about that. I guess this goes along with learning to not allow myself to get baited. Not worth my time and energy.

Edited August 7, 2022 by Dafadilia Wayfarer

[Persephone Emerald]

Just now, Coffee Pancake said:

The problem is that bait isn't technically against any rules, recognizing bait is a contextual skill and taking it is now a punishable offence.

Calling it out may also be frowned upon if one seems to be picking on a particular poster.

[Coffee Pancake]

1 minute ago, Persephone Emerald said:

Calling it out may also be frowned upon if one seems to be picking on a particular poster.

Which is likely due to the contextual nature of bait.

 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

17 minutes ago, Istelathis said:

I can not say with certainty if there was bait involved, my own bias toward certain topics cloud any such judgment and leaves more of a gut feeling than anything of substance.  It is why actual baiting is so successful, there is no real evidence behind it, what might be seen as an intention to derail a thread into political banter, might not be the intent behind the poster and the mods are probably left with nothing in their arsenals to combat them.  

Although I used the word "bait" above, I have to say in fairness that I don't think that that was the intention.

I think the poster simply wanted to make a particular point, and was willing to see how far it could be pushed.

I need to devise a response to such posts, which will happen again, that is less belligerent.

Edited August 7, 2022 by Scylla Rhiadra

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Persephone Emerald said:

Regarding the thread in question that was locked, I was glad it was left viewable rather than being deleted altogether. I think it gives good examples of how someone can derail a thread with examples that are actually more dog-whistles and bait than anything else. 

Generally speaking - with no specific references: Part of me agrees.

On the other hand - if someone seems "new to me" on the Forum, from all of the recent experience I am learning that I cannot really know:

a) The other person's "intent"

b) Whether the other person understood the repercussions of what they were posting, regardless of their intent - what could happen if they posted it.

c) Whether the other person understood the underlying issues in what they are discussing, and why it is not allowed.

So, I'm learning just a little bit of patience.  A little more patience than I had before the changes.

On the third hand (or third "paw") - if it were some "familiar person", then I would hope they know better.

And then again, we're not supposed to discuss "locked threads" - so I kept my statements as generic as possible! 

[Love Zhaoying]

7 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

Calling it out may also be frowned upon if one seems to be picking on a particular poster.

NOT referring to the "picking on" part:

When I brought up with a Mole the "replying" part, I was told (and also the Mole posted on the Forum) that it is better to Report a post, than to Reply.  Or most obviously, ignore it.

Replying just makes more work for the moderators.

 

[Persephone Emerald]

1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Generally speaking - with no specific references: Part of me agrees.

On the other hand - if someone seems "new to me" on the Forum, from all of the recent experience I am learning that I cannot really know:

a) The other person's "intent"

b) Whether the other person understood the repercussions of what they were posting, regardless of their intent - what could happen if they posted it.

c) Whether the other person understood the underlying issues in what they are discussing, and why it is not allowed.

So, I'm learning just a little bit of patience.  A little more patience than I had before the changes.

On the third hand (or third "paw") - if it were some "familiar person", then I would hope they know better.

And then again, we're not supposed to discuss "locked threads" - so I kept my statements as generic as possible! 

All good points.

I also want to add that we don't even know if the "new person" is a new person or if they're a sock puppet for another account.

[Love Zhaoying]

Just now, Persephone Emerald said:

All good points.

I also want to add that we don't even know if the "new person" is a new person or if they're a sock puppet for another account.

IMHO: A "new person" would not have a reason to use "bait" unless they are just ornery.  It may just "look" like "bait". 

"People say the funniest things."  <== reference to the old "Kids say.." TV show which I am too young to have seen.

[Solar Legion]

Again, report, move on and potentially put them on Ignore.

Make it clear in the report box what is actually present.

This was a long time coming and needed to be done - the original description of the GD section was similar enough to what it is now that all they needed to do was make the wording stronger/more final.

Such things were simply tolerated at the time. No longer.

Good.

They needed to either stop tiptoeing around this sort of moderation/regulation or cease even making the attempt to do so. They made a choice.

Also good.

People will now either remain or seek out a forum where they can continue such discussions.

Personally? I'd rather they'd gone the other direction. They did not and the writing for such was on the wall for a bit now.

Edited August 7, 2022 by Solar Legion
Minor spelling correction

[Love Zhaoying]

8 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Again, report, move on and potentially put them on Ignore.

Make it clear in the report box what is actually present.

his was a long time coming and needed to be done - the original description of the GD section was similar enough to what it is now that all they needed to do was make the wording stronger/more final.

Such things were simply tolerated at the time. No longer.

Good.

They needed to either stop tiptoeing around this sort of moderation/regulation or cease even making the attempt to do so. They made a choice.

Also good.

People will now either remain or seek out a forum where they can continue such discussions.

Personally? I'd rather they'd gone the other direction. They did not and the writing for such was on the wall for a bit now.

^^ Well said! Although I may have missed the posts in question, I like your logic and way of thinking about it.

[Luna Bliss]

Does anyone know when we report a post if are we allowed to mention who their alts are in the report to a Mole or Linden?

I believe I will break my rule and go ahead and file an AR if there is a next time for this poster, and I want to include all relevant information.

[Quistess Alpha]

3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

if are we allowed to mention

I don't see why/how there could be any moderation on what you're allowed to put in a report. there aren't a whole lot of ways to be 100% sure someone's an alt and not, I dunno, a cult member though.

Edited August 7, 2022 by Quistess Alpha

[Luna Bliss]

Just now, Quistess Alpha said:

3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

if are we allowed to mention

I don't see why/how there could be any moderation on what you're allowed to put in a report. there aren't a whole lot of ways to be 100% sure someone's an alt and not, I dunno, a cult member though.

Well, I know we can't mention who someone's alt is on the forum, so wondered if this was true when speaking to an authority.

I know it's true because I did get a slap for it when I didn't know any better.

I can be pretty sure about alts btw if I choose to pay close attention...though not 100%...there is a rhythm to speech...I supposed I picked that up by doing so much with music. Plus, at some times they say actual things the alt said at some time in the past...so a good hint there.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

32 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Again, report, move on and potentially put them on Ignore.

Make it clear in the report box what is actually present.

Yeah. No, I'll not be doing this.

While not averse in principle to making the mods' lives a bit easier, I have no intention of myself becoming a cog in the implementation of a new system to which I am fundamentally opposed.

I'll find another way of responding -- one that neither contributes to contentious debate, nor makes me complicit with the new rules.

And just as soon as I've figured out what that is, I'll let you know . . . 😏

[Persephone Emerald]

1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

Well, I know we can't mention who someone's alt is on the forum, so wondered if this was true when speaking to an authority.

I know it's true because I did get a slap for it when I didn't know any better.

I can be pretty sure about alts btw if I choose to pay close attention...though not 100%...there is a rhythm to speech...I supposed I picked that up by doing so much with music. Plus, at some times they say actual things the alt said at some time in the past...so a good hint there.

I doubt the moderators want to hear our assumptions or even educated guesses about who's an alt of who. It would probably be safe to tell them that you suspect a post is someone's alt and give your reasons for why you suspect this though.

[Ceka Cianci]

45 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

Calling it out may also be frowned upon if one seems to be picking on a particular poster.

If someone is trying to get you to trigger or going at you personally to where you feel you are being attacked, no matter how small of an attack, they don't want us taking matters into our hands and throw back, they want us to report the incident.

If they are slapping you into a group with their words and labeling you as something, treat it as an attack.. because it's trying to get you to drift off topic.

 

 

[Kathlen Onyx]

5 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Well, I know we can't mention who someone's alt is on the forum, so wondered if this was true when speaking to an authority.

I know it's true because I did get a slap for it when I didn't know any better.

I can be pretty sure about alts btw if I choose to pay close attention...though not 100%...there is a rhythm to speech...I supposed I picked that up by doing so much with music. Plus, at some times they say actual things the alt said at some time in the past...so a good hint there.

There is no way for you to know for sure so I would leave it out. Besides there is no reason to even point  it out in the first place. Let the moderators moderate posts based on the content not the person.

[Luna Bliss]

5 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Yeah. No, I'll not be doing this.

While not averse in principle to making the mods' lives a bit easier, I have no intention of myself becoming a cog in the implementation of a new system to which I am fundamentally opposed.

I'll find another way of responding -- one that neither contributes to contentious debate, nor makes me complicit with the new rules.

And just as soon as I've figured out what that is, I'll let you know . . . 😏

Well I'm glad you were a little grumpy -- kept me from having to respond. I might have been suspended.    

[Luna Bliss]

1 minute ago, Sam1 Bellisserian said:

There is no way for you to know for sure so I would leave it out. Besides there is no reason to even point  it out in the first place. Let the moderators moderate posts based on the content not the person.

How would you know there's no reason to point it out?  Were you privy to all the discussions I had with them?