Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Discussion of moderation policy
#2
I apologize for doing this to your post, my intent way to have a locked post up, not a discussion thread. I do want to address your concerns, my bad.

Quote:This needs to be defined otherwise it will be abused. People like Eric (and a few others) confuse ad hominum arguments and insults on a daily basis.

There is a difference between someone posting the following: "You are wrong because of X, Y, and Z. Also you are an idiot.", and someone posting "You are an idiot and are therefore wrong."

While the former the clearly preferable to the latter neither adds anything of substance to the discussion; saying “your wrong because of X, Y and Z” says the same thing while keeping the tone civil.

Quote:Again this needs to be defined. A discussion of say Musician A turning into a conversation of Musician B probably should not be split if there is a clear indication of when the discussion shifted.

Splitting the thread allows people who interested in Musician B but not Musician A to know that there is a thread that they are interested in, while allowing people who like Musician A to talk about him without having to sift through posts talking about Musician B.

Quote:Not a problem, but this assumes that there will be more than one moderator with the authority to move threads to the proper forums. I would also suggest that descriptions be added to the main forums to prevent unnecessary reporting. Thread reports can get tiresome as I know from experience.

I do plan on adding descriptions and I plan on bringing on moderators at some point to ease the workload, I had to get these forums up and running on short notice so I haven’t has time to do it yet.


Quote:The total lack of any moderation except in the most extreme cases was a problem with the old forum. Moderation ideally should tackle those extreme cases before they get out of hand. At the same time over moderation will turn off far more people, and turn the forum into an echo chamber. In truth the lack of moderation on the old forum was both a weakness and a strength.

As I've said in other posts here, I think that we should maintain a policy of absolute free speech excepting in cases where said speech is clearly illegal (and using US law here) or is libelous.

Overall the moderation team, which this forum will eventually need should permit all expression excepting those which promote criminal activity, or are themselves criminal actions. As such community guidelines should be clearly and explicitly written. An echo chamber turns more people off than the chaos of the old forum ever could.

I’ve seen forums turn into echo chambers and I think your concerns are valid, at the same time I know that a large number of people left the cold forum because the debate wasn’t civil and there were too many petty insults. When I add moderators I will ideally have at least one to my right and one to my left politically. I have absolutely no intention I’ve engaging in viewpoint discrimination, I enjoy reading everything from alt-right to Marxism and everything in between. For what it’s I don’t recall reading a post of yours that I think crossed the line.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Discussion of moderation policy - by Kinser79 - 05-06-2016, 01:04 PM
RE: Discussion of moderation policy - by Webmaster - 05-06-2016, 02:17 PM
RE: Discussion of moderation policy - by Kinser79 - 05-06-2016, 03:02 PM
RE: Discussion of moderation policy - by Dan '82 - 05-07-2016, 11:29 PM
RE: Discussion of moderation policy - by Kinser79 - 05-07-2016, 06:48 PM
Time Out? - by Bob Butler 54 - 05-08-2016, 07:16 PM
RE: Discussion of moderation policy - by Kinser79 - 05-16-2016, 12:50 AM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Discussion of Warning System Webmaster 30 28,439 03-22-2021, 09:57 AM
Last Post: David Horn

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 15 Guest(s)