Rule enforcement in the PPR forum.

Post Reply New Topic

No, probably not one of the worst ones. I actually have thrown in an insult once or twice. But the liberty I mean is every man's liberty to do everything!! That is what anarcho-PPR-ism MEANS!!

While that sounds good, what are the implications?

Probably something glorious in an awesome manner.

Yes, you would have liberty to give one or two sporadically, what about people who do nothing but flame and troll? Should they have freedom to interrupt and drive people away?

lol

Thanks! That's the sort of input I'm looking for.

I think it might require a bit more redirection and involvement than one finds at present. I don't think that has to take the form of "chastisement". I've seen threads successfully redirected when a mod just steps in and makes a good point responding to the original purpose of the thread, and people flock to that rather than the insults flung before that point. Humor can be a good way of diffusing the situation, too. Once the members are aware of the sorts of suggestions that would be found in the sticky, I think we could count on many members being intent on setting a great example, too.



Frankly, I don't think NeantHumain's offering was at all amusing. I think it was a mischaracterization of the opposition and really little more than a nasty attack in jester's garb. It's not good communication to use tactics like that. In my view it was dishonest and had the potential to function as an impediment to communication.

I'm giving a lot more weight to the opinions of those who bother to read what's actually written in this thread instead of responding to what they fear is written.

I'd say to enforce the rules yet do so in such a way to make sure it doesn't interfere with anyone's freedom of expression in the forum.

Bah, anarchy means flames and trolling for EVERYONE!!

In all seriousness I don't want no regulation but I don't think that these forums are too bad at this moment. I mean, I like things that can be a little spammy and don't mind people who can be a little obnoxious so long as they aren't always so.

Yes, I've noticed you intervene tactfully in a thread and head off a potential conflict. I'm not sure if there are many other mods capable of that, though. Perhaps MrMark, I recall he's fairly diplomatic, but I reckon as it's usually males who are likely to be disruptive then you're better off with a female trying to calm things down. If a male steps in he's automatically seen as an aggressor which tends to escalate things. That's not criticism of other mods, as everyone has different strengths, and I'm sure there are other roles they fulfil. Of course, I'm sure some of your fellow mods disagree with the whole concept of diplomacy as I'm describing here. And I admit it is resource intensive, but if you want WP to be the best, then I think you need to make the effort.


That's just the way he does things. I've been reading his posts here, and elsewhere, for over 3 years and he's always been like that as far as I can recall. I do like his sense of humour, and think perhaps you're taking it too personally. Interjections like that are amusing, and provide food for thought, IMO.

As for your comment about what people fear I see your point, but think you should credit those people with a bit more sense than you do. Things tend to move incrementally, and once you take the first step at removing people's freedom to express their opinions, experience tells many of us where that ends up. That also needs to be seen in the context of certain members here making a big fuss in another thread regarding some of us talking about prostitution and thereby supposedly viewing women as chattels (or some other such nonsense). I recall them also extolling the virtues of mods on other fora who run their boards like the internet equivalent of socialist dictatorships. It doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to see what will happen if someone like that gets some power here. In fact this thread could be interpreted as a move to placate such individuals who believe children are being corrupted left right and centre by our wayward behaviour, and whom often use emotional blackmail to further their ends.

Last edited by ascan on 30 Dec 2007, 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thanks. I was about to ask for your serious input.

What do you think of ascan's suggestion?

I've never had much fear of authority so it is hard for me to see where they're coming from. I'm trying though.

I also see how Alex and the rest of the mods go about making their decisions and so I have a lot of faith in them. In my opinion, based on the gossip I've heard and what I've read of the old mod discussions, any accusations of overmoderation over the past year were grossly exaggerated and taken out of context. So it's not that I think those who are fearful are being unreasonable (because certainly there are some bad cases out there on the web), but I think that their fears are not warranted here at WP. I think all the mods have open ears and open minds, and if we're approached ideas or concerns, we listen.



I actually have received zero complaints about potentially corrupting children with the content of the PPR. The main concerns are insults, bullying, and an environment that is not always conducive to quality discussion. I don't understand how this thread could be a way of placating anyone. I'd like something productive to come from it, even if all that happens is I get a better understanding of the average member's view.

Well, you've called my opinions rotten, stated NeantHumain's are nasty, and characterised PostPerson's as grossly exaggerated. You know, we've all been here considerably longer than you and perhaps deserve a little more respect than that if you wish us to actually believe that last sentence of yours.

Serious input??? That is messed up and crazy!!

I do tend to agree. There is no need for heavy handed enforcement. If people are doing something wrong then it is often best to just try to diffuse the situation rather than slap on some punishment. Not only that but most people do not really read the guidelines that well either. Really, the forum isn't too bad, and the areas where it is bad could probably be dealt with using soft correction rather than outright displays of power as I think most mods are competent posters and most violations don't seem to be based upon a desire to flout the rules so much as perhaps a sense of humor gone awry or too much passion.

I meant to imply no such thing about PostPerson. She clarified what she meant and that was helpful.

As for the rest, why take it out of context? It was rotten to call people names, as occurred here. I won't apologize for saying so. It was also nasty to make a caricature of the opposition instead of addressing their legitimate concerns. I stand by my assessment of that tactic, too. To my view, said opinions were delivered with hostility and there's nothing disrespectful about commenting on that fact.

Seniority can be an asset to understanding the site, but it doesn't mean I have to agree with everything you say or with how you present it. Nor do I have to wink and nod when an old school member is being less than civil.



Agreed. I'd actually classify this approach as "enforcing the rules" though. Perhaps there's not as much disagreement among members about which option to take, once the specifics are spelled out. It seems like some people were interpreting "enforce" as a euphemism for "immediately ban anybody who steps out of line" which definitely is not going to be considered as an option.

Ah, ok, and there is some question on what this really means. My suggestion is really one of the absolute max rather than the min though. I really also don't know much about the complaints either, so to me this just seems like this huge abstract thing because I don't usually go to other forums to see how they are moderated.

I still agree. I mean, there will still be those whose behavior is truly excessive but I think those people are already being taken care of. The aim of any new approach should be to increase participation and satisfaction, not to winnow the population.

As for other forums... I don't know a whole lot about that. I've only ever gone to one site that had a debate section that was better than ours. I had the impression that it was the good example of the most active members on the site that kept things interesting and civil. I don't think the moderators had to ban very often, though every now and then a member was given a brief suspension (usually the same handful of short-tempered folks). Lone incidents of insulting/rude behavior were ignored by moderators. If several people in a thread resorted to that behavior, a mod would intervene by saying something along the lines of "the charity level in this thread is too low and if it does not improve the thread may be closed." (Then carrying through, of course.)