EPTUS Politics Feedback Thread - Page 104
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 22 2018 02:00 Danglars wrote: Mods generally get away with it with the “this is our house” rule. I’m ok assuming this is forever baked in the cake. I sure hope you mean that in the "I don't think this is going to change" rather than in the "I don't think this is a problem" sense. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 22 2018 03:26 LegalLord wrote: I sure hope you mean that in the "I don't think this is going to change" rather than in the "I don't think this is a problem" sense. It's a problem I don't think will be fully fixed, but over the years I've grown to accept as the cost of posting on a left-wing forum. It's better moderated than most other gamer community forums, after all. StealthBlue warn was an unexpected step. They could totally blow me away with a warn/threadban on the kind of uncivil shitposter that had extreme latitude last thread (obviously nothing up to this point really warrants one in the new thread). Give it another few weeks and somebody will leave a stupid response to an xDaunt post or something and we'll see if there's a change in the winds of subjective moderation. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9139 Posts
Give it another few weeks and somebody will leave a stupid response to an xDaunt post or something and we'll see if there's a change in the winds of subjective moderation. I have a theory that a lot of those stupid responses made in the past didn't get actioned purely because nobody bothered to report them. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 22 2018 04:29 Sent. wrote: I have a theory that a lot of those stupid responses made in the past didn't get actioned purely because nobody bothered to report them. On March 22 2018 04:31 LegalLord wrote: Often based on a history of similar posts that were reported never being actioned in the past. Yeah you report five or six posts you see are over the line. No action. PM a mod. Mod says somebody else reviewed that report, sometimes mod says he'll bring it up to whatever mod forum deal, no action. No followup response. So you've just discovered the real rules governing bans and warns, and there's no use wasting the energy. In theory, maybe the last two examples were close enough to the creation of the new thread that maybe that covered the mod response. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 22 2018 04:29 Sent. wrote: I have a theory that a lot of those stupid responses made in the past didn't get actioned purely because nobody bothered to report them. I basically never report responses to my posts. I may have done it twice over the years. | ||
tofucake
Hyrule19014 Posts
On March 22 2018 05:21 Danglars wrote: Yeah you report five or six posts you see are over the line. No action. PM a mod. Mod says somebody else reviewed that report, sometimes mod says he'll bring it up to whatever mod forum deal, no action. No followup response. So you've just discovered the real rules governing bans and warns, and there's no use wasting the energy. In theory, maybe the last two examples were close enough to the creation of the new thread that maybe that covered the mod response. we have several threads in two different staff forums just about US Pol thread. Not all action we take is visible (there have been many discussions with people in PMs), and sometimes it takes a while to sort through things. We are not obligated to tell anyone outside the mod staff what we do, that's just something you'll have to deal with. But if you don't report posts, there's a significantly lower chance of any action being taken. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 22 2018 04:09 Danglars wrote: It's a problem I don't think will be fully fixed, but over the years I've grown to accept as the cost of posting on a left-wing forum. It's better moderated than most other gamer community forums, after all. StealthBlue warn was an unexpected step. They could totally blow me away with a warn/threadban on the kind of uncivil shitposter that had extreme latitude last thread (obviously nothing up to this point really warrants one in the new thread). Give it another few weeks and somebody will leave a stupid response to an xDaunt post or something and we'll see if there's a change in the winds of subjective moderation. It's not really related to being a left-wing forum as much as to having too many mods of the larger forum who have no place being mods of the politics forums setting a shitty example (or worse, simultaneously moderating and participating). It sets the tone for how others will act to a very large extent. And they only get actioned in rare cases like StealthBlue where not doing so would demonstrate such a blatant double standard (after Doodsmack's post and micronesia's clarification) that it'd undermine the flavor of the day "we're going to make some changes" attempt. This has come up a lot, and the result is always the same: after whatever recent event sparks a "we need to do things different" push, it's quickly forgotten and people go back to doing exactly what they did before. There seems to be a desire to see things to change but no desire to actually make meaningful changes. As always, it will be a brief promise of change, a failure to actually see it through for more than a few weeks, a few statements of "please report people who cause trouble" and "lots of confidential things are happening behind the scenes" whenever someone says things aren't working, and then within about six months we'll rinse and repeat because the revamp attempt failed horribly. Although in a lot of ways the moderation here is not too bad that is definitely one way in which the group here is actively very much below average. Mods set a standard and some of the ones that have done so do a terrible job at that. Given that there is little indication that this will ever change, why bother with half-hearted attempts at shaking things up? | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 22 2018 07:21 LegalLord wrote: It's not really related to being a left-wing forum as much as to having too many mods of the larger forum who have no place being mods of the politics forums setting a shitty example (or worse, simultaneously moderating and participating). It sets the tone for how others will act to a very large extent. And they only get actioned in rare cases like StealthBlue where not doing so would demonstrate such a blatant double standard (after Doodsmack's post and micronesia's clarification) that it'd undermine the flavor of the day "we're going to make some changes" attempt. This has come up a lot, and the result is always the same: after whatever recent event sparks a "we need to do things different" push, it's quickly forgotten and people go back to doing exactly what they did before. There seems to be a desire to see things to change but no desire to actually make meaningful changes. As always, it will be a brief promise of change, a failure to actually see it through for more than a few weeks, a few statements of "please report people who cause trouble" and "lots of confidential things are happening behind the scenes" whenever someone says things aren't working, and then within about six months we'll rinse and repeat because the revamp attempt failed horribly. Although in a lot of ways the moderation here is not too bad that is definitely one way in which the group here is actively very much below average. Mods set a standard and some of the ones that have done so do a terrible job at that. Given that there is little indication that this will ever change, why bother with half-hearted attempts at shaking things up? On the one hand, you very much have a point. The bigger deal is there is no report button available for banhammers that post in thread. Kwark spewed his shit, or StealthBlue did something, and the shitposters follow along with the de-facto standard. Why act different? On the other hand, I saw enough prior to the 2016 election to also conclude it is political beliefs as well. The default political beliefs of moderation staff meant that right-centered posters had less of a leash. Right wing posters would respond in kind to shitposters and get the warns and bans the others did not (with exceptions, this isn't a hard and fast rule). This is very much just where I saw the evidence stacking up, not that I presumed a left-leaning moderation staff would observably function like this. The first actual posting on the effect I think was from DeepElemBlues, but the more recent example was oBlade on ErectedZenith In this case it's as though EZ got banned because he was being snide coupled with apparently being wrong. I think that suggests a significant ideological element. There are people dumping snark all over the thread which, the way I see it, aren't approached by moderation either because of where they are ideologically or get excused because of their significant posting history. The other factor is it's just looser than the TL I grew up in. Like I said earlier, it's a really high volume thread and I don't think it warrants excessive moderation. Social forces for the most part "handle" the flow. People luckily are smart enough not to engage with every garbage one liner. That's basically my feelings on the matter. There's enough here in 6 years to add the ideological bias tag on top of the more general shitty red hammer example. A lot of this is more in the past, because after Trump was elected, the moderation staff performed much better compared to the years before (also, the thread before). I'm just observing past trends here. I'm also not going to invest time following up on unactioned reports with PMs, and PMs after those PMs, and copying them into a document to have a reliable trove of examples. If it's strict warns/bans, I'll report to confirm that it goes both ways. If it's mostly DMZ, I won't bother so much. If it only applies to one group for long enough, I'll stop reporting so much. Interesting things moving forward: if the StealthBlue thing is a fluke--everything ends up counting as breaking news not needing additional comment to dodge the warn. Secondly, if one or two-liner snide posts, throwaway insult posts, or pure vile rants are worth reporting now.+ Show Spoiler [exs unactioned/borderline] + Biff The Understudy wrote: Oh ok, so please admit it had nothing to do with freedom of religion or being accepting and respectful of different faiths, as the founding fathers wished. It’s more about being a biggoted jerk towards both gays and muslims while pretending in bad faith that you are defending discriminations against the formers because you care about freedom of cult even though double standards!, it’s only about people who ain’t brown. Geez, you guys are like batman villains. So predictable you become boring. « I wonder what xDaunt/Danglar view is on that issue... What’s the best way to be a complete a-hole about it? Oh here we go! Nailed it. » Nyxisto wrote: What currently passes as conservative in the US has no intellectual basis. David Brooks maybe but he's probably hated more by conservatives than liberals at this point Velr wrote: This forum looked less left before trump, but he scared everyone with some decency away from the right. Doodsmack wrote: So Trump's rally yesterday confirmed again that he's an old-fashioned flaming racist. Any denial of this fact is intellectual dishonesty. There's too many correlations for a half intelligent person to deny. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22998 Posts
 I think the most obvious difference in moderation I've noticed since then, is giving newer posters far more lenience insulting someone like xDaunt or Danglars using the generic "conservatives are _____" format (they do plenty of their own "liberals/the left"). I had to tolerate a lot of crap from the likes of Jonny and other right leaning posters coming up with a limited ability to defend myself in kind but I see posters like Wulfey get away with trash posts and no post count (maybe from another forum?) hunts is another good example of low-count liberals getting away with posts that would have gotten someone like me actioned a couple years ago. They both fight from the center as well, so their insults and bad posts go both directions. So if there was a political bias here I'd say it's more toward centrism (argumentum ad temperantiam) but my view has an obvious bias as well. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9139 Posts
On March 23 2018 23:15 Doodsmack wrote: How many Trump towers are in Turkey again? www.yahoo.com User was temp banned for this post. Doodsmack was just temp banned for 2 days by Seeker. That account was created on 2010-08-17 14:55:43 and had 6260 posts. Reason: Unfortunately, due to the fact that you have 3 pages of mod notes, we can no longer issue warnings. Please make sure to follow the US Politics Mega-thread guidelines and provide context and your own opinion as to why the source is important or necessary when providing one. I don't understand this ban. I agree that excessive CCstealthbotting may be annoying to some, but in this case the context is obvious and it's not some ridiculous unsourced story about a gorilla channel posted by some twitter celebrity nobody but their followers know. Is posting news with little commentary of your own against the rules now? | ||
|
farvacola
United States18820 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18820 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 24 2018 02:38 farvacola wrote: Not only was it being a "shitty post" not a part of the ban reason, the one liner you clearly take issue with provides ample, if not inflammatorily framed context aimed at pointing out a possible reason for Trump's decision to not pursue Turks who committted violent offenses here in the US. So a baseless, conclusory claim that Trump is corrupt and in the pocket of Turks is justification for posting that article? I think not. Clearly the mods don't, either. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18820 Posts
| ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9234 Posts
On March 23 2018 10:07 Doodsmack wrote: This post is not in accord with the facts. User was warned for this post (don't post just to say a post is wrong, whether it is actually wrong or not) Would it have been acceptable under the new thread rules to ask for substantiation of a specific argument or is this a precedent for shifting the burden of proof from poster to the reader? e:if something like a precedent can exist with the announced increase in subjective moderation. | ||
| ||
