MEEP: Discord, Ban Log, Deleting Content

Author: bsh1

Posts

Archived
Read-only
Total: 93
#61
Castin
Castin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,222
3
2
7
Castin's avatar
Castin
3
2
7
I'm a part time mod so my votes may not be countable, but fwiw my opinion on those issues is:

1. Doxxing, threats, and severe violations made on discord should result in bans from DART as well as discord. But there is a second question. Should doxxing and threats made on DART result in a ban from discord as well?

2. There should be a public ban log. Either we make it public or people make gossip-y threads asking about it, and it all comes out anyway.

3. Unless it's threats or doxxing, posts should not be deleted. My reasons:
  • Deleting destroys evidence. There are consequences to banning someone for a crime no one can see.
  • Even if you find some way to delete the post while still preserving a private record only the mods have access to, you still have the problem of banning someone for a crime no one can see. Transparency is important.
  • If Mike will create a way to red flag, gray out, or strike through offending posts, it can demonstrate to others what sort of conduct should be avoided. It can also demonstrate that the administration does not condone the offending post even though it has been left up.
  • Deleting all CoC violating posts will inflame accusations of censorship and inevitably result in a dramatic backlash. I am for limiting censorship of members' words and thoughts as much as possible, and deleting only what constitutes special harm.
Topic's author
#62
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
Proposal 1

Yes - 14
No - 3

Proposal 2

Yes - 8
No - 6

Proposal 3

Yes - 2
No - 13

Topic's author
#63
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
Time Check

About 12 hours remain to make make your voice heard! Votes cast after 10:00am, EST, on 1/31/19, will not be counted.
#64
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,298
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Castin
If Mike will create a way to red flag, gray out, or strike through offending posts, it can demonstrate to others what sort of conduct should be avoided. It can also demonstrate that the administration does not condone the offending post even though it has been left up. 
Well stated.
Topic's author
#65
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@3RU7AL
Well stated.
+1

Topic's author
#66
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
Attention

Voting is now closed.

Thanks to everyone who participated in the MEEP process and made their voice heard!
Topic's author
#67
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
Attention

The final vote count is as follows: 

  • Proposal 1
    • Yes - 14
    • No - 3
  • Proposal 2
    • Yes - 8
    • No - 6
  • Proposal 3
    • Yes - 2
    • No - 13

Per the rules of the MEEP process, as previously ratified by the site usership:

  • Proposal 1 has been ratified
  • Proposal 2 has not produced a binding result
  • Proposal 3 has been rejected

Therefore, DART moderation will now have the authority to punish severe misconduct which occurs on DART's official discord on DART. There will be no public ban log and all COC-violating conduct will not be eligible for deletion; instead, for both Proposals 2 and 3, the status quo prior to this MEEP will remain moderation's official policy.

Topic's author
#68
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
This thread will be locked in the next hour or two.

(Fun fact, this was my 1,000th post on DART).
#69
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,298
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@bsh1
Please consider proposing an anonymised ban log.
#70
David
David's avatar
Debates: 92
Posts: 1,218
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
-->
@bsh1
I am quite pleased with the level of participation in this thread. Congratulations, bsh, on your 1000th post. It's quite an achievement. 

Topic's author
#71
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@3RU7AL
Please consider proposing an anonymised ban log.
Can you explain what you mean by that?
Topic's author
#72
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@David
I was also pleased with the level of participation, and the results were roughly what I had anticipated and hoped for.
#73
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,298
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@bsh1
Please consider proposing an anonymised ban log.
Can you explain what you mean by that?

2. Should there be a public ban log?
An anonymised ban log would be a good idea.  Something like, "(anonymous) was banned for 4 days due to harassment and or other specific CoC violations."  I would like to see this in order to be able to quickly tell if people (mods) are enforcing CoC and what content they are focusing on.  The order in which the log appears could be randomized in order to make it more difficult to match a 1 to 1 violation to a specific user by chronological order alone.

Without this information, secretive (or obfuscated) enforcement can easily appear to be capricious and tyrannical. 
#74
David
David's avatar
Debates: 92
Posts: 1,218
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
This is kinda why I hoped the ban log would pass. An anonymized ban log would kinda defeat the purpose because they'd easily be able to figure out who it was.


#75
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,298
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@David
This is kinda why I hoped the ban log would pass. An anonymized ban log would kinda defeat the purpose because they'd easily be able to figure out who it was. 
Is it true that a ban explanation is currently available to anyone by private request?

If this is the case, then the "ban log" is de facto public information already, and is merely unposted.

A properly anonymized ban log would not "defeat the purpose" because only the person banned would know if the ban in the log matched their violation, and they themselves would already be privy to that information regardless of whether there is a log or not.

A ban log would be something like,

"User temp banned for CoC violation"
"User thread deleted for gross CoC violation"
"User warned by mod for CoC violation"
"User perma-banned for gross CoC violation"

Then you just jumble them up so they don't display chronologically.

The funny thing is that if you don't delete the offending content, the violating post is a de facto ban log anyway (merely obfuscated).
#76
David
David's avatar
Debates: 92
Posts: 1,218
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Is it true that a ban explanation is currently available to anyone by private request?

No. We maintain a private ban log via google docs, but we do not share that specific doc with anyone.
r

#77
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
I admit that proposal 2 was the one I was most concerned about. I accept that it did not go my way because bsh clearly stayed the rules beforehand and the votes did not make the requirements and I believe the mods are honest enough that they would have instituted the log if it had met the requirements, regardless of their personal opinions on the subject.

However I would like to ask whether there are currently any plans on revisiting the issue at a later date. I ask this not because I am disappointed that it did not go my way, but rather because it did recieve a signifigant number of "yes" votes (contrast this with the near-unanimous agreement on proposals 1 and 3) and I cannot be sure what the result would have been if this MEEP thread was more widely advertised and allowed more time for the community to notice its existence and more importantly to discuss the proposals. I personally only noticed this thread by chance as I was browsing through the forum in general and came quite close to not even knowing it existed despite being a relatively active member of the site.
#78
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,298
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@David
@bsh1
Is it true that a ban explanation is currently available to anyone by private request?
No. We maintain a private ban log via google docs, but we do not share that specific doc with anyone. 
r
I am moderately certain that bsh1 posted at least once, something like, "if anyone has questions about why someone was banned to ask by PM".
#79
David
David's avatar
Debates: 92
Posts: 1,218
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
-->
@3RU7AL
That is true, but doesn't give access to the full records that we have

#80
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,298
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@David
That is true, but doesn't give access to the full records that we have
An anonymised ban log would not be a full record.
#81
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,298
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@David
@bsh1
Another option for an anonymised ban log would be something like,

CoC Rule 1 violations - 17
CoC Rule 2 violations - 22
CoC Rule 3 violations - 7
CoC Rule 4 violations - 4
CoC Rule 5 violations - 46
CoC Rule 6 violations - 12
#82
TheHammer
TheHammer's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 211
1
2
4
TheHammer's avatar
TheHammer
1
2
4
None of these proposals are important enough for a site wide notification. Please refrain from using those so liberally in the future.
#83
spacetime
spacetime's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 206
0
1
3
spacetime's avatar
spacetime
0
1
3
-->
@DebateArt.com
@bsh1
STOP SENDING ME FUCKING NOTIFICATIONS FOR EVERY SINGLE FUCKING ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATE YOU STUPID MOTHERFUCKERS
#84
David
David's avatar
Debates: 92
Posts: 1,218
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
-->
@spacetime
these announcements are important to ensure that everyone knows the important updates and to ensure everyone can participate in the MEEPS stuff. That being said Mike could make a feature to turn off announcement notifications. 
#85
spacetime
spacetime's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 206
0
1
3
spacetime's avatar
spacetime
0
1
3
-->
@DebateArt.com
@David
That being said Mike could make a feature to turn off announcement notifications. 
pls & ty
#86
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
Aomething is wrong, this thread does not have nearly enough curse laden accusations of moderations abusing their power.
#87
David
David's avatar
Debates: 92
Posts: 1,218
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
lol! I actually mentioned that in private to bsh. I’m pleased with the participation and the lack of toxic mudfest 
#88
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 4,228
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@bsh1
1. NO
2 NO
3 NO

Topic's author
#89
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@TheHammer
Every MEEP will be announced using a site-wide notification. If you find that use liberal, I apologize, but it is not going to change my position on that. They are easy enough to ignore if you find them bothersome. Ultimately, the importance of making all users aware that there is a voting process underway (so that no user can claim that their voice wasn't heard because they don't check the main forum) outweighs the minor concerns of annoyance that are being expressed.
Topic's author
#90
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@David
That being said Mike could make a feature to turn off announcement notifications. 
Such a feature would defeat the purpose of the announcement feature and would be counterproductive.