Moderation Policy: Finalized Changes

Author: bsh1 ,

Posts

Read-only
Total: 16
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
Following from the public discussion that I initiated, which itself followed from various suggestion box threads, I am posting this list of finalized changes to moderation policy. Those policies with a clear consensus of support were adopted. Two-thirds of the suggested changes will be implemented.

1. No longer post vote remove notices on FF, troll, or conceded debates
2. Whenever a vote is borderline, default to considering it sufficient 
3. Whenever a vote is removed, explain--briefly--how the voter could improve 
4. No longer post detailed analysis in notices on non-removed votes 
5. Allow users to summarily post the contents of mod PMs so long as no non-public information about other users (other = not the sender or receiver of the PM) is revealed by the revelation.
6. Lock objectionable or COC-violating threads instead of deleting them, unless leaving them up would severely breach a user's privacy or safety rights
7. Cap the number of vote reports that a user can make per day at 10
8. No longer prohibit the use of slurs so long as those slurs are not intended to render insult to the subject of the comment
9. Make all significant changes in mod policy subject to a mandatory 2-day public comment period
Those proposals that were not adopted, except for the proposal allowing only voters and debates to report votes on a debate, met with mixed feedback in the discussion, with at least 2 objectors each. I am still willing to adopt the "mixed feedback" proposals if and when a clear consensus in favor of them emerges. That is to say, they are not permanently off the table. Ultimately, however, 2/3rds of the proposed changes will be implemented. The new policies will come into effect tomorrow if they have not already. If you have any questions or concerns about these finalized changes, please feel free to comment.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,608
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
thank you bishy
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 343
Posts: 10,489
10
10
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
10
11
Kaiser bsh1 reigns once again.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,608
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
--> @RationalMadman
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 343
Posts: 10,489
10
10
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
10
11
--> @Greyparrot
Firstly, lazy modding isn't good modding. Secondly, that's bullshit controlled opposition by Illuminati. The network won't last and all you post there will be used against you potentially.
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,659
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
--> @bsh1
Based on this, anonymity is not being restored?
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
--> @drafterman
Based on this, anonymity is not being restored?
Correct. Ethang and RM dissented. I would need more than 5-6 "yes" votes to determine that a clear consensus in favor of that proposal existed. However, the issue is open to future debate and if, at some point, a consensus does emerge after a public discussion, I would be willing to implement that proposal. 

drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,659
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
Utterly ridiculous. Anonymity was stripped and abused without so much as a whisper yet you're going to require unanimity to give it back (despite a supermajority agreeing to restore it.) The reasonable thing to do would be restore the status quo unless a consensus agrees with it's removal.
blamonkey
blamonkey's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 504
2
4
8
blamonkey's avatar
blamonkey
2
4
8
--> @bsh1
Perhaps creating a seperate thread to poll people about the proposals would make establishing a consensus easier.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 343
Posts: 10,489
10
10
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
10
11
--> @blamonkey
Everyone wants to be anonymous until the guy/girl harassing them is anonymous. Same with reports and same with anything in life.

If you want real anonymity, don't make an account for a website and don't participate in any community as a persona at all. You can hide behind IPs all you want, your persona itself is a way to catch you. You want to report? You want to spam them? Want to inaccurately report them? Then you'd want anonymity. Why else would you be concerned about anonymity?

Something I found (and believe me I've hung out with both folk in my online life) is that the crew on the side of privacy is usually filled with both extremes; highly naive/kind and highly paranoid/sinister. The crew that say 'meh, privacy isn't that needed' 'we only need to hide sometimes when it comes to oppressive governments etc' are usually very balanced individuals who likely have not necessarily got as high IQ as the former group but much higher EQ and long-term strategy to their plan.


RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 343
Posts: 10,489
10
10
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
10
11
The more that you demand anonymity, the more you force the controlling group, be it Illuminati in the real world or Mike and bsh1 here, to hide thigns from you. The more you allow them to admit they spy, the better the world and this site become in terms of transparency and relaxation between the leaders and the led.

The reason Illuminati are so corrupt and conniving is we force them to be.
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,659
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
--> @blamonkey
We did that.
SupaDudz
SupaDudz's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 12,675
5
8
11
SupaDudz's avatar
SupaDudz
5
8
11
Happy with all changes

However number 7 would cause us to remove a badge because it is 15 votes in 24hrs
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,659
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
--> @SupaDudz
That's a limit on vote reports, not votes themselves.
SupaDudz
SupaDudz's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 12,675
5
8
11
SupaDudz's avatar
SupaDudz
5
8
11
--> @drafterman
Misread
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
--> @blamonkey
That was already done. The thread where people were offered an opportunity to weigh in was linked in the OP.