PROPOSAL TO END ALL MODERATION "PROBLEMS"

Author: 3RU7AL

Posts

Total: 58
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@RationalMadman
giving each individual the ability to filter out content they personally find offensive is NOT "shadowbanning"

and giving mods an option to filter out content they deem "unfit" for public consumption is NO DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THEY ALREADY DO

the main difference here is that under my proposal - - people who are not easily offended could "uncheck" the OPTIONAL mod filter
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
The goal is for the atheists in the religion forum to block every theist so they have their own little private forum. They don't have to read our posts, they don't have to respond to us and they can say whatever they want and it not come back on them by the mods cuz all they have to say is well they can't read anything.
If they ever actually achieved this, they would just leave the site to find a new forum where they could have the same argument with a bunch of religious people who don't want to talk to them ad nauseum. Extremely online atheists have an all-consuming drive to invade any online space where religious discussion is taking place and shit all over it with their midwit takes. It's a strong biological urge that they'll never be able to shake, and this proposal robs them of their satisfaction.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 556
Posts: 19,389
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@3RU7AL
Shadow banning, also called stealth banningghost banning or comment ghosting,[1] is the practice of blocking or partially blocking a user or their content from some areas of an online community in such a way that it will not be readily apparent to the user that they have been banned. For instance, shadow banned comments posted to a blog or media website will not be visible to other users accessing the site. Also, reducing the visibility, or impressions within the "main feed"

By partly concealing, or making a user's contributions invisible or less prominent to other members of the service, the hope may be that in the absence of reactions to their comments, the problematic or otherwise out-of-favour user will become bored or frustrated and leave the site, and that spammers and trolls will be discouraged to continue their unwanted behavior or create new accounts.[1][2][3]

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
at least they don't show up on your doorstep at 9 am on a saturday
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@zedvictor4
pure poetry
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@badger
It sounds utterly dysfunctional.
How so?

This is sitcom shit. "Can you please tell your father..." "Tell him your fucking self."
Autonomy is good, isn't it?
rbelivb
rbelivb's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 205
1
2
5
rbelivb's avatar
rbelivb
1
2
5
-->
@3RU7AL
Personally I think this is a good idea, and I remember proposing a similar idea on DDO. It could be difficult to implement, but I think it could be useful to filter out content we don't want to see. Also, where it might get confusing is with replies, if others are replying to a post that we have hidden.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,073
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@3RU7AL
Vote 3RU7AL.
MarkWebberFan
MarkWebberFan's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 291
1
2
6
MarkWebberFan's avatar
MarkWebberFan
1
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
I'm turning Chinese,

I think I'm turning Chinese,

I really think so.
Good. You’ll fit in Singapore, where guys obsess over anything chinese. Lol 
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@Athias
How so?
It seems to me that it's literally not to all be on the same page. That does not seem conducive to good discussion.

I think I'd prefer strict and principled modding.
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@badger
It seems to me that it's literally not to all be on the same page. That does not seem conducive to good discussion.
What good discussion is there to be had by two or more individuals who do not intend to engage each other?

I think I'd prefer strict and principled modding.
Fair enough.
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@Athias
What good discussion is there to be had by two or more individuals who do not intend to engage each other?
Obviously none. But we'll have to navigate their bullshit. 

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,073
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@badger
A Haiku for Badger


Strict and principled.

Contradictory kink badgeman

See, moderation.

139 days later

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@RationalMadman
I don't think I ever said I'd use blocking as much if it disallowed communication entirely to the point we can't read each other's posts. 
what utility do you find in the current block function ?
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 556
Posts: 19,389
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@3RU7AL
My notifications stay securely things I give a shit about, overall.

It also is less about me, I found people realising they cannot @ me affects them negatively, it is a good, proportional punishment, mutual irritation.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@3RU7AL
And you told me I was 100% false, little liar.
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
And you told me I was 100% false, little liar.
What truth have you told?

I never found the original post but I did find where it was discussed.  3RU7AL suggested it would be easy to do a list of banned members, both me and RM were to definitely be on that list, where we would be basically blocked no one could see our post and that in order for people to see those posts they'd have to opt out.  It was also discussed that this list would be secret and that we would just have to figure out that's what was going on. It was basically a list of members disliked or mods hate.  As long as the mods are going to allow people to make disgusting comments then I'm going to use the block function especially so I don't get messages from those people. That said those functions only work when you're logged in anyway log out and you can see everything.


Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
It's okay you want to defend your friend I don't give a shit, the post speaks for itself.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
And you told me I was 100% false, little liar.
i never once proposed a "super-secret-shadow-ban"

the mod mute would be an alternative to the current "perma-ban"

the user would be notified exactly the same as they are currently notified of moderator actions that affect them
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
both me and RM were to definitely be on that list
false
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
It was also discussed that this list would be secret and that we would just have to figure out that's what was going on.
false
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
It was basically a list of members disliked or mods hate.
false
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@3RU7AL
The post speaks for itself I don't have to say anything else about it. There will several other people suggest to be on the list as well wasn't just me and RM. It's not my fault you people talk to one another in private message and then it gets back to the people you've talked about.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
There will several other people suggest to be on the list as well wasn't just me and RM.
i have always been against banning users and censorship generally

i have never personally blocked anyone and do not ever plan to block anyone
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
01.13.22 04:32PM


the mods could make an OPTIONAL moderator-muted-list of users they deemed "inappropriate" so they would be invisible to the public and also invisible to all site members - UNLESS - site members un-checked the OPTIONAL moderator-muted-list
💩
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
It's okay you want to defend your friend I don't give a shit
True, I do want and intend to defend my friend. (Though, 3RU7AL has done well enough--naturally--on his own defending himself.) I defend anyone whom I deem can use a second person's input. I've defended quite a number of members, here, including you.

the post speaks for itself.
That convenient. Because the post doesn't speak to your description. As soon as I saw your post, #115 that is, I knew it wasn't truthful because I remember this discussion quite well.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
the mods could make an OPTIONAL moderator-muted-list of users they deemed "inappropriate" so they would be invisible to the public and also invisible to all site members - UNLESS - site members un-checked the OPTIONAL moderator-muted-list
instead of what they currently do with "inappropriate" users (which is perma-ban them)
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
the mods could make an OPTIONAL moderator-muted-list of users they deemed "inappropriate" so they would be invisible to the public and also invisible to all site members - UNLESS - site members un-checked the OPTIONAL moderator-muted-list
i don't see any mention of adding you and rm to this OPTIONAL list

i also don't see any mention of this OPTIONAL list being "secret"