this is genuinely the only effective moderation strategy
hard and fast rules mean that the worst actors will quickly test exactly what the lines are and live right on them, and they are very good at this
"nah, man, you're bad news, goodbye" is the only way to deal with them
hard and fast rules mean that the worst actors will quickly test exactly what the lines are and live right on them, and they are very good at this
"nah, man, you're bad news, goodbye" is the only way to deal with them
Reposted from
Cooper Lund
For the record: I think the best thing Something Awful did on the internet was implement a "We can just ban you if your vibes are off" policy, and I hope that's what we're seeing here.
Comments
Too much of a consumer.
(and everyone knows dance clubs which charge a cover and have more assertive bouncers are safer to hang out at 🤷♀️)
If you don't engage with that which offends you, with compassion and a desire to understand, you just get more division and less middle ground to work from.
That sort of behavior is entirely inappropriate and childish, and will undoubtedly doing more harm than good in the fight against the imminent attempt to install a Fascist government here.
I was under the impression that that sort of judgementalism is part of what we're supposed to be fighting against.
Hate doesn't beat hate, it begets more hate in a never ending cycle
And I wonder how much of this will go on until by proxy it kills all the legacy media in the US because they all are owned by oligarchs
The big problem is that there are too few individual owners anymore, and none of them happen to be decent.
The little hairs on the back of your neck will always beat any rules based methodolgy.
It's complicated by situations where you have a marginalized person who's often in altercations bc people are picking on *them*
But there's also that one person who is always starting shit, always taking everything in the worst faith & seeming to revel in taking others down. Bad bad bad news.
Hard to troll and be a worm when no one can see it.
ANYBODY who has spent more than a couple of years in a PTA knows of the person who shows up, takes on an office that everybody lets them take because nobody wants to do the work, and then spends a year throwing sand into gears intentionally or accidentally.
It worked really well.
As a bonus, you don't need to keep track of infractions, strikes, or warnings or whatever. One click, ya done, keep it movin, try again next timeline
There's no guesswork, and you can see cautionary tales. Plus it's very funny.
If anyone wants to take a browse.
"You are not welcome here because we believe your presence will be of detriment to this community" is a perfectly valid ban reason
"But they'll see being banned as a win."
Their opinion matters? They're trolls. They lose by default.
My win conditions are my own to decide. If they get off on being blocked, or find it annoying, is their problem. Not mine.
Polycarp was the first non-homophobic Christian I ever met, and it shook my (then-homophobic) worldview. I wish I could thank him.
And MPSIMS remains the best subforum name of all time.
We used to be a real internet 😭
I have no problem with conservative-only spaces I don't have to go there, it adds nothing for me.
The inverse is that I don't have to tolerate them in my spaces either. I'm not here to endlessly "debate" my existence
https://www.reddit.com/r/bartenders/comments/j7y3cu/how_to_deal_with_nazis_in_the_bar/
Naw.
Dropping the banhammer on them asap really is the best way. And anyone whining about that should, if not immediately whacked, be put on notice that they're on thin ice
And this was in 2004 when no one wanted to buy access to anything online.
but if you want a genuinely good online space, your only hope is one where the worst actors are banned, quickly, regardless of whether or not they've technically broken the rules
Also, always a good reminder to just be mindful of what you're posting to whom (and ever sacred larger context).
Don't self police, just be smarter than them.
He's actually the one that made me choose to step away from the community
This really bodes well for the continued health of Bluesky.
oh my sweet summer child, the answer is so much more than you think
I support vibes based bans, and a forum moderation model. That is not Scalzi's model.
Oh, and that town has fewer than 2000 people.
I ended up with mental health issues. All because he didn't like my opinion.
There’s some room for refinement within that, but whatever causes the mods the least amount of admin. Communities police themselves, and bad actors want to build critical mass.
I'll think back to these years.
anyone who wasn't cool, was gone- worked great, thriving community, everyone had fun, no rules lawyering
built a great community of gamers who didn't fit the preconception of 'gamer'
"if you're asking that question you aren't being cool, bye"
Good times.
I find myself lobbying to keep them around, even when they clog channels with constant benign nonsense.
More "lack of self awareness" than "trying to be a jerk" imo.
We gave them plenty of chances. Explained hoe they can fix things. And if it kept happening, eventually we banned them
It seems mean but better that one annoying person leaves than dozens of users stay uncomfortable indefinitely