Community Policy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-08-2012, 08:50 PM (This post was last modified: 30-08-2012 08:54 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Community Policy
(30-08-2012 08:02 PM)cufflink Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 06:23 PM)closet.atheist Wrote:  That said, there are people who intend to damage a site and care nothing about its mission, the people using it, logic, etc. If this site has admins with a little experience, I would expect them to balance absolute free speech against the damage to the culture of the site when the need arises. If that fails, they will probably eventually notice a mob armed with torches and pitchforks chasing some idiot off the site.

This states the problem clearly. The solution isn't as clear.

The current policy of virtually absolute free speech, with no one banned for invective, insensitivity, racism, sexism, and general asshole-ish behavior, at least has the virtue of being clear-cut and workable. We know exactly where the line is: post porn or nudity, spam, or threaten someone, and you're gone; otherwise, say what you want--you won't be kicked out. If the admins were to ban for "bad behavior," however that's defined, the lines would get fuzzy; people wouldn't necessarily agree whether a given incident of bad behavior was over the line or not. And I can see a lot of decisions creating divisiveness.

But if we don't expand the current criteria for banning, what should the response be to "people who intend to damage a site and care nothing about its mission, the people using it, logic, etc."? It can't simply to be to put the person on ignore. That sends a totally wrong message: say whatever you want, and the worst that will happen is that some us won't respond to you. Think of someone who's just discovered the site and is trying to get the lay of the land before joining. They see all this abuse, and no one is calling the abuser on it. I don't think I'd want to part of a group like that.

The only thing I can think of is some kind of concerted community response to egregiously bad behavior. A dozen members piling on and letting the abuser know they're way over the line can be powerful. Neg reps can be useful. Strongly supporting someone who's been abused can help. In extreme cases, 20 members telling someone they're not welcome and urging them to leave on their own--"the torches and pitchforks" solution--might be necessary. I dunno. My point is that people have to respond in some vocal way to really bad behavior. Silence is not an option.

Torches and pitchforks just tend to encourage them. If they came here with malevolent intent that's the response they wanted to provoke. Derailment by drunken pirates and vulgar hairless talking monkeys who can not only respond to their prickness in kind but with superior firepower at least distracts them from their primary mission with a more immediate concern. ... And then they get bored and leave. ... Or they stay like Egor and eventually realize they're just another ordinary asshole like the rest of us.

Breathing - it's more art than science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
30-08-2012, 08:55 PM
RE: Community Policy
Assholes R us.... Wink

"Like" my Facebook page
Brain Droppings Blog
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT16Rq3dAcHhqiAsPC5xUC...oR0pEpxQZw]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Seasbury's post
30-08-2012, 09:06 PM
RE: Community Policy
(30-08-2012 08:55 PM)Seasbury Wrote:  Assholes R us.... Wink

I wonder how cheap their insults are? Do you think I could get two for one?Big Grin

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
30-08-2012, 09:07 PM (This post was last modified: 31-08-2012 04:27 AM by DLJ.)
RE: Community Policy
Well said, Cuffs.
In fact, lots of well argued and articulted opinions. That's why I like this place.

So mum and dad have a difference of opinion on how to raise the kids:
Mum is super-protective of her little darlings and Dad says they should be allowed to play in the mud, it'll build up their immunity.

Of course, new born babies need protection and growing up, we all get to experiment a bit and meet the occasional bully and we build our defense mechanisms.

The "I've got a new bike" tactic and the "upside down dog" tactic seem to work (for ignoring and diffusing) as community self-policing tactics.
And a "neighbourhood watch" scheme is good to support newbies.

Perhaps we could try a little more vigilance as a first step before we go for the vigilante approach (pitchforks) etc.

I hear what you are saying, Dom (and others) but I'm on the "let them play in the mud" side.

Free-thought and free speech trumps all, in my view even at the risk of offending the community / changing the culture.

Example: I could easily be arrested for things I say about Islam and the Quran when I do training in Indonesia. I break their blasphemy laws every time. I don't go beyond what I think I know to be factual when I do it but I would be betraying the memory of Hitch (let alone those who have died for the right for free speech) if I didn't point out totalitarianism when I saw it.

So let the trolls troll and let the newbies play in the mud.

Add this to the welcome acknowledgment (if there is one):
"Welcome to TTA... blah, blah ...
Please note there are many different characters here. Be careful for there be trolls hiding amongst the gentle and outspoken deists, theists and atheists. But do not be alarmed, there are plenty of good and supportive people here when you need them.

If you are a troll, welcome, have fun. Be prepared to be out-trolled by your wiser and sharper and more determined superiors. "

Or words to that effect.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like DLJ's post
30-08-2012, 11:00 PM
RE: Community Policy
(30-08-2012 09:07 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Free-thought and free speech trumps all, in my view even at the risk of offending the community / changing the culture.

That. ... I mean except for spam, nudity, and porn.

Breathing - it's more art than science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-08-2012, 12:45 AM (This post was last modified: 31-08-2012 04:29 AM by DLJ.)
RE: Community Policy
(30-08-2012 11:00 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 09:07 PM)DLJ Wrote:  Free-thought and free speech trumps all, in my view even at the risk of offending the community / changing the culture.

That. ... I mean except for spam, nudity, and porn.

Personally, and I'm speaking only for myself, I would go further. I would have no censorship. There is a (naked) truth and honesty to be found in nudity and porn; better to let children see that than the lies and dishonesty of religions. Ban porn ... Ban the bible!

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
31-08-2012, 01:05 AM
RE: Community Policy
(30-08-2012 08:50 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(30-08-2012 08:02 PM)cufflink Wrote:  This states the problem clearly. The solution isn't as clear.

The current policy of virtually absolute free speech, with no one banned for invective, insensitivity, racism, sexism, and general asshole-ish behavior, at least has the virtue of being clear-cut and workable. We know exactly where the line is: post porn or nudity, spam, or threaten someone, and you're gone; otherwise, say what you want--you won't be kicked out. If the admins were to ban for "bad behavior," however that's defined, the lines would get fuzzy; people wouldn't necessarily agree whether a given incident of bad behavior was over the line or not. And I can see a lot of decisions creating divisiveness.

But if we don't expand the current criteria for banning, what should the response be to "people who intend to damage a site and care nothing about its mission, the people using it, logic, etc."? It can't simply to be to put the person on ignore. That sends a totally wrong message: say whatever you want, and the worst that will happen is that some us won't respond to you. Think of someone who's just discovered the site and is trying to get the lay of the land before joining. They see all this abuse, and no one is calling the abuser on it. I don't think I'd want to part of a group like that.

The only thing I can think of is some kind of concerted community response to egregiously bad behavior. A dozen members piling on and letting the abuser know they're way over the line can be powerful. Neg reps can be useful. Strongly supporting someone who's been abused can help. In extreme cases, 20 members telling someone they're not welcome and urging them to leave on their own--"the torches and pitchforks" solution--might be necessary. I dunno. My point is that people have to respond in some vocal way to really bad behavior. Silence is not an option.

Torches and pitchforks just tend to encourage them. If they came here with malevolent intent that's the response they wanted to provoke. Derailment by drunken pirates and vulgar hairless talking monkeys who can not only respond to their prickness in kind but with superior firepower at least distracts them from their primary mission with a more immediate concern. ... And then they get bored and leave. ... Or they stay like Egor and eventually realize they're just another ordinary asshole like the rest of us.

I had forgotten about thread derailment. Thanks for the reminder.

Religious disputes are like arguments in a madhouse over which inmate really is Napoleon.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: