Important Civility Rules Enforcement

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Original Sixth said:
It has, but people don't always understand things the same way. We may not even be understanding each other now, which is the big thrust of the confusion. As an example, think to the US and Turkey. When the US armed Kurds in Syria, the US thought it was fine. Turkey thought it was very much NOT FINE. Because the US generally isn't worried about Kurds as a security threat, whereas Turkey is.

So in this example, you don't really have one group you're talking to. You have several.

  1. The People who follow the rules 100% of the time.
  2. The People who follow the rules 80% of the time.
  3. The People who follow the rules 50% of the time.
  4. The People who follow the rules 30% of the time.
  5. The People who generally don't follow the rules.
  6. Trolls
So when you drop a message that says "we need to crack down on this", everyone on this list group is going to turn around and say "Who, me? What did I do?"

And if you say "abusive language", then all six of those people are going to have a different interpretation of what that means.




Your job entails far less and far more power than people give it credit for. The trust people put in you is nothing to sneeze at, but at the end of the day it is entirely optional and either way, doesn't come with a paycheck.
Click to expand...

I'd argue most of the board is already in compliance. What we are stating is that we are cracking down on the ones who are not.

This is as much internal consistency as anything else. But I wont lie to you. There is an optics angle too. You know it as well as I do. We were never going to get a fair chance due to malicious actors and the smear campaign by malicious actors. We all knew this and accepted this. But when people who were not even involved in that whole kerfuffle point to a small subset of our base and the clear violation of our rules with no clear action from the staff. Then we start looking like we support it. That's where the issue comes into play.

Let me ask you something. Have you noticed that a number of our members have stopped posting? Have you wondered why that may be?
 
Zoe said:
I think that's a reasonable summary of what's happening here, yes.
Click to expand...

Well, if that's the case, I think the next step is really to look at two major things:

  1. Where does example 3 push into example 4 and 5. This is difficult and I don't expect anyone to answer this today. This is really something that has to be established by policy. The mods and the users are going to likely have differing views on this. I would recommend a "phase-in-period", like a week, a two at most, where staff can establish where the boundaries for those two actually are. An alternative would be for mods to go back and flag things in the past with warnings--none that incur any penalties, but so as to help mold expectation of what we DON'T want to see in the Boot Chart. (Actually, a Boot Chart might be a good idea)
  2. Number 5 needs to be discussed a bit more, because it's open to misunderstanding. We all agree that seriously suggesting Number 5 is out of bounds. A legitimate concern arises in, what to do with people who might be joking or might in a moment of anger (the world is about to get really, really crazy--I am warning you of that now), might get TOS banhammered. I think it goes without saying that obvious sudden bursts of emotions from otherwise good posters will be taken into account, even if a punishment is required. That of course then raises the legitimate concern of the staff of "Hey man...I know this is the 50th time I said, 'Let's kill the Jews' in graphic detail...but it was just a joke...". So we need to be straight with each other and talk about what is allowed under that, what is not, and why.
 
The Original Sixth said:
Concerned Posters -- "We think numbers 1-3 are fine, 4 is just whacknuts, and 5 should never seriously be posted on the forum. But we're worried someone might be joking and get TOS banned without warning."
Click to expand...
Getting a 5 would be hard for me. On self reflection the moments I would act uncivil is when private property is damaged so my feelings would cloud my opinions to express hypothetical sentiments that wouldn't happen but would be frowned upon on expressing acceptance of extreme sentences on offenders that damage private property during the George Floyd riots in it's height that those links being shared would influence me to doom post more often and express radical sentiments on thinking I understand why people act more extreme in reacting to a riot.

Otherwise the other one is expressing haters of the site to waste their life trying to down the site if they're that obsessed.
 
Spartan303 said:
I'd argue most of the board is already in compliance. What we are stating is that we are cracking down on the ones who are not.
Click to expand...

I'm all for that. There are areas of improvement for this site. And while none of us users really wanted the responsibility, we do have some responsibility in drawing people in. In a sense, the founders of this site are both users and product.

This is as much internal consistency as anything else. But I wont lie to you. There is an optics angle too. You know it as well as I do. We were never going to get a fair chance due to malicious actors and the smear campaign by malicious actors. We all knew this and accepted this. But when people who were not even involved in that whole kerfuffle point to a small subset of our base and the clear violation of our rules with no clear action from the staff. Then we start looking like we support it. That's where the issue comes into play.
Click to expand...

I won't lie to you either. That is not a minor issue, that is a major issue. From a business perspective, that is a terminal issue and one that needs to be corrected. I think we're all onboard on this point. My concern, and that of others, comes from our past shared experiences at SB. So I think on our end, we're a bit skittish about a sudden crackdown. And no doubt our reaction has upset you and the rest of the staff, because you were right there with us when this happened.

Let me ask you something. Have you noticed that a number of our members have stopped posting? Have you wondered why that may be?
Click to expand...

Due to personal issues, I've been less engaged with the site and my own personal habits might contribute to me seeing mostly the same people with the same interests. That said...I have noticed a less-than-optimal amount of dissenting voices on certain policy issues. This forum needs different voices or it will die. We honestly should have at least 25% of a forum population that is outspokenly liberal if we want a healthy forum.
 
Random Username said:
Getting a 5 would be hard for me. On self reflection the moments I would act uncivil is when private property is damaged so my feelings would cloud my opinions to express hypothetical sentiments that wouldn't happen but would be frowned upon on expressing acceptance of extreme sentences on offenders that damage private property during the George Floyd riots in it's height that those links being shared would influence me to doom post more often and express radical sentiments on thinking I understand why people act more extreme in reacting to a riot.

Otherwise the other one is expressing haters of the site to waste their life trying to down the site if they're that obsessed.
Click to expand...

See, me too, but I also know that my restraint has been tested at times. In fact, I can't even promise I've never posted something like that. For example, I might post something akin to a 5 (but not a direct call to action or promise of action, mind you) if I saw a mayor allow his city to be burnt to the ground. Because I would seriously consider killing anyone who did that to my city. Mind you, that might still call for some sort of infraction, even if it is understandable.

The world as we know it is entering into a very difficult change. Rules that we all grew to understand as basic civility in the past 20-50 years may not apply when someone's whole life threatens to come crashing down.
 
Questions for the staff.

1. Will this new change in policy enforcement be retroactive? Like, will people get warned or temped for stuff they posted before this?

2. Does this mean I’m no longer to make cracks about Pinochet and helicopters?
 
Spartan303 said:
And we will do our best to explain as clearly as we can.
Click to expand...

Well, that seems to have hammered out the basics.

Is it possible that @LordSunhawk could set that list as the standard (at least temporarily) so that current and new users can get the gist of what we're looking to achieve? Because honestly, he really managed to cut through the confusion and I think, get most of us on the same page. Which is what I think we all needed.
 
The Original Sixth said:
That said...I have noticed a less-than-optimal amount of dissenting voices on certain policy issues. This forum needs different voices or it will die. We honestly should have at least 25% of a forum population that is outspokenly liberal if we want a healthy forum.
Click to expand...

I don't know. The membership numbers keep going up (we've more than a thousand people now!) and it's hardly like we're a hive of alt-right ethnonats and Neo-Nazis. Maybe we just aren't an attractive prospect for liberals (those are what yanks call lefties, right? We've got a fair share of classical liberals here), who'd likely not really be interested in us anyway because they've got Spacebattles and Sufficient Velocity? I do often view the Sietch as almost "Spacebattles for anyone centre and right of centre", and that's a little niche that will draw people over time as it already has done and is doing.
 
I do not believe this crackdown to be either fair or just. I do not consider it necessary, I consider it overblown and markedly unnecessary.

While I have no sustained disagreement in the abstract, I find this course for the future of the site most concerning. I am greatly leery and concerned with what appears to be the site’s now decided direction.

I have said my peace.

That will be my last post in this thread.
 
Lord Sovereign said:
I don't know. The membership numbers keep going up (we've more than a thousand people now!) and it's hardly like we're a hive of alt-right ethnonats and Neo-Nazis. Maybe we just aren't an attractive prospect for liberals (those are what yanks call lefties, right? We've got a fair share of classical liberals here), who'd likely not really be interested in us anyway because they've got Spacebattles and Sufficient Velocity? I do often view the Sietch as almost "Spacebattles for anyone centre and right of centre", and that's a little niche that will draw people over time as it already has done and is doing.
Click to expand...

It's not really a matter of membership numbers, but also account engagement. What good is a member who opens an account, posts for a week, and then never comes back? The forum works on a model of repeat business.

Now there are several difficulties to this that we have to manage. I see three primary issues right now:

  1. Generating interesting content. People want a place that is safe and fun. No one wants to post on a site they aren't passionate about. They can just go somewhere else and getting verified in today's market is like, 24 hours at the most. So you can get a lot of new member accounts, but not retain that traffic because they've moved on. To generate interesting content, we need opposing, but not too opposing people discussing ideas and posting fun stuff.
  2. The USA is very political right now. The USA is also going to be this forum's largest market. So if other American show up and all they see is their own side getting thrashed and the only place to really post is politics, they aren't going to stay. We'd honestly be better off investing in our fictional sections, because what people want right now is escapism.
  3. As the Staff stated here, not enforcing our own rules. Especially if we're deficient in the above.
 
balom said:
Civility seems like the camels nose of SJW convergence. It's always " can we have a little civility" at first, with the meaning of this civility always being stretched further and further in a leftward direction.
Click to expand...


I am gonna have to agree. It always starts like this. A little more civility, a bit more politeness. It's just good manners! No one wants to take your freedom away, its just a simple rule...

Seems I was already a target, getting a infraction warning. Not sure which one, but I think it is the one where I reffered to the resident moderator pet of SB who is a complete CCP apologist as a faggot. A term that has nothing to do with is sexuality but everything to do with insulting someone who defends such a undefendable regime and country with no hint of shame.

I categorically disagree with the mods opinion. This person deserves to be mocked and insulted, and the term faggot is weak and time tested internet slang peefectly uo to the job.

That said though, if the mods feel like throwing infractions at posts like "So guys what should we do about (((them)))" or "I am gonna be next to a Biden rally should I raid his village and grief his base in Clash of Clans with a 5.56" I will not object as those seem more like actual infractions too me.
 
Lord Sovereign said:
I don't know. The membership numbers keep going up (we've more than a thousand people now!) and it's hardly like we're a hive of alt-right ethnonats and Neo-Nazis. Maybe we just aren't an attractive prospect for liberals (those are what yanks call lefties, right? We've got a fair share of classical liberals here), who'd likely not really be interested in us anyway because they've got Spacebattles and Sufficient Velocity? I do often view the Sietch as almost "Spacebattles for anyone centre and right of centre", and that's a little niche that will draw people over time as it already has done and is doing.
Click to expand...
The issue is not pure numbers of members, but more who is active and who is not.

There are a lot of members with no posts or reactions, who are either long term lurkers, or have simply made an account but found it not to be worth their time to post here.

However, there are some posters who were active, but no longer are for what sound like reasons of not liking the way the atmosphere has been building here, and those are what @Spartan303 is speaking about, if I am reading him correctly.
 
MelancholicMechanicus said:
Seems I was already a target, getting a infraction warning. Not sure which one, but I think it is the one where I reffered to the resident moderator pet of SB who is a complete CCP apologist as a faggot. A term that has nothing to do with is sexuality but everything to do with insulting someone who defends such a undefendable regime and country with no hint of shame.
Click to expand...
The word is quite politically charged. I know people like Steve Crowder get around it with fig but if you want to insult try something else less politically offensive.
 
Crackdown is overly dramatic, it implies some sort of massive wave of incoming drama. It isn't, it'll be telling a handful of people to dial it back for the good of general discourse and it'll have zero impact on the majority. It's just doing what we should have been doing since day one.

We did try the whole ignore people thing but unlike the real world where they might shut up on here they didn't. So we need to be a bit more active.

Most people won't be affected, some people will have to exercise restraint in their passions, but there are no rule changes. You can talk about the same stuff, but it will be talk not rant.

To quote a wise person You can't control every event that happens in the world, but you can control how you react to it.
Or another quote from a more ancient source, don't shit on your own doorstep.
 
Random Username said:
The word is quite politically charged. I know people like Steve Crowder get around it with fig but if you want to insult try something else less politically offensive.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I thought we replaced "fag" with "cuck".

It's more accurate in what people are trying to say, anyway. Although I honestly think fag/faggot is overblown...maybe not something we should have sprawled across our message board with a small user base.
 
The Original Sixth said:
Is it possible that @LordSunhawk could set that list as the standard (at least temporarily) so that current and new users can get the gist of what we're looking to achieve?
Click to expand...
Indeed, and it might be worthwhile to add some additional examples.
The Original Sixth said:
We'd honestly be better off investing in our fictional sections, because what people want right now is escapism.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've wished the creative writing section was more active for a while now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top