PROPOSAL TO END ALL MODERATION "PROBLEMS"

Author: 3RU7AL

Posts

Total: 58
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
PROPOSAL TO END ALL MODERATION "PROBLEMS"

moderation almost always only happens when a user complains

i propose we implement a "mutual-mute" feature

this would make the "problem user" invisible to the complainer

AND

this would also make the complainer invisible to the "problem user"

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
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@3RU7AL
  • Is this technically feasible?
  • Would mutual intra-invisibility render some forums unintelligible?  That is, in some conversations with a lot of masked out replies, do we risk making forums hard to follow because of lack of connected replies?

RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@3RU7AL
That sounds more corrupt than anything I have ever heard mods do in my whole life.

That would be gaslighting of the most extreme kind and be so cruel to the user deemed inappropriate.

Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@RationalMadman
@oromagi
Well there's a reason it's here and not in the religion forum. 
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 3,432
4
5
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
5
10
-->
@3RU7AL
If someone does something worth being addressed,
What matters is that someone did something worth being addressed,
Not whether one's own head can be buried in sand.

Though I think it's an interesting idea,
I'm not for it myself.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@3RU7AL
Your platform is uniform policies so they can be evenly enforced. Is this your response to this post?

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
  • Is this technically feasible?
  • Would mutual intra-invisibility render some forums unintelligible?  That is, in some conversations with a lot of masked out replies, do we risk making forums hard to follow because of lack of connected replies?
DebateArt.com believes it is feasible with a redesign - 

The invisible replies (and accounts) would ideally be completely missing from view - and not stacks of blank entries -

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@RationalMadman
your intolerance is not necessarily shared by all members

this would allow you to "delete" any user you wish - without any action required by a "moderation team"

of course you'd also be deleting yourself from their view as well
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@3RU7AL
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
My 'intolerance' to your intolerance is shared by many. You're a tyrant posing as an anarchist.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Lemming
If someone does something worth being addressed,
What matters is that someone did something worth being addressed,
if you personally find an account offensive - you can "delete" them - without any action required by a "moderation team"

this would greatly reduce the workload of the moderation team

also, your personal sense of decency may not be shared by other accounts on this site

this proposed system would allow anyone to OPTIONALLY view content that other specific users might consider "inappropriate"

it would completely automate the current "restraining order" system

full account bans could still be implemented - but they would be much less common and much less urgent
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
-->
@3RU7AL
If people feel the need to silence members, they should not be on a debate site
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@RationalMadman
My 'intolerance' to your intolerance is shared by many. You're a tyrant posing as an anarchist.
you are the king of the "block" function

this is basically an enhancement to the current "block" function

full account bans could still be implemented - but they would be much less common and much less urgent

AND this would completely automate the current "restraining order" system
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Vader
If people feel the need to silence members, they should not be on a debate site
if people don't feel the need to silence members, they should stop "reporting" every tiny little thing to the moderation team

a mod report is a de facto request to silence the "offender"

this proposal is basically an enhancement to the current "block" function

full account bans could still be implemented - but they would be much less common and much less urgent

AND this would completely automate the current "restraining order" system
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Some mod is discussing complains with regular members? Sounds like the mods are creating an atmosphere of hate.  
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 3,432
4
5
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
5
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Fair points,
But for some reason, I'd prefer not to use such a method, myself.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Lemming
Fair points,
But for some reason, I'd prefer not to use such a method, myself.
that's the genius of the proposal

it is 100% OPTIONAL

just like the current "block" feature

i don't use the current "block" feature myself - but i understand that it is useful to those who are easily offended
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@3RU7AL
you are the king of the "block" function

this is basically an enhancement to the current "block" function

full account bans could still be implemented - but they would be much less common and much less urgent

AND this would completely automate the current "restraining order" system
Do you know what ad hominem actually is?

This argument is complete ad hominem because of what you tried to dodge with the personal jibe.

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. 

Also, what you suggested included this:

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
which you are trying to pass off as something else.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@3RU7AL
that's the genius of the proposal

it is 100% OPTIONAL

just like the current "block" feature
It is not optional to be a victim of this;

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
They could silence you overnight and you wouldn't know until you felt so ignored.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@RationalMadman
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.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@RationalMadman
They could silence you overnight and you wouldn't know until you felt so ignored.
i'm sure there could be some notification process to inform those affected

something like perhaps "YOU'VE BEEN BLOCKED BY RATIONALMADMAN"

or "YOU'VE BEEN BLOCKED BY THE MODERATIONTEAM"
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@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.
AND,

YOU WILL ALSO NOT BE ABLE TO READ THE ATHEISTS POSTINGS THAT YOU HATE SO MUCH (IF THEY BLOCK YOU)

MUTUAL-INVISIBILITY

in other words - you will not be bothered by atheists anymore - you will only be able to see posts by people you like

it will be like the evil atheists don't even exist
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@RationalMadman
Do you know what ad hominem actually is?

This argument is complete ad hominem because of what you tried to dodge with the personal jibe.
i have made no attempt to "disqualify" you or anything you've said
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@3RU7AL
I'm just finally glad one of the crew finally stood up and is actually making an effort to get what they want. Think of all the atheist members that left the board that will come back. Because the idea of all of you going someplace and having your own space isn't good enough for you, you actually have to be in the religion forum blocking theists. It's one of the most extreme  expressions of bigotry I've ever encountered.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I'm just finally glad one of the crew finally stood up and is actually making an effort to get what they want. Think of all the atheist members that left the board that will come back. Because the idea of all of you going someplace and having your own space isn't good enough for you, you actually have to be in the religion forum blocking theists. It's one of the most extreme  expressions of bigotry I've ever encountered.
i'm not blocking anyone

i'm proposing you should have the option to make all of those annoying atheists disappear from your view at the touch of a button

that way, YOU will never have to suffer the pain of reading another annoying atheist rant ever again
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
To those who bear objections to this proposal, I ask that they explain their objection as well as the reasons for it. It may also be useful if you make it a bit more clear your understanding of this proposal.
Bones
Bones's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 968
3
7
9
Bones's avatar
Bones
3
7
9
People about to be cancelled on a debate cite. 
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Vader
If people feel the need to silence members, they should not be on a debate site
I have never blocked anyone and never will, but the current way that blocking works seems pretty pointless. IF I was going to block someone it would be because I didn't want to see their posts, making posts of blocked users invisible to the blocker just sounds like making the block feature actually do something (it currently does nothing).
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@oromagi
@Athias
  • Is this technically feasible?
It should be very easy to implement. It's just a WHERE clause. 

To those who bear objections to this proposal, I ask that they explain their objection as well as the reasons for it. It may also be useful if you make it a bit more clear your understanding of this proposal.
It sounds utterly dysfunctional. I guess depending on how much it's used, but it seems like it's making work in relating to people on this website. This is sitcom shit. "Can you please tell your father..." "Tell him your fucking self."
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,243
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
I'm down, just because it might be funny. 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,171
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
A Zedku for Debateart.


I'm turning Chinese,

I think I'm turning Chinese,

I really think so.

Paraphrasing a song I vaguely remember,

Big Bro's.


Blocking is futile,

And ignorance is bliss.

And over-sensitivity is a modern curse.

Though one would suggest that,

The over-sensitive get their kicks 

From being over-sensitive.

In today's Nanny State Western World,

Over-sensitivity is power.


OOOH I'm soooooo offended by that.

So ignore it you stupid d**kh**d.

And stop f**king whinging.


Just expressing,

A personal opinion.

If you feel that this is aimed at you,

Then,

You're far too sensitive.

So Man up,

Or Woman up,

Or gender neutral,

Or what the f**k.