***Discussion of and proposal of revamped moderation policy ***

Author: PREZ-HILTON

Posts

Total: 79
#31
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,591
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I agree with your proposal. 
George Washington wrote out a copy of the 110 Rules of Civility in his school book when he was about 14-years old. 
These maxims originated in the late sixteenth century in France and were popularly circulated during Washington's time.

Topic's author
#32
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@FLRW
Added to my reading list. 
#33
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,164
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I don't know man, calling people idiots and morons completely without provocation doesn't really require any interpretation or policy changes to be interpreted as personal attacks. Pretty blatant willful and obvious.
Topic's author
#34
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
I'll see what I can do. 
Topic's author
#35
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
I have reread this 100 times. It really is very difficult to use the linked current policy https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/rules


To crack down on personal attacks. The language around it almost makes it sound like some personal attacks will be tolerated. 


If I was in their shoes I would interpret that language to mean a strong response to some of the stuff you mentioned they are what you can refer to as lawful neutral or lawful good so are very careful about how they act in regards to the written policy. 


This new policy cuffs them in some respects while uncuffing then in respects to their ability to crack down on personal attacks. 
Topic's author
#36
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Here is the wording in the current COC that I think would be used to address personal attacks

Unwarranted systemic vulgarity and invectives, which may include off topic personal attacks and/or hate speech, are subject to disciplinary actions.

I would use it to give warnings to some current members who repeatedly engage in it and start escalating for every repeated attempt.

We also need to make sure these posts get reported otherwise it's possible for the problem to fly under the radar. 

I personally have been failing because I don't report personal attacks against myself. I also avoid threads that I know will be toxic unless it is just a drive by post. I will see if we can get some reports in for repeat offenders. 
#37
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@sadolite
Hey.

Call me just what ever you like Sir.

I will read,

I will smile,

And I will respond.

Offence is created by the offended.

They input light signals, electro-chemically decode them, assess, conclude and decide to play for the sympathy vote.

Deciding to smile is a whole lot easier.


Point of fact.

Poly was by far the most amusing contributor on Dart.


Have a lovely day Sir.


#38
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,164
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Rules are rules like laws are laws. If they aren't going to be enforced there is no point in having either.
#39
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@sadolite
Very true.

And I suppose it's only right that we protect the sensitive from their sensitivity.
#40
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
I like some, I don't like some. Neither the less, some of these policies could be effective to implement
#41
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
i have to agree with rm on this. even as someone who wasnt banned. and was away for 3 years. things havent changed much. people have to ignore the trolling and disregard for others, because a slap on the wrist only makes trolls angry, a ban would be more effective.

if you want a website devoted to open minded debates and discussions, i suggest cleaning the house and keeping it swept. the forums are the best example of this.
children can go to reddit to troll. Adults discuss and walk away when no agreement can be reached.
respect is needed and idc what philosophy people have, respect is given because that person is a human being and has thoughts and feelings just like you.

thats why i give every atheist a chance to reason with me before i block them and ignore their blasphemies.
Topic's author
#42
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Vader
It's not to late to alter some things before creating a meep. Speak now while you can
#43
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
here is my suggestion. when a person says directly and very clearly that they dont want to talk to someone and asks that person to leave them alone, and that person continues to speak to them. That the person being talked to can tell the moderators to have a RO without group decision or deliberation. This is targetted harassment and websites have been taken down over this very issue.

it helps secure the people intrested in open dialogue from those who do not. And, it will protect the website from being reported to organizations/government agencies/media.

we do not need harassment or a form of verbal rape (ie trying to talk to someone without their consent) and that stricter punishments would be considered for repeat offenders, who, it is clear that they neither care for the person's (they are harassing) wellbeing, nor the openess of dialogue.
#44
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
such measures of clarity can be forum posts and comment sections of debates That have no evidence of pm hypocrisy.

in otherwords. if they say they want them to stop talking to them but the person(s) show evidence that they are talking with that person via pm. The claim of targetted harassment can be negated by mods.

mods arent responsible for communication OUTSIDE of debateart.
Topic's author
#45
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Melcharaz
Doesn't blocking them prevent that. Harassment is also covered under what is being proposed. . if this isn't sufficient give me the language you want used to make sure this is addressed 
#46
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,164
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
No, having your feelings hurt by someone saying something you don't like or challenging what that person has said isn't a personal attack. It in no way violates the rules. This of course if you aren't calling for other people to be killed or harmed , denigrating.  I poses the ability to know the difference, most don't.
#47
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
no. all blocking does is make it where you dont get notified when you are mentioned. they can still openly harass anyone on this website.
harassment doesnt cover it as it ought to. people will still be harassed regardless if notified or not. It is unreasonable to assume that harassment is nullified by such measures and shows ignorance on the part of anyone to assume it solves anything.

the hypothesis of how its suppose to work assumes the person can somehow navigate forums and debate comments and magically never see someone talk about them. its a thought experiment that has no basis in reality as long as a community is sought to be established.

However, that is not the point of my post AT ALL. i am arguing for more freedom to have ro's and swifter response to harrassment IN GENERAL. not withstanding a person be blocked or not.

i promise you this. any strawman attempt to say that the person blocking the harasser is at fault because they "shouldnt read forums or debate comments" will not be recieved kindly and will not pass an inspection of fcc, europol nor FBI harassment standards.
Topic's author
#48
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Melcharaz
i promise you this. any strawman attempt to say that the person blocking the harasser is at fault because they "shouldnt read forums or debate comments" will not be recieved kindly and will not pass an inspection of fcc, europol nor FBI harassment standards
There actual lawyers on the site and I promise you they all will tell you, how silly you are for somehow believing europol will come after the site owner because people feel like they are mentioned too often by people they don't like. 
#49
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
you cant understand what im saying, i may as well speak icelantic to you. you lack understanding and intelligence to understand my concerns. Its somewhat not your fault, many people who reach an extremely negative place in their life have to reach for illogical realities to justify their value.

forget what ive said, it doesnt concern you anyways.

Topic's author
#50
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
I understand what you are saying. You are saying if somebody you dislikes mentions you too often than the FBI will get involved. Very high IQ take by you. You are definitely an expert lawyer. 
#51
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
im flattered you think so highly of me. but i am no lawyer. and flattery wont change the truth of the matter. Debateart wont last much longer. and none of the lawyers that supposedly exist here will fight for it. no money, they wouldnt be able to defend a website they are a member of. conflict of intrests and all that.
i digress though, i dont have anything more to say regarding this. i dont want you attempting to tag or mention me. and i wont tag or mention you wylted, from every post after this one. If you are wise, and take time to think for 15 seconds or so, you will appreciate this and how it relates to my suggestion. farewell, know that i pity you and am praying for you.
#52
Skipper_Sr
Skipper_Sr's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 299
1
2
7
Skipper_Sr's avatar
Skipper_Sr
1
2
7
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Some vocal users who created 5 threads a day might fall into that category
Like you? Ha ha ha
#53
Skipper_Sr
Skipper_Sr's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 299
1
2
7
Skipper_Sr's avatar
Skipper_Sr
1
2
7
-->
@TWS1405_2
Respect for other users

Users must treat other users with respect and refrain from personal attacks, insults, or discriminatory language. We do not tolerate any form of harassment, bullying, or threats of violence. All users are encouraged to engage in productive and respectful debates, even if they disagree with the opinions of others.
Respect is earned, not given. 
PREZ-HILTON is talking about respect as opposed to disrespect 
#54
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@Skipper_Sr
Respect is earned, not given. 
PREZ-HILTON is talking about respect as opposed to disrespect 

Bolded it for you, since you clearly missed it the first time. 
#55
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Could I also suggest:

Doxxing (the posting of personal information of others without their consent) and impersonation (pretending to be someone else) are strictly prohibited on DebateArt.com. This includes impersonating the site owner, moderators, or other users.
Be modified to

Doxxing and threats of Doxxing  (the posting of personal information of others without their consent) and impersonation (pretending to be someone else) are strictly prohibited on DebateArt.com. This includes impersonating the site owner, moderators, or other users.
Simply on the grounds that the threat often means either implying some personal data is available, which in itself can be pretty scary, or makes other people think such personal data reveals bad information about someone.
#56
Elliott
Elliott's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 407
2
2
6
Elliott's avatar
Elliott
2
2
6
Personally I have no objection if someone wants to cast the odd insult about providing it is accompanied by something worth debating, otherwise it is a waste of time.
Topic's author
#57
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
Will alter it to that. I am going to within the next 48 hours see if I can get a meep up with approval of the mod team and add a few other things. 
Topic's author
#58
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Elliott
I agree with you and I think the new COC will be interpreted that way I have discussed the detail of the COC with the mod team as well to make sure everything is practical and is in the spirit of what the site is intended. I think I have another thread up where I differentiate between good and bad insults.

It's expected for things to get heated so we don't want to suffocate people and allow zero release of those frustrations, but you can drive the conversation forward while making some attacks. 

Oromagi is an example of somebody who can usually strike this balance though sometimes he goes into some inappropriate cross thread contamination. Another member who walks this line well is double R

So these individuals allow themselves some emotional releases and insults while still being able to move the conversation forward.
#59
Skipper_Sr
Skipper_Sr's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 299
1
2
7
Skipper_Sr's avatar
Skipper_Sr
1
2
7
-->
@TWS1405_2
Respect is earned, not given. 
PREZ-HILTON is talking about respect as opposed to disrespect 

Bolded it for you, since you clearly missed it the first time. 

I do not understand your point. What are you trying to explain to me?
#60
Skipper_Sr
Skipper_Sr's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 299
1
2
7
Skipper_Sr's avatar
Skipper_Sr
1
2
7
This thread is about what should be allowed to be done and what should be done. 

Not everything is wrong, but not everything is productive

Freedom vs. Abuse of Freedom