++++Meep for sweeping code of conduct change++++

Author: PREZ-HILTON

Posts

Read-only
Total: 56
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
This is a simple yay or nay vote on the proposed new code of conduct. You can find a copy of the policy here https://www.evernote.com/shard/s645/sh/644d1e17-1ef3-3ef5-f968-542592992d8f/oE3TDdHIibb3PsfMvwM5EpSE0FVNCufDv-upv_hudVvOVqFEskfHk3YAdA


This moderation policy was shown to all the active moderators who have agreed to enforce this code of conduct should it pass the meep process. 

I have accepted nearly every requested adjustment to the meep first in the moderator chat and then in the following thread. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8967-discussion-of-and-proposal-of-revamped-moderation-policy-?page=1

The purpose of this moderation policy is to accomplish the following two goals because the dart community mostly falls into one or both of the following camps and the current moderation policies do not meet the needs of these two camps.

Camp 1- people who would like to make sure that no topic is considered too taboo to discuss in a respectful manner on the site.

Camp 2. Individuals who would like to see more respect amongst community members towards each other. 

This meep will be active for 7 days and the final vote count respected as of 6:30 pm next Tuesday. 

When voting please compare the proposed new COC to the former COC found following this sentence and not towards some idealized perfect policy you have in your head. We want progress not perfection. https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/rules
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 policy for those who don't want to open an Evernote link 

DebateArt.com Moderation Policy

DebateArt.com is committed to promoting an environment where users can engage in open and thoughtful debate on any topic, no matter how controversial or offensive it may be. Our moderation policy is designed to encourage free speech while ensuring that all users are treated with dignity and that our community remains safe and constructive.

Respect for other users

Users must treat other users with reasonable respect, and refrain from personal attacks/insults with the purpose of causing harm to another user. 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.

Constructive debate

Users are encouraged to present well-reasoned arguments and avoid logical fallacies. We do not permit the worst forms of trolling, such as spamming, posting irrelevant or inflammatory content, or engaging in personal attacks. However, we do allow more borderline forms of trolling that are intended to provoke thought or stimulate debate, as long as they are presented in a respectful and thoughtful manner.
No plagiarism or cheatingUsers must write their own arguments and not copy or plagiarize content from other sources. Cheating, such as using multiple accounts or vote manipulation, is strictly prohibited.

Doxxing and impersonation

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.
Extravagant lies, not to be confused with mere context issues, may rise to the level of constituting impersonation.

Renaming of threads or debate titles

Moderators have the right to rename a thread or debate title if it is deemed to be offensive or inappropriate. This includes any title or thread that is harmful or offensive to a particular individual or group.

Reporting violations

Users are encouraged to report any violations of our policies or guidelines to the moderators, who will investigate and take appropriate action. Please include specific details and evidence to help us address the issue quickly and fairly.
Moderator actions

If a user is found to have violated our policies, the moderators may take a range of actions, including issuing warnings, suspending or banning accounts, removing content, or renaming threads or debate titles. Our goal is to maintain a dignified and constructive community for all users, while also promoting free expression and constructive debate.

By using DebateArt.com, you agree to comply with our moderation policy and any updates or changes to it. We reserve the right to modify our policies at any time to ensure the continued safety and integrity of our platform.
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Vote Yay
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
"We do not tolerate any form of harassment, bullying, or threats of violence. "

HAHAHAHAHHAA that's a good one! Also problematic how vague that entire section is but most websites have that section vague except they are least try to stop bullying. I had my flagging removed for reporting bullying not just of myself.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I vote Nay

There a lot of vague areas in this letting mods do very much in a very wrong direction.
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Vote count


Yay 1 (Prez)

Nay 1 (RM)
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 182
Posts: 807
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
Yay
AustinL0926
AustinL0926's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 2,185
3
5
9
AustinL0926's avatar
AustinL0926
3
5
9
Yay

As Wylted said, it's progress, not perfection.
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Vote count


Yay 3 (Prez, sir.lancelot,Austin)

Nay 1 (RM)
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@AustinL0926
it's literally the opposite but you guys aren't realising what's being replaced maybe, as in removed.
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Everything below the COC on that page remains starting with consequences if that's what you mean. 
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
@AustinL0926

Just so  you are both aware and future voters are aware, this entire following text is being deleted and what's in the OP is replacing it:
Basics
  • By using DebateArt.com, you are bound and agree to be bound by this Code of Conduct and the Privacy Policy, as well as any other rules that may be published from time to time. If participating in debates, you are also bound by the Voting Policy.
  • In essence, treat others as you wish to be treated. If someone makes a wholly reasonable request of you, please try to comply.
User Accounts
  • All users must be a minimum of 13 years of age when creating an account, or older to help comply with any local laws pertaining to Internet usage.
  • You may not use hateful, harassing, or obscene language or imagery in your username or avatar.
  • Multi-accounting and any action indistinguishable from it is prohibited. Dispensation may be granted on a case-by-case basis, such as for multiple users within a single residence; but they will have certain restrictions applied (e.g., never voting on each other’s debates).
  • Users are free to transition a new account or back to a former, so long as they demonstrate no exploitative intent, and inform moderators to ensure only one is active.
  • Account bans may be appealed by emailing: [email protected]
Authenticity
  • You may not impersonate individuals, groups, or organizations in a manner that is either intended to or likely to deceive others. Parody accounts are acceptable, so long it is clear that they are parodies and do not parody other site users.
  • Extravagant lies, not to be confused with mere context issues, may rise to the level of constituting impersonation.
  • You may not violate others intellectual property rights.
Harassment
  • Targeted harassment of any member prohibited, as is inciting others to do so at your behest. This includes wishing or hoping that someone and/or their loved ones experiences physical harm.
  • Creating threads to call-out specific users qualifies as targeted harassment, as does obsessive attempts to derail unrelated topics with impertinent grudges. However, criticizing statements within an ongoing discussion, is fair game.
  • Threats of lawsuits are not allowed, and by using this site you agree to waive any rights to file civil suits against fellow site users for any non-criminal actions.
  • If a member politely requests that you leave them alone, do so. Repeated failure to comply, is a clear aggravating factor regarding the content of said posts.
Violence and Criminal Behavior
  • You may not threaten or promote violence against any person or persons, barring hyperbole against public figures (e.g., “all politicians should be shot”). Advocacy in favor of terrorism and/or violent extremism, especially as related to hate groups as generally defined by the SPLC, is likewise prohibited.
  • You may not promote or encourage suicide or self harm.
  • You may not engage in or promote criminal activity.
  • You may not engage in or promote the sexual exploitation of minors.
Safety and Privacy
  • Doxing is strictly forbidden. Without their express permission, you may not post, threaten to post, nor encourage others to post, anyone’s private or identifying information no matter how it was obtained.
  • You may not share any content from private messages, without the consent of the respective authors; or with moderator approval (such as for dispute resolution).
one section left... (char limit)
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Objectionable Content
  • You may not post or link to media that is excessively gory or violent.
  • You may not post or link to pornography or other explicit adult sexual material.
  • You may not engage in commercial advertising anywhere on the site.
  • Spam is prohibited, and any overtly repetitive nonsensical posts are considered spam.
  • Unwarranted systemic vulgarity and invectives, which may include off topic personal attacks and/or hate speech, are subject to disciplinary actions
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Most of that is covered under the new policy if not all of that. I am more concerned about removing some of the stuff you didn't quote. 
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
There is also a portion of the new COC being proposed that if we did overlook something or if circumstances dictate that we made an error by removing a portion of the old COC, we can update the new COC as long as the spirit of the COC remains the same.

That's kind of where community involvement comes in. Just elect people who reflect what you want to see in the COC who will put their foot down and not willingly allow sweeping changes to the new COC that violate the spirit of it.

I can tell you personally I wouldn't expect sweeping changes for a very long time. Maybe minor adjustments here and there for things we overlooked but I ran this by the mods before asking the community what should be modified in it. 

I will also note that in a previous thread RM had the opportunity to show specifically what he would like changed about the new policy so that we he can be comfortable that it is superior to the old one and he offered zero constructive criticism
AustinL0926
AustinL0926's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 2,185
3
5
9
AustinL0926's avatar
AustinL0926
3
5
9
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
You should probably copy in the "objectionable content" clause, btw - that seems to be missing from the new CoC.
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
obviously the staff is untrustworthy to fairly nuance what fairness and harassment are.

people say its good, its good in precept if we operate in a website that has no bias, no favortism and isnt on the verge of shipwreck. but alas, we dont, and i have screenshots that prove 2 of those 3.

NAY
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,169
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
[RationalMadman] Just so  you are both aware and future voters are aware, this entire following text is being deleted and what's in the OP is replacing it:
That was my understanding, and that is an improvement despite the fact that the new one still contains vague language.

Especially "You may not engage in or promote criminal activity." as I said when I first signed up, a ridiculous thing to put on a debate site. What set of laws of what place are used to determine this? "engage in" as if moderators should be the judge and jury for purportedly criminal behavior that has nothing to do with this platform.

All political disagreement is disagreement about proper use of government violence and thus what should constitute criminal behavior. Most nations on Earth today have a history steeped in democratic revolution. That was what would now (absurdly) be defined as "terrorism".

I know that this clause "You may not threaten or promote violence against any person or persons" has not been enforced despite reporting. If the mods aren't willing to enforce a rule it shouldn't be there, why? because they may be willing asymmetrically when they're pissed off at someone. Unequal application of the law is worse than unequal laws.

The only thing that would ever be legally required of this website is the prohibition of the posting of illegal content in the jurisdiction of the servers/corporation.

Thus:

Yay


PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@AustinL0926
The meep has already been created but let me quote one of several relevant parts. While Ii did not use the term "objectionable content" because of the vagueness of it allowing for content being removed for wrong think, I do have these clauses.

Moderators have the right to rename a thread or debate title if it is deemed to be offensive or inappropriate. This includes any title or thread that is harmful or offensive to a particular individual or group.

We do not permit the worst forms of trolling, such as spamming, posting irrelevant or inflammatory content,
Both clauses can serve the same purpose of removing porn, spam and links to websites describing how to create pipe bombs. 
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Vote count


Yay 4 (Prez, sir.lancelot,Austin, Dreamofliberty)

Nay 2 (RM, melcharez)
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,637
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
Yay

Finally a better set of rules for the site. This should at least decrease insults on the site, which now I think are being a bit overused. No new user wants to be called "idiot" if he expresses a different opinion. Is it a debate site or a site filled with insults? Its a debate site. Save insults for YouTube.
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Vote count


Yay 5(Prez, sir.lancelot,Austin, Dreamofliberty, bestkorea)

Nay 2 (RM, melcharez)
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
YES
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
I will count that as a yay because Ii am not pedantic

Yay 6(ramshutu, Prez, sir.lancelot,Austin, Dreamofliberty, bestkorea)

Nay 2 (RM, melcharez
Bella3sp
Bella3sp's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 214
1
4
9
Bella3sp's avatar
Bella3sp
1
4
9
I vote Nay. 

"refrain from personal attacks/insults with the purpose of causing harm to another user. We do not tolerate any form of harassment, bullying, or threats of violence", this is vague. If you can't handle being insulted, why are you here? Welcome to the real world, folks. I just can't imagine some of the users who would suffer from this.

Let me clarify one restriction. I know most of Debateart doesn't engage in rap battles that diss one another, but its still something others may want to try. With these rules, dissing another with personal attacks would be considered 'wrong'. Unless there is a modification with this, it restricts engaging in rap battles freely. 

As for more access for moderators, I don't know. I can't say I trust any of the moderators, i've talked little with only one moderator. It's not that they are or aren't doing a good job or aren't worth trusting, but how would I know? Further down the line, I will. But as of right now, like said, I don't know.
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 4,820
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I’ll vote yay.

I think it’s worth overhauling moderation policy in some ways and I’ve seen a lot of progress and community interaction with these potential changes. As for whether this gives moderation more power or access, honestly, I don’t see how that’s the case. Mod discretion has always been integral to the existing policy, and if the goal here is to restrict how we can act in meaningful ways, then changes can be made if they get enough support. This is a good start that can yield other changes.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I wonder if Ramshutu will remember that he voted yes on this when he next insults me.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,169
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Bella3sp
As for more access for moderators, I don't know. I can't say I trust any of the moderators, i've talked little with only one moderator. It's not that they are or aren't doing a good job or aren't worth trusting, but how would I know? Further down the line, I will. But as of right now, like said, I don't know.
As some people are learning in the real world the hard way, there is no set of rules that can't be warped by a sufficiently dishonest judge (or mod). You have no choice but to trust them regardless, the reason to put the rules in precise language is so abuse is obvious and demonstrable.

The part you quoted is indeed vague, but so was the previous CoC. This has less basis that can be used to arbitrarily justify a ban.
Bella3sp
Bella3sp's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 214
1
4
9
Bella3sp's avatar
Bella3sp
1
4
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
As some people are learning in the real world the hard way, there is no set of rules that can't be warped by a sufficiently dishonest judge (or mod). You have no choice but to trust them regardless, the reason to put the rules in precise language is so abuse is obvious and demonstrable.
Incorrect. Theres a misconception between trust and hope. I don't have to trust the mods, I don't have to trust they are doing the right job. I can hope they are but it doesn't mean I trust them. Honestly, as of right now, I don't trust anyone here. This also applies for voters, you're vote can be against someone with the better argument but its still valid. As long as it is an  explained vote. That right there can show biased votes can be placed without worry or technical violation. No, I don't trust the mod's judgment until I see something worthy to be trusted. This isn't meant to be an understatement for the mod's. Just until they've proved their 'good judgement' to me, I can't say I trust them, their judgement. But then again, our opinions differ. I could think something violates and they may not, vise versa. 

The part you quoted is indeed vague, but so was the previous CoC. This has less basis that can be used to arbitrarily justify a ban.
What do you mean by "this"? The under-development possible MEEP or the current one? 

If anything, the current CoC is better. I won't get called out for 'hurting someones feelings'. Could you imagine the amount of debaters who could possibly get affected? Thus, this one feels more vague depending on what parts you pull out.
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Bella3sp
Let me clarify one restriction. I know most of Debateart doesn't engage in rap battles that diss one another, but its still something others may want to try. With these rules, dissing another with personal attacks would be considered 'wrong'. Unless there is a modification with this, it restricts engaging in rap battles freely.
The debate voting rules cover that rap battles are allowed and considered troll debates. This policy will still permit rap battles and the other COC also could be interpreted to ban them if not taken in the full context of voting rules etc. I just want to clarify so you can feel comfortable making rap battles should this pass, if you are inclined to do so