You keep saying this, and I'm struggling to understand. How, exactly, is this going to lead down a path of bannings. I know I personally don't have a list of people I want to ban.
Pixy, we haven't banned ANY regular posters that I'm aware of. Like zero bannings. We don't have a warning system or anything in place to ban anyone other than a spambot, really. Someone "accidentally" outed another poster's info and they weren't banned.
That's what I mean by that. The common practice around here has been not to ban and little to no moderation; basically as requested, but even then, bans have never happened.
My point is that if we start banning people - or even one regular poster - we start down the path of more serious and time consuming moderation and I think time and time again, when we've had mod related discussions, the answer has been people want very little moderation.
I've spent all day on this. How much more time consuming do you assume moderating is going to be? Every action, unless it relates to spam or porn, requires a 10 page thread about it. It's just what happens.
ETA: I think we need to move into more of a middle ground where we can ban people, even if they are regular posters, if they are violating the TOS and the agreement of those on the board.
Ok, so I think the vote is disingenuous. Voting if you're a lurker, voting if you're just passing through from another board, voting if you don't actively participate on *this* board shouldn't be counted. This is not a democratic vote where everyone gets to vote.
We are talking about the regulars, on this board, who actively participate and deal with her on a daily basis.
And I'm not just saying this because it's going against what I recommend. Most of the regulars are on the FB page, and there's only 101 people there (give or take a few that aren't active, but those would be replaced by the handful that are active here and not on the fb page). There's something weird going on here.
Like I said, photo IDs. Illegals should not be allowed to vote.
Pixy, we haven't banned ANY regular posters that I'm aware of. Like zero bannings. We don't have a warning system or anything in place to ban anyone other than a spambot, really. Someone "accidentally" outed another poster's info and they weren't banned.
That's what I mean by that. The common practice around here has been not to ban and little to no moderation; basically as requested, but even then, bans have never happened.
My point is that if we start banning people - or even one regular poster - we start down the path of more serious and time consuming moderation and I think time and time again, when we've had mod related discussions, the answer has been people want very little moderation.
I've spent all day on this. How much more time consuming do you assume moderating is going to be? Every action, unless it relates to spam or porn, requires a 10 page thread about it. It's just what happens.
ETA: I think we need to move into more of a middle ground where we can ban people, even if they are regular posters, if they are violating the TOS and the agreement of those on the board.
Time consuming is just a piece of that though, because the trend in these discussions has always fallen pretty heavily on the very little moderation side. I mean, if we need to have a discussion like you mentioned in your ETA, that's fine. I'm not opposed to that, but my general point was that I think the vote about lys is sort of falling along those lines (rejecting more moderation and bannings) which is consistent with these conversations in the past. I personally fall on the side of very little moderation so of course I voted to not ban lys; I just don't think we've seen a need for more stringent requirements and more involved moderation.
No. She said she would leave when we voted to ban her, then her stupid ass showed up a week later under a new name. We found out it was her when someone hovered over her new screen name and found that her log in name was amoosed. And now here she is. Just hanging out like nothing happened.
I don't recall anyone actually paging an admin or mod and asking for her to be banned. It was more like many threads discussing it, and a vote thread.
Aug 15, 2014 at 2:34pm lys said: If Michael Brown's community is overwhelmingly black, then why is not the school board likewise overwhelmingly black.? Are they not putting up candiates? How do you vote white candidates in when you (black) have most of the votes -- unless they are not interested, not registered to vote, or do not get themselves to the polls.
NewOrleans, is this the comment where she perpetuated a racist stereotype? This is the closest thing she said to "Blacks don't vote." Also it seems that this is the comment where you lost your shit. To be honest, though, and I can't believe I'm even defending Lys a little bit, it doesn't read as though she is perpetuating a stereotype. Inflammatory? Very. Racist? Not really. Ban-worthy? Absolutely not.
I couldn't quote right, but there is an underlying bootstraps/their own fault theme that runs under Lys' posts. So Lys saying that white school board members in a predominantly black neighborhood means that black people "are not interested, not registered to vote, or do not get themselves to the polls," is another way to say they are too lazy to vote and therefore run their own school board.
Maybe it's a culmination of all her posts that brings me to that conclusion. But yes, that does read to me as thinly-veiled racist comments about black people being too lazy to vote.
NewOrleans, is this the comment where she perpetuated a racist stereotype? This is the closest thing she said to "Blacks don't vote." Also it seems that this is the comment where you lost your shit. To be honest, though, and I can't believe I'm even defending Lys a little bit, it doesn't read as though she is perpetuating a stereotype. Inflammatory? Very. Racist? Not really. Ban-worthy? Absolutely not.
I couldn't quote right, but there is an underlying bootstraps/their own fault theme that runs under Lys' posts. So Lys saying that white school board members in a predominantly black neighborhood means that black people "are not interested, not registered to vote, or do not get themselves to the polls," which is another way to say they are too lazy to vote and therefore run their own school board.
Maybe it's a culmination of all her posts that brings me to that conclusion. But yes, that does read to me as thinly-veiled racist comments about black people being too lazy to vote.
So.. more moderation, with voting, but some voters don't count. And what are the guidelines for deciding which voters are valid?
I'm actually not ok with it being a voting process either, as it becomes a popularity contest.
For an example - see the stan vs. lhc thing in the other post. There's no way that lhc would ever be voted off the island. (And ftr, I'm not taking a stand on that issue either.)
That's not what I meant, and I added an example, but ok.
No, I saw your example and in that instance yeah it would have been a popularity contest. But the votes don't hold weight anyway because the global mod/admin won't ban, right?
That's not what I meant, and I added an example, but ok.
No, I saw your example and in that instance yeah it would have been a popularity contest. But the votes don't hold weight anyway because the global mod/admin won't ban, right?
Full circle.
We're back to no one not wanting to do anything because they don't want to piss people off.
As a mod, I think sometimes you do have to piss people off. An example of that is whoever deleted the double dick pic off ML. Although at that point I think proboards had been notified and stepped in (my memory may be fuzzy, but there's been other instances where that happened). We shouldn't be governed by proboards either. We should be able to take care of our own shit.
No, I saw your example and in that instance yeah it would have been a popularity contest. But the votes don't hold weight anyway because the global mod/admin won't ban, right?
Full circle.
We're back to no one not wanting to do anything because they don't want to piss people off.
As a mod, I think sometimes you do have to piss people off. An example of that is whoever deleted the double dick pic off ML. Although at that point I think proboards had been notified and stepped in (my memory may be fuzzy, but there's been other instances where that happened). We shouldn't be governed by proboards either. We should be able to take care of our own shit.
But that's the thing. Not all of us have issues with how the mods are handling this. They are doing what they think is the right thing. This time you're in the group that's pissed off. Next time it might be me.
Lys: What happened in Carthage MO is another example of Obama's failed economic policies. Amy wouldn't have had to leave if Obama's policies supported good jobs for out of work writers. And Benghazi.
We're back to no one not wanting to do anything because they don't want to piss people off.
As a mod, I think sometimes you do have to piss people off. An example of that is whoever deleted the double dick pic off ML. Although at that point I think proboards had been notified and stepped in (my memory may be fuzzy, but there's been other instances where that happened). We shouldn't be governed by proboards either. We should be able to take care of our own shit.
But who gets to decide what "taking care of this" means, if you don't want a vote (or call into question the validity of a vote when it doesn't go your way)?
Are you really saying the the board mod just gets to make unilateral decisions on banning?
I do call into question the validity of the vote, and not just because it didn't go my way. There have been other "whole board" votes that I've posted publicly wondering where the hell all these people are coming from. And yet, when it comes to specific board issues, such as should we give to a charity, there were all of 50ish votes. ETA: I looked 70ish votes
Your mods are mods for a reason. Do you, or do you not, trust their judgement? That's what it boils down to. If you don't, then why have mods at all?
I did jump into a decision about banning lys, yes. From past conversations and the definition of what a troll is, that is what I based my decision on. I was wrong and I can admit that.
No, I saw your example and in that instance yeah it would have been a popularity contest. But the votes don't hold weight anyway because the global mod/admin won't ban, right?
Full circle.
We're back to no one not wanting to do anything because they don't want to piss people off.
As a mod, I think sometimes you do have to piss people off. An example of that is whoever deleted the double dick pic off ML. Although at that point I think proboards had been notified and stepped in (my memory may be fuzzy, but there's been other instances where that happened). We shouldn't be governed by proboards either. We should be able to take care of our own shit.
I certainly don't give a shit about pissing anyone off. I don't want Lys banned because I don't think her posts are ban-worthy. I've read the TOS and I still don't think her behavior fits the criteria.
The boards are ultimately governed by Proboards because they host the forum. Whether or not someone needs to go tattle to Proboards for something that we should be able to handle on our own, well that's a different story.
EllieArroway and y4m not banning people members want banned, well, isn't that what their positions require of them to make a judgment call on? I'm anti-ban in all but the most extreme circumstances (spamming, doxing, and obvious violation of PB TOS.)
@elliearroway and y4m not banning people members want banned, well, isn't that what their positions require of them to make a judgment call on? I'm anti-ban in all but the most extreme circumstances (spamming, doxing, and obvious violation of PB TOS.)
It gets a wee bit tricky there, as was brought up in the other post. All other mods were elected. The two with the most power were not.
No, I saw your example and in that instance yeah it would have been a popularity contest. But the votes don't hold weight anyway because the global mod/admin won't ban, right?
Full circle.
We're back to no one not wanting to do anything because they don't want to piss people off.
As a mod, I think sometimes you do have to piss people off... We should be able to take care of our own shit.
Who is we? You? This poll seems to indicate that the numbers aren't behind your ban charge here.
We're back to no one not wanting to do anything because they don't want to piss people off.
As a mod, I think sometimes you do have to piss people off. An example of that is whoever deleted the double dick pic off ML. Although at that point I think proboards had been notified and stepped in (my memory may be fuzzy, but there's been other instances where that happened). We shouldn't be governed by proboards either. We should be able to take care of our own shit.
@elliearroway and y4m not banning people members want banned, well, isn't that what their positions require of them to make a judgment call on? I'm anti-ban in all but the most extreme circumstances (spamming, doxing, and obvious violation of PB TOS.)
It gets a wee bit tricky there, as was brought up in the other post. All other mods were elected. The two with the most power were not.
Has there been discussion among the mods to for ellie and y4m to step down and call for nominations/votes for those positions?