Not sure what your question is but I’ll try to answer.
From Aspenglow: The reason YOU did not get a note to desist early on (remember this was over days) is because …
From Puzzlegal: No complaints. She said don’t keep doing what you’re doing. Do this instead.
From What_Exit: Something more than “Don’t report so much.” For context I have been told multiple times when in doubt report. Note Puzzlegal said “Don’t report this unless it turns into a hijack.” That’s a rule I can follow. After what What_Exit told me, I don’t know what I’m allowed to report or even if I’m allowed to report anymore. Will I get suspended if I report a post now for not following mod instructions to stop reporting? IDK. Am I on a quota system not? IDK. Can I report perceived violations of this rule but not that one? IDK.
If you can read what What_Exit wrote to me and translate that into clear unambiguous rules that I can follow re: reporting post then please translate for me
What am I allowed to report?
How often can I report posts?
As a poster I would say there is no answer to those questions. There is no bright line for this. If a post needs reporting than do that. The mods encourage it.
I think what is being asked is that you use better judgement on what requires moderation.
Yeah, if you’re trying to be helpful and the target tells you to re-calibrate, it’s probably a good idea to step back and re-calibrate. That would be helpful.
I feel the same way. If you have an unpopular position in a debate, or just in general, you have to put up with borderline-insulting comments, drive by potshots, multiple bad arguments that would take too long to counter, etc. The majority of these posts don’t cross a line so they’re not worth reporting. And to be clear I don’t think the mods can fix this. They can enforce a certain standard of behaviour, but they can’t change anyone’s underlying attitude, or make everyone debate in good faith. This treatment is the natural result of being in a minority and of crazy politics off the board.
When I came back to the Dope, I accepted that as the price of admission. But I had always felt in the past that the mods were pretty fair, not judging people based on popularity. And we were always assured that everyone got plenty of warning if they were breaking rules, and that no one was banned without having received plenty of chances.
And then I was suspended out of the blue for something that is really not obvious from reading the rules, without having received so much as a mod note on it previously, and for which other posters hadn’t even received a warning. Apparently I was also considered a ‘problematic poster’, which was news to me. I hadn’t been racking up warnings. I had no idea I was under any special scrutiny.
I think it’s pretty justified to feel paranoid in the circumstances.
Being a mod here is obviously a hard and rather thankless task (and in general I would have said they do a good job). But we as ordinary posters don’t see everything they see. If a poster is causing more than a normal number of flags, they don’t know about it unless it results in action. It’s also not obvious how many mod notes is considered a problem - I’ve had a few, I’ve seen other posters get them, I don’t know what the average is or whether mods might be thinking I’ve had too many. I still don’t really know what I did that made a mod treat me as though I was some kind of repeat offender. If mods are thinking a poster is causing problems or on thin ice, I think they should tell that person explicitly, and include what they can do differently, as @puzzlegal did for @Saint_Cad.
We tell that to everyone. We would much rather have too many reports than too few, and I very much hope that this ATMB thread does not discourage anyone from flagging posts.
This is only the second case that I am aware of where we have told someone not to keep reporting posts. This is very much the exception. In all other cases, we want all of you to keep reporting posts, even if you’re not sure if moderation is needed.
Paracelsus far back in the 15th-16th century coined the phrase (paraphrased), “dosis sola facit venenum”, or “the dose makes the poison”. Even a good thing taken to excess can turn bad. That doesn’t stop it from being a good thing when done to a normal extent.
(Alternatively, if you do something bad just once and not again, generally the mods are going to forgive you unless you make it a pattern; so again, the dose makes the poison.)
As for when is it too much? It seems like the mods will let you know, so when they tell you that, listen.
I’ll add, it doesnt matter if you’re a popular or just a troublesome poster.
The notice you get will put you front in peoples minds.
If you are mouthy and post alot it is apparently a clue you are a problem.
I’ve been called the most horrendous names on this board. Things I’ve never heard applied to a person.
It took me a hot minute to understand why.
Well, I still don’t understand why its allowed, even in the pit. I accept it as “just how it is”
Certain posters will fight to the death to preserve their right to bad mouth and use nasty names for people for S&Gs, I guess. I see no other advantage. Except to cause pain.
There are 5 or 6 real bullies. Bonafied internet bullies. They troll this board looking for fights.
Just humans with no other life is how I see them. Picking on people is their funzies.
I just hate it.
I didn’t come here to be beat down.
Me neither. I didn’t come here to be attacked, or to attack other people. I enjoy debating, even though I don’t expect to change anyone’s mind (or to change my own) on anything major. I like to understand what other people really believe, and put my own ideas and arguments to the test. Maybe a real debate where people disagree about something contentious is more work to moderate, IDK? But that’s what Great Debates is supposed to be for.
I muted the whole Pit because I don’t want to deal with the pile-ons - it was harming my mental health. I thought if I didn’t see it, it wouldn’t hurt me. But maybe I was wrong, because the mods still read and post in the Pit; if other posters are talking shit about me and I’m not there to deny it, mods could be influenced by it, at least subconsciously.
I don’t understand why they’d attack you, though. You seem pretty nice and inoffensive. You don’t post much about politics and religion, the usual suspects for causing bad feelings.
She has been attacked for her method of debate. There are those who are popular on this Board do the exact thing as Beck who never get called out for the same thing she does.
This is incorrect as far as the overwhelming main criticism against her. I ordinarily wouldn’t want to have yet another Beck hijack occur but since you’re the OP…
It is one criticism against her. I used that as the example here as to the culture of calling out some users for how they debate while others that use the same technique use the same. Yes there are other complaints against her.
I think if someone is acting in ways that annoy you, inviting 20 different people to personally attack them in the Pit is probably not the best way to get them to change.
Call me naive (many have) but I think most people have good intentions (including the mods here) and are generally sincere, even when they disagree quite radically. Many would be willing to try and change something specific if they were given feedback in a non-hostile way.
