(Apologies for extreme length.)
Dear Ed,
Dead Badger said this elsewhere, and I think it’s true:
Having read all now-19 pages of the Pit rules have been revised thread, especially this part:
… I’ve compiled a Reader’s Digest for you of things said there, things you haven’t responded to or acknowledged, that I think are worth your attention. As Robin Goodfellow said:
These arguments are along these three lines, and I very much hope you will hear them this time:[ol]
[li]Rule #2 will not kill the Pit, but it will hurt it. Some of the “abuse” (at least as you seem to be defining it on the fly) is necessary and a force for good. Yes, there are few existing Pit rants that would be off-limits now, but some of those are priceless.[/li].
[li]We think the Pit wasn’t broken and didn’t need to be fixed. We need to see examples of the problem threads that motivated you, and an explanation of why modding with the “Don’t be a jerk” rule wouldn’t have been enough.[/li].
[li]Even if Rule #2 turns out to be absolutely necessary and hurts not a thing, please be aware of what you’re losing because of the *way *you’re enacting it.[/li][/ol]
Arguments for “abuse” in the Pit
… the Telemarketer Thread is one of the best examples of our environment and culture with respect to the Pit.
Cervaise called another poster a cunt, one of many apposite and necessary insults hurled at the dimwitted parasite in that masterpiece of rage. Using that one biting rhetorical tool in tandem with other similar words of scorn, derision, and invective, he crafted himself the single most memorable rant on the Dope, and also one of the best rants I’ve ever read on the internet at large. It was insulting. It was abusive. It was beautiful. …
… That’s kind of why I liked the Pit actually—I didn’t really fall under the new rules as a poster in there, but I loved to read it for those little turns of phrases and insults that would backfire onto the poster. It was intelligent and it was quite witty—anyone can say FU, it takes a better man to take someone else’s FU and turn it against themselves. That’s why I liked the old Pit, not for all the *unting *unts supposedly spewed forth by everyone. Sure juvenile humor may be just that, but the Pit was filled with plenty of people who weren’t just that, and were able to take something as silly as juvenile humor and turn a phrase so well that it became something more. Plus, I do admit one of my favorite lines of all time that I love to see in the Pit is Cervaise’s “Fuck You, You Fucking Troll”. It’s simple, sophomoric perhaps, but it works so well sometimes. Because it’s not like he’s going around calling everyone that. When it’s called out, you know you’ve just seem someone get dissected with a crude giant Bowie knife but in the hands of Cervaise, he wields it like a scalpel. And it’s truly a joy to see a master at work then. That’s half of the reason I dislike the new rules, because it DOES diminish the entertaining quality that the Pit had.…
… here’s why I like people to have the full range of emotion in the Pit. It’s so that posters who are admittedly lazy in their arguments can be mocked to the full extent so that they either increase the level of their discourse or they get out. For me, that dynamic serves as a self-policing which increases the level of play in the Pit, not decreases it.
Cite? or: Please show us what you think was broken
…Ed, I’m a paying customer—how will this policy change improve my experience with the SDMB? If it will not improve my experience with the SDMB, which customers’ experience will it improve? If it would help, please assume that I am fucking retarded and provide some examples.
And a couple related questions:
[ul]
[li]What metrics did you use to determine that the rule changes were necessary?[/li]
[li]What metrics will you use to determine whether the rule changes are beneficial? (If your boss says “Prove to me that the change was for the better”, how will you do so?) …[/li][/ul]
There have been a lot of references to supposedly awful exchanges that have taken place, but I’ve yet to see a concrete example. I think it would be helpful for people to understand the need for a new rule if someone could dig up a few links that highlight the behavior some feel is unacceptable.
As someone else suggested, I’d love to know more about what threads prompted all of this. I may not keep up with every single Pit thread, but this really seemed to come out of nowhere. If the outbreaks you describe happen “fairly rarely”, it seems like they would be easier to deal with piecemeal than to make a new, blanket, wildly unpopular rule. … we don’t really even know what the impetus was behind it.
I think you had room to do what you say you want to do under the old rules. In the rare cases where things became just abuse rather than heated disagreement, people could be told to knock it off. Those who failed to take the hint could go. The new rule is opaque at best, incoherent um, already. …
… An obvious question comes to mind, if most people won’t notice the difference then why change the rules in the first place?
…This is not the first time you have asserted that you are trying to regulate something that was not really a large problem anyway.
If you had said “From now on, “goose tatooing” is forbidden. There will be NO references to, instructions on, or links to other websites involving the subject of goose tatooing.” Most posters would be asking “WTF? When was this a problem?”. …
I don’t think that it is unnatural for people to try to understand the reasoning behind what may be a “new” rule (or at least a return to enforcement of a previously unenforced standard). This understanding may make it easier (on a practical level, not an emotional one) to comply more fully with your wishes.
… This is not a twelve-page thread of people who are angry because they want to call each other names. This is a twelve-page thread of people who are angry because you have removed the assumption that we are adults and will act as such (with occasional intervention from the mods). The new rules make several insulting presumptions based on no evidence. Show me where the Dopers have been behaving so badly that we need a rule change. Show me why “don’t be a jerk” doesn’t cover these instances. Your intentions are fine, it’s your implementation that’s high-handed, unnecessary, and insulting. Your condescension is only partly in words like “relax.” It is most evident in your refusal to hear what the vast majority are saying.
None of us needs to swear to make a point. That’s a red herring. We are endlessly creative and can find other ways to let off steam verbally if necessary. But you have not yet explained why you think it’s necessary other than some vague feeling of unease which you cannot or will not articulate.
… There was already a rule in place that dealt with the Rule 2 problem you see Ed. All you or a mod had to do was say “PosterX what you just said about PosterY crosses the ‘Don’t be a jerk’ line, your posting privileges are under discussion” and decide on the proper punishment. (The same thing could have dealt with posts that crossed the abuse of mod line.)
The really sad thing is, some of the posters who are the targets of the worst real, personal, abuse here (the thing you want to stop) have posted in this thread, and they don’t want to be protected by you Ed.
…I’ve read this whole thread and I still don’t understand why rule two was created. Rule two must have been created because the existing ‘don’t be a jerk’ rule and enforcement failed. When was that?…
Ed Zotti, we’re talking to you
… People aren’t just throwing tantrums because they can’t call each other “cunts” any more. And yes, if that’s really what you’re getting from these complaints, Ed, you come across as either condescending, dismissive, or both. It’s the principle. We think that the tone wasn’t that bad before, and we’ve been around for years contributing to the community and consuming the service you provide. If someone got out of line, or if someone was horribly “abusive” in the past, they were dealt with by the person insulted, by the mods, and by everyone else posting to the BBQ Pit thread. We are the community you are trying to raise the tone of… …
… I see this in a slightly different way. … it’s not that the Pit has gotten suddenly unacceptable for civilized folk, it’s that Ed is no longer tolerant of the “ambiance” there. IOW, (IMO) he isn’t enjoying this any more, if he ever did. …
The Boards will go on, of course. So why the brouhaha? Not because you have lost the confidence of the posters, but because you have not had it yet. Maybe that’s an unfair view of your stewardship of these boards, but that’s how it is. In the eyes of the membership, when have you been here aside from the Melin thing and the Tuba thing?
Ed—One of the reasons many of us are reacting so badly to your “relax and leave it to me” attitude is that we simply do not trust your judgement any more.
This whole “rule #2” business is one example of why. But a better example is you warning a poster for violating the rules DAYS before the rules were even announced. (See posts 90 and 92) …
… We’re not allowed to say, “fuck you!” in the Pit anymore—but isn’t that what Ed’s basically said to all of us here?
Ed, I doubt you are reading this but I hope you understand. In the past there has been disagreement, confusion, irratation about some of your actions and from your staff. The anger is not because of those actions. The anger comes from the go fuck yourself attitude directed from the administration towards the posters. Right now you are telling us that these are the rules and we can go fuck ourselves if we don’t like it. Instead how about defending your position. Have your staff comment on it. There is overwhelming opposition to this move. More than I have seen about anything else. If you feel so strongly about it, answer all the questions. …
… Yeah, you (TPTB) knew. The vocal majority of this board responds very poorly to top down change with no warning or explanation. But you (TPTB) went ahead and did it again anyway.
If there had been an announcement that TPTB think that there’s a problem in the Pit and think some changes need to be made. Here are the reasons we want to make the changes and these are the changes we propose. Let’s discuss it before we make any changes. This thread wouldn’t exist.
Would it have gone smoothly, of course not, but you would have seen that the vast majority of posters, really interested in this, didn’t have any problems with most of what you wanted to change. …