Question for Moderators

AdHoc · Post by **AdHoc** » Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:39 am

Hypothetically, what would happen if a person on this forum posted disrespectful comments about a person's dog?

Philbert · Post by **Philbert** » Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:35 am

Complete deletion is a bit harsh if the poster hasn't got a back-up copy.

Poster's problem.

I suggest it is deleted from view but PMed back with the advice to fix it.

More work for the mods.

In most cases it only means editing 'Your stoopid' into 'I think if people re-examine the evidence the contrary stance is more readily justifiable.'

Edit before posting.

Please understand, I'm not that worried about manners myself, but the mods are, and it's their forum so they have that right.

My proposal would both save the mods time, and advance their goals. If posters know that a personal attack will equal their post going in the trash, they'll eventually stop writing those personal attacks, meaning less work for the mods.

None of us have a right to post here. We should think of ourselves as guest columnists. Just like in any other publication, some guest columns are accepted and printed, while others are not.

keithprosser3 · Post by **keithprosser3** » Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:46 am

Poster's problem.

Of course you're right. But if people find their 200 line posts getting deleted for a minor infraction they won't reform - they will leave.

More work for the mods.

PMing a copy of naughty post is precisely the sort of automated action computers are supposed to be good at. Alas, we have to adapt to them, not them to us.

Philbert · Post by **Philbert** » Sun Oct 06, 2013 6:57 am

Of course you're right. But if people find their 200 line posts getting deleted for a minor infraction they won't reform - they will leave.

I'm sure you'd be right in a number of cases.

What this fails to take in account are all the posters who leave or never join because this forum, like all others using the same publishing model, tends to contain quite a bit of junk.

So my argument is, either way you go somebody's not going to like it and will leave.

Let's say half the forum leaves due to the policy I've suggested, and the other half stays and raises their game.

How's that strike you?

keithprosser3 · Post by **keithprosser3** » Sun Oct 06, 2013 11:51 am

Before I answer that, are you in the half that goes or stays?

AdHoc · Post by **AdHoc** » Sun Oct 06, 2013 12:09 pm

otseng wrote: There is no rule that dogs must be respected. But, there is the general rule that posters must be respectful and civil. This would apply to any area of discussion.

In terms of respecting Jesus Christ, it depends on the circumstance. Do you have a particular post that you have in mind?

Is it respectful to say a person is a joke? Is it respectful to say an educated person is illiterate?

If someone created a thread titled "AdHoc is a joke" what would happen to that thread? Would it be allowed to persist?

AdHoc · Post by **AdHoc** » Sun Oct 06, 2013 12:14 pm

keithprosser3 wrote:
Hypothetically, what would happen if a person on this forum posted disrespectful comments about a person's dog?
I don't think a person even has a dog.

You know that's a good point... There's a strong argument to be made that they have us.

We feed them, bathe them, open doors for them, take them for walks... I think we've been dreaming that they belong to us.

We're basically their personal slaves. Be right back my master er...my dog is hungry.

AdHoc · Post by **AdHoc** » Sun Oct 06, 2013 12:19 pm

Philbert wrote: As a dog myself, I will now bark noisily.....

Imho, there's a bit too much worry about respect on the forum. Members might be encouraged to take responsibility for the management of their own emotional states....

Imho, there's a bit too little concern about content quality.

I suggest the mods set up one little section of the forum where they pre-approve all posts, and set a higher standard for both manners AND content quality. This one little section of the forum would serve as a live example of what the mods hope the whole forum might be like.

As for manners, another idea is....

Instead of putting up those little mod notices scolding members about their manners, why not simply delete any post which contains personal attack statements the mods find to be objectionable. This would seem to be more persuasive with posters than the little lectures.

Great point. I have only officially reported one post and I doubt I will report another because the offensive post was highlighted and repeated in the moderator's warning. If it was deleted it would be a more effective deterrent as most of these posters are just trying to get attention.

Philbert · Post by **Philbert** » Sun Oct 06, 2013 7:45 pm

Before I answer that, are you in the half that goes or stays?

I would love to work with an editor I have some trust in. From what I've seen so far, that seems possible here. Not likely, but possible.

keithprosser3 · Post by **keithprosser3** » Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:05 am

You see, if you were in the half that goes, I'd be all for it, whatever it was - I've forgotten now.

Only joking, Philly OM.

I say leave things as they are. That's probably what will happen anyway.
If it was my board (which it isn't and no doubt a good thing too) I'd tell people to grow thicker skins. Sticks and stones and all that, what?

Nickman · Post by **Nickman** » Mon Oct 07, 2013 10:51 am

AdHoc wrote:
Philbert wrote: As a dog myself, I will now bark noisily.....

Imho, there's a bit too much worry about respect on the forum. Members might be encouraged to take responsibility for the management of their own emotional states....

Imho, there's a bit too little concern about content quality.

I suggest the mods set up one little section of the forum where they pre-approve all posts, and set a higher standard for both manners AND content quality. This one little section of the forum would serve as a live example of what the mods hope the whole forum might be like.

As for manners, another idea is....

Instead of putting up those little mod notices scolding members about their manners, why not simply delete any post which contains personal attack statements the mods find to be objectionable. This would seem to be more persuasive with posters than the little lectures.
Great point. I have only officially reported one post and I doubt I will report another because the offensive post was highlighted and repeated in the moderator's warning. If it was deleted it would be a more effective deterrent as most of these posters are just trying to get attention.

Every person I have seen on here (Atheist or Theist) who acts in such bad behavior gets banned. They are given warnings and if they don't comply they get banned. Reporting is the best way to ensure that this forum remains in the quality standard that it already has. You won't find a site like this one elsewhere. This site doesn't have the resources to filter every post. So reporting is the only tool we have to clean up on a daily basis. If you look at the moderator warnings, they are not just focused on bad behavior, they also include fallacious arguments, blanket statements, inability to back up claims, one-liners, ad hom, and many others. So report away when necessary. I have seen over a hundred people banned in the last few years. The mods also do their best to ensure that these banned members don't get back on under a new username. Lastly, two other ways to help the site would be; become a site supporter, and/or become a moderator if possible.

V/R
Nick