Discussion thread for possible FP/moderation changes to ILX

The ILX site administration and moderation team (currently stet, emil.y, MattDC, El Tomboto, WmC) have been discussing possible changes in the Flag Post threshold that result in temporary site bans.

The FP system exists because it’s a good and important thing for all ILXors, not just the mods, to have input in what the community standards of discourse are, and how those standards are to be enforced. ILX has fewer regular posters than it did when the mark of 50 FPs/6 month/30 day ban was first established. We now regularly have situations where obnoxious and trollish behavior racks up a significant number of FPs in a relatively short time, but never quite reaching the ban threshold of 50.

The mods have been kicking around the idea of adding other FP thresholds, like 20 FPs within 30 days resulting in a 14-day ban; and changing the ban time for 50 FPs/6 months to a 90-day ban.

Moderators also have discretion to act more quickly in exigent circumstances, or to not take action if there seems to be abuse of the FP system.

This thread is for public commentary before any changes are made. Have at it.

A personal request: If you post in this thread, please be clear about what your point is, and refrain from insinuation, obliqueness, snark and weaponized sarcasm. I am very bad at reading those languages.

20 FPs within 30 days resulting in a 14-day ban

You and the other mods are in a better position to gauge this, but 20 seems like a low threshold to me, even for a two-week ban. 25-30 strikes me as more appropriate.

Anyhow, I agree that 50 is a relic of the olden days. A new covenant is long overdue.

If we're talking 20 FPs from 20 unique users within a 30-day stretch, a two-week cooling off period seems totally appropriate. Like you're pretty much courting as much given those circumstances.

Especially since there are only, what, twelve of us left at this point?

RIP 51, I knew thee well

I think the thought behind these suggestions is basically sound. Anything that comes in should be clear as to what the new guidelines are and the person themselves should be notified.

Re the 20 to a two week ban - that doesn’t seem that much for a two week ban, but again given how hard it is to rack it up from 20 unique users in that time period, I think ...I agree with Neanderthal?

Also re discretion and taking a look at the FPs - so for example if I FP pom jokingly for having bad opinions, and say so in a clearly joking context, that would be discounted from his total?

The FP interface doesn’t show context easily, no. Safest not to comedy flag tbh - just say you did and don’t

You and the other mods are in a better position to gauge this, but 20 seems like a low threshold to me, even for a two-week ban. 25-30 strikes me as more appropriate.

Going on current usage, 20 is still kind of a high number. If the change results in massively increased use of FP, we could look at raising it or shortening the ban time. One of the things we're aiming for is for posters who don't use FP much but do feel uncomfortable with posts/modes of discussion to feel like it's worth using the FP button. We're not looking to fill Increased Ban Quotas or anything like that, but there are definitely times when shit is going down on the boards and the FP system is miles away from representing the posters who are unhappy.

xp fair enough, just have to be extra scathing

How much overlap is there between people who get serious FPs and those who get LOL-FPs? But what stet said.

Tsk, tsk, no need to put your money where your mouth is, gyac!

Fwiw I've never jokingly FP'd anyone.

i think I've probably only FPd about 5 or so posts ever? i have no sense of context - how freely are these flags flying around generally?

Whenever a clusterfuck materializes out of the blue, so once every couple of weeks on average?

Not very! There are definitely some posters who FP for the lolz, but as almost nobody gets up to 51 unless they're really trying to fuck shit up for everyone, the 'funny' FPs don't make much of an impact.

xp

Another point is that as volunteers who all have our own shit going on in our lives, it can be difficult to make those discretionary mod calls (I had a proper meltdown over the last clusterfuck and in comparison to ones of yore it wasn't even that bad), so changing the FP system in a way that's both fair and effective would make it a lot easier on us. It does need to be as fair as we can possibly make it, though.

There are definitely some posters who FP for the lolz

it is/was a time honored tradition to FP posters whenever they ask what their FP (SB) total is ...

FWIW people have been using the FP function significantly more over the past couple of months, which I'm taking as a clear signal coming from the community that they aren't happy with some aspects of the board, and even then there are only a tiny number of posters who would have exceeded the 20-in-a-month threshold or would be in any danger of doing so, and this is a particularly fractious time for obvious reasons. The overwhelming majority of posters here have barely racked up two or three.

I'm open to a different threshold if enough people feel strongly about that, and I'd also advocate resetting everyone's FP count back to zero before making any changes, fwiw.

I'm also in favour of a much more transparent warning system, privately letting people know when they are approaching the threshold - and perhaps letting people know which specific posts they've been FP'ed for (although obviously not who has flagged them).

perhaps letting people know which specific posts

yes, the policy against this makes no sense

would be funny for each post to have a running FP count next to it. but the system would alas last half a day

maybe if it only worked for your own posts though...hard to code perhaps

^ that post -- running FP count = 1

The proposed 20-30-14 system sounds reasonable to me, as does the shorter 51'd ban period. If y'all are nervous about it, why don't we don't an, idk, 6-month trial run?

I don't think any of the mods are nervous about it, just want to be transparent and open to comment and dissent. The proposed change to 51 FPs is to make the ban longer, not shorter.

20 seems low to me, but maybe a mod who sees the numbers could speak to what the actual numbers look like in terms of "problematic" posters / posts? Basically wondering why you chose 20 as opposed to 25 or 30

I'm also in favour of a much more transparent warning system, privately letting people know when they are approaching the threshold - and perhaps letting people know which specific posts they've been FP'ed for (although obviously not who has flagged them).

I think this is the most reasonable and sensible suggestion posted on the thread. I keep asking for more transparency, for clearer explanations of *what*, exactly, people are being censured for. It is not always clear at all, the public threads of debating people's sins are clearly an invitation for badness - and yet punishing people seemingly arbitrarily without telling them what they're being punished for does not change their behaviour for the better - it just makes them resentful.

I would also suggest that perhaps some imagination is required, to think of ways to head off, or defuse situations *before* they escalate into requiring a site ban?

Maybe some judicious use of individual threadbans if FPs are racking up on one specific thread? Granted, that may lead some posters to just take their clusterfuck elsewhere, but it might defuse a situation where there is an obvious aggressor, or even just a person who really needs to go and take a walk around the block.

As discussed before, greater use of yellow cards - and also, the use of *private* communications from mods (we've seen how one mod in particular, Tombot, has made things worse, and ended up escalating clusterfucks through overly *public* moderation. A private note saying "you're racking up quite a few FPs, take a break" would be a lot better than something that looks like a public dressing down.

Would it be at all possible as a feature request, to ask for *private* mod request threads? I am, to this day, still nervous about making moderation requests in the "open", due to the repeated habit of (now thankfully banned) posters piling onto me the moment I made a mod request. The very public nature of moderation requests can be quite offputting. To create a way of making a mod board only thread readable only by the moderation requester and the mods might make it clearer when immediate attention is required, than FP-ing and hoping for the best? (Also, the idea of a "mods plus user only" thread might be better for those mod conversations described above - telling the user what they are being asked to stop, in a way that is not public and open to rubbernecking and moderation clusterfucks - and also giving the user a chance to explain what they think is going on, if they think there is something else going on?)

Are we going to a poll once various options are on the table?

And yes, once whatever is agreed is implemented we could have a trial period.

There are six or seven posters who have picked up more than 20 over a period of six months and half of those wouldn't fall foul of a 30 days rule because they are largely spread out over a longer period of time. Only one poster is over 40.

The types of post that attract flags would be more enlightening - if I can get the data in a reasonable format I might try and break that down in more detail.

thanks Matt!

That would be helpful indeed.

i'm excited to see a new taxonomy of ilx posts

well, you've got yr classic double-down
and of course, image bombing, spamming threads
then there's yr straight up shit post

Can yellow cards be turned off now? I remember that they were on a timer of several days and mods didn't have the ability to remove one once it had been handed out. If they still work that way, can we add the ability for mods to turn them off?

Stet is working on the threadban function, which I'm not sure has worked in all my time as a mod; I do think it would be one of the most useful items in a mod's toolkit. Private messaging between posters and mods, in both directions, would be great. ILXmail isn't always effective; I sent a poster a message yesterday that they were close to 51, but I have no idea if they received it. I can't be ILXmailed because my login address vanished in an ISP takeover years ago.

More communication from mods to posters along the lines of "your post (X) has received a large number of FPs in a relatively short time; please take this into consideration" would be good. BUT: I think it would create a lot more work for the mods, and there aren't many of us. ILX needs a few more moderators.

xp -- Not sure. Yellow cards have always been a blind spot for me. I've almost never used the function, and always had the sense that they were ineffectual. (based on nothing at all really)

i'm gonna miss FPing bad opinions but on the other hand this sounds pretty reasonable and probably needed

at the moment mods are the only ones with a clear sense of where the boundaries should lie because you see the figures. personally i feel like a shorter ban, a week maybe, would be plenty for a first offence. if the idea is to improve the way people treat others or behave on ilx then some kind of increasing exile for repeat offenders seems like the way to go.

i think there might always be a problem with questions of degree - if the exclusion is based purely on the number of FPs people will always argue that some offences are worse than others and that individual posters' contexts are different. not sure there's a non clusterfucky way to address that

I didn't use yellow cards on this iteration of the board because I couldn't turn them off. Generally speaking, when I needed to use one the point was made and behavior was modified within an hour, but the yellow card couldn't be turned off for something like 3 days. It became overly punitive for my purposes, going from "you are inflaming things right now, chill" to "don't forget how much of a dick you were two days ago".

Only one poster is over 40.

seems doubtful given the makeup of this board

there really should be a "don't forget how much of a dick you were two days ago" option ...

I mean, I know I have needed this reminder on occasion

(no snark, just a light-hearted joke, but I’ll accept any and all fp’s)

xps

lol i was gonna make a joke about imago finally having an fp count that is less than his age

I agree with everything my fellow mods are saying here and especially the following aspects:

- establishing published guidelines in the FAQ to help empower posters and encourage helpful, timely moderation

- resetting the fp balance sheet so nobody gets immediately banned for past sins under the new rules

Things I also agree with but have limited ability to affect:

- need for more mods, especially women and LGBTQ, and other time zones if possible

- need for improved transparency in the fp system, e.g. allowing posters to see their own counts, and possibly which posts are getting flagged (but again, not by whom)

fwiw, i agree with the general direction of the proposed changes; don't have quibbles with the specific fp numbers/time involved

and please also consider me another voice in support of more transparency, like el tomboto just mentioned, also more direct communication lines between mods and posters, like WmC mentioned.

The main problem with the communication thing is we only have access to posters’ ilx email accounts, which in some cases are not their “real” email and may be rarely checked.

I still shouldn’t have handled the silby situation the way I did, not trying to make any more excuses for that.

I mean, he hasn't posted since, so I think you did good work there.

I would also suggest that perhaps some imagination is required, to think of ways to head off, or defuse situations *before* they escalate into requiring a site ban?

This is a good idea, but it's also a good idea for everyone, not just the mods.

I dunno, remember this?

An open letter to ILX & mods re: an alternative to the current system

600 posts of snark and ad hominem and "that never happens" and people doing ~exactly what I said people did, as if to prove my point~ in reply to the most reasonable and well-thought-out suggestion as to how to improve moderation... which was eventually taken up and implemented once a cis male moderator came along and said exactly the same things I said?

We've been through all this before; we'll go through all this again.

Suggest ban has a better ring than flagpost and most of the time I am really sbing in spirit when I fp (only exception was a previously innocuous poster having a wee anti-semitic spree in a world music thread)

OK in a bit I'm going to post a general breakdown of the kinds of things that - based on recent evidence - are actually likely to push people over the limit.

Since the function was renamed from Suggest Ban to Flag Post there's been a marked change in the way in which people use the function and in general they only use it for very specific kinds of post.

There aren't very many of them but they fall into a few broad categories - none of which should be any great surprise to anyone but otherwise we're going to end up with hypotheticals that aren't grounded in people's real life use of the function.

It's also worth reemphasising that the overwhelming majority of posters have zero flagged posts or one or two at most.

(not sure if that was in response to me, Branwell?)

Things that, in general, attract a large number of flags in a short period of time. The posters doing the flagging are often, in large part, people who do not get involved in fights or meta-discussions and just want to quietly make a point.

- Straight-up personal abuse of the "fuck you, epithet" variety (this is the vast majority of it, really)
- Gratuitous use of NSFW images
- Blunt political challops or widespread condescension of the "I alone see what you idiots all refuse to admit" variety + doubling down on it in a way that derails a thread for hours
- Racism or racist trolling (there hasn't been very much of this of this lately but I'm including it for obvious reasons)
- Straight-up or more insidious misogyny, homophobia, transphobia etc (ditto)
- Posts that, in one way or another, refuse to respect or even acknowledge the sensitivities of the posters around them (this includes generalisations about sexual orientation or gender identity, violent imagery, lecturing minorities about race or religion, rape or sexual assault apologism, tone deaf language about mental illness or suicide, casual use of ableist language etc)
- Continuing to do any of the above when you've been asked to stop or furiously asserting the right of other posters to do so
- Skirting any of the above for edgy lols or to hammer home a point

There are of course exceptions, but if you avoid doing any of these you are highly unlikely to hit any kind of threshold, and if you do it's because the community is saying "we don't want this here".

Also:

- Dragging a personal beef out endlessly on a thread or reviving a thread to reheat days-old beef (the latter is unlikely to push anyone over the threshold but the people who hate it seem to really hate it and flag for it often)

"Dragging a personal beef out endlessly on a thread"

It me

Nah you drag it out over several threads iirc

Thanks, Matt. Those all appear to be legitimate uses of the FP button.

LBI - yes, mainly one, but sometimes the calling is strong.

Aren’t you ever bored of or embarrassed by it the way we are?

I mean, he hasn't posted since, so I think you did good work there.

wins is correct

idk ... it was a self-imposed break that they have maintained the self-discipline to continue to self-impose so ... there have been really bad instances where heavy-handed modding was done against a vulnerable, fragile poster whose "bannable behavior" was a result of being a bad place, one in which sympathy and gentleness would have been a better response. Silby's FP count was rampaging righteousness of a crusading white knight variety. Pretty sure ILX has plenty of white knights in waiting ...

Aren’t you ever bored of or embarrassed by it the way we are?

― beef stannin’ (gyac), Friday, 28 August 2020 bookmarkflaglink

I've no shame gyac.

My goal with that post would have been much better accomplished with a terse yellow card.

My idea for robust reform to FP

1) For each flagged post, the author of the flagged post gets a letter in the mail explaining they were FPed, along with a one-sheet job aid for how to avoid FPs im the future.

3) Fifth FP, your account is temporarily suspended and you are forced to watch a 20 minute sensitivity video and pass the quiz at the end

4) 10th FP - Your posts are limited to 10/day

5) 15th FP - All instances of the letter E are removed from any new post

6) 20th FP - All instances of the letter A are removed from any new post

7) 25th FP - Account suspended for 24 hours. You must then go through a 2 hour pre-ban diversion program and complete it to reinstate posting rights.

8) 30th FP - your DN is changed to burt_stanton for all future posts.

9) 35th FP - All vowels are removed from your posts, except for your dn

10) 40th FP - your posting is limited to ILM only

11) 45th FP - your posting is limited to Beatles threads only

12) 51st FP - You receive a commemorative certificate denoting the milestone. You are banned for one year. You must pay a $200 reinstatement fee to rejoin the board afterwards for a 1-Year Probation. The ban goes on your permanent record. Any FPs while you are on probation is a permaban and you will also be kicked out of Big HOOS's hotel

i think it would be better "punishment" to remove popular consonants rather than vowels. A lack of vowels has a certain cachet ... a lack of consonants does not.

Also, I would prefer a restorative justice circle as opposed the diversion program.

your DN is changed to burt_stanton for all future posts.

cruel and unusual punishment!

Not directly related, but how much has number of posters / number of posts dropped over the years, and when did the usership decline start?

probably when the suggest ban flag post pish was introduced

for example, removing all the vowels:

51st FP - Y rcv cmmmrtv crtfct dntng th mlstn. Y r bnnd fr n yr. Y mst py $200 rnsttmnt f t rjn th brd ftrwrds fr 1-Yr Probtn. Th bn gs n yr prmnnt rcrd. ny FPs whl y r n probtn s prmbn nd y wll ls b kckd t f Bg HS's htl

now let's remove the consonants instead:

51 - ou eeie a oeoaie eiiae eoi e ieoe. ou ae ae o oe ea. ou u a a $200 eiaee ee o eoi e oa aea o a 1-ea oaio. e a oe o ou eae eo. Ay ie ou ae o oaio i a eaa a ou i ao e ie ou o i OO' oe

lol

o

re switching flag post back to suggest ban:

this messes up my vanity googling (ftb "bookmark suggest ban") so don't enact unless you hate me

poor mark f ... won't someone think of poor mark f

i've been thinking of the phrase "reheat days-old beef" for hours now

lol me too

Not directly related, but how much has number of posters / number of posts dropped over the years, and when did the usership decline start?

In reader terms it's not actually very different in recent years — we have roughly the same number of monthly unique users (100k) that we did 3 years ago. Lurkers (defined as people who visit the same thread multiple times in a month, or multiple threads, but don't post/sign in) usually are about 10,000 a month. I can't easily access the old stats, but that doesn't seem massively different to what it was before the suggest ban flag post pish came in.

I haven't done the numbers on post volumes though, I'll run some DB queries to figure out numbers there.

That’s a lot more witnesses to my shitposting than I thought.

I've convinced myself 300 of them are people I know from work looking for ways to cancel me out of a job

That's kind of astonishing; in my head, there are about a dozen people here.

is that 10,000 unique IPs or 10,000 impressions

that's users, we do that in impressions in about 25 minutes

fackin hell

surely most of them are just popping by to read darraghmac's "coal bucket" story and then quickly retreat

post volumes, though – big difference there.

Biggest-ever year was 2004, with 1.2m posts
In the period 2005-2012 we averaged around 900k––1m posts per year.
In 2013 that fell to around 700k, and further in 2014 to a new average of around 450k posts a year.

2013 seems to really have been the year to make the difference in post volumes, there's a clear before/after. This year shows a slight uptick vs the last couple but not much.

what happened in 2012-2013? 2012 was the year of Twitter's explosive growth iirc, and it's when mobile browsing got really big, they could be factors. Can't remember the board drama of that year.

when did we switch to requiring registration to post?

I've been pretty good at suppressing unhappy board memories. I kind of hope someone's been keeping notes on the site/history for the last 20+ years; it would be pretty interesting to read and find out what we did. xp

2007 it was on site-wide, iirc xp

I feel like new ILM posters used to show up via Google and that's kinda stopped - y/n?

HOW DARE U TALK SHIT ON THE NEW ZEBRAHEAD, U ARE FUCKER, U R NOTHING BUT A FUCKER

-geoff

I signed up in 2006 or so, drifted, and returned (at a guess) in 2014 via a Twitter link to the amazing ILX Gonna Shine in My Back Door thread and never looked back.

you can never look back

Though I have a feeling I've been flagged a lot (lol), I'm also fine with the proposals outlined above. I do think that knowing when one is approaching a threshold would be good-- we can all be a little overzealous at times, and blinded to how assholish we're being.

Anyway, feel free to flag this, but I really am glad to be able to spend time here, and appreciate the transparency with which this conversation is taking place!

i miss fake Tuomas

requiring registration really killed the random googler influx

i joined the board just to post about how the Darkness didn't sound like Queen since people itt were saying they did

I read way more than I post here and I've learned so much - notionally about music but so much more. It's one of the truly sane places in the world, let alone the internet.

omg i just found my first ever googler post and I used my gov't name. full LJing it

xpost very true. I've plagiarized many things Alfred has written and passed it off as my own thought. novel due out in fall.

This seems to be moving into lulz territory now, but prior to that, it sounds like we’re coming close to a consensus that the proposed changes are OK. We can still hold a poll as xyzzz suggested to be double sure that most posters agree with moving the FP goalposts.

this is obvious, but xyzzz is one of the main reasons we would like to move said goalposts

Let’s not. As above, I support resetting all fp counts to 0 once any change is made.

^ keeping the FP counts in place increases the chances of lulz in the first weeks of new regime though

wouldn’t you like to know your count

Sometimes you wanna go
Where everybody flags your post

And they all hate you the most.
You wanna be where you can see. the jerks are all the same.
You wanna be where everybody knows your display name.

Hi I

HI DERE

Hi I appear to be posting by accident.

there are no accidents. this is all pre-ordained.

you fuckin' Cylon

This seems to be moving into lulz territory now, but prior to that, it sounds like we’re coming close to a consensus that the proposed changes are OK. We can still hold a poll as xyzzz suggested to be double sure that most posters agree with moving the FP goalposts.

― sound of scampo talk to me (El Tomboto), Saturday, 29 August 2020 bookmarkflaglink

this is obvious, but xyzzz is one of the main reasons we would like to move said goalposts

― sleeve, Saturday, 29 August 2020 bookmarkflaglink

A 'troll' who gives the odd good suggestion, it me

Proposed poll options:

- 20 FPs in 30 days = 14 day ban; 50 FPs in 6 months = 90 day ban

- 20 FPs in 30 days = 7 day ban; 50 FPs in 6 months = 90 day ban

- 20 FPs in 30 days = 14 day ban; 50 FPs in 6 months = 30 day ban

- 20 FPs in 30 days = 7 day ban; 50 FPs in 6 months = 30 day ban

- No change (51 FPs in 6 months = 30 day ban)

I'd like to propose a rider to the bill which would bring back forksclovetofu-style comedy modding.

i will support "peace, man" if I can get board mod privileges for ILAFL

I guess I will chime in with my thoughts, fwiw.

Due to the contraction in the number of active participants and slow changes to the character of ILX over the past six or eight years, I'd be fine with alterations to the FP/moderation which lowered the 51 threshold and introduced some well-defined intermediate steps based on warnings and temp bans prior to permabanning. This sounds reasonable to me. Whatever we decide, we still need to be sparing with the ILX equivalent of the death penalty.

As for attempts to convert ILX into a safe space where anyone may enter secure in the knowledge that one will encounter no disturbing instances of racism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, ad hominem attacks, or other similar ugliness, I think that any mechanism capable of ensuring such safety for everyone who opens an ILX thread and reads it would require such profound alterations to ILX that ultimately it would be reduced to a one-topic board. iow, trying to perfect ILX into an ideal society, while society at large is so deeply flawed and morally chaotic will eventually purge it of all but the most fervid moralists and that fervor will continue to narrow participation down to a precious few, as more and more energy is devoted to the finer points of who and how to conduct the purges, and everyone else loses interest and leaves.

Aimless, that strikes me as a rare instance of you being not OTM. The degree to which the community is moving in that direction is the degree to which the community is choosing to move itself in that direction. I think there's still plenty of room for people to slip up and misstep and misspeak even while, as a nebulous whole, we seem to be saying that it's not okay to intentionally overstep certain boundaries for the sake of provocation (or worse). And the mods are all fairly level-headed long-time ILXors who have avoided corruption from the great + heady powers they wield. Enough people have recently commented upon ILX as an oasis of sanity that I'm inclined to think we're on the right track and disinclined to worry about who we might lose because eg they can't sling transphobic pejoratives with impunity.

I think there's still plenty of room for people to slip up and misstep and misspeak even while, as a nebulous whole, we seem to be saying that it's not okay to intentionally overstep certain boundaries for the sake of provocation (or worse).

I agree that this is so.

I was speaking mainly to desires repeatedly expressed by [redacted], whose dissatisfaction with the present state of the community has been stated and restated over a period of more than a decade, and whose apparent objection is that instances of what they define as racism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, ad hominem attacks have not been wholly eradicated from ILX, causing them emotional pain. To the best I can estimate, reforming ILX to this person's standards would require ILX to conform to criteria so demanding and narrowly defined that it would perforce recreate ILX as that person's personal domain.

That sounds like an issue for the individual in question. I think it’s good that this thread exists and we can discuss how we feel about the current system, but I also think of emily’s point above. Modding this place is a voluntary thing for everyone, expectations need to reflect that.

I like those poll options.

Wow, Aimless, you have some pretty bizarre and outlandish fantasies about what you believe other people want.

I am a bizarre and outlandish kind of person, so it comes naturally.

instances of what they define as racism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, ad hominem attacks have not been wholly eradicated from ILX, causing them emotional pain

I mean, this is the case for me (though I don't think that Aimless is referring to me). I hate to see this stuff, and it hurts that a community I've been part of for so long still falls into it, and more frequently than you might imagine. You're right, though, Aimless, that the insidious/covert parts of these can't be moderated in any real way without tyranny, but to me the overt instances of these *should absolutely* be moderated, and I think/hope most board members would agree with that?

agree

I also agree that overt instances are not hard to recognize and they should be dealt with summarily by mods. afaics, overt racism, misogyny, transphobia, ableism and the like are now exceedingly rare on ILX. what I see being called out in recent times are such things as insufficient deference to minority experience or opinions, or uninclusive normative language. These can be corrected, but they're going to happen and they are slips, not micro-aggressions.

Compared to overt racism or misogyny, I see far more garden-variety aggressive name-calling and bullying on ILX, on the order of calling another poster a shitbag or telling them to go fuck themselves. This comes of having such a strong tilt toward male posters and may never get fixed. I do generally FP it when I see it.

they are slips, not micro-aggressions

Unfortunately, these two things aren't mutually exclusive. What may be a slip to the person who says it or the casual viewer can be the hundredth "slip" the person who receives it has seen that week, underscoring how systematic and ingrained such bigotry is. Which is why people blow up. I totally get that, y'know, yelling about it isn't the most productive thing, but when you're faced with a monolith that to other people looks like a pebble, sometimes you just want to scream.

But yeah, moderating such situations is an absolute minefield, for definite.

underscoring how systematic and ingrained such bigotry is.

During a dust storm, you can't keep the dust from seeping into your space. however much you try to seal it out there's going to be some grit between your teeth.

Aimless it sounds like you need to familiarize yourself with the theories behind "intent vs. impact" and realize that impact is what matters

The person making a slip that causes a person to blow up doesn't have to also blow up.

Aimless it sounds like you need to familiarize yourself with the theories behind "intent vs. impact" and realize that impact is what matters

Uh, I came to this conclusion independently, without the aid of theories, based solely on observing people interacting, back in the 1970s.

The point I have been trying to develop and communicate is that even if the impact of perceived 'micro-aggressions' or any one individual's emotional pain is what is weighted as most important and then becomes the controlling factor in moderating ILX, so that those who give pain regardless of intent are soonest banned, will inevitably result in ILX being regulated according to the standards of the most vulnerable to emotional pain, most easily triggered by memories of pain inflicted outside ILX, or most likely to recognize this as a source of power over other ILXors.

In whatever way such a principle is elevated to dominance, it would quickly drive ILX moderation to reflect the pain inflicted upon whoever is the least able to bear the slightest provocation. This would not make that person guilty of some sin for being so sensitive to slight provocations. Most likely it would be because they have suffered some egregious wound. But making the impact upon that person the standard that the whole ILX community must invariably meet would certainly kill ILX.

My own conclusion is that, if the ILX community is to survive in a meaningful form, there must be a community standard that allows some measure of unintended pain to be inflicted without causing serious repercussions to the person who unwittingly causes such pain. I think ILX is doing a decent job in that regard already. I do not want the principle that when "intent vs. impact" are weighed impact is all that matters to be the guiding light for banning or ostracism. Societies do not thrive in catering exclusively to the needs of their most extreme case.

moderating such situations is an absolute minefield, for definite.

emil.y is otm.

[video of masturbating orangutan REDACTED. Thanks for your contribution, burrito - mod]

ah, right on cue.

hey, give burrito a break. it's a Saturday night, they're bored, and under the circumstances what video could be more appropriate to their situation?

Uh, I came to this conclusion independently, without the aid of theories, based solely on observing people interacting, back in the 1970s.

Wait, how are you not in your early twenties?

Poll options:

Theory Reader
Observing people interacting, back in the 1970s.
I grew up in the 80s

just want to say what an incredible job the mods do. i am blissfully unaware of their machinations 99% of the time which feels like a good hit rate for the amount of monitoring and engagement and consideration that’s actually going behind the scenes. it’s quite a privilege for the rest of us.

Seconded.

Quite right.

how are you not in your early twenties?

It is a mystery. Let me know if you find out.

hey now, we're all in early twenties right now

/dad joke

the modding is indeed very good here.

i've had bad modding experiences elsewhere.

the worst being in #metal on DalNet (IRC), where there was a group of American AOPs and Swedish AOPs who went to war and kept removing each others Op access in retaliation.

they were dark times.

I have a question:

Is the board's prevailing opinion that people should be getting banned who aren't? Are these changes being discussed because the current rules are not addressing the behavior they are meant to curtail to the satisfaction of the posters?

i thought it was the opposite (people getting banned for too long for offenses)

there's definitely an element of "people should be getting banned who aren't" - i'm not sure why else you'd drop the threshold from 51 to 30.

i thought it was the opposite (people getting banned for too long for offenses)

― pass the cur's dossier (Neanderthal)

Who do you think was banned for too long?

but there's also an element of people getting banned for too long, too - tomboto was floating a few options with shorter ban lengths, i think

Who do you think was banned for too long?

― Scampos Runamuck (WmC), Sunday, August 30, 2020 2:56 PM bookmarkflaglink

Me, personally? nobody, really. I honestly have no dog in the fight and am fine with what everybody else wants.

I'm just trying to think of somebody we wanted banned that wasn't getting banned in recent memory and drawing blanks. almost everybody who needed to be was banned, either through our FPing, or mods doing a good job of catching it and taking care of it on the spot.

My actual question is "What is spurring the desire to change the banning threshold?" I'm don't feel I understand what problem is being solved, or even if there is a problem other than "people aren't getting banned as much as they used to," which might not actually be a problem.

from OP:

(The mods...) have been discussing possible changes in the Flag Post threshold that result in temporary site bans.

From this I take it that the mods are not particularly focused on permabans, but feel that tempbans should be better regulated by the FP system. I suspect that allowing FPs to drive more of the tempban decision-making would lighten the load on mods, since tempbans more often require moderator intervention.

I am happy for any mod to correct this impression with better information.

I think "we" is not a monolithic entity -- there are definite factions regarding a lot of posters -- we have not had a unifying ban candidate since Raccoon Tanuki

haha, yeah that was kind of like the alien in the watchmen

xp Harsh on Turrican imo

As Matt said upthread "FWIW people have been using the FP function significantly more over the past couple of months", and there has been clear dissatisfaction from ppl that only god-tier posting can get you over the 51 barrier, as the numbers aren't there. Only Fred has managed to antagonise enough ppl, and it took him hours and hours, day after day, to manage it.

My own desire is for, yes, more bannings. I would like time-outs to be triggered by outpourings of crude and content-free verbal violence, just spewing "cunts" and such. They can be short 3-day time-outs, that's fine with me. I've occasionally wished and thought out loud they should be longer, but short is fine.

I have FP'd people who've posted "go fuck yourself" and declined to FP others who've done the same thing, depending on how that "gfy" sits in the poster's larger body of work.

I want an additional FP threshold so it will take a lot of the guesswork away from me in my role as a mod, because I doubt my own guesswork 24/7 and I'm paralyzed by fear of getting it wrong, and find myself not taking any action against actionable posts/posters, then regretting my inaction.

Dan, it's a worthwhile question. I'm not sure that I've got much more than I said upthread, though:

One of the things we're aiming for is for posters who don't use FP much but do feel uncomfortable with posts/modes of discussion to feel like it's worth using the FP button. We're not looking to fill Increased Ban Quotas or anything like that, but there are definitely times when shit is going down on the boards and the FP system is miles away from representing the posters who are unhappy.

I don't know for sure that changing the FP system will have major benefits, so if you think it won't, that's perfectly reasonable imo. Personally, I think it's at least worth trying out.

xp with WmC, who also has good points.

When enough FPs are accumulated it should trigger an automatic seven-day temp ban and a poll featuring the flagged posts, the names of the users who flagged them, and options to either ban permanently or not ban permanently the offending poster while they wait in seven-day purgatory.

During the seven days, message board users would discuss whether or not the offending poster should be banned, explain their rationale, challenge others' opinions, call into question the applicability of precedent, etc. Much dramas and entertainments would unfold. Once the poll has closed and a verdict has been reached, the names of the users who voted and their votes would be disclosed. Users would then have the opportunity to spend many more weeks celebrating or agonizing over the decision while discussing the interpersonal politics among board users and their votes (and hopefully resulting in even more new flagged posts reaching the threshold and resetting the process all over again, much to everyone's bemusement).

This progressive reform approach to the ILX FP/ban moderation mechanism would be fun and entertaining and highly democratic, and once these changes are implemented we can all finally get back to discussing the important things we've been trying to discuss without the bad people stopping us like they have been for years.

is this related to the masturbating orangutan thing ???

Absolutely! Our genomes are 97% identical, after all.

Why do some posters react to reasonable moderation discussion as if they're vying for ILX best dramatic performance? Because the ILXies aren't a real award. Just thought you should know. Save you some time.

Is that what I'm doing? I'm just saying I like the idea of a board deciding collectively on whether or not to oust someone. I'm probably not the only one, either.

Typically/ironically, when I see something that makes me want to FP - I've never FP'd anything - that's usually a sign that I need to take a break myself for a couple of days.

doubt my own guesswork 24/7 and I'm paralyzed by fear of getting it wrong, and find myself not taking any action against actionable posts/posters, then regretting my inaction.

this is enough reason to lower the thresholds imo, ILX moderators do and take enormous amounts of shit for no reward whatsoever except raising their personal stress levels

I missed the consensus being arrived at as I was away but I'd just like to go back to an earlier point Matt made:

this is a particularly fractious time for obvious reasons

Maybe when looking to reduce the threshold for exclusion from the community we should remember everyone and everything is totally fucking fried at the moment. Many of us are both more likely to say the wrong thing and to react badly to someone else doing it.

I support simple and transparent modding if that's what we're trying to fix.

I don't feel like the board is generally getting worse or being overrun by trolls. Excluding generally good people (have you SEEN the rest of the Internet?) from our small and relatively safe space should not be our aim but it's what might come of these new thresholds.

I'm going to start a one week poll with new threshold options on Thursday, one week after the start of this thread; "no change" will be one of the options.

I don't feel like the board is generally getting worse or being overrun by trolls.

I agree with this, but I also think the current FP threshold is insufficient to deal with the trolls we do have.

While I'm absolutely sympathetic to the notion that everyone is currently teetering on the edge (and had the same thought myself re: the increased risibility of late), there have been more than a few occasions over the last six months where things got super heated super quickly and thought it would be good if those involved in the heatedness could have a brief intercessory cooling off period. I'm also absolutely sympathetic to the notion that the mods don't want to have to operate as coolers all the time, so hopefully some minor alterations to the FP system will help alleviate some of that grief.

OK taking a number of these points into account:

- Let's not forget that this place is meant to be enjoyable first and foremost, especially now
- Preventing ILX from becoming like the rest of the internet should always be a central aim for anyone modding this place, and parts of it are becoming a little too like the rest of the internet for comfort
- Totally sympathise with the fact that people are on a hair-trigger right now, but that also accounts for people reading, who probably don't want to be told to go fuck themselves by a stranger on the internet, as much as anything else it's about preventing good posters from just quietly leaving because they've had enough
- This, and I can't stress this enough, isn't and shouldn't be about lowering the threshold to get x posters banned, but about encouraging people to moderate their own behaviour. There are people who are genuinely up to their necks in it and lashing out and people who have lapsed into a mode of default belligerence and it's the latter group who tend to get the higher FP counts
- This is all up to a vote on particular threshold levels, as has been pointed out, if people vote for no change then fair enough

otm, and again if there are people genuinely worried this will damage the board, a trial period and revisiting seems logical to me

Make sure you don't forget to cancel during the 7 day period, that's how they get u

Oh I'm going to do a ton of cancelling during this purge of thought deviants experiment

This could probably do with better polling though, if we end up with four changey options on 18% and no change on 28%, I'd hesitate to claim that no change is the consensus.

I'd read that as Change 72 - No Change 28 and I think the mods would feel comfortable coming to a decision as to what the change should be. But no need to put the cart before the horse.

if you do have a poll, i ask sincerely to please make it very clear/unambiguous and avoid jokes

That's a good goal - do you consider the options in Tom's linked post clear, say (though of course WmC may have other options)?

Discussion thread for possible FP/moderation changes to ILX

Those were what I had in mind.

I'm going to start a one week poll with new threshold options on Thursday, one week after the start of this thread; "no change" will be one of the options.

― Scampos Runamuck (WmC), Tuesday, 1 September 2020 18:48 (one week ago) bookmarkflaglink

Did this happen?

POLL: Proposed FP Threshold Changes

ta

I think in a particularly fractious time, temporary suspensions are good and necessary!

the idea a cooling off period is punitive is weird to me. when you have trust in a community, that trust is enforced and not tested by your peers having you step away and cool off

if I can interrupt my coworkers when they get off the point in a meeting and call things to order with no hurt feelings, I know it’s a constructive work environment and I view social environments no differently tbh

there've definitely been plenty of times I wish someone had stopped me before letting me shoot myself in the foot on this borad. so I definitely agree.

With poll results in and after mod consultation, there will be an additional FP threshold of 20 FPs within 30 days resulting in a 7-day time-out from posting, effective on the Day of Jubilee when stet deletes all FPs from the system, i.e. any day now. User Left's current 30-day ban will be unaffected; they will be unbanned October 31st.

roll the credits

Should have been 14 days, but whatever. Roll on new regime.

please all temp bans to be signalled with the message "u ok hun"

effective on the Day of Jubilee when stet deletes all FPs from the system, i.e. any day now

Is this a subtle cue to deploy our most FP-worthy material before all our sins are washed away (except for Left's)?

Will the language be changed? i.e. will the admin log reflect that these are 7- and 30-day bans and not say "peace, man has been banned permanently"?

It'll probably stay the same and be up to the mod doing the banning to write a note indicating the length of the ban.

If he has the spare time maybe stet can get around to removing the adverb, but he already has about a half dozen changes on his entirely voluntary plate from this

so I only have to create a few more sock puppet accounts and I can unilaterally temp ban people? good to know.

That is correct, mods have zero tools to identify socks and will be powerless to do anything but follow the new guidelines according to the letter and not the spirit. You’re too clever for us.

How many socks are currently going in your estimation?

There are twelve people in the world, the rest are paste

it's just you and me in here, pom

and I'm going to fp you lots

Challenge accepted.

I am he as you are he as you are me
And we are all together

and I'm going to fp you lots

lol

Take your pick:

https://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/FP

I'll take Fountain Pepsi over Fungus Patrol fwiw.

Fungus is among us.

I have been certified as human by captcha

I'll take Fountain Pepsi over Fungus Patrol fwiw.

Depends what you mean by 'earnest'. I know what I meant. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Banned all of u using my accounts Garu G-1 thru Garu G-71

Tom initially found it questionable and asked me if I was a sock but i made him pancakes and he forgot to ask again

so I only have to create a few more sock puppet accounts and I can unilaterally temp ban people? good to know.

― rascal clobber (jim in vancouver), Monday, September 21, 2020 3:35 PM (three hours ago)

if you are going to do this, you should really do this over an extended period of time ... like, you kinda don't want to have "bob in vancouver," "dale in vancouver," "another bob in vancouver," and "the other other bob in vancouver" all show up as new user registrations in the same week.

^ good idea, and also be sure to spread them out geographically. here are some sock suggestion names to help get you started based on what I know of the area from looking at google maps for 45 seconds, and from my research into the most popular male baby names from British Columbia, Canada, 1970: michael in coquitlam, david in squamish, robert in tsawwassen, jason in chilliwack.

cum in burrito

not a single one of those words is a popular canadian baby's name or a british columbian toponym, you inconsequential oaf

bet that one slays at the Chuckle Hut

Get a room you two

yeah I'm just gonna go ahead and uh, get my own if that's cool. Gotta get up early tomorrow. Thanks though.

I assume it's out of the question to change the name to something that actually describes what it does, e.g., "vote to ban"

It used to be called “suggest ban” (or “SB” in the parlance) but people pointed out that the problem was the posts, not the posters, so it was changed, and then it turned out the department of pre-crime wasn’t up to preventing bad posts in real time, so we’re back to how the world works: temporarily suspending people from posting due to bad behavior.

also be sure to spread them out geographically. here are some sock suggestion names to help get you started based on what I know of the area from looking at google maps for 45 seconds, and from my research into the most popular male baby names from British Columbia, Canada, 1970: michael in coquitlam, david in squamish, robert in tsawwassen, jason in chilliwack.

you could also be super sneaky and change up the pattern, like, instead of these, you could go with coquitlammichael23, squamishdave81, tsawwassenbob69, and chilliwackjason420

what happened in 2012-2013? 2012 was the year of Twitter's explosive growth iirc, and it's when mobile browsing got really big, they could be factors. Can't remember the board drama of that year.

― stet, Friday, 28 August 2020 21:13 (three weeks ago) link

ahhh...the kitty pryde thread was around that time...

why did Left get banned? i like his posts lol

but then i also think some ppl deserve to be condescended to sometimes which is apparently fp-able so what do i know. some of my fav ilx posts were condescending

going to assume Left was banned for posting "Dud" in the New Order thread

As mentioned elsewhere, the fastest way to collect FPs is to insult fellow posters with a broad brush, which Fred, Left and gabbneb all demonstrated with aplomb.

Allowing any single poster to veto a temp ban based on “this poster I occasionally skimmed over didn’t seem so bad to me” is how we got here. The new social experiment is “let’s use democratically determined temporary time-outs to see if we can put some brakes on the attrition rate.”

yea im just wondering what he did, i didnt see any insults in his recent posts aside from calling a politician the c-word in a britishers politics thread i dont read

going to assume Left was banned for posting "Dud" in the New Order thread

― ILX’s bad boy (D-40), Tuesday, September 22, 2020 5:42 AM (fifty-two minutes ago)

missed this but i'm guessing left thinks they're fascists because of their name

Left did a "kamala is a cop" post shortly before the ban and it is likely that that did it

I know this is posts VMIC and likely to get me clusterfucked, but...

Get a room you two

― sound of scampo talk to me (El Tomboto), Tuesday, 22 September 2020 03:14

^^^Tombot, can you not do this? Understanding that you are a mod, can you try to avoid framing beefing between posters as 'flirtation'?

I say this as someone who was told repeatedly by mods during the dom-and-jon years, that long-term, overly personal harassment was 'just flirtation' and told to 'get a room' with men who were eventually banned for their behaviour.

If you are going to be a mod, and hold other people to account, maybe you should start by holding yourself to a higher level of account, and think through what subjects you consider 'jokes'?

'Get a room' is a perfectly fine and harmless joke in this context, and I know for a fact Tombot holds himself to a high enough account as a mod to consider his jokes. It's not all about you or what happened 10+ years ago.

It’s great how there’s always a man around, to tell me what ‘jokes’ are!

You're phrase-policing in the worst possible way.

Left did a "kamala is a cop" post shortly before the ban and it is likely that that did it

― despacito ergo sum (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, 22 September 2020 bookmarkflaglink

It was his hatred of popular group "The Beatles" that did it

Didn't he have a go at national treasure Ali G too?

(also do we know Left is a he? apologies if not)

A fun data point is that nearly 8% of all posts Left has ever posted to ILX were flagged. Sorry to disappoint you but none of them were about Ali G.

It's like Fred on steroids

xpost Thus demonstrating that regularly taking reasonable assertions that most people 'round here can hang with and wrapping them in a 'you sheeple (derisive snort)' construction is a pretty efficient way to get the boot.

Left is a poisonous shit and shouldn’t come back

sorry if answered upthread but can mods see who has flagged a post?

^^^Tombot, can you not do this? Understanding that you are a mod, can you try to avoid framing beefing between posters as 'flirtation'?

I say this as someone who was told repeatedly by mods during the dom-and-jon years, that long-term, overly personal harassment was 'just flirtation' and told to 'get a room' with men who were eventually banned for their behaviour.

If you are going to be a mod, and hold other people to account, maybe you should start by holding yourself to a higher level of account, and think through what subjects you consider 'jokes'?

― Masonic Lockdown (Branwell with an N), Tuesday, September 22, 2020 2:23 AM

I'm not Tombot but I am a mod, so I'll say thanks for letting us know that you don't like this, and I promise I won't ever do it in beefs you are involved with. I'm not extending that promise past that.

kinder, yes

ta

I personally thought Tombot's reply was fine, being on receiving end of it.

lol i had no idea left was banned. very incendiary poster, would often start off with a reasonable argument and then push it until it became unreasonable

Tbh I was going to post something similar to "get a room" last night, but then I realised that what I actually meant by that was more like "hey, you guys - do you in fact enjoy this back-and-forth to the extent that you've become friends in beefing, or is this a multi-thread-spanning beef that neither of you enjoy but you've got trapped in?"

would often start off with a reasonable argument and then push it until it became unreasonable

New board description.

(I know I keep saying this, but really, a new board description is long overdue. New board description.)

I think it really rolled into a flirtation with that burrito post on wdyll, which I laughed at

This whole board should get a room. After all, isn't that what we're really here for?

Remember when the board decided meetups would be called FAPs as an acronym for "Fancy A Pint?" while the rest of the Internet decided "fap" would mean... something else?

that was one of the first, weirdest conundrums upon visiting ILX the first few times

Indeed. And it's doubly abstruse when you're North American.

Imagine my disappointment when I turned up at a pub and got a lager shandy rather than a hand shandy

In these trying times, it's either FAP on zoom or get a room.

I think I once tried to get people to call them WABs for Want A Beer but man fetch really didn't happen on that one

Tracer veered so close to a WAP joke there

FAPs and POOs, all over mid-2000s ILX

For 2020, may I propose 'Relax, Enjoy a Cold Hefeweizen, and Rock Out Until Nearly Dawn!'

U

Stet has wiped your FPs, kids. Now please behave or you'll have to go sit on the naughty step.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKqV7DB8Iwg

the webcomic that created the onomatopoeic fap only started a year before ILX, so Tom"s FAP may have been in use first

Afraid to post

fp'd for timidity

FUCK

Left did a "kamala is a cop" post shortly before the ban and it is likely that that did it

― despacito ergo sum (jim in vancouver), Tuesday, September 22, 2020 2:01 AM (eleven hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

This ... seems like a bad reason for someone to get a ban? Lol kamala is a cop. I’ll vote for her but

Left didn't get a ban for that. Left got a ban because 51 ILXors flagged Left posts.

I mean whether it's a bad reason or not is irrelevant, no one FP'd that post.

oh, I'm surprised. was the last left post I saw and at the time I remember thinking "left is flying too close to the sun"

wait lol what is so transgressive about calling Kamala Harris a cop

probably one of the *least* controversial things Left posted tbh

how is it even remotely controversial for anyone to say?

why are we still talking about it?

you got something better to do?

I've got my own album to do

I can't believe Left got banned because of that post he wrote about disliking shiba inu puppies, it just seemed so innocuous?

Left u left 2 soon

much post very ban?

someone set us up the ban

Just a fyi I wasn't unbanned on Sunday as the admin log states -- which was going to be an earlier end to my 7-day ban period (today).

wb

👍

can't wait to see your new approach to ilxing

tbh it's always thrilling when someone gets made more reckless by a tempban, and ramps up the style that rankled people upon their return. whatever doesn't kill me makes my posts stronger!

Stronger but more short lived.

20 is too low a bar for that to really get going xp

That burrito fellow managed it.

tbh it's always thrilling when someone gets made more reckless by a tempban, and ramps up the style that rankled people upon their return. whatever doesn't kill me makes my posts stronger!

― @oneposter (⛰️) (sic), Wednesday, 11 November 2020 bookmarkflaglink

Planning to post as I always do

Welcome back comrade

he’s literally this tweet in action

go ahead. keep screaming "Shut The Fuck Up " at me. it only makes my opinions Worse

— wint (@dril) March 10, 2018

dril deserves a nobel prize in online psychology, rly

I was thinking especially of burrito - became the first casualty of the 20 FP limit after a strong handful of obliquely mocking posts mixed in with the regular ones, has come back at about 90% oblique. is that all you got, coppers?

unperson was banned at roughly the same time as burrito I think, for a edgelord racisty joke iirc. Seems to have learnt his lesson.

(at this point I'm boring myself with this shit)
when we're banning for being 'obliquely mocking' and yellow carding for failing to keep it positive during a fraught election day (fucking seriously wtf mods) there's not a lot of room for people failing to fall in line with the 20 FP-happy 'vaguely left of centre mostly nice incremental change deal with the system you've got blah blah bland' posters
(it me btw)

can you tell I'm not well and shit at articulating myself when I'm not well

failing to keep it positive during a fraught election day (fucking seriously wtf mods)

fwiw I don't think it was the mods who were at fault here. I'd rather milo get warned that people are using the fp system to control the board's mood than him get banned for it. That it's being used that way has changed my mind about this experiment though

I said this elsewhere yesterday but you can see it in that stupid thread that devolved into landlord defending - baiting someone whose views bother you across multiple threads = fine & very tolerable, someone lazily trolling (albeit on a heated post election morning), fp button goes smashy smashy. But yeah I understood you onimo (hope you feel better soon).

gyac I really like you and I don't wanna get into this but reminding people that "all of group x are bad people" generalizations are bullshit isn't "landlord defending" FFS

but hey I hope the next person you know who lets a room to a friend in need gets ripped off by them and has their house trashed, that'll teach them to be a landlord

my actual parents have had bad experiences when renting houses to people, that doesn’t change my view at all because of the wider circumstances I’ve experienced that are so well articulated by plax and others.

But yeah again, no particular beef with you user sleeve, just casually wondering if it’s actually fine and good to revive threads to bait people into arguments with multiple other users? Certainly seems to have gone unremarked so I’m guessing it’s just me. I have to work lol so I’ll just assume that continues to be the case.

yellow carding for failing to keep it positive during a fraught election day (fucking seriously wtf mods)

This was a late-night response to FPs mounting up precisely because I didn't want milo to get banned for not being happy-clappy about the election, not an instruction to feel a different way. I would've done the preferred route of ilxmailing but it was like 3am or something.

Burrito is a troll who does nothing but troll so I'm not sure why you're defending him, particularly.

It does seem like we're getting more people using FPs at the moment (which I think is a good thing for the community), but it's leading to more temp bans than I expected (which I don't necessarily think is a good thing for the community). Obviously there's going to be something of a self-selecting sample of people who are keeping an eye on this thread, but I'd be very interested to know the general feeling about how the new system is working and any changes or improvements that could be made.

One of the side-effects is that tempbans now feel like nbd. I, for one, am ok with that.

I didn’t read that as onimo defending burrito fwiw, but you are generally (and really DJP) otm regarding him.

One of the side-effects is that tempbans now feel like nbd. I, for one, am ok with that.

Let me know what you think when you get banned.

I've somehow managed to avoid that so far, but I'll be sure to report if/when it does.

I was going to say you're not likely to get banned, but who knows now that the pitchfork and flaming torch has been legitimized on ILX?

Tbf ILX has always had a love/hate relationship with the pitchfork.

lots of boomers out here who didn’t grow up getting kicked from forums or irc channels once a week when they got too online. it’s all good and normal

you’re back on the board in no time, lads. just tidy your shelves for a week and bide your time

It does seem like we're getting more people using FPs at the moment (which I think is a good thing for the community)

I wouldn't want to forfeit the option, but why is this a good thing for the community?

Personally the new threshold has facilitated a banning or two I was glad to see, but it also seems like it risks creating a more punitive culture here. There's something satisfying in ganging up for a ban, and it seems like people may be looking for more opportunities to FP when not entirely necessary?

(I voted for no change.)

it’s only punitive if you think posting whatever you like on a message board is a right and not a privilege!

the reward for being a community member in good standing is the ability to post to conversations, is how I think of it

who knows now that the pitchfork and flaming torch has been legitimized on ILX?

lol

It's very funny as a former moderator to watch the tone shift from "the moderators want to stifle all opposing opinions" to "a bunch of posters want to stifle all opposing opinions" without ever landing on "maybe people are trying to tell me I'm acting like a dick"

hahaha

my posts are very good and surely it’s a single person with twenty sockpuppet accounts flagging my posts

^^^ new board description.

i'm definitely an accelerationist when it comes to this stuff. chaos reigns

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMVTOxELjfU

I get the temp ban is getting people to look at their own behaviour but really it's just a week here, a month there...and as I've posted on ilx for 19 years that is unlikely to go anywhere for me.

And, as it isn't for posting the real shitty bigotry or nastiness that is actually the thing that gets you banned on the spot...

It does seem like we're getting more people using FPs at the moment (which I think is a good thing for the community)

I wouldn't want to forfeit the option, but why is this a good thing for the community?

Personally the new threshold has facilitated a banning or two I was glad to see, but it also seems like it risks creating a more punitive culture here. There's something satisfying in ganging up for a ban, and it seems like people may be looking for more opportunities to FP when not entirely necessary?

(I voted for no change.)

― early-Woolf semantic prosody (Hadrian VIII)

Previously there were posts going un-flagged that really should have been dealt with. I tend to keep to threads about music or books or films (I prefer to do my politics in places that are more centred around queer women/NB organisers than angry middle-aged men, sorry all you angry middle-aged men, I enjoy your company for other topics, I swear), so I often only see things that are flagged up. There was also a feeling that 51 was too high a number for even persistently dickish posters to reach so some people just didn't bother and ended up drifting away from the boards because of a bad atmosphere.

I definitely don't want to create a "gang up for a ban" environment, and that does worry me. But nobody likes it when mods use their discretion either, so I feel like leaving it to the user base is a better idea.

Sorry, that does make it look like I think politics threads are the only threads where shitty behaviour happens. That's not true, but it is more common there, often for the obvious reason that it deeply affects people's lives but also sometimes just b/c people like being dicks on those threads.

Basically I've given up the UK politics thread because I don't really want to get banned. Good work all round.

Trying to stick to ILM and more light hearted threads in future. I slip occasionally though.

Don't forget US pol. The pull is just too strong.

Basically I've given up the UK politics thread because I don't really want to get banned. Good work all round.

― Boring blighters bloaters (Tom D.), Wednesday, 11 November 2020 bookmarkflaglink

You mean the US Pol?

was gonna say who gets FPed on UK Pol? all the melts fucked off to the Change UK thread months ago

nb people probably still get FPed because hey why not?

I can think of one.

I've purposely avoided the US pol thread for most of the last few years because there's nothing more irritating than some clueless outsider sticking their nose in to your business. I've posted a few times lately but as soon as the election shitshow dies down I'm out of there.

also we still get the odd ecofascist

No caveats needed imo, US pol is everyone's business, whether we like it or not.

No it isn't.

Or it won't be once things settle down to something appraoching normality.

I admire your optimism.

xp that I can get behind.

lads the secret to getting a good FPing has been explained umpteen times and it's really not about where you post

Indeed, the secret is

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/Hippie_Kitchen%2C_Jefferson_Highway%2C_Old_Jefferson_Louisiana_Burrito_Unwrapped.jpg/1200px-Hippie_Kitchen%2C_Jefferson_Highway%2C_Old_Jefferson_Louisiana_Burrito_Unwrapped.jpg

is that lime pickle?

I'm hoping against hope if I keep it light and superficial then ILX can return to its roots as an offshoot of a Belle & Sebastian Message Board.

we'll try in vain to take away the pain of being a hopeless nonbeliever

plenty of people find a way to keep it real without getting FP'd dozens of times

*trumpet solo*

Not dozens, 20.

cmon now nobody accumulates 20fps in a short space of the time on the uk pols thread no matter what they post. be astonished if that were the case. otoh going into a thread and calling another poster a cunt for no discernible reason prob racks up the fps fairly swiftly.

xp

Sorry, that does make it look like I think politics threads are the only threads where shitty behaviour happens. That's not true, but it is more common there, often for the obvious reason that it deeply affects people's lives but also sometimes just b/c people like being dicks on those threads.

No need for this post then?

(By the way, that's not a dig at emil.y)

I'm not sure what you're getting at there, Tom? The post above it was explaining that I'm not everywhere on the boards, not directing any ire at politics threads. I just realised that it could look like I was blaming those threads in particular for FP-worthy posts, so wanted to clarify that wasn't my intention.

Also you really don't need to worry so much about getting banned, you know.

No problem. I'm just thinking aloud.

fp is 4 losers

Unanimous mod-inflicted permaban or gtfo.

if you care that much hire a hitman and have your enemies killed

lots of boomers out here who didn’t grow up getting kicked from forums or irc channels once a week when they got too online. it’s all good and normal

you’re back on the board in no time, lads. just tidy your shelves for a week and bide your time

― mh, Wednesday, November 11, 2020 11:11 AM bookmarkflaglink

lol mIRC bans were fun when the idiot mods accidentally banned an IP range rather than one IP and suddenly 30 people banned

is that lime pickle?

― big man on scampus (Noodle Vague)

Disgusting savage.

in NV's defense that thing looks more like a dosa than a burrito

i know it's a burrito which was why i couldn't parse the side

i mean i say i know it's a burrito but my favourite doner kebab place serves them in a naan so

the burrito that defied a genus

I cribbed it from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burrito

Courtesy of Hippie Kitchen:

https://www.hknola.com

A tomatillo-based salsa is what I would think.

xp fped for advertising

😢

people who think shitty behavior only happens in politics threads have never expressed the wrong opinion about a band

Tbf there are several dedicated musical challop threads to keep the negativity from spilling over and instigating a clusterfuck.

Um, have y'all never heard of escabeche? What planet are y'all on?

N.W.A. - A Beche esca Beche

If we're talking about the sauce, that's not escabeche, unless it means something different for you.

I scrolled past too fast, looked like escabeche and not a salsa verde.

I like that the username system results in people saying things like 'I am not defending burrito'

some burritos are clearly indefensible

I think my badly made point was that we were potentially veering from taking out the trolls to tone policing and eliminating diversity of thought/opinion but maybe I'm overreacting as I've been doing a lot of that recently. Covid and general brain melt has me spinning around looking for demons in every corner

burrito emailed me under his other account, del griffith during the election, only to send one email that said "poop", and the second one said "pewp"

while he was banned, technically, tho he didn't post.

moooooom

he was del griffith during the election?

I always prefer to do my tone policing through tut-tutting instead of banning. More civilized.

He is in fact John Candy post-framing of his own death.

it doesn't look like salsa verde -- the sliced carrot definitely signifies pickled veg / escabeche to me -- and I think that's a jalapeno slice which also kinda resembles lime pickle

he was del griffith during the election?

― @oneposter(✔️) (Karl Malone), Wednesday, November 11, 2020 1:32 PM bookmarkflaglink

he transformed into Balthazar Getty and chased me in my truck

it doesn't look like salsa verde -- the sliced carrot definitely signifies pickled veg / escabeche to me -- and I think that's a jalapeno slice which also kinda resembles lime pickle

Their delivery menu:

https://www.grubhub.com/restaurant/hippie-kitchen-3741-jefferson-hwy-new-orleans/2258859?chiri_restaurant-banner=5PRCoylkfEgYCMyklOpl0l

I'm guessing it's 'Jalapeno, Carrot, Pickles'. Technically not escabeche in my book but YMMV.

mh and DJP otm. bans and timeouts are normal parts of functioning online communities, they make ILX stronger, and they are easy to avoid: don't be a dick and don't double down on being a dick.

my ability to send webmails from this account magically vanishes when I'm banned! but it worked on my old account, which is why I could say pewp to Neanderthal

and if you are a dick, try to at least be funnier

xp

burrito, is your side in that depiction salsa verde or escabeche or something else entirely?

my g/f told me my dick was funny once

it was then i realized she was not really my g/f

sometimes I wonder if people would hate me as much if I'dve named myself the sandwich that defined a generation

hmm

food for thought

See but in gambling world doubling down is incentivised. It's high risk high reward xp

xp -- this actually is something I wish I understood, why bans had to be a "normal part" of communities instead of people, once they got banned once, thinking "holy shit, I must be behaving really badly, I need to be better immediately"

I'm guessing it's 'Jalapeno, Carrot, Pickles'. Technically not escabeche in my book but YMMV.

― pomenitul, Wednesday, November 11, 2020 10:39 AM (one minute ago)

yes -- agreed.

his side is 'pewp', according to the minutes

can't speak for anyone but myself but personally I think bans should be reserved for posters who are threatening, harassing, or insulting other posters, and I don't think mods should have to wait for a certain number of flagged posts to do it.

this actually is something I wish I understood

i think it has something to do with poor impulse control and seeking self-gratification over sociability

I think my badly made point was that we were potentially veering from taking out the trolls to tone policing and eliminating diversity of thought/opinion but maybe I'm overreacting as I've been doing a lot of that recently. Covid and general brain melt has me spinning around looking for demons in every corner

― ALAB (onimo)

I think that's fair, and it is something I don't want to do either.

I know a lot a lot of people are still sore at me over calzinogate, but the idea that it was about silencing a dissenting voice has never been close to true. I didn't know anything about his politics until after the whole thing and it turns out I agree with the actual political points the majority of the time, so that's a thing. I think I failed badly at trying to show that it was about the posts rather than the poster there though, and just made bad feeling worse.

But anyway, for me, trying to avoid a repeat of that mess is part of what the new system's about - taking the shorter "time out" principle but without the individual moderator decision, making sure we always give people warning & communication now (usually via ilx-mail but sometimes yellow card if we need to be quick, as in the instance you gave). And I for one definitely welcome feedback on it, the rules are supposed to be in place for the community not against them. "The community" often has pretty wildly differing ideas of how things should work, mind you.

i would like to shout out to the mods because i time i turned into a dog and they helped me

@ katherine - oh hmm! that's a different way to look at it. i guess in some sense tho what i'm saying is that WITHOUT timeout/ban capacity it's even more unlikely that people have that realization. but i also am less motivated by the idea of provoking change and more into making the discussion space functional and not icky. if we didn't have even the tools to throw out somebody who's being an obnoxious jackass derailing everything, then we'd be basically ceding the forum to whichever jackasses are willing to put in the time.

i feel like we collectively run a nice pub, and sometimes there's someone being loud and obnoxious and ruining everyone's night without necessarily crossing into harassment or threats, and it's a good thing that the patrons as a group can say "okay buddy, you've had enough," and go back to having a nice time.

oh no definitely, this isn't a "so therefore, there should be no bans" argument, just a broader thing. like on twitter, when someone gets a ban for harassing people, the reaction is never "oh shit, guess I shouldn't harass people anymore" but "oh shit, guess I have to wait 7 days to harass people again."

What, and they never harass anyone ever more on Twitter?

some people are addicted to drama, is the thing, katherine
it’s a way to decide you were ostracized for your very good ideas

my only worry is the smaller threads, where people care about a specific interest not everyone shares (see: obscure band threads) are the ones with fewer people posting and some irritants only frequent a couple of those, leading to their lack of flagging/banning. I think bringing that kind of posting to mod attention is reasonable because the niche interests are what I really love about the site

the large politics/flame-heavy threads are of lesser interest to me, really, but the more people interacting means something happens faster

I’d be fine with per-board FP thresholds tbh. make ILM’s lower than ILE, etc

I don’t think analogizing ilx threads to twitter as a whole makes sense, but we do get some of that impulse on the very high traffic contentious threads

xp -- this actually is something I wish I understood, why bans had to be a "normal part" of communities instead of people, once they got banned once, thinking "holy shit, I must be behaving really badly, I need to be better immediately"

Oh and Tom, you shouldn’t have stopped posting on the UK politics thread, I was sad when I noticed you were steering clear. :(

That's lovely of you to say so but I don't really need the stress tbh.

Also, it's pretty pointless, everyone agrees with one another.

Lol, can assure you that isn’t true 🙃, but yeah if it’s stressing you best not to.

They should be normalised because maybe then we wouldn’t have so Mitch beef every time someone gets one.

― scampus fugit (gyac), Wednesday, November 11, 2020 2:04 PM (twenty-one minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

man, who doesn't have Mitch beef these days

Ah ffs I didn’t even spot that lol

I've got *cling cling* *mmmmmmmmmm* mitch beef
but i can't get warm without your hand to hold

it's pretty pointless, everyone agrees with one another.

new board description

emil.y thank you for a considered response and sorry that once again my random mod angst ended up pointed at you. Pure coincidence, honest!

I need to remember that when I get all FFS MODS it's posters emil.y and matt and tom and stet etc and not some random detached overlords. You are all as invested (if not moreso) as everyone else in making things work and mod actions are normally taken in good faith and with the best of intentions.

No worries, onimo. I think everyone's been pretty chill in this revive, it's all good.

well I'm not chill you fuckers .. grr. lol joking obv, couldn't give a monkeys tbh ... until I get banned for depicting my hyperreal fantasy of hiring a professional assassin to slice Starmer's testicles off and feed them to a rabid otter.

take it to ILTMI, calz

a rabid otter? dear me, that is a bit extreme ... perhaps a somewhat elderly rabbit with Myxomatosis

a wee cute french bulldog with distemper will do!

Include fluffy kittens somewhere and I'll have no problem.

http://previews.123rf.com/images/ffphoto/ffphoto1510/ffphoto151000013/46559114-french-bulldog-puppy-playing-with-ball-on-the-grass.jpg

^ workshopping new ideas for telling "...the Aristocrats!!" fine. but some borads/threads are better suited for that.

Can you just imagine an elderly rabbit singing in Thom Yorke's voice "I've got myxamatosis."

Please pause and consider that and then get back to me thanks.

mixing my toasties with Thom Yorke

Starmer's balls are far too big in that pic

It's very funny as a former moderator to watch the tone shift from "the moderators want to stifle all opposing opinions" to "a bunch of posters want to stifle all opposing opinions" without ever landing on "maybe people are trying to tell me I'm acting like a dick"

lowering the threshold from 51 does make it feel less like "this person is too reprehensible for common society" and more "look we've all had a few, skip the bus and have a walk home"

so Mitch beef

FP'd you for doxxing burrito

Starmer's balls are far too big in that pic

xp -- this actually is something I wish I understood, why bans had to be a "normal part" of communities instead of people, once they got banned once, thinking "holy shit, I must be behaving really badly, I need to be better immediately"

― like, I’m eating an elephant head (katherine), Wednesday, 11 November 2020 bookmarkflaglink

Even less reason to do that now as it happens to more people, such as myself.

are you saying that you’re going to carry on as you normally do

Why ask when you know the answer

why do people play the same songs over and over again?

Gotta play the hits *looks at North Korean news service twitter account*

Yissssss

are you saying that you’re going to carry on as you normally do

― scampus fugit (gyac), Thursday, November 12, 2020 9:33 AM (six minutes ago)

let's check the tape

Planning to post as I always do

― xyzzzz__, Thursday, November 12, 2020 1:39 AM (eight hours ago)

nb that "calmly" no longer forms part of this affirmation :)

It was you!

xp as the originator of the meme, xyzzzz__ can deviate from it

The Twitter comparison is bad because who has gotten banned here for harassing anyone in particular? Getting personal is weirdly acceptable relative to other 'online communities.'

enough of that hanky panky, tankie!

xp - uh, milo, this is a good one to let go

Let go of what? I'm not talking about you quoting me in another thread (don't care), that's not harassment or getting personal. But ILX is (and always has been) far more personal in attacks than would be acceptable anywhere else.

it's just an example, it's not a direct one-to-one comparison

I got tempbanned for bullying someone earlier this summer. I deserved it but I also wasn’t wrong to do so.

Modban rather than 51'd though, right?

What I'm saying is that it's been normal to ascribe various mental illnesses to some people over the years here and that's rarely (if ever) ginned up the FP/SB posse.

People don't change their behavior when they come back from a ban because it was about attitude or arguing or tone rather than harassment - they presumably don't think their tone was wrong (and that's a much harder case to make than when someone is harassing another person). People don't get banned from Twitter for having a bad attitude.

let go in the sense that yes, people have been banned for personal harassment on ILX in the past and the people involved probably don't want to get into again.

I deserved it but I also wasn’t wrong to do so.

This takes some weird mental gymnastics to get to, silby, but whatever.

you might wonder ... why was chaki banned for like -- almost 10 years? or ... there was that bloke dom passantino, whatever happened to him?

The highest my FP count ever got was from repeatedly losing my temper with milo and it took me a while to moderate* my behavior but I’ve learned I’ve no interest in pursuing that any further & it’s detrimental to the conversation. It’s perfectly possible for posters to learn from warnings and change behavior.

*see what I did there

let go in the sense that yes, people have been banned for personal harassment on ILX in the past and the people involved probably don't want to get into again.

Two people in 10 years?

That's a one shit poster every 5 year average

I think the average is a bit higher than that!

twice as good as Nas though

I got tempbanned for bullying someone earlier this summer. I deserved it but I also wasn’t wrong to do so.

― The Bosom Manor Michaelmas Special (silby), Thursday, 12 November 2020 bookmarkflaglink

That's the spirit!

i think we need to brace ourselves for the inevitability that trump, in his post-presidency, after being banned from twitter, sets up shop on ilx and starts running all the EOY polls. how do we square our commitment to free speech with the social harm of disinformation?

weren't like this when I were a lad. you can't even flag a post in the street these days

When you have your posts flagged, just for being English

used to be you could kick a post up a flag no problem

these days

Move to open a new discussion covering two proposals, possibly more to follow idk

1. If you post more than twice in a row in a thread you are banned from that thread for a week

1. (i) If any of the posts referenced above are a tweet you get sitebanned for a a week

ok boomer (who is probably almost 10 yrs younger than me!)

Lol ty

(I needed a post to stop myself falling foul of my own proposal see)

2. Im still trying to nail down the wording here but essentially if a reasonable poster like me hints that you should post less or in a different way that should be that but if this expert warning is not heeded you should be permanently banned

As i said ive to put better wording on that one i suppose

Move to open a new discussion covering two proposals, possibly more to follow idk

― pandmac (darraghmac), Tuesday, December 28, 2021 7:02 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

1. If you post more than twice in a row in a thread you are banned from that thread for a week

1. (i) If any of the posts referenced above are a tweet you get sitebanned for a a week

― pandmac (darraghmac), Tuesday, December 28, 2021 7:03 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

motion passed

darraghmac is hereby banned from this thread for a week according to rule 1.

on our next order of business, one second, no wait --- aaahhhh

"more than" twice in a row, tbf

oh wait, on second glance at this new law it appears that the rule is "more than" twice in a row, therefore, darraghmac is hereby REinstated and it appears that i am...once again banned from this thread for a week, aaaaaaahhh

*as a howl down a terrible tunnel*

"ex possssssssssssst!"

Doctor Casino, you saved me from hell! oh no, wait, ahahhhhhhhh

a reasonable poster like me

i totally know what the reasonable poster dmac is talking about but if enough people are bothered can't they gently flag post? i mean it depends on the quality and utility of the series of posts.

#teamharbl

tweets are great you monster

1. If you post more than twice in a row in a thread you are banned from that thread for a week

this is absurd in the context of the multitude of threads that are centered on an individual poster, that even include their name. It seems like half of all active posters have an active thread with their name in it. Like, are you suggesting we ban the Aeon Flux guy?

let's fucking do it!

Each proposal is clear and the merits of each proposal is clear, i would rather we debated the issues and not lower ourselves to performative incredulity pls

lol

agreed

but lol

let's have a debate

let's have a televised debate

and then at the end, everyone has to vote on who won. and the answers are determined by the voters.

Ban

suggest flag post on you, if someone wants to work on that. dmac you have gone TOO far this time

debay-it

For now, let us set the record straight
And later on we'll have a forum and a formal debate
But it's important you remember though
What you reap is what you sow
Talkin' all that jazz

Coward mods have banned me despite clearly not having read the proposa carefully and despite not enacting the proposal in other merited instances where is the JUSTICE

justice is something that comes in waves of 3 or more

is that first rule because I kept bumping the Telex thread

Do i give a fuck what happens on ilm do i

Oh, more than twice, misread that

Just to note this means fps dont register which i feel is double punishment

FP’d you to confirm ;)

(I really did, though. +1 4U)

Coward mods have read, misunderstood but not yet addressed this (ever more urgent) genius proposal

please, explain it further --- take all the posts you need

Tbh i can only approve of the strategic use of goading ppl into falling foul of this gamechanger, kudos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcFErAemd0Q

tip the sign

how about a decision-based ban, so they could choose their own send-off? choice could be implemented at every stage of the banning, even the pre-ban.

for example, imagine a ban that triggers when more than 50% of a poster's posts over a given 3-month period amount to complaining about other posters. at this point, the pre-ban choice would go into effect. more like a challenge: IF the poster can make at least 10% of the complaining posts either a) funny or b) interesting, they are able to avoid the ban and the clock is reset. if, shocking all observers, the poster who complains all the time is neither funny nor interesting at least 10% of the time that they're complaining, they can either receive a 2-week ban OR be asked to find a new messageboard filled with better people that won't get complained about more than 50% of the time. if they choose the latter option, they also get a 3-year subscription to the criterion channel

If you could translate that to C I’d be impressed

it's possible that at first there would be a period of adjustments

Hilarious you’re complaining about other people being obsessive

You got a spreadsheet for these posts or what

Hey gyac go fuck yourself

gyac was born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad. at least gyac calls other ilxors "hilarious" with predictable regularity, which amounts to the same thing... right?

pretty sure km was just doing a “bit” no?

Hey gyac go fuck yourself

I have to be honest, my eyes crossed around the second line of that needlessly complex scheme, which seems like an awfully complicated substitute for just not being inappropriate/intrusive/offensive in spaces where it affects a lot of other people.

You mean besides the time you replied on slack right? Fuck you

zs: seriously, with no rancor or specific enmity, I beg you to please just go live your life and stop sub-tweeting various people and lashing out peevishly. I think you'll be happier. I can't speak for everyone else but I'll definitely be happier without massive thread derailments and personal sniping.

various people? sub-tweeting?

do those standards apply to the slack?

(rhetorical - there's no spokesperson for the slack, i know)

there's a slack?

it is 99% a fun place

oh man here we go

in orbit otm, please stop doing this

it is 99% a fun place

― the world's undisputed #1 fan of 'Spud Infinity' (Karl Malone), Saturday, 12 March 2022 bookmarkflaglink

Wrong again, it's 100% fun.

Let’s just be clear here: people talking on ilx, bad
People talking off ilx, also bad

Your repeated nonsense: fine actually. Have I got that right?

Is this current revival necessary? How long do people have to tolerate this? Just wondering.

I would personally love it if you would killfile me KM, as I really don’t enjoy our interactions at all and the same seems to be true of you, and I’m not going to stop existing just to please you.

Just fuck off

No use dealing with cops, KM.

FP'd u calstars even tho u are a Led Zep fan, dial it down buddy

VHS please go die

hahaha o fuk what a twist

You don’t know the half of it

"please stop doing this"

is anyone telling gyac not to do this? that's the only thing i've been pointing out, the entire time. kind of sucks when gyac is like this 110% of the time and everyone knows that if they say anything they'll get stomped by her. am i ever like this toward anyone that is not a complete fucking asshole? is anyone shushing her?

I am shushing her
On slack she assured me that no one gives a fuck what i post

Mate, please begging you to a) killfile me and b) consider why you’re so fixated on a female poster. I don’t need this, it’s pretty unnerving to have someone that I’ve never interacted besides a couple of times act like this towards me. Is this who you are? And if you have such a problem with my behaviour, then fp me, I truly don’t care, but leave me alone.

three people have been temp-banned for assholish posting in the past 2 weeks, you could just flag the posts and move on instead of peppering multiple threads with this.

xps Karl the problem is that you attacked multiple female posters, not just her, for no discernible reason, and then deleted your slack posts because you didn't want to take any accountability for your behavior, then you stormed off.

and you have consistently chosen to blame everyone and everything but yourself for the way that went down.

there have always been off board subgroups going back decades, the platforms vary but it doesn't matter.

calstars idk even what to say but gyac doesn't deserve y'alls bullshit here "fixated" otm

You came out of nowhere and told me that no one gives a shit what I post

so, let me get this straight, you bumped a thread to complain about other posters who complain about other posters?

That’s an attack

I’m like this 110% time you know, except when I’m starting threads about nonsense, or posting about books, or UK politics, or telling the pinefox I love him

three people have been temp-banned for assholish posting in the past 2 weeks, you could just flag the posts and move on instead of peppering multiple threads with this.

― towards fungal computer (harbl), Saturday, March 12, 2022 3:45 PM (two minutes ago)

harbl otm as usual

Of the three ppl banned only VHS is the asshole. Other two were most unfair.

lmao

haha, fair