POLL: Proposed FP Threshold Changes

Third option for me

51 FPs = 30 day ban
71 FPs = instant mod powers

good luck everybody

Voted option 3; 90 days is too long in these indoor times and I’m not sure it deserves that much of a step up in terms of duration. You could easily accumulate 20 during a “heated discussion” at the beginning of the 6 months and then pick up the remainder in little dribs and drabs without ever crossing the line in such a way again.

option 5: permaban everyone who casts a vote in this poll (including me)

We currently are at a 50 FP threshold and hardly anyone ever hits it; I don't think adding a 20 FP threshold into the current system would materially change that.

Voting 'no change' until there is such a facility that enables posters to find out their FP number (and what they have been FP'd for) without having to go through trial by clusterfuck.

https://i.redd.it/b1qyge9txwn01.jpg

Agree with the need for changes. Think 90 days is probably way too long for the 50 fp threshold.

voted for option 4.

Option 4

license to kill mode: 1 fp = permaban

xp But...two weeks off! Wouldn't that be lovely?

Thresholds should be 21 and 51, respectively.

20 and 40 imo

I say we try option #4 and see where it takes us.

No breaks I'd be stalking the boards, taking notes and reviving multiple threads on my return with 'told you so' level posting on my return 😎

you are a formidable opponent for sure

leave that goal any more open why don't you lj

i don't have super strong opinions on this, but 90 days seems too long for a banning for getting 51'd. 30 days is enough to get the message across.

for the 20 FP in 30 days, i prefer 7 days to 14 days. really, i think even 3 days would be better, but 7 is fine.

in other words, i voted for option 4

No breaks I'd be stalking the boards, taking notes and reviving multiple threads on my return with 'told you so' level posting on my return 😎

wassup gabbneb

I agree with Branwell that users should be able to see which posts they have been FP'd for, although not who has issued them obvs. If I recall correctly, the argument against this in the past was that knowing which post of yours has been flagged might inadvertently disclose the person who flagged it. But thinking back to my modding days of yesteryear, I'm pressed to think of an instance where this would have been true. Would welcome counter-opinions, of course.

I agree with Branwell that users should be able to see which posts they have been FP'd for, although not who has issued them obvs. If I recall correctly, the argument against this in the past was that knowing which post of yours has been flagged might inadvertently disclose the person who flagged it. But thinking back to my modding days of yesteryear, I'm pressed to think of an instance where this would have been true. Would welcome counter-opinions, of course.

― peace, man, Thursday, September 3, 2020 5:58 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

I'd think in 95% of the cases it'll be crystal clear why a poster is banned. Plus, it's already possible to just asked for your number of fp's. Don't think having mods to file a whole 'u were banned and here's why' report is a good use of their valuable time.

I'm going with option 3, but don't have very strong feelings about this (anymore).

Agree. Generally opposed to anything that involves more moderator input - I usually prefer less interference rather than more and the whole reason for this conversation is that user feedback wasn’t doing it.

I dunno, maybe it's just me but it seems like if I suddenly found myself banned for passing any FP threshold, I'd have a pretty good guess as to what I'd done to cause that. Like FPs are not the only means by which folks express their displeasure around these parts.

Exactly, talk about it will spread across the borads like wildfire, 't was ever thus.

license to kill mode: 1 fp = permaban

I'd really prefer to retain the existing levels but have two different FP flavours, where original = please moderate your behaviour, and new double strength = just fuck off now and never come back

original = please moderate your behaviour, and new double strength = just fuck off now and never come back

https://www.insidehighered.com/sites/default/server_files/media/Stan.jpg

wassup gabbneb

― shout-out to his family (DJP), Thursday, 3 September 2020 bookmarkflaglink

Will moderate my behaviour now

license to kill mode: 1 fp = permaban

loving this trend of introducing permadeath to games

Alternative solution: grant everyone mod privileges.

you are restricted to 50 words a day, but you can bank them if you like

write-in for every time you post = 1 fp. 20 posts in 30 days = 14 day ban; 50 posts in 6 months = 30 day ban

xp unfair persecution of Fizzles

Alternative solution: grant everyone mod privileges.

― pomenitul, Thursday, 3 September 2020 bookmarkflaglink

Editing lj's politics posting so he sounds like a Socialist.

I'd think in 95% of the cases it'll be crystal clear why a poster is banned. Plus, it's already possible to just asked for your number of fp's. Don't think having mods to file a whole 'u were banned and here's why' report is a good use of their valuable time.

I'm going with option 3, but don't have very strong feelings about this (anymore).

― Monte Scampino (Le Bateau Ivre), Thursday, September 3, 2020 12:01 PM (twenty-two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I wasn't suggesting that mods contact every user each time their FP'd. But maybe it could be that there's a FP dashboard on your Preferences page or something. This obviously isn't the issue at hand. And of course setting up such a dashboard would mean a lot more work for stet. But I just wanted to chime in and say that I didn't think Branwell's idea was a bad one.

they're

I like the idea of an FP scoreboard dashboard

Then the gamification of ILX will be complete.

Aye, can we not

Sounds like an awful idea. Old Lunch otm.

In the last round of recent bannings, Calzino literally just said that he had no idea what he was banned for?

I mean, you can just go on insisting that people should ~just know~ by magic, or ESP, or whatever until you’re blue in the face - or you can actually listen to the people the board are trying to moderate, about what is effective, and what isn’t.

I mean that was a unilateral mod action not an fp thing, and there was an explanation in the admin log as there always is in such cases

maybe put the admin log link at the top of SNA and boards pages - not everyone knows what or where it is

may be an idea to let people bookmark it too so users (who want to) get notified when it is updated

yeah I have been posting here on and off for almost 20 years and idk where the admin log is lol

Amateurs

I mean, you can just go on insisting that people should ~just know~ by magic, or ESP, or whatever until you’re blue in the face

true -- also, some posters are very prolific and will accrue FPs for a variety of reasons. for example, silby was blazing their way through numerous threads on different topics -- politics, economics, religion, board lawyering -- I was actually surprised they had accrued 40 FPs until I did a search-by-poster and saw how many threads they were posting on ... like, silbs was interacting with a very large number of posters overall, whereas someone who is "more niche" is less likely to garner that many because their interactions are more limited.

best was the bold tom D saying he had no idea wtf the admin log was on the 'let's discuss the admin log' thread

I had no problem believing that somehow

Me neither.

(That is only a slight dig at Tom D, who I am secretly fond of.)

Tom D would've been the most recent person banned under the proposed changes afaict. I don't want people like Tom banned

uh it was actually "ADMIN LOG WATCH 2" -- though it is actually the 3rd Admin Log watch thread

or you can actually listen to the people the board are trying to moderate, about what is effective, and what isn’t.

ime as a mod elsewhere, the people whose conduct requires the moderators to moderate them are not the people you want to listen to on the subject of effective moderation. you're just going to hear a lot of board lawyering or else plain abuse.

Uh, as a member of the ILX Bar Association I flagged that post, Aimsy.

Tom D would've been the most recent person banned under the proposed changes afaict. I don't want people like Tom banned

uh it was actually "ADMIN LOG WATCH 2" -- though it is actually the 3rd Admin Log watch thread

Presumably the first two were ADMIN LOG WATCH and ADMIN LOG WATCH 1.

Tom D would've been the most recent person banned under the proposed changes afaict. I don't want people like Tom banned

― this is my clean tone (NickB)

I haven't gone back to double check this, but I think he racked up 20 for calling crut a cunt with pretty much no provocation - so he would've just been under the new regs, and also I think a week break for that would've been plenty warranted. (He did apologise, mind you.)

xp - gyac, unless you were previously someone else, you haven't ever been banned for any length of time, correct?

If you're given a 14-day time-out, you should also be required to wear a tailor-made ILX™ Dunce Cap throughout. You must also provide pictures (at least two per day) to demonstrate your good will.

like, if we are discussing the efficacy of bans on posters, the experiences of posters that have actually been banned seem important to listen to??? Like, I'd be more swayed by opinions from LJ and Branwell (and others who haven't posted on this thread) than posters who are making assumptions without experience.

For what it's worth, just wanna say I think the mods are doing great job. Understandably difficult task indeed. Couldn't do it, myself. Kudos to them for their competence.

Yesterday I saw some questionable posts and realized I wouldn't know what action to take. On the other hand, the mods probably do. Umbrage may very well be a thing of the past with these new changes!

burrito otm!

If you're given a 14-day time-out, you should also be required to wear a tailor-made ILX™ Dunce Cap throughout. You must also provide pictures (at least two per day) to demonstrate your good will.

I was autobanned once for posting too much, that was no fahren I can tell you

I agree with the idea behind more transparency, but asking for a whole new dashboard seems a bit much - not in terms of whether it's a good idea, but just in terms of stet being the only one who can do that stuff and he's not getting paid for any of this. Seems a bit of an ask to me.

For full disclosure, I initially suggested extending the 51 period, but on reflection I favour shorter bans and have voted for such - I think when looking at pure numbers it's easy to forget how losing a mode of communication can affect someone, even if they have been acting like a proper dick.

Of yourself sporting said ILX™ Dunce Cap. My bad, should've specified that.

2xp

I was autobanned once for posting too much, that was no fahren I can tell you

correct

I think he racked up 20 for calling crut a cunt with pretty much no provocation

Mis-spoke here, he ~got up to 20~ for this, so some were from before the 30 day period. I think.

Anyway, probably better not discuss an individual poster's FP count much more than that, just wanted to clarify the point, sorry.

but asking for a whole new dashboard seems a bit much - not in terms of whether it's a good idea, but just in terms of stet being the only one who can do that stuff and he's not getting paid for any of this. Seems a bit of an ask to me.

100% agreed. Was just offering a pie-in-the-sky scenario.

thanks emil.y, i appreciate that

Hope Tom D comes back . Crut accepted the apology too, after a heated argument. Also Tom D had an argument with a poster on the UK politics thread for an hour or so a few months ago and everyone made peace and apologised with no need for intervention.

The new system will place further automation, that's for sure.

Where the fuck is "take off and nuke the planet from orbit" you monsters?

on ILAFL iirc

wassup gabbneb

even short bans will drive people away, don't know why we would want that

If people can’t deal with a 7 day ban from posting then maybe they really do need to find somewhere else to express themselves.

Nothing’s stopping anyone from registering under new usernames btw. There’s a cheap shortcut to get around every ban, it’s been used by trolls for years and years.

"If people can’t deal with a 7 day ban from posting then maybe they really do need to find somewhere else to express themselves"

but I haven't seen anyone here lately who deserves a 7 day ban! people lash out, so forgive them and move on.

I can understand banning obvious trolls like Moo Vaughn, Racoon Tanuki, Larry Appleton (although even they were entertaining), but there isn’t anybody here now that is like that as far as I can see

Then don’t FP anyone

it’s satisfying to FP others out of anger, I have done it, but I think the threshold for actually banning someone, even for a limited time, should be very high

don't agree with any change to make that more likely

Nobody wants to permaban more users. Look at the poll options, none of them even suggest permanent bans.

The point is to empower users to use FP so that mod actions are democratically supported instead of leaving the mods in this hapless DMZ where any tiny little temp ban becomes a clusterfuck unless the poster in question is so phenomenally bad they actually hit the 51 mark.

20 in 30 days is higher than you think.

No change for these poll options but I (sincerely) believe mods should be given carte-blanche to ban.

The 51s are almost never for racism, homophobia, sexism or etc., if it’s primarily about curating tone posters seem to trust the current mod team to do it.

Not opposed to FP and I guess I haven't imagined what it is from the point of view of the mods, I don't know what your restraints and reservations are and how you navigate this. maybe 20 in 30 days is ok

But I don't think silby should have banned for even 3 days, and I don't think Fred B should have been banned for a month.

also don't agree with driving posters away. I regret the loss of Οὖτις every day

I (sincerely) believe mods should be given carte-blanche to ban.

In real terms they already have such powers and have used it when necessary. If any of the options cited in the poll are instituted, the mods will still be able to insta-ban and perma-ban.

xpost It may be a problem of nomenclature. If it helps, don't think of it as a 'ban' but rather a 'time out'. Everybody needs one now and then, and people in desperate need of a timeout are not always good at knowing when to time themselves out.

I also miss shakey. Come back, shakey. Come back to us.

xp agree, but they may not return, which is not good for ilx

also don't agree with driving posters away. I regret the loss of Οὖτις every day

Was Shakey driven away? I think he made a major error in judgment with that poll and got the sense that the backlash startled the hell out of him. I think he has been a good poster here and I hope he comes back. Being told by many posters "what you did is some bullshit" is not being driven away. (Cue court reporters eager to read back the trial transcript.)

error in judgement maybe but it feels to me like he was driven away, and I don't think he will come back. with all of the policing this board is increasingly less interesting

When posters quietly leave, it’s mostly because of other posters who should have already been banned.

NB I only have anecdotal evidence for this.

Don't know that I even agree with 51 FPs as a threshold. Nobody should be banned ever, unless it's clear to all of us that they are a troll

license to kill mode: 1 fp = permaban

― mellon collie and the infinite bradness (BradNelson)
I think this is how vinylengine works. I was permabanned for forgetting my password there.

Dan, we understand your position. Just vote or abstain. Restating your opinion once more won't help.

I will shut up, but just want to say:

we banned Fred B, a reasonable poster with interesting ideas who was a great contributor to the film threads and who was not a troll, because some people didn’t like him.

And he’s not ever coming back, so it’s our loss. You may not feel it but I do

I feel the loss of almost every poster we've banned, because they usually generated interesting discussions on some threads. They got banned because they decided to dive into specific threads with completely horrible attitudes, instigating unnecessary conflict, and doubling down on positions that pissed off a majority of users.

I say "users" instead of "posters" because sometimes the FPs come from lurkers who almost never post. And that's fine as far as I'm concerned.

Every poster who gets banned has the option to register a new username and start posting again if they can't deal with the timeout period. Our mod actions are soft as can be.

hey I just want the mods to know that my FP of Dan S defending Fred B here is 100% sincere and IMO completely warranted

Btw, Fred B chose not to come back after his ban. You know that, right Dan?

I did not FP Dan, but ftr I would like to state that he has some absolutely terrible posts and lots of them are itt.

Tombot otm re what he said about people leaving. I have also heard that.

lots of people have also bounced lately with no ban at all just fyi

can't imagine why, it's probably nothing

Thresholds should be 21 and 51, respectively.

OTM, 51 has great symbolic value to our culture

I hate the number memes tbh (though mainly for restricting the album and single poll's to 77)

we banned Fred B, a reasonable poster with interesting ideas who was a great contributor to the film threads and who was not a troll, because some people didn’t like him.

And he’s not ever coming back, so it’s our loss. You may not feel it but I do

― Dan S, vrijdag 4 september 2020 6:11 (three hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

Otm. I prefer an ilx where people like Fred B. aren't driven off the board to one where he is. That's not a defense of Fred B. but a desire to see ilx as a place where a lot of different ideas and people with different mindsets are welcome, or tolerated. ILX of yore was not better or worse than ILX today, but it was def less homogenic, which was a good thing in my book. We've lost quite a lot of great regulars recently (Deems and shakey, for one), people you didn't think would leave/not return, and it is our loss.

But this all has little to do w/ the issue at hand here.

ps. I am glad and in awe of said regulars leaving and being better off because of it obv. We should all aspire etc

Not posting is one thing, if anyone actually leaves and doesn’t read or check in that might mean something. Otherwise it’s just...not posting.

Fred was 51d because he thought it was important to question the honesty of sexual abuse victims if it challenged his politics, just so we're clear

It's really hard to get 51d, just so we're clear

You're right.

He managed 51 twice, a true legend who will live in our hearts 💓

Nobody should be banned ever

this is just an alternate way of driving people away from
the board

otm

or, well, certain people

"we banned Fred B, a reasonable poster with interesting ideas who was a great contributor to the film threads and who was not a troll, because some people didn’t like him."

Just love this defence of him. It's just the best!

Tony Abbott knows a lot about trade tbf

Brad is otm

The poster being discussed here is an absolute classic example of what I was talking about re: refusing to acknowledge the sensitivities of the posters around you and then doubling down on it when you've been asked to stop.

There's a tendency in these discussions to start talking about banned posters as if they are sensitive flowers who must be protected (and in some cases that's true) but less attention is paid to people who are reading them and eventually just decide they've had enough, and in a lot of cases these were great posters who brought a lot of personality and humour and interest to the boards. I've had enough pub discussions and emails over the years to know that this happens a lot. (People also leave for plenty of other reasons obviously, mostly jobs but also family etc). Brad OTM.

It's impossible for me to read 'interesting ideas' in a positive way.

mark s can't be with us at the moment but he would like to assure the board that he will never post anything interesting

“Every poster who gets banned has the option to register a new username and start posting again if they can't deal with the timeout period. Our mod actions are soft as can be.“

Gershy says “hi”

in the end, his greatest revival was.....himself

I mean that was a unilateral mod action not an fp thing

My understanding is that this* is the vast majority of bannings? The flag post mostly just alerts the mods, action is usually taken before 51 are racked up in a Fred B situation (i.e. an obvious and completely justified banning) - the 51 is to keep their hands clean in the few cases where it's not. I could be wrong, that's the impression I got from a few mod posts.

*Apart from calzino's wasn't unilateral I think?

It was, I thought

Allow me to amend my previous statements regarding ILX bans. At the time I made those statements, I did not realize that those who are banned also have their internet access shut down and their hands forcibly removed such that they can never, ever return. Such drastic, draconian measures. It is to barf.

On some level, I miss every poster who has vanished over the past three years, barring obvious trolls. It sucks that this occasionally devolves into a zero-sum game, i.e. 'either you go or I go' – it's not like ILX can afford to lose more blood.

I agree with that but then everyone has their own definition of "obvious," no?

Anyway, given how taxing the world & the internet are right now, I don't buy the idea that particular posters are leaving because of banning issues (unless some of you are actually in touch with them irl?) rather than finding that ILX isn't good for their mental health. I know I haven't looked at my twitter in a month and don't plan to until after November at least

Every poster who gets banned has the option to register a new username and start posting again if they can't deal with the timeout period. Our mod actions are soft as can be.

well, maybe in the past few years -- chaki tried this a handful of times and got re-banned but then was allowed back. ... though y'know maybe that wasn't really him?

When I was a mod, there were a few occasions where we banned someone who re-registered under a new name.

They got banned because they decided to dive into specific threads with completely horrible attitudes, instigating unnecessary conflict, and doubling down on positions that pissed off a majority of users.

uh, that is also an over-generalization ... i got banned for making a "thread of missing" for a "thread of missing" that got locked by a moderator - why - idk. But my actions were light-hearted fun that wasn't the type of posting behavior you describe ... and I don't recall that all of LJ's many bans involved this behavior either, though there was definite doubling down involved at times.

My over-generalization was meant to describe those who’ve been banned by achieving 51, not to everyone who’s gotten a mod-inflicted timeout - sorry for not being clearer.

Basically, imo being a site mod can be challenging and is kinda shitty work, and it is done by people and people will sometimes make judgment errors or take things too personally, and that doesn't make them horrible, but the system should make it less awkward to walk back a judgment error, and I feel like shortened ban times and larger FP minimums would be better for that.

My over-generalization was meant to describe those who’ve been banned by achieving 51

though also in my post, I pointed out that even just including those who achieved 51, that doesn't seem entirely accurate. Some posters have been the subject of group antagonism with the purpose of driving them to that behavior ...

Then vote option 5 I guess?

group antagonism (piling on) is an obvious phenomenon in every social group from school age kids on up. ilx isn't immune from it, but when it happens to you here the best strategy is to stop struggling and play dead so the antagonists lose interest and drift away. it's the ones who fight back against the whole board and insist they are correct, whereas the rest of the board is bad and wrong, who start piling up FPs like flies on manure. twas ever thus.

what I find more interesting is watching two or three posters trying to get a pile on rolling and failing. it's like a failed coup d' etat where the state television is commandeered for an hour, then retaken by the loyalists.

but that hour of tv is pure gold

or pure shit ... but at least somewhat novel

how about 20 fps in 7 days DN is changed to "#1 Coldplay Fan, Stevie Wonder Sucks" for 14 days?

specific user such as imago

sorry to have missed the preceding discussion thread. i support the mods' tireless thankless work and appreciate them making this a discussion.

as was the case three years ago ( FP: Should 31 be the new 51 y/n ), i think the 51 threshold is wildly, absurdly high. people shouldn't have to keep vainly clicking FP on godawful, mean-spirited posts, with the tacit understanding that it will do nothing to stop the behavior except maybe enough FPs will accumulate in like six months. i agree that we lose (or fail to attract) far more and better posters by the continued fostering of old-school showy toxic internet dudebro aggression than we do by banning its avatars.

personally i think the number should go way lower. maybe like... 12. a jury of one's peers! this could be combined with the cooldown period being fairly short, but also increasing penalties if you get 12'd again so that real serial shitheads don't treat it as a slap on the wrist. i've gone with whichever poll option seemed closer to that spirit when i worked out the math.

said it on the other thread, but the idea people are pushed away by a temp ban is silly. short-term bans, threadbans, etc. are our group consensus way to shape the community, and without moderation the worst impulses of good people have no check

I understand the impulse to keep posting, and society as a whole has caught up with those of us who were very online a couple decades ago. but the lessons we should remember on ilx — that “posting through it” when people find your current comments particularly irritating, or doubling down on a position because someone dared to disagree, has circled back from the twitters/facebooks of the internet and poisoned our board

when conversation starts to go off the rails it’s not time to vilify someone and ban them for a long period. it’s time to get them to stop posting for a bit to cool off and gain perspective. the only people who need longer ban periods are those who absolutely can’t help but grind the same axes when they come back

there is no shame in being temporarily suspended. there is group shame in creating a place where no one wants to come back

agree with Doctor Casino that it should be a cumulative thing, but that’d require a more strenuous reworking of the rules and having a couple rolling windows as proposed seems like a good test

the idea people are pushed away by a temp ban is silly

I'm no board historian but haven't people literally left forever following temp bans?

Then you circle back to people leaving the site because of persistent trolls and general shittiness so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yep and a fair point

I genuinely hope this leads to more transparent and simple moderation but 20's an easy target in a tight spot

I just don't like it when good people leave for whatever reason

There will always be one poster who will irritate, sometimes the person about to leave will just use whatever excuse. People sometimes have a good run, but that does end.

Bad trolls still tryna get even
Haters mad for whatever reason
Smoke in the air, binge postin'
They lose it when the mods drop the temp ban

if people have left over a temp ban, then a temp ban has a stigma it should not have! we’ve made moderation seem onerous and not routine and imo it’s wearing on the moderators. there is no lack of transparency in moderation, as I’ve seen it, just a lot of ganging up on moderators when they’ve done their job

temp ban would have less stigma if it were called a yellow card or a timeout or even a temp ban, however it seems to currently be called a permanent ban, can this not be fixed?

There will always be one poster who will irritate, sometimes the person about to leave will just use whatever excuse. People sometimes have a good run, but that does end.

seems to currently be called a permanent ban, can this not be fixed

that has been discussed in the other threads, yep. one would home that a "seven-day timeout" notice would reduce, if not eradicate, borad lawyering

temp ban would have less stigma if it were called a yellow card or a timeout or even a temp ban, however it seems to currently be called a permanent ban, can this not be fixed?

a yellow card is a separate thing! I am in favor of greater use of them vs. temp bans ... like, at least from my experience, just having someone respectfully tell me "you're too close to this" or "chill, take a minute, go back and read what people are actually posting instead of how your angry brain is interpreting the posts" ... etc. ... like I think that would work in most cases without having to ban someone for 3 days.

We can’t have a whole site of you splitting your time between lazy trolling and serious book discussion, can we?
― scampo italiano (gyac), Tuesday, 8 September 2020 bookmarkflaglink

Why not, sounds good to me?

i don't recall anyone leaving over a tempban but please someone set the record straight if needed

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

just a few more minutes...

lol

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

lol

Time for a rerun.

split the difference, 10.5 day ban

This is actually my fault, I think (can mods check?) I clicked to view the results and accidentally whacked vote on option 5 (no change), instead of option 4, as I mentioned upthread.

"Btw, Fred B chose not to come back after his ban. You know that, right Dan?"

I know that. I really didn't mean to offend, I just don't agree with banishing people who are posting in good faith, even temporarily

Don’t recall much of that ‘good faith’ when he was trolling about rape, but hey, it wasn’t you he bothered so it didn’t matter.

sorry, I didn't see that

I think Shakey and Fred were both posting in good faith - whether that makes it better or worse?

(I voted no change, because I think there's a new tendency to accuse people of trolling and acting in bad faith here when all that really means "I don't like what you have to say.")

as opposed to the old tendency of ....?

I don't remember people calling gabbneb a troll, it was just accepted that he had bad beliefs. The problem with 'troll' is that it's used as a bludgeon to try to get people to gang up on the person whose beliefs you don't like.

in the past people just ganged up on the person whose beliefs they didn't like -- it didn't matter whether they were arguing in good faith or trolling ...

I think it's harder to build that gang up when you don't have a mod or established figure calling someone a troll.

i think ilx has gotten older and nicer and some of those "established figures" are no longer here ...

which is to say, the shift to claiming people you don't like are trolls wasn't effective enough, so now the desire seems to be lowering the barrier to make that ganging up even easier.

sorry for my using that term in the past in regard to posters who are honest, it's more clear to me now

neither of y'all seem to get what is driving this entire conversation, like, at all

mh has had some very good posts, so has Doctor Casino, go read them.

Doctor Casino's very good post is specifically about how it's too hard to ban people.

Which indicates that I do get what is driving this conversation and just disagree with it?

You might actually not be getting it in part because 'ban' in this case is a misnomer. I feel like a lot of the opponents are getting hung up on that misnomer, tbf. Two weeks is not a ban, it's a time out.

i think a more accurate name for it could be ... a temporary ban!

I agree! But some people seem to express a gut-level revulsion to the term and start getting all 'not all ILXors'. Let's call it a fun break.

I think that's questionable semantics. Someone being told they're not welcome (ostensibly by the community) and prohibited from posting is a ban, temporary or not. Hence many of them not coming back.

As I said above, no change was my vote because 51 has required a good chunk of community and has seemed quite capable of banning racists and sexists over the last what 10+ years of SBs/FPs?

ILX has always been cliquish and reducing that 'community' capable of banning someone (along with, as I said above, my belief that using troll and bad faith instead of "I disagree" or "I don't like you" is about rallying people to the cause) is problematic.

i'm ambivalent about it tbh -- having been the recipient of a "fun break" on several occasions -- it felt shitty tbh

"I think that's questionable semantics. Someone being told they're not welcome (ostensibly by the community) and prohibited from posting is a ban, temporary or not. Hence many of them not coming back."

agree with milo, whether it’s temp bans or shunning, people have been driven away, and I don't think it's good for ilx

Dan, the flipside is people feeling unwelcome and being driven away by aggro antagonistic posters ...

People are divided between 7 or 14 days for the 20 FP threshold; 90 day bans are out; keeping the existing system is out.

I think mods are capable of casting the “tiebreaker” between 14 and 7 in our little star chamber.

xps for the millionth time, for every person "driven away" by the community moderation system, there is at least one other person who just quietly stops posting because they don't like being here any more.

you're never going to make everyone happy, and yet the solution you propose is allowing the most divisive posters to continue posting freely, because....they want to?

as long as the ILX Bar Association can continue to lobby for the lightening of sentences and mods will hear grievances in good faith ... do what thou whilst

I am wondering what is the reason people quietly stop posting here. I really don't think it is because of divisive posters

It’s 100% because they get tired of putting up with assholes

I know a lot of people who’ve quit and I’ve also personally quit

do people still like this prick enough for this to work, I was hoping he was generally agreed to be over

00s liberal comedy esp UK just an absolute hellzone of smug sneery pseudo subversive crypto conservative back patting wankery. I can’t even watch the stuff I thought was good at the time (office 1, peep show) because the general tenor of that whole comedy/media phenomenon is so nasty & pervasive & stifling

if this guy isn’t quite as blatantly pure reaction & minstrelsy in liberal clothing compared to say little britain he’s close enough to be buried in the same chamber, any additional satire is so tame & loses out to the thrill of laughing at the funny foreigner (/other ‘other’) saying or getting provincials to say these un-PC things. none of these people are us- we appreciate jew jokes on a higher level than those bigots, we know how to put our racism in quotation marks

are we at a place yet as a culture where we can just call Ali G fucking racist (supposed whitemiddleclassness of character is either irrelevant or the point), without being shouted down by the comedy defence league? I’m not sure. but I’m pretty sure we could have been spared Bo! Selecta if it wasn’t for this dickhead’s efforts

― ... (Left), Thursday, September 10, 2020 5:23 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

Zzzzzz

― rascal clobber (jim in vancouver), Thursday, September 10, 2020 6:52 PM (twenty-seven minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

oh shoot I forgot to include my opinion

my opinion is: what the heck is Bo! Selecta

don't leave us El Tomboto

sorry but shouldn't this be on I Love Boat Propulsion

― life is beauitul (rip van wanko), Wednesday, September 2, 2020 12:38 AM

this was a quite humorous post, at which I lolled

I’ve self-deprecatingly mentioned that a lot of people have left because they’ve achieved success in their careers/marriages/child rearing and don’t need a social outlet to talk about which album by The Cure is most underrated. Shame on them

tbh, there are nearly as many reasons to wander away as there are people who have wandered away. I know a few mentioned they didn’t really care who posters were unless they’d met them irl, and couldn’t really tell people apart. Have a few bad interactions with someone who does notice those things and you go back to tweeting takes on movies/music instead

I enjoy the conversational, linear nature of ilx. deciphering of x-posts aside, it’s a format that’s not well-served in a very thread-heavy or upvoted Q&A web these days

I can't really tell all of you apart and haven't ever met anybody from here in real life... I've only formed rudimentary images of you all in my mind, but that's enough, I love you all

I’m not leaving, Dan, I was referring to a
hiatus in the past.

This is actually my fault, I think (can mods check?) I clicked to view the results and accidentally whacked vote on option 5 (no change), instead of option 4, as I mentioned upthread.

Which of these was which again? It's difficult to check now the results are in.

comrade gyac is another 7 dayer 😍

Sorry, it was option 3, 20 fps = 14 day ban, 50 fps = 30 day ban

14 days has won the aggregate poll anyway tbf

Which of these was which again? It's difficult to check now the results are in.

comrade gyac is an unreliable narrator 😱

xp tbf I didn’t know this, I use Zing so I don’t check polls on there that often

focusing on posters we know by name, and why they've left misses the big picture imo. to me it feels like common sense that if you let rampaging aggression and clusterfuck-fueling go on and on unchecked until MAYbe the person gets a timeout (through an arcane system that is not particularly visible to the casual visitor, and which in practice requires dozens of people to file complaints over months), is going to discourage tons of people from becoming posters we know by name!

i've said this before, but if we were designing ilx from the ground up and thinking "what functional and design choices would i make to make this space feel like a safe haven for civil and fun discussion, and an appealing one to newcomers," i think there's a ton of small things we would do differently. i don't mean giving the site a makeover to look more hip or otherwise lose what's special about it --- i mean stuff like, linking at the top to an faq that spells out what this place is, what kind of behavior isn't tolerated, what "flag post" does... like even at the level of a decent Usenet group FAQ circa 1993 explaining that flamewars are frowned upon etc. or like, when threads are rightfully locked for being awful and offensive, we shd probably note this at the top and in the title so a new visitor doesn't have to get to the bottom to go "oh whew, this IS or has at least BECOME the kind of place where this awfulness isn't wanted" etc...

those are just a couple of examples but i just mean, elsewhere on the internet people are actively trying to create non-toxic spaces where people feel safe, and i appreciate any efforts by the mods to do that work. we're very far from the worst space out there, obviously, but does that mean the work is done? why are the numbers here still so heavily weighted towards cis white dudes age 35 and up, when going on the internet to be nerdy about music and everything has gotten a million times more diverse in the lifetime of this site?

p.s. i recognize that i probably sound like the obnoxious uber-radical dude in every org that derails all meetings by wanting to spend another hour designing the perfect, fool-proof bylaws that will prevent capture by centrists or w/e, but IRL i hate that guy!! i just think we can love ilx and also believe that it doesn't have to be the way it's been.

Doctor C, I went on the same mental odyssey. Public policy is a rabbit hole