The joys of a properly moderated forum

[SiuiS]

I am, as far as I can tell (always leave room for possible self-delusion).

Darn. Knew I forgot something!

IRL, this is what they call politeness, a basic skill we teach each other for the main purpose of not having fisticuffs all the time.

I am uncomfortable with this. Politeness is an empathetic skill. Simply not getting baited is not politeness. I don't necessarily agree with Skeppio that all this is toxic (not have I been hurt as she has, though, which is important), but I would like to think there's a middle ground where you can be polite but direct. The only time I agree completely is when I cannot be sure of my own motives; when "just telling the truth" serves no purpose other than to make someone aware of something I know will negatively affect their emotional state.

There's a difference between being polite and flat-out lying to people because you'll get thrown out if you so much as say one negative thing.

I have never seen any situation on this forum that requires flat out lying to avoid a ban or similar. And if it's a clique, well, screw them.

Even if it's a clique I'm part of. Your health – mental and emotional as well as physical – is more important than you liking me. Take care of yourself. Try not to get weighed down.

No need for that. But I appreciate the sentiment.

Spoiler: Speaking of toxicity...

Show

And SiuiS, once again, please refrain from making comments on me. <-- This is me asking politely, yet again, for the records. I've been instructed to do so.
I don't want to waste my time on this forum defending myself from misrepresentation.
Also don't bother answering, you are on my ignore list and I won't click "view post". I just read your post in Killer Angel's quote and I was displeased to find that you are still talking about me when you have no business doing so. You are as far form knowing me as anyone can ever be.

I am not misrepresenting anything if I supply a fact, unless I also supply an interpretation. I specifically phrased that in a neutral and supportive fashion; you were in a place where bad things happened and it upset you, and that's unfortunate. That's not misrepresentation. That is what you have said directly, and what I have witnessed. No value judgement attached. Feeling that I am misrepresenting you says more about your animosity to me than it does about what I said.

I'm bending my forum break (which is for health reasons, not because I don't like it here) in order to say: Yes, definitely. I am direct and open essentially all the time*, and what's more I'm reasonably sure I don't stealth-bully anyone either.

Aye, you're pretty good about that sort of thing. You, Pair o'Dice lost, and Mark Hall have all comported yourselves with grace. Thanks.

Regarding "stealth bullying", if it's recognizable as bullying I believe that would make it still against the rules here. If you see it, I would say report it. If it's not recognizable as bullying, then is it really bullying at all?

That's a good question, actually. I think it depends. We all have different baseline assumptions for what the maximum background radiation level can be before it becomes an issue. I also don't think that an objective measure is as useful as we all believe; I know there are some people who have experienced traumas wherein things that would be considered normal are considered bullying or an antagonistic environment. For example, I have walked into a thread on a random page and found something that, if said to me directly, would have been sexual harassment at minimum. But in the context that evolved of these people talking it was a wry throwaway line which may even have only held value because, while one person said it, no one believed it.

The set-point for what antagonism is acceptable is a hard one to define. But I think it would be valuable to do so.

[Killer Angel]

I am uncomfortable with this. Politeness is an empathetic skill. Simply not getting baited is not politeness. I don't necessarily agree with Skeppio that all this is toxic (not have I been hurt as she has, though, which is important), but I would like to think there's a middle ground where you can be polite but direct.

We also must remember the context in which we move.
to write is not the same as to speak. I know of misunderstandings between lifetime friends, for things written in e-mails.
We discuss with unknown people, that often don't speak our native Language, and it's not an easy starting point.
Politeness, may well be "to give the benefit of doubt, because maybe that user is not saying the thing it seems to say"

[Thufir]

I do have to ask, though -- don't threads like this usually end in tears?

Kinda, yeah. Any time someone makes a thread to say "Hey this forum is pretty cool the mods do a good job and stuff," it's like a massive Bat-signal to all the people who think the mods are draconian tyrants carrying out personal vendettas against them, or who hate passive aggression with the fire of a thousand suns, or some combination of the two.

[Serpentine]

I've never told a lie on this forum (as far as I can remember), and I've always been open and honest. I've had to give myself a chant of "report, don't respond", but overall I'll take the moderation as it is over... pretty much anything less, really.

[Grinner]

Kinda, yeah. Any time someone makes a thread to say "Hey this forum is pretty cool the mods do a good job and stuff," it's like a massive Bat-signal to all the people who think the mods are draconian tyrants carrying out personal vendettas against them, or who hate passive aggression with the fire of a thousand suns, or some combination of the two.

The mods here actually seem very detached. It's admirable, really.

The members...well, it's kind of like being in a comic shop. This forum attracts a certain breed of individual. We tend to be intelligent, well-educated by most standards, and often asocial, with headcases of every stripe interspersed. Consequently, while we may have the most honest of intentions, we frequently grate on each others' nerves. The one thing keeping most mouths in check is the fear of the ever-looming banhammer.

For myself, I don't particularly like you all, but this forum is the lesser of several hundred thousand (if not more) evils.

[Serpentine]

You don't like me? I like you.
Maybe you'd grow to like me if you got to know me better?

[Dienekes]

You don't like me? I like you.
Maybe you'd grow to like me if you got to know me better?

Probably not. Don't take it personally, I don't like many people. And most of them share my taste for utterly sickening humor and believe that growing a thick skin is a good thing and not something that should be mitigated by forcing people to speak nicely to each other.

I can't think of anyone on the forum I actually like. Plenty I respect as intelligent, decisive, and full of conviction. But like? Nah. Though I do think that is almost entirely caused by the moderation. I remember a joke thread awhile back where I dropped a couple I found funny and right afterwards there was a bit of a warning (not specifically directed at me, admittedly) about trying to be appropriate with our humor. Which is kind of bullcrap if you ask me. Humor is about taking situations and turning them funny. Any situation, from the most horrifying to the mundane, to the most majestic. After the warning it became full of knock-knock jokes and puns. It was just sad.

[Serpentine]

...it was a reference, hun

[Dienekes]

...it was a reference, hun

I know, I watched part of the giant Simpsons marathon. I just felt like responding, due to boredom mostly.

[Hyena]

I would like to point out that there is a group with very specific ideas, that I am not going to name, that is given a surprisingly lenient, for this forum, treatment, and followers of which continue to get away with flaming and accusations they really, by the rules, shouldn't be getting away with.
But hey, it's just me with my negativity.

[AtlanteanTroll]

I've never told a lie on this forum (as far as I can remember), and I've always been open and honest. I've had to give myself a chant of "report, don't respond", but overall I'll take the moderation as it is over... pretty much anything less, really.

Taking something over anything less is a whole different ball game than taking something over anything else.

[Sorrcerousflux]

Is it that sometimes people just dont report things when they should, so people get away without punishment?

But you guys are here so it cant be too bad? Right?

[SiuiS]

We also must remember the context in which we move.
to write is not the same as to speak. I know of misunderstandings between lifetime friends, for things written in e-mails.
We discuss with unknown people, that often don't speak our native Language, and it's not an easy starting point.
Politeness, may well be "to give the benefit of doubt, because maybe that user is not saying the thing it seems to say"

Ah, that's much better. Thank you.

I would like to point out that there is a group with very specific ideas, that I am not going to name, that is given a surprisingly lenient, for this forum, treatment, and followers of which continue to get away with flaming and accusations they really, by the rules, shouldn't be getting away with.
But hey, it's just me with my negativity.

It's those damn bronies, isn't it? Silly pony lovers, the lot if them.

[AtlanteanTroll]

It's those damn bronies, isn't it? Silly pony lovers, the lot if them.

Well seeing as the Pony Thread goes through almost no moderation and has more pointless content than the Random Banter...

[Gwynfrid]

I am uncomfortable with this. Politeness is an empathetic skill. Simply not getting baited is not politeness. I don't necessarily agree with Skeppio that all this is toxic (not have I been hurt as she has, though, which is important), but I would like to think there's a middle ground where you can be polite but direct. The only time I agree completely is when I cannot be sure of my own motives; when "just telling the truth" serves no purpose other than to make someone aware of something I know will negatively affect their emotional state.

I agree with you on all points. I guess what I wanted to say is, truth is generally overrated, at least when people equate "truth" with speaking their mind honestly. Speaking honestly serves no useful purpose if the other party is either unable or not prepared to hear it out.

Other than that I fully agree it is generally possible to speak both politely and directly, at least when the situation isn't already contentious. Politeness certainly doesn't require outright lying - at most, omission of certain portions of the truth may be warranted.

[Dienekes]

I agree with you on all points. I guess what I wanted to say is, truth is generally overrated, at least when people equate "truth" with speaking their mind honestly. Speaking honestly serves no useful purpose if the other party is either unable or not prepared to hear it out.

Other than that I fully agree it is generally possible to speak both politely and directly, at least when the situation isn't already contentious. Politeness certainly doesn't require outright lying - at most, omission of certain portions of the truth may be warranted.

You see and I'm the opposite opinion. Being honest is most important when people don't want to or aren't prepared to hear it. Now that doesn't mean walking into a McDonalds and yelling at random people that they're fat and gonna die of a heart attack. But if someone is deluding themselves and it is affecting themselves or others and the topic comes up I will not lie to them, no matter how painful or how unprepared they are.

[Gwynfrid]

You see and I'm the opposite opinion. Being honest is most important when people don't want to or aren't prepared to hear it. Now that doesn't mean walking into a McDonalds and yelling at random people that they're fat and gonna die of a heart attack. But if someone is deluding themselves and it is affecting themselves or others and the topic comes up I will not lie to them, no matter how painful or how unprepared they are.

I can see where you're coming from. I would agree with you in those cases where what you have to say is an important truth, and news to those you're telling it to. Opinions exchanged on the Internet, alas, rarely fall in this category.

[SiuiS]

Well seeing as the Pony Thread goes through almost no moderation and has more pointless content than the Random Banter...

Pointless is relative, but yeah that's mostly true. During the seasonal downtime, we resort to modded games, fanfiction, and such. Much less on-pointe.

I agree with you on all points. I guess what I wanted to say is, truth is generally overrated, at least when people equate "truth" with speaking their mind honestly. Speaking honestly serves no useful purpose if the other party is either unable or not prepared to hear it out.

Other than that I fully agree it is generally possible to speak both politely and directly, at least when the situation isn't already contentious. Politeness certainly doesn't require outright lying - at most, omission of certain portions of the truth may be warranted.

Oh most certainly. "Being honest" and "being abrasive" are not the same.

You see and I'm the opposite opinion. Being honest is most important when people don't want to or aren't prepared to hear it. Now that doesn't mean walking into a McDonalds and yelling at random people that they're fat and gonna die of a heart attack. But if someone is deluding themselves and it is affecting themselves or others and the topic comes up I will not lie to them, no matter how painful or how unprepared they are.

If you value conveying the truth but choose to do so in a manner that you have reason to know will not be recieved, are you conveying the truth?

We have numerous studies that say clearly, how you say something matters. It's often possible to tell an uncomfortable truth in a compassionate way. Choosing to instead say "you're wrong you **** head, listen to me" is folly.

If you go about telling someone an uncomfortable truth in a compassionate way, they tend to accept it better. Often because they understand that you are there to help and not to be malicious. It's harder online, and requires more effort into your past history to present this image, but it's valuable when pulled off.

[Dienekes]

I can see where you're coming from. I would agree with you in those cases where what you have to say is an important truth, and news to those you're telling it to. Opinions exchanged on the Internet, alas, rarely fall in this category.

Agreed, but I would argue that similarly situations where blatantly lying is the best option are also rare in the arguments on forums such as this. Maybe you see it differently, but I have no patience or desire for emotional pandering and undeserved compliments.

If you value conveying the truth but choose to do so in a manner that you have reason to know will not be recieved, are you conveying the truth?

Yes. Next question.

We have numerous studies that say clearly, how you say something matters. It's often possible to tell an uncomfortable truth in a compassionate way. Choosing to instead say "you're wrong you **** head, listen to me" is folly.

In what strange world did conveying the truth suddenly turn to mean being an *******? I think I even gave an example in the post you quoted that going about things in a similar manner is wrong. Yes, generally calling someone a ****head means your words are less likely to be paid attention to. How is this news? That doesn't mean the message itself was false, just that the messenger is an *******.

If you go about telling someone an uncomfortable truth in a compassionate way, they tend to accept it better. Often because they understand that you are there to help and not to be malicious. It's harder online, and requires more effort into your past history to present this image, but it's valuable when pulled off.

Yes, criticism without maliciousness added to it is more difficult online. But that doesn't automatically mean that it suddenly becomes better to lie or that the truth becomes meaningless as Gwynfrid was saying.

[SiuiS]

In what strange world did conveying the truth suddenly turn to mean being an *******?

Simply, we are discussing using rhetoric. You say there are situations where bluntness is better than politeness. I say they are not opposites and you can always do both. Though you may not want to. I know I've had conversations where "gosh you're a four asterisk, what is your deal?" Was the actual fastest resolution.

Yes, criticism without maliciousness added to it is more difficult online. But that doesn't automatically mean that it suddenly becomes better to lie or that the truth becomes meaningless as Gwynfrid was saying.

That is true. I am trying to break up the idea of a binary where you're either completely truthful and unempathetic or very polite but walk on eggshells.

[Dienekes]

Simply, we are discussing using rhetoric. You say there are situations where bluntness is better than politeness. I say they are not opposites and you can always do both. Though you may not want to. I know I've had conversations where "gosh you're a four asterisk, what is your deal?" Was the actual fastest resolution.

That is true. I am trying to break up the idea of a binary where you're either completely truthful and unempathetic or very polite but walk on eggshells.

I do not believe I ever made the dichotomy between bluntness and politeness, or if I did I did not mean to. My initial remark was against Gwynfrid's quotes "the truth is overrated" and "honesty serves no purpose" which are two statements I disagree with on a fundamental level regardless of the target's acceptance or reluctance of the truth you are giving them.

Now, what I have said before is that I find the over emphasis on politeness to the point of avoiding all confrontation even when it is justified and completely called for is deplorable and I want no part in it. But, that has not been mentioned on this thread, I believe.

[SiuiS]

Now, what I have said before is that I find the over emphasis on politeness to the point of avoiding all confrontation even when it is justified and completely called for is deplorable and I want no part in it. But, that has not been mentioned on this thread, I believe.

You have my full agreement there. Maturity is both the ability to give this criticism and the ability to recieve it. It doesn't always work, but the surface example of people only giving advice without malice and accepting critique without rancor should help people understand that this is how it's supposed to be.

Unfortunately, passive aggression and back room cliques seem to have cropped up instead. That's sort of related to what has been said; a little bit of rancor is good. A little bit of accountability. A little bit of having to self-moderate. I have only really joined one other forum, most of them seem so... What's the word? Uncoordinated? Unprofessional? Whatever. I've only ever been on one other forum. I left it because it's a very macho, sort of toxic and antagonistic atmosphere. But the basics of that antagonism were to do your research, to have data to back up what you said and to be responsible for your behavior. Those were good lessons, and I still hold to the idea that if you don't respect your point enough to attempt grammar, your audience shouldn't respect it either.

[warty goblin]

This is the only forum I post at, so it's clearly working for me. I don't post as much as I used to, mostly because I find my interests have drifted a bit over the years in relation to the rest of the forum, and I often don't feel like putting in the detail work necessary to make my post future-proof against what seems a rather bad faith reading of what I wrote. Or maybe it's just me, and what I write actually is that terrible. Since it's frequently ignored, I'm guessing irrelevant is probably a more accurate description.

But whatever, it's still a mostly fun place to hang out.

[SiuiS]

That sounds like the spotlight effect a little, to me. I always assumed what you write is just sufficient enough that it doesn't need much comment. You and Zrak tend to be good at condensing stuff that takes me reams of rhetorical posturing into a no nonsense sentence or paragraph, for example. A lack of response is probably just no one wanting to argue.

[Tvtyrant]

I like strict moderation myself. When I am on a forum I am there to discuss a particular topic, and if that topic isn't allowed I move to one where that is the focus. GitP is my most posted in forum because it covers the most subjects that I am interested in and has the best moderation by my standards. If it didn't I would be somewhere else.

[hamishspence]

I've only ever been on one other forum. I left it because it's a very macho, sort of toxic and antagonistic atmosphere. But the basics of that antagonism were to do your research, to have data to back up what you said and to be responsible for your behavior. Those were good lessons, and I still hold to the idea that if you don't respect your point enough to attempt grammar, your audience shouldn't respect it either.

Sounds rather like Stardestroyer.net - at least, what little I've seen of it.

[SiuiS]

Electric samurai dot com, actually. Official unofficial forum for Amtgard LARP. A lot of fantastic, wonderful people I truly respect, but they can be anuses.

A topic came up based on transsexuality and I was able to directly contrast the tone and sensitivity between the two. It solidified my fatigue and I stepped out.

On the upside, I was able to witness a deep conversation about racism just a few weeks ago between to very, very different and often antagonistic people. I feel the respectfulness of that conversation was directly caused by the antagonisti air; these two knew each others' measure and treated the topic sensitively, even if they didn't treat each other so. Pros and cons to either method I suppose.

[Killer Angel]

Well seeing as the Pony Thread goes through almost no moderation and has more pointless content than the Random Banter...

Isn't it moderated by the magic of friendship?

[Gwynfrid]

Agreed, but I would argue that similarly situations where blatantly lying is the best option are also rare in the arguments on forums such as this. Maybe you see it differently, but I have no patience or desire for emotional pandering and undeserved compliments.

No, I don't see it differently. As far as I'm concerned, such situations are nonexistent. When I said above that I believe I have always been honest on this forum, this implies I never pandered to anybody.

If you value conveying the truth but choose to do so in a manner that you have reason to know will not be recieved, are you conveying the truth?

Yes. Next question.

No, you're not. You are uttering the truth, it is not the same thing as conveying the truth. What you perceive as the truth is what you see on your screen at the moment you click on `submit`. The moment your post hits the other person's eyeballs, however, it is no longer the truth: It is a bunch of words they will interpret into... something. What you're conveying is this interpretation, which is no longer under your control at that point.

My initial remark was against Gwynfrid's quotes "the truth is overrated" and "honesty serves no purpose" which are two statements I disagree with on a fundamental level regardless of the target's acceptance or reluctance of the truth you are giving them.

I realize the expressions that I used were overly provocative. It looks like I got carried away by my own rhetoric, thus making myself less intelligible. Sorry about that. The irony of this situation is at my expense, in fact: Our exchange and the fact I failed to properly convey my meaning... is a pretty good illustration of my point. Oh well.

[Hiro Protagonest]

No one is ever honest on this board.

No, not even me.

Ooh, a paradox.

I like this forum a lot. Maybe I'm blind to all the backstabbing that goes on at other sites, although I've been to Minmax boards and all I've seen from people who are actually GitP members is "it's not good for serious conversations", which is... true of pretty much every internet gathering place that's reasonably popular. Sure you can attempt to have a conversation about politics on other sites, but aside from one Twitch streamer who has like, five hundred viewers and has discussed economics and political views a couple times, I've never seen a good discussion about politics on the internet, and even that was only surface-scratching, just making estimates of the salaries of YouTube personalities and clearing up the definition of the word "conservative".

While I've seen many an argument her just fizzle out as it goes nowhere, at least people are forced to concede they're going nowhere and not switch to hurling insults.