Mal Posted July 22, 2011 So we have had a few issues recently. And as moderators frankly we have not been able to deal with them as well as we should have. It's a repeat of the usual, it starts with little jabs, slight insults, nothing really that objectionable. We really do try to moderate through non-action. And usually that works well, the general participants smooth it over, difference are settled, people move on. But sometimes things get a bit heated and escalate. Again it's not unexpected, someone said something so someone else takes it further. People start to get angry and follow up. But it gets to a stage where people are only arguing, not discussing, and any attempts to smooth it out are just ignored. Once big arguments are entrenched I do believe that we have stopped respecting our "opponent" As moderators we have discussed and examined a wide range of behaviors and it seems that mostly they boil down to not respecting each others views, hence we feel that this could be helpful Tao bums is a moderated, privately owned, web site; all who agree with our guiding principals are welcome to join our discussions: Treat other members with respect. No personal attacks. Moderators are present to enforce this, please abide by their decisions. Thoughts? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted July 23, 2011 Treat other members with respect. No personal attacks. Thoughts? But we are still allowed to attack what the other member says, right? If a member presents a bunch of BS in a discussion I am participating in I surely want to let them know that I think what they said is BS. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mal Posted July 23, 2011 Yes as Sean stated in the original insult policy This may seem restrictive but I think it'll force us to grow up a bit and think about how to present our perspectives intelligently without just flinging unproductive rudeness at each other. No one, including the originating poster, gains anything from statements like "So and so is a complete moron" or "XYZ sexual preference is abominable". If you have an opinion and you believe it's relevant to a topic at hand, post it as constructively as possible so we can learn from you, debate with you, ignore you, whatever. So if you must "attack" do it with respect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mal Posted July 23, 2011 Got a PM with great points so I'll put that into the discussion already formulating exactly the same question Marblehead posed; must we respect each other's views? As others have said, this is an open and unregulated forum; anyone with an opinion and a keyboard can participate, regardless of the integrity of the ideas presented. This invites enormous challenges, for participants as well as moderators, reckless unaccountability of posted content being the most obvious, precisely the content that engenders uncharitable backlash in the first place. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sloppy Zhang Posted July 23, 2011 People get fired up. Shit happens. I'm fine with taking a few insults. I try my best to word things as best I can, and make it about the arguments, but, you know, if someone is presenting a BS argument over and over again, it gets reaaaaaaaallllyy hard to not sprinkle in something like "you are full of it". [edit](I started typing up the post but had to leave, so didn't see the PM'd comment Mal just posted) Well that is certainly a part of it. Not everyone who comes to an open forum is going to necessarily be respectful, be worthy of respect, present an opinion that has integrity, whether personal or intellectual or otherwise, or is going to meet other opinions with respect. Should we stop that? I don't think so. I think we should keep it open. I think people should be allowed to talk and, yes, get a little angry. Because that's what happens when we get a bunch of people with not only mis-matching ideas, but also mis-matching ideas of how respect is granted or earned, what actions are respectable and which actions are not, how to present an opinion/argument and what to do with it. We aren't a university where everyone had to meet certain requirements to get in. We aren't some legal consulting firm where each of us have a laundry list of credentials. You need to have an e-mail and intelligence to leave a post in the intro forum, then move elsewhere (or the intelligence to create a program that can do that ) But beyond that... I mean, it's equal! I could be President Bush, or Mark Zuckerburg, or a schoolteacher, a security guard, a housewife, ANYTHING behind this screen- and so could any of you![/edit] Yeah, it's hard when people involved don't fundamentally respect each other, because when that happens it's never about the argument, it's always personal, or at least it can seem that way. You could present the best argument in the world, but if I don't respect you as a person, I'm never going to listen to it. And vice versa. It's what people do, and, well, we ARE people. I'm not a fan of instituting a bunch of rules that would make us "pretend" to get along. If people get suspended or banned or threads locked for someone saying "you are full of it", or an equivalent, I'm not for that in the slightest. Isn't that what the pit is for? Are these rules going to extend to the pit? I don't know. I don't think the pit should be moderated, except for potentially legally actionable acts (threats, endangerment to forum members, the posting of copyright or otherwise illegal material, etc). And I think those rules should be pinned to the pit. I also think that people should be given a lot of leeway (and I think in general (hehe) they are, so props for that) for comments which seem to be a little bit too personal. Because we're people and that will happen, especially in important topics. If it is demonstrably disruptive, or repeatedly unfounded and personal, move to the pit. I think it's different, in Sean's examples, when you say "so-and-so is a complete moron" or "XYZ sexual practice is abominable", and when, after a long back and forth argument, where people have exchanged a lot of posts and have gotten to know the behavior of the person rather well, to say "you keep dodging" or "you keep misrepresenting my position" or "you are misquoting me" or "that isn't what I said". I think that was the source of a LOT of problems in some of the more recent hot threads. People would come in and say one thing, then another person would come in and say that person said another thing, and the first person would say "no, that's not what I said, this is what I said" and the second person would say "no, that is what you said" and back and forth. So by the end, you've got a long trail of posts which point to how someone handles a debate/argument- be that good or bad, maturely or immaturely. If it is legally actionable even in the pit, move from there. If not, just leave it be. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted July 23, 2011 Yeah, it's hard when people involved don't fundamentally respect each other, because when that happens it's never about the argument, it's always personal, or at least it can seem that way. You could present the best argument in the world, but if I don't respect you as a person, I'm never going to listen to it. And vice versa. This is exactly the point. As I see it the mod rules are not about quashing debate but about helping it move past this point. So when you are about to type "you stupid moron" you stop for a minute take a breath ... then tell then exactly why you were thinking that ... Its difficult because people have different boundaries. Some people are very sensitive to insult and others its water of a ducks back .... they don't even notice. So for me respect each other is just about that 10 sec gap where you draw breath and think what do I actually want to say to this person. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheWhiteRabbit Posted July 23, 2011 I am no moderator. I have noticed several different forums over the years dealing with spirituality in general just go under. I can only guess at these things. In my observation, it seems when something escalates people involved somehow think that there is something they can do that they can get away with. This usually snowballs out of control. How to prevent it? I am unsure. My faults I try to deal with. Yes, we all have them yet some of us beat our selves up repeatedly over things. Something Ive only recently been able to overcome. I suppose back on track... I can only remember one time that my anger blinded me. I allowed myself to get wrapped up in it. Instead I should have asked myself: Am I ever going to meet this person in real life? No. What importance is it if I am some how "snubbed" on a forum? none. The word especially tends to take a negative aspect when online, so I think it is up to all of us to try to make what we post as positive as possible. There have been times where I wanted to post despite the fact that what I said would have come off as negative. In those cases I should not have over the years on different forums. Forums can be taken very very seriously it seems. When people give opinions, that is usually how they feel from the fiber of their being? Is it right or wrong? No. Its not wrong or right. It is when we make something wrong or right that it escalates. I don't mean this from the perspective of times past nondual type blah blah. I simply mean when we begin to judge right or wrong we start down this path we are talking about. People get bent out of shape, peoples feelings get hurt... someone leaves. Things are what they are. It doesnt afford much in the neighborhood of insight. Then again it seems that people might want to debate on how right or wrong that statement is. Course I am just a moron standing on the back of greatness. The last paragraph was more or less inspired by Neale David Walsch's Conversations with God. Still doing Stillness-Movement. Heart palpatations have gone away. Peace guys 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted July 23, 2011 Sloppy's point in the first half of his post is a valid one. We all do get emotional now and then. That happens. That's life. And I think this is an area where moderation is very useful. When a discussion starts becoming personally emotional a reminder to us all that we are discussing a concept and not a particular member's personality traits. I'm just glad Y'all don't know a lot about me. Hehehe. I would have people all over my case. But trying to kill the messenger instead of dealing with the message is time wasted. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sloppy Zhang Posted July 23, 2011 This is exactly the point. As I see it the mod rules are not about quashing debate but about helping it move past this point. So when you are about to type "you stupid moron" you stop for a minute take a breath ... then tell then exactly why you were thinking that ... Its difficult because people have different boundaries. Some people are very sensitive to insult and others its water of a ducks back .... they don't even notice. So for me respect each other is just about that 10 sec gap where you draw breath and think what do I actually want to say to this person. Sloppy's point in the first half of his post is a valid one. We all do get emotional now and then. That happens. That's life. And I think this is an area where moderation is very useful. When a discussion starts becoming personally emotional a reminder to us all that we are discussing a concept and not a particular member's personality traits. I'm just glad Y'all don't know a lot about me. Hehehe. I would have people all over my case. But trying to kill the messenger instead of dealing with the message is time wasted. The only issue I have is moderator action becoming about making sure everyone is a friend or something. Okay, that sounds bad, but really, I mean, it's not like this is a cooking forum or a knitting forum. There are plenty of people here who have dedicated their lives to this stuff. So I consider it completely appropriate that people get ticked off at others. If it's contained to a thread, let it play. If it gets reasonably out of hand, move to the pit. If it's clear that one member is chasing down another person in a bunch of threads, and every time, say, Person A leaves a post, person B comes in and is all like "well it's not like you would know, person A, you are just a stupid head", well that's starting to get out of line in the sense that it's disruptive to everyone. If it starts to seem like someone has a real vendetta against someone (tracking down all their posts and harassing them over it), well that would be cause for action. If it seems like one or more members are looking like they are at risk beyond the scope of this forum, well that's also a time for action. It just seems too ambiguous to say "you are being disrespectful" and then suspend/ban someone for that, unless it can be show that it is systematic and disruptive. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mal Posted July 23, 2011 The only issue I have is moderator action becoming about making sure everyone is a friend or something. True, not everyone needs to be friends, or even agree with each other. (Many of the things I strongly believe in are not shared views here on TTB) But as you point out that doesn't mean every time, say, Person A leaves a post, person B comes in and is all like "well it's not like you would know, person A, you are just a stupid head", well that's starting to get out of line in the sense that it's disruptive to everyone. Exactly besides when we all agree the threads are just boring a-I've found this new method, it's awesome b-Yes, I love it too c-I've been doing it for years, its great. ....silence... a-Yay us? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted July 24, 2011 It just seems too ambiguous to say "you are being disrespectful" and then suspend/ban someone for that, unless it can be show that it is systematic and disruptive. Suspension or banning only comes into play for either something very extreme or repeated ignoring of warnings. So yes, systematic an disruptive. The rule is one thing ... its a statement of how we would like to see people interact ... how it is enforced is another ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sloppy Zhang Posted July 24, 2011 Suspension or banning only comes into play for either something very extreme or repeated ignoring of warnings. So yes, systematic an disruptive. The rule is one thing ... its a statement of how we would like to see people interact ... how it is enforced is another ... Well that's quite reassuring Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mal Posted July 29, 2011 any more comments on - Tao bums is a moderated, privately owned, web site; all who agree with our guiding principals are welcome to join our discussions: Treat other members with respect. No personal attacks. Moderators are present to enforce this, please abide by their decisions. ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted July 29, 2011 any more comments on - ? Not at the moment but if you feel you really need a question or two I am pretty sure I could come up with a couple. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
