A Discussion of the Political Theory Regarding Internet Forum Moderation - Can Anarchism Work?

[Thestatusquo]

What groups are we protecting

[KayJayQueue]

The way you are bringing those groups into this discussion feels adversarial.

What groups are we protecting

Groups that should and need to be protected. However, you can’t only protect them and still act like you have every user’s best interest in mind when it comes to moderating the entire site and the entire user base.

[Thestatusquo]

I want you to be very plain what you are saying and stop speaking in circles. I've heard this complaint from you every thread that vaguely touches on it for a while now and I still don't understand what your complaint is other than you think people are being toxic and abusive to you, and in general you think those people have gone unpunished. Leaving aside the not punished part of the complaint for the time being, which is on the balance not true (most in game reports of abuse do in fact receive action) and indeed you have no way of knowing if it is true or not since most moderator action takes place in the form of warnings, how, again, does this not fall into people simply disagreeing with you about what constitutes abuse or toxicity in a mafia game, a game which is inherently about conflict and manipulation?

Because it really seems to me that's all it is. You can say "there are rules printed on your site." but the enforcement of those rules is subjective because what constitutes toxicity and abuse are subjective especially in the context of games. There is no objective definition of toxicity in a mafia game where the express purpose is to disagree with each other, and indeed most people who report people for toxicity themselves eventually do or say the exact same things they themselves report.

If you have a complaint other than "I believe these subjective rules should have a different line" I'd love to hear it, but I have not heard it yet, and as I said you've made this same complaint over and over again without managing to actually state what it is you have a problem with other than you thinking a few things should have been actioned and we perhaps disagreed that they were over said subjective line, once again leaving aside the problem that you do not actually have any idea what we have or have not actioned.

[KayJayQueue]

I feel like it should be clear I am not asking for less moderation here just unbiased consistency. I think there are many instances where the mod team is going above and beyond to make sure toxicity is swiftly dealt with to protect the victims of the offenders, and I am glad that is happening. I just wish that everyone was protected from those that break site rules equally.

[Thestatusquo]

And in case it is unclear I am disagreeing with you that some people are protected in any way differently from others.

[KayJayQueue]

I want you to be very plain what you are saying and stop speaking in circles. I've heard this complaint from you every thread that vaguely touches on it for a while now and I still don't understand what your complaint is other than you think people are being toxic and abusive to you, and in general you think those people have gone unpunished. Leaving aside the not punished part of the complaint for the time being, which is on the balance not true (most in game reports of abuse do in fact receive action) and indeed you have no way of knowing if it is true or not since most moderator action takes place in the form of warnings, how, again, does this not fall into people simply disagreeing with you about what constitutes abuse or toxicity in a mafia game, a game which is inherently about conflict and manipulation?

Because it really seems to me that's all it is. You can say "there are rules printed on your site." but the enforcement of those rules is subjective because what constitutes toxicity and abuse are subjective especially in the context of games. There is no objective definition of toxicity in a mafia game where the express purpose is to disagree with each other, and indeed most people who report people for toxicity themselves eventually do or say the exact same things they themselves report.

If you have a complaint other than "I believe these subjective rules should have a different line" I'd love to hear it, but I have not heard it yet, and as I said you've made this same complaint over and over again without managing to actually state what it is you have a problem with other than you thinking a few things should have been actioned and we perhaps disagreed that they were over said subjective line, once again leaving aside the problem that you do not actually have any idea what we have or have not actioned.

I think you are assuming quite a lot in this post and that not only is it uncalled for, it’s extremely rude and disrespectful to bring up anything about me personally, especially things that are not public. I am allowed to speak in generalities. You have made many assumptions here about what I’m speaking about in this thread. You have just made this personally about me and I think that you are being unprofessional as a moderator on this site to bring up anything that is not public, which you have just alluded to and that feels pretty low and that you’re using a position of power to publicly shame me for having an opinion.

[Thestatusquo]

Quite frankly kay I don't care. I am extremely tired of you disparaging a group of people who work their asses off for free to administer a website for you to play mafia on because you disagree with them on the margins of very marginal decisions.

Just like you are entitled to your opinion I am entitled to mine.

And to be honest with you I am a little pissed at you because though I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt it really sounds like you're equating us having a zero tolerance policy on issues of transphobia with you not getting your way every time someone says something you dont like to you in a game of mafia and I really really REALLY hope thats not what you're saying.

[KayJayQueue]

Again, you’re assuming quite a lot. You’re using your position as a moderator with privileged information to make these postulations. None of which are true. You act like the only thing I do here is play mafia games, and you’re wrong. You act like I don’t have friends here that also have issues with moderation and that we don’t converse about it. I think you are being extremely unprofessional to make assumptions in your head and then back up your arguments with private information that’s not even relevant to the things I’m saying. Just you, yourself, assuming what you think I’m saying and fighting against me using what you think you know as ammo. It’s highly inappropriate to accuse me of the things you’re accusing me of right now. You’re trying to silence me when you’re just assuming you know what I’m talking about. That’s getting pretty close to an abuse of power since you are using private information (even if it’s not relevant to the things I’m saying) to publicly admonish me.

[Thestatusquo]

I have not said a single thing you have not said yourself publicly, nor have I disclosed any personal or privileged information.

And I'm not a professional, I'm an unpaid volunteer.

[Ythan]

I hope neither of you will take it the wrong way if I say that I doubt this is a conversation you will look back fondly on prolonging. Glhf

[KayJayQueue]

I have not said a single thing you have not said yourself publicly, nor have I disclosed any personal or privileged information.

And I'm not a professional, I'm an unpaid volunteer.

I disagree especially since nothing I’ve said in this thread has anything to do with mafia games, yet you’re implying (or outright saying) it does. None of the rules I quoted in an earlier post were under the mafia guidelines - therefore I was not talking about mafia. It seems to me you assumed I was based off of private information about things I may or may not have reported in the past. And you should not be using that against me, especially when the mod team encourages people to report things. I don’t think a mod using a user’s history in that regard against them publicly ingratiates others to use that system if they have to worry about a mod getting upset and airing out those grievances against the user if they so choose.

And you may be a volunteer, but you’re in a position of power and you should be acting in a professional manner when you’re speaking as a moderator on behalf of the site, which you’re currently doing.

[Thestatusquo]

You have made this same complaint publicly many times. I have read all of those threads and your posts within them.

I once again reiterate that nothing I have said is based on any personal or privileged information, but rather the very obvious context of this complaint which you have made repeatedly and in many forums.

[KayJayQueue]

Except I wasn’t talking about mafia and you were, which means you thinking the context is “obvious” is inaccurate. Especially since you’re not even a mafia mod, you’re a discussion mod, so it’s interesting how you immediately jumped to implying the issue was about something mafia game related and now you are backtracking.

As much as the mod team admits they can make and have made mistakes, it’s pretty telling how much you’re defending the team against someone that implied mistakes were made and that you’re making this solely personal against me when I was speaking in generalities for a reason.

I won’t continue this conversation but I find the behavior presented here by a moderator representing the site and the moderation team pretty appalling.

[Thestatusquo]

I am primarily a user of this website and I am speaking as myself and have been the whole time. I am just as entitled to my opinions as you are to yours, whether you like them or not. The fact that you immediately go on the attack and start trying to impugn my character when all my post did was ask you to be more specific about what you're actually complaining about speaks volumes though.

[kuribo]

Anyone wanna take up a democratic vote about that latest ban? Maybe add a few weeks of debate about whether they should be banned or not while they make racist jokes?


Justice for whoever that guy was, racists horribly underrepresented and oppressed on MafiaScum dot anytee.


(This entire post was brought to you by the letter sarcasm and the number eye roll and viewers like you)

[kuribo]

That post not directed at Shea or Kay btw, it's referring to the original subject and don't wanna post it in the ban thread

[Jake from State Farm]

The problem is that most toxicity IS subjective, as much as we would wish it not be so, and some toxicity IS objective.

I partially agree toxicity is subjective, however when it comes to these rules below, they are not subjective.

Do not abuse or insult other users of the site, or intentionally try to upset them. We understand that some topics and issues can be contentious, but please try to interact with others respectfully and calmly.

Do not make any post or start any thread with the intent to insult or offend any other user on this site.

Do not make any post or start any thread that abuses or harasses another user.

These rules are written clearly, however people violate them and nothing happens.

Player A does something to insult/abuse Player B and Player B reports the post, the admins shouldn't get to decide if the post meets some sort of criteria, when the criteria is clearly stated. If Player B feels abused/insulted, then Player A broke the rule and should be punished. PERIOD.

I try to stay away from stuff like this, because I just come to play mafia and have fun, and don't really care about much else but I agree with what kay was saying with regards to this.

I would cite specific examples but can't because ongoing and it won't matter because those people won't get punished or else they would have already.

[AniX]

I think "If Player B feels abused/insulted, then punishment must result" is a very poor standard because people have wildly different standards of what is insulting/abusive to them. There could certainly exist a hypothetical user who sees ANY criticism, no matter how constructive or innocuous, as insulting or abusive. A user cannot simply become immune to criticism by declaring them all insults and have that enforced under our rules. I think you'd all roast me over the fire if I were to declare "Saying we don't act on toxicity is insulting to me and the mod team and the hard work we do and therefore any user who says it will be punished" but that's the sort of absurdity invited by the standard you suggest.

The criteria for it needing to be abuse or insulting is clearly stated. Where the line between criticism and insults exists, however, is not and cannot be clearly stated and must rely on judgment.

[Enchant]

Because of these people existence, you can for example nominate someone for scummie, but if you want to vote against it, you need to vote silently in mod PMs and provide reason.


I dislike policy where slander behind people back are preferred. But probably nothing will be done about it.

[Jake from State Farm]

I don’t think this is the right topic for that discussion.

Posting Slander right in people’s faces isn’t good either but happens and doesn’t get punished.

I don’t think providing reasons why you don’t agree with a nom qualifies as slander unless you know what they are saying and only the objector and person they PM would know that.

[Tangion]

Because of these people existence, you can for example nominate someone for scummie, but if you want to vote against it, you need to vote silently in mod PMs and provide reason.


I dislike policy where slander behind people back are preferred. But probably nothing will be done about it.

which "people" are you referring to here?

[Tangion]

I think "If Player B feels abused/insulted, then punishment must result" is a very poor standard because people have wildly different standards of what is insulting/abusive to them. There could certainly exist a hypothetical user who sees ANY criticism, no matter how constructive or innocuous, as insulting or abusive. A user cannot simply become immune to criticism by declaring them all insults and have that enforced under our rules. I think you'd all roast me over the fire if I were to declare "Saying we don't act on toxicity is insulting to me and the mod team and the hard work we do and therefore any user who says it will be punished" but that's the sort of absurdity invited by the standard you suggest.

The criteria for it needing to be abuse or insulting is clearly stated. Where the line between criticism and insults exists, however, is not and cannot be clearly stated and must rely on judgment.

while I agree the line between insult and criticism can't be pointed to as a universal truth, are things like past interactions taken into account when determining each individual case?

[Enchant]

Because of these people existence, you can for example nominate someone for scummie, but if you want to vote against it, you need to vote silently in mod PMs and provide reason.


I dislike policy where slander behind people back are preferred. But probably nothing will be done about it.

which "people" are you referring to here?

Those who are too fainthearted to accept criticism, to put shortly.

[Haschel Cedricson]

/ego

[Silverclaw]

I partially agree toxicity is subjective, however when it comes to these rules below, they are not subjective.

I'm interested in this. I'll give you some examples here - what does and does not constitute abuse?

1) A and B have an argument in a mafia game. It gets very, very heated. No specific bad words are said.

2) A and B have an argument in a mafia game. It gets very, very heated. A says B should go back to the kitchen.

3) A and B have an argument in General Discussion. It's not that heated, but someone's intelligence is called out.

4) A and B have an argument in General Discussion. B follows A around and starts the same argument in a number of threads.