Just a quick point:
Revile politics if you want. Bemoan the influence of "politics" in places that are otherwise "goodnatured".
But to do so is folly. "Politics" is a euphimism for elements in a "society" that are unavoidable.
In a society there will be people with differing opinions. "Politics" is often simply used as a euphemism for the elements in the process through which reconciling the differences is acheived that are to the opinionator's distaste.
In short, when people revile "politics" it's often an indictment of something inherent to humans: that we have differences and that the process through which they are sorted out is not always a walk in the park.
Where is the anonymous feature to report violations of the TOS by general members? I've never really looked for it but it isn't very predominant -- some site sites have a button within each forum to report violations to moderators.
I wasn't quite clear that I meant using personal attacks, especially containing epithets, is not going to prove one's argument or change anyone's mind.
Go to the member list LW, and pm to the Moderator account. Moderator is a member on the first page.
Excellent point BrandX -------also taking a serious look at the responses on this thread point out the vastly differing perceptions of what was just said by a particular individual. Go back and read everyting one time it's amazing and in some cases hilarious.
Msolga---this thread was a great idea----it would seem to me that it relaxed everyone--- of course in varying degrees.
I didn't take Msolga's topic post to be all so lighthearted, Diane; I took it as an expression of frustration and concern put in a somewhat lighthearted way. M'self, I think this discussion has been pretty useful to a lot of us, and not a hijacking.
Yes, I think Soz and Butryflynet and Jespah basically agreed, as I do too, on people asking for review of possible t.o.s. offenses by Moderator. Easily done by putting the word Moderator in the pm member window. [aside, when I was first here I had trouble finding out how to send pms... and now routinely do it by clicking on "you have no new pms". Maybe that could be worded a little differently, something like PM Mailbox with a icon for if you have any?].
Craven did ask if anyone wanted the standards to be changed to either lower or higher, and in my last post I addressed that some might want them lower. It has seemed to me that there is a tendency to get into and enjoy sparring with name calling, especially in "response", and that some may have mixed feelings about the present standard. Obviously I personally approve of the present standard and appreciate the efforts to moderate its being followed.
Is this feature really anonymous as Sozobe points out? I don't think so but I don't think anyone should feel that they are being a cry baby by reporting violations against themselves. Regardless of someone's obvious position in a confrontation, I would hope a third part would report the violation.
Politics junky here.
Anyone who has taught a class of children is faced pretty quickly with the frustrating realization that there is no design for either classroom procedure nor for curriculum which will accomodate all of the unique interests, talents, and eclectic personalities arrayed in front of you. Trying to figure out how a political forum ought to be run seems much the same problem - keep a metal detector at the entrance, take the bullies out back and shoot them, and then try to share your excitement for the subject.
Political discussions are unavoidably contentious - we differ, one to another, on ideas of how our society ought to be managed and what values ought to be forwarded to make the communities we live in more agreeable.
And it is important stuff. It is life/death stuff. One might make the argument that we small band of brothers aren't likely to change anything in the world other than our own blood pressure, but I believe a yelling, feisty, reading, thinking community is a good thing.
Here's how I understand it:
- You see a violation of the TOS.
- You send a PM to the Moderator.
- The Moderators look at the situation and decide if action needs to be taken.
- IF action needs to be taken, they take it. I don't think they ever say, "Lightwizard complained, so you'll have to quit."
So it's not necessarily anonymous from the Moderators' perspective -- they know who complained -- but nobody ELSE knows who complained.
And (I'm not sure about this), I think the "report this to a Moderator" button that Craven talks about will be entirely anonymous.
I've not been on a2k much these last few days. I see the content has changed a bit, but I'm heading back to MsOlga's first post:
I don't have the stamina for it. I drop in when there's something in the news I want to learn more about and then I mostly read posts rather than post myself. I then go days or weeks without peeping into the P-forum at all.
I do the same with news in general. I keep a vague eye on it and focus deeper if there's a new subject or new development in an old subject that is interesting to me.
You're likely right Sozobe -- I would like to know for sure that they don't say, "Sozobe complained so you'll have to quit." I would think they'd first ask the person to delete the offending remark and refrain from making others if that sort. I'm sure they probably do keep the one reporting anonymous and that's even a delicate situation so I don't envy their responsibility. It can't be taken lightly.
Oh - I hope Msolga does not think the thread "hijacked"??
Discussion has become serious (a sort of meta-discussion on discussing discussion and the nature of the beast we call rudeness...lol... and the uses of politics and the Meaning of Life and A2k) - and will probably become less serious again, or not, as things DO move in and out of seriousness around here...this is a discussion style that I, I must admit, really like.
I would thank Msolga for opening the matter up again.
Now...to find something to be silly about...that's gotta be hard work....lol!...
Harrumph!
(WHAT is that on the Bunny's bum??)
Lightwizard wrote:You're likely right Sozobe -- I would like to know for sure that they don't say, "Sozobe complained so you'll have to quit." I would think they'd first ask the person to delete the offending remark and refrain from making others if that sort. I'm sure they probably do keep the one reporting anonymous and that's even a delicate situation so I don't envy their responsibility. It can't be taken lightly.
We do not reveal the identity of anyone who complains. It will
never be our policy to do so. Any moderator who reveals the identities of anyone complaining will have to answer to me. And you wouldn't like me when I'm angry.
I thought about changing into Moderator clothes to say this, but what the heck; Soz has it right. Communications to Moderator are completely confidential apart from being discussed among the Moderators. Moderators do not "Take Sides", nor do we share with any other member information contained within any member's PM to the Moderator account. All reports are examined, sometimes action is taken, sometimes not, sometimes folks will notice if action has been taken, sometimes not. Any time action is taken, any discussion of that matter is exclusive to The Moderators and the principals in the issue at hand. The Moderators will not comment on any past or ongoing action to any but the principals in the action. If you don't know, you aren't involved. The Moderators don't much care for silly, petty, interpersonal squabbles, but the Moderators deal with them on a constant basis. Much Moderation goes on of which the membership in general is largely unaware, and that is as it should be. Broken links or invalid BB code may get fixed, threads may be locked briefly for Moderator review and discussion, posts or threads may or may not be moved or pulled, threads may be locked for a longer or shorter period of time, PMs may or may not be sent to offenders, deletion or editing may or may not be suggested, warnings or reminders may or may not be posted on threads, and in general, the job gets done without much notice taken by, or given to, anyone not directly involved. Moderation is not a matter of partisan gossip, it is a job involving the entire website, a job handled by a few volunteers so the rest of the membership can get on with things. Some folks figure there's too much of it, and an equal number feel there's too little. Most folks don't comment on it, or even seem to notice it much at all. Draw your own conclusions.
I like blatham's assessment, BTW, speaking both as timber and Moderator.
And I see Jes beat me to this, and said it shorter. That's cool too.
I surmised as much and really brought it up to punctuate how it is handled. And, no, I don't want to see Jesp angry!
(I'd probably prefer the Van Allen Belt to ignite!)
I do! C'mon Jes - give us a li'l sample!
(KIDDING!)
