Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Conduct policy beliefs from someone important

imabench
Posts: 21,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2016 11:59:03 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
Someone important = Me

As someone who has been temp-banned seven times, all relating to personal conduct, I likely have more temp bans then all the people reading this very sentence put together. So you can bet im throwing in my two cents here. I read through YYW's hilarious thread and am noticing recurring themes in the conversations, so Ill list some questions I see and provide my own opinion of the question

.
.
.

1) Do mods have bias?

The short answer is the mods dont have a bias. The long answer is that they dont have a bias, but sometimes can appear to have a bias if you do not look at the situation objectively.

In several of my more recent conduct flare-ups, I gave Airmax a fair amount of lip regarding me getting banned for x amount of days while (insert-retards-name-here) would be let off the hook. There would be a scrap, both sides pushed each other's buttons, yet id find myself on the hot-seat more than the other person..... Seems a little biased right?

Not really..... When one side has an extensive history of getting into arguments and insulting other people (A side historically dominated by me and YYW), compared to the other side who usually only spars with those who happen to get into a lot of fights (The Me + YYW party), you can take a good guess which side likely holds more responsibility for an issue breaking out...... If two cars collide, and one car has a history of break failure and crashing into other cars while the other doesnt, you can bet that the first car is usually to blame, intentional or not.

Ive been under Airmax's boot long enough to consider it my second home, and the red mark on my a** where Airmax likes to kick it when I get temp-banned is probably the second home for his foot as well. There isnt bias behind this though. Ive tangled with Airmax (and some of his advisors) in the past, and I cannot recall a single time where in hindsight he anyone he trusted was being biased or irrational against me (and there were a LOT of times where we had to discuss my conduct as well).....

As much as I have to deal with the mods whenever some whiny little idiot (usually dumb religious retards who prowl around in the religion or politics forums) reports my conduct, which happens a lot, I dont believe Ive ever had mods or people they seek advice from hold their bias against me when dealing with me..... And if the person who has been most under a magnifying glass by the mods regarding conduct doesnt feel the mods have acted with bias, then chances are that the rest of you guys are free and clear as well.... Cause if anybody is likely to have to deal with mod bias, its the unlucky f*cker who has been temp-banned 7 times.

.
.
.

2) Is moderation excessive?

Personally, we may be a little over the line in terms of how far site moderation should be extended, but we are not so far over the line that moderation is crippling or unbearable like some people try to paint it as.

I once made a big stink about moderation after I couldnt run the Weekly Stupid under updated guidelines that led me to eventually (temporarily, as expected) leave the site. That was way in the past, and it was way back then when I was under the idea that the Weekly Stupid wasnt controversial, and that people complaining about it made it controversial..... The reality though is that the Weekly Stupid had a controversial existence since Day 1, which for the most part was mitigated just because the show was quarantined to the misc forum rather than the main forum. The Weekly Stupid was also the only thing I had going for me (apart from troll debates) as well, so not being able to host the show however I wanted was the equivalent of being told I cant exist.... The same exists for some other users to a degree, where being told you cant be controversial or a complete d*ck to people whenever you want is akin to being told you cant exist on here.

If being controversial and outlandish is your way, then you naturally will feel that moderation seems excessive since moderation is aimed at those kinds of people.... But if you're a normal fuckin person who rarely gets in trouble or rarely attracts drama in the first place, then moderation seems/is fine where its at. Those who are more likely to feel the pressure of moderation policies tend to be the ones who feel it is over-extensive.

Moderation is for the most part fine where its at, or at least in the correct neighborhood of where it should be.

.
.
.

3) Can people lobby Airmax to ban someone?

This one is actually a yes, but it only works in rare circumstances.....

When YYW attempted to name names of people who pushed Airmax to ban him, almost all of them promptly spoke out and said they had no hand in YYW's upcoming ban. While people certainly can lobby Airmax to ban someone, it rarely works as much as people suspect. Ive lobbied Airmax loads of times in the past to ban members (Zarroette, ScottyDouglas, BornofGod, ViSpex, Brontoraptor) for a variety of reasons (Stupidity, spamming, their very existence), and the only times it ever works is if the member has done something that is in itself a punishable action...... You can lobby Airmax to ban someone, but you need to build a hell of a case to actually convince him to. Being famous on the site doesnt give you a free-pass to lobby anyone you want to be banned off the site...... The idea that F-16 or PetersSmith or Bsh or Whiteflame or someone else can simply ask Airmax to ban someone because they dont like that person, and Airmax will agree to it just to avoid the headache, is completely retarded..... I've pissed off just about everyone on this site at one point, do you think Id still be around if people could lobby Airmax to ban someone simply because of personal feuds? Nigga please......

If anyone claims that Member A, B, and C whined to Airmax to ban them because they dont like that person, and Airmax allegedly agreed to it due to bias or avoiding a headache, that person making the claim is completely full of sh*t..... Every person who has ever been banned had at least some sort of case against them when they were banned.... Nobody on here is famous enough to simply call up Airmax and have him ban someone out of bitterness or some personal beef they have with that person, and the only times people can lobby for someone else to be banned is if that person did something that is genuinely punishable......

Aaaaaand im just about out of character space. The point is that moderation is not nearly as bad as some people make it out to be, and this is coming from a person who has dealt with moderation more from week to week than most other people will have to deal with in their entire lives (on the site)

tootles
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 12:54:09 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
Can you please just agree with being president. The conventions are good, but there is no reason why unelected people should be favored over you to work with mods.

It is really just behind the scenes stuff you have to do.
imabench
Posts: 21,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 1:27:44 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 12:54:09 AM, Wylted wrote:
Can you please just agree with being president. The conventions are good, but there is no reason why unelected people should be favored over you to work with mods.

It is really just behind the scenes stuff you have to do.

?
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 1:34:06 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 1:27:44 AM, imabench wrote:
At 6/28/2016 12:54:09 AM, Wylted wrote:
Can you please just agree with being president. The conventions are good, but there is no reason why unelected people should be favored over you to work with mods.

It is really just behind the scenes stuff you have to do.

?

Maybe I had too much to drink. I want you to be a leader while simultaneously enacting your program. I think you deserve and can handle a leadership position. A behind the scenes one. Airmax can veto the proposals right?

So maybe you can step up and help Airmax come to the right position, or maybe despite the commu ity enacting policies, you can be (coughs) the voice of reason that stops some policies that are harnful.

You can empower the community, while simultaneously leading it, you can take it a step closer to abolition, while being the Moses figure that we need.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 1:40:16 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
This thread is actually one that shows true leadership, and this is the abolitio ist candidate
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 1:44:21 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
It's obvious you are going to win, but hopefully the candidates have enough sense to come together to discuss a miffle road that will make everyone nust a bit unhappy.

A good negotiation results in the unhappiness of all parties
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 12:36:45 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
1) Do mods have bias?

I agree with your statements here. But I disagree that there is no bias in the system, it is just the bias does not lie with the mods. In the situation you describe (you arguing with some nobody pissant in the religion forums) I'd be willing to bet that, on the whole, each side's behavior is comparable to the other's, but the other is more likely to report your behavior as over-the-top whereas you are more likely to simply accept both your and the other's behavior as par for the course.

In this sense the system itself is biased toward those with thinner skin. That is, when people find themselves in a situation where they cannot handle what they have dished out, out comes the report button.

From the mod perspective, they are then looking at something of a one-sided case. You getting all the reports and the other person getting none, or few.

So, while inbiased mods is a good thing, if they rely purely on unbiased input, the output will still be biased. There must be some sort of compensating factor.

2) Is moderation excessive?

I actually don't think moderation is strong enough. As far as I can tell, it is entirely reactive. Mods respond to what is reported and act accordingly. The problem is that this puts control of the moderation in the hands of the whiners. Moderation is NOT a bad thing. I know that sounds supremely surprising coming from me, but in terms of forum moderation, I think it could benefit from proactive and firm moderation.

With respect to your Weekly Stupid. Let's be honest. It got a past due to the quality of production and the fact that it was funny. Remove those elements and it would never have been allowed to continue.
imabench
Posts: 21,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 3:04:07 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 12:36:45 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
1) Do mods have bias?

I agree with your statements here. But I disagree that there is no bias in the system, it is just the bias does not lie with the mods. In the situation you describe (you arguing with some nobody pissant in the religion forums) I'd be willing to bet that, on the whole, each side's behavior is comparable to the other's, but the other is more likely to report your behavior as over-the-top whereas you are more likely to simply accept both your and the other's behavior as par for the course.

In this sense the system itself is biased toward those with thinner skin. That is, when people find themselves in a situation where they cannot handle what they have dished out, out comes the report button.

From the mod perspective, they are then looking at something of a one-sided case. You getting all the reports and the other person getting none, or few.

That doesnt mean though that the mods cannot see the actual fight that went down in the forums.... One side can be reported sure, but it only takes a quick glance at the thread itself to see the actions of both sides. The side whose actions didnt get reported dont disappear simply because the other side triggered the report button, so there isnt bias towards one side......

So, while inbiased mods is a good thing, if they rely purely on unbiased input, the output will still be biased. There must be some sort of compensating factor.

2) Is moderation excessive?

I actually don't think moderation is strong enough. As far as I can tell, it is entirely reactive. Mods respond to what is reported and act accordingly. The problem is that this puts control of the moderation in the hands of the whiners.

'control' doesnt revolve entirely around who clicks the report button first.... The whiners are more likely to report someone, but that doesnt mean they will succeed in moderation impacting only the other side while they emerge unscathed, since control over moderation still ultimately rests with the moderators themselves.

Moderation is NOT a bad thing. I know that sounds supremely surprising coming from me, but in terms of forum moderation, I think it could benefit from proactive and firm moderation.

With respect to your Weekly Stupid. Let's be honest. It got a pass due to the quality of production and the fact that it was funny. Remove those elements and it would never have been allowed to continue.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 4:01:22 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 3:04:07 PM, imabench wrote:
At 6/28/2016 12:36:45 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:

That doesnt mean though that the mods cannot see the actual fight that went down in the forums.... One side can be reported sure, but it only takes a quick glance at the thread itself to see the actions of both sides. The side whose actions didnt get reported dont disappear simply because the other side triggered the report button, so there isnt bias towards one side......

Sorry, but years of mafia have taught me that while people can sift through hundreds of posts of a fight between two users and make an objective judgement about who's in the right, most people don't have time for that.

When a person reports something, they're reporting something specific, in the middle of a conversation and that's the first thing the mod sees. That immediatel colors their perception of the issue. To get a fully objective assessment of the situation requires that they: A) dig back to the beginning of the conversation and then B) follow the entire conversation to its conclusion. No mod is doing that. Especially given that often times the issues aren't confined to a single conversation in a single thread.

'control' doesnt revolve entirely around who clicks the report button first.... The whiners are more likely to report someone, but that doesnt mean they will succeed in moderation impacting only the other side while they emerge unscathed, since control over moderation still ultimately rests with the moderators themselves.

Control doesn't imply a guarantee of success, just that things are more likely to go their way than the person that doesn't exploit the report function.
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 4:24:14 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 3:04:07 PM, imabench wrote:

I never thought I'd say this... :( *wipes tear and sniffles*

You're growing up kid.
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 1:04:25 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
Bumping
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 1:12:11 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 1:04:25 AM, donald.keller wrote:
Bumping

As a candidate for president, this really isn't a good thread to bump.
Tsar of DDO
imabench
Posts: 21,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 3:17:41 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 1:12:11 AM, YYW wrote:
At 7/4/2016 1:04:25 AM, donald.keller wrote:
Bumping

As a candidate for president, this really isn't a good thread to bump.

I was kinda confused by it as well
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 3:39:40 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 1:12:11 AM, YYW wrote:
At 7/4/2016 1:04:25 AM, donald.keller wrote:
Bumping

As a candidate for president, this really isn't a good thread to bump.

Me being a candidate has nothing to do with what I post or bump, in any way. I have said over and over again that I am going to act the same as I have always acted. I will not choose to act differently than I would have prior to seem more appealing. Bringing up my candidacy is laughably irrelevant to rather or not bumping this thread was right. Had I not been a candidate, it'd been no different. I bumped the thread because I agreed with imabenchs op, and saw it as appropriate with all the people attacking Airmax's decision.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --