PPR rules

Post Reply New Topic

The guys in the PPR forum started a very interesting discussion about how and if the general rules of this site should apply in there. One of the propositions is to have no moderation - link

Since the PPR is such a small place I thought a thread here would allow a larger audience to discuss this - that's why I chose General Discussion.

So, what are your experiences with the Politics, Philosophy, and Religion forum and what rules could make it even better?

I don't go in PPR, but fair play to those who use it. There's a kind of culture that's accumulated there that disagrees with my sensibilities, but I recognise its right to exist.

I think a wild west unmoderated board would be good for those guys, and then a sister (or brother ) board for moderated discussions and a gentler kind of PPR culture.

Last edited by Moog on 26 Sep 2010, 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Seems a bit illogical to post this in the general forum when the discussion is already there in the PPR forum.

It seems to me that only people who frequent the forum would care whether the rules there are different. Posting here only increases the chances of getting responses from those who don't go there, and likely don't really care what happens there.

Kind of like canvasing the streets outside a private club asking what people think of the rules inside the club. Isn't it?

Or are you looking to see if the "rules" can be changed in ways that would encourage more people to use it, who currently don't (because of the way things are there now)?

IMHO, I really don't think changing rules will change anything there. Politics, Philosophy and Religion are by nature very contentious subjects. No rules will ever change that. Even separating the topics won't change that fact. Other forums have done that, and the contentiousness doesn't disappear, it just becomes more focused.

I don't see why the overall site rules shouldn't apply there as they do everywhere else. The rules as they exist are based on simple common sense.

Anyway, it really doesn't matter what I think, since I avoid that forum like the plague. I've never found any satisfaction from posting in similar forums elsewhere. Here would be no different.

i actually enjoy a great deal of the hotheaded and opinionated discussion in PPR. i am 'debating' in a couple of threads in there right now, and i find it really fun to argue various points.

but... when threads contain certain types of comments that volate the TOS, i think the mods should have a role***

i.e. racism, sexism, hate speech, direct name-calling or insults if it is are quite severe or pervasive

***moderation =/= absolute silencing. private warnings, locking threads, reminders of TOS, etc. can all suffice. people need not be completely shut down unless they persist.

All I can say is that I generally avoid the PPR forum. I have posted a few things there, but some of the views expressed there are quite disturbing to me and I become even more depressed and angry than I already am after reading them.

This DOES NOT mean I think those expressing the views in question should be censored, banned or even warned. They have every right to post their views IMO, but I also have every right not to read them.

A few members there express blatantly racist, elitist and even genocidal views
which I find unspeakably reprehensible. I expect such views among NT's and this is yet another reason I avoid NT online forums. I do not expect them from members of a minority group which has faced more than it's fair share of discrimination and abuse. I think people with ASD's and other neurological differences really ought to know better IOW.

Nonetheless....they are first and foremost human and many can be just as ignorant, hateful and downright sociopathic as any other humans.


A few members there seem to flaunt their IQ's like they're a badge of honor or something. Some have even suggested that those who don't meet some abitrary standard of "intelligence" should be killed off. Oh...and you might be on their death list too if your issues prevent you from working at a job which would allow you to be financially independent irrespective of how high your IQ is.


This is simply despicable by almost any standard (even in the purely logical sense IMO) and I have no desire to hold discourse with such people.


All that said...I am fine with the rules as they are. Speech and expression should never be restricted no matter how vile most of us may find it. Still....there is enough human ugliness in the world and I don't need to go to PPR to seek out more of it.

While most, if not all, the racism on PPR is not blatantly expressed (e.g., few posters use the "N" word or anything), it's implied and even painfully obviously in many cases. That is bad enough as far as i'm concerned. Still...I don't think posters who express these views, or equally hateful/ignorant ones, ought to be censored in any way.


One recent thread (which you've posted in at least once) there has disturbed me greatly and I think it's the straw that broke the camel's back insofar my own ventures into PPR are concerned

Private club you say? That's interesting as some of the PPR regulars are very adamant that it's not.

I only chose General Discussion seeking for more diverse experiences and opinions - many people only come here or just check the latest topics. There's another discussion in the .net part of the forum that looks like it will go on forever - more varied input might help find a balance and even allow PPR newbies to understand how the place works.

yes, i know the thread. it was quite extreme.

but in my opinion, you have just as much right to speak as the posters with racist comments. if the posts are too disturbing and have driven people such as yourself away, that is significant. the lack of moderation effectively silences people who don't want to debate amid hateful speech or other nastiness (or those who don't want to be the indirect target of such speech).

but i think i understand what you are saying, and i appreciate your perspective.

Your views are very close to mine, Horus. I do believe all opinions - even unusual and unpopular ones should be discussed, although I favour a civilised way of doing that.

But the initiative of changing the rules in the PPR came from the regulars themselves, after someone reported a thread in the Moderator forum and although the said thread is still alive and kicking, this poster keeps getting a lot of flack for it. A clear cut decision about moderator presence in the PPR would help avoid such situations.

I agree with Horus that some of the stuff that gets posted in PPR-- which I rarely visit, but happened to visit on the occasion of the thread that caused the recent kerfuffle -- is despicable. And I also agree that speech should not be restricted, as a general rule. My view is that hateful speech should be countered with more speech.

But on the other hand, this is a forum for people with autism. It isn't a political forum nor is it the only place where one can air one's political views. I don't think that having guidelines that would, for instance, prevent someone from stating that all members of a given religion ought to be killed is an infringement on someone's ability to broadly express such views, since there are many other places where those views can be expressed. Censorship is only at work if someone's ability to speak is shut down entirely, by an entity with the power to enforce such silence, like the government. Here, I think that keeping the forum a relatively civil and safe place for everyone who chooses to participate should be the higher priority.

There is a difference between expressing an opinion that is uninformed or prejudiced and outright hate speech. I don't see any reason to preserve the right to espouse hate speech on WP.

agree.
i don't care for the no moderation idea.

or rather, it's a perfectly good idea to be taken elsewhere. then it could be sculpted into exactly what the people most invested in it want it to be, and without having to consider to what is good for this forum. everyone wins.

I'm going to partially repost what I just put up in WP.net Discussion:

Anyone interested in contributing to the ongoing discussion of how PPR ought to operate can vote or comment in this thread: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt138230.html

As of right now, this is how the results stand:

I'm rather pleased to note that only one person has chosen my "out" option rather than voting for one of the suggestions, and that the general consensus at this point is that the most important things are civility and the freedom to discuss contentious subjects. I'll soon be correlating this data and putting forward some draft proposals for the chosen guidelines, with the final version being submitted for moderator review and sticky status. In other words, get those votes and suggestions in soon, as I'm gearing up for phase two.

As can clearly be seen, "no moderation" isn't on the list, and choice #1 was clarified later in the thread to meaning "go to the mods only as a last resort", which is currently the generally accepted practice within PPR. We don't like to make a big deal of incidental or isolated violations of the site rules, and prefer to only resort to reporting when someone is obviously trolling or engaging in repeated personal attacks within a short period of time, that sort of thing.

I'm also not interested in rehashing the WP.net thread, so I will be ignoring any comments attacking me personally or attempting to impugn my motives in trying to improve PPR.

To save a lot of time, I'd also like to point out that "hate speech" is a very subjective term that only means what a particular speaker wants it to, regardless of what various online encyclopedias and such may have to say, though Wikipedia does add this intriguing disclaimer:



Since the TOS relies on this effectively meaningless term to describe what is prohibited, there is a substantial gray area within the site rules, and PPR has historically operated within that zone, subject to the whims of the moderators. I'm not so much trying to change that as shed a little light on the distinctions for newer members, as well as provide a certain amount of security for posters in that forum against selective enforcement of the TOS in a stricter than usual manner. Rule creep is a real concern, and regulations used to quash unseemly thought in PPR today could just as easily stifle discussion on other forums on the site tomorrow.

So it falls to a moderators discretion.


And you never know, a moderator might think that a call to kill all members of a religion might just be hate speech.

No moderation is the worst idea I've ever heard. As far as I'm concerned, the rules stickied at the top of PPR should be enforced fully by the moderators, no matter what "unwritten rules" one anarchist member has decided to make up

Who says they aren't? Like I pointed out, "hate speech" doesn't actually mean anything and the decisions regarding what is and isn't allowed are almost completely at the discretion of the moderators, who generally choose to allow PPR to function semi-autonomously at the moment. They've been called upon to examine some of the alleged "hates speech" in the forum and decided that no action was required, ipso facto the reported posts did not constitute hate speech in the eyes of the forum moderators. Have you already forgotten the lessons that AG and I imparted in the WP.net thread?

Secondly, I'm not an anarchist (I'm a minarchist libertarian, there is a difference) and I didn't just make up the proposed guidelines; they were drawn from my not inconsiderable personal experience within PPR, and as can be seen from the low number of votes for "other rule not specified", they seem to accurately reflect the etiquette of the forum. Also, read my post again, since I clearly address this rumored "no moderation" rule and proved it's fallacy.

Lessons that you and AG imparted? LOL, I had to have a laugh at that one!

What you mean is, you tried to present your opinion as fact. Hate speech means nothing according to you, but it has a definition and laws attached to it, so your opinion is worthless.

But, as I said on the other thread, in the case of any thread on this forum - no matter what it's about or which section it's posted in - only the moderators' view matters. Not mine, not yours, but the moderators'. If they're happy having hate speech on the forum, that's their call. But quit trying to challenge that and quit acting like your opinion matters.