Wolfram87 wrote:
Amity wrote:
There is the forgotten middle group, quite symptomatic of the climate today I suppose, what about them, why should those of us sensitized or hardened take precedence because we are shouting louder?
Well, that is of course also an aspect. I guess what I'm really asking is how wide is this middle ground. I realise it's a difficult question to give a tangible answer to, so maybe I'm just an aspie looking for hard points of reference where none is to be found.
I dont think it can be defined clearly, it is a case by case basis, this is the issue with the rules, they will always be interpreted differently.
That requires unbiased decision making and significant levels of trust in those making the decisions.
Openness and transparency is how this would be ideally achieved, not a debate, but decisions that can be verified by others, where there is concern about impartiality or fairness.
It's why I've suggested before that WP needs roles outside of moderators, to properly accommodate our autistic abilities.
Private information remains confidential, yet by having a small group of people assigned to verify these decisions there is less pressure on the mod team to behave as NTs, leading to this repeated cycle of mod burn out.
I'm suggesting an internal verification, a sampling of decisions made, to identify issues and promote trust.
If issues are identified, then all decisions will need examination, this is about constructive feedback and support as we often need as people on the autism spectrum.
Just ideas for potential long term solutions.