Done with this site

Post Reply New Topic

I'm sick of seeing threads get locked simply because the discussion gets heated. The moderators here are little too heavy-handed for my sensibilities. I am done here. Take care, everyone!

IMO in a perfect world it would be better to try to resolve conflicts before locking a topic.
It seems to me that threads too rarely contain warnings like "keep it clean guys" before they get locked.
Maybe something that could be worked on on mods' side.
But I can understand that it is difficult to maintain order and always be updated on what is posted in threads...

I would hate to see you go, Sir. You are a well-respected presence, and a man of dignity.

I would emphasize the "agree to disagree" theorem, rather than lock threads so quickly.

People are going to have strong opinions; that's the nature of the beast.

I've seen too many decent people leave the Site. I find that this is still the best Forum for Asperger's/Autism.

Ironically, I think the quick-lock thread thing has led to more bickering! Almost as if to try to defy the Mods.

Do like I did, make a thread where you quote the posts in question, illustrating how the case took shape. Those who abuse their privileges like to shuffle the case under the rug to get away with it. Bringing it to light prevents just that.

This fosters constructive debate around moderation policies. Some people beg to differ, but the less transparency, the more potential for incongruence and discrimination, as has been the case when moderators have been very patient with instigators, but cracked down on replies because the instigator happened to hold the right opinion according to them.

It should encourage moderators to discuss moderation policies between themselves. It is a healthy exercise in self-control to discuss controversial topics. Those who lose their s**t so to speak, have a problem and they are the ones who need to work on respecting other peoples opinion. Forum echo-chambers are a cancer of the internet, and those tendencies needs be addressed before they develop into irreversible conditions.

We had OOM leave too because of touchy feely moderation. I hope you change your mind and stick around.

I don't lock threads when they "get a little heated."

I lock them when people start hurling personal insults, and I deem the thread to be beyond salvageable.

When you are a moderator, you have to use your personal judgement, and not everyone is going to be happy with the result. I've long since come to accept that, no matter what I do, someone is going to be unhappy.

He'll be back. They always come back, if only to lurk and send PMs.

Governmental agencies as well as most corporations and nonprofit organizations have long adopted prohibitions on statements or other acts which bring them or their members into “disrepute” (a state of not being respected or trusted by most people; a state of having a bad reputation). While it is illegal to violate libel and slander laws by defaming others (a criminal act), it isn’t illegal to bring groups or their members into disrepute, though it usually results in being professionally or socially removed if rules provide so.

WrongPlanet.net has rules which, for the most part, prohibit defamation. I argued privately and publicly for the rules to include a prohibition of any act of bringing WP or any of its members into disrepute. I don’t know if my advice was ever considered let alone acted upon. Free speech is correctly protected in the public square, not the private parlor of WP which may choose its own rules on civility. But, shouldn’t its rules reflect a group desire to protect its members against the hostility, not provoke it?

My reasoning is that the world treats autistic individuals unfairly and worse in some instances. We shouldn’t have to swallow hard and accept such actions here despite how much WP is described as a “microcosm of the world.” If the world is largely hostile, I don’t want to be a part of any microcosm which mimics the whole, thanks.

Needless to say, this is why I stopped posting within the WP forums. I note that I wasn’t the last WP member to do so. While it discourages me to see WP members leave, it discourages me more so that the rules do nothing to discourage the actions that make them choose leaving. Sadly, WP moderators are left with their own interpretations on how to react to the problem of “free speech v. instances of disrepute.”

What does that say about WP, or us?

WP has its faults, like every entity has its faults. I'm a proponent of free speech/free argument. I'm not an advocate of censorship. Overall, I find WP to remain, for the most part, a decent Site--an oasis, especially for people who want to learn if they have autism, or to identify with those who have autism. People have fun here, definitely. People argue here, definitely. There is much PRODUCTIVE argument here.

I believe in people being responsible with their free speech (you don't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, or call someone the "N" word in Central Harlem). I also don't believe that people should be offended. If I offend a specific person with what I say, I withdraw.

I take the philosophy that opinions are like buttholes. I don't let a few bad apples ruin my impression of the majority of the Site.

Glad to see you, Mr Utah.

What I propose wouldn't affect free speech among responsible WP members. Bringing disrepute is an intentional or negligent act which harms the reputation of another. Responsible WP members wouldn't want to bring disrepute, would they?

I am pretty sure that I don't have the body of a "Mr Utah." But, thanks!

Bringing disrepute against someone is pretty major. It's pretty close to libel, if it is not libel.

It's ridiculous, say, to accuse a person of being a liar in real life if the accuser doesn't know that person in real life. I know this happens here, sometimes.

What I believe should be strongly moderated: instances where people use rhetorical techniques to advance their own arguments--some of these techniques make the attempt to bring disrepute against the alleged "opponent."

Alas, the above happens all the time in legislative/judicial bodies throughout the world.

Disrepute is close to defamation, but, legally, a world apart. That is why it is usually left to autonomous groups to adopt as policy. And, because of the same things we are discussing (again) at WrongPlanet.net, such groups have found it useful to govern themselves without resorting to criminal complaints. Why can't WP adopt such a rule?

I see what you mean.

I'm no advocate of censorship myself. And I believe in free argument.

There is the notion, though, that there are some WP members who are especially sensitive and might do something harmful to themselves because someone insults them on WP. There is the fear that someone might do something drastic because of what is being said on WP, even if it's not directly specifically at them.

I think the above might be the basis behind the increased moderation, and the quickly-locked threads here on WP--a notion of the the enhanced sensitivity of the ASD population as compared to the general population.

It's not something that I agree with necessarily (the quick lockups). But it's something I have some understanding of, and not something I oppose vociferously.

Two of the most hostile groups on the planet are the U.K. Parliament and the U.S. Congress. Both groups have rules against bringing disrepute to others as it reflects poorly on the groups. But, the real reasons that they have such rules include: 1) preventing the escalation of bringing disrepute to others, and 2) preventing such escalations from becoming legal matters which would involve the groups. To this end, I am left surprised that Alex wouldn't want to adopt such a rule. It would allow for the internal correction of actions without waking up some day and finding that a court complaint has involved the groups involuntarily. Plus, it would have the added benefit of encouraging more civil behaviors from those who get warned about their less civil behaviors.

Meanwhile, we improve the atmosphere for those, like myself, who see WP as more hostile than the world around us.

My own position is similar to that of the OP. I've definitely seen threads locked, even in PPR, simply because they're becoming 'controversial'.

That said, it's very unlikely I'd leave the site on this matter alone.

I think the current standard of moderation is pretty high overall. A while ago I read some of the most half-witted, abusive bickering I've ever encountered on WP in a thread from October 2007 (which ironically was about the locking of threads), and three of the main participants were themselves WP mods or ex-mods at the time. It's hard to imagine that happening now. I'd like to give a link to the thread, but the CAPTCHA won't let me.....

Last edited by DeepHour on 05 Nov 2015, 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hey Vegetableman, I don't like seeing these type of threads, but life is too short for small things to cause big upsets, so if you feel that you must go/take a break, I wish you well and hope to see your posts again.

There seems too low threshold for locking thread here, in my opinion.