Moderators and their special interest moderation

Page 2 of 2 [ 22 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

01 Nov 2015, 5:29 pm

Personally, if I had children, I'd want them exposed to a variety of viewpoints so that they could learn to think for themselves rather than blindly following dogma, but that's just me.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

01 Nov 2015, 5:42 pm

What dogma? We're not discussing dogma.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

02 Nov 2015, 5:11 am

YippySkippy wrote:
What dogma? We're not discussing dogma.


Your views on prostitution fit the definition to a tee, especially considering that you want to shame and or censor anyone who feels otherwise. It's also not even illegal in many countries and some US states, so that argument for suppressing discussion also falls flat.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

02 Nov 2015, 5:27 am

XFilesGeek wrote:
Speaking for myself, I'll take your complaint under advisement, and be sure to be more vigilant concerning negativity directed towards male members.


That's all well and good, but unless you and the other mods want to spend all of your time responding to hurt feelings and questionable definitions of "offensive" opinions, it would make more sense to narrow the types of posts that you'll respond to, name calling, unambiguous personal attacks, threats, etc, otherwise you risk causing more trouble than you solve by seemingly biased moderation. Aspies tend to be sticklers for fairness, and if it looks like moderating is being driven more by the personal opinions of the mods than adherence to the rules, which can actually happen without any real bias just because the site demographics ensure that posts from certain viewpoints are more likely to draw reports than others, that's going to cause a lot of resentment and a general feeling that the mods are not to be trusted. I've seen that happen before, it's not pleasant for anyone.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

02 Nov 2015, 8:33 am

Quote:
Your views on prostitution fit the definition to a tee, especially considering that you want to shame and or censor anyone who feels otherwise. It's also not even illegal in many countries and some US states, so that argument for suppressing discussion also falls flat.


The words "dogma" and "opinion" are not interchangeable.
I don't feel that an ASD support site should encourage members to solicit prostitutes. It's really kind of a no-brainer to me.



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 43
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

02 Nov 2015, 9:01 am

Dox47 wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
Speaking for myself, I'll take your complaint under advisement, and be sure to be more vigilant concerning negativity directed towards male members.


That's all well and good, but unless you and the other mods want to spend all of your time responding to hurt feelings and questionable definitions of "offensive" opinions, it would make more sense to narrow the types of posts that you'll respond to, name calling, unambiguous personal attacks, threats, etc, otherwise you risk causing more trouble than you solve by seemingly biased moderation. Aspies tend to be sticklers for fairness, and if it looks like moderating is being driven more by the personal opinions of the mods than adherence to the rules, which can actually happen without any real bias just because the site demographics ensure that posts from certain viewpoints are more likely to draw reports than others, that's going to cause a lot of resentment and a general feeling that the mods are not to be trusted. I've seen that happen before, it's not pleasant for anyone.


We already spend a significant amount of time dealing with "hurt feelings," and I don't foresee that changing in the near future.

Currently, for every member that claims we're biased in a certain direction, there's an equal number of posters who claim we're biased in the opposite direction. I would really love it if moderating was a straight-forward, black and white affair, but it isn't, and I've accepted that certain people are going to be upset no matter what we do. And that doesn't even take into account the people who simply dislike authority.

So, there's really naught else for me to do other than promise to consider all viewpoints, and to enforce the rules in accordance with Alex's wishes.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)