Backup Room – The h Bar - 2017-05-17 (page 2 of 2)

SevenSidedDie

8:00 PM

@heather Inconsistency is a problem, yeah. That's why more and more consistent moderation is happening now, too.

heather

when it gets to borderline things, it's better to spell them out.

@SevenSidedDie i'd argue it's happening more harshly, but not more consistently.

SevenSidedDie

@heather Is it? In practice that just seems to result in more arguments, not less.

heather

@SevenSidedDie arguments arguing whether or not that's a reasonable thing to ban? yes, sure. but that's the point of democratic moderation, yeah? arguments arguing whether or not kicking/deletion in chat is fair? no, that's not gonna increase, that's gonna decrease.

do mods have an alert for conversations like these? =P

SevenSidedDie

@heather Ah. Mistaking SE for a democracy is one of the problems.

heather

@SevenSidedDie well, seeing as we elect moderators, there's a meta, etc, that's a pretty reasonable semi-true thing to say.

it's not a perfect democracy, no, but generally, it operates mostly like one.

David Z

8:03 PM

It's somewhat democratic, yeah, but not in the sense that ultimate authority lies with the community as a whole.

SevenSidedDie

@heather Elections exist in more structures than democracies. SE isn't a direct democracy. Notice that mods don't have constituencies, we actually represent not the users to SE, we represent SE to the users. The structure here is exactly the opposite of how a democracy works, despite elections being a tool the site owners have found useful.

David Z

@SevenSidedDie I guess we kind of do both (representing the users to SE and vice versa), but the former tends to be invisible to most people

heather

policy is determined by users, aside from overarching stuff from SE.

SevenSidedDie

In a democracy, ultimate authority lies in the people. At SE, ultimate authority lies with and derives from the network owners. So to respond to the previous message about democratic moderation: that's not the model SE has. SE uses community moderation. That means the community is expected to do its own moderation. But not being a democracy, it doesn't get to set the standards. SE does.

@DavidZ True.

@heather That's explicitly false.

David Z

I dunno, it's... sort of true

heather

8:05 PM

@SevenSidedDie erm - no - close reasons, chat policy, etc - that's a very true statement

ArtOfCode

yeah, that's mostly true

's what meta's for

heather

^

SevenSidedDie

@heather Being able to decide some policy is a power that SE has granted to users, it's true, but users don't have the power to choose from any policy they like.

heather

"aside from overarching stuff from SE"

David Z

I mean, one mustn't take the implication that policies are determined fully democratically, with one-person-one-vote, but in general the users do determine a lot of things.

SevenSidedDie

8:06 PM

@heather Which is where we come back to chat moderation. Users don't make chat moderation policy at all.

The Dark Side

@heather Another aspect of that is, when users don't like a policy, they post about it in meta. Those posts are also voted on by SE users, and eventually, in some sense, the policy decisions taken by most users, override those taken by some users.

David Z

@SevenSidedDie Though each room does set its culture to some extent. I mean, technically you're right in that chat policy doesn't generally go through the whole meta-approval process, but then again the users do have an important role in the process that actually does happen.

(Sorry for the multiple pings)

SevenSidedDie

@DavidZ Yeah. And SE has clarified that the idea people have got about what counts as room culture isn't actually what SE was talking about. So we've arrived here, trying to re-explain that room culture doesn't override mod judgement about the application of Be Nice and message removal.

David Z

Indeed.

Though I do agree with heather's point that SE's clarifications on chat policy still leave some ambiguity (or one might say room for judgment).

Or, what I mean is that further guidance would be beneficial. It's just really hard to come up with it.

The Dark Side

@SevenSidedDie Relevant post?

113

Q: A guide to moderating chat

Chat is an offshoot of the main site, and using it is a privilege users earn early on during their time here. Chat is our place: for real-time collaboration to meet fellow members of the community for less structured, casual (but still roughly on-topic) conversation Our chat syst...

?

David Z

8:11 PM

@TheDarkSide IMO that isn't particularly relevant - it covers how to moderate chat, in terms of what tools are available, rather than what should be "moderated", and is more of interest to room owners and mods

But I dunno, maybe others will see some value in it even for non-mods/ROs beyond what I see

SevenSidedDie

@TheDarkSide We've recently been seeing objections that that meta is mostly about how rather than what to do in chat; not really guidelines, but a user manual to the tools. This meta is more on-point for how to manage meta, rather than how to use the tooling:

The Dark Side

@DavidZ That's why the question mark. There was some discussion on Meta regarding room culture too, IIRC.

SevenSidedDie

307

Q: Toward a philosophy of Chat

TL;DR: The Problem This keeps happening in chat: Surprise at flags on vulgar messages. Language that would invariably get your comments deleted on the main site occasionally gets flagged and deleted in chat. Confusion reigns. Controversial topics leading to bickering and name-calling. Folks b...

discussion chat feedback help

David Z

@TheDarkSide Yeah, that might be what @SevenSidedDie just linked

That post is probably the best we've gotten from SE

I have to go AFK for a few minutes, I'll be back

The Dark Side

@DavidZ Right. This one.

@SevenSidedDie Yes. Exactly.

SevenSidedDie

8:16 PM

So in general, when moderation in chat happens, the best we can do is point at Be Nice, point at Toward a Philosophy of Chat, and point out that mods' jobs are to make these on-the-spot decisions. Arguments about those judgements are generally frustrating, because of course people are going to disagree with calls, but they're not the ones who are given the job to make the calls.

What we'd like to see happen instead, is taking those as examples of what the overall judgement of mods and staff hold about how to apply Be Nice, and see those examples learned from. A single message being removed isn't a huge black mark, but they add up if nobody is trying to learn from them and just keeps doing it.

3

The Dark Side

I concur. So, there is a threshold until the mod hammer eventually falls?

heather

sorry, i had to go for a minute - room culture aside, SE doesn't determine all chat room rules. that's left to users/mods. so clarify why you are deleting a certain type of message in meta and that will help clarify what the rules are and reduce in-chat arguments.

David Z

Yes, SE doesn't determine all chat room rules, but they do have a lot more influence than some chatters seem to give them credit for.

SevenSidedDie

@TheDarkSide There's grey areas, yeah, and when people are getting into grey areas that's when mods are going to start asking for changes of topic or just not doing something again. When it's not grey, that's when the tooling comes out immediately without asking. Even then, those are ~~unrecoverable~~ recoverable (edit: whoa typo!) — we mostly want things to change direction, not to have to do more in a minute.

ACuriousMind

@TheDarkSide What do you mean by the "hammer falling"?

heather

8:21 PM

@DavidZ sure, but you need to clarify what isn't outright stated.

SevenSidedDie

The problem mostly comes out when we ask, but asking turns out to not be enough. Because we've only got two options: asking and using the tools. Walking away from someone who has been asked to chill, but decides to escalate instead, isn't really an option we have.

The Dark Side

@ACuriousMind Muting/suspending/banning etc.

David Z

@heather We can certainly try to clarify why we're deleting messages, but a couple caveats: first, even if we have a hard time explaining why a message gets deleted (especially in the moment), that doesn't necessarily mean the message was appropriate and shouldn't have been deleted. Second, if the people we're explaining to aren't receptive to the explanations, it defeats the point of explaining, and incentivizes us not to bother explaining to those people in the future.

4

The Dark Side

I think all of this can go down as a canonical discussion regarding mod-approach. Bookmark worthy maybe? (But again, all this discussion may have taken place countless number of times earlier.)

:)

David Z

You can even bookmark it yourself. Anybody can create a bookmark.

The Dark Side

8:27 PM

Yes. That's what I was in the middle of doing David. :)

David Z

oh gotcha ;-)

The Dark Side

:)

heather

let me rephrase: on meta, one should explain, and one should delete for those guidelines and any obvious junk, but gray areas not explained on meta shouldn't be bothered with.

further, this cannot be a canonical discussion without more people than me talking.

(on the side of the chat users)

SevenSidedDie

We do understand that users won't always agree, and that it's natural to want to challenge calls one doesn't agree with. But chat is large and fast-moving, and we have to keep on top of it or it goes to pot (and then SE starts blowing up rooms and talking about disabling chat), and nobody wants to see staff run out of patience and use nuclear options.

@heather This isn't a negotiation though. :(

heather

if it's just me and TheDarkSide along with a couple of mods, that doesn't constitute canonical. meta, now that constitutes canonical.

@SevenSidedDie we're talking about gray areas in chat that SE doesn't cover. that is a negotiation and is the democratic part of SE.

SevenSidedDie

8:29 PM

@heather There are lots of metas. We have the canonical one up there ↑ already.

heather

that doesn't cover the gray areas. i'm sorry for reiterating this, but you guys seem to keep missing the point, and it's getting a tad frustrating.

SevenSidedDie

@heather It isn't. Grey areas aren't where people get to argue over what is and isn't okay. Grey areas are where mods ask people to back away from the line between acceptable and not acceptable. What we want to see is people saying away from the line, not trying to cozy up to it.

David Z

I think the two of you may be on two non-parallel black-and-white scales

SevenSidedDie

@heather I feel like you've got a mental model of chat governance that doesn't match the reality.

heather

@SevenSidedDie, I could say the same of you, honestly. You said things above about SE governance that other mods disagreed with.

The Dark Side

8:32 PM

@heather You are right. It can still be a useful reference though. Some angry people may see some light with it, if they stumble onto it.

heather

@SevenSidedDie gray areas are where mods should take it easy, as well as the chatters.

The Dark Side

:)

SevenSidedDie

@heather Grey areas are places where mods try to take it easy. When we say back out of the grey zone and back into the white zone, but people argue, that's a problem. That's not an opportunity for users to discuss what's acceptable, that's users failing to self-moderate. SE is currently super-not-happy with that continuing to happen. Mos was nuked for that exact problem.

ACuriousMind

@heather That's...not how chat moderation is supposed to work. The grey areas are not what we should not bother with, the grey areas are where mods are trusted to make decisions if the users fail to do so.

SevenSidedDie

The problem seems to be that there are chat users who think that everything is fine inside [white zone + grey zone]. But chat moderation is that everything in [grey zone + black zone] needs to stop happening, and everyone needs to stay way in the clear, in the white zone.

vzn

8:34 PM

@heather heather, you seem smart to me sometimes, other times... isnt there something productive/ rewarding to do than seemingly endlessly engage chat mods? you seem to want to protect the rights of the downtrodden in cyberspace... but youve been basically repeatedly defending troublemakers... maybe consider that the incidents/ conflicts are fundamentally not about unclear policy but often about offenders personalities... :(

heather

the gray areas are where mods are trusted to carry out user instituted policy. the black and white is outlined by SE. the keywords here are "user instituted policy". if mods want to ban something, or clarify gray-area rules, they need to go to meta, just like anyone else.

David Z

@vzn that seems just a tad harsh, eh?

rob

@heather Here's a great story about why it's impossible to lay down a list of simple rules for distinguishing offensive from inoffensive from borderline speech --- especially in a fast-moving medium like a chat.

SevenSidedDie

@heather No, that's not it at all. The grey are is not what users decide. The grey area is when people are too close to the line, and often accidentally cross it.

vzn

@heather the stuff that gets deleted is usually really offensive... can you point to any case where you have endorsed chat mod judgement?

David Z

8:36 PM

@heather I'm quite confident that you and @SevenSidedDie are using different definitions of "gray area"

SevenSidedDie

This cat is in the danger zone. They're not about to get in trouble, but they really should step farther away from the edge.

heather

@vzn um...as members of this site we have a responsibility to some extent to assist in determining policy. consider it practice for the real world.

@vzn when i don't object, i endorse.

SevenSidedDie

@DavidZ I'm quite certain we're using different ideas of what the grey zone means, but the same definition of material that constitutes grey zone.

heather

the mods do a great job, and i never try to disagree with that.

@SevenSidedDie This cat is in the "danger zone". What constitutes danger zone, and how that zone should be handled, is determined by the cat.

vzn

@heather it seems like you repeatedly defend ppl/ cases youre not even personally involved in...

SevenSidedDie

8:38 PM

@heather That's not how it works.

heather

@vzn by that argument, no one should get involved in politics =P

@SevenSidedDie again, reference my earlier comment about your idea of "how it works"..

i have to go in a minute.

David Z

@SevenSidedDie I don't know about that. It seems like heather's definition of "gray area" is meant to include material where it hasn't been decided whether the material is appropriate or not, whereas it sounds like you're using "gray area" to mean material where it has been decided just how appropriate it is, just that the decision doesn't come down overwhelmingly to one extreme or the other. That's how it seems to be coming across to me, anyway. (Not sure if this matters)

vzn

@heather speaking of politics, maybe get involved in that "for real" instead of SE chat room politics? which seemingly has little benefits to anyone involved... :(

SevenSidedDie

@heather What I'm taking away from the conversation is that a) you want to stand close to the edge of what policy allows, and b) you don't like it when that gets you in trouble. Can I say that's not a great plan for success?

heather

^if that's what you take away, you totally missed the point.

@vzn wee bit hard when you're under voting age.

ACuriousMind

8:40 PM

@heather I don't quite get where you get the idea that chat policy of what is appropriate is user-determined.

vzn

@heather there are many under-18s involved in politics. think youd be a natural at it. already are. :)

SevenSidedDie

@DavidZ By material in the grey zone, I mean things that aren't decided, but that are getting close to the edge. Stuff that might be fine by the person saying it, but encourages people to scoot closer to the edge of what's acceptable. Living near the edge of Be Nice is a terrible idea, and lots of people find themselves in sudden trouble because they decided to live there in chat, and then tripped.

ACuriousMind

I mean, you're right in most moderatorial aspects of the site, but the question of Be Nice and its extent is explicitly not user-determined, and I don't think anything has been deleted by mods so far for any other reason than "that's not Nice".

SevenSidedDie

@heather Can you succinctly articulate that point?

David Z

@SevenSidedDie But how do you know that it's close to the edge if it hasn't been decided?

SevenSidedDie

8:42 PM

@DavidZ Be Nice is well decided, and being capable social humans we can tell when people are treading near topics that shouldn't be cozied up to.

heather

@ACuriousMind take, for example, the politics ban.

vzn

@heather trying seeing how many times the mods are doing great/ well & then balance it out some & try not to focus/ fixate on the (perceived) exceptions. remember its all volunteer work aka unpaid labor...

SevenSidedDie

@heather Which politics ban?

ACuriousMind

@heather Yes...which was taken back. Nothing of the sort has been tried again, so in that sense, user-determined policy is well and alive. What's your problem?

David Z

Incidentally this back-and-forth involving multiple mods with different perspectives reminds me a lot of the discussion that takes place "behind the scenes" in the private mod chat rooms. In case anyone's curious about what that discussion is like.

ACuriousMind

8:43 PM

@SevenSidedDie If you like reading lengthy metas, it's here

SevenSidedDie

@DavidZ Yeah, this looks a lot like back-stage discussions.

heather

@SevenSidedDie what isn't defined by SE is defined by users. mods carry out that user policy. often, that user policy falls in the gray area. mods must define the policy they are carrying out in meta or else that policy isn't legitimate/will appear unfair to users. that's the best i can sum up my point.

though i must admit i'm bad at being succinct. i like to argue things out.

@ACuriousMind the problem? that's how anything not defined by SE should be. and that's why, i think, people get upset when mods act.

ACuriousMind

I fully understand that point, but I don't see that any of the moderator action that has been the point of this entire debate is in the realm of what's determined by users. It's simply Be Nice.

vzn

@heather for example another case you were upset about was 0celo7 & he hasnt suffered mod action in weeks. progress right? :)

DanielSank

Hi, everybody.

I was told to come here.

SevenSidedDie

8:46 PM

@heather Okay, we're simply disagreeing then. Take the example of the ban on politics: politics isn't inherently delete-worthy in chat, so that's users going above and beyond to ban more than SE cares about. That's within users' remit only because it's nowhere near what Be Nice cares about. Users don't get to determine how mods apply Be Nice though, nor what mods ask people to drop because it's getting too close to Be Nice violations.

@ACuriousMind ty

heather

@DanielSank for reference, beginning of conversation is about here

@SevenSidedDie again, i must repeat, anything not explicitly laid out by SE, needs to be laid out by mods somewhere, and users should be able to comment at the very least. at the best users get more say in how those actions by mods are carried out.

mods are janitors, not policy determiners and arbitrators of their own.

SevenSidedDie

@heather Okay, but we're talking about what is explicitly laid out by SE.

@heather (Actually, we are arbitrators. That's what being given the job to judge when SE policy is violated means.)

heather

@SevenSidedDie what's explicitly laid out by SE? "be nice". the obvious applications of that, no one's objecting too. the things people are objecting to, that's not explicitly laid out.

ACuriousMind

@heather We are not determiners, but we are certainly the arbitrators of what a given policy means in practice.

DanielSank

Yeah so the one thing I'll point out here is that I hang out on a few other chats, and the mods on the physics one are way, way more likely to act than are the mods elsewhere.

SevenSidedDie

8:49 PM

@heather Okay, but we're not disagreeing on the obvious applications. We're disagreeing on what mods ask people to back away from. Do you agree that it's reasonable for mods to ask a room to drop a topic that's getting dangerously close to violating Be Nice?

DanielSank

DZ in particular is way more sensitive than other mods.

heather

@SevenSidedDie i meant those phrases to go together - you aren't both judge and executioner, but merely executioner. the people judge with the moderators.

David Z

@DanielSank hm, any data to back that up?

DanielSank

@DavidZ Nope.

heather

@DavidZ fwiw, i must agree.

DanielSank

8:50 PM

This is entirely my impression.

I have zero interest in spending time collecting what you would consider data.

SevenSidedDie

@heather That's not the case though. Remember that we're not discussing things that users add to SE policy, we're talking about applying SE's direct policy.

DanielSank

I think the impressions of the users are "data". Up to you whether you want to think about that.

ACuriousMind

@DanielSank You keep saying that. And there are also chats that are stricter that we are. From my experience in other chats the h bar is at the less strict end of moderation (excepting now deleted chatrooms :P)

DanielSank

@ACuriousMind Go hang out in Electrical Engineering.

heather

@SevenSidedDie let me make this clear: just because SE says "be nice" doesn't mean that anything you think approaches not nice is worthy of deletion. that's why users are important in gray areas for more clearly drawing the line.

2

David Z

8:51 PM

@DanielSank sure, as long as we keep in mind that it's just an impression. My impression is not consistent with that. So we're really saying very little.

DanielSank

Oh, and fwiw, I find the environment in electrical engineering rather abrasive. I'm glad hbar is not similar.

SevenSidedDie

@heather Sure. But mods and staff have exclusive authority to make that decision. Users don't have any.

heather

@DavidZ of course your impression isn't consistent with that. that's a rather ridiculous statement. impressions of users are as DS said, data.

ACuriousMind

Many chats are also simply...unmoderated, for lack of a better word. I think it's only been over the last few months that it was realized more broadly that chat is moderated.

heather

@SevenSidedDie who elected you?

for lack of a better way of pointing it out, if you think that, i completely question your election as moderator.

"users don't have any" - that is nonsense.

SevenSidedDie

8:53 PM

@heather Remember, this isn't a democracy. Mods are chosen by the users, but to be representatives of SE, not representatives of the users.

David Z

@heather They're data on the issue of what the users think, sure; they're not data when it comes to determining what actually happens.

DanielSank

I think you guys treat Bernardo with a ridiculous level of strictness.

heather

@SevenSidedDie when you said that earlier, multiple mods disagreed.

SevenSidedDie

@heather SE explicitly rejects the idea that users get to decide what is okay in chat regarding BE Nice.

heather

@DavidZ i think you're drawing an unfortunate and pointless distinction.

DanielSank

8:54 PM

You know what really needs your attention, mods? The way you tolerate such incredibly lewd comments from JR but use executive power when e.g. Bernardo makes a similar, or often less problematic comment.

ACuriousMind

@heather I'm afraid as much as you wish that was true, it's not true. We are entrusted by both SE and the users to make these decisions - we can't have a multi-day meta debate every time someone makes a problematic statement.

SevenSidedDie

@heather I think you missed the naunce of the disagreement. We do represent the concerns of users, in the sense that we will go to bat for them regarding feature requests and the like. :) We aren't democratic representatives of users, and aren't answerable to their concerns vis-a-vis site governance politics or policy.

heather

@SevenSidedDie first, i'd like to see a citation for that. second, see what I said earlier: obvious stuff under Be NIce is hammered. not obvious stuff is not hammered.

@ACuriousMind no, of course not. i never said that.

"more clearly drawing the line" not "setting down the line once and for all on every issue"

David Z

@heather The distinction is quite relevant if people are accusing me of overusing my mod powers beyond the norm set by other mods.

heather

in gray areas, users must help.

DanielSank

8:55 PM

Oh, while we're talking about this, I'm just curious: are all the mods on our site actually active moderators (i.e. Manish)?

heather

@DavidZ this is not an accusation, but an observation.

David Z

@heather Yes, but it's presumably the "preamble" to an accusation.

DanielSank

@DavidZ No that's just you being too sensitive again ;)

heather

@DavidZ, not at all. just a simple note.

DanielSank

Seriously.

ACuriousMind

8:57 PM

@DanielSank Manish is the least active, but we're all active, yes (though some more than others).

David Z

Why bring it up then?

heather

why bring up that I disagree with the way mods are acting currently?

i'm asking for change, not that you all be demodded!

Bernardo Meurer

@heather Yes, why would you ever bother to disagree with moderation? :^)

SevenSidedDie

@heather In grey areas, users must help. But they must help by moving the room toward white areas, not by arguing that it's okay to be in the grey area, or that something isn't in the black area.

David Z

@heather No, I mean why bring up that I, personally, am to be singled out for overusing mod powers?

Bernardo Meurer

8:58 PM

@SevenSidedDie Why?

DanielSank

@SevenSidedDie Why?

SevenSidedDie

@BernardoMeurer @DanielSank Simply, because SE has demanded it.

heather

okay, i need a citation.

DanielSank

Reference needed.

Bernardo Meurer

@SevenSidedDie [Citation needed]

heather

8:59 PM

^oh, wikipedia, bringing that into our phraseology

SevenSidedDie

Has everyone missed the “room culture is no longer an excuse for anything” conversations have have occurred in the past two years?

Bernardo Meurer

@DavidZ Well, if you overuse your powers then you will be singled out for overusing your powers, yes

DanielSank

@SevenSidedDie Distractionary debate tactics detected.

Bernardo Meurer

@SevenSidedDie Quit being sneaky and find basis for your statements

SevenSidedDie

@DanielSank No, I'm pointing out that yes, a citation could be grabbed, but it's an entire bibliography that everyone here has already read.

DanielSank

9:00 PM

@SevenSidedDie False.

heather

@DavidZ no "singling out" it's a comment to improve your work. that's all! if a teacher comments on something to be improved, it's not to say that i'm the worst student ever and oh my gosh i should go die, it's to say that i should work on improving so I don't get an F.

SevenSidedDie

Well, here's the start

307

Q: Toward a philosophy of Chat

TL;DR: The Problem This keeps happening in chat: Surprise at flags on vulgar messages. Language that would invariably get your comments deleted on the main site occasionally gets flagged and deleted in chat. Confusion reigns. Controversial topics leading to bickering and name-calling. Folks b...

discussion chat feedback help

DanielSank

^

David Z

@BernardoMeurer If I overuse my powers and other mods don't, then sure, I will be singled out for overusing my powers. So if one is to proceed along those lines, one should establish that I am overusing my powers and other mods don't. That is where the data (not of impressions, but of actual actions) becomes necessary.

heather

@SevenSidedDie "room culture" isn't relevant here. where has SE demanded that users demand users don't help with policy but merely obey like sheep? nowhere.

DanielSank

9:01 PM

> I'm not implying that room culture is always a terrible thing. Different sites have different personalities, and so be extension different rooms have different personalities.

SevenSidedDie

@heather Can you tell me what “self-moderation” means to you?

heather

@DavidZ we are giving you a comment. take it and try to improve. don't start a war.

DanielSank

> Over-the-top, offensive, and otherwise inappropriate room culture is not okay and should not be tolerated.

Bernardo Meurer

@SevenSidedDie We're not talking about room culture, we're talking about your statement that it's the "duty of users to direct the chat towards explicit "white areas" and avoid grey areas"

SevenSidedDie

@DanielSank Right, and this is what we're talking about.

DanielSank

9:02 PM

No, we're not.

SevenSidedDie

@BernardoMeurer Yeah, that's self-moderation. That's also listening when the mods say “okay, drop this.”

heather

@SevenSidedDie sure. working to keep oneself within bounds that oneself has set. so we must keep ourself within bounds, but we must also set our bounds, though society might set overall bounds.

SevenSidedDie

Let me ask: do you want mods to ask nicely, or do you want mods to give up on attempting to ask, and just going directly to tools?

DanielSank

Or at least, if we are, we need to define "offensive" because it means very, very different things to different people.

Bernardo Meurer

@SevenSidedDie If a mod can't give us a good reason to drop a conversation, why should we?

SevenSidedDie

9:02 PM

@heather Bounds that SE has set, not oneself.

DanielSank

@ACuriousMind is the only mod who's bothered to explain their interpretation of "offensive" (some months ago).

SevenSidedDie

@BernardoMeurer Mods jobs are to make that decision, not you.

heather

@SevenSidedDie you miss the analogy. society is SE. the users are oneself.

Bernardo Meurer

@SevenSidedDie You're creating a false choice situation to try and make a bogus point

heather

the users must keep oneself within bounds, and set those bounds within the gray areas. SE provides overarching bounds all must stay within.

SevenSidedDie

9:03 PM

A civil conversation was being had. Users who want to make this into a fight are welcome to leave or will be kicked out.

heather

no one is making this into a fight.

SevenSidedDie

@heather Bernardo was

As I said.

heather

@SevenSidedDie uh...what? he was trying to make a point. I see no inflammatory language by him. he's stating his opinion.

David Z

@heather Saying that I'm "particularly sensitive" (para.) is what I mean by singling me out. If my impression does not support the claim that I'm particularly sensitive, I really can't make use of that comment to improve. Or more precisely, I believe the conclusion you want me to make is that I should bring my use of mod powers more in line with other mods. But if I believe my use of mod power is already in line with others', the feedback isn't helpful to me.

SevenSidedDie

@heather Accusing me of arguing in bad faith, to make a bogus point, using false information, isn't a civil conversation anymore.

heather

9:05 PM

@SevenSidedDie not what was said. saying something's a false lead (i.e., a bogus point, a straw man) is a perfectly reasonable thing to say.

SevenSidedDie

So, let me point out: this kind of behaviour is why mods are unhappy with users who won't take “hey, please drop that topic” with grace and reasonableness.

heather

no one said "please drop this". they were kicked without warning for doing nothing.

SevenSidedDie

@heather I'm not going to argue with a transcript that's right there.

heather

this kind of behavior is why users are unhappy with mods.

@SevenSidedDie neither am I.

SevenSidedDie

@heather They can lump it, or learn from it. This is what we've been saying.

heather

9:07 PM

@DavidZ sorry, to many threads going on =)

@SevenSidedDie you guys maybe need to start taking a cue from this. what did they do? they disagreed with you. am I going to get kicked? I legitimately don't know.

SevenSidedDie

If the example of Mos being nuked from orbit isn't enough to make people reconsider that maybe they've got a misapprehension about what SE expects from chat, then maybe there's nothing mods can say.

rob

@heather It's fine to disagree with each other.

SevenSidedDie

@heather Naw, you're not starting fights.

heather

@rob what did Bernardo and Daniel do other than disagree

@SevenSidedDie if people protesting the way mods are using their power and kicking people without listening, maybe there's nothing users can say..

rob

5 mins ago, by Bernardo Meurer

@SevenSidedDie You're creating a false choice situation to try and make a bogus point

ACuriousMind

9:08 PM

@heather Bernardo has done nothing but accusing others ("Quit being sneaky", "that a bogus points") without providing any arguments for that. That's not constructive, and a continuation of his earlier behaviour today.

SevenSidedDie

@heather Good. Yes. There are some things where mods get final say. Can we talk about that?

heather

@rob and what might be wrong with that.

ACuriousMind

You're actually trying to argue something here, and while I disagree with you, can you not see the qualitative difference here?

heather

@ACuriousMind um, i cannot. they were talking respectfully.

"that's a bogus point" - that's a straw man argument, aka a standard logical fallacy.

SevenSidedDie

@heather They really weren't. “Who the fuck is making a fight?” isn't talking respectfully.

rob

9:10 PM

@heather Daniel's profanity was removed.

heather

also, speaking for Daniel, he has no idea why he was banned - profanity, especially when not directed at anyone in particular, is by no means forbidden.

@SevenSidedDie "who is making a fight" is. adding f*** is perfectly legal - see above comment.

i've seen John Rennie, mods, and others use profanity all the time.

now you're telling me it's forbidden?

that's truly ridiculous.

SevenSidedDie

@heather But to be avoided. When it's harmless and non-volatile, that's okay. Using it to yell at a mod in a previously civil discussion is exactly what Shog has said profanity is not for.

ArtOfCode

would it be easier if everyone involved left this conversation here, took a night off, and came back to discussing it peacefully tomorrow?

heather

@SevenSidedDie "to be avoided" =/= kickban

SevenSidedDie

@heather That's not your call.

heather

9:12 PM

@ArtOfCode fwiw, i'm being perfectly peaceful.

rob

Look --- internet chat is a terrible medium for having real-time discussions. It's too easy to misinterpret, to miss body-language cues, to type past each other, etc.

SevenSidedDie

@ArtOfCode Yeah, I think so. I think this can be taken as an object lesson in why poisoning a discussion with poor behaviour makes it hard to get back to civil discussion.

rob

My mode of operation is that if some discussion goes around in circles for too long, it's time to take a break.

heather

@SevenSidedDie it is. you just said "to be avoided". that does not mean kick-ban! that's laid out, clear and simple.

@SevenSidedDie if this isn't civil discussion, i dunno what is.

rob

I think that now might be a good time for us to take a break from this discussion.

heather

9:13 PM

further, i might point out Daniel wasn't warned even once.

SevenSidedDie

@heather If you can point me to where there's a sentencing law for that violation that's that specific, please do.

heather

that's standard protocol.

David Z

@rob Agreed.

heather

i need to hear your reason for the kick ban.

rob

@heather No. Perhaps later.

David Z

9:14 PM

This room was placed in timeout for 45 seconds; Taking a short break from the discussion

SevenSidedDie

@heather I'm sorry, but I'm not going to attempt to convince you on that point. And I'm not going to later. Please see a CM if you would like to know whether that was appropriate by SE's standards.

heather

timing me out and then letting mods talk is called an unfair discussion.

i'm not being unreasonable in any way. what have i done that deserves this behavior?

David Z

@SevenSidedDie I'd appreciate it if you let the discussion lie for a while - I know mods can talk through timeouts but that was meant as an indicator not to post more on the topic

heather

i need to know why you found it okay to kick out someone who pointed out a logical fallacy without warning, and why you kicked someone who used a cuss word that many mods use without any problems.

ArtOfCode

Time to take a break. Leave it for now. Come back tomorrow if y'all still want to discuss.

heather

9:16 PM

this is a huge problem. "let's leave it for tomorrow" is an unfortunate response. i will be here tomorrow.

and i want an explanation.

because that's the last piece of the puzzle: when mods do something controversial, users have every right to demand an explanation.

good day.

SevenSidedDie

@DavidZ Apologies, I cross-posted with the timeout.

David Z

@SevenSidedDie gotcha

Bernardo Meurer

9:37 PM

@SevenSidedDie Next time you decide to kick someone, double check to see if you have any reason whatsoever please.

heather

11:31 PM

i think however that meta does work, mods just don't use it enough. also, the homework discussion has been stagnating. there's something we can implement (Daniel's renaming) and it would be nice to focus on that.

i posted a continuance of that, but it's been rather buried.

Bernardo Meurer

This homework thing is sisyphean effort

heather

seriously.

ACuriousMind

@heather I've been mostly hands-off with the latest homework posts in order to see what the users think. Thus far, I've mostly come away with the impression that right now (no matter how upvoted Daniel's post is) most users don't really feel the need or drive to actually change something about the policy.

heather

it's arguable whether that's the case, or whether people are just so annoyed at getting nowhere.

ACuriousMind

Oh, I'm pretty sure a significant fraction has just given up, no question about that. That's what I mean by "drive".

But I also think the main problem is that it's easy to figure out which things are wrong currently but that it's really hard to figure out what we actually want it to be (even when just trying to reword it, I've spent some time thinking about a better formulation and in the end I just found myself injecting what I think the policy should be)

heather

11:45 PM

yeah, i suppose that makes sense.

Transcript for

Backup Room – The h Bar