EL&U 2014 Election

phenry

18:06

So here's a question, for @KitFox as well as for the candidates: Is it a moderator's job to enforce (and thereby reinforce) a site's organically developed cultural norms? Under what circumstances is it appropriate for a moderator to try to influence and change those norms?

KitFox

That's a good question and one I periodically review.

phenry

@medica @MattЭллен @MrHen @AndrewLeach - question ahoy!

Matt Эллен

What is a cultural norm here?

phenry

@MattЭллен - I suppose that's an important part of the question.

KitFox

If you don't win the election, how will your contribution to the site change? Would you run again in the next election?

3

Matt Эллен

18:11

the SE culture (on a main site) is one of Q&A only, minimal discussion, questions that help lots of people, try and be a bit friendly.

phenry

I think that when someone comes to meta and criticizes something about the way things are generally done here, and that criticism gets a lot of upvotes, that's an indication that a cultural norm exists.

Matt Эллен

If I don't win, I'll probably carry on as I am. I wouldn't run again.

phenry

@KitFox - If I don't win I'll still be a contributor here, although I may drift away for extended periods due to other responsibilities, as I've done in the past.

I flatter myself to think that my candidacy has already had an effect on how we talk about issues of self-governance, so I'd like to see that through.

Plus I need to keep rep farming until I reach 10,000. Then I'll stop caring about rep.

KitFox

hahaha. I did also rest on my laurels once I got to 10K.

Matt Эллен

@phenry depends on if I think the criticism makes sense or if it's come from confirmation bias. I want this to be a place the core contributors like being. I want it to be a place we attract interesting points of view about English. I'm not too concerned about people who don't understand English at all. That's not what this site is for.

KitFox

18:18

Now ima try to catch up on some more of the transcript so I can understand what's going on here.

Also, what do you all think of the new tagline in the main chat?

Matt Эллен

I like the new tag line :)

phenry

@KitFox - I like it.

KitFox

Sycophants.

;-P

Matt Эллен

only for you!

tchrist

@KitFox While fawning collocates somewhat higher than obsequious, both sorts of sycophancy are clearly at work here.

Matt Эллен

18:22

:D

Andrew Leach

If I don't win, I'll carry on as I am. Who knows what the future holds re running again?

As to the other question, Matt's written the answer for me.

Matt Эллен

yay! efficiency!

Andrew Leach

Oh, and I like the new tag-line too.

MrHen

@phenry No, because these cultural norms shift over the process of a few years. ELU is not the same site as it was three years ago. The community should enforce the norms by close voting, up- and down-voting and flagging things they think are issues.

KitFox

So what you're saying is that none of you has learned anything just from the process of running?

tch

MrHen

18:24

@KitFox It won't change. I already have a short list of things I'm working on to improve the site and I don't see that changing because the community chose a different moderator. The only way it would is if one of the new moderators turns out to be a complete dolt. I may take a short break from the site if I feel they are doing more harm than good. (I am not expecting this to happen; just playing hypotheticals.)

KitFox

gasps

MrHen

@phenry I think that means an interesting question exists and the culture on meta is tilting one way. Meta is not an accurate representation of the entire site.

@KitFox It's certainly a tagline.

Matt Эллен

@KitFox exactly. I'm a perfect little snowflake.

MrHen

@KitFox Nope. I knew all of this stuff before I ran. It's not like some sudden, hidden wealth of knowledge was dropped on the candidates during this process. :/

KitFox

Oh crud. I knew I forgot something.

MrHen

18:27

I can't even say that the candidates themselves surprised me. This has played out about how I expected it would.

Wait, that's not true. I expected all of the candidates to fill out the questionnaire.

phenry

@MrHen - Does that mean there's no way to gauge the sentiment of site users overall, even as a proxy? Isn't that what meta is for?

Andrew Leach

@KitFox Well, I've learned quite a lot. But there have been no phenomenal surprises, and what I thought about moderation has been confirmed, on the whole. I'm not going to elucidate on my first sentence here.

MrHen

@phenry It means that our gauges are not perfect. Meta is one way to measure the community but it isn't the only way. Actions on the site itself are more indicative of our community than a small subset of the community discussing things amongst themselves.

medica

I'm back, finally. Let me catch up.

MrHen

As for what Meta is for, I think it is simply a place where people can discuss the site. But since participation is voluntary, it will always suffer from certain biases. I do think that people can get "meta-blind" by either (a) forgetting to go check their theories in the real world for accuracy and (b) focusing too much on theoretical solutions that have little chance of successfully impacting the main site.

phenry

18:32

@MrHen - That's fine as far as it goes, but some people have more of an ability to take action than others. That's as it should be, but it can result in a small minority having a greatly outsized impact on the direction the culture takes.

MrHen

@phenry Sure. And I don't have an inherent problem with that. I am simply pointing out that "Meta.ELU" is not the same thing as "ELU" and each has a slightly different culture.

medica

@phenry asks: Is it a moderator's job to enforce (and thereby reinforce) a site's organically developed cultural norms? Under what circumstances is it appropriate for a moderator to try to influence and change those norms?

MrHen

It would be a mistake to assume "because it is true on Meta.ELU, it is also true on ELU."

In exactly the same way, it is a mistake to assume "because it is true in ELU chat, it is also true on ELU."

KitFox

Right. Meta is advisory, chat is sometimes advisory. In the end, we're each an army of one.

MrHen

Here is a slightly irrelevant question for... well, anyone. Do you think that voting power should be scaled according to reputation? E.g., someone with 20k reputation has more influence over the election than someone with 200 reputation? (There is little relevancy to this question. I just like talking about things like this because I find them interesting.)

phenry

18:36

@MrHen - Okay. But by the same token, I also see high-rep people in meta and chat griping about voting patterns. But voting patterns are also part of the culture. In fact, it's one of the broadest-based indicators of culture we have, as voting is one of the few actions that just about anyone can take.

medica

@phenry - Hmm, I didn't read Kit's answer, but I would say, I would try to do both; reinforce and support what is good, and try to have some positive effect on the bad. Is that too wishy-washy? For example, as @Maru-LouA pointed out, there's a user who has obviously become upset by downvotes. I would attempt to communicate with him about the system, to encourahe him to rethink his position.

MrHen

@phenry Exactly correct. :)

The difficult part is determining what is best for the site. Voting patterns, for instance, are not always a good indicator of what is "good for the site". It is also an imperfect lens.

medica

@phenry - Also, though I'm reluctant, I think chat needs to be slightly less of a home for a few and more of a chat for everyone who wantd to participate, being more respectful of other people's feelings. Not that it should be abused by new users who

MrHen

@medica As a moderator, what would/could you do to affect this?

phenry

@MrHen - I feel the same way about that that I would feel about a proposal to give wealthy people more influence (okay, "even more influence than they already have") over the presidential election.

medica

18:38

want to get answers by bypassing the main site.

MrHen

@phenry That's a non-answer. :)

I can guess what your answer is, but feel free to spell it out. :)

medica

@MrHen about chat?

MrHen

@medica Yes. You said, "I think chat needs to be slightly less of a home for a few and more of a chat for everyone who wantd to participate, being more respectful of other people's feelings." As a moderator, what would/could you do to affect this?

phenry

@MrHen - Goodness, I hope not.

MrHen

@phenry "My answer to that question is the same as my answer to this question which I have not answered here."

medica

18:39

@MrHen OK, well, I would encourage people to raide flags in chat as well as in the main site.

MrHen

Sorry, it's a non-answer.

medica

@MrHen We don't know what's going on in chat unless someone notifies a mod.

phenry

@MrHen - Spelled out: I favor a broad-based franchise for this site, as well as in electoral politics.

MrHen

@phenry Right. I think I know the answer to this, but why?

medica

@MrHen Encourage flagging for hostilities, reduce the shame culture in chat.

MrHen

18:41

@medica How could/would you effectively reduce the shame culture?

medica

@MrHen meaning people are afraid to flag because of exclusion.

MrHen

@phenry To be clear, I'm just poking you. I understand your position; I'm just making you spell it out. :)

phenry

@MrHen - Apart from basic philosophical objections, this site must serve both question askers and question answerers. Giving high-rep people more voting power would have the effect of favoring the interests of answerers over those of askers, which would be harmful to the site as a whole.

MrHen

(And I'm fairly certain I agree with your position.)

@phenry Yeah, that's the kind of answer I was looking for. Thanks for being patient. :)

medica

@MrHen check out flags. Make sure I was looking at the transcripts to see it there was punitive action taken.

MrHen

18:43

@medica So you would recommend people flag chat lines that invoke shaming?

medica

Following up. Things like that which will assure that I lose the election.

@MrHen sure. I don't think chat should be immune to behaving civilly.

MrHen

@medica Not necessarily. (a) There are a lot of people who think chat could be improved. (b) The number of people who post in chat is miniscule compared to the number that vote.

medica

@MrHen What do you think?

phenry

@medica - I absolutely agree with this, although it would be difficult to accomplish. The regular chatters are pretty zealous about protecting their domain.

MrHen

@phenry That's basically why I was asking @medica for specifics. It is a very difficult and delicate problem.

medica

18:44

@phenry you're telling me. I've seen some bad behavior in chat.

KitFox

@phenry Are they? Not to seem too zealous, but you've not much come to chat and have in fact eschewed it.

medica

@MrHen You haven't answered my question, though. Would you do anything about chat?

phenry

@KitFox - I'm going mostly by the response that happened when an outside moderator came in and changed their tagline yesterday.

People were not pleased.

KitFox

Fair enough.

MrHen

@medica In my opinion, I think chat is a problem that is safe to put on the backburner. The impact of changing the chat for the better is much smaller than improving the main site. -- That being said, if I were to try impacting chat I would try to stay present in chat and actively encourage good behavior by calling it out and actively discourage bad behavior by also calling it out. I would also attempt to lead by example.

@medica Sorry, was typing. :)

@phenry People were also deliberately escalating things. :P

medica

18:48

@MrHen I agree with you that it's not a front and center issues. But I do think it's a problem.

phenry

@MrHen - Well, the experience convinced me that it's not an important enough hornet's nest to justify poking it.

MrHen

@medica I personally see all problems as relative to the other problems on the todo list. I have limited time to contribute and I personally think that "ELU chat" is extremely low on the priority list.

medica

@MrHen The recent meta post does give a picture of the mentality of some of the members, and I have seen that very behavior.

MrHen

@phenry Right.

phenry

@medica - A problem, certainly, but maybe one that can be tackled incrementally.

MrHen

18:49

5

Q: How can we improve the introduction of new chat users to EL&U chat "culture" and features?

When I recently first visited the English Language and Usage chat room, I arrived with many erroneous expectations. I presumed that the EL&U chat room would center on English language discussion, and that experienced users would be welcoming towards curious new users with similar interests. In re...

This one?

medica

-3

Q: Do something about puerile chat flagging

Recently I got suspended from the chat because 2 of my posts were flagged and the flag "accepted"; one referenced Islam as people believing in a "magic sky man" or something, the other mentioned masturbation in a way that only the most puritanical person could find offensive: http://chat.stac...

discussion feature-request

This one.

MrHen

@medica Oh, that one.

medica

Where in shog9 is encouraging more tolerance, and the OP is saying he has absolutely no regard for outsiders.

MrHen

You said, "The recent meta post does give a picture of the mentality of some of the members, and I have seen that very behavior." I guess I'm not completely understanding your point.

medica

@MrHen Have you read the above post?

MrHen

18:53

@medica Yes. I have actually answered it.

12

A: Do something about puerile chat flagging

I think the flagging system needs to be measured based on the cost of false positives and false negatives. In this case, you claim that you were incorrectly suspended which (assuming you are correct) carries the penalty of not being able to use chat for a relatively small period of time. The wors...

medica

@MrHen Then you must understand that the attitude of the OP was not one of tolerance.

MrHen

@medica Right. But why did you bring it up? Did you have another point that you were conveying?

medica

@MrHen No, it directly went to my comments about making chat a more tolerant place, for everyone.

MrHen

I've been aware of Jez's opinion on this subject for some time since I've had a few different discussions with them in chat.

phenry

It must be said, I monitored chat sporadically after that question was asked, and there was some definite wagon-circling going on around the asker. The regular chatters like to protect their own.

medica

18:55

@phenry There was evidence of that in the post itself.

MrHen

@medica Ah, so was your point was that not everyone agrees with your definition of "tolerant"?

@phenry Chat tends to attract a very anti-censorship crowd so I think it has less to do with the OP and more to do with the idea that people were disagreeing about what is or is not "offensive".

medica

@MrHen No, not at all. But do I think it's ok to have the attitude the OP has?

@MrHen ""Mocking a deity" might make a few over-sensitive people unhappy but frankly, who gives a shit? "

phenry

@medica - Yes. Shog9 has been around since the early days of Stack Overflow and has earned near-universal respect. He is not an interloper.

medica

@MrHen Do you think that's me imposing my value system on someone if I say this is incorrect thinking?

Andrew Leach

@medica Some of us have got used to that. As I think I've said before, it tells me more about the "mocker" than the object of mocking,

MrHen

18:58

@medica No, it would just be stating your opinion.

medica

@AndrewLeach I know that you feel this way.

MrHen

@AndrewLeach Right. Btw, I've always been impressed by how well you handle that crowd. You set a very good example.

medica

@AndrewLeach But not everyone who comes here and happens into chat knows that this reaction is not terribly uncommon.

phenry

@MrHen - Free speech is not consequence-free speech.

MrHen

@medica Sorry if I'm sounding obtuse. I was just confused by why you mentioned Jez's meta question.

@phenry Correct. But the anti-censorship position would vastly prefer to err on the side of "let it be said".

KitFox

19:00

@phenry What? We were pretty deeply divided over it.

MrHen

(I am not in that camp, in case you were curious.)

medica

21 mins ago, by MrHen

@medica Yes. You said, "I think chat needs to be slightly less of a home for a few and more of a chat for everyone who wantd to participate, being more respectful of other people's feelings." As a moderator, what would/could you do to affect this?

@MrHen does this help?

MrHen

@medica No. I don't see anything in the linked meta thread that would relate to how you would/could affect chat.

It's just a link to someone who apparently disagrees with you on flagging.

phenry

@KitFox - My impression--and I could be wrong--is that Shog9 came in for some pretty harsh criticism from some users from whom I would not have expected it.

medica

I discussed that. I think people should be encouraged to flag instances of aggressively bad behavior in chat.

That's the start.

MrHen

19:03

@medica Right. I understood all of your points. I just didn't quite understand why you linked to Jez's meta post.

medica

But, as I also stated, not the function of the main site.

MrHen

But that's fine.

phenry

@MrHen - I've become fairly jaded about the applicability of the concept of "censorship" when we're talking about voluntary association on someone else's privately-owned server.

medica

I need to see what happened this morning. Apparently it was lively in here!

MrHen

@phenry Well, yeah, me too. :P

medica

19:05

@phenry, et al, please ping me if you have a question for me, ok?

KitFox

@phenry But also support. The room was almost equally divided in my impression of it.

MrHen

Have to go; back whenever.

Good luck to everyone!

phenry

@MrHen - It kind of reminds me of the uproar on Reddit when Gawker unmasked the "creepshots" guy.

gawker.com/5950981/…

gawker.com/5952563/…

@KitFox - Fair enough.

I should go tend to life myself. See everyone later.

Matt Эллен

CU

medica

@Robusto, There is clearly more to this story than you're saying. My reason for changing my username had nothing to do with my image. I kept posting without pause, just with a new name. It was clear to anyone who looked at my profile that it was still me. Had I wanted a rebirth, I would have created a new profile. It had everything to do with privacy. A few people are aware of why I wanted privacy; you have assumed much.

Andrew Leach

19:27

@phenry I did wonder how an outside pro-tem moderator on another site who happened to have been a member here for a couple of months could just wade in and change something. (This is not about whether he should have done; it's about how he could have done without owner/moderator privileges here)

I suppose that might colour whether he should have done...

medica

@Robusto The second part of your complaint is also misleading. You say you just decided to test my fitness as a moderator by provoking me. That's an interesting take on it. I would have thought if this were the sole cause for your behavior that you might also test at least a few of the rest. In any case, I've apologized for that for which I was responsible, and have no more to say on the subject.

I would hope that every member votes their conscience. If you want to talk, I'm very open to that. I see nothing to be gained by animosity. But I'd ask that this be done privately with minimum disruption to the site. Thanks.

@KitFox I agree with @Kit Fox: moderators don't know about unkind behaviors, either in chat or on the main site, unless it's flagged. With the increased number of mods, I'd encourage people to flag offensive behavior. I definitely see that as a major function of the mods: to respond to flags.

@MrHen I think I've only ever raised one "too chatty" flag. I have raised a few not constructive flags. I'm with Mitch, though, that flags (in my opinion) should be about objectionable comments. Someone asked way back what out rejected flag count was. My helpful flag count is 704; my rejected flags are 24.

Most of my rejected flags are for very poor quality answers. It took me a little bit to learn that completely wrong answers and bad but potentially editable answers were not a reason to flag, and some things that I would define as spam are not here.

MrHen

19:50

@medica I stopped flagging them after I felt it was clear that the moderator team wasn't interested in cleaning them up. The only reason I flagged them was because it was listed in the flag reasons and, therefore, I thought I was supposed to be flagging them.

medica

@MrHen And rightly so. It's was learning curve for me, and I still get a flag rejected now and then. Usually when I take a look at the comment I flagges, I can see where I went wrong and agree with the moderator that declined it. There was one flag, and I only remember one, where I thought what??? This is an answer?!? ;-) But one out of hundreds is acceptable, lol!

MrHen

@medica Yeah, same here.

I have some unpopular opinions about what is or is not considered "useful"... but meh. I just found other ways to help.

medica

@phenry I think that for every meta post (and not all of them are valid), there must be twenty new users who just leave in a huff. Like @Steven King. I hope he doesn't leave. I wish there was a way to explain the voting system so it didn't seem unfriendly. We can do that by friendly comments when they first arrive,

inviting them to take the tour, making sure the tour actually explains the voting system well (not just up and down), and making sure we all agree on what constituted a good and a bad answer.

@MrHen Agreed.

MrHen

@medica There is a way to explain the voting system. Users just don't have an interest in reading documentation on how to use the site and what to expect. :P

medica

@MrHen It's a mystery to me why totally erroneous answers need to go through a lengthy process before they're removed, but it is what it is. Comment, comment, comment.

KitFox

20:02

Erroneous is a matter of opinion, is why.

MrHen

@medica It's a mystery to me why people are so stingy with downvotes. It's what they are there for. You can undo downvotes after the issue was fixed/edited.

medica

@MrHen Yes, as @phenry said, he writes a lot of instructional material; it doesn't mean people read it.

MrHen

@medica I also write quite a bit of documentation. (Not as much as phenry.) People rarely read the manual.

Andrew Leach

There's already a ton of instructional material in the tour.

medica

@KitFox I do understand this. But there are some answers that are so egregiously wrong it seems it should be off the site in hours, not days. But that's just me. I understand it's the system.

MrHen

20:04

@medica Someone will always disagree.

medica

@AndrewLeach I've taken the tour and read through all the help sections. It's not very clear - not very clear - to me always what makes an answer off-topic.

MrHen

@medica An answer?

Andrew Leach

@medica english.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic

medica

@AndrewLeach If I can't find it, (I'm sorry, a question). If I can't find it when I'm looking the page over for the third time, how can I expect someone new to the site to find it?

@AndrewLeach Sometimes I have to go to meta to find the reason.

@AndrewLeach There's little there about supplying context, dictionary definitions, etc.

Andrew Leach

I think the Help/On-topic page is clear. It even recommends using a dictionary.

> Of course, if your question isn't adequately answered by these resources, feel free to ask here on English Language and Usage Stack Exchange. Be sure to mention the research you've done and what you're still hoping to learn!

medica

20:09

@AndrewLeach I'm just saying it could be easier to find, and more clearly spelled out.

@AndrewLeach Sometimes I see a borderline question, and read through the help section, and it's not a help. These I won't close.

Andrew Leach

@medica That's fine (although others might plump for the other side of the borderline). But there really is no excuse for not spending 20 minutes reading through ALL the help prior to asking your first question. What's twenty minutes?

MrHen

@AndrewLeach 19.9 minutes too long for the average user. ;)

medica

@AndrewLeach I didn't do it before I started using the site, honestly. Did you go through all the help pages?

I took the tour and jumped in. My answers show it.

I would propose, therefore, that the tour itself have more salient information on it.

I'll recommend it. That's all. I'm quite willing to work within the exact framework we have in place already.

@MrHen exactly.

Andrew Leach

@MrHen Possibly: I posted my first answer 8 minutes after joining, apparently. But I got +2 and a tick. Asking a question is more problematic because you do have to fit into the site, so it's imperative to do some research to find out what fits. Stack Exchange is not "anything goes" like some other sites.

KitFox

How much onus is on the user?

medica

20:22

@KitFox I think if anyone thinks the current mod team is in any way responsible for the site's reputation, then they don't understand the role of a moderator. We can only work with what we see, and more inportantly, what is flagged. Which is why I would encourage more flagging.

When I was new (and for a long time afterwards) I wouldn't flag because I didn't want to be seen as a problem user. I would encourage people to flag now.

KitFox

What about users who build their reputation on flagging, rather than doing?

Where do you draw the line?

medica

@KitFox Can you please explain or give me an example?

KitFox

You, as a non-mod user, see an answer to a single word request that reads "Serpentine [citation] is the perfect word. The guy who suggested snake-y is a stupid cocksucker." What's the appropriate response?

medica

I'm sorry I read that too quickly.

KitFox

What flag?

Oh, I see.

medica

20:26

I would want someone to flag that answer.

KitFox

Let me be clearer.

Andrew Leach

I'd just edit out the second sentence. Who needs a diamond to do that?

KitFox

@Matt, @MrHen are you two still here?

MrHen

@KitFox Kind of.

Matt Эллен

hello

KitFox

20:28

I asked a question.

tchrist

@KitFox How can one build one’s reputation on flagging?

medica

@tchrist my question, too. I don't understand it.

MrHen

@KitFox I'd edit out the second sentence.

KitFox

@tchrist I don't mean points, I mean it the real sense.

MrHen

And possibly flag it just to let the mods know about a potential problem user.

Matt Эллен

20:28

@KitFox edit it.

come back later to check if it's been rolled back or otherwise undone

tell them not to be that way

and flag it for moderator attention

medica

@KitFox If I saw this answer as a non mod, I'd edit out the offensive sentence, and flag.

Matt Эллен

if it has been undone

tchrist

@medica What flag?

KitFox

You mean "which flag"?

MrHen

@tchrist "Other" with the text "Potential problem user; this is just a head's up."

medica

20:30

5 mins ago, by KitFox

You, as a non-mod user, see an answer to a single word request that reads "Serpentine [citation] is the perfect word. The guy who suggested snake-y is a stupid cocksucker." What's the appropriate response?

@KitFox If I saw this answer as a non mod, I'd edit out the offensive sentence, and flag.

tchrist

@KitFox Probably.

Andrew Leach

@MattЭллен Yes: this is what I did with inappropriate tags in Christianity.SE. Mods told the other guy "Don't revert edits by experienced users."

Matt Эллен

Yeah. It's bad enough that they're unpleasant, but once we've cleaned up their mess, don't go and make the same flipping mess!

medica

@AndrewLeach not all experienced users use appropriate language. But I am hesitant to edit other people's work. That said, I'd still flag it.

KitFox

So my question is about the line between flagging and doing. When do you just do, and when do you flag?

Matt Эллен

20:33

I flag when I can't do

medica

@KitFox an a non-mod, I wouldn't just do. I'd do and flag.

tchrist

ponders

medica

@KitFox I will edit lots of posts for grammar, etc. without flagging of course. But for offensive behavior, I'd flag.

Andrew Leach

It's exception handling. If I'd edit it without a diamond, I'd edit it with. If I'd flag without a diamond, then with a diamond I'd deal with it as though it had been flagged.

KitFox

@MrHen You could just tell me, for heaven's sake.

medica

20:35

@AndrewLeach That's my feeling as well.

MrHen

@KitFox I err on the side of flagging. The mods can sort it out.

@KitFox I could, yes.

KitFox

@MrHen About me being a jerk, I mean.

MrHen

@KitFox Yep. I could. ;)

(No, you aren't a jerk.)

KitFox

So then @medica and @Andrew, how will you deal with complaints that you are abusing your powers by acting unilaterally?

medica

@KitFox I would back it up by citing the site's rules on behavior.

Andrew Leach

20:37

I was just about to post "And I'm aware that this is taking unilateral action"! So... composes answer...

MrHen

@medica The rules are subjective. The person complaining is exactly complaining about your interpretation of the rules.

medica

@KitFox We do not tolerate name calling... etc.

Mitch

@KitFox To keep this all 'on-topic', I have to point out that that is a good example of the accusative absolute.

KitFox

Thanks.

medica

@MrHen The rules aren't that subjective. It's kind of like the Supreme Court Justice's comment about pornography: I can't define it exactly, but I know it when I see it.

Mitch

20:40

@medica How is that name-calling?

MrHen

@KitFox I would firstly ask them if they agreed with the action and, if they didn't, why not and what they would have done instead. Afterward, admit that the area is a bit of a grey area and I made a judgment call which is my prerogative. If they strongly disagree, encourage them to post a topic on meta to gather other opinions on the action.

Andrew Leach

Ad-hominem namecalling is not necessary: the answers stand and fall on their merits. If an answerer is stupid and wrong, downvote; with enough downvotes the answer is greyed and shown to be discredited. Stack Exchange's As in Q&A should be objective answers to the question asked.

Matt Эллен

@Mitch Kit's question is about a post calling someone a cocksucker

MrHen

@medica You won't be able to convince our hypothetical user of that.

Alraxite

@Mitch Your actions are being called unilateral. That's name-calling!

KitFox

20:40

As a mundane, you have the luxury of finding out whether other people agree with you first. As a mod, you do not.

Mitch

@MattЭллен Oh. I didn't realize we were still talking specifically about that particular question.

Andrew Leach

Meta is the place to call out moderators' actions.

Matt Эллен

I assume we are :s

medica

@Mitch Pornography isn't name calling. I was saying the site's guidelines on offensive behavior aren't that subjective. If I see it, I can recognize it.

Mitch

@Alraxite That's what I disagree with.

MrHen

20:41

@KitFox My basic position is that I'm fine with people disagreeing afterward. If it reaches a consensus, I am more than willing to undo any particular action.

But at that point, it's on them to generate the consensus.

medica

@KitFox In the case that someone were being obstreperous, I would find another mod to review the case.

MrHen

9/10 times people just whine and don't bother following up. As soon as I give them work to do they just wander off in a huff.

Mitch

Calling someone ignorant is name calling. Calling someone wrong is not.

tchrist

Editing out the adhom is no more unilateral for a mod than for a nonmod, nor less. Wholesale deletion would be, although this can happen easily enough from offensive flags or simple delete votes. And suspension is something else again.

medica

@Mitch are you addressing this to me?

@Mitch this was the original question:

18 mins ago, by KitFox

You, as a non-mod user, see an answer to a single word request that reads "Serpentine [citation] is the perfect word. The guy who suggested snake-y is a stupid cocksucker." What's the appropriate response?

Mitch

20:44

@medica Wow, you're projecting too much (or whatever the opposite of that is). I am responding directly to those things via the link I link to.

medica

@Mitch this comment was not directed:

"
Calling someone ignorant is name calling. Calling someone wrong is not."

tchrist

@Mitch The opposite of projecture is conjecture.

medica

@Mitch That's why I asked if you were directing it to me.

KitFox

@tchrist Right, but in the case where one would be closing or deleting, etc.

medica

@Mitch I waited but didn't get an answer, so I clarified what I was answering exactly. That's all. No projection.

Mitch

20:46

@medica oops should have linked to @Alraxite.

KitFox

@AndrewLeach Oh and they will be.

It's just a matter of course.

MrHen

@KitFox And that's fine with me. People can riot all they want as long as they do it in an orderly fashion far away from the public. ;)

Mitch

@tchrist ha ha. I don't know what projecture is. except that it is the opposite of conjecture. which could mean many things. (link to your 'antonym' answer)

medica

@Mitch thank you. :) ats what I was sayin' :)

KitFox

@MrHen Yes. Orderly queues.

MrHen

20:48

@KitFox "Welcome to the ELU riot. Please take a number."

Mitch

@MrHen There's a schedule and secluded area for spontaneous protests. Which you have to sign up for well ahead of time.

medica

@MrHen I agree here.

Mitch

dammit..too late with the jinx

medica

@KitFox Is there not an option, when a user is being obstreperous, to consult with another mod and send a warning?

Andrew Leach

@KitFox I believe it's allowed to have two accounts provided you don't break the rules on bans and vote-rigging. There's little point, because most users will want to aggregate rep quickly and a single account is best for that. Presumably there would be nothing to stop a moderator using a non-mod second account to act as "a mundane", if it had the necessary privileges? (It would take a bit of time to build up editing rep, or close-voting, for example)

Mitch

20:50

as a mod can't you do the (well-reasoned and cautious) thing yourself? a warning is just talking.

@AndrewLeach that still seems wrong, anything more than one account is misleading.

MrHen

@AndrewLeach Interesting feature request: All mods get a "ghost account" where they can walk amongst the ~~peasants~~ regular users undetected.

KitFox

@AndrewLeach I think we'd have a dim view of that.

tchrist

@MrHen This already exists.

Mitch

@tchrist isn't it already disdained too?

KitFox

@medica I'm not sure I understand what you are suggesting.

medica

20:53

@KitFox I'm sorry, I feel like there are a number of questions floating around. It's not important. I'll find out what mods can and cannot do if and when I become a mod.

tchrist

@Mitch I’m more thinking of kiboing the logues while not actually present.

medica

@tchrist what is "kiboing". please?

Andrew Leach

Gets out dictionary again...

KitFox

@medica I'm just not sure which situation you are referring to, so I can't say yes or no here. Mods can send warnings, but it would be highly irregular to send a wqarning to someone who posted on Meta.

medica

@KitFox I was still responding to this:

Mitch

20:55

@tchrist but that's not mod specific.. anybody in the effing world can do that.

medica

30 mins ago, by KitFox

You, as a non-mod user, see an answer to a single word request that reads "Serpentine [citation] is the perfect word. The guy who suggested snake-y is a stupid cocksucker." What's the appropriate response?

tchrist

James Parry

James Parry (born July 13, 1967), commonly known by his nickname and username Kibo , is a Usenetter known for his sense of humor, various surrealist net pranks, an absurdly long .signature, and a machine-assisted knack for "": joining any thread in which "kibo" was mentioned. His exploits have earned him a multitude of enthusiasts, who celebrate him as the head deity of the parody religion kibology, centered on the humor newsgroup alt.religion.kibology. Background James Parry grew up and lived in Scotia, New York. He showed early computing skills, such as being able to open up and reprog...

medica

@tchrist Thank you! very informative.

KitFox

@medica Oh, then yes.

medica

Thanks. Now I can move on! :-) and try to keep up with the other questions flying around.

Mitch

20:56

@medica also ancient history? like with usenet?

medica

@Mitch I am not an ancient history kind of person when it comes to computer terms. I haven't heard things that you probably knew in grammar school! :)

Mitch

@medica You flatter me with your implicit judgement of my age.

medica

:-)

@Mitch I do tend to assume I'm one of the older users here, along with folks who actually give their ages as being mine or older.

Mitch

@medica I won't play that game with you. We'll both lose.

medica

lol! I was not laughing, however, the year my (younger) husband signed me up for AARP, for the discounts!

(But you need only to be 50 for that.)

Andrew Leach

21:03

You have two husbands?!!

medica

lol!

several!

funny.

Mitch

@medica I don't think that's fair. for election for mod.

tchrist

@AndrewLeach She’s part of that odd Christianity splinter-group, the Nomroms.

medica

:-)

Must monogamy be a requirement?

Andrew Leach

Hope not.

Mitch

21:06

@medica nope just irrelevant.

unless of course it is, and that's the unfair advantage.

medica

:-)

Matt Эллен

monogamous with several people...

medica

The events unfolding in Utah are interesting.

Andrew Leach

You can't get married in less than 28 days in the UK. I'm a bit late for the end of voting tomorrow...

Mitch

TIL that the German defense minister has 7 kids. That's just overachieving.

medica

21:07

@MattЭллен I was thinking that. Serially monogamous on a nightly basis.

Matt Эллен

@Mitch to use as a wall. they're not defence minister for nothing!

Mitch

@AndrewLeach In the US the wedding takes only an hour or so.

medica

@Mitch a 28 day wedding... oh the horror! oh, the expense!

Andrew Leach

And it can be over after an hour as well, it seems.

medica

@AndrewLeach even better

Mitch

21:09

@MattЭллен Question to mod candidates: ... dangit I can't think of a serious one.

@AndrewLeach I 've heard that part is much more expensive.

medica

I wanted to sling mud at MrHen, but I couldn't find anything with which I disagreed!

Matt Эллен

@Mitch please don't pollute this chat with your idle ramblings. this is a serious place. we're serious people.

medica

I'm still on my first marriage. All my kids are now married. Thank God!

College is over, weddings are done.

KitFox

@medica Try asking him about unanswered questions.

medica

Now the fun with the money starts.

Mitch

21:11

@medica YOu're not even humble bragging... you're out right bragging!

medica

@KitFox not with a ten foot pole! we sparred over that in Meta.

@Mitch I didn't mean to. I was just thinking of weddings and divorces and how expensive they were...

Mitch

@medica nah it's great! You can probably watch movies now that you actually want to see.

medica

lolol!

No, dammit, I still have to go see trash like Pacific Rim!

They want us to!

(probably so we'll pay!)

Mitch

Or when someone says "hey, where do you want to go out for dinner?" you don't have to use the mental faculties of solving a Rubik's cube to determine what will displease the least people.

medica

I'm grateful they invite us out all the time.

Mitch

21:15

This is all appropriate talk for regular chat. see you there!

medica

I know. I'm breaking my own rule. But I figured it was a hopeless cause after this morning when I was not here to grumble.

MrHen

22:22

@medica Eh? We did? I think only controversial thing about Unanswered questions are answers-in-comments.

medica

@MrHen Nah, I wasn't saying there was anything bad. We disagreed (still do) about answers-in-comments. Nothing untoward. We were feeling jocular by then. Sorry if that came off badly.

MrHen

@medica No, it didn't come off badly. I just couldn't remember what you've said on the subject.

medica

I do know we disagree about comments-in-answers. But if that's all we disagree on, that's quite something. :-)

I don't like to Answer bad questions.

I'd rather comment and close.

You were not in favor of that.

Done and over.

that's all.

and Kit was playing with me because I thought there wasn't enough mud-slinging going on.

MrHen

@medica Ah.

medica

:-)

MrHen

22:29

@medica Oh, that's right. You're one of those people.

(Actually, I don't think I saw an answer-in-comment from you during my Unanswered drive. :P)

(The only serial offender was John Lawler and he doesn't seem to mind if I just copy/paste it into an answer. So that works for me.)

medica

Yes, one of those.

And I certainly don't mind if you do the same with mine.

But it was the idea that I was creating more work for you to which I objected.

anyway, as I said, done and over.

A slight variation on our vision for the forum.

tchrist

@medica What forum?

medica

AAggh! Sorry, that's a dirty word here. Site.

user116848

22:49

So who WON?

user116848

Just kidding :)

medica

@KitFox About rudeness to new users, and why are people allowing it to happen. Do you mean, why aren't people flagging it? I agree with @phenry here: "I would say that the appearance of unfriendliness is the result of a number of factors, which can't all be gauged by looking at comments that are clearly rude or offensive when viewed in isolation." and "there's a right way and a wrong way to talk to people." I do not see it as a moderation failure. I see it as a flagging failure.

Transcript for