Like an issue that has exploded of late.

@Cerberus I would think moderation worthy arguing is more likely to happen in the more private and transient rooms, meant for direct conversation between two members, that people might not think moderators regularly check.

@Ghalib No! You're wrong!

@Tonepoet Really? The only fights I have ever seen were in normal rooms.

@Ghalib We reserve the word "fight" in an argumentative sense for arguments which are not fun.

@Cerberus Because you've never been a regular of the problem rooms. But yes, between the time we spend dealing with chat and, more importantly, the time spent discussing how we should deal with chat, chat has been a huge drain of mod time and resources.

@Cerberus It was a mere supposition, hence the word "would".

@Tonepoet But you can fake that.

@Tonepoet OK I cannot exclude the possibility.

And it isn't just about fights. It's also (or even mostly) about dealing with chat flags. And ugly conversations.

@terdon I have heard of the Scifi room, although I've been there a number of times and always without fighting.

Idly making rape jokes, for example, doesn't constitute a fight, but it is not OK.

Meh.

@Cerberus There were rarely actual fights. Fights aren't the problem.

@Ghalib Pretty much always. Arguments are great fun, as long as they don't become fights.

I don't really care about jokes, as long as they're not aimed at someone personally who doesn't like them.

@Ghalib Ask a member of a debate club. =P

I think the problem with chat flags occupying moderators' time can be dealt with in two ways: 1. let trusted users handle them: if you have enough reps, you can handle chat flags already, so why are moderators necessary?; 2. ignore most chat flags, because, in my experience, the large majority are insignificant and can be solved by users participating in the discussion themselves, by either calling out the chatter, or ignoring the line, or both.

That's not true at all! Everything you're saying is nonsense!

@Cerberus Sigh. And what if the user really doesn't want to participate? They feel intimidated or are socially awkward. You happen to have a very thick skin, as do I, but others do not. And chat should be safe for everyone.

@Ghalib Context speaks for a lot on its own, and we do have facial expressions! XP

@terdon I really, really do not like this idea of "safe spaces". But anyway, that's what the ignore button is for.

If people don't use it, then apparently they're not that bothered.

But you've been talking about this for hours.

So let's change the subject.

That's just it. SE, and I agree 100%, don't want a place that can only be used if you put various people on ignore. If that's needed, then those people should adapt their behavior or go away.

not to mention that the vast majority of people don't even know about ignore.

I tell them.

And, more importantly, everything said in chat is indexed and searchable by google.

But anyway.

The problem isn't so much about conversations happening now but about the permanent record they leave behind and what image that gives of the site they are hosted on.

@Ghalib Oh come now; smileys aren't my proprietary invention. You just used one! ;-)

It's just a chat room on the Internet with people you don't know.

Nobody ever reads the logs.

@Cerberus Yes, and that can be extremely intimidating to some people.

@Cerberus Of course they do. I do all the time. More importantly, they can show up as search results.

Old logs.

Yes, old logs.

I don't think I've ever got an SE log as a chat result!

@terdon You're the only person!

remember the drive by flaggers

But about president Duda, I was surprised when he blocked this horrible Polish law.

I hope he will keep it up.

He used to be considered a puppet of the prime minister.

So was this all for show and will he allow the law after protesters have grown tired, or has he developed a mind of his own?

@Cerberus encrypted.google.com/…

Oooh something encrypted?

They're static webpages that can appear in search results just like any other.

@Cerberus No, just a normal google link.

Showing the result I got when I searched for a random chat message from this room.

Discussions in this chat room are permanent not transient. Just as much as any post and more than any comment.

@terdon I know that they can in theory, but in practice they never do, at least I've never seen them do so.

Hell, unlike your posts, you don't even have the ability to delete older chat messages.

@Cerberus What you have seen != what can happen.

I'm talking about a realistic situation.

I'm not yet convinced that this is realistic, but of course I'm open to contrary evidence.

@Ghalib That's besides the point though. Is it not? I'm just saying we have the expressions, even if we choose not to use them.

@Cerberus As am I. Your using anecdotal evidence to make the argument that because it hasn't happened to you, it can therefore never happen is absurd. As you well know.

I use Google a lot.

Riiight

And you obviously search for every possible search string anybody might search for, right?

And I have never heard someone else get a chat log as a search result unless they were looking specifically for a chat message.

Have you?

@Cerberus No. But that doesn't even indicate anything, let alone prove it.

Probably because there is hardly ever anything in the chat logs that someone else would find useful later.

I haven't seen a pink teapot orbiting the earth, but that is no indication.

@Cerberus The fact that somebody can potentially read the chatlogs is enough. It's actually part of the reason I quit playing Wesnoth generally, and it's harder to get chatlogs from the then newly implemented replay archive than here.

@Cerberus Precisely.

@Tonepoet If you want to hide something, then it might be a concern. But this discussion was about potentially insulting or shocking passers-by, and I think that will not happen with the chat logs, exceptions excepted.

To get back to the Polish situation, I wonder what the EU can do.

To take away Poland's right to vote in the EU, you need all other countries to agree.

But Hungary never will.

So what leverage does the EU have?

@Ghalib Yes, I am. They are representative of facial expressions. The fact that they have less meaning than words does not preclude them from qualifying, since facial expressions are generally less meaningful than words.

I don't understand.

You can't engage with a user when you're ignoring him or he you.

And the other people can make their own decisions, put the offending person on ignore if they so choose.

@Cerberus The ignore button doesn't work here. It punishes the person who uses it.

@Cerberus And what if the exception ends up being your employer? People have been fired over their facebook posts before...

@Tonepoet But how would an employer find this offending message? And it would have to be an extremely serious offence for an employer to care enough.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Meh, that's not such a big problem.

@Cerberus Have you ever used it?

@Ghalib No, you won't see his messages, so it doesn't matter to you.

It makes the chat room unusable whenever you're in a chat with someone you're ignoring.

Sure I have.

Not unusable.

You can no longer follow the conversation.

Sure you can, just not the lines directed at this person.

But you can ignore those lines.

you can't tell who a line is directed at, though

And respond to the lines you can see.

You can have a conversation with the other people in the room.

If it's slightly less convenient, then surely that's a small price to pay if it shields you from this obnoxious user.

If you don't use the ignore button, then apparently you didn't care enough about the "insults".

Nahh I don't agree with that at all.

Besides, this user could go to another room and do the same thing without your noticing.

Sorry, but I am not convinced at all.

Moderators don't ban people on hearsay.

@Cerberus Do you know what percentage of chat users are aware of the ignore button? I would be very surprised if it is even 1%.

And why do you insist on thinking of chat as a transient thing? It's not. If it were, things would be very different. The main issue is that everything stays and is on record and people should act like they know it's on record!

That's why it's our job to tell them whenever there is a fight.

Because I don't think a chat line in a chat log that hardly anybody reads a year from now is important, except for reasons of privacy.

@Ghalib You could do the same thing in another room.

Or when I wasn't present.

@Cerberus Exactly. And then they'll ask "why me"? And "why is this OK and this not" and "what are the exact rules you apply to decide who to chastise"? and "hey, but why didn't you do this yesterday when Bob did the same thing?"

@terdon To be fair, I never imagined that S.E. policy was predicated upon how many people knew about something. I mean how many first time questioners know about gen. ref., P.O.B. &c.

@Cerberus I've tried using the ignore feature and managed for a few weeks but I had to stop because being in the chat room with that person was annoying as hell.

I think ignoring someone you find obnoxious, either through the ignore button or by just not addressing them, can work very well in chat.

If this person had been worse to me, such that I couldn't unignore them, then I would have had to stop coming to the room.

@Tonepoet Huh? Of course it isn't. That's just one of the many reasons why the ignore button is not a substitute for 'chattiquette' rules.

@terdon Huh? The ignore button is not a punishment: it is a tool you provide people with. An instrument to get what they want, i.e. not being exposed to person x.

@terdon rules guidelines

@user685252 No, rules. We tried guidelines. They didn't work.

@user685252 rules guidelines rules

@Cerberus I was answering your comment about us mods telling people to simmer down when there's a fight.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 And how about just ignoring this person without using the button?

@Ghalib Actually, we do try very hard not to and we have access to information you don't see. We never need to act on hearsay.

Sure, mistakes do happen, but usually when you think something like that happened, it's because you can't see deleted content.

@terdon What I meant was, it's our job to tell people there is an ignore button.

Not always, of course. Mods are as falible as anyone else.

can you force people to behave?

@Cerberus Ah. Well, I still don't see how that helps when the entire atmosphere of a room is toxic and when those things that are said there remain in a permanent record.

@user685252 Mods. can penalize for misbehavior, with suspension and bans, so yes.

@user685252 No, but we can kick them out of the room or suspend etc. As you have good reason to know.

:P

@Ghalib Nevertheless, they won't act on hearsay, only on what you have been saying in chat. So how could they ban you if you haven't done anything that flouts the "rules"? What could this evil person do to get you banned?

but they will come back with a vengence

@terdon It can help because you don't have to "leave the room" when you find someone's behaviour obnoxious, but you can just ignore him.

that's when it gets ugly

@user685252 Not if the ban is permanent.

there are ways around that

@Cerberus That's much harder, depending on the circumstances

I think the best kind of intervention is trying to convince someone.

@user685252 That's true.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I don't know, I don't find it that hard.

@Cerberus you're not everybody, though

Sometimes it sound as though people think they are "forced" to talk to someone who's in the same room.

You're an adult.

Walk away, ignore, shrug.

Or not, if that is your choice.

Now, spam is another thing.

There is no disadvantage to deleting spam and banning spammers immediately.

but it's not just a case of "walk away". you're in a pub and someone comes over to your table and starts insulting you, constantly. you ignore him, but he doesn't stop.

Haha.

why should you have to walk away? why is his doing that privileged over your being forced to endure it?

That would be funny.

In that case, surely the other people at the table will tell him to shut up, and he will.

@Cerberus Well, except that they don't, or they do, and he doesn't.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 They will if it's clearly and utterly bad behaviour.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 call the bouncer

@Cerberus well, in my experience, you can't rely on that, especially not in a chat room.

@Ghalib Can you be more concrete? How will this ban happen?

What will they say to this moderator?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 If I start insulting you here, out of nowhere, I'm sure some people will tell me I'm not behaving well and please stop.

@Ghalib So you're saying that people in positions of authority can never overcome their biases and act fairly?

@Cerberus Maybe they will, but does that mean you'll stop?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Yes, when the room is against you, you'll give up sooner rather than later.

It's the internet: people have demonstrated over and over an ability to be total assholes to a degree that isn't found in real life.

come on

@Ghalib If only some can't, then that means chat rooms can be moderated fairly.

@Ghalib If you did this thing, then there must be proof in the chat logs. If not, then it won't happen.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 real life is far worse

@Cerberus I think you're being optimistic here.

It's just my experience.

@Cerberus And it's not my experience.

I'm talking about a situation as egregious as the one you mentioned.

there is no physical presence here

But anyway, I'm getting a bit tired of this subject.

me too

And after only one hour!

Pour Terdon, how exhausted he must be.

wow Cerb, you're losing your stamina in your old age

he tries so hard

stumbles

plods

I'm a 34-year-old dog.

that's only about 11 years/head

@user685252 Still quite old for a dog's head!

@Ghalib I'm glad!

me three

:-)

@Ghalib There are a total of 548 moderators on the network and we're all individuals with our own opinions and personal offense thresholds. So yes, you will get different responses from different mods but there's no other way to do it. We can't have a list that says "fuck you: 5 days suspension; shit on you: 3 days suspension" or whatever.

How do you feel about the common weal v. the commonwealth, to mean "the common good"?

gotta run ttyl

Bai!

There's an ignore button?

searches around

Click on me, click "ignore".

I don't hate you that much yet.

Thanks.

Thank you too.

Dang it. I cannot ignore myself.

What's the use.

@Færd Such is life.

@Cerberus I'm going to type so hard your eyes will get tired reading it all!

Hah!

Yay! Webinar canceled! I can blow all my time here instead!

blows time

What Tonepoet meant was "from qualifying as expressions".

Uh oh

tries to relight time

To qualify as an expression means to deserve the name "expression".

Can somebody help? I put out time and I can't get it to start back up again.

I have a bus to catch and I'm really concerned about the schedule now.

@Mitch That's like one of those computer attacks where a programme heats up your processor so bad it burns out.

Yes.

@Ghalib Depends on the mountain. I'm sure google would tell you.

But that wasn't what he meant there.

@Cerberus Yeah! That! But for your eyes!

When I say 'I mean it to sting', I mean that I really mean it to sting!

Like attacking an epileptic by posting flashy G. I. F.s on the Internet: some people say that works.

@Ghalib I'm just here to give factual information or to lead to it.

@Cerberus I think that's an urban myth.

Unless of course that is an urban myth that I just started.

There have been lawsuits, but I'm not sure.

If the lawsuits took place in a jurisdiction where suing people is rewarded with lots of money, perhaps it's less meaningful.

@Færd If they put that in, chat comments become a Turing Complete system. If they allowed that, there'd be no end to the mischief.

@Mitch It is annoying though.

@terdon I

@terdon keep

@terdon pinging

@terdon myself

@Cerberus I think here was a situation of lots of kids showing up at hospitals in Japan a few years ago because of one particular Pokemon episode tht had flashing in it. (I'm pretty sure that happened). But the actual phenomenon was maybe figured out to be just a bunch of kids complaining and their parents freaking out, so no actual epileptic fits or such happened.

'mass hysteria' was the label I remember.

Mass hysteria is indeed a powerful and age-old nocebo.

It's cargo-cult behavior. just because someone else is doing it.

There's the mom-question: "If all your friends decide to jump off a bridge, would you do it too?" and the answer, to be honest is 'Most likely yes because people are idiots together'

Well, a cargo cult is perhaps an example of irrationally imitating people, but it's not the other way around.

@Ghalib Hm... yeah, I'd do that

Yeah. all the time

You're busy sticking your head in an oven, or preparing to jump off a roof with a pogo stick onto a trampoline, and your mom says the above. It's the worst because you don't know what the hell she's talking about, there's no bridge involved.

If it weren't for all those cars

and when they do work, people don't always follow them

@Ghalib do you ever have policemen directing traffic? like an extra incentive to stop or go?

@Ghalib Oh. That makes things difficult

I've never been to Pakistan, but I imagine it is sort of like the roads in Morocco. And that's the only place I've seen where people are even crazier than in Greece when driving.

Wiktionary oneboxing is worthless in its current state. The quotations need to be filtered out from the definitions.

@Cerberus 'common weal' sounds really old fashioned, and 'weal' sounds really weird like some kind of injury. 'commonwealth' is a common enough word that there is nothing special about it.

@terdon OMG Greece

I used to think we were the worst drivers in the world. And then I went to Morocco and relegated us to second place.

Or rather, Oh My Zeus

depending on the place, they may or may not be bad drivers, just non-rule based drivers.

@Mitch OMZ sounds like a potato chips factory

that is, when nobody is following rules of the road, there is a tendency to be actually very skilled at driving.

@Mitch The distinction is largely one of semantics. The result is the same.

@M.A.R. With Cayenne Flavor-blast micro-explosions

@Ghalib Antarctica is the worst when it comes to cuisine.

@M.A.R. Are those silicon potatoes or germanium potatoes?

@MetaEd silicon. Jeez, what is this, the 23rd century?

@M.A.R. Germans make better chips. Just saying.

@Ghalib By qualify, I meant it has the requisite qualities to be appropriately considered such a thing. See the American Heritage Dictionary definition 1. c.

A picture is worth a thousand words

@Ghalib I use Webster's as prima facie evidence to determine correctness. As much as I try, I do not deign that my use of the language is always correct, particularly since I've inherited the habits of more careless speakers. Now I need to do research regarding whether or not I should continue to use the word that way, because A.D.E.L's. definition implies that the word might only apply to persons.

@Mitch no it's not

I find emojis hard to read. They're too small, and the colors don't differentiate between the supposed intended meanings

I find emoticons hard to remember beyond the smiley and winky.

@Ghalib Do goes with difficulties, number agreement.

@Ghalib Correct

@Mitch ;-+

@M.A.R. uhhh

That's a sniper aiming at your screen. Duck!

Hey you made that up!

@Ghalib It's fancy talk

@Mitch =-=;*&£%

@M.A.R. How dare you

@Mitch I can't control it. The emoticons are taking over my brain ;+()!

@Ghalib Consider is a close enough synonym, I think.

:-Oo.

@Tonepoet or stoop

@M.A.R. That's a duck aiming at your screen. Snipe!

Or maybe it's a snipe hunt.

@MetaEd military-trained ducks . . . my worst enemies

@MetaEd Is it a snipe or a duck? Make up your mind

jinx

@Mitch But in the sense "the common good".

@Cerberus Oh sure 'commonwealth' only really means to me a meaning empty alternate label for a state, like republic or nation. 'common weal' does sound like 'public good' (like public health care or public transportation systems. But it does sound a little archaic.

@Mitch The Commonwealth of America's Internal Revenue Service is almost surely going to be the U.S.A's. replacement. =P

@user685252 Your control of fonts and caps got out of control pretty fast

@Mitch say what NOW?!!?!.!.

@M.A.R. and punctuation. man, get a grip on it.

The markup police are emptying their citation booklet just for you

@Mitch how can you gain grip on something you've lost control of?

That's a sentence that has never been uttered before, and may never again

The markup police are emptying their citation booklet just for you

there. fixed.

By ending sentences with a preposition appended at?

@M.A.R. just repeating for emphasis. in case you didn't get it the first time.

@M.A.R. +1

Never end sentences with.

Or begin them with a conjunction

And to never split an infinitive

Hopefully

Or Yoda speak, use

practices

wait..

stops practicing

Ö

starts preaching

Wha_?

stops preaching

now I can start practicing

The speaker off comic is his mom. I'm pretty sure.

Which is to say, usually if you're about to go do something stupid because all your friends are doing it, your mom will say that.

@terdon Just to point it out in case it is not obvious, if you ever do become a Nobel peace prize laureate, you sure are going to feel real stupid having said that.

@M.A.R. protected from your cat by Community♦ 34 mins ago.