About the New Forum Rules

[Aerion Brightflame]

It's not like it's hard to avoid ad homien in a debate if you actually bother. But most people here don't because we are all fairly bad.

 

It's also not like it's a hard line in the sand to draw either; If you are attacking the person instead of the argument, one is in the wrong.

[Dad]

Yeah, but calling someone stupid in an argument isn't grounds for two warning points.  You're not gonna tell the police "he called me stupid" and expect them to seriously act on that.

[Aerion Brightflame]

So verbal warnings, and you eventually punish repeat offendors?

 

It might be a minor offence, but if it's a repeated pattern of behavoir it's still worth addressing for the sake of bettering discussion.

 

And I say repeated offence because all of us get a little high strung at times and call at least one person here a funking moron or something along those lines.

 

You guys aren't the police, but it doesn't mean that one can't try to hold people to a higher standard within a specific part of the forum. Debates should have a higher minimum standard than the rest of the site.

[Dad]

So verbal warnings, and you eventually punish repeat offendors?

 

It might be a minor offence, but if it's a repeated pattern of behavoir it's still worth addressing for the sake of bettering discussion.

 

And I say repeated offence because all of us get a little high strung at times and call at least one person here a funking moron or something along those lines.

 

You guys aren't the police, but it doesn't mean that one can't try to hold people to a higher standard within a specific part of the forum. Debates should have a higher minimum standard than the rest of the site.

 

Do I actually have to type all of that out?  Because repeat offenders are already punished for this.  You guys want debates to be held at a higher standard, but you don't want too much moderating because "it should sort itself out".  I shouldn't have to tell you to act like adults and "have a nice polite discussion".  Cuz in reality, that ain't how debates work.  

[epicmemesbro]

It's not like it's hard to avoid ad homien in a debate if you actually bother. But most people here don't because we are all fairly bad.

 

It's also not like it's a hard line in the sand to draw either; If you are attacking the person instead of the argument, one is in the wrong.

 Also I am pretty sure if anyone goes on debates and most of their activity involves using  ad hom and they would be reprimanded either way for derailing the topic. Although I have seen a few recently sneak one in a concise post.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Because repeat offenders are already punished for this.

 

In my opinion, statements by black implied the contrary.

you don't want too much moderating because "it should sort itself out".

 

pretty sure this is actually a minority

I shouldn't have to tell you to act like adults and "have a nice polite discussion".  Cuz in reality, that ain't how debates work.

 

but are those the aspects of a real debate you want to emulate? Just because debates are often won through slander and disrespect doesn't mean that should be the standard.

[Dad]

In my opinion, statements by black implied the contrary.

pretty sure this is actually a minoritybut are those the aspects of a real debate you want to emulate? Just because debates are often won through slander and disrespect doesn't mean that should be the standard.

 

No.  That's not what I'm saying.  I'm saying it's pretty damn pitiful that I have to instruct most of YCM's debate goers to act like adults.  Why is it so hard for a civil discussion to take place?  Why do I have to make an additional rule for you to understand what is and isn't acceptable?  What about this isn't common sense?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

In my opinion, statements by black implied the contrary.

pretty sure this is actually a minoritybut are those the aspects of a real debate you want to emulate? Just because debates are often won through slander and disrespect doesn't mean that should be the standard.

Idk about Hina, but the mods have given me week bans and pretty explicit threats when y'all get touchy

 

They just publicly nail people to a cross for you to throw eggs at, it's done silently and behind the scenes

 

If anything, the report button in debates needs to largely be gone outside of actual sheet like someone porn or gore posting

Just bring negreps back, that's the best way to kick some sense into some of the sheet heads in debates (including me)

[Dad]

Idk about Hina, but the mods have given me week bans and pretty explicit threats when y'all get touchy

 

If I've done this, I actually don't recall.  I'll admit jabroniing at you once or twice to get you to fall in line, but threatening you?  Like life threat?  Wtf?

 

 

If anything, the report button in debates needs to largely be gone outside of actual sheet like someone porn or gore posting

 

Hell no.  There are legitimate times where there has been spam, actual flaming, and the like.  It's fine as is.

[Aerion Brightflame]

Neg reps would just lead to unpopular opinions being unnessicarily dragged down and this place would be turned into an echo chamber. (More so than it is every currently is), because we know that if people here can't refrain from ad homien they won't refrain from just down-voting sheet they agree with instead of stuff that is of low quality.

 

You shouldn't need some arbitrary karma rating to tell you when you are barking at the wrong bush say, or conducting yourself poorly. It usually gets pointed out, it's just most of the time the people it get gets pointed out to don't improve upon it. Which makes it all pointless, sadly.

 

Do I actually have to type all of that out?  Because repeat offenders are already punished for this.  You guys want debates to be held at a higher standard, but you don't want too much moderating because "it should sort itself out".  I shouldn't have to tell you to act like adults and "have a nice polite discussion".  Cuz in reality, that ain't how debates work.  

 

Yes, those are contrasting demands. But that's part of the job requirement, finding a balance between promoting good form, and allowing conversation to flow naturally. They aren't mutally exclusive things in all scenarios.

 

If the reality is that you have been giving warnings or whatever out for consitent ad homien behavoir, then I've not seen the effect of it. Which is sad because it means we for the most part can't get our heads out of our arses. But chalk it up to the fact most of us here are varying levels of unstable/immature or whatever else you wish to mark it by. (I have my theories but it's whatever)

 

It is a bugger to manage, but you've been doing a fairly good job of it thus far from what I can make out.

 

IDK; I just think that slightly too many people border to closely to ad homien without ever actually discussing sheet of substance for it to not be considerable as a rule infraction or whatever the mods have in mind.

[Dad]

No, I hear you.  And I hear all of you.  Finding the balance is difficult.  I just have to use the force my head and make my decisions clearly.  I'm hoping this update doesn't take too much away from the section (it's more for clarity anyway, like Black said).  I'll be monitoring the section actively like I always do.  The next two weeks or so, more closely than normal per the rule changes.

 

And I'm going to go back to what I was doing and stop posting in my own section topics.  It's not good for me as a moderator and it will push me to one side.  I'd like to voice my opinion, but from an objective stand point, that's not healthy for the section.  So I'm going to watch and listen and try to step in only when necessary.

 

Struggle or not.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Unpopular opinions won't get dragged down if someone really has conviction in them and keeps at it. 

 

ie. Hina

[Tourmaline]

I rarely post in debates. What are you referring to?

 

My opinions are pretty different for some things though.

[Aerion Brightflame]

Not everyone has that conviction though. Which is the point; you shouldn't need undying conviction in your belief to argue the point because of immediate downvotes and such.

 

Whilst we could try and promote that conviction, I'd rather just not introduce a system where that conviction is nessecary in the first place. It's a lot of effort for almost no gains (Because the conviction could easily turn to bull-headedness which would just defeat the point of the discussion because no one would ever be willing to give ground on anything).

 

It's just not worth doing so over a bunch of internet points.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Saint Fluffalas

Remember, ad hominem is not, inherently, a punishable offense.

 Yesterday, 05:32 PM

 

This has never been true, in any section on YCM. Do your job.

 

Saint FluffalasThis is true.

But reporting someone for calling you dumb or, my personal favorite, a troglodyte isn't going to fix anything. We are not thought police or parents. 
Yesterday, 07:06 PM

 

No, but you *are* a moderator, and if that's not something you have the patience to do properly then please do everyone a favour and step down.

 

If I've done this, I actually don't recall.  I'll admit jabroniing at you once or twice to get you to fall in line, but threatening you?  Like life threat?  Wtf?

 

Let me refresh your memory.

 

Winter.  This has been a long time coming.  We've received numerous reports of your malicious behavior on an almost regular basis.  We've tried to take a lighter touch to approaching you, but it doesn't seem to be working.  As a team, we've decided it is best to issue you a temporary one week suspension.  We'd like you to take this time to reconsider your behavior and the way you address members of the forum.  After so many offenses have been mounted, this would usually end in a permanent ban.  However, we believe a temporary suspension would be the best solution as to not hinder you for too long.  This will be the only temporary ban we will be willing to issue you.  Your next major offense will result in a permanent ban.  The temporary susension will begin as of 12:00 midnight central, tonight. 

 

Thank you for your cooperation, and we hope that you'll return rehabilitated and more considerate of other members on the forum.

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Hi I'm Dad

Specifically:

Your next major offense will result in a permanent ban.

[Dad]

Saint Fluffalas

Remember, ad hominem is not, inherently, a punishable offense.

 Yesterday, 05:32 PM

 

This has never been true, in any section on YCM. Do your job.

 

Saint Fluffalas This is true.

 

But reporting someone for calling you dumb or, my personal favorite, a troglodyte isn't going to fix anything. We are not thought police or parents. 

Yesterday, 07:06 PM

 

No, but you *are* a moderator, and if that's not something you have the patience to do properly then please do everyone a favour and step down.

 

 

Let me refresh your memory.

 

Specifically:

 

I wrote that.  I thought when he said "threat" he meant someone was threatening his life.  But yeah, I wrote that and I meant it.  Winter's next major offense will be a permanent ban.

 

Regarding the ad-hominem thing, I'm handling it case by case.  That has been true and will continue to be true.  Whether or not I like dealing with it or not is irrelevant.  It will be done.

[VCR_CAT]

Just bring negreps back, that's the best way to kick some sense into some of the s*** heads in debates (including me)

 

Considering that neither people verbally telling you off or the frequent week-long bans have done anything to kick some sense into people like you in debates, I fail to see how a little number is going to make any kind of difference.

[Blake]

 

 

 

Saint Fluffalas

Remember, ad hominem is not, inherently, a punishable offense.

Yesterday, 05:32 PM

 

 

This has never been true, in any section on YCM. Do your job.

 

 

 

Saint Fluffalas

This is true.

But reporting someone for calling you dumb or, my personal favorite, a troglodyte isn't going to fix anything. We are not thought police or parents. Yesterday, 07:06 PM

 

No, but you *are* a moderator, and if that's not something you have the patience to do properly then please do everyone a favour and please step down.

wot

 

No one has ever been seriously warned for the minor cases, unless there was some impartiality involved. It has always been the case.

 

That doesn't even make sense. No, minor things like "you're dumb" here and there are not warnable offenses and should not be reported. If it's a repeat issue, that's a problem in its own right. If it's an actual attack on a person, that's an issue.

 

We aren't in the business of giving more than a verbal warning to offenses of that ilk.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Considering that neither people verbally telling you off or the frequent week-long bans have done anything to kick some sense into people like you in debates, I fail to see how a little number is going to make any kind of difference.

This is ignorant, you have no idea what Inwas banned for

[VCR_CAT]

This is ignorant, you have no idea what Inwas banned for

 

It's not really; I do have pretty good ideas of what several of your bans have been for, and my point still stands.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

It's not really; I do have pretty good ideas of what several of your bans have been for, and my point still stands.

Tell me then old wise one

[VCR_CAT]

Tell me then old wise one

 

A generally poor attitude when presenting in debates and other threads; such as some very specific ones you've posted in and have gotten week-long bans for those posts. Includes but not limited to: Overly aggressive when attacking other people, and there's adhom in full posts, and then there're the ones you've made that are only adhom with no other content presented. You've basically gone full shitpost on more than one occasion.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

A generally poor attitude when presenting in debates and other threads; such as some very specific ones you've posted in and have gotten week-long bans for those posts. Includes but not limited to: Overly aggressive when attacking other people, and there's adhom in full posts, and then there're the ones you've made that are only adhom with no other content presented. You've basically gone full shitpost on more than one occasion.

0/3

 

Try again

 

---

 

Technically the last one is true, I got a week for literally posting a picture of actual sheet in misc once

 

so fine, have 1/3

[Dad]

A generally poor attitude when presenting in debates and other threads; such as some very specific ones you've posted in and have gotten week-long bans for those posts. Includes but not limited to: Overly aggressive when attacking other people, and there's adhom in full posts, and then there're the ones you've made that are only adhom with no other content presented. You've basically gone full shitpost on more than one occasion.

 

 

0/3

 

Try again

 

---

 

Technically the last one is true, I got a week for literally posting a picture of actual sheet in misc once

 

so fine, have 1/3

 

Speaking of sheet, take this to pm.  This is not the place and I don't expect to see more of this nonsense here.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

wot

 

<_<

 

That doesn't even make sense. No, minor things like "you're dumb" here and there are not warnable offenses and should not be reported. If it's a repeat issue, that's a problem in its own right. If it's an actual attack on a person, that's an issue.

 

We aren't in the business of giving more than a verbal warning to offenses of that ilk.

 

Comments like "you're dumb" are an offense precisely because they're an actual attack on a person that detracts from any given discussion. It is the type of comment that moderators exist to clean up in order to facilitate discussion and keep things from devolving further towards posturing and further away from the topic. The idea that an insult isn't an "actual" insult due to brevity or being too "minor" for you to acknowledge is to ignore the definition of what an insult is and to create your own. Moreover, you save face by being consistent and not having to explain yourself all the time because your rule is vague. The way you're going, it's going to be very difficult for you to give flaming warnings at all, as you'll always be suspected of sympathizing with the opponents of whoever you choose to warn. 

 

My argument isn't that I want to see more warnings dished out. I don't use the report button. My problem is with the lack of clarity, because however well and sensibly you might think you enforce unclear rules, you're leaving yourself open to accusations of being too harsh or too lenient. What then? Your only choices are to move towards clarity, or shut down the dialogue completely through abuse of power. That you're already deliberately avoiding clarity makes your motives questionable. Distinguishing between "minor" and "major" insults can't be done without a degree of subjectivity, and these labels only serve to further mystify something that isn't complicated. You may think obfuscation gives you carte blanche to use your powers however you want. For such moderators, it never ends well. I think you've seen enough moderators come and go to know what I mean. 

 

No one has ever been seriously warned for the minor cases, unless there was some impartiality involved. 

 

This doesn't make sense. Do you know what impartiality is?