What do you want out of Cong?

Myzozoa

to find better ways to say what nobody says
is a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Past WCoP Champion
I think there has been plenty of discussion besides replies to 'bigoted' posts and that obviously can be emotional too. I also don't think these discussions go on 'ad nauseum', they eventually stop one way or another and resume on a different topic. To me, that is a melodramatic hyperbole Rodan.

I know for myself, I can sometimes resist replying after a few posts exchanged.

Rodan, your post suggests that everything is about generating conflict, but obviously there is also a lot of agreement as users also agree with each other. Thats what generates what you call 'piling on', but that doesnt go on endlessly either, it usually means someone liking a post and not even replying.

I have had arguments with users in these threads, but not because I seek conflict. I am much happier to c/p links and excerpts to articles/news and have people like the post and to like others' posts.

If it feels like I am attacking people when I attack the ideas in their posts... consider the urgency of the subject matter in each case. I know I am a paranoid and traumatized person, but certain ideas have been shown to be not only false but illustrative of distortions in thinking that have,in the past manifested in violent and destructive outbursts. You will probably always see me mercilessly making fun of people who think education is harming boys in order to advance girls, or that think college students are silencing free speech in America, because I literally live in fear that someone will shoot up a school over these things, and they already have. So yes, sometimes I may be very harsh explicitly or implicitly when it comes to dealing with these topics, but I'm not sure if a bad thing and I definitely don't feel like it happens often enough to push anyone away unless they just have a pile of conspiracy theories they believe in...
 

Soul Fly

IMMA TEACH YOU WHAT SPLASHIN' MEANS
is a Contributor Alumnus
If it feels like I am attacking people when I attack the ideas in their posts... consider the urgency of the subject matter in each case. I know I am a paranoid and traumatized person, but certain ideas have been shown to be not only false but illustrative of distortions in thinking that have,in the past manifested in violent and destructive outbursts. You will probably always see me mercilessly making fun of people who think education is harming boys in order to advance girls, or that think college students are silencing free speech in America, because I literally live in fear that someone will shoot up a school over these things, and they already have. So yes, sometimes I may be very harsh explicitly or implicitly when it comes to dealing with these topics, but I'm not sure if a bad thing and I definitely don't feel like it happens often enough to push anyone away unless they just have a pile of conspiracy theories they believe in...
This.

I understand where the "we won't police content" sentiment comes from but I honestly feel its a little misguided. Like I'm sure there are complex reasons as to why some Cong threads deteriorate, but I'm very sure that this is a huge factor.

http://theconversation.com/are-all-ideas-equal-not-in-the-classroom-7571

And to be really honest it also feels like shirking responsibility. I understand it is inherently impossible to legislate a "correct" set of ideas, but certain ideas (and posters who keep regurgitating them with zero engagement) have time and again derailed threads and destroyed productive discussions. There is nothing wrong with having non-mainstream opinions but that shouldn't be extended to condone demonstrable falsehoods, lies, fallacies and assertions. People will obviously get mad. For instance man-made climate change shouldn't be a contested fact. The modalities of it may be debated but its denial has never, ever, ever led to a nice fruitful discussion. Why is this entertained in Cong?

I am sure everyone's familiar with that adage that trolling Cong takes little effort because the posters troll themselves. That's because in this forum people have to respond civilly, unironically to people who keep circulating certain ideas. Response to bad faith is strictly monitored, while bad faith itself isn't. Guess what thrives in such an environment.

People losing their shit and going hostile is a symptom rather than a problem. Either be willing to go the distance if you want to have charged socio-political discussions or ban them. There are plenty of other avenues on the internet. Otherwise you are not going to get rid of toxicity.


tl;dr: You cannot not have zero standards on content and then somehow try to solve a problem that in large part stems out of certain content. If you want people to be tolerant and amenable, you have got to meet them halfway.

---
e: I feel my post reads quite negatively. As a whole I sincerely believe mods are trying to make a solid effort to turn this forum around, and it shows. I guess I just wish they could be more assertive against obviously bad influences on the forum and care a little less about being perceived as absolutely-utterly-neutral-by-every-fucking-standard. Because that ain't happening.
 
Last edited:

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Here's a poll regarding the level of moderation question:

https://strawpoll.com/1e6ewbgs

Strict moderation favors ridding the forum of condescension and "cringe". Loose moderation favors a less clinical forum where people can fight their problems out. There is NOT an option for moderating only topics YOU don't agree with, so choose wisely.

Keep in mind this isn't a vote. Also, anyone who does not normally read/post in Cong should be willing to participate as well.
 
there's no point in posting in political threads if anything slightly out of center-right is gonna be deleted and censored. i agree with letting moderation in these threads relax. also, can you crack down blatant propaganda posts made by myzozoa?

"This is a critical and educational video about the deceptive strategies used by the Alt-Right to appeal to centrists."

thanks, we needed our daily dose of training to crack down these Terrible Alt-rights! No differing opinions allowed!
 

Myzozoa

to find better ways to say what nobody says
is a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Past WCoP Champion
there's no point in posting in political threads if anything slightly out of center-right is gonna be deleted and censored. i agree with letting moderation in these threads relax. also, can you crack down blatant propaganda posts made by myzozoa?

"This is a critical and educational video about the deceptive strategies used by the Alt-Right to appeal to centrists."

thanks, we needed our daily dose of training to crack down these Terrible Alt-rights! No differing opinions allowed!
lol why dont you post some more of your differing opinions instead of trying to get the mods to delete my posts? note this is literally one of the users that has posted about his fear of mixed race babies unless he doesn't know what 'miscegenation' is and still uses that word. posting history speaks for itself.

edit: Wrt to von's poll, I voted for slightly strict moderation, as I believe it may be impossible to engage with a certain type of "cringe" without a condescending attitude and if this gets out of hand the entire thing, beginning with the cringe itself (v important) and all the way through the condescension can be deleted.
 
Last edited:
too much of a fascination with rationality in this forum and in the world generally. what i mean by that is pretending every argument / point of view is worthy of engagement. reality check: some views are not to be tolerated. it's 2017. nazis are comfortable with having rallies. we got an explicit racist running the us government who brags about sexual assault. don't see why people sympathetic to that shit need another place where their views are tolerated. we gotta be moving past this. if u harbor these sorta views and post em ur gonna get pooped on. ur view is not entitled to equal treatment. u can be conservative and not be a bigot so stop using that excuse too. its played out

edit - not trying to say that trump supporters cant post in political threads in cong b/c obv not all trump supporters are bigots. cant be giving yall strawmans
 

termi

bike is short for bichael
is a Community Contributoris a Top Tiering Contributor
there's no point in posting in political threads if anything slightly out of center-right is gonna be deleted and censored.
hey yeah tru-
also, can you crack down blatant propaganda posts made by myzozoa?
oh, by "anything slightly out of center-right" you were referring to bullshit alt-right trash. leftists can be censored because theyre all evul gommies whom killed 100 million billion people according to the author of the black book of communism, Dr. Prof. Extremely Smart Science Man Who Should Definitely Be Trusted.

do you even know what propaganda is, anyway?

anyway wrt what shouldn't be tolerated danilo p much covered it.
 
Myzozoa's post is mostly lies. I'm not going to address them because this isn't the place to do that.

You guys were right about my statement about myzozoa. Yes, it's hypocritical to want lenient moderation while wanting to crack down on his/her posts.

I would love to post more of my opinions but it's not possible if they get deleted and I get infracted for them.

So, what I would like to see happen is. If we keep our current moderation stance then, the radical leftists should be cracked down equally as radical rightists. Otherwise, let both positions be posted.
 

TheValkyries

proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
I’m so sorry im not sure I understand the poll what is being defined as cringe posts?

Undisirregardless of that since I’m taking it as a given that the mods don’t want to be proactive in sussing out and Deleting actively shitty posts I’m for increasing the levels of condescension in this forum. For example: my first draft of this post was simply “How many of us had bets on this being the way the thread went.”

Under old rules probs would’ve been deleted for “not adding to the discussion”. But man “Racist fuck is scared he won’t be allowed to be racist, normal humans get mad, moderator says everyone relax no need to get too heated” is pretty much damn near every single political thread on this site. It’s tiring to have this same conversation over and over and over again with no resolution. Either you gotta pick a side as a moderation team and set the culture personally or you gotta just let the fights play out and have a permanent fixture of combative bullshit forever. If we’re lucky maybe one side gets tired and leaves.

I figure the latter is the way things are gonna go and have been going. But boy do I still hold out hope for the former.
 

destinyunknown

Banned deucer.
The mods have done such a good job this year honestly, except in the lgbtq thread as can still be seen there are still posts in need of deletion, but that isn't their fault, they don't write the posts. basically my biggest issue is that you always try to explain yourselves too much and you really don't have to lol. the mods of these forums seem to be the only users in the community that care what other people think about their actions. Sometimes, thats cool, but

It worries me that yall feel such a need for confirmation and attention that you will explain your decisions even when they are obviously correct, because if you do the same shit when youre obviously wrong (and you do) it is a shitshow and I've had to deal with that a bunch of times this year. the lgbtq thread is still covered in invective-filled posts that the mods won't delete even after theyve banned the user and deleted the same post made by other users.


Remember kids: everyone should be banned and decisions should be taken without an explanation, except if the infracted person is me - Myzozoa
 

tcr

sage of six tabs
is a Tutor Alumnusis a Team Rater Alumnusis a Smogon Discord Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
I truly do not see where people get off with saying "anything to the right of centrist is censored." The difference comes in quality of arguments. I identify as slightly left of central and have seen various posters that have been good at promoting conservative viewpoints in most / some cases. Outlaw and Jalmont are two posters that come to mind as rational posters that I don't agree with but can respect and read through their opinions. The vitriol that inhabits this forum comes from the lack of understanding most posters have about nuanced topics. Not to sound "elitist" but many posts simply don't back themselves up correctly leading to the belief that those blanket statements (gun control thread for example) are possible troll posts / missing the point of the arguments. Its extremely hard to humor certain arguments in this forum or have rational discussion when sources are never checked up on and just dismissed because "lol sjw left" or when statements are made without any sort of backing (or even worse, the poster just grabs random articles that can vaguely back them up, never reads them, and relies on other people to also not read them. re; that one argument about boys vs girls in education environments and how boys are slowly being "feminized"). Similarly its hard to take posts seriously that do not have content outside linking the source and snippets of the article. It is also hard to take seriously sides that insist on ridiculing and making light of other posters through joky "witticisms." There are two posters in particular who I rarely if ever see post good quality content, and one of those when they post about content its so vitriolic and sarcastic that it puts Aldaron to shame.

I believe that this subforum should have more strict moderation in certain threads. Threads like "what video game could be a movie" don't need any moderation however threads like "political correctness and race" should have much stricter guidelines in posting to prevent shitfests like what happened in the Election thread. I for one find it extremely hard to debate people who insist on misconstruing my argument / source and fail to provide any form of structure for their own posts, because at that point you aren't "debating" anything you're simply teaching them, and there are some 25-30 year old people here who don't need to be taught and should know how to rationally debate.

I wouldn't mind Cong becoming a more "strict" subforum anyway. I feel that threads like the "what video game could be movie" and other threads that really only promote one liners could be moved to Firebot. That would make Firebot less of a "funny" subforum anyway, and iirc isn't that one of the mods goals?

Anyway thats my two cents, I voted for somewhat stricter moderation in the poll. With the risk of sounding elitist, there are simply too many little content posts in serious discussions, emotional backed thinking, or even just assumptions in peoples arguments. There is questionable logic in some posts and in other posts they don't even pertain to the argument at hand but backhandedly insult other posters in "creative" ways. On top of this, Cong could probably become a more serious subforum, one that should actively promote discussion. Threads that I think are good that aren't political are the Depression thread, the Poetry thread, the LGBT thread, etc. Threads I don't think are particularly good are the "whats the weebiest / nerdiest thing youve done," the Drag thread, asking about what people are planning to do for holidays, "where is your profile picture from." etc. In my personal opinion those are threads that could easily go in firebot, the only difference is that firebot wouldn't censor "joke" posts so maybe that isn't really the best idea.
 
suggestion: let thread creator decide if thread is a safe space or not rather than enforcing all threads equally. a lgbt thread can be and should be a safe space while politics threads shouldn't be.
 
like the rule isn't "no copy pasting or linking relevant articles" it's "no copy pasting or linking relevant articles without any sort of explanation because well the point of the forum is that you engage with the people on the forum and their thoughts/takeaways not random articles that one finds over the internet." that's true regardless of who the poster. what sort of conspiracy could possibly exist?

let's be real here, prior to the election thread being locked, the amount of unnecessary flaming/passive aggressiveness/trolling that occurred was incredible, and i'm not just referring to the alt-right posters here.i totally get that people naturally want to respond to bad/wrong stuff negatively or that they want that sort of bad faith to be moderated, especially now that moderation has been tightened. i'm on-board with that and totally get that sentiment. bullshit should and needs to be called out. but let's not act like the mods have unfairly cracked down on some innocent users who have only ever rightfully attacked wrong opinions in a crusade of justice because that's just not what's going on at all.
 
I agree that being entirely hands off is bad, but we've always drawn the line at harassment and personal attacks.

I think since we're a discussion forum on Smogon, there's not a lot at stake here. I don't consider these political threads to be venerated Halls of Debate where we're trying to find the definitive answers to controversial questions, it's just that these topics can be interesting to talk about especially when something brings them to our attention. Presumably we want to hear what other people have to say, or engage with their arguments when you disagree.

When I say that I don't want to police on content by and large, it means that if you don't want to engage with a poster you don't have to. It means that people speak for themselves. It doesn't mean that I'm looking for a diversity quota, trying to enforce neutrality in what ideas are represented on here, or whatever. I also think expressing emotion is more than fine. I argue with people I disagree with politically just about every day at work, and they still deserve to be treated with basic respect.
 

TheValkyries

proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
Personal attacks are right out, but impersonal attacks must be protected at all costs. So long as the target is a hypothetical point of debate then we MUST allow for the most vile dehumanizing disrespectful rhetoric to be tossed around. And we have to respect that.

Every time we let the conversations get into the realm of hypothetical people the conversations cease being a. In good faith and b. Useful or interesting yet those posts are not even considered for moderation because they aren’t “personal” attacks.
 
Personal attacks are right out, but impersonal attacks must be protected at all costs. So long as the target is a hypothetical point of debate then we MUST allow for the most vile dehumanizing disrespectful rhetoric to be tossed around. And we have to respect that.

Every time we let the conversations get into the realm of hypothetical people the conversations cease being a. In good faith and b. Useful or interesting yet those posts are not even considered for moderation because they aren’t “personal” attacks.
Yeah using hypothetical people in an argument and misrepresenting arguments to make attacks against people making them are both examples of toeing the line where moderating that post is context dependent in my opinion, not even close to protect at all costs. Ideas can also be hateful enough to represent a clear attack on a subset of a community, which also isn't acceptable.

You don't have to accept or respect vile rhetoric or hateful ideas, that's not what I mean by respecting posters.
 

TheValkyries

proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
You don't get bonus points for thinking about moderating and then choosing not to. If you actually did really moderate those posts we wouldn't even be having this thread in the first place.
 
You don't get bonus points for thinking about moderating and then choosing not to. If you actually did really moderate those posts we wouldn't even be having this thread in the first place.
I mean this thread exists because we have some new blood including me so it's a good time to have some dialogue about what our forum's identity is.

What would be most helpful to me is an idea of what specifically you feel deserved attention and hasn't been getting it. You can talk to me about this privately if you want.
 

Myzozoa

to find better ways to say what nobody says
is a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Past WCoP Champion
whatevers happening in the donald trump thread to stop happening
whats happening in that thread do you think?

maybe you could make an effort to articulate your well-thought-out views to others before lamenting that they haven't been silenced yet.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top