Wouldn't life be a little easier for the mods if they didn't have to remove personal attacks?

It would be easier for the mods, it would hurt the site. I’ve had members admit the personal vicious attacks upset them. They couldn’t understand why an ass would come at them so hard.

It’s mild here compared to askville. It got so mean there I left. I don’t think moderation will be perfect but someone trying to make it civil is kind of nice.

@Coloma My blatantly horrid attack on that twerp was left up, but the question itself was deleted, bahaha! Then he sent me a PM, blaming ME for getting his thread deleted! Ha! Sometimes an attack really is warranted, IMHO.

The difficult part is that some personal attacks really are deserved, as was the case today, but others are stupid and flat out uncalled for. If they left every attack alone, it would become so tiresome, that people would bail left and right. So their only other option is to remove them all, which sometimes doesn’t seem fair, but it is what it is.

(To me there’s a big fat line between calling a douche out for being a douche, and constantly making fun of and insulting the hell out of someone just because they… oh I don’t know… believe in God or vote republican. I dunno how often that happens here or anything…)

^^^ Agreed 100% @WillWorkForChocolate

I will talk with him tomorrow. Maybe he’s like me, and didn’t understand the sight when I was a newbe. I’ll give him a chance.

@Adirondackwannabe You do that, give him a chance to take a little walk with you out behind the barn where you keep your stash of hickory sticks. haha

He get’s a chance. No one is without worth. I hope.

@chyna Well, I guess that’s rhetorical.

@WillWorkForChocolate You know I’m shitting you.

You can be a dick, you just can’t say someone is being a dick. just sayin’

We shall use proper words to put people down.~

Proper…as in..” you addle brained son of a mentally handicapped she swine?”

^exactly. No helmet for you.

Life would be easier for the mods, yes. Of course, it would be easier on the mods if we had no moderation, too. It’s a subjective thing, to be sure, but we have to draw lines somewhere…we do the best we can.

Also, sorry about all the moderation in this thread. We know you all were joking, but a new member wouldn’t.

what new members.

just get rid of the Q is this is how it’s going to be. this is ridiculous

and Jon personally attacked me with the first answer~

Indeed he did. I missed it, but it’s gone now.

um….label it as a personal attack please.

Since it was a joke, I went with “other”.

haha. ya right.

Every answer that was removed was a joke.

This thread.

15 moderated posts.

lol

@jonsblond Not true. Some were removed as flame-bait because they negatively referenced a member who isn’t present to defend themselves.

They were all jokes @Symbeline.

Now I’m being labeled as antagonizing.

@augustlan That happens here ALL the time. And you are defending a newb who is trolling?

Well then, to actually answer this. We all know it, some shit here flies under the radar. And frankly, it does disappoint me, greatly at that, that a lot of it is allowed, just because it doesn’t say something like ass sucking cock bitchbastard in it. It can hurt a lot, I’ve had it done to me quite often. Then again, it’s not like I’ve never done it to anyone, either. I can admit that shit. But is it that bad? I can try and explain, maybe.

I suppose one reason it remains is because it cannot be proven that it was an attack, even if it’s obvious, since the rules, such as they are constructed, are respected. I mean, it could be someone’s opinion, they may not have meant it, they worded something wrong, but they broke no rules. You don’t know, and you can’t prove it, even if you’ve seen that person making dolls of you in their basement and raping them with scorpion tails made out of ass puss. Even if you know for a fact someone was doing it on purpose, you can’t attack the person and accuse them, because the rules don’t really allow for one’s personal basis as any kind of justification, lest it has conflicted with the rules. There’s probably some political term for that. Do I think it’s fair? No. Sometimes, I wish someone would defend me. Maybe someone wishes I would defend them. But I do have to say, it’s much better than allowing common flaming to go on, and it’s not like this site is based on under radar butt hurting, anyways. That being said, I have seen mods step in many times when stuff like that was going on. I actually have examples too, but I can’t name names, so…and I don’t care to go over it, so if anyone gets curious, don’t ask me to PM you about it, just fuck it. But mods do take liberties to try and keep the peace even when rules are not being breached, so there’s always that, no?
And really that’s how it ought to be, since we’re supposed to be all mature and intelligent and all o dat crap. I mean it’s not perfect, but it sure beats any site that allows general flaming to go on. Nobody would stick around, in that case, and Fluther would not be, or if it would be, it would not be what it is. I’ve seen what happens in site when flaming is allowed. People go nuts. Seriously.
But @jonsblond, I see your point, and am not trying to make it void. I see it and I recognize it. Just saying, if the mods just let flaming and personal attacks fly by like it was nothing, things would suck, a lot. I think it’s unfair, but there aren’t going to be that many sites out there with the freedom that we have here, and I appreciate the freedom, even if it has its price. At least we’re not invaded by complete and total name calling. It fucks places up.
I can’t bitch because I’ve flown under the radar so I guess it’s not fair for me to say it’s unfair, but I do pride myself in having the balls to admit that I’m an asshole at times.
Also, I like the amount of freedom we have here. I will bitch anyways then, because I can, and because I’m pretty sure most of my posts here aren’t making a habit of pissing people off subtly, and because I have the freedom to bitch.

You fucking bitches. :D

But eh I don’t know what I’m trying to say. It would be a lot harder for the mods to have to decide what is truly an attack and what is not, make a basis and then act on it. And anyways, members who have been found to be a nuisance here are warned or banned, so it’s not like what we’re talking about here goes unnoticed. It’s just that, what do you wanna do? There is a big difference in between cutting freedom of speech and allowing schoolyard bullshit to go on. Again, is it fair? No. But it could be a lot worse, of this, I am sure.

Also, I’m drunk, and you’re all whores. All of you. Whores.

I also appreciate when this site knows when I’m joking. I was joking about the whores part, not the drunk part. Just gonna have to wait for someone to bust in here and go, obviously.

Once conditions are applied, then you create a grey area which is bound to lead to confusion/discontent.
Personally, personal attacks aimed in my direction have precisely the opposite definition.
I laugh, lie back & glow in my undiluted superiority…like a roman emperor pouring scorn on his minions :D

Making that call of what’s acceptable or unacceptable, and how to label the unacceptable stuff, is the really hard part of modding. I absolutely hate doing it. I’d much rather zap spammers. I always secretly hope that some other mod will step in, but then I give myself a little talk and do my job.

I hate it because it so often comes down to a gut-level judgment call. It would be great if we could quickly convene some Master Council of Sages to rule on this stuff—and sometimes that actually does happen—but more often it’s that one of us schmucks just happens to be wandering through Flutherland and stumbles upon a brewing shit-storm. It may be hours before any other mod shows up, so dude, it’s all you.

As you start actually removing stuff, your mind reels out all kinds of unpleasant scenarios. You imagine Augie coming along later, seeing your handiwork, and regretting ever letting you near the mod controls, You imagine the flurry of objections that will be raised by the interested parties in the thread, some of whom are your friends. All of that imagery is agonizing, but it serves a good purpose: it keeps you from being cavalier about the whole thing. Still, in the end, you have to not let yourself be paralyzed by the dreadful prospects and act.

The line separating acceptable from unacceptable is necessarily fuzzy. There will always be a dynamic tension between freedom of expression and social harmony, That tension is actually a beautiful thing, worth the trouble of endless maintenance. If it were possible to perfectly delineate what passes and what doesn’t—and I’m not sure you could—I think you’d find that much of the vitality would be drained from the community.

Conflict isn’t always bad. It’s charged with potential for pain, yes, but also for growth. Interesting things happen in that conflict zone. The mods have the hard task of deciding whether conflict is veering more toward pain than toward growth. Even the inner conflict that the mod experiences has those same potentials for pain or growth. That’s life.

I’m not trying to start trouble, and I’m not actually whining about the moderation, but I wanted to point out that anyone could easily tell the banter between @blondesjon and me was joking.

@WillWorkForChocolate . . . whatever . . . richard!

@WillWorkForChocolate I was blissfully sleeping when all this went down, but consider this: Imagine you’re the teacher in a 3rd grade classroom. Two of the kids start antagonistically poking each other and it escalates to the point of being disruptive. So you lay down the law: No touching!

What you really mean, of course, is “no antagonizing”, but that’s a little too abstract in this context. You need concrete here, and “no touching!” is concrete.

Now two other kids in the class, realizing that there are many kinds of touching and that this semantic flexibility opens up some interesting comedic possibilities, begin jokingly patting each other on the head, to the amusement of others in the class.

The teacher may get the joke, but letting it slide really probably isn’t the best thing to do given the context.

Dammit! Why do I always miss the good stuff??

@thorninmud I get that; I have children. But I don’t admonish them for play fighting, when the “play” is obvious. I’m just saying that I understand the reasoning that “a new user might not know it was a joke” but in this particular case, the joking was very obvious, and could easily be seen by any member, veteran or newb. I get removing any comments about a troll who’s not present to defend himself, but removing the rest was unnecessary this time.

@jonsblond It’s okay honey. I’m just going to sit here contentedly, with my helmet on, and eat my crayons and lick the windows. :)

@WillWorkForChocolate My point, though, is that how strictly you enforce the boundaries is going to be contextual. Joking around about personal attacks in an atmosphere where the mods are already on edge about personal attacks is different from doing that in mellower times. Lighting a firecracker in your backyard on July 4th is fun and adds to the festive atmosphere. But if you do the same thing on a street in Kabul, you’re likely to get shot.

And I already said I get your point! Nevermind, ffs.

Sorry, no offense meant

Okay actually, not nevermind. Sorry, my editing period is up. There were no actual personal attacks on this thread, and so walking on eggshells to not blow up the streets of Kabul makes no sense in this particular case. No one here was actually attacking anyone else here, and all the funny dick and bitch comments were quite plainly lighthearted and silly.

This thread was very calm and peaceful, with discussion about the topic, and some goofy banter between a few people. Nothing in this situation was volatile, so nothing warranted the removal of that banter, especially since, as I’ve said, it was VERY obviously a joke. So much so, in fact, that a total newb to the site would have recognized it as such. I even used winking and laughing emoticons, for crying out loud, and made it a point to say, “please make note of the winky face up there, haha”... It couldn’t possibly have been misconstrued, and I totally understand @jonsblond‘s upset over its removal. It was one of those times when something was pointlessly modded off.

It’s like beating a dead horse, kids. Sadly, nothing will be done about it. Why do you think so many good jellies left?

But this thread didn’t just come out of nowhere. It grew out of the exchanges in an earlier (heated) thread. If this thread existed in an isolated bubble, then I think you’re right. But the mods have to consider the broader context.

I think if I was a newcomer here, i’d be far more intimidated by the huge amount of removed posts than any blatantly obvious tongue in cheek exchanges.
Maybe noobs should be given a little more credit/respect, in the sense that they can quite easily pick up the humour vibe.

I must admit that I feel hesitant to respond to questions on moderation as a new moderator. It reminds me of my time as a Teaching Associate: you have the proper training, and all of the resources and tools, but are still coming into your own at the front of the classroom, developing your voice, gaining authority. It is difficult to step up to a moderation question knowing that I am significantly greener than the rest of the staff.

I joined when we were at the peak of spam season: the site was flooded with the same question and responses, copy and pasted, and it necessitated constant watch for us to catch it on time. I also learned that the majority of my time would be spent clearing out profile spam, removing random spam on old threads resurrected by marketers, and accounts randomly created with nonsensical names like VVx5kfgh.

But I do not view my role as merely a spam filter, nor do I think it should be seen as such. The harder, more taxing role, is to moderate the discourse of this site according to the Guidelines that I, and every other user on this site, has agreed to follow upon making an account. I can relate to a lot of the sentiments outlined in @thorninmud‘s post about hoping someone else on staff might deal with it, second-guessing your decisions, wondering WhatWouldAugustlanThink.

The original question here is about moderating the discourse of users who are being mean when the line drawn between personal attack / flame-bait and general meanness feels blurry.

It sucks having to leave certain comments standing. We deliberate, whenever possible, as a team. While some comments may more obviously break the rules, and are easier to remove, others toe the line and require more sets of eyes before we can make a decision.

I have seen comments flagged that were definitely harshly-worded, mean-spirited, or even ignorant, but were neither personal attacks nor flame-bait. The user(s) who flagged the response in question may not have liked what they read, and may have felt justifiably frustrated or offended, but a moderator cannot remove said comments unless they break the Guidelines. As @Symbeline mentioned, most, if not all of us, have been in this situation (and certainly a good percentage of us have been the snarker on at least one occasion.) It is never a good feeling to be the one snarked at, but you either defend yourself or let it go.

I don’t think leaving personal attacks / flame-bait will benefit the discourse of this site. I am open to considering and reconsidering whether a certain response fits either of those categories. Moderation requires a very difficult balance and the end result is not always going to leave everybody happy.

Well I for one am glad we have you as a mod. go easy on me XD