Moderation of MDC - What do you think? - Page 16

[kittywitty]

Originally Posted by kmeyrick 

It is when posters condemn Jewish people and their religion and accuse them of being barbaric baby rapers as has happened. Paternalism and majority privilege- you have it!

I don't know about that language, but as a former (?) Jew, even I agree that religion is no excuse to hide behind. We don't allow FGM, nor should MGM be allowed.

[BroodyWoodsgal]

never mind.
Edited by BroodyWoodsgal - 6/17/11 at 3:44pm

[Mommel]

Originally Posted by QueenOfTheMeadow 

I looked at the poll and the majority of the people think the less moderation is good. But there is a large section who wants more and some who want a little more. So, for those who are looking for something else, what suggestions do you have and where do you want the line to be drawn?

In answer to the above, may I suggest, that you moderate publicly for general tone and meanness (as in... "here there, poster, tone it down a little, please be nice"), remove hate speech (racism, etc) altogether and note that publicly as well (as in, "this post has been removed because it violated THIS part of the UA: racism, etc) along with a warning, publicly remind posters of MDC values and mission if needed (like when dissenting opinions turn angry and hurtful - i.e. "this is a site that generally supports _____ and while we'd like to hear your opinion on it, there is a better forum for that, so please take it there" or " this thread is asking for support or information about something MDC values, so please be nice if you disagree"), and ban members if people don't heed these public warnings and a develop a trend of UA violations.

Seriously, didn't everyone's mother teach them that if they can't say anything nice they shouldn't say anything at all? I mean, I have always been one to speak out about my beliefs and values, and do so strongly and passionately when I feel it necessary, but there seems to be a general lack of filter from brain to keypad. No one is going to hear me or change their opinion on an issue if I can't first meet them where they are and move from there... at the very least, most of us should have learned this from mothering small children. 

[oaktreemama]

I did read your whole post AM and I think it is naive at best and shows that maybe you haven't read much history. Human history has shown time and again that the strong will always steal from the weak unless there is some kind of counterbalance, i.e. "government."

Ideas like your are best debated in the safety of a classroom because as a political or social philosophy it fails on many many levels.

Human history has never been safe, it has never been pleasant and it has never been some peaceful oasis. There are NO good old days. They don't exist.

What we can hope for and strive for is balance. But that won't happen if it is a free for all.

[MomGmaMamaAgain]

I'm new to this site, but seeing as I've been through both types of mod in other groups.. I have to say somewhere in the middle is the best.... I've left groups because too much freedom leads to some real nasty people ganging up on others... and not enough makes it too hard to express yourself. I say let people post freely, but moderate the ones who go overboard. There ought to be at least a "report this post" link on every post, but the person doing the reporting should have to back up their reasoning as to why the post is so objectionable.... threats, harrassment, etc should not be tolerated. Debate is good... but making people feel so unwelcome that they feel they have no choice but to leave, is not.

But what do I know?!  Again- I'm new here & don't know all the details either. This is just my general opinion on the topic.

~Wendy (aka Mom/Gma/Mama:Again.)

[Arduinna]

Originally Posted by QueenOfTheMeadow 

I looked at the poll and the majority of the people think the less moderation is good. But there is a large section who wants more and some who want a little more. So, for those who are looking for something else, what suggestions do you have and where do you want the line to be drawn?

As I posted up thread, I'd like to see MDC stick to the core AP/NFL stuff of GD, intactivism, vax questioning, UC, natural birth, BFing and HSing while allowing diversity of opinion on political, social issues and religious beliefs on subjects like abortion, sexuality ( including homosexuality, polyamory and chastity) and gender issues while requiring civility from BOTH sides. 

[Mommel]

Originally Posted by Honey693 

I can't see an apology coming either.  MDC will just keep banning people who call them out on their horrendous choices (which MDC will continue to blame on others) and eventually there will be no one left or everyone left will be to terrified to say anything.

Did you see the posts these women made on that thread? I really do not think that they were banned for coming out against MDC moderation issues. The posts were horrible and nasty and after PMing with the OP newbie of that thread (which I felt compelled to do given her treatment there), I remain horrified at their insensitive and, quite frankly, nasty responses to her question. She is young and new (not to mention newly and unexpectedly single) and was in a lot of pain. While the answer to her question may have seemed obvious to some and the question seemed troll-like to others, not one of those women took the time to ask her directly what she was after. Instead they made assumptions and made things worse for her. I'm sorry, but that type of posting is what really makes me sick to my stomach. The OP was the one who was reduced to terror about ever asking a vulnerable question again.

IMHO, this is a prime example where moderation was exactly what it should have been. I am not terrified to post here and I give plenty of dissenting opinions, but I won't ridicule or belittle people to do it. And if I come off that way to someone, I try to apologize for it and re-phrase my stance to be nicer and/or more clear about my stance on the issue, separating it out from the person behind the issue. People who don't, or for whatever reason can't, do that, should be moderated accordingly.

[eclipse]

Originally Posted by Arduinna 

As I posted up thread, I'd like to see MDC stick to the core AP/NFL stuff of GD, intactivism, vax questioning, UC, natural birth, BFing and HSing while allowing diversity of opinion on political, social issues and religious beliefs on subjects like abortion, sexuality ( including homosexuality, polyamory and chastity) and gender issues while requiring civility from BOTH sides. 

I don't think it's possible to civily express certain beliefs - when you're talking about something like sexual orientation, you're discussing something at the very core of human beings who post in this community.

[kmeyrick]

Originally Posted by kittywitty 

Originally Posted by kmeyrick 

It is when posters condemn Jewish people and their religion and accuse them of being barbaric baby rapers as has happened. Paternalism and majority privilege- you have it!

I don't know about that language, but as a former (?) Jew, even I agree that religion is no excuse to hide behind. We don't allow FGM, nor should MGM be allowed.

I'm not arguing that. But I have seen such language in CAC in the past. Considering the things that have been falling through the cracks around here lately I don't think MDC can afford to have bigotry sneak onto the site, anywhere. The CAC would be a soft target.

[Arduinna]

Originally Posted by eclipse 

Originally Posted by Arduinna 

As I posted up thread, I'd like to see MDC stick to the core AP/NFL stuff of GD, intactivism, vax questioning, UC, natural birth, BFing and HSing while allowing diversity of opinion on political, social issues and religious beliefs on subjects like abortion, sexuality ( including homosexuality, polyamory and chastity) and gender issues while requiring civility from BOTH sides. 

I don't think it's possible to civily express certain beliefs - when you're talking about something like sexual orientation, you're discussing something at the very core of human beings who post in this community.

Well no one is forcing anyone to post, who is in incapable of being civil, that is where hopefully self moderation comes in. I've seen a lot of lack of civility over my years here, but shutting down everyone for the lack of ability of a few isn't the best method IMO. 

[APToddlerMama]

Originally Posted by rhiandmoi 

A Thumbs Down option for posts. If we're going to have thumbs up, we should have thumbs down too.

In line moderation. Instead of *poofing* posts I think the mods should insert posts or edits showing what's going on, and explaining to everyone what was or was not acceptable about what was posted.

Agree with mods explaining what was not acceptable.  That is a good idea.  I am leary of the new moderation because I was slapped on the wrist for things I didn't understand like "referencing another thread" which made no sense.  So, I'd like an explanation so I can stay on good terms with MDC and know what is okay.

I think a thumbs down option would be terrible and encourage the mob mentality that we've been seeing more and more of already. 

[Arduinna]

Originally Posted by APToddlerMama 

I think a thumbs down option would be terrible and encourage the mob mentality that we've been seeing more and more of already. 

Boy is that the truth. 
 

[lalaland42]

Originally Posted by Arduinna 

Boy is that the truth. 
 

So we are allowed to agree but not disagree? *scratcheshead*
 

[kmeyrick]

I don't see the point in a thumbs down icon. I don't really see the point of a thumbs up. If the post is in violation of the UA, report it. If the post is awesome, respond to it.

[Arduinna]

Originally Posted by lalaland42 

So we are allowed to agree but not disagree? *scratcheshead*
 

That is exactly what have had for ages. Did you know that we couldn't post negative reviews about Drs on the tribe threads? That is just one example. Not sure if that changed with the recent changes or not.

I was agreeing with that poster about the mob mentality part specifically.

[APToddlerMama]

Originally Posted by Ornery 

I absolutely do not think that the new moderation level has been what has sent people running.  It is the board's overall clunkiness, coupled with multiple very poor decisions done by Mothering.  The way the magazine was shut down, the invasion of board member's privacy (remember the searchable emails and all the threads being posted on FB - not just the featured ones were on there - all of them were under one of the tabs on FB), the constant shilling for advertisers, and mostly the devotion to the almighty dollar seen here lately has run people off.

WHAT searchable emails??? Where and how??

[BroodyWoodsgal]

Originally Posted by oaktreemama 

I did read your whole post AM and I think it is naive at best and shows that maybe you haven't read much history. Human history has shown time and again that the strong will always steal from the weak unless there is some kind of counterbalance, i.e. "government."

Ideas like your are best debated in the safety of a classroom because as a political or social philosophy it fails on many many levels.

Human history has never been safe, it has never been pleasant and it has never been some peaceful oasis. There are NO good old days. They don't exist.

What we can hope for and strive for is balance. But that won't happen if it is a free for all.

My ideas are not being conveyed properly, this is not your fault. You're not understanding what I'm saying or where I'm coming from at all and again I am certain that it is my technique in conveyance and not your ability to comprehend which is the culprit. I'm not suggesting what you think I am at all and yes that would be incredibly naive. For the record, if everything you know about world history you learned in a classroom in a major university in this country, it is my belief that you are far from properly educated on modern history, the written history of this world and particularly when it comes to the omitted materials and archeological findings which support a far different picture of ancient civilization and the roots of the modern day construct we live in. the people of this thread have been so kind in ignoring my hijacking, thank you and my apologies.

[peainthepod]

I voted "Other". The previous moderation style was really confusing and inconsistent, and I dreaded getting PMs because I was always worried that I was being warned for something ridiculous or petty. But the new lack of moderation has let this place become really hostile and unfriendly. I agree that we're all adults and I don't mind the foul language or sex discussions, but I really can't stand to see people getting ganged up on or snarked at for no good reason. That Single Parents thread was simply awful, nauseating...I can't believe anyone here would support a vicious attack on a clearly vulnerable person.  That sort of thing should not be tolerated here.

One thing that needs to stop is the removal of threads and posts. I'd much rather see a thread closed with mod comments explaining why than to see it just vanish. It's even worse when offensive posts are removed but the thread remains, because it becomes unreadable and confusing and no one can tell anymore what posts violated which rule.

Please stop deleting threads. I walked away from MDC for a few months because I was so frustrated with the way I just knew that the minute a thread became heated and/or interesting, it would vanish. I've adminned a few message boards and been a member of several others and I've never seen non-spam threads just outright removed anywhere else. It's kind of creepy, actually. The secrecy is totally unwelcome and unnecessary IMO. And how can we get a feel for what's unacceptable here if we can't see unacceptable posts?

My main problem with MDC right now is the insufferable number of ads and blatant commercialism. The new format is also horrible and my (brand new updated) browser crashes a lot. But that's not what this thread is about, I don't think, so I'll save it for another time.

[Subhuti]

Originally Posted by Mommel 

Did you see the posts these women made on that thread? I really do not think that they were banned for coming out against MDC moderation issues. The posts were horrible and nasty and after PMing with the OP newbie of that thread (which I felt compelled to do given her treatment there), I remain horrified at their insensitive and, quite frankly, nasty responses to her question. She is young and new (not to mention newly and unexpectedly single) and was in a lot of pain. While the answer to her question may have seemed obvious to some and the question seemed troll-like to others, not one of those women took the time to ask her directly what she was after. Instead they made assumptions and made things worse for her. I'm sorry, but that type of posting is what really makes me sick to my stomach. The OP was the one who was reduced to terror about ever asking a vulnerable question again.

IMHO, this is a prime example where moderation was exactly what it should have been. I am not terrified to post here and I give plenty of dissenting opinions, but I won't ridicule or belittle people to do it. And if I come off that way to someone, I try to apologize for it and re-phrase my stance to be nicer and/or more clear about my stance on the issue, separating it out from the person behind the issue. People who don't, or for whatever reason can't, do that, should be moderated accordingly.

I am glad that someone else felt the same way I did.  I was beginning to think I was crazy.  

But I missed where the mod's actually did anything ... it seems like the thread is unchanged.  Maybe I missed something?
 

[oaktreemama]

For the record, if everything you know about world history you learned in a classroom in a major university in this country, it is my belief that you are far from properly educated on modern history, the written history of this world and particularly when it comes to the omitted materials and archeological findings which support a far different picture of ancient civilization and the roots of the modern day construct we live in. 

Uh I don't even know what to say to this. Do you have some kind of secret Illuminati tome or something? Something that the major (and minor) historians I have read (women's studies, aboriginal studies, Native American studies, Innuit studies, African studies, etc) have missed? Because I am sorry but this is exactly the argument conspiracy theorists use to back up their conspiracy theories about the modern and ancient world.

To each their own though.