Site Management > Site Support / Feedback

Split from: DRAFT/FEEDBACK - HLP Community and Moderation Standards - Open to 2021/03/06


Well, certainly a lot to catch up on while I was away. A lot I can talk about, and probably too big to just dump into one post. So I'm not going to do that.

Broadly, these new standards for moderators encapsulate much of what I've been calling for for years. Accountability and transparency. The latter is more clear than the former here. And we certainly need to know what appealing moderator action involves, and the creation of new mods. I also approve of the start with least serious moderation tool available first.

Now, the standards for us and the principles you're trying to work towards through them are much more questionable to me. You want the community to police itself, but I haven't seen anything to make me think it's capable of doing so, in a good way anyway, certain people who have decided they are the moral arbiters of HLP have proved quite capable of purging it of people they don't like over the years by making the environment as hostile as possible to them to drive them away. I can only hope this is not what you have in mind, and that seems to be the case. But this community does not produce amicable conflict resolution, it produces extreme hostility and has an unbelievable ability to cause people extreme levels of emotional trauma that can stay with them for many years afterwards. I do not think this is an attainable goal.

In order to have a forum welcome to everyone, these practices must cease. People have been creating hypotheticals, but not really the kind that get to the meat of the issues this forum has. Pick any of the incendiary threads that have happened in the past, and those are the situations where you ask yourself what would the new moderation protocol do in these situations?

So rather than put up a wall of quotes, I just want to call attention to the topic that is discussed on page 2, and reference that. Open up another tab:

In reality, we're not dealing with nazis and such, it's those threads. Imo, it's the people who's heads are exploding that are in the wrong. Me, you can bring your nazis and such on, and if I debate them, I'll debate them civilly. It is pointless to rage at them, it will accomplish nothing productive. Selfish catharsis does not qualify as productive. If you can't be civil, if you don't have the emotional maturity to handle opposing viewpoints, then walk away.

So, the next time people's heads are exploding, what do you do? If you side with the exploding heads, then you might as well just shut down all discussions because the forum itself can't handle opposing viewpoints.

Btw, punching nazis is morally wrong. Arresting people for crimes is what we do in a civilised society. If the nazis commit crimes (or are going to) deal with them. If they don't, and people punch them, arrest the punchers.

Just think about it. Punch a nazi, what does it achieve? After they've been punched, do you stop? Does that make everything okay? Or do you just keep punching until they die? And after you've established that it's "okay" to punch nazis, then it's going to become "okay" to punch an ever increasing group of others, and other people are going to start deciding it's "okay" to punch you...

A police officer arresting a nazi criminal and treating them with the same dignity and professionalism as a petty criminal is what a strong society is built on, where you trust in authority figures, not one where they cuff the nazi and let people lay in some punches and lay in some punches themselves.

EDIT: I'm not opposing banning nazis on sight from HLP or anything.

We've already established continuing the whole "punching Nazis" tangent is counter-productive, not to mention completely off-topic to the community standards conversation.


[0] Message Index

Go to full version