Moderation Issues (3)

Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.

4,124 thoughts on “Moderation Issues (3)”

  2. Patrick is unfit to be a moderator. He is biased and employs double-standards- well that is typical of all evos

  3. Frankie:
    Patrick is unfit to be a moderator. He is biased and employs double-standards- well that is typical of all evos

    If you feel that a comment has been moved to Guano incorrectly, please provide a link to that comment. If you feel a comment should be moved to Guano, please provide a link to it.

  4. Patrick: If you feel a comment should be moved to Guano, please provide a link to it.

    I’d have to take them off ignore, and to do that might expose me to challenges to my deeply held religious beliefs. No thanks.

  6. Frankie:
    Patrick,

    You are unfit to be a moderator, Patrick. Do this forum a favor and drop out

    Thank you for sharing your views. The Skeptical Zone appreciates the input of all participants. If you have specific complaints, please provide links to the offending comments and a reference to the rules supporting your claim.

  9. Patrick: Please provide references to particular comments so that the admins may address your concerns.

    And who tattled on my alleged transgressions? If you picked them out for yourself then you should be able to do the same for other posters. If you can’t then you have proven my point.

  10. I wrote a new thread. its been a few days and not up. Not complaining but maybe I did something wrong in organizing it. It says pending.

  11. Robert Byers:
    I wrote a new thread. its been a few days and not up. Not complaining but maybe I did something wrong in organizing it. It says pending.

    I just published it. Please let me or another admin know when you’d like something published.

  12. Patrick: Please let me or another admin know when you’d like something published.

    Sure. Please publish the rule that moderation issues must be discussed in the Moderation Issues thread and please publish the rule that “meta-issues” and “meta-threads” must be discussed in the Moderation Issues thread.

    I’ve been asking to have that published for months now.

  14. Patrick: I just published it.Please let me or another admin know when you’d like something published.

    Okay. Thanks. i thought I did have to tell someone but wasn’t sure. It said pending and so i thought that was the evidence for being checked over.
    Thanks again.

  16. I think we need at least a link to the original article in walto’s panpsychism thread.

    In general, posting more than three paragraphs is not acceptable under copyright law. You could get hit with a rather onerous takedown request that would require a full search of the site.

  20. Kantian Naturalist:
    hotshoe_,

    I’ve put him on “ignore”. There’s nothing else to do.

    Yes, that’s surely the right thing for you to do. Ignoring rather than risking escalation with the wacko neighbor who yells slurs at you over your fence.

    But sometimes people in the neighborhood need to remove the wacko from the neighborhood, for everyone’s health and safety.

    That’s why I call for mod aid.

  21. People, it’s not like ‘knowledge’ is actually important to KN. He has shown this willingly, intentionally; he actually seems to PREFER agnosticism & alienation to his ancestor’s religion. Does this site sadly promote such religious deviance & confusion as KN’s? Apparently yes.

    Funny too-personal vs. impersonal ‘scientistic’ junk. KN is so far from mainstream credibility. But no one here (other than the few tolerant theists) seems to recognize this.

    Wow – classy? No. LOL.

    No moderation or even acknowledgment of convenient avoidance? PROTECT KN’S IGNORANT AGNOSTICISM AT ALL COSTS TAMSZ FANATICS! : (

  22. hotshoe_,

    Sure. But apart from moving his posts to Guano, there’s nothing we can do within the site rules. If asking Gregory to abide by a minimal degree of civility and respect didn’t motivate him to change his behavior the first 100 times he was asked, why expect him to do so on the 101st time?

    The fact is that Lizzie’s vision for TSZ assumes that everyone here possesses some minimal capacity of empathy and respect, so that if anyone strays from that, a mere admonishment is sufficient. It’s a picture of all of us as engaged in polite conversation. It doesn’t take into account that there are participants in TSZ who really do hate non-theists, and who view non-theists as an enemy. Enemies are not placated or coddled or even treated with any honor — enemies are to be destroyed. That’s Gregory’s attitude, and WJM’s, and a few others from Uncommon Descent who occasionally grace us with their vitriol.

    Lizzie’s vision for the site doesn’t take any of this into account. She seems to think that implacable hatred is just a result of misunderstanding, and if we just sat down and talked through our differences, we’d be just fine. That attitude is not going to work with Gregory or WJM any more than it would work with the Islamic State.

    But we’re obliged to operate within the framework that Lizzie has stipulated, and given that, ignoring Gregory is the least-bad option any of us have.

  23. Kantian Naturalist:
    hotshoe_,

    Sure. But apart from moving his posts to Guano, there’s nothing we can do within the site rules. If asking Gregory to abide by a minimal degree of civility and respect didn’t motivate him to change his behavior the first 100 times he was asked, why expect him to do so on the 101st time?

    The fact is that Lizzie’s vision for TSZ assumes that everyone here possesses some minimal capacity of empathy and respect, so that if anyone strays from that, a mere admonishment is sufficient. It’s a picture of all of us as engaged in polite conversation. It doesn’t take into account that there are participants in TSZ who really do hate non-theists, and who view non-theists as an enemy. Enemies are not placated or coddled or even treated with any honor — enemies are to be destroyed. That’s Gregory’s attitude, and WJM’s, and a few others from Uncommon Descent who occasionally grace us with their vitriol.

    Lizzie’s vision for the site doesn’t take any of this into account. She seems to think that implacable hatred is just a result of misunderstanding, and if we just sat down and talked through our differences, we’d be just fine. That attitude is not going to work with Gregory or WJM any more than it would work with the Islamic State.

    But we’re obliged to operate within the framework that Lizzie has stipulated, and given that, ignoring Gregory is the least-bad option any of us have.

    FWIW, I think you put up with an awful lot from Erik.

  24. Lizzie also assumed that rule abiding posters would have the self discipline to ignore taunts.

  25. petrushka:
    Lizzie also assumed that rule abiding posters would have the self discipline to ignore taunts.

    One more error, I guess.

  26. KN – I agree with you, mostly.

    It’s appropriate for you personally to have put Gregory on the ignore button because you – for no reason of your own – have become his target. Meanwhile any of the rest of us who happen to be in the neighborhood – and don’t have him on ignore already – can alert the authorities to move his guano.

    Now I want to know why Gregory is not put into pre-comment moderation, so none of his comments are released until a mod has time to approve them. I’m sure I remember that happening with some other commenter – or was it Gregory himself once before? – so I think we have the technical capability and I think it must not have broken Lizzie’s rules. It’s not a ban, and mods could release all Gregory’s mania directly into guano instead of into whatever threads Gregory wanted to pollute.

    Obviously, the first reason NOT to do that is because it creates more work for the mods because then they have to read every single Gregory comment in queue.

    Easy for me to say, since I wouldn’t be the one doing any extra work, but if the mods think it’s still technically an option, I do believe putting Gregory into preemptive moderation would be a net good for all of us. Including him – because then he wouldn’t get the positive feedback of seeing his mania in living color on open threads. I may be projecting here, but there seems to be something for him in seeing his own words which triggers another comment, and yet another …

    Well, I’m not god, so I have no way of knowing whether TSZ is an outlet where Gregory can safely uncork, and without us to vent, he would start spraying swastikas on windows and threaten to kill all the (atheistic) Jews at work.

    But I don’t think that – hypothetically – keeping him from blowing up is a moral excuse for letting him – certainly – make you, KN, his personal target whenever he drives by. If it’s against the rules to ban Gregory altogether, he should be in permanent “detention”.

  27. walto: FWIW, I think you put up with an awful lot from Erik.

    Indeed I do. He tries my patience often, though in fairness I believe the feeling is mutual. But from my point of view there’s a big difference between someone who advances the conversation a little bit and someone who does not advance the conversation at all.

    petrushka: Lizzie also assumed that rule abiding posters would have the self discipline to ignore taunts.

    Granted. That’s why my having him on ‘ignore’ is better for everyone.

  28. walto: FWIW, I think you put up with an awful lot from Erik.

    Yes, Erik is an absolute shit.

    But Erik keeps his poison within bounds of the rules. So, not a moderation issue.

    Unlike Gregory.

  29. Kantian Naturalist:

    petrushka: Lizzie also assumed that rule abiding posters would have the self discipline to ignore taunts.

    Granted. That’s why my having him on ‘ignore’ is better for everyone.

    Yes, YOU having him on ignore is better.

    But we collectively have an obligation to keep this site clean and not to willingly harbor garbage.

    Someone has to be vigilant. Someone has to be responsible for not ignoring Gregory, in order to enforce the known rules.

  30. Ignoring is the most effective way of enforcing rules. It may feel good to slam people, but ignoring is more effective.

  31. petrushka:
    Ignoring is the most effective way of enforcing rules. It may feel good to slam people, but ignoring is more effective.

    Ignoring the garbage doesn’t take out the garbage.

    It’s still there, stinking up the place.

    Ignoring things in reality usually doesn’t work – yeah, I’m all for turning a blind eye to a little jaywalking rather than a confrontation with cops that ends up with a young black man shot dead in the middle of the street – but ignoring the burning crosses your neighbor lights on your lawn is just a recipe for disaster.

    Please do carry on with your policy of ignoring whomever you want, petrushka, but please stop trying to encourage a do-nothing ignorance and apathy in everyone else.

  32. hotshoe_:
    . . .
    Now I want to know why Gregory is not put into pre-comment moderation, so none of his comments are released until a mod has time to approve them.I’m sure I remember that happening with some other commenter – or was it Gregory himself once before? – so I think we have the technical capability and I think it must not have broken Lizzie’s rules.It’s not a ban, and mods could release all Gregory’s mania directly into guano instead of into whatever threads Gregory wanted to pollute.
    . . . .

    If I remember correctly, that was someone who repeatedly attempted to dox people and refused to agree to refrain from doing so.

    In any case, it was Lizzie who put whoever it was into instant moderation. The rules as they are now don’t permit the admins to do that.

    Alan mentioned some time ago that Lizzie would be visiting Real Soon Now. Apparently that’s not happening. She does participate at TalkRational — you can probably contact her there if you like.

  33. Troll is as troll does.
    I am one of the worst troll-feeders around; it’s a weakness.
    Now, site rules cannot protect against incessant trolling, but the less we feed them, the less they’ll be motivated to stick around. They’ll migrate to youtube eventually, heh.
    I look on Gregory as a piece of performance art. Probably unintentional performance art.
    I am glad to hear that KN has him on ignore. If admins have the time and energy to move his spewage to Guano, that’s fine. If they don’t, that’s okay too.

  35. I didn’t mean to suggest that I think Erik deserves any sort of ‘pre-moderation’ or other form of scolding. I actually think many of his posts are interesting and substantive. I just meant that I wouldn’t put up with the constant insults from him that KN puts up with.

    I honestly don’t know why Erik can’t disagree without being abusive about it. I understand that he’s often treated with hostility by people here too. But never by KN.

    When, e.g. Erik and Robin call each other names, it doesn’t bother me so much, since there’s give and take, but it does get to me when erik abuses KN, because it’s always a one-way fight. (BTW, on the substance of the current ‘assertion’ battle, I agree with Erik that Robin is quibbling, but don’t mind too much if they call each other stupid occasionally.)

    I’ve mentioned before that KN is a mensch in ‘being the change’ he’d like to see–a behavioral set I seem incapable of myself–but it’s hard to watch someone being a punching bag.

  36. walto:
    I didn’t mean to suggest that I think Erik deserves any sort of ‘pre-moderation’ or other form of scolding. I actually think many of his posts are interesting and substantive. I just meant that I wouldn’t put up with the constant insults from him that KN pits up with.

    I honestly don’t know why he can’t disagree without being abusive about it.I understand that he’s often treated with hostility by people here too. But never by KN.

    When, e.g. Erik and Robin call each other names, it doesn’t bother me so much, since there’s give and take, but it does get to me when erik abuses KN, because it’s always a one-way fight. (BTW, on the substance of the current ‘assertion’ battle, I agree with Erik that Robin is quibbling, but don’t mind too much if they call each other stupid occasionally.)

    I’ve mentioned before that KN is a mensch in ‘being the change’ he’d like to see–a behavioral set I seem incapable of myself–but it’s hard to watch someone being a punching bag.

    Uh…thank you…?

    Personally, I don’t think anyone should be moderated here. Some folks are really annoying and just impossible to have any sort of rational discussion with, but as I noted about Joe sometime ago, so what? I may not be the poster boy for how to deal with trolls/obtuse commenters, but there’s really no one holding a gun to my or anyone’s head (or actually fighting.) I know that some people get more riled up by words and are affected more emotionally by BS than others (hence that trolls can find victims whose buttons they can really push), but on the whole, I think most of the folks here react pretty reasonably to the crap slinging and recognize it for what it is. I don’t see what moderating would accomplish.

    ETA: Incidentally, I’m not the only person quibbling about such things:

    http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/297282/assertion-versus-statement

    The site itself is all about discussing and detailing the nuances of terms and how they explicitly or implicitly differ in minor ways. Interesting if one is into that sort of thing…

  38. Kantian Naturalist: The fact is that Lizzie’s vision for TSZ assumes that everyone here possesses some minimal capacity of empathy and respect, so that if anyone strays from that, a mere admonishment is sufficient.

    If only this worked with her own mods, but alas.

  40. Now that Mung has bravely stood up in defense of Gregory’s ad hominem attacks on me, I’ve put him on “ignore commenter” as well. Likewise with FMM. And Robert Byers, of course. Four people who contribute nothing of value to any conversation here, and wouldn’t be missed if they left.

  41. Kantian Naturalist:
    Now that Mung has bravely stood up in defense of Gregory’s ad hominem attacks on me, I’ve put him on “ignore commenter” as well. Likewise with FMM. And Robert Byers, of course. Four people who contribute nothing of value to any conversation here, and wouldn’t be missed if they left.

    What did Mung say? (I didn’t see Gregory’s post–I ignore him.) FWIW, I don’t agree with you about either FMM or Mung. Again, if it’s nastiness you object to, Erik is nastier to you two than either of those guys. FMM is a broken record, but he pushes a position I find interestingly wrong. Mung is a provocateur/mischief-maker I suppose, but he seems to me intellectually curious.

    Your other two choices I agree with–and I’m close with the Steiner supporter.

    The other guys who annoy me–I’m pretty sure I annoy them at least as much so it’s a matter of weighing….

  42. I would read and respond to mung if he ever went beyond being provocative.

    I can be pretty trollish on occasion, but I think the majority of my posts attempt to include content.

  43. walto: Again, if it’s nastiness you object to, Erik is nastier to you two than either of those guys. FMM is a broken record, but he pushes a position I find interestingly wrong. Mung is a provocateur/mischief-maker I suppose, but he seems to me intellectually curious.

    I don’t object to nastiness per se. Erik has a way of advancing the dialectic every so often, even though he doesn’t quite realize it. I find FMM’s position interestingly wrong — because he makes it perfectly clear that presuppositionalism is a version of the Myth of the Given — but since he is a broken record about it, I don’t find it helpful to interact with him. Mung I used to like as a mischief-maker, but I find that lately he’s become less intellectually curious and more of a provocateur. That’s not helping.

  44. I’m sure I could do better if I put some people on ignore myself.

    I do think it a bit unfair that Gregory goes to Guano while Patrick makes comments like this:

    [to fifth] People like you have been in power more often than out of it, and have often used that power to harm others.

  45. Mung: I’m sure I could do better if I put some people on ignore myself.

    Ignore yourself. Good idea!

  48. Just a reminder, my latest post has appeared out of moderation yet. Busy weekend perhaps?

Comments are closed.