Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.
The Skeptical Zone
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.
We’re just remarking on your remarkable lack of integrity.
However, while the debate on whether self-plagiarism is possible continues, the ethics of self-plagiarism is significant, especially because self-plagiarism can infringe upon a publisher’s copyright.
It is a debatable topic and it does not apply in this case as I am not infringing upon a publisher’s copyright.
Frankie,
Wow. That is record-breaking stupid.
And your opinions matter, why? Just because Richie can link to a site that doesn’t apply and you can quote-mine said site, that shows you two have a lack of integrity, Alan.
Your response in the thread about biological evolution proves that you lack integrity Alan. the same goes for Richie. It’s as if you are OK with being perceived as a spoiled brat who soiled himself.
Richie, If you want record breaking stupid just look in a mirror
Is that new, or have you said that before?
Joe just craves attention. His blog is the attention he deserves.
But the second coming has been promised!
I have it in writing. {checks date} Ah!
Sounds suspiciously like democracy.
The sole monetary cost of TSZ is the fee to the service provider. I guess there is value in the accrued content and value in the name. But Lizzie has said she is happy to go on paying the ISP fees as long as there is interest. On the other hand, is there anything stopping anyone from establishing a new site and building it from scratch?
phoodoo,
It seems you still haven’t figured it out, so here are the obvious ways in which you would benefit under my proposed moderation scheme.
Right now your comments are hidden from everyone when they are guanoed. If your arch-nemesis Alan — who I agree has done a poor job as a moderator — nixes your comment, no one sees it unless they take the trouble to seek it out in the Guano thread.
Under the proposed scheme, when Alan nixes your comment, each commenter will still see it in its original location unless they have granted sufficient moderation power to Alan or to someone else who has nixed your comment.
It also means that unless you choose Alan as one of your moderators, he has no power whatsoever over the comments from others that you see.
It vastly reduces the power of Alan, or any other moderator you distrust, to affect your audience, and your experience, here at TSZ.
It also fits perfectly with Lizzie’s stated goals (and the TSZ ethos) of not interfering with what people write, nor with what they read.
On the other hand, the people who won’t like it are a) those who want to control what other people say and read, b) those who see the current moderation scheme as a desirable means of punishing commenters, and c) those like you and Mung who habitually play the martyr and would be sorry to lose that moral cudgel.
Lizzie has rejected those rationales, and wisely so, in my opinion.
Without integrity, I’d simply collapse!
Hey! It gives me something to shoot for.
Keep it up, you’re almost there
phoodoo does not want Alan moderating phoodoo’s posts. Tell him how you’re going to address that.
You’re going to take Alan’s power to moderate phoodoo’s posts and put it in the hands of Glen, who then puts it back in the hands of Alan. Is that right?
Brilliant.
derp
Yet the proportion of phoodoo comments that go to guano is relatively small.
The number of readers that phoodoo coments lose because of guano is likely far smaller than the number lost because of the “ignore commenter” feature. And guano is readable by anybody. If the browser supports it, reading guano in a private browsing window allows seeing even comments by folk that are blocked due to “ignore commenter”.
Neil,
The proposed scheme is far better.
Right now, readers who wish to read all comments are punished for that:
1) Sometimes they don’t even know that a comment has been guanoed, because the moderator doesn’t mention it in the thread. In that case they can miss it completely.
2) Even if the moderator does mention it, there is usually no link to the guanoed comment(s). The reader has to open the Guano thread, scroll down, and try to find the comments that came from the particular thread.
3) There is no indication of which thread the guanoed comments came from, nor where in that thread they were located. The reader has to figure that out, or else give up.
Under the new scheme, none of that extra work is required. Readers who see moderation as having negative value can opt out of it completely, so that every comment is visible to them. Readers who do see value can opt in and choose their moderators. Once readers set up their preferences, the filtering (or non-filtering) is handled for them automatically, with no extra work required.
Again, Lizzie’s stated desires are
a) not to interfere with what people write, or punish them for it;
b) not to interfere with what people read; or punish them for it; and
c) to provide a ‘housekeeping’ service for those who desire it.
The proposed scheme satisfies those goals, but the existing scheme does not.
Right now, ‘housekeeping’ is mandatory for readers, and it forces them to do extra work if they want a completely free and open discussion. The proposed scheme levels the playing field, giving all readers the ability to choose the level of ‘housekeeping’ they desire. They even get to choose their housekeepers.
Mung,
No, I’m going to let each reader choose whom to delegate their personal moderation power to, if anyone.
Negative value is an oxymoron.
Each reader does not have moderator powers and they cannot delegate what they do not have. Why not start small and give every reader moderator powers, and then we can take if from there.
Mung:
No, it isn’t.
Sure they do. They can decide which comments to read (although right now they are penalized if they wish to read all comments) and which comments to ignore. They can choose to ignore a commenter altogether if they so desire.
The proposed scheme allows them to delegate that power to particular fellow commenters if they so desire, or to retain it for themselves if that is their wish.
According to keiths all members here have the same powers as a moderator here has. I’d like to start exercising mine by moving keith’s post to Guano. But I can’t.
Can one of the real mods, who has real moderator powers, help me?
No, keiths, just because a moderator can read posts just like everyone else it doesn’t mean that everyone else has moderator powers. That’s simply a failure in logic.
Moderators can perform actions that other readers cannot perform. Those are moderation powers. If I don’t have those powers I cannot delegate them.
Your other proposal is just as ludicrous. I can choose to not read a post. How can I delegate that “personal moderation power” to Alan? I cannot delegate something that only I can do.
Mung,
Speaking of “negative value”, your “contributions” to TSZ, such as the comment just above, are a perfect example of it.
My proposal is easy to understand, and thus probably out of reach for you. Leave the discussion to the smarter folks.
Nice projection, keiths
That leaves you out. Well that leaves out all of the evolutionists.
keiths,
I suppose there’s the curious case of the lurker / first timer. ill they know you must sift through lots of Joe and Phoodoo to get a nugget of Mung?
Or will they be put off from the get-go?
keiths, I can certainly see why you were granted an early retirement. On the bright side, now you should have time to actually reflect before posting!
I never said your plan wasn’t easy to understand. What I said was it doesn’t deliver. Or that it promises to deliver something it cannot do. the TrumpLite plan.
Nothing valuable comes easy. 😀
Good point though. Say someone comes here for a first time visit. What should they see? A mud-slinging free-for-all? I don’t think that’s what Elizabeth had in mind.
What do we want a first-time visitor to this site to experience, and how can we achieve that? I think that’s worthy of discussion.
Perhaps we should offer a first-time visitor package, lol.
Mung hates the proposed scheme, of course, since it will make it harder for him to justify his constant whining about TSZ. Phoodoo may dislike it for the same reason.
That’s a good sign.
Rich,
There could be a prominent notice on the home page directing newcomers to a post explaining the policy, how to register, and how to set their preferences.
Sorry, but no. I don’t hate it. Anything is better than the current ill-conceived [by Elizabeth, no less] situation. What part of I’m with you in having NO MODERATION AT ALL do you not grasp?
Mung,
I don’t think that’s what they would see. We’ve had periods in which moderation was minimal — including the experimental period in which moderation was only at the request of the “victim” — and discussions went more smoothly, not less. Even Alan, who is otherwise a fan of invasive moderation, agreed that the experiment went well.
Guano was well-intentioned, but in the end it caused more damage than it alleviated.
Joe stays in moderation though. He spams every board he can find with his PRATTS otherwise.
keiths:
Mung:
You called it “ludicrous” and described it sarcastically as “brilliant”. That doesn’t sound like a fan letter.
It’s understandable. When you’re forced to discuss thread topics rather than whining about TSZ, you lose. You clearly don’t like that.
I agree with you. Do we dare ask why? Do we care?
Is the site broken but capable of being fixed, or is it time to declare independence from The Queen and forge our own Republic?
Stringing up the current set moderators by their balls is obviously out of the question.
True, you can’t string ’em up by what they don’t have
Let me ask you a serious question.
Where did I actually quote or link to anything from your original proposal and offer an opinion?
Or your addendum, other than this post:
Or your response to Neil.
I was responding to your posts to phoodoo, and then later your posts to me. If you think otherwise please make your case.
I’d just like to thank keiths for actually providing a link to his original proposal.
If I hated it then, then surely I hate it now! But did I hate it then?
This place used to be fun to come to, with Kantian Naturalist and Walto weighing in on epistemological issues.
Since Frankie (aka Joe Gallien, joe g, joe, joseph, john paul, ID guy, jim, frisbee kid, frankie, virgil cain, etc.) started stinking up this place with its belligerent claptrap, it’s become a bore, and those better angels of our nature have stayed away.
I hope the admins can find a way to clean up this recent pollution without violating any site-specific principles of fair discourse.
But not you, lol!
Do you know how to use the Ignore Commenter feature? If you don’t like Frankie’s comments put him on ignore.
Mung, you have a knack for missing the point.
It’s your best feature.
Have a good cry for all of us, projector boy.
“This place used to be fun when no one called us on our asinine claims and no one corrected our nonsense and misrepresentations.”
Couldn’t agree more
Then you ran into people willing to expose your beliefs for what they are.
Perhaps “The Skeptical Zone” is not the place for you.
Pedant:
So true.
Also true, and quite sad.
Meanwhile, keiths, based on his incredible mind reading skills, concluded that I hate his proposals. It’s his best feature.
Mung, quoting Lizzie:
Mung,
She was talking about Sal’s dumb idea for allowing thread starters to moderate their own threads.
There’s a continuum of offerings. AtBC is a bit like the wild west, which I like. UD is a nanny state. Sal Cordova’s Young Universe and Untelligent reasoning both had low appeal for being havens from wrongitude.
I addressed your challenges to (my) skepticism. You chose to ignore the relevant points, told you you were ignoring them and you persisted. So no, you’re in no position to tell me TSZ is not the place for me. I think it’s time to put you on ignore too
Oh goody!
So her explicitly stated desire for this site cannot be applied to anything that you propose, even if what you propose violates her explicitly stated desire for this site.
And you’re not advocating a “knit your own echo chamber.”
That’s right. The “ignore commenter” feature doesn’t constitute a “knit your own echo chamber” approach, and neither does my proposal.