Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

WY6

Member
  • Content Count

    502
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Funny
  2. Funny
    WY6 reacted to TVwazhere in Its totes not political. Don't ban be bro   
    Story time:
     
    We have a chain around here called I Love NY Pizza. Me and my sister were driving by one one day and she turns to me and says "How the FUCK do they stay open? We've been here for over 10 years and I've never once seen anyone get pizza from there?????? How are they still open? Where are they getting their money?"
     
    "Well [sister], they're franchised so I mean there might be more successful locations than others..."
     
    "No. You know what I think? It's a front for the Mafia"
     
    ".... The Mafia? What, do you think they just have a pizza oven and glass racks for displays, and then in the back are six guys in pinstriped tux's smoking cigars, playing poker with hand guns in their back pocket?"
     
    "Yes. Exactly"
     
    "Okay well next time we want pizza we will get it from there"
     
    *Two weeks passes, we order pizza form there and we go in to pick it up, just so we can see what's inside.*
     
    *Older Man with silver hair and European accent is the only one there doing a majority of the work besides a teenager with slicked back jet black hair*
     
    *Me whispering to my sister* "Okay you may be onto something here"
  3. Funny
  4. Agree
    WY6 reacted to Schnoz in A 2-star review is usually worse than a 1-star review in my opinion because the peopl   
    @Spotty I guess a 3-star review would be like a golden turd.
  5. Agree
    WY6 reacted to Drama Lama in A 2-star review is usually worse than a 1-star review in my opinion because the peopl   
    Similar things can be said about 4 star reviews being more trustworthy than 5 star reviews 
  6. Like
    WY6 reacted to colonel_mortis in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    We didn't ban political statuses because because of instances where they have caused problems with members (although there are examples of that), we banned them because they are causing problems with moderation. When only a small handful of people are resulting in a large fraction of moderator time, it makes sense for us to reevaluate the rules to see whether we can alleviate that without causing too many issues.
     
    Our internal guidance for status update moderation, which I wrote a bit over a year ago, was
    Our moderation standards are very much living standards, so that may not exactly reflect how moderation has been applied recently, and I think we have tended towards becoming stricter. The guidelines reflect a balance between proactive moderation, which we want because we want to catch content before it becomes a problem rather than after everyone hates each other, and letting status updates be a place where you can post whatever you want.
     
    The problem with these guidelines is that they depend on whether an issue is judged to be contentious. This seemed reasonable at the time, when there were a few clearly contentious issues (mostly linked to current affairs) and most other discussions were broadly uncontentious. However, a lot of the political content that we're seeing at the moment is related to the election or generally party-political stuff, which is hard to bucket into those categories - for many of them, there would be an argument if the wrong person read it. Moreover, there was no other clear categorisation that we could use that would distinguish between status updates that we broadly think are appropriate for the forum and those that are not.
     
    We have tried to apply these rules fairly on all status updates, but that has led to lots of people being unhappy, and an unreasonable amount of moderator (and administrator) time being spent reviewing these reports, discussing them to make sure the right judgement is made, then reviewing them again when we inevitably receive a complaint.
     
    If we didn't apply any rules to status updates, there would inevitably be arguments. Arguments in status updates are worse in some respects than on the forum, because there's no way to opt out of notifications one you have replied, so you get dragged along even if you want to stop. Beyond the personal cost, arguments drive people away from the forum, and if Orange and Purple encounter each other on in a topic on the forum after having a heated argument in a status update, that topic is going to end up much less productive than it could otherwise have been. This is a forum first and foremost, so if there are things that will make the forum worse, we want to stop them from happening. Even if you think this doesn't apply to you, I have seen this in the past, and it's not pretty.
     
    That means we can't make the rules more relaxed, and we can't leave them as they are, so we have to make them stricter. That is why we are here today.
     
    I truly hope that this decision doesn't drive any of you away from the forum, because that is absolutely not what we want.
  7. Agree
    WY6 reacted to AluminiumTech in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    @LogicalDrm In response to part of your statement earlier:
     
     
    Functionality exists within the IPS Forum Software to enable mini Communities within an IPS Forum website. The admin team or @colonel_mortis could enable this feature and make a subcommunity specifically for Politics that would be opt in for all users and then if there are people causing problems there you can just prevent them from being able to post in that community.
     
    Some preliminary rules could be requiring 1000 posts on the forum before being able to join the Politics community and if people are aggressive or violate the CS then you can restrict access as needs be.
     
    This ensures a layer of separation between the regular forum and any political discussion without needing to ban politics entirely.
     
    Unless the real reason for the change of rules is pre-textual and is instead aimed at getting rid of whoever the mod team dislikes or disagrees with.
  8. Agree
    WY6 reacted to AluminiumTech in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    @LogicalDrm @colonel_mortis
    I'm guessing this also applies to the forum blogs.
     
    This is going to be a very unpopular decision and I hope that people express their disdain for it in the allowed ways. The fact that I have to use that language should suggest to you that what you are already doing is at least in some way censorship.
     
    I'll reply to the earlier replies in greater detail later but I have to say I'm dissapointed with this decision and I hope the mod team/admin team reconsider, as I see it today Status Updates should not exist if they're going to be treated the same way as topics on the forum proper.
     
    If that's the position that the mod team want to take then I have to ask what's the limiting principle: meaning what's stopping the mod team from treating status updates identically to topics. If they are going to be treated the same then what's the point in keeping status updates.
     
    Are the mod team/admin team really that willing to throw away a large number of regulars for the sake of gaining a small number of new members? If the answer is yes then you've just violated the spirit of the community standards which is to ensure a safe place for ALL members including regulars.
     
    Also, I have to ask what does the mod team suggest as an alternative for the people who now can no longer post anything remotely political in status updates?
     
    Discussing alternative forums or linking to them is against the current rules and so there is no way that people can currently organise or arrange an alternative so long as those rules are in place.
  9. Agree
    WY6 reacted to Trik'Stari in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    I'm not arguing for politics on the wider forum, but you do realize that an individual who continuously actively seeks out content that offends them and reports it, is using the report button as a political weapon, right? This applies to either side. 
     
    Just know that all you've done is guarantee that some members are less active, and the forum is less enjoyable. 
  10. Agree
    WY6 reacted to STRMfrmXMN in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    Why though?
     
    If somebody posts political topics, you can just unfollow them.... right?
  11. Agree
    WY6 reacted to Trik'Stari in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    That's not my position at all. My position is that reporting leads them to believing that it's a bigger problem than it actually is, because they see reports far more than they see the opposite.
     
    Kind of like how negative reviews are somewhat exaggerated because people are more likely to come back and leave a negative review than they are to leave a positive one. I say that as a person who goes well out of their way to leave positive reviews on products and services I enjoy. I've got a rather large number of views on my reviews on google alone.
     
    The people flagging political status updates, are likely louder, but far smaller, than the people who either don't care, or don't mind. But because of flagging, they're louder.
  12. Agree
    WY6 reacted to piratemonkey in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    I agree with paul on the complaint side of things, but at the same time agree with trik. I feel like if you treated SU like 4chan (only stepping in when stuff is reported) it would be fine. Again, people who do SU are regulars
  13. Agree
    WY6 reacted to Java in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    Censoring someone expressing themselves and what they believe when apart of a community will just lead them to an echo chamber.  I strongly disagree with this decision.  Banter and full scale shitposting is one thing, but civil discussion has been apart of human civilization since we evolved.  Good luck.
  14. Informative
    WY6 reacted to wkdpaul in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    @Trik'Stari
     
    That's not how it works, if it was, we wouldn't be doing this.
     
    It came to that because we had to do more and more interventions in SUs in general. While we were rather lenient on political discussions in SUs, some people abused this and as such it became more work for us, and the people that got warnings weren't happy to be told their SU weren't allowed, while other SU they felt were similar were left unmoderated and felt unfairly treated. Sadly, some don't see the difference between "check this interesting article / video" VS "the other side is full of *insert generic political insult* !!"
     
    The line in the sand is now VERY clear and because of that, it will be much less work for us mods, not more.
     
    And as it was mentioned before (on multiple occasions), we CANNOT avoid moderating a section of the forum, or a type of content (we did try with SU and politics, but it didn't work). Political discussions (personally interesting) aren't meant for this platform ; there are better place suited for soapbox speeches, and political debates  Plus online discussions often tend to become campy point of vues that are sometimes in the extreme and that's never helping the discussion. We have our fair share of these types of arguments without involving politics, that's also why we have the rules ; no "company A vs company B" and "company X sucks" discussions
     
     
    It's not against the rules, we've had threads complaining about rules before and have change the rules because of them
     
    And no, there's not need to bring specific instances, simply explaining WHY a rule should be changed, rather than complaining that they got "silenced" by the mods is how others have helped change the rules ; explaining your POV tends to help a discussion go forward instead of complaining that you're being oppressed and we're taking away your freedom of speech (spoiler, freedom of speech isn't a thing on a private platform) ... not saying that's what YOU would do, but that's about 90% of the messages we get when we have to remove replies or threads.
  15. Agree
    WY6 reacted to imreloadin in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    @Trik'Stari when it boils down to it they don't care
  16. Agree
    WY6 reacted to Trik'Stari in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    I also disagree with this decision. It's quite ridiculous considering that status updates are something you have to actively opt into in order to see them regularly. If you don't want to see someones status updates, don't follow them.
     
    We want active and engaging forum life, not a Facebook group run by Karens. I understand that it's "difficult to moderate", what I'm asking is that you do nothing. I'm actively asking you mods to do less work, not more.
  17. Funny
  18. Funny
  19. Agree
    WY6 reacted to piratemonkey in We have been relatively tolerant of politics in status updates, but the degree of pol   
    I don't agree with this decision, but if it means a better quality of life for the forum, I'll go along with it
  20. Agree
    WY6 reacted to Cyberspirit in I'm raising awareness of the new rule changes that the mod team decided to inflict us   
    Instead of politics we all should just talk about thicc thighs. The world would be a much more peaceful place.
  21. Agree
    WY6 reacted to Den-Fi in I'm raising awareness of the new rule changes that the mod team decided to inflict us   
    If not being able to discus politics on a tech forum is the most oppressed you've been in your life.... consider yourself lucky.
  22. Funny
    WY6 reacted to Den-Fi in I'm raising awareness of the new rule changes that the mod team decided to inflict us   
    If only there was a bright orange bar that achieved the same thing.
  23. Funny
    WY6 reacted to FloRolf in Well, can't say I'm surprised. Y'know, with how this year has gone... RIP anyone who   
    Is this only shitty US politics or also the European MasterRace? 
  24. Like
    WY6 got a reaction from soldier_ph in smol rant kek so if you have your camera off during band without a good reason, you g   
    kroambuks bad
    well the 2gb ones
  25. Agree
×