Changes

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Arkady

As I understand it, Andy’s parting gift was to disable Chang’s posting rights. Had he not done so I would have ended up doing so sooner or later, and probably sooner.<br><br>I understand that some people found him amusing. For my part, I did not. That isn’t a reason to ban someone. However,  I simply do not think that using defamatory language when referring to ethnic groups or homosexuals is merely irritating – it’s just unacceptable. Nor do I think it was done unknowingly.  I also have concerns about his regular habit of lying about the status of local businesses, just to get a reaction. (In conversation, I once received an embarrassed complaint in person from a business owner concerning that issue). And yes, I really do think that’s <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)">trolling</a>. It’s certainly not being excellent to one another.<br><br>Online communities, particularly semi-anonymous ones, allow people feel able to say things that they wouldn’t say to other people’s faces for fear of the consequences. There are real benefits to that. But some people tend to abuse that privilege, not least to be rude or personal. I have very strong feelings about this, not least because I have seen some of my favourite online communities – over a nearly 20-year period now - literally destroyed by it. Many of you have expressed concerns about that happening here – some of our best contributors explicitly left because of it. So yes, I do think that trolling is indisputably a major part – though not all – of the problem.<br><br>On the interweb of late there has been something of a change in the zeitgeist concerning how that should be dealt with. One increasingly prevalent idea – which I increasingly subscribe to – is that of ‘<a href="http://trevorhultner.com/safe-space-policy/">safe space</a>’. Bottom line – just as abuse of free speech can have very real consequences in the ‘real world’, it will have consequences here too.<br><br>I’ll give another case study, one which involves the important distinction between criticising an argument or institution and being personal:<br><br>Yesterday NorthNineteen made the legitimate point that LB Haringey are ultimately responsible for the state of parks in Haringey. Kreuzkav chose to respond by making a series of personal accusations with no basis in reality. The fact that many of us have met NorthNineteen - including at the last social - and that he in no way resembles <a href="">famous media personality Mark Pack</a>, makes those accusations risible as well as delusional. But regardless, there is just no need for personal attacks of that kind. Nor is it acceptable to accuse someone, without solid evidence, of lying.<br><br>That sort of behaviour in ‘real life’ – down the pub, say, or in the office - would have social consequences. It has consequences here too. In this instance, Kreuzkav won’t be posting for a couple of weeks. Yes, this is an arbitrary period defined by me being quite busy for the next few days, and then going to Glastonbury. I won’t be able to pay sufficient attention to ensure that people aren’t threatening the future of the site by making libellous statements (as he has done before). But all conventions are ultimately arbitrary in the beginning. Some may feel that I’m being heavy handed, and you are entirely within your rights to say so. <br><br>This place is precious. Please treat it, and your fellow posters, with respect. I’d urge you all to go back and read the first post in this discussion. Especially the bit about shaking it up or shutting it down.<br><div><br></div><div><img src="https://wiki.pumpingstationone.org/images/Bill_and_ted.jpg"></div>

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Sutent

Will we democratically start freezing people using the poll?

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Arkady

I understand your point entirely. Yet, Kreuzkav can hardly be said not to have had plenty of warnings (even if that were not the case, everyone has seen the first and second posts in this discussion). Nor is it the first time his posting rights have been suspended. <br><br>This *is* a yellow card, and hopefully a red card won’t be necessary, as I too value his better contributions. He, everyone, can choose not to be rude or personal. <br><br>I take the view that it’s better for one person to try to be fair than for this sort of thing to be put to a vote (which is how it has always been). The latter would invite precisely the sort of populism and ‘bullying’ that I know you fear.  Let's see how it works out.<br>

NorthNineteen

I'm glad Andy disabled a certain persons posting rights.<br><br>I think with KK it is a bit heavy handed - I didn't find his response particularly pleasant but this is an internet forum so I expect to take the rough with the smooth - I actually generally found it quite amusing in a bizarre way.  While calling someone a liar in person would not be acceptable I would say it is neither threatening or offensive. I also strongly feel this is not "real life".  True, the tone was negative and I completley agree with the mantra of being excellent to one other - should that not extend to moderators too.  I realise that some change is both inevitable and needed I'm just not sure the outcome of this is quite right.<br>

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

miss annie

It's not his, it's all of ours thanks to Andy and David's spark of inspiration, hard work and generosity. There is one rule 'Be excellent to each other'. I don't think it is heavy handed to ban someone temporarily, but then Kreuzkav has been extremely unpleasant, (which I don't particularly care about), and personal (which I do) to me, to the point of having his posts deleted. I think having your posts deleted is a yellow card and a warning that you have broken the only rule of this site. To continue to do so should have consequences.

Arkady

And just to respond narrowly to NorthNineteen's point - I am less concerned about existing regulars. They can evidently "take the rough with the smooth" or they wouldn't still be here. I'm worried about new people and irregulars being dissuaded from participating due to an unpleasant atmosphere or fear of taking unwarranted personal abuse.<div><br></div><div>This is a community forum.  It's not just a forum for the rough-tongued and thick-skinned.</div>

Toddlesocks

Appears a case of do as I say, not as I do. Excluding then discussing anyone on open forum when they are unable to respond is hardly reasonable or polite. Worse than trolling as people can at least defend themselves if they chose. Over zealous / unfair 'moderating' destroys forums for that reason quicker than most other questionable behaviour, especially on supposed to be adult forums! Andy did a good job , very sorry to see him hand over, though know the hassle moderating is. I stopped seeing this forum as a true community forum ( why I rarely post ). Feel there is lots of personal agendas with a my way or no way attitude. Opposed to embracing and reflecting a diverse community ( what I love about the area ). Be better closed if its how it will now be moderated.

Arkady

<span style="font-style: normal;">Believe me when I say that I am open to suggestions concerning alternative methods of remedying the negative tone, personal abuse and declining number of regular posters and page views (and, of late, comments too).<br><br>But some of you may just think that things were fine before. I, and many others, take a different view. Others may think that things were not fine, but that there is no fair way of tackling the problems. You may be right – but let’s try it this way and see what happens.  I will not be trigger-happy.<br><br>I can’t accept that view that it is better to close down the site than to attempt to stop people from being personal or abusive (or that people should be prohibited from discussing why someone has been suspended/banned after the fact - it's important that people understand why). But, once again, those are the </span><i>real and imminent choices</i>, so do be careful what you wish for.<br>

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Arkady

That doesn't really address the points made above.  It's not foolishness or 'reactionariness' that is the issue here - it's ad hominum attacks.  If you're saying that ad hominum attacks should be acceptable, or at least not met with consequences, then that argument has already been lost.  That behaviour changes, or the site closes down.<div><div>Fundamentally - like nearly every forum in the world - this <b>is</b> a private members club in that is technically private, and has members.  If members break the rule they risk losing their membership.  If people are dissuaded from joining because they are not allowed to make ad hominum attacks then that is a very, very good thing, as those are not people who should be posting here.</div><div style="font-weight: normal;"><br></div><div style="font-weight: normal;">Again, if people have constructive advice on how the tone and personal comments can be addressed differently (rather than not at all) then I'm all ears.</div><div style="font-weight: normal;"><br></div><div style="font-weight: normal;">Regardless, this is a useful discussion.</div></div>

miss annie

Chang has been banned, most people are ok with that it seems. He said some really quite offensive things but also some interesting and entertaining things but as far as I can remember (and I'm open to being proved wrong), was never personally rude to anyone. By rude, I mean calling other members of this forum c***s, liars etc. If people want to do that, Twitter is full of it. In my own opinion, this forum is not the place for it. As has been pointed out many, many times, people have the absolute right to disagree and argue with each other. As adults we should be able to do this without name calling here or elsewhere. Andy exercised a very light touch when moderating, I would have gone for the 'off with their heads' approach. Arkady has told us that people who cannot exercise basic courtesy when speaking to each other will be prevented from posting. If that makes people think for a moment and remember that are possibly speaking to their next door neighbour, or the lady in the shop before they post, good. I'd totally do away with anonymity too, that would end the abusive posts completely, but Arkady is less harsh than I.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

miss annie

What do you want it to be? Arkady has asked for ideas.

JoeV

This website isn't a private members club, it's private property. Posting to it is not a public right, it is a privilege and at the discretion of its owners. <div><br></div><div>It's not like there's a long list of rules to abide by, there's only one, 'be excellent to each other' which is a very low threshold. If Kreuz or anyone else can't even manage this what else is there to be done? It's not his opinions that invoked the ban it was his attacks on other people, which he was called out on in the past by myself and other members. <span style="font-size: 10pt;">(By contrast, Chang's opinions earned an outright ban and he never attacked anyone like Kreuz has to my knowledge.)</span></div><div><br></div><div>Kreuz isn't being excommunicated, he's temporarily suspended and he'll live. If he's unhappy with the one rule this website has, he should feel free to create one of his own. It's not that hard anymore anyone can do it. The hard part is creating a welcoming space that people want to come to. If he attacked people like he has here it would fail.</div><div><br></div><div>For every regular who posts here there are many others who lurk, and petty arguments and attacks are a huge turn off to many of them. </div><div><br></div><div>I moderate a local neighbourhood website back in New York, very similar to this one. <span style="font-size: 10pt;">We had much heavier moderation </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">(the need has lessened now)</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> then this site has had or will have and yet t</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">he vitriol and nastiness and endless complaints and negativity about how the neighborhood is going down the drain, gentrification, hipsters, almost killed it off. </span></div><div><br></div><div>What are the options then? Should nothing be done and have participation diminish because people are intimidated and afraid to be attacked for contributing?</div><div><br></div><div>I'm sure Arkady will do a good job in running and moderating the site and is open to any one's ideas. Good Luck Ben!  (And thanks to Andy and David).</div>

Arkady

Again, you're not offering solutions, only more of the same. I was genuinely hoping for your suggestions.<div>As noted, the user stats suggest that the 'beginning of the end' arguably started many months ago.  It is this that I am hoping to remedy.</div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;">And yes, using derogatory language about people who of a different sexuality, gender or ethnicity will be treated similarly to personal abuse.</span></div><div><br></div><div>If you want to see what heavy moderation really looks like then go to HarringayOnline.</div>

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Mirandola

90% of Kreuzkav's posts were fine. I got the impression he'd occasionally go through a rough patch and say regrettable things - I also think people were sometimes quite harsh back to him, though usually after being provoked. Chang on the other hand was duller than dull. Delighted to see the back of him.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

JoeV

Why should there be a different standard of acceptable behaviour on this website then in 'real' life? If you invited people to your home and one of the guests started insulting and attacking another, even if there you felt s/he had some sort of cause, Would you do nothing? Or would you tell your guest to cool down and go outside for awhile. This is the same thing in my opinion.  

Arkady

We may have to agree to disagree. Again, the number of active participants and page views has declined steadily of late (though not, tellingly, the number of posts). We also know that a number of people have left specifically because of the trolling and personal abuse, because they said so. This strongly suggests that there is a problem that needs to be addressed. People who think so aren't inherently weak-minded. Most successful forums are moderated much more strictly than I am proposing here. Fundamentally, it's not condescending to ask people not to abuse one another and to behave like adults. <br><br>Yet thus far you haven't suggested any alternative methods for tackling the problem. Indeed it seems like you don't accept that there is a problem, and perhaps believe that people should be able to make personal attacks. That's fine. You are entirely entitled to your opinion, just so long as you follow the rule yourself - which you previously acknowledged was a good one. You will be treated like anyone else.<br><br>As JoeV notes - and I'm not being facetious here - if people want an unmoderated forum where they can be abusive then there are plenty around, and they can always create one for Stroud Green if they feel there is a gap in the market.

Arkady

JoeV makes my point better than I could.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Arkady

I appreciate your thoughts.  But Kreuzkav wasn't suspended because he called someone a Lib Dem, he was suspended because he called someone a liar.  If you think that this is acceptable and 'in the spirit of the community' then, again, we will have to agree to disagree.<div>I strongly suggest that you ask Kreuzkav whether he thinks I made the right decision when he gets back in a couple of weeks. </div>

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Arkady

<div>I'm content to leave it for others to judge who does and doesn't get it.</div>