The Chainlink

So after the amazing shit show that was Gabe and Michelle crapping all over the message board here I think it is a good time to ask this question.

 

What happened here is ridiculous, two people were allowed to run wild like a couple of monkeys flinging shit everywhere.  Regardless of who you want to see as wrong or right there the fact remains that they were allowed to carry on completely unchecked.

 

Why?  Light moderation is one thing but why should two defective people be allowed to run wild like that?  Especially when others have been kicked off for doing the same?

 

Didn’t we kick off Beezodog for hijacking threads and not letting an argument die?

 

Of course that leads to another thing; we have some loose rules but they never seem to be enforced, why?



So what is it, do we have an enforce rules or can people just do whatever they like?  Because it mostly looks like people can just act however they want…

Views: 8876

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You can see and read the forums even "unlogged" you can't see the groups or post anything, obviously.

 

Maybe start a group for people who want to flame, complain or otherwise vent? Keeps it off the front page and everybody knows the reason for the group.

It is like asking why we have laws or why software companies make you agree to terms of service or why anywhere, at any time, a rule, regulation or law is enforced when so often it is not?

There is a limited amount of time, bandwidth and patience for dealing with forum behavior.  Acting in any way causes swift and certain backlash from one corner or another.  If and when someone proves themselves to be an insurmountable problem, we are always well within our rights to make them gone.  We COULD act more often, and it would certainly lead to more backlash, regardless of what and when we decide to act. 

In general, as I have said before, I would normally advocate for allowing a conversation to happen as it does within the walls of the Chainlink.  You have been the beneficiary of this policy and attitude on multiple occasions and yet you are asking why we don't moderate better.  It is quite a funny proposition as I find myself making the argument to you that I often make for you.

The line is arbitrary.  My position on where we draw the line tends towards more lenience, more freedom of expression, more community and organic response, less medium response.  It is not my website so it is a collaborative process to reach conclusions about what we do.  If someone interprets that as the Chainlink favoring one person over another, that is their right to do. 



notoriousDUG said:

I think what I am trying to ask here more than anything is why do we bother having rules if they are either not enforced or not evenly enforced?

This is the internet. Your going to have good and bad. 
You just have to know when to back away.
I don't post very often for that reason alone.
When the conversation starts getting negative I just back away from it and leave it alone.
Like Joshua said in Wargames, The only winning move is not to play!

I agreed with the Michelle's. The so lite as to be nonexistent moderation has created safe harbor for sadism. And frankly the any moderation is a slippery slope to fascism arguments sound like teahadists on Obamacare.
The actuality of moderation here is actively anti-nice. So be it.
In conclusion, hail Satan.

A Billion time THIS!


Lee Diamond said:

/snip/

In general, as I have said before, I would normally advocate for allowing a conversation to happen as it does within the walls of the Chainlink.  You have been the beneficiary of this policy and attitude on multiple occasions and yet you are asking why we don't moderate better.  It is quite a funny proposition as I find myself making the argument to you that I often make for you.

/snip/

notoriousDUG said:

I think what I am trying to ask here more than anything is why do we bother having rules if they are either not enforced or not evenly enforced?

I, for one, find the quick-to-be-indignant and judgemental types to be the main reason I visit the site less and post less. I get the impression that notorious never had one word passed along to him to tone it down a bit, if this is correct than the current hands-off approach is probably a bit too hands off.

H

So what was the aftermath? Were both Michelle and Gabe banned?

Gabe, who sent her what she considered a threat and posted pictures of here has participated in this thread so it looks like there was nothing done there.

KevinM said:

So what was the aftermath? Were both Michelle and Gabe banned?

So, just for us keeping score at home, it would be great to some evidence of moderator's actions after shit storms like that crazy thread. Because, from what you can read in the thread, there's nothing, the thread gets closed, Vilda gets the last word, and I guess Michelle's presence(s) just vanish. 

From an outsider's perspective it smells a little like croneyism when people vouch for Gabe by saying stuff like "yeah, we all know he's a prick, so you should know better and not egg him on."  

Douglas, if you are going to be apart of the discussion get the facts straight. The fool known as michelle was sent a cartoon by someone else who has since apologized to the fool known as michelle because that person didn't think she would misunderstand it. You see you have to read all the posts to play the game.


notoriousDUG said:

Gabe, who sent her what she considered a threat and posted pictures of here has participated in this thread so it looks like there was nothing done there.

KevinM said:

So what was the aftermath? Were both Michelle and Gabe banned?

I know this sounds simplistic but imposing a numerical limit or number of posts per time frame might have a dampeninmg effect. Altho I do like the idea of a basement to shunt the runaway threads into without badgering or banning neighbors in the community.

Jeff in a peaceful mode

Nicely done Julie!  Hope you are having a great weekend!

______________________________________________

"In the past few days many of you have contacted me privately as well as online about recent activity on the forum.

As we all know, the internet is a largely unregulated place open to everyone. The Chainlink exists in the internet, but we want it to be slightly regulated so that it can be a comfortable online space for the community of cyclists in Chicago to share information and experience about cycling in the region. Being a community, we also talk about other things like gardening, and barter, and sometimes politics. In all areas, debate and free flow of information are important and will not be curtailed.


The approach to moderation that we have taken over the years has been light, leaning as much as possible on the community to self police. It has generally worked, although it is not perfect. There is a fine line between stifling conversation and maintaining civil conversation.


That being said the Forum rules will be rewritten in the next few weeks, and a small team of moderators will be put in place. Our new website will be up by the end of the year and will provide new tools for the community and the moderation team to address issues more quickly and to take appropriate action.


I hope everyone has a great holiday weekend. I’ll be spending time with friends and family."

Julie

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service