Relationship Psychology Discussions > The Vent

Self-Moderation and Civility - Brainstorming

(1/2) > >>

melancholia:
Okay, first and foremost - this is a snark-free zone.  I'd appreciate it if, should anyone decide to get snarky on this topic, that everyone just ignore that person until they chill out.

This is not about any specific individuals. But let's be real here - I've been on this board since 2011, and while I'm not by any stretch one of the earliest members I can't deny that we do have - and have always had (from my perspective) - a problem where, periodically, we'll butt heads and it turns into an explosion.  I've been known to participate myself - I think we all saw that over the last couple days and back in...I think it was September?  Prior to whatever that Tarotti nonsense was? Or immediately following? (I'm being sloppy and not looking back. Sorry.)

After being able to take a night to decompress from everything that's been going on (not just here, but in general) I was able to clear my head enough and realize, okay.  We're all here (in theory) for the same reason.  No one is here because they like conflict or getting stressed out.  But it doesn't change the fact that we're going to keep butting heads with one another.

We don't have a moderator at this point.  I don't know if we ever can get one, and I don't know what Healer's status is.  So here's what I'm proposing, and I'm asking everyone's input on this.  (And again, please keep it civil. For the sake of this one topic, set aside whatever has happened in the past and any resentment you may or may not be holding onto.  Everyone.)

First, I think we should come up with a list of requests for features for Healer should he return.  That doesn't mean requesting that certain individuals be banned, because the whole point is to try to make this entire environment more civil, and requesting bannings isn't the way to do that.

For instance -

1.) I would like to see a block feature.  It sucks when you feel like you need to block someone, but it's better than perpetually getting into fights with that person when it's become clear that you're not going to be able to communicate with one another without it turning into a fight.

2.) I would like an impartial mod, someone that has managed to keep their cool in all of these...let's call them "instances" and not engage or, at the very least, not take sides.  That obviously rules me out, so please don't mistake this as a petition to make me mod.  That would be a terribad idea at this stage.

In addition to these suggestions, I think we should try to, as a community, without excluding anyone, draft some guidelines for conduct beyond what we currently have, because what we currently have isn't really working, and agree, as a community, that if someone breaks that code of conduct we will not allow it to escalate and will simply not engage that individual until they calm down.

For instance, and I'm spitballing in a little bit of a stream-of-consciousness way here:

1.) Person A makes a post. Person B replies or asks something about it that Person A could construe as offensive or as a "challenge."  Then the appropriate response is for Person A to calmly state something along the lines of, "I feel like I might be taking your comment the wrong way.  Can you please explain what you mean by that?"  And then Person B calmly explains what they meant.  Person A  can then calmly respond or not, at their leisure.  If Person A decides not to respond, Person B does not pursue further. 

2.) Personal conflicts are kept to PMs.  If someone feels that someone is speaking to them harshly or unfairly and wants to address them, they don't do it in the middle of a thread.  They instead PM that person directly.  It won't prevent bad feelings between individuals, but it will prevent what we've been seeing.

Those that don't comply with whatever we, as a community, draft, then we simply refuse to engage them in conversation until such a time as they begin to comply with the standards set forth by the community.

Does that make sense?  I would like to see some feedback to this because while we'll probably disagree on the reasons why this environment has become a breeding ground for toxic behavior, I'm pretty sure we can all agree that yeah, each post now brings with it the potential for an explosion, and when you consider just how emotionally vulnerable some of us can be at any given time when posting (since otherwise there'd be no need to even call psychics), a toxic environment is counter-productive.  Yes, it's a psychic review site, but let's be real for a moment - it's become a lot more than that.

I don't feel like excluding anyone - yes, I really do mean anyone - is a solution, even though I support a block feature, and I think that we all know that simply voicing the problems we have with each other isn't solving anything either.  So let's just take a moment to move ourselves outside of the internal conflicts we've been having and let's try to find impartial solutions that can be implemented across the board as a community.

As for me, I do apologize for the role I've played. I've been overly defensive of what I've been seeing, and coupled with everything going on that's kept me on edge, I acknowledge that I've been out of order in the way I've handled things.  I think we all know that I'm not the only one in that boat.  I'm not asking anyone to step forward and take responsibility for their actions here, though.  All I'm asking for are ideas, from everyone, to make this better.

(One more apology: I'm so sorry I'm abusing the glow feature.  I probably won't stop, because its rediscovery is making me happy, but I'm sort of sorry for my lack of self-control in regards to pretty lettering. <3 )

Bark angel:
I wasn't kidding when I posted that a little self-control would work wonders.  That's absent here. So is basic civility.

I don't think there is a need for a block feature and, in my opinion, it would simply cause more of a division and would do nothing to promote harmony.  In fact, it would provide no need for harmony.  It would be another means of censoring and that doesn't treat individuals equally.  So I don't support that.

If all people, and I include ALL people would begin to treat others with respect and dignity and some civility, instead of accusing and making claims that are not true, there's no need for anything more. What's missing is that "benefit of the doubt" (you know that something that so many have claimed I offer psychics and not others?). 

The abuse of power is what is rampant on this board.  An ignore button would simply amplify that.

How about a decision to simply exercise a little more self control?

melancholia:
No one can police the actions of others.  Relying on "self-control" is all well and good, provided we have guidelines that are clearly laid out in regards to expectations for conduct, but the reality is that requires everyone to be on the same page and it clearly hasn't been working thus far. Everyone (and I do mean everyone) actively involved in the past few conflicts are guilty of a lack of self-control. I'm not married to the idea of a block function; but, in lieu of an active moderator, it could (in my opinion) solve some problems between individuals.  That opinion comes only from experience with other communities; however, those communities were drastically different from this one with drastically different purposes, so it's plausible that it wouldn't fit here.  It's certainly something up for discussion, hence this thread.

I'm actually a lot more interested in the community guidelines than the functionality side.  Aside from the blanket, "Use some self-control," can you think of specific things that you would want referenced in such a list?

Bark angel:
Yes.

* Name-calling would be forbidden
* Insults forbidden.
* Telling people to go away would be forbidden
* Snarky remarks (unsolicited) would be forbidden.
* Memes that cause conflagration would be forbidden.

Bark angel:
I thought of something else. 

We have probems with accepting others' opinions.  I know that is a pet peeve of mine.  Something is stated without a reference to the source, and it appears to be suggested as fact, but in fact it is simply someone's take on something.

If one wishes to post something as fact, how about we require that a source be cited?  If not, then we can all assume and consider it simply an opinion.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page