| |||||||||||||
ToleranceTolerancePosted Aug 15, 2012 18:22 UTC (Wed) by bfields (subscriber, #19510)In reply to: Tolerance by louie Parent article: Aurora: DEFCON: Why conference harassment matters
The position needs to be "feel free to say stupid things, just not at my conversation/party, where I want my friends to feel welcome" rather than "never say stupid things." Yeah. But it's a challenge to keep the moderation from becoming a huge pile of no fun. You're now dealing with real people rather than bots, and they're better at evading your filters. And there will be a few people that want to test (and argue about) precisely where you draw the line. You can end up spending most of your energy dealing with the most annoying 1% of your readers.
(Log in to post comments)
Tolerance Posted Aug 15, 2012 18:45 UTC (Wed) by louie (subscriber, #3285) [Link]
Oh, absolutely agreed on all points. It's an unfortunate cost of having a community that is both high-profile and high-quality.
I'd add that I agree that Jon's suggestion to surface the information that "this guy has been filtered regularly and by many people" would be a good step. It's still gameable, of course, but it's a good social cue. Think of it as people walking away from the Creep at a party - maybe not as good as throwing the Creep out, but still sends the signal that "we don't approve of what this guy is doing." Worst case, it helps people understand that this person is not representative of the community, and best case, perhaps surfacing that signal (like the red/green/yellow cards discussed in the original article) gives people an opportunity to learn.
|
|||||||||||||