71–80 of 204 posts
A little meta-civility goes a long way, too. If one is inclined to call people jerks, bozos and assholes, perhaps one is not understanding people very well. It’s much more effective to work learn about people, their predilections, biases and experiences. No one is a “checkbox” asshole. Much better to focus on specific behaviors, instead of writing off a person as a type. When I see a company describe its “no assholes…
Moderators just need a 1 click button that bans the account and deletes all their posts. 1 moderator could get rid of hundreds of accounts an hour. I am a huge fan of the banhammer with no warnings. Rules should be posted and those not following get banned. No one has time for that nonsense IMO.
Quite a few others have similar solutions, sometimes as add ons.
I would add one thing to the author's list of admirable behavior: always seek out the truth, no matter where it lies. IMO a component of the growing toxic atmosphere in public discourse is the "win at all costs" mindset, that fosters the belief that a little white lie here and there is justified by the end goal.
"Vanishing" implies that there was some Golden Age of civility that has now gone by. This is not really true. I would argue that this impression comes from the fact that media options were much more limited in the recent past, and therefore had to appeal to and not offend a wider range of audiences than current sources. Watching TV programs from the 50s/60s, for example, they do seem quite polite and civil. Now thoug…
Moderators just need a 1 click button that bans the account and deletes all their posts. 1 moderator could get rid of hundreds of accounts an hour. I am a huge fan of the banhammer with no warnings. Rules should be posted and those not following get banned. No one has time for that nonsense IMO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That the efficacy of this approach is repeatable suggests that the problem exists primarily b/c sites are willing to put up with bad behavior. I think there's a little more at play, here. Look at the two subreddits /r/askhistorians and /r/askreddit, which vary about as much as possible in moderation patterns and resulting quality: /r/askhistorians is possibly the best moderated forum on the internet, allowing only…
I keep seeing deleted comments on /r/askhistorians though. Community is so big that they probably get new users all the time that they don't know the rule.
I doubt it. I've seen reddit mods complain about being harassed across multiple social media sites, sent death threats and so on, not least by people professing to be affronted by their offenses against "free speech". I would be very surprised if a goodly number of deleted comments aren't people deliberately posting off-topic.
When I was the editor of Dr. Dobb's, we were very concerned about how to create a lively discussion forum that was free from jerks and unpleasant people. Ultimately, we settled on two components: treat everyone respectfully even those who seemed to be trolling, and delete all insulting posts. This largely worked. Similar elements seem to work here on HN too. That the efficacy of this approach is repeatable suggests t…
I'm glad to hear that an experienced editor sees HN that way, and also that you see evidence of a repeatable approach. Those are good signs. As I'm sure you know, it's a more complex problem than just being willing or unwilling to put up with bad behavior. There are costs to addressing it—quite a few, it turns out, no matter what approach one takes. Our plan is to move HN toward more community self-regulation. Each s…
When I was the editor of Dr. Dobb's, we were very concerned about how to create a lively discussion forum that was free from jerks and unpleasant people. Ultimately, we settled on two components: treat everyone respectfully even those who seemed to be trolling, and delete all insulting posts. This largely worked. Similar elements seem to work here on HN too. That the efficacy of this approach is repeatable suggests t…
I'm glad to hear that an experienced editor sees HN that way, and also that you see evidence of a repeatable approach. Those are good signs. As I'm sure you know, it's a more complex problem than just being willing or unwilling to put up with bad behavior. There are costs to addressing it—quite a few, it turns out, no matter what approach one takes. Our plan is to move HN toward more community self-regulation. Each s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm glad to hear that an experienced editor sees HN that way, and also that you see evidence of a repeatable approach. Those are good signs. As I'm sure you know, it's a more complex problem than just being willing or unwilling to put up with bad behavior. There are costs to addressing it—quite a few, it turns out, no matter what approach one takes. Our plan is to move HN toward more community self-regulation. Each s…
IMO the biggest challenge of self-moderating communities is avoiding the echo chamber effect: ideas surviving and spreading due to their popularity, rather than their merit. I'm curious if you agree that this is a problem, and what your plans are to address it, if you do.