@nazokiyoubinbou @Viss Exactly
Uncategorized
1.4k
Posts
383
Posters
0
Views
-
@Viss my old neighbor had a bluetooth soundbar in his man cave that i could connect to because it was open auth, so i used to drop in and blast “Hello” by Adele every so often.
@SecureOwl @Viss
THAT WAS YOU?! -
@k3ym0 yeah thats the opposite of whats happening. if they control my chromecast they control what i watch
-
@Viss I identify with this but my brain instructs me to complete a task unrelated to the deadline
-
@Viss s/handling of the touchpad //
FTFY
-
@Viss It’s the modern equivalent of “Hey Peter, man, check out channel 9! Check out this chick!”
-
@Viss @zarchasmpgmr At this point all stocks are meme stocks. There's no rational decision making being made.
-
@Viss I guess an alternate reading of the data is it only takes 3% to make a space extremely toxic :/
@aburka @Viss This is kind of a well-known thing among experienced community moderators already, though - it's always just a handful of people inciting shit and riling up everyone else. Even in the context of school bullying, it's the same thing - a few bullies and a pile of bystanders.
Where it often goes wrong in practice is that people are afraid to moderate decisively against such people because those people tend to be very good at walking lines, and with a prevailing ideology of "you can't ban someone unless they are clearly breaking a defined rule".... well, you can see where this is going.
Pretty much the only working defense against this sort of toxicity is moderating subjectively for community health rather than legalistically, and just not enough places are willing to do that today. -
@aburka @Viss This is kind of a well-known thing among experienced community moderators already, though - it's always just a handful of people inciting shit and riling up everyone else. Even in the context of school bullying, it's the same thing - a few bullies and a pile of bystanders.
Where it often goes wrong in practice is that people are afraid to moderate decisively against such people because those people tend to be very good at walking lines, and with a prevailing ideology of "you can't ban someone unless they are clearly breaking a defined rule".... well, you can see where this is going.
Pretty much the only working defense against this sort of toxicity is moderating subjectively for community health rather than legalistically, and just not enough places are willing to do that today. -
-
@aburka @Viss This is kind of a well-known thing among experienced community moderators already, though - it's always just a handful of people inciting shit and riling up everyone else. Even in the context of school bullying, it's the same thing - a few bullies and a pile of bystanders.
Where it often goes wrong in practice is that people are afraid to moderate decisively against such people because those people tend to be very good at walking lines, and with a prevailing ideology of "you can't ban someone unless they are clearly breaking a defined rule".... well, you can see where this is going.
Pretty much the only working defense against this sort of toxicity is moderating subjectively for community health rather than legalistically, and just not enough places are willing to do that today.@etherdiver this sounds very familiar, eh?
-
@ifixcoinops @joepie91 @aburka @Viss RPS policy was, I paraphrase, no warnings just ban them. checking comments and banning dickheads is a valid worktime activity
The one time I went against my better judgement and warned someone (they were making a valid criticism of the site, but channelling it into an attack on one young writer with obviously zero influence over management decisions), they kept up with the shit so it was just a waste of energy and I had to ban them anyway
-
@ifixcoinops @joepie91 @aburka @Viss RPS policy was, I paraphrase, no warnings just ban them. checking comments and banning dickheads is a valid worktime activity
The one time I went against my better judgement and warned someone (they were making a valid criticism of the site, but channelling it into an attack on one young writer with obviously zero influence over management decisions), they kept up with the shit so it was just a waste of energy and I had to ban them anyway
@ifixcoinops @joepie91 @aburka @Viss also when I banned someone on another writer's article cos they were giving me the "nah this one's trying to start shit" feeling, that writer had a go at me for overdoing it. And now that commenter was kicking off ranting about how they were banned for nothing and we were awful and etc etc
So like... I was fuckin right and I'd do it again
-
@ifixcoinops @joepie91 @sinvega @aburka @Viss
So much this.
I have a group of real life in-person friends. We don't have a written set of bylaws or code of conduct, and if/when someone gets obnoxious, they stop getting invited. Why would my online friend group be different? "Be cool and nice, don't cause problems" shouldn't need to be explicit.
-
@ifixcoinops @joepie91 @aburka @Viss RPS policy was, I paraphrase, no warnings just ban them. checking comments and banning dickheads is a valid worktime activity
The one time I went against my better judgement and warned someone (they were making a valid criticism of the site, but channelling it into an attack on one young writer with obviously zero influence over management decisions), they kept up with the shit so it was just a waste of energy and I had to ban them anyway
-
@ifixcoinops @joepie91 @aburka @Viss don't show em how you parry
-
@ifixcoinops @joepie91 @sinvega @aburka @Viss
So much this.
I have a group of real life in-person friends. We don't have a written set of bylaws or code of conduct, and if/when someone gets obnoxious, they stop getting invited. Why would my online friend group be different? "Be cool and nice, don't cause problems" shouldn't need to be explicit.
-
@aburka @Viss This is kind of a well-known thing among experienced community moderators already, though - it's always just a handful of people inciting shit and riling up everyone else. Even in the context of school bullying, it's the same thing - a few bullies and a pile of bystanders.
Where it often goes wrong in practice is that people are afraid to moderate decisively against such people because those people tend to be very good at walking lines, and with a prevailing ideology of "you can't ban someone unless they are clearly breaking a defined rule".... well, you can see where this is going.
Pretty much the only working defense against this sort of toxicity is moderating subjectively for community health rather than legalistically, and just not enough places are willing to do that today. -
@woe2you @aburka @Viss I do actually think there is value in having more rules than that - though their purpose would be to communicate expectations (both in terms of how to behave and what can be expected from others), rather than to be an exhaustive list of grounds for moderator action, and that should be made clear ("moderator has the last word"). That approach to rules is also how pre-internet communities have historically worked.
-
@ifixcoinops @joepie91 @aburka @Viss RPS policy was, I paraphrase, no warnings just ban them. checking comments and banning dickheads is a valid worktime activity
The one time I went against my better judgement and warned someone (they were making a valid criticism of the site, but channelling it into an attack on one young writer with obviously zero influence over management decisions), they kept up with the shit so it was just a waste of energy and I had to ban them anyway
@sinvega @ifixcoinops @aburka @Viss I have actually had a fair few cases in moderation where someone did learn from a warning, or even multiple warnings, and improved for the better over time.
But crucially, if someone actively pushed back on a warning - trying to treat it as some severe punishment, questioning the moderator's legitimacy, trivializing what they did, making bigoted comments, that sort of thing - in basically 100% of cases where that happened, they ended up being banned after repeated incidents, and they never learned.
"Does someone accept direct feedback on their behaviour, even if they disagree" is, in my experience, the single most reliable indicator for whether they can participate in a community in a healthy way.
Feed RSS
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@Otttoz il Giorno della Dimenticanza.
-
@nemeciii even if Trump wasn’t being an asshole towards the world, just his presence in the White House should be enough to divest oneself of US treasury assets.
-
La Ratelemelonitaliana ricorda il rastrellamento del Ghetto. Ma dalla fiction scompaiono i fascisti...
La mini serie in onda in occasione del Giorno della Memoria
-
@nemeciii Trump's response to this is, of course, going to be to threaten Denmark and demand that they not do it, which is just going to encourage others to follow Denmark's lead.
The U.S. economy crashing is in my opinion the only thing that has any chance of propelling Trump out of office, so the sooner it happens the better.
I've already pulled nearly all my money out of the stock market.
-
@evan @chad I absolutely believe Canada needs a healthy collection of stable Fediverse instances. I hope the sincerity of this call is heeded by some of your strongest members.
-
Cos'è balenaEtcher e come funziona l'utilità open source per la creazione di unità avviabili. Quali sono le sue principali caratteristiche e quali le differenze rispetto a Rufus.
#linux #FOSS
https://www.ilsoftware.it/focus/balenaetcher-come-funziona-e-quali-differenze-con-rufus/
-
PROVINCE
