I've never flagged anybody. I prefer to face people directly. I would have thought that flagging moderators or even complaining about their actions would be a waste of time.
Anybody see it a differently and want to share your experiences?
Just a little internet sociology in the making. :wink:
Well... after much red tape I finally found out the # to call. It’s 1-800-BTT-HURT...
I have it on speed dial and call at least twice a week.
Sorry, bad joke. Hope you can work out the situation, if there is one. As for flagging, doesn’t one double click on the icon with the dots? A flag then appears. (If that’s what you’re referring to).
Also, hope you are not about to go down in flames and get banned. Happening kinda frequently lately, it seems. Your posts and insights are appreciated, whether I happen to agree or not with the particular point. Do what you think best, of course. Good luck. :victory:
Reply to 0 thru 9 It's interesting that your first thought would be that I'm on the road to being banned.
I have no issue. Baden told me in another thread that I should have complained about StreetlightS merging threads about Trump into the lounge thread which has lower standards of discussion.
But you're saying I would have to be ButtHurt to do that? There seems to be some disagreement here.
You kind of enjoy harassing people who complain don't you? I picked up on that.
Reply to frank
Sorry man, just a lame joke and a handful of assumptions on my part. No offense. Carry on. But several members have seemed to self-destruct recently. Glad to hear that you won’t be the next. :up:
Reply to frank
No, not really. I think I once flagged a comment by someone who was just spamming or obviously trolling. Disagreed with comments numerous times of course, but not much of a flagger. Which seems odd to me, since I’m always sending food back in restaurants.
Reply to 0 thru 9 I don't send food back unless it looks dangerous. If I think there's something I would want to know if I was the manager I think about taking the time to email it. I don't always follow through, though.
Reply to frank
That’s a good strategy. Especially when sending back food might encourage the kitchen staff to add their own... erm... special sauce to the dish, like in the movie Fight Club. :zip:
Baden told me in another thread that I should have complained about StreetlightS merging threads about Trump into the lounge thread which has lower standards of discussion.
No I didn't. I said I don't know what happened with that but in future if something gets folded in you don't agree with you have the right to complain.
And I don't know anything about what's been folded in here. You can take that up with Street. The OP is the OP and we're in the Lounge. That's the context as it stands. If something gets folded in in future that shouldn't be, let us know.
Basically you text your ssn to [email protected] along with a precis of your complaint and a valid credit card number (just for authentication.) They respond within 3-5 business days, unless you include nudes, in which case youre greenlit for same-day consideration
Reply to frank I tried it on a different forum once. If moderators on a forum are of a similar mindset they can pretty much do whatever because no one will check them and they can ignore the membership. That’s one reason diversity is good. Unfortunately however, diversity often dies in a slow painful death and groupthink takes its place.
I’ve noticed the mod team here lose some diversity of late, incidentally.
Could you share the story? Or would you rather not?
I'd rather not, and in any case, I used to be the ban-meister-in-chief back on the old site, so it may be that I have a certain elder-statesman status that makes it a bit different for me. But here instead are some words of wisdom, because you are quite right to be concerned about these things.
Firstly, sites like this are tyrannies, not democracies, and the site owner rules absolutely. Secondly, there is no justice system, but an editorial one.
So the final recourse of us peasants is only to find or create somewhere more congenial to cast our pearls, or put up with the foibles of the local executive.
But in the meantime, we assume that our dictator is benevolent and seeks to appoint benevolent servants. I'm pretty confident that such is the case here, and by and large, the regime succeeds in fostering a lively debating community with a minimum of unpleasantness and folly. I think it should be encouraging that a couple of mods have been found unsuitable for the task and reduced to the ranks.
From the pov of the administration, as the site expands, they can no longer be on top of everything, and have to rely more and more on their undercover agents, which you can join by flagging stuff that needs attention. Since, by hypothesis, the administration is benevolent, they are concerned to know from us what we think needs attention. If nobody ever complains, they will think they and the site are perfect.
So flagging, pms, and feedback are important ways to influence them and guide the conduct of the site, as petitions to the tyrant and his minions. At the same time, one should be a little cautious not to get a reputation as a constant moaner and unreliable witness, who will likely be ignored.
In the case of a thread being moved, merged, or some such decision, I would think a reasoned appeal by pm is the best course, though I will just come out and say that I do not believe that there is such a thing as 'the philosophy of Trump'. (I think that is your current concern?) But hopefully, such matters can be discussed and minds can change or not without any acrimony. Its not a personal matter on either side, is it?
So say what you want and don't want, complain about decisions you disagree with, argue politely, and then don't bang on forever about it, but decide to live with it or not.
...though I will just come out and say that I do not believe that there is such a thing as 'the philosophy of Trump'.
I don't have the issue you think I do.
Someone said that the internet is the domain of the id. I've come to agree with that. There are places here and there that try to raise themselves up from that state, but the id doesn't care.
And maybe that's really a positive sign about how we are to each other in real life. Or not. I'm not really sure.
I do not believe that there is such a thing as 'the philosophy of Trump'.
This wasn't my concern. As I explained, I think Baden wants the members to flag moderators if there are concerns. I found that to be odd. My view was well expressed by Praxis: that's not how most forums work, so it's not likely that someone wandering in off the street would think of doing that. I didn't until Baden suggested it.
But why not a philosophy of Trump? What other things are resistant to philosophy in your view? Bananas?
I found that to be odd...that's not how most forums work, so it's not likely that someone wandering in off the street would think of doing that. I didn't until Baden suggested it.
It's written in the Guidelines, which I hope everyone wandering in off the street or off anything else would read: :)
"Moderator conduct:
In discussions, a moderator is subject to the same guidelines as everyone else...You can report a moderator or ask that a moderator be moderated in the same way as you would any other poster by flagging their posts or by sending a private message to another moderator."
Authority should always be granted and monitored with caution. The application of any such system must be carefull tended, edited, and made exactly transparent or candid for all parties. In order to continue such a system of crude and unfathomable persons who clash and crash into one another, there must come a definite vigilance against abuse and corruption. I have found that this is a fairly generic prescription for the preservation of democracy, but the sentiment remains a befuddling one. It is arduous to prevent corruption by puissance in any system, but the most challenging one is that of intellectuals. These discussions may so swiftly be entangled in clever manipulation, ideological wars, or empowered factions. Even those empowered should be held to equal standards of respect and academia.
These discussions may so swiftly be entangled in clever manipulation, ideological wars, or empowered factions. Even those empowered should be held to equal standards of respect and academia.
Indeed. Unfortunately, it requires some lack of apathy to hold anyone to a standard.
It's written in the Guidelines, which I hope everyone wandering in off the street or off anything else would read: :)
As with all guidelines, I'm guessing the rules are a tad malleable if @frank has some of that $100 million dollar super pac money to throw your way, or if he happens to be cousins with the owner of the site. :lol:
Firstly, sites like this are tyrannies, not democracies, and the site owner rules absolutely. Secondly, there is no justice system, but an editorial one.
So the final recourse of us peasants is only to find or create somewhere more congenial to cast our pearls, or put up with the foibles of the local executive.
But in the meantime, we assume that our dictator is benevolent and seeks to appoint benevolent servants. I'm pretty confident that such is the case here, and by and large, the regime succeeds in fostering a lively debating community with a minimum of unpleasantness and folly. I think it should be encouraging that a couple of mods have been found unsuitable for the task and reduced to the ranks.
From the pov of the administration, as the site expands, they can no longer be on top of everything, and have to rely more and more on their undercover agents, which you can join by flagging stuff that needs attention. Since, by hypothesis, the administration is benevolent, they are concerned to know from us what we think needs attention. If nobody ever complains, they will think they and the site are perfect.
So flagging, pms, and feedback are important ways to influence them and guide the conduct of the site, as petitions to the tyrant and his minions. At the same time, one should be a little cautious not to get a reputation as a constant moaner and unreliable witness, who will likely be ignored.
In the case of a thread being moved, merged, or some such decision, I would think a reasoned appeal by pm is the best course, though I will just come out and say that I do not believe that there is such a thing as 'the philosophy of Trump'. (I think that is your current concern?) But hopefully, such matters can be discussed and minds can change or not without any acrimony. Its not a personal matter on either side, is it?
So say what you want and don't want, complain about decisions you disagree with, argue politely, and then don't bang on forever about it, but decide to live with it or not.
What does the flag icon mean and what is its purpose? I clicked it thinking I will be asked something or given some options, but nothing of all that. The icon just greyed out! Horrible!
I searched all over the place and couldn't find anything! I hope it's not something bad!
(Note: As you must have guessed, I am relatoively new here.)
I have on occasion asked myself that question when it appeared that others were flagging my posts.
But I've never flagged moderators and I doubt that it actually works as they tend to enforce a forum's agenda and do as they are told from above. So they aren't exactly impartial, are they?
We just get a message that the post has been flagged. That's it.
Thanks. But ... Flagged for what purpose? To indicate what? Who sees the flagging and what does it mean to him/her? If, onthe other hand, is just a kind of "bookmark", how can I find it back?
Comments (64)
So you've never flagged a moderator's post?
Anybody see it a differently and want to share your experiences?
Just a little internet sociology in the making. :wink:
I have it on speed dial and call at least twice a week.
Sorry, bad joke. Hope you can work out the situation, if there is one. As for flagging, doesn’t one double click on the icon with the dots? A flag then appears. (If that’s what you’re referring to).
Also, hope you are not about to go down in flames and get banned. Happening kinda frequently lately, it seems. Your posts and insights are appreciated, whether I happen to agree or not with the particular point. Do what you think best, of course. Good luck. :victory:
I have no issue. Baden told me in another thread that I should have complained about StreetlightS merging threads about Trump into the lounge thread which has lower standards of discussion.
But you're saying I would have to be ButtHurt to do that? There seems to be some disagreement here.
You kind of enjoy harassing people who complain don't you? I picked up on that.
Sorry man, just a lame joke and a handful of assumptions on my part. No offense. Carry on. But several members have seemed to self-destruct recently. Glad to hear that you won’t be the next. :up:
No, not really. I think I once flagged a comment by someone who was just spamming or obviously trolling. Disagreed with comments numerous times of course, but not much of a flagger. Which seems odd to me, since I’m always sending food back in restaurants.
That’s a good strategy. Especially when sending back food might encourage the kitchen staff to add their own... erm... special sauce to the dish, like in the movie Fight Club. :zip:
No I didn't. I said I don't know what happened with that but in future if something gets folded in you don't agree with you have the right to complain.
Quoting Baden
I’ve noticed the mod team here lose some diversity of late, incidentally.
Why does that happen?
I thought there was something james bondish about you.
I'd rather not, and in any case, I used to be the ban-meister-in-chief back on the old site, so it may be that I have a certain elder-statesman status that makes it a bit different for me. But here instead are some words of wisdom, because you are quite right to be concerned about these things.
Firstly, sites like this are tyrannies, not democracies, and the site owner rules absolutely. Secondly, there is no justice system, but an editorial one.
So the final recourse of us peasants is only to find or create somewhere more congenial to cast our pearls, or put up with the foibles of the local executive.
But in the meantime, we assume that our dictator is benevolent and seeks to appoint benevolent servants. I'm pretty confident that such is the case here, and by and large, the regime succeeds in fostering a lively debating community with a minimum of unpleasantness and folly. I think it should be encouraging that a couple of mods have been found unsuitable for the task and reduced to the ranks.
From the pov of the administration, as the site expands, they can no longer be on top of everything, and have to rely more and more on their undercover agents, which you can join by flagging stuff that needs attention. Since, by hypothesis, the administration is benevolent, they are concerned to know from us what we think needs attention. If nobody ever complains, they will think they and the site are perfect.
So flagging, pms, and feedback are important ways to influence them and guide the conduct of the site, as petitions to the tyrant and his minions. At the same time, one should be a little cautious not to get a reputation as a constant moaner and unreliable witness, who will likely be ignored.
In the case of a thread being moved, merged, or some such decision, I would think a reasoned appeal by pm is the best course, though I will just come out and say that I do not believe that there is such a thing as 'the philosophy of Trump'. (I think that is your current concern?) But hopefully, such matters can be discussed and minds can change or not without any acrimony. Its not a personal matter on either side, is it?
So say what you want and don't want, complain about decisions you disagree with, argue politely, and then don't bang on forever about it, but decide to live with it or not.
Here endeth the old fart ramble.
I don't have the issue you think I do.
Someone said that the internet is the domain of the id. I've come to agree with that. There are places here and there that try to raise themselves up from that state, but the id doesn't care.
And maybe that's really a positive sign about how we are to each other in real life. Or not. I'm not really sure.
Thanks for the response!
A natural attraction to order, I suppose.
Implants can really speed up the process, my geeky side imagines.
Or maybe there just isn't enough social glue to go around?
This wasn't my concern. As I explained, I think Baden wants the members to flag moderators if there are concerns. I found that to be odd. My view was well expressed by Praxis: that's not how most forums work, so it's not likely that someone wandering in off the street would think of doing that. I didn't until Baden suggested it.
But why not a philosophy of Trump? What other things are resistant to philosophy in your view? Bananas?
It's written in the Guidelines, which I hope everyone wandering in off the street or off anything else would read: :)
"Moderator conduct:
In discussions, a moderator is subject to the same guidelines as everyone else...You can report a moderator or ask that a moderator be moderated in the same way as you would any other poster by flagging their posts or by sending a private message to another moderator."
There's no great mystery here.
Indeed. Unfortunately, it requires some lack of apathy to hold anyone to a standard.
As with all guidelines, I'm guessing the rules are a tad malleable if @frank has some of that $100 million dollar super pac money to throw your way, or if he happens to be cousins with the owner of the site. :lol:
I'm not familiar with jamalrobs's family tree.. :)
Whenever I see them, I flag them. Simple really.
:up: :up: :up:
Really? You know that part about moderator conduct was unofficially known as The Sapientia Clause?
It's there in its current form since @Sapientia went rogue and was neutralized. Can't remember when that was. About a decade ago I think, was it, Sap?
:zip:
Quoting Agustino
What does the flag icon mean and what is its purpose? I clicked it thinking I will be asked something or given some options, but nothing of all that. The icon just greyed out! Horrible!
I searched all over the place and couldn't find anything! I hope it's not something bad!
(Note: As you must have guessed, I am relatoively new here.)
I've never flagged any post. I'm not sure why any adult would.
One day you'll be an adult and you'll understand.
To protect the non-adults from reading naughty words and ideas?
I guess so.
I have on occasion asked myself that question when it appeared that others were flagging my posts.
But I've never flagged moderators and I doubt that it actually works as they tend to enforce a forum's agenda and do as they are told from above. So they aren't exactly impartial, are they?
We just get a message that the post has been flagged. That's it.
To make this world a better place, ser.
That’s adorable.
Thanks. But ... Flagged for what purpose? To indicate what? Who sees the flagging and what does it mean to him/her? If, onthe other hand, is just a kind of "bookmark", how can I find it back?
It's to let the moderators know someone's breaking the rules of the site so as to diminish the experience of posting here.
As @frank said.
Thanks.
OK, thanks.
How then can one "upvote" a post (topic or comment)? Just upvote, w/o replying/commmenting.