I also fail to grasp why moderation unironically stated
If someone made a mistake, please point it out. On the other had if someone has clearly put out information that will put others at risk (doesn’t seem to be the case) please flag it.
From the post where whoami trivialized the risk their advise posed to others as a “personal view” I knew something was wrong. I had presumed that whoami simply did not want to lose face by admitting they fucked up and gave people advice that put them at risk, but after literally everyone without fail piles on the bandwagon, I can only conclude I haven’t the faintest clue what your collective deficiency is other than that moderation based on tone is far easier to implement than moderation based on content.
After a fashion, that’s called tone arguing, and it’s a red flag for any forum community, and your community guidelines include stipulations that seemed to be designed to ward off specifically the damage that tone arguing does to humans.
Your moderation guidelines might consider the relevance of similar stipulations as well, or you could consider leveraging a software solution to assess materially the extent to which your moderation actions correlate to poster tone. If all you needed was something to slap posters around for their tone irrespective of the content, it sure doesn’t have to be a human wasting their time doing that these days.
Since you sent your last message to me I also want do let you know that I have asked the mods to follow up our issue of dispute in a moderated way (not on a public thread)…
Anyway, I see you drew the line already, it is unfortunate how it ends. Bye
The moderation team try our best to sticking to enforcing Code of Conduct. With your original, pre edited replies the moderation team (and those reporting your posts) felt that your replies violated the code of conduct in several ways. Our posts tried to steer you to ways to help, while also trying to ensure adherence to CoC.
Your public complaint here seems to want to rationalise professional community setting CoC driven moderation as tonal policing, which seems like a flawed logic in my opinion.
Sorry to see you go, as you seem to have a good understanding of the technical side of things. Best wishes.
@Plexus If you’re going to beat a dead horse, beat this one:
You seem to like the word professional, so perhaps you understand the word recuse, but I find that unlikely given the nature of your backhanded post here that misrepresents my statements as an anarchical generalization I did not make or intend.
Rather, anyone with any experience moderating should understand that if a mistake were to be made, then the mistakes would be on a case by case basis and claiming that it’s somehow a universal failing that is unreedemable like you have done in my name is utterly strange.
You folks sure like to make stuff up and attribute it to me. Put your own damn names on your hallucinations, not mine.
