Page 2 of 2

Re: Systemic problems amplified by discretionary moderation

Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2015 4:24 pm
by aero
Tinkerbell wrote:Unless we're talking about me saying nameduser needs to use common sense bc there is no free stuff without a blackhole on the internet.
I was referring to this, yes.

Re: Systemic problems amplified by discretionary moderation

Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2015 11:05 pm
by MistakesWereMade
Moderation is done by the staff and not the users.
i didn't know thread management didn't count as moderation.
Joey in the progress bar thread wrote:No, users are supposed to let threads die so that the staff doesn't have to go around and unnecessarily lock a bunch of threads.
----------------------

So, by reading half of this thread, i've come to the conclusion that shitposting is acceptable as long as it's lawful shitposting. Cool.

Re: Systemic problems amplified by discretionary moderation

Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2015 11:22 pm
by Shadow Yoshi
Users letting threads die is not moderation. It's just what you're supposed to do - kind of like how you're supposed to post screenshots with your levels, not insult other users, etc.

Also, let me make a distinction here:

- The threads created by Quill and me that Aero used as an example are joke topics. Are they shitposts as well? Some may think so, sure, but they're harmless.
- The threads created by Vinyl that Aero used as an example are shitposts. Are they joke topics as well? Yeah, I suppose, but Vinyl has a bad reputation and therefore it's inappropriate for him to be making such topics. Also, those topics were created out of protest anyway, so that example is completely different and not applicable to the point I'm making.

I don't see why this is so hard to understand.

Re: Systemic problems amplified by discretionary moderation

Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2015 11:38 pm
by MistakesWereMade
Joey wrote:Users letting threads die is not moderation. It's just what you're supposed to do - kind of like how you're supposed to post screenshots with your levels, not insult other users, etc.

Also, let me make a distinction here:

- The threads created by Quill and me that Aero used as an example are joke topics. Are they shitposts as well? Some may think so, sure, but they're harmless.
- The threads created by Vinyl that Aero used as an example are shitposts. Are they joke topics as well? Yeah, I suppose, but Vinyl has a bad reputation and therefore it's inappropriate for him to be making such topics. Also, those topics were created out of protest anyway, so that example is completely different and not applicable to the point I'm making.

I don't see why this is so hard to understand.
top definition on UD wrote:shitpost
To make utterly worthless and inane posts on an internet messageboard.
(you can't deny the source because it's "unreliable", as it's the most reliable source for terms like these, which don't have dictionary-accepted definitions)

And, going by your scenario, if an user has a good reputation it's fine for them to shitpost, but if they have a bad reputation, it's inappropiate.

Even if they were made in indirect protest, that shit only concerned vinyl-the staff, unless i'm missing something, there was no public statement (until now) of them being made in protest, which leaves them on the same level of shitposting as this thread to any other user.

Re: Systemic problems amplified by discretionary moderation

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 12:04 am
by Shadow Yoshi
Nien wrote:And, going by your scenario, if an user has a good reputation it's fine for them to shitpost, but if they have a bad reputation, it's inappropiate.
At its most basic level, yes. That's how it works here and everywhere else. Obviously if someone with a good reputation starts making a continuous stream of shitposts for a while, we'll have a problem, but I think it goes without saying that bossedit8 making a GIF thread would go over better than Vinyl making one.

Vinyl's threads being made in protest means that it's not really applicable to the rule I'm talking about - if somebody makes a shitpost in protest of something, regardless of their reputation, it's still wrong (see: what Marina did).

Re: Systemic problems amplified by discretionary moderation

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2015 2:51 pm
by Mable
AeroMatter wrote:
Tinkerbell wrote:Unless we're talking about me saying nameduser needs to use common sense bc there is no free stuff without a blackhole on the internet.
I was referring to this, yes.
Well, tbh you got to agree that using common sense here is pretty rare.

I mean if you really think everything on the www is free and download it just to get a virus, then go on a mario forum and complain about it to everyone and get told to use common sense and then say "keep out of my business" why even post about it?

People will just laught and point their fingers at you. Everyone who uses common sense should know that the so called free stuff isn't always legit and safe. So think first before you shame yourself on the whole internet.