Zekka's recent activity
-
Comment on Lots of reduced activity it seems. Just the weekend? in ~talk
-
Comment on Would anybody be interested in a Tildes Minecraft server? in ~games
Zekka Linkhey, i'm just boosting the count for people who are interestedhey, i'm just boosting the count for people who are interested
-
Comment on Civil disagreement (or, how to get people to consider your meta-opinions while not singling out individuals) in ~talk
Zekka LinkHey, I was originally tempted to quotesnipe this post (because it's obviously directed at me, goldfish, and Tenlock, and a few lines made me feel glaringly misunderstood) but instead I want to be...Hey, I was originally tempted to quotesnipe this post (because it's obviously directed at me, goldfish, and Tenlock, and a few lines made me feel glaringly misunderstood) but instead I want to be nice and polite and comprehensive.
In a super ideal world everybody would approach every topic with a ton of patience and civility. The problem is that it's way easier for people who don't really care to conjure up patience and civility. This is where you get glib concern trolls, etc, who post the same thing again and again, pretending to be slightly clueless bystanders who happens to support victimizers instead of victims.
Websites that prize civility tend pro-racism. This is anecdotal, but I've posted on a lot of web forums under a lot of aliases, so I'm going to pull out Reddit, Quora, LessWrong, and Medium as examples. If you tell someone the thing they're saying is racist on any of those websites, whether you're nice about it or mean about it, you get brigaded by very polite people who will whatabout at you until you snap at them or leave the site. People act as if the word "racist," even justified, is a slur.
Holding people to the standard of writing a mod and the involved user before posting about a user they don't like basically amplifies established members and silences new or quiet members. Your average quiet person will drift off the site before they actually complain about a thing that is bothering them, and that's even more true if they feel like they're shouting into a void.
The problem with complaining to a user directly, in private, is that they don't really think the thing they did was wrong, or if they know it was wrong, they don't care. You will most likely be ignored. Also, everyone knows this -- PMing someone to say "you did something wrong and here's a link" looks seriously stalkerish, no matter how polite you are. If you hold me to doing this, I now have to deal with the prospect of being told I'm being weird and taking things too personally.
Here are some examples of things I've heard from mods elsewhere online that have made me more likely to quit a website than to bother dealing with them:
- You're the only person who complained.
- Did you wait another day for [problem user] to respond?
- They'll catch a ban next time they do that.
- I know I said they'd catch a ban, but [problem user] actually acted out in a different way this time than the last time you complained. I warned them on that topic too.
- The mod you contacted is actually away right now. I just found out about this situation. To be safe, I've given the user a warning.
Any user who has a history of making good-faith complaints has already been in this situation a bunch of times. You can say "our mods will be better" but they never have been on any site I've ever posted on. Something about this almost-imperceptible increase in power makes normal people incredibly hard to deal with, and when I was a mod I quickly caught myself saying the exact same things. It especially doesn't bode well that many of our current posters are actually mods from Reddit, a website whose default moderator culture is just like what I just described.
Here are my opinions about why civility rules do not work as intended.
People who want to post bad shit have a specific kind of content they want to post on your forum. They're very disingenuous, so to post it, they'll adapt to any set of form-oriented standards. If they have to look nice, they will -- if they have to message a mod first, they will. If they have to refer to their targets euphemistically, they will. If they have to refer to their targets chronologically, they will. (like in this thread: "this happened recently, I think you all know what I'm talking about," in clear reference to Tenlock, goldfish, and me)
As a person who gets hit by form-oriented standards a lot, who tries really hard to be civil and nice on the internet anyways, please don't come up with guidelines like this and hold people to them! Please keep your guidelines internal and try to evaluate them from first principles in every situation -- "this guy posted a callout thread -- did he actually hurt anybody, and do I really care about how those people feel?"
This (from the OP) is an example of the kind of thing I want to avoid:
The targets of it feel offended, and the poster gets yelled at by the community for hurting people. No one wins.
When becoming offended earns moderator actions, bad actors will manufacture offense until the people opposing them capitulate completely. It doesn't even need to make sense -- I've been banned from an ostensibly center-left forum for having the gall to refer to a self-described neo-nazi as "a little racist," because it apparently bothered him.
The other problem with this is that the kinds of people doing the yelling -- that is, the people in a community who spend the most time condemning dudes who a moderator has already singled out for criticism -- are the people with no skin in the game. Every forum has a subset of members that really likes validating moderator decisions, whatever they are -- and it's not the same as the subset that identifies actual bad behavior. So treating this situation as bad by default means assigning a lot of weight to the opinions of people who registered to post bad things and to bystanders who don't care.
-
Comment on <deleted topic> in ~tildes
Zekka Link Parenthi, i'm seriously on the spectrum and i think some of these theories could be correct. we don't have enough evidence though. i used to post like him on a lot of places online, and i still...hi, i'm seriously on the spectrum and i think some of these theories could be correct. we don't have enough evidence though. i used to post like him on a lot of places online, and i still sometimes do.
i think his original sin is being racist or at least having extreme empathy for racists while having like, none for their victims. his sin is also looking for complicated explanations that cast antiracist shit in a negative light, while missing the fucking obvious over and over -- literally one of the behaviors i listed in my original post. some of that might be accounted for by autism, part of it is probably becoming accustomed to being the smart guy in nerd social circles. but i'm in danger of just describing myself.
-
Comment on <deleted topic> in ~tildes
Zekka Link Parenti posted this in another comment: he had like fifty paragraphs of defense ready for people who might falsely be accused of being racists. never did i see him show the same moral outrage for like,...i posted this in another comment: he had like fifty paragraphs of defense ready for people who might falsely be accused of being racists. never did i see him show the same moral outrage for like, targets of racism. it's kind of obvious which of these populations he identifies with
i could apologize and say "maybe he thought everyone already knew that it's bad to be targeted by racism," but instead i'll avoid being passive aggressive about it and say i think go1dfish is seriously unintentionally racist
not glad he was banned, but still
-
Comment on <deleted topic> in ~tildes
Zekka Link Parenti really share the view that most of this stuff shouldn't have been deleted. (his digression in my thread should have been moved though, it was pretty irrelevant to what everyone but goldfish was...i really share the view that most of this stuff shouldn't have been deleted. (his digression in my thread should have been moved though, it was pretty irrelevant to what everyone but goldfish was talking about)
i'm annoyed that like most libertarian dudes who register for an online forum, goldfish took paragraphs and paragraphs of moral outrage at the idea that racism would be censored and like, two sentences of moral outrage at the actual racism.
that's not the same as saying "i am a racist" but when I read that I think "oh, you spend a lot more time feeling sorry for racists than feeling sorry for targets of racism" and my reaction to that is "holy fuck"
a lot of people are willing to articulate the sixteen paragraph long, exhausting case for maybe-white-supremacy, but like, when definite white supremacy happens, they're mysteriously absent from the discussion.
-
Comment on <deleted topic> in ~tildes
Zekka Link Parenti just want to add something because i'm obliquely referenced several times in the OP: i hardcore disgaree that discussion promoting censorship was a wrong way for my topic to go -- it's fine if...i just want to add something because i'm obliquely referenced several times in the OP: i hardcore disgaree that discussion promoting censorship was a wrong way for my topic to go -- it's fine if everyone who posts in my topic disagrees with me.
goldfish seemed to think that that stuff being posted in my topic was somehow disrespectful to my wishes -- i wouldn't have bothered posting a topic if i didn't want people who seriously disagreed with me to reply.
-
Comment on <deleted topic> in ~tildes
Zekka Link Parenti actually really like this post. i didn't expect something i would like this much to show up in this topic (i was super worn out by the thread i posted earlier so i procrastinated on reading it)i actually really like this post. i didn't expect something i would like this much to show up in this topic (i was super worn out by the thread i posted earlier so i procrastinated on reading it)
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parenti like the indicator -- i'm used to being able to go back and see my own content, to potentially copy-paste and use lateri like the indicator -- i'm used to being able to go back and see my own content, to potentially copy-paste and use later
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parentdeimos can do what he will! i've posted a ton of thoughts. i won't shout at deimos for banning them nearly as much as i will shout at them for being present, in part because i actually like deimosdeimos can do what he will! i've posted a ton of thoughts. i won't shout at deimos for banning them nearly as much as i will shout at them for being present, in part because i actually like deimos
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parenthey, this is extremely true of my emotional experience arguing with horrible people. (some background: before posting on this site, i spent a lot of time trying to post sanity on extreme...hey, this is extremely true of my emotional experience arguing with horrible people. (some background: before posting on this site, i spent a lot of time trying to post sanity on extreme right-wing websites, and eventually stopped because it's emotionally draining and unpleasant)
the first time you show any incivility people will quibble about it forever and use it as an excuse to ignore you. i actually think this is what algernon is doing in another comment thread under this post in that he's just listing my crimes over and over now. but i don't think it's like intentional.
fwiw, i've advocated much stronger moderation in communities that are plainly overrun with that shit but the moderators obviously didn't want to be associated with it. like, i used to post in a game dev chatroom that got overrun with Sargon shit -- i now frequent and co-mod a community related to that where we heavily moderate that stuff out.
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parentthis seems unrelated to your previous posts. thank you for ceasing to accuse me of things i didn't say. you're being even more hostile than i was, but i don't think this is bad because i started...this seems unrelated to your previous posts. thank you for ceasing to accuse me of things i didn't say. you're being even more hostile than i was, but i don't think this is bad because i started it.
i think it's very bad that you're acting like i posted this to be an evil person who attacks people -- i posted it because i thought it was good, because i want the racists to shut up (not because someone shut them up, but because they can't get anywhere with a crowd as good and enlightened as the rest of us) and because i thought other people would too. so far, several people who also dislike my tone agree with me on these things.
i legitimately did not understand that using people's names violated an etiquette guideline. i left them in the post for so long because i'm used to being told that things I witnessed never actually happened. i'm genuinely surprised that you don't believe me.
i feel like you're trying to drag me through the mud by acting as if, because my post is a bad thing, it can't be these other good things i listed, too. if we don't quibble over connotations. you are correct about what my post was, but i don't know why you think that's exclusive with what i said it was.
EDIT: one other edit; i specifically called for people to shout the racists down, several places in the comments, and also in the post, here:
I do want to shout bad opinions down with better opinions. People who support free speech, which I think is most of the people on this website, also want this. This is an example of me trying to do that.
you are definitely, directly misrepresenting me here, so stop that
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parenti disagree that returning every hour is a trolling tell -- trolls get bored fast. it's probably more of a true believer tell -- anyone who actually does that is probably seriously dogged....i disagree that returning every hour is a trolling tell -- trolls get bored fast. it's probably more of a true believer tell -- anyone who actually does that is probably seriously dogged.
otherwise i agree that with human intervention this is fine. like i said, i think mods have done a pretty good job not banning people just for having horrible opinions, so i think giving mods a wider range of tools is fine.
this was actually a big problem on stackexchange: Puzzling.SE, a site for sharing riddles, appears on Hot Questions a lot. but the questions that appear tend to be low-effort, because low-effort questions invite a lot of responses. (which are also low-effort) so the site has kind of directed in the effort of super low-effort riddles because those paradoxically get more attention.
imho the conclusion to draw is that activity level isn't a good proxy for how good a topic is. maybe we should consider boosting topics that have a high upvote/log n comments ratio? don't implement anything thoughtlessly ofc!
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parentwhy do you keep putting words in my mouth? i've already said what I want, which is for people to shout the racists down and reply to their bad opinions with good opinions. if you want to get...why do you keep putting words in my mouth? i've already said what I want, which is for people to shout the racists down and reply to their bad opinions with good opinions. if you want to get legalistic about it, yes, that will chill racist speech, and it's sort of the point. but it doesn't absolutely crowd it out and if racists stop coming here it will ultimately be voluntary.
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parenti actually like this, if you find a way to signal it in the UI. (so it's not just a secret block -- maybe an icon, like a raindrop or something) i think a lot of people (like me) have a strong...i actually like this, if you find a way to signal it in the UI. (so it's not just a secret block -- maybe an icon, like a raindrop or something)
i think a lot of people (like me) have a strong "gotta get the last word" impulse and feel personally victimized when a topic is left up, but someone's misrepresentation of their point is the final post. this would basically guarantee that that wouldn't happen.
you can think of it as an equivalent to locking topics that wouldn't make lastworders feel victimized.
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parenttbh, if you want to delete this and refactor it into what you see as actionable, i would understand that. i have frequently said it's not good to be mean online, but done it anyways, because I'm a...tbh, if you want to delete this and refactor it into what you see as actionable, i would understand that. i have frequently said it's not good to be mean online, but done it anyways, because I'm a little bit of a hypocrite -- it's not one of my strong points as a person.
what would make my blood boil is seeing it deleted and nothing happen at all, but i'm glad you read it.
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parentno, i've explicitly said I'm against moderating based on tone and against censorship in general. you are the person who thinks I am promoting censorship and moderating based on tone. i also didn't...no, i've explicitly said I'm against moderating based on tone and against censorship in general. you are the person who thinks I am promoting censorship and moderating based on tone.
i also didn't say it was wrong to prolong the argument. i do think it's good to respond to people who have horrible viewpoints by posting the correct viewpoints. that's how arguing works when you have free speech instead of heavyhanded moderation, the thing that i have consistently said i wanted, but you don't believe I want.
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parenti think the standard format of one of these arguments is definitely "one person who's very stubborn goes through a revolving door of people who are less committed." an example of a thread that...i think the standard format of one of these arguments is definitely "one person who's very stubborn goes through a revolving door of people who are less committed." an example of a thread that follows that format would be this one -- where i'm the very stubborn person.
i'm not convinced it would improve this thread, but maybe other people think that.
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parentyou can delete every odd-numbered Zekka post, but none of the even-numbered ones, please -- those are precious.you can delete every odd-numbered Zekka post, but none of the even-numbered ones, please -- those are precious.
-
Comment on To a select minority of less than ten people: please stop getting judo'ed into defending white supremacy in ~talk
Zekka Link Parenti think the modding we have now is pretty impartial, which I like, but i agree that the result is that we get nastiness and repetitive discussions. there are people who are never going to stop...i think the modding we have now is pretty impartial, which I like, but i agree that the result is that we get nastiness and repetitive discussions. there are people who are never going to stop arguing for their side and are going to be super deaf to the other side. it only takes one (no matter what side they're taking) to prolong an argument for a super long time, so the nastiness is inevitable.
i'm not a free speech absolutist but i earnestly meant that I don't want people to be censored just for having wrong POVs. i think this site strikes a way better balance on that than a lot of ostensible "free speech" sites, probably because many of those form when extreme right-wingers get exiled from other social media platforms.
i'm probably the person who is causing you the most annoyance here, but I think that if you want to be non-partisan and also not have long political arguments on your site, you are probably going to need to block political topics. failing that, you can ban anyone who makes it nasty, but i think this will probably lead to a center-right monoculture because the pool you're drawing from is Reddit and people who have a personal stake in identity politics issues like racism will probably get increasingly fed up with what they perceive (right or wrong) as moderator bias.
I posted one and I'm drained! (Also, work's been horrible.)
I promise to post more nice things instead.