Tildes code of conduct
Tildes code of conduct says
Do not post anyone's sensitive personal information (related to either their real world or online identity) with malicious intent.
Can you change that to just say don't post personal info? Even if it's not done with malicious intent it should still be removed to protect people's privacy.
Also while it does say to not post spam on tildes terms of service I think It should say that on the code of conduct.
Edit: I mean posting personal info without consent and not public information.
Telling someone how to contact a company would be fine but not posting someone's address.
People might interpret that to mean, you can't post an article about a doctor that includes their name, or anything else that contains personally identifying information (PII). Or you can't post an article with PII about any Tildes user. Or that you can't post your own PII.
I personally think it's fine how it is.
Maybe it would be helpful to move from an "intent" framing to one of consent?
That seems to avoid the problems you mention?
I'd just be careful with using the term consent, because that means someone can unconsent to you using their information, even if it's public or in the news. Like say, a politician, a public business etc.
I think reddit's model for PI actually works well.
Wether it's enforced or not is a different story.
Seems reasonable to me.
Sounds good to me.
Can I add don't be racist, sexist, misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic or otherwise unwelcoming and bigoted to vast swaths of the population predicated solely on innate traits rather than the content of their character?
There's places to discuss these things, for example, in a thread about 'what made you racist?' it would be appropriate for someone to explain how they arrived where they are. If Alex Jones does an AMA, cutting him off prevents people from asking him difficult questions and does nothing to reduce his audience size anyway.
On the whole though, a bunch of randos stumbling around with a set of cherry-picked statistics they're copying and pasting to justify their asinine views on race or women or whatever are the internet equivalent of people screaming vile shit at the bus station.
I would mind, because almost all of those are subjective and can be used to stop conversation and debate instead of providing a counter-argument. We already exist to be a high quality content community and posting something that is obviously racist, like a slur directed at someone, is going to be removed very quickly.
The rule you find objectionable is there to handle situations where the racism/sexism/etc. isn't obvious. The idea is to encourage people to err on the side of caution and think before they post.
I don't think I should have to err on the side of caution to share my thoughts on something, your approach leaves no room for intent. If you think something I believe is sexist then you should argue why what I believe is sexist, not point the finger and ask a mod to intervene to remove my thoughts.
Again, unless it's something like, "Haha ur gay" which falls directly under, "don't be an asshole".
Sorry, but I'm used to intent being treated as irrelevant.
It's grating to see someone get into a tired spat about wage discrimination in a fashion that's a thinly veiled rant against feminism and then watching them wall of text their way to 'victory.' There should be carve-outs for appropriate time/place/manner for difficult conversations. I have 0 issue removing poorly thought-out bullshit that's dressed up in civil language designed to railroad people.
It doesn't need to be decorated in slurs to be in bad faith and for whatever reason, the good faith component of that guideline seems to have fallen by the wayside in favor of the internet equivalent of mentally ill vagrants yelling in a subway station here.
I've been careful not to reveal my official name or the titles of my novels in public here. It isn't because I fear reprisal, but because I don't want to be "that indie author who's always self-promoting". That behavior was annoying when other people did it elsewhere, and I doubt it would be any better here.
However, if somebody I told about my work bought a copy, read it, and reviewed it here while saying something like, "the author is active on Tildes as so-and-so", I wouldn't want Deimos coming down on them with a COC violation because they probably aren't doing me any harm.
Self-promote to me in a PM! I would love to support your work and give it a shot!
Ugh, that guy is always self-promoting through private messages.
Not always, not to you, and never without the other person's consent. I'm sorry if that bothers you.
I'm obviously not Kenny, but I'm pretty sure that was a sarcastic comment, considering how clear you were about not wanting to self-promote.
It's often hard to tell, and I thought it was important to highlight the importance of consent in marketing. I don't like getting the hard sell (unless it's from Coheed & Cambria), and I doubt anybody else does either. I suspect that in our advertising-saturated society most people would rather not get the soft sell, either. So I try to be careful and respectful.
Yes, this makes things harder for me, but it's easier for me to live with myself this way.
Does my name count as breaking the code of conduct...
Did you mean to reply to someone?
Goddammit, not again...