RFC: Should I start handing out 1-day "cool off" bans to thwart flamewars?
RFC: Should I start handing out 1-day "cool off" bans to thwart flamewars?
OK peeps, I am seeing a lot of flamewars lately which go off-topic of this comm. I am also getting dozens of reports about people reporting each other for "rudeness" or "trolling". I don't want this comm to start becoming a drama haven, so I want to try and prevent people getting worked up like this.
What do you think about me starting to deploy strategic 1-day bans for people who I notice are getting into flamewars? If not, what else do you suggest to help people remain civil?
Don't just upvote/downvote. I won't take these into account, I want actual comments about this to better make a decision.
The amount of trolling and debatemebros keep going up each thread and it looks like people are just trying to start drama here now rather than report actual mod abuse. I'm not sure how you could improve this, it seems like every one of these kinds of communities turn into drama communities with people at each other's throats each thread lol. I think temp bans would help for the most egregious offenders, but locking threads after a certain timeframe might be better? Considering the comment threads keep going on and on for some of them.
What would that timeframe be though? A week? A month? A day? Ultimately, what would that matter even - why is it bad to respond to something three months later, e.g. asking a follow-up question "was this matter ever resolved - did you manage to get in contact with the admin/mod and what did they say?"
The problem with that approach is that it penalizes people other than the offender (I assume here you mean locking the entire post, not just a comment chain underneath it?), e.g. if you take time to think about the scenario, read it thoroughly, go gather some additional references, type out a reply, and not even necessarily to the person inflaming the conflict but others who happened to respond more quickly, but then bam, your well thought out and crafted message is rejected, bc you did not deliver it quickly enough, and because while you were treating the matter seriously, a flame war was breaking out, but it's not like a chatroom where you can see the messages coming in live?
It makes sense for the people involved in spreading drama to be affected/penalized, but why discourage discourse elsewhere by others in the community? And all the more so the ones delivered more slowly, while allowing the most hot-headed quick replies to go through before the post can be locked.
Any abuse reporting or appeals system will invite some general "they're saying things I don't like" complaining, that's just human nature for some people. And the fact that this is a open forum makes that a hundred times worse, and makes it harder to keep an outsider perspective.
That said, some people just need to think before typing. I don't think locking stuff would work on such a small community
I’m ok with a penalty box. Pointless bickering gets this sub off topic. It’s tough because people come here ready to air grievances so I think that pre-charges the atmosphere and makes it that much easier for things to get off the rails
It’s tough because people come here ready to air grievances so I think that pre-charges the atmosphere and makes it that much easier for things to get off the rails
You put in to words what I was struggling to find. People are often already a little charged up when they show up here, that's the nature of this kind of board.
My suggestion is to warn the user first, and then if they don't comply a 3d ban. Because:
- Cooperative users are quick to comply, even without punishment.
- It helps to show other users the limit of what's considered acceptable in the community.
- When people get really worked up, a single day is not enough.
Trolls are a different can of worms. I think that users who are blatantly trolling should be removed = permabanned; there's no place for those.
[Replying to myself to avoid editing the above again.]
Ah, I propose an explicit rule for this comm: "off-topic is only tolerated if non-divisive, non-derailing, and in the comments". That gives people some room to chitchat, but would do a quick work of "ackshyually u don't have rules against flamewars right".
Happy cake day!
Thanks!
Well, this is drama heaven because it's for users who aren't legible to post in fedidrama (because they're involved themselves) and then they end up here. And IMO the posts kind of set the tone. You often start out with a negative impression after reading the post, and then you're likely to be negative. And it doesn't help that other comments are negative or low quality as well... Then it's super easy to drop what's left and just shitpost.
I'm not sure if I want to continue reading anyways. It's several posts a day of people whining about something they brought upon themselves. Often something completely insignificant like one removed post/comment or a one day time-out from shitposting. And half the people don't listen or get anything, neither does OP, and the commenters just flame about arbitrary things, or attack each other for their strongly held opinions... I'd say a bit more moderation would be worth a try. But don't listen to me, I'm probably not the target audience of this community.
Is that a thing? That's what used to happen with SubredditDrama like 15 years ago. I wonder if it's the same people.
Yup. 100% a perfect tool for the situation.
And I say that as someone that has likely deserved a few of them here and there.
It won't stop report abuse, but it will reduce the in-thread drama.
Hell, it might reduce drama in general since the serious drama queens are going to get butthurt and not come back.
If the only offense is that people are getting heated, a cool-off ban as a reminder to take a walk and come back later works wonders.
Honestly, I personally haven't seen any of these flame wars. And I'm not sure restricting engagement on a service already trying to increase engagement is productive even for a good reason.
If it's off topic or getting personal, sure. If not, I'm neutral on it.
That's what flame wars are. Getting personal or just exchanging insults
Then I agree with you, a day at least of cooldown. But not without interaction. As another's suggestion here covered, see if they'll stop? Then a cooldown based on their reaction.
First, make it a rule. This community is for discussion about moderation, not about whether a cat can be vegan. If you see off-topic discussion, nip it in the bud and remove the comments. If users continue to knowingly violate the rule, progressively longer bans.
It's really not hard to stay on topic and avoid a flame war. I know fighting is stimulating, but sometimes it's better to just put your phone down and walk away.
Tbf, if something were removed for "misinformation", like Russia has invaded Ukraine "for its own good" or whether cats can be vegan, then evaluating whether the mod is acting appropriately or is a PTB depends on those facts?
Though that should not be the focus - as you say the point here is the moderation.
banning people for reporting seems like a way to discourage reporting.
but banning for flaming and trolling sounds reasonable, especially if it's a short ban. even a 6 or 12 hour ban might send the right message.
banning people for reporting seems like a way to discourage reporting.
Is it if they're flooding your feed with nonsense reports? That stuff takes time to sort through, and the time spent sorting through it takes away from other moderation duties.
Besides, if you're only banning excessive reporters like that, aren't you only discouraging people who are actively abusing the report button?
EDIT: to be clear, I mean a temp ban, not permanent one
it's my feeling, and I'm open to disagreeing about this, that it should be encouraged to report bad behavior, and the only use of the report button i would characterized as "abuse" is something like actual automated spam or opening a users page and reporting everything regardless of content or context.
being wrong about whether content does or should break community standards should not be a bannable offense.
Eh, you'd be amazed how many people use reports to say "I don't like this, and it's your problem" instead of it actually being a community rule violation. I don't moderate any busy lemmy C/s, but I did some high traffic reddit subs, and I'd even say that half of reports were just trying to get a mod to shut down the other person in a slap fight. Then they're amazed when you shut both parties down lol.
I definitely think that anything more than a one day ban for single reports is way over the line. And I'd prefer warnings with an explanation be the default.
Do it. But please be self-aware and remember that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Lets not get bogged down in analysis paralysis. Do it, gauge the feedback, adjust, iterate (the beatings will continue until morale improves).
Didn't know about this community, just read the description to understand its title, and I immediately thought that it was going to be a trolling mess. So my first thinking is that you created a banquet for trolls, and now you're dealing with the consequences. Do you have the magic mental power to deal with this?
If yes, then I would make it very clear from the beginning in the rules that uncivil discussion will be moderated, that continuous incivility will lead to a 1-day ban and that attempts to bypass the temporary ban will lead to a permanent ban.
Get ready for motivated trolls spending days creating new accounts to harass your authority, or you, after they have been banned.I think short cooling bans are a great idea. And I think they help prevent permanent bans by allowing people to cool off.
Why can't people argue in peace? Why do you have to moderate that?
Being mean to someone else because of what they said is fine, unless someone threatens someone or is mean because they're discriminating
There's no reason to be mean, honestly. That's how many of these slap fights start.
Rather than going straight to bans (except for egregious trolling, or repeat offenders) I think that maybe removing off-topic discussion threads in their entirety is probably the way to go. If they are discussing something that isn't directly related to the OPs original complaint, then it's off topic imo. That would cover 90% of the problem. Personally, I don't mind some strong language and argumentation so long as it's about the actual topic. While I know drama isn't everyone's jam, it can be entertaining for some folks. And I agree with @neurospice@lemmy.dbzer0.com that maybe a 24 hour or 48 hour post lock rule would also be helpful so people aren't going back to dredge up drama again in older posts, while still allowing time for folks to discuss the issue?
The problem is that people don't have agree with what is "directly related". Just see the point about PTB in ytpb
True, but you can't please everyone.
I find it hilarious that every single time I've been admonished about civil conduct, it's because I'm reacting to a bunch of assclowns who somehow evade any oversight.
maybe start taking the reports as self indicators?
Tiny one-day bans are barely a slap on the wrist, which some people need to help them cool off. The usual caveats apply like perhaps driver a warning first and all of that, but obviously depending on severity you may not want to wait for that to develop further, at which point a quick ban along with explanation should at least, again, allow them the time they need to cool down.
You'd be surprised how seriously people take even a 1-day ban. There's a lot of ND people in these comms who feel passionately about their position, and you can easily hit someone with RSD or with ASD and get a bad reaction. I try to tread lightly because I know how these peeps can be affected but it cannot always be helped unless people have already internalized you're not trying to power-tip but to maintain civility.
Yeah that's a good counterpoint to consider. I think one of the issues is that the only way to implement such is a "ban", which is kind of a scary word. If it were called a "time-out", to "cool off", it could be taken differently, while to call it a "ban" seems so much more serious.
Perhaps a message delivered to them directly, e.g. as a reply, could allow them to see that first rather than just stumble upon the modlog entry later. But I'm not certain how those work: can the recipient still access the community in read-only mode to see that, and is the button to reply greyed out or could they type a long reply but then not be able to deliver it, thereby generating frustration?
And ultimately it's a juggling act: how to handle the needs of individual new (or old) contributors who want to be free to speak, while also showing consideration for those who may not enjoy what the community becomes whenever the former crowd are allowed free reign to do so.
In Reddit we had similar issues of a community trying to be all things to all people. Post flairs helped a bit, like people could literally filter out those that they did not want (e.g., "yet another Lemmy.ml site-wide ban"). Perhaps you could go the route of offering a megathread, allowing people to post such as comments rather than making full posts? Though it was always an eternal struggle to get people to pay attention to such - like just about every single new post to r/Android was always "which phone should I buy", even despite the two other posts within the last hour asking the identical question (perhaps mods removed those, in which case the problem was even more intense as those were simply the ones that made it through the cracks).
But whatever you do, please make it clear in the sidebar what the desires are for the community so that people are aware prior to posting. Like right now it reads to me as being receptive to all instances of potential power tripping mods, similar to AITAH.
You have a keen mind. I trust you to find a vision for the community that you are comfortable with, that will be compatible with what can be implemented in Lemmy:-).
Does Lemmy provide a council/consensus type voting system on bans? How do you arbitrate it by yourself on what is or isn't "rudeness" or "trolling"?
Imo let downvotes and reports sort it out, instead of being proactive, until there is a multi-headed arbitration system in place.