Jeric

Administrator
  • Content Count

    15604
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    105

 Content Type 

Profiles

Character Archive

Frequently Asked Questions and Helpful Hints

Equestrian Empire Character Archive

Art Contest Uploads

Banner Archive

Banner Submissions

Golden Oaks Memorial Library

Pony Roleplay Characters

Calendar

Blogs

Forums

Store

Everything posted by Jeric

  1. Not to further that thought spiral, but That insightful video basically illustrates why I personally wade carefully in internet debate. It also explains why I do not engage someone over more than four posts if I am trying to instill a seed of doubt in someone’s mind. Of course, most of the times I do post in Debate when I am in a friendly mood, it’s not to prove someone wrong, or to change a mind. Sometimes I just like having a conversation regarding life and politics. A conversation for conversations sake is not a bad motivation.
  2. I’m honestly not going to get into the argument of subjective moderation of what constitutes being abusive. You can’t possibly itemize everything under the sun, and the more comprehensive you try to be, the more the assumptions exist that the absence of an example makes it acceptable. I’ve been personally called homophobic and anti-religion on the same day and related to the same moderation situation and topic. That isn’t completely uncommon because it is natural to assume those in power are acting against you when a topic is shuttered, even if that isn’t the case. But that shows you how you can’t make things bias proof and objective. Honestly we need some passion in these topics. Maybe a longer discussion of my general musings about debate and moderation in there will at least allow some clarity of a very very hard to clarify subject. I want civil discussion, but I personally have nothing against cleverly applied snarky comments about a political idea or view point. Saying a view point is absurd may get some of the staff bristling, but I’m likely to undo anything that comes from that if there isn’t a direct insult to the person. While I have stated publicly that I hate how the term SJW an fascist are too casually used, I’m not going to shut down a discussion surrounding these two words. There are generally words that shouldn’t be used, obviously. I’d honestly stay clear of charged words like fag, retard, and the like. That said, two things I want to make clear because these issues have been reported and staff won’t act on them. Calling a public official a derogatory word isn’t going to be acted on. While I would prefer that points be made without that, that tends fall into the pick and choose your battles type of situation. I’d rather hide a user calling another user an insult than a user venting about an elected official. People don’t like the President and people do not like Ocasio-Cortez. I get it. They aren’t users here so I don’t feel any Administrative duty to protect their honor and reputation. As far as passive aggressive, man that is hard to effectively moderate. Like I said, I tend to allow some leeway. I don’t want to send a chilling effect on people who put some of their personality into their posts. Are there moments that people can cross the line? Of course, but it’s like that SCOTUS Justice that said “I know it when I see it” when he was referring to porn. You can usually tell when a debate is becoming toxic. Similar that is the obsession with some users on one subject. Careful observation over the years will tell you that staff will grow weary of one user making topics that amount to a singular idea if that idea is predicated on a group. We have had to remove users who constantly made topics focused on “I hate men!” And “I hate Muslims”. Eventually we will say it needs to slow or stop. While we will allow some contentious topics some breathing room, some topics will not be allowed. One example of that is the occasional defense of pedophilia or beastiality. Not here. And yes I know I can come across as a smartass in DM’s when people use regurgitated phases about abuse of power, bias, and censorship, but if anyone disagrees with a discussion being locked I will hear them out, especially of there is some form of compromise solution. I mean, it’s a shame we can’t have more delicate conversations here about sex and other hot topics without someone going out of their way to make it weird for others due to some self-indulgence pushing their to talk about their fetish experiences and desires. Anyway, just a few random thoughts to keep discussion going
  3. I am assuming that this is not due to a specific message or moderation action. Otherwise I would have just locked this and invited an honest private conversation between the Administration and you over how the site is moderated. In the we allowed these sorts of discussions to go on and on and on under the guise and pretense it was for community improvement, which it rarely ever was. So if this is the case let me know now so we can take this up in a DM. I asked that this be moved to Feedback. I’ll allow the community to opine. My initial (but not final) thoughts on DS are this: In the end most of what I tossed into the Debate section are best practices. Using a logical fallacy or incorrect information isn’t going to be challenged by staff directly. I do want to give the younger or less experienced users who may not be aware of the finer points of Philosophy a chance to give their thoughts. The rules currently all boil down to one general thing — don’t be an insulting asshat. That will never change. I did entertain the idea of a more structured and formal format for debate, however it quickly became very apparent that few people know how formal debates are conducted. Also, because of the general level and flavor of pathos and humor found in that section, finding staffers willing to manage such a concept becomes a time sink none of us are prepared to undertake. The reputation of that section precedes it. Sometimes it is impossible to tell if someone there is being genuinely naive, a troll, or so caught up in their own internal vacuum of ideas that they can here anything beyond the white noise of their chosen talking points. Such is the internet. And then there is my personal taste. There are users in there I would love to engage with on a discussion. All of them have widely diverse views. @Twiggy and @Goat-kun are definitely not individuals who share my personal worldview but I actually enjoy reading what they have to say, and even engaging them from time to time. I certainly don’t want to have a formal debate with them. For one, I have a feeling that they wouldn’t like that sort of overly structured system. Two, they would probably kick my ass in a genuine debate. I’m like most and don’t like losing. So, if anyone has any other thoughts on the section, shoot away.
  4. Oh, I have been slacking haven’t I? How did I allow suck a beautiful concept fall from the forefront of every user’s mind on this site? Have I lost my touch? I swear by all that is Fabulous and Cidery, the Church of Rarity will arise again to support the Holy Union of GemApples! Many will be married to their waifu in Rarijack’s honor! For it has been written and it shall be done.
  5. Closing as question was given the correct answer. Thanks for the question
  6. It takes all of two minutes to read. Go ahead and read them and come back and ask your question if you feel it isn't answered.
  7. until
    RSVP Below if you are going! Join the MLPF @ BRONYCON DISCORD Here