moderation & banning

[Savage]

I don't think we've ever banned anyone for swearing. The forum software censors most swear words automatically.

Almost all the bans are for spamming. A very distant second is trolling and personal attacks.

[st33med]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

I don't think we've ever banned anyone for swearing. The forum software censors most swear words automatically.

Almost all the bans are for spamming. A very distant second is trolling and personal attacks.

Anyway to disable that censor? I believe we are mature enough to handle cursing!

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by MidasGirl

Ah, ok. I did not have any interaction with said character. They must be a miscellaneous character in my dream.

You missed the tea party! Without really missing it, at the same time.

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by st33med

Anyway to disable that censor? I believe we are mature enough to handle cursing!

Based on the recent thread about "being offended by swearing", I'd say no. Most people aren't mature enough to handle that.
That thread derailed into people just throwing out as many swear words as possible in a single post, instead of a mature discussion about swearing and being offended...

And besides that, a forum where there are a lot of swear words looks (in my eyes, and more importantly in the eyes of the owners) bad. It doesn't look like a forum where you can have mature discussions. (not saying that you cannot, saying that it looks like you cannot).

[st33med]

Originally Posted by ssandra

Based on the recent thread about "being offended by swearing", I'd say no. Most people aren't mature enough to handle that.
That thread derailed into people just throwing out as many swear words as possible in a single post, instead of a mature discussion about swearing and being offended...

And besides that, a forum where there are a lot of swear words looks (in my eyes, and more importantly in the eyes of the owners) bad. It doesn't look like a forum where you can have mature discussions. (not saying that you cannot, saying that it looks like you cannot).

I just thought of that as well. I agree.

[MidasGirl]

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

You missed the tea party! Without really missing it, at the same time.

Yes I did, and I really wanted to see my friend Sarah, but next time....

[MidasGirl]

Originally Posted by st33med

Anyway to disable that censor? I believe we are mature enough to handle cursing!

In all fairness, swearing is one of those things that are easily abused by trolls or people having a bad day. So even though personally I can handle it, it does feel negative to me when over-used. And really, this place still does not censor some basic curse words. For example, not sure while I can say ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ but if I remove the bull then the system censors it.

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by MidasGirl

In all fairness, swearing is one of those things that are easily abused by trolls or people having a bad day. So even though personally I can handle it, it does feel negative to me when over-used. And really, this place still does not censor some basic curse words. For example, not sure while I can say ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ but if I remove the bull then the system censors it.

Exactly. And if it is really needed to use a certain word in a certain way... there are ways around it that everybody knows and everybody uses...

[James81]

Originally Posted by ssandra

Exactly. And if it is really needed to use a certain word in a certain way... there are ways around it that everybody knows and everybody uses...

I was actually warned by a mod not to circumvent the filter like this, because I was infamous in using the word "****" (censored, of course, but it rhymes with "spit") and replacing the "i" with a "1".

[James81]

The funny thing about cussing is, we make the whole thing up. LOL

For example, I bet none of the current mod staff would have little problem with me saying the words "wanker" or "tosser." But in Britain, I hear, those are highly offensive curse words.

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by James81

I was actually warned by a mod not to circumvent the filter like this, because I was infamous in using the word "****" (censored, of course, but it rhymes with "spit") and replacing the "i" with a "1".

Originally Posted by ssandra

Exactly. And if it is really needed to use a certain word in a certain way... there are ways around it that everybody knows and everybody uses...

[James81]

How do you determine which is needed and which is not?

Remembering, that I don't see cursing with the same negative connotations as most people do. Like, for instance, if I DID come to the CGW and hung out with peeps, I hope they aren't offended by cussing, because I do curse like a sailor.

[moonrambler]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Almost all the bans are for spamming. A very distant second is trolling and personal attacks.

This reminds me . . . members here might see bans on other really perfectly reasonable members . . . who turned out to be spamming. But you won't see the spam, because we nuked it. Yet if these people have done a little bit of posting first, those posts will often stay up, especially if others have quoted them and it's all part of a discussion.

[James81]

Originally Posted by moonrambler

This reminds me . . . members here might see bans on other really perfectly reasonable members . . . who turned out to be spamming. But you won't see the spam, because we nuked it. Yet if these people have done a little bit of posting first, those posts will often stay up, especially if others have quoted them and it's all part of a discussion.

Another forum I've been on has a ban log. It looks like it's a part of vbulletin or a vbulletin add-on or something.

It lists the user, the length of the ban, and the reason for the ban.

That's one possible way you could limit the questions of "why was a person banned?"

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by James81

How do you determine which is needed and which is not?

Common sense. Does the sentence still make sense if you leave out the "bad" word? Not needed.

Originally Posted by James81

Remembering, that I don't see cursing with the same negative connotations as most people do. Like, for instance, if I DID come to the CGW and hung out with peeps, I hope they aren't offended by cussing, because I do curse like a sailor.

Not offended by it personally. I do think (personally) it takes away some of the validity of a point of someone has to make it with a lot of swearing.. But that is just in discussions.

And you HAVE TO come to the CGW! Or at least to LV that weekend! You wanted to come anyway, so just go! Otherwise you cannot see both me and Angela with both 25 pounds less...

[James81]

Originally Posted by ssandra

Not offended by it personally. I do think (personally) it takes away some of the validity of a point of someone has to make it with a lot of swearing.. But that is just in discussions.

I tend to use it in more "humorous" ways.

Like, I get a huge charge out of adding "and ****" (spit)to the end of a list of things. (makes me laugh)

Like, I want to embrace love and peace and ****. Takes on a whole new "lighthearted" tone than lopping it off. And the astericks just make it lose it's panache.

BTW, I'm not complaining about it. Just expressing my opinion on it. I don't expect it to change, I just think it's so funny how people go "batty" over certain words.

Originally Posted by ssandra

And you HAVE TO come to the CGW! Or at least to LV that weekend! You wanted to come anyway, so just go! Otherwise you cannot see both me and Angela with both 25 pounds less...

I need to let go of a lot of resistance to make that happen. I should get to work on that.

[AaronB]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

This article should address all of these questions and more:
Free Speech in Online Communities: The Delusion of Entitlement

We're definitely tight on the moderation here. I think that's appropriate in a place where people discuss things like suicide, divorce, etc.

The mods and admins here get a whole different view of the forums than regular members do. Every week we do a lot to maintain a positive environment, including cleaning up the trash talk.

You'll virtually never see the posts that got someone banned (if that's why they got banned) because it's standard practice for the mods to nuke them. That way old threads can continue to provide good value for those who stumble upon them instead of being derailed with occasional flaming, trolling, marketing spam, etc. We also do this so we won't have people reporting the same posts repeatedly and more people feeding pointless drama, which would create more work for the mods.

If you prefer a forum where trolling is par for the course, there are plenty to choose from. But not this one.

Wow! I really really enjoyed reading that article! It's something that I've needed to read my whole life. It seems to address my main difficulty with reality, especially authority, which I have been fighting against my entire life. At this moment after reading that article I have a hard time remembering what I was so upset about. It's like a dysfunctional thought pattern just got its ass kicked. Which I GREATLY appreciate! Now that I don't remember what I was upset about I'll go on reading this thread in a completely different state of mind.

What I enjoy about Steve Pavlina's writing is that this guy seems really in touch with reality. There's very little pretense here. He doesn't have a foundation that's going to fall over in the next wind storm.

I've been fighting with this question for the last 20 years. It feels so good to not carry that around anymore. It's like I don't even remember who I am because that question has been such a big part of my entire life.

Thanks!!!!!
Aaron

Ps. If you ever recognize any other dysfunctional thought patters from me you can kick their asses too. I love that!!!!

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by AaronB

What I enjoy about Steve Pavlina's writing is that this guy seems really in touch with reality.

Seeing as he IS reality....

[elucidate]

Yes, I think I was just in a mood last night where I was thinking purely from my non-conformist side, and possibly just playing the devil's advocate a little...but I can see how it is important to keep the place looking good for newbies and any younger people that may visit and be a bit timid.

Not being a Mod myself, I cannot know what it is like or the amount of duties you have, so I have the luxury of not having to think about it from your point of view, until it is brought to my attention...as with your post Ssandra.

I also think that maybe some level of control is not necessarily a bad thing. Some rules make sense...though if people used their common sense in the first place, there'd be no need for the rules!

I just think that sometimes it seems like certain people get banned over relatively minor things (which I cannot know the full extent of or keep track of their personal histories as forum members, as you have to.) So, when I see that, it can seem like it is unfair.

I don't have personal low oppinions of the mods themselves, as I know they are doing their jobs...I just have issues with control...which are my issues, I know.

Originally Posted by ssandra

Just think of it... how would this forum look for a new visitor (who potentially could have a lot to share) if all those old posts would be kept up?

Personally, if it is someone who has made more then a few posts and there is a thread where they are using personal attacks and/or trolling I'll always warn them first.
Some people shape up to become pretty decent people (Hi James ). Others simply ignore me and get banned.

[elucidate]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

This article should address all of these questions and more:
Free Speech in Online Communities: The Delusion of Entitlement

I really enjoyed reading this, and it helped me gain more of an appreciation of things from your side of the fence Steve. I also enjoyed the humour you injected into it.

I also don't think that any of it is unreasonable at all.

I've wondered if the Mods get paid, and now knowing that they volunteer their time, it helps me gain a new respect for them.

[Weena]

Originally Posted by ssandra

Do people here really think that I of all people (and the other mods) would engage in an ego war?
That we would ban people simply because they have their own opinion?
That we would ban people because they "won't back down?"
That we won't listen to reason?
Or fairly warn people who make a mistake or get overheated in a debate?

Nope nope nope nope. I reckon the mods do a great job and certainly don't need people to agree with their own opinions. I have seen all of you many times not agreeing with ideas the exact same way other members can disagree on ideas. Like, I've never seen Moonrambler banning people because they don't buy free range eggs, right? Or Caren banning people because they send their kids to school .

I would actually like to slip a big THANK YOU to ALL the mods here for making it a (bit too) addictive place to come and discuss concepts. Hugs to all of you!

[AaronB]

I was just realizing the quality I perceived in Steve's article that woke me up. He spoke of structure without frustration.

For me growing up and my whole life it seems those who establish structure including family members or police officers or school officials always seemed to have a sense of frustration as they were disciplining or enforcing their structure. Somehow this resulted in me recognizing those "frustration" strings since I was very young, and constantly pulling on them. There has never been a happy enforcer. Or at least a not frustrated enforcer.

So for once I'm reading Steve's article, and he has his rules, his structure, and he doesn't feel the least bit bad about it. He feels very calm about the structure that he chose. Are his rules appropriate or not? I don't care. Even though he explains why rules are important. Big deal. I don't care why his rules are important to him. Everyone thinks their rules are important and could come up with a reason for them.

But he had another quality in there. A calmness. A stability. Boundaries that weren't taxing to him to enforce. He wasn't at the end of his rope. And so as I see a calm stability in the structure that he has created, my anger at structure vanishes. It's okay. It's his structure. Could it be better? Right now I don't feel like I care anymore.

Yesterday I was going out to eat and I drove by some flashing blue lights of police cars, and for the first time I had no emotional charge. I didn't care, and I didn't know why I didn't care. It just didn't show up for me. It wasn't until I just woke up this morning that I realized how Steve's article effected me, but the effect was just as much there (flashing blue lights don't set me off anymore) whether or not I recognized it's source.

Isn't that weird? Something can impact me in a huge way and I may not even realize why. But I'm just as released from the old pattern whether I recognize why or not. Until this morning I just assumed that it was Steve's really good explaining skills that made a difference And then I would tell everyone that rules are okay and if I ran into myself nothing I would have said to me would make a shred of difference because Steve's explanation of why rules are important is okay, but not life changing. It's just practical boring stuff you could find in any sociology course.

Edit: Why are police officers so unhappy? If Steve Pavlina were a cop he wouldn't be upset as he gave me a speeding ticket. He'd welcome me to speed again. Plenty more tickets where that came from. And then when I lost my temper and got out of the car (in real life cops HATE it when I do that... but I do it anyway...), he would laugh at me so hard as he took me to jail. His sides would probably be hurting.

[AaronB]

That something wrong happened here is completely irrelevant to enforcing a rule. I get this sense with authority that as they enforce a rule, that this should never have happened. This rule should never have been broken. And so they unhappily enforce it. Enforcing of rules has never bothered me. Not even a little bit. I have only been bothered by the unhappiness that goes along with the enforcement. The feeling that I should not be right here right now in whatever position I have managed to get myself into. I get angry at the rejection of who I am, but not the punishment. When I recognize that my anger is at rejection and I'm quite all right with punishment, I realize who am I to demand someone not reject me? Everyone has the right to reject me. You can get mad at me just for walking by your house without your consent if you wish. Who am I to say you shouldn't feel that way?

[carenkh]

You're hitting on one of the reasons we don't have rules in our house, we live by principles. (and not enforced principles) I suspect that one reason some of the enforcers are unhappy enforcing is because SO MANY rules are arbitrary. I've seen rules enforced when the rule made no sense at all, but whomever was in charge wouldn't budge because "that's our policy".

Also, some people get sucked into being in the seemingly more powerful position of enforcer, and they relish having power over others. Someone breaking the rule calls that power into question, because really, most rules can be broken, rules aren't powerful in and of themselves.

One reason why I enjoy moderating here is because the rules make sense; they're not arbitrary, they exist to keep this community functioning at top value. When I keep the purpose of the forum in mind, it makes moderating easy for me.

[AaronB]

Originally Posted by carenkh

You're hitting on one of the reasons we don't have rules in our house, we live by principles. (and not enforced principles) I suspect that one reason some of the enforcers are unhappy enforcing is because SO MANY rules are arbitrary. I've seen rules enforced when the rule made no sense at all, but whomever was in charge wouldn't budge because "that's our policy".

Also, some people get sucked into being in the seemingly more powerful position of enforcer, and they relish having power over others. Someone breaking the rule calls that power into question, because really, most rules can be broken, rules aren't powerful in and of themselves.

One reason why I enjoy moderating here is because the rules make sense; they're not arbitrary, they exist to keep this community functioning at top value. When I keep the purpose of the forum in mind, it makes moderating easy for me.

Aren't all rules and principals arbitrary? Of course they all have a reason from some perspective somewhere. But there doesn't really exist a fundamental set of rules. For me at the moment I like the idea of throwing all my principals in the dung heap, considering all rules to be completely arbitrary, taking the right and wrongness out of the whole thing, and seeing them simply as a description of expected responses to certain behavior. That's fine. Every person I meet seems to have a different rule set that they judge others by anyway. I'm not excluded. I judge people by my rules all the time, no matter how arbitrarily or unconsciously these rules were made up. It's habit. As I can allow anyone to respond in anyway, whether it's a rule written down on paper or a typical expected response, I'm free from evaluating whether their rule is appropriate or not. It doesn't matter. It's a rule, which means it's arbitrarily chosen to meet some arbitrary purpose that someone at sometime arbitrarily recognized as being significant to their happiness. Who cares why? Not my job.

[Andrew Brunelle]

I've often wondered why some people have gotten banned myself, but it is not up to me who gets banned. Secondly, as someone stated on the first page, most of the time, the posts that got the member banned were deleted due to them being way over the line, so who am I to judge who should get banned and who shouldn't when I don't see the real reason why they were banned?

As I am sure, these banned member have received multiple warnings from moderators, so I'm not going to feel sorry for those who got banned. They just couldn't help themselves from continuing in the violating behavior. That's just the way it is. I may be sometimes surprised when someone gets banned, but deep down I know there had to be a good reason for it.

[Dharma]

(I read the OP, skipped the rest, my comments ensue)
For a truly open 'smart people' forum you'd need moderators and coaches. The coaches would be to point out how someone who's pressurizing over some issue can move differently from within their state of pressurization and not into their normal forum behavior. In essence showing them how to choose differently while in an internal state of reaction.

This is real evolution that people need.

This piece of Self doesn't get worked on here (or anywhere else for that matter) because of the rules. Everyone must move from within the 'nice box' as defined by the forum rules. Yes, this gives you an inviting place for newbies and attracts healthy conversation. The flip-side is people don't learn to navigate outside their nice box or reactions. So you need to use the forum with this in mind.

And I'm not saying a forum would be an appropriate place to learn these things. Just sayin...

I am a true believer in the ignore list. Got 13 peeps on mine right now. If you choose not to read the same old stuff from person ABC or person ABC always sets you into reaction, ignore them. (though exploring reaction is a favorite of mine so I usually don't put people on for that ).

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Dharma

This piece of Self doesn't get worked on here (or anywhere else for that matter) because of the rules. Everyone must move from within the 'nice box' as defined by the forum rules.

That's not really my experience here -- but I do think not everyone sees the working on of that aspect. It's often done behind the scenes.

I am a true believer in the ignore list. Got 13 peeps on mine right now. If you choose not to read the same old stuff from person ABC or person ABC always sets you into reaction, ignore them. (though exploring reaction is a favorite of mine so I usually don't put people on for that ).

Are you avoiding dealing with your reaction to those 13 people, or are they all just noise, like the static channels on a tv? (I hope I'm not one of 'em!)

[AaronB]

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

As I am sure, these banned member have received multiple warnings from moderators, so I'm not going to feel sorry for those who got banned. They just couldn't help themselves from continuing in the violating behavior. That's just the way it is. I may be sometimes surprised when someone gets banned, but deep down I know there had to be a good reason for it.

Maybe they had multiple warnings. Maybe a moderator was having a bad day and just felt like taking a few people out. It doesn't seem that important. "Violating behavior" is like being Jewish and living in Nazi Germany. Yup, you are in violation of the "Do Not Be Jewish" rule. A rule that is no more or less legitimate than any other rule. If you continue violating this rule you will be tortured and killed. But don't say you weren't warned

Deep down it might make you feel good to know there is a good reason for it. Like deep down you could say Hitler had good reasons. That's fine and dandy and all, but it's still just an arbitrary expression that made sense at the time. If you cut to the chase, everyone behaves in a way that seems appropriate at the time. Some people make rules. Some people break rules. Some people follow rules. Neither are appropriate or inappropriate. Rules are external expressions of internal programming. Programming meaning any type of limitation imposed on expression in order to protect me from disturbing myself.

[Dharma]

Originally Posted by Angela

That's not really my experience here -- but I do think not everyone sees the working on of that aspect. It's often done behind the scenes.

Yes, it's not out there so everyone else can see examples of it.

Originally Posted by Angela

Are you avoiding dealing with your reaction to those 13 people, or are they all just noise, like the static channels on a tv? (I hope I'm not one of 'em!)

As I said in my post, I like the reaction ones, they give me stuff to work on. I ignore ones who offer nothing new, and as people have given them repeated insights into themselves, they are not open to receive this input. I don't need the background noise in the forum, but recognize I am slow to move on those subjects internally.

Originally Posted by Angela

(I hope I'm not one of 'em!)

No Angela, your posts are true love.