I feel like the mute player and mute thread options are all the moderation we really need.

This is weird to read. I hvae remuted krellin and maple is on permanent mute as there is nothing redeemable in him. So it makes for an interesting conversation.

here's the problem with thucy's method:

Everyone would agree not to interact with that person, something on the list gets posted, it cheeses off one person, they go and respond, then the thread gets full of people defending the "victim", or bitching that they shouldn't respond (even though they are making it worse by responding), and the discussion devolves into a shitstorm.

Why do I know this will happen? Cause every damn person on the site knows how not to feed the trolls, yet half this forum is trolls with 100+ replies.

The only way self moderation would truly work is for every member to upvote and downvote forum posts. But, as krellin has said, this could cause corruption of the majority. Because if 80% of the members are pro-scub, and 20% are anti-scub, any anti-scub post will get downvoted along with stuff like ethnic slurs. Corruption.

The one thing I want to avoid is scaring away new players because our forum resembles 4chan. Kestas's idea (from my understanding) was to give people tools to mute the idiots... the problem is, most new users have to deal with EVERYTHING before even understanding how muting works. So it isn't tough for a new user to come on, see the ethnic slurs and personal attacks on the forum and decide this isn't the place for them.

I suspect one of 3 things happening, from most likely to least likely:
1.) The forum becomes a discussion of diplomacy related subjects, only.
2.) The forum becomes heavily moderated, which everyone will hate (because heavy moderation is biased and a lot of 'gray area' calls)
3.) The forum devolves into 4chan
4.) The forum cleans itself up on its own

Those are my thoughts.

(BTW - I misspelled skub):
http://pbfcomics.com/20/

"But, as krellin has said, this could cause corruption of the majority."

I'm not so sure. I would upvote items that interest or challenge me, even if they offend me.

The only way they'd get downvoted is if they are a waste of time.

though I suppose that's the way youtube is "supposed" to work, and yet idiots downvote highly entertaining things just because they disagree with the message.

"This is weird to read. I hvae remuted krellin and maple is on permanent mute as there is nothing redeemable in him. So it makes for an interesting conversation."

How is it any different from normal though?

LOL! Well, the replies to krellin and maple don't quote them so one has to either hit ESC as the page loads to read the original or just scratch their head and wonder what the hell they said this time. :-)

@ abge, thank you for directly addressing this topic. I don't have a clear answer, but I like Knox's # 4. Semck, good points, well taken.

I would certainly be sad to see knox's #1. I'd probably drift away from the site, because I'd never get to know anybody (playing diplomacy is fun, but talking about it all the time? Yuck!) and thus would not get enticed into further games.

Oh, and one other thing -- knox makes a good point. Why not make it clearer, in the introductory email or something, say, that the community has a strong tradition of self-moderation, but one might want to use mute heavily if one is offended?

You are just as likely to lose new players by them receiving abusive messages directly from other players for reasons such as 'they didn't follow website etiquette' when playing gumboat games.
Maybe you can ask people to agree to a general code of conduct requiring them to act with a bit more class and maturity and ask them to take their hate and their bile to Facebook.

"What would be nice is if we could all be a little nicer to each other."

I am just proposing a kind of honor code document that *has been proven* to make this actually happen more than it would have.

This code would totally voluntary to sign, and once signed, voluntary to follow. It would never get out of hand because, well, I think people would stop supporting it if it did.

Just basically a bit of expounding on "be a decent person, and ignore people who aren't."

I'm willing to just do it myself and invite others to join.

I like the voluntary part.

If it's not voluntary then the "self" part of moderation evaporates lol.

I can think of a few other quick options
1. Everyone on the site is given a button on their profile with a counter set at some number, 10, 15 whatever. You can go on anyone's profile and vote. If their counter reaches 10 they are muted for a day, every post/thread/comment. Yes I realize the problem of abuse so there would have to be some way for the mods to remove other members voting option if they repeatedly voted for no reason.

Option 2: Some person continuously trolls the forum, the mods receive complaints, other members whine about this person. At the point where the mods become fed up they make a new thread titled "Permanently mute XXXX?" Vote yes or no, leave said thread open for a week. If there are more yes votes then no, then permanently mute said person. Maybe give them a second chance in a month or so if they promise to stop trolling. This option would be a measure less sever then banning, but still a rarity.

Option 3: Kidnap annoying trolls and drop them in the congo...this option is a joke.

Not that this will get through because he has me muted but...

@Mujus - Reducing the extremely vile communication isn't going to eliminate the use of swear words. Most of us agree the hate speech has to go, but the use of words like fucktard and calling people fucking idiots will still remain. So you are still going to see shit your overreactive hypersensitive self will be forced to mute.

Option 2 is bad because it's a popularity contest and also idk it just seems harsh.

Option 3 should be less a joke, more reality.

Also, Thucy would be the first to go with option 2 and option 3. Wait, mods can be muted by admin, right? ;)

zultar's can be banned by thucy.

that i'm sure of.

^ Um... Not without reason or a willingness to face the consequences of their rash decision. :-)

Considering the witch hunts that would arise in the past against "cheaters" based on no evidence at all, I cannot support solutions that allow individual members to directly affect another player's account.

Draug

I don't afraid of anything.

Witch hunts? Which hunts?

lol. no but for real abge what do you mean directly affecting other players' accounts?

@Thucy

Systems where people could vote to silence a player. I think those would end in disaster.

Also, I don't think mods should ever be forced to enact a decision voted on by the public at large. Mod discretion is important.

Oh yeah definitely they would.

I think we just have to work a little harder at actually making "self-moderation" mean something other than "non-moderated". If you feel where I'm coming from.

You know....thre are rules on this site, one of which is "NO CHEATING ACCUSATIONS IN FORUMS"....Which individuals like Draugnar violate REPEATEDLY, even to the extent of accusing MODS of cheating...and Draugnar isn't yet banned. So...until we can follow the PUBLISHED rules, isn't this conversation, again, a little ridiculous?

TC doesn't post nearly as much as he used to. Why? He muted everyone, and everyone muted him...and maybe he got tired of it. Like all things, the hostility of threads goes up and down, ebbs and flows...in part this happens in pace WITH SOCIETY and the issues on the public's mind. I think this is s A GOOD THING...

When I *first* started playing on this site, I can not tell you how many times I read threads that were overflowing with brutal, anti-Semitic HATRED. It was like a bunch of neo-Nazis had been let loose on this site....it repulsed me...and yet I stayed. Maybe some of the vile manners that some display is because they see it, and they feel free here to sometimes fly off the handle and vent, knowing that this is a site about truly having free discussions, where so often there is truly no other place where these discussions can be had.

Does that mean "hate speech" (whatever that is...I'm still waiting for a definition. a *word* is not hate speech...hate to tell you that...).

Anyway...I'm just saying...

Forgot to finish my thoughts...
Anyway....if you can't handle "hate speech" from some anonymous forum post....then I kind of pity you in real life, which is *full* of hate, whether you like it or not...Maybe this is just a good training ground for people to grow a little thicker skin, and learn to deal with reality, with the real thoughts of real people in the world around you instead of being so naive as to think you can "clean things up" and live in some thought-controlled Utopia...

We do have kind of a creepy neo-Nazi thing going on.

Maybe that's just the whole internet I don't know.

e.g. SSREICHSFUHRER

Hell, I'll one up your, Thucy....there is a poster on here with the name "NigeeBaby" Please do NOT for one second suggest that that was not intended to evoke a certain "hate" word....