Comment on [deleted]

jordanlund@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• Enkers@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Generally it’s not allowed to have meta posts about the way things are run or the moderators.

  That seems to me like an incredibly bad policy decision, in general. If there are legitimate meta/moderation issues, it’s important to be able to address them in a proactive manner. Banning that sort of discussion outright is going to lead to problems in the long run, as you’ll be making a pressure cooker with no outlet.

  If there’s maybe a concern that meta content might displace other content, you could always designate a specific day for meta discussions.

  source

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Well, there are two fields of thought on moderation…

    One is that it should be invisible. It happens, but nobody knows how or why. Like pruning a garden… You never see it happening, you just know the end result is beautiful.

    I’m in 100% the polar opposite camp in that I believe in transparency. If some post or comment is bad enough to remove, everyone is going to know why. If something is reported for bullshit reasons, I’ll keep it, and tell everyone why they can stop reporting it.

    This paints a target on my back and I’ve picked up stalkers because of that who then go on to post meta posts attacking me or the other mods, which then causes them to get permanently banned because other mods and site admins a) don’t have time for that kind of crap and b) have an entire back channel for communication where we share notes on users who are abusing the system, making sure they get banned.

    source

    • Blaze@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I’m in 100% the polar opposite camp in that I believe in transparency. If some post or comment is bad enough to remove, everyone is going to know why. If something is reported for bullshit reasons, I’ll keep it, and tell everyone why they can stop reporting it.

      Seems reasonable

      source
• otter@lemmy.ca ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I’m moderating a handful of communities, and I’ve done so on Reddit for a long while as well.

  It’s generally not a good practice to stop people from discussing how things are run. If the criticism is unfounded, the mods or users can reply with why. If the criticism is valid, then it’s a good way to improve the community. What people don’t like is when mods use their power to remove criticism

  Some cases where it might be ok to remove the posts might be

  • the user is posting in bad faith and breaking some other rule (ex. complaints about the removal of rule breaking content, or if content in the meta post is hateful, etc.)
  • the subreddit has very strict post format rules. In this case, there should be some other way to talk about the issues, such as regular meta threads or a separate meta community

  In this case, I don’t think removing the post helped much. It was a low stakes discussion and the movie/TV communities on here are already very small.

  It might be nice now if the mod leaves a comment about why the other post was removed, and what they’d suggest instead

  source

  • Blaze@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Hello,

    Good to see you here, thank you for your insight.

    source
• DoctorButts@kbin.melroy.org ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Generally it's not allowed to have meta posts about the way things are run or the moderators.

  This is a horrible policy.

  source

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Well, there are two fields of thought on moderation…

    One is that it should be invisible. It happens, but nobody knows how or why. Like pruning a garden… You never see it happening, you just know the end result is beautiful.

    I’m in 100% the polar opposite camp in that I believe in transparency. If some post or comment is bad enough to remove, everyone is going to know why. If something is reported for bullshit reasons, I’ll keep it, and tell everyone why they can stop reporting it.

    This paints a target on my back and I’ve picked up stalkers because of that who then go on to post meta posts attacking me or the other mods, which then causes them to get permanently banned because other mods and site admins a) don’t have time for that kind of crap and b) have an entire back channel for communication where we share notes on users who are abusing the system, making sure they get banned.

    source
• maegul@lemmy.ml ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Yea, while I’m not sure I agree with that as a policy, I can see it making sense.

  But this isn’t Reddit. We’re much smaller, and frankly, should be thankful that people are here and posting. So long as a post isn’t way off topic, or obviously toxic or of a kind that is known to bother the community members, honestly, at this stage of things, mods have no business removing posts.

  I can see exceptions to this for communities that have rather specific purposes, but for anything that’s a discussion community intended to be driven by its users, come on, let the users discuss!!

  source
• Blaze@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Hello,

  I recognize you from !comicbooks@lemmy.world, good to see you here!

  I see where you come from, but in this case, it seems a bit strange as the whole idea of the thread is to discuss who the community wants to address that issue. Some people might think the first option is the best, some other people might prefer the second one. There is only so many of us here, so I guess it’s better to find a consensus together instead of having half of the people going in opposite directions. The discussions were actually quite interesting.

  Also, historically, this community was created when !moviesandtv@lemmy.film when down with its instance. We were a few members wanting to create this one, so it came from a group effort rather than one person initiative.

  source

  • inlandempire@jlai.lu ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Aaaaaaaa they’re censoring my third option 👿

    source

    • Blaze@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      For history

      Image

      source
    • GroteStreet@aussie.zone ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I don’t see what’s so confusing… We’re not allowed to discuss how discussions should be handled. But looking at how this thread is still up, we are allowed to discuss the removal of those discussions discussing how to discuss things 🙃

      source

      • Blaze@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        How silly of me 😄

        source
  • maegul@lemmy.ml ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    We were a few members wanting to create this one, so it came from a group effort rather than one person initiative.

    Yea, just for sanity’s sake, I’d always thought there should be more than one mod. I figured you didn’t want to do it … ? Still, at this stage, all of this is a group effort and so some form of meta discussion really should be allowed more.

    source

    • Blaze@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I figured you didn’t want to do it … ?

      Actually, at first I was, then I needed to take a week-end off, so I announced it to the other mod (just for them to know), which removed me as a mod completely (see the modlog). I asked to become a mod again, but to no avail. I didn’t bring this up before because the community seemed to be doing well, but now it’s a different story.

      source

      • maegul@lemmy.ml ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Riiiiggghhhtt. Ugh. Without knowing their reasons, I I can’t help but really wish mods wouldn’t think a community belongs to them.

        Otherwise, I don’t know what to say.

        At the risk of jumping the gun … there’s still movies at lemm.ee?

        source

        • -> View More Comments