Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

Ambiguity in mod rules and decisions

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
7/19/2022 1:29:09 AMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
7/19/2022 1:28:25 AMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
7/19/2022 1:27:52 AMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
7/19/2022 1:27:26 AMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
7/19/2022 1:25:04 AMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
7/19/2022 1:22:07 AMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
Before After
1 Even putting aside the point TinySpider quoted about evasion of too-rigid rules, I don't think it is feasible to write a set of rules which will unambiguously set out what is and is not permissible in verbal conduct. Even in a formal legal context, where many professionals over the years have spent their life's work on laying out the rules, cases are still decided by the judgement of juries and judges. We are hardly going to improve, or even match, the thoroughness and rigor of the entire legal profession. 1 Even putting aside the point TinySpider quoted about evasion of too-rigid rules, I don't think it is feasible to write a set of rules which will unambiguously set out what is and is not permissible in verbal conduct. Even in a formal legal context, where many professionals over the years have spent their life's work on laying out the rules, cases are still decided by the judgement of juries and judges. We are hardly going to improve, or even match, the thoroughness and rigor of the entire legal profession.
2 \n 2 \n
3 That having been said, in grey areas of the Code of Conduct such as "just how much foul language are you allowed to get away with", the moderators do make an effort to have conversations with people, and issue informal and formal warnings, before escalating to mutes and bans. 3 That having been said, in grey areas of the Code of Conduct such as "just how much foul language are you allowed to get away with", the moderators do make an effort to have conversations with people, and issue informal and formal warnings, before escalating to mutes and bans.
4 \n 4 \n
5 To take a concrete example, I know that both myself and other moderators have interacted along these lines with @Jadem several times before the current ban. I get that it's not laid out unambiguously in the Code of Conduct, but I think that we had made it pretty unambiguous and clear in direct conversations that calling people "cunts" on the regular is a problem. 5 To take a concrete example, I know that both myself and other moderators have interacted along these lines with @Jadem several times before the current ban. I get that it's not laid out unambiguously in the Code of Conduct, but I think that we had made it pretty unambiguous and clear in direct conversations that, for example, calling people "cunts" on the regular is a problem.
6 \n 6 \n
7 Personally I think we are all better off with the moderators having those kind of conversations with people directly, rather than lawyer-esque wrangling over the exact wording of a (necessarily much larger) Code of Conduct that is probably *still* ambiguous. 7 Personally I think we are all better off with the moderators having those kind of conversations with people directly, rather than lawyer-esque wrangling over the exact wording of a (necessarily much larger) Code of Conduct that is probably *still* ambiguous.