|
I am posting this here, instead of in the Forum proposals and questions thread, because creating a new topic allows me to add a poll. Of course, much of what I'm about to say relates to the issues currently being discussed in the Forum proposals and questions thread and I understand that the same discussion happening in two threads will cause confusion. I'll leave it up to the mods to decide what to do with this post, but I will be quite disappointed if there is no poll. One solution that I would be happy with would be to have a duplicate of this post in the Forum proposals and questions, and for all discussion to happen there, leaving this thread open exclusively for the poll (if responses could be blocked without preventing users from voting, then I suppose that would be ideal).
While the popularity of the idea is something that should certainly be taken into serious consideration, I do not believe that the majority should necessarily get their way. Many factors need to be considered, and this is just one of them.
I personally support the idea of a debate subforum, but only under certain conditions. I understand that last time controversial topics were allowed, it created a lot of hostility and was overwhelming for the mods. However, I believe that it's possible to design a system capable of handling, or minimising, the challenges presented by allowing such topics. The following points represent my attempt to design such a system, and these are one set of conditions under which I would support lifting the ban on controversial topics.
1. I think that allowing controversial topics can only work if such topics are confined to a special subforum. I will refer to this as the debate subforum.
2. I think that access to the subforum should be conditional. Certain people will prove themselves not capable of discussing sensitive issues without insulting others. While it should be seen as a last resort, removing someone's right to access this subforum might, in some cases be, necessary. I personally think that users should not be able to access the forum by default, but I also think that almost all standard users should be granted permission on request.
3. I think that we need at least two new mods to be assigned to this forum. I suggest that these new mods operate independently of the current mods, and that they should have no additional privileges outside of this subforum (no access to the moderator subforum, for example). If the debate subforum is created, I suggest that the new mods be chosen by some sort of democratic process. Current moderators would be welcome to moderate this subforum as well, but it don't think that it should be seen as their responsibility, and I personally would discourage it as much as possible.
4. I think that the new moderators should have the following tools available to them:
- grant and restrict access to the subforum
- lock and unlock topics in the subforum
- edit and delete posts made by others in the subforum
5. I think that there should be guidelines for appropriate moderator responses to various issues. The following is my attempt to create some rough guidelines. These will be refined and expanded on if the subforum is created.
- If a single user makes a post that contains valid points, but is slightly disrespectful and/or insulting, the moderator should either request that the user edit their post so that it reads as being less offensive, or edit the post themselves and send a respectful PM to the author explaining why their post was edited.
- If multiple users are making posts that contain valid points, but are slightly disrespectful and/or insulting, the moderator should lock the topic for a period of time (12, 24 or 48 hours, perhaps) and make a respectful post explaining why the topic was locked and when it will be unlocked. Sending the users involved a respectful PM might also be necessary.
- If a discussion becomes "messy" - that is, when recent posts contains a high proportion of fallacious arguments and/or poorly expressed, ambiguous arguments - the moderator should again lock the topic for a certain amount of time, explaining why, and when the topic will be unlocked. Again, respectful PMs to the involved might also be necessary.
- If a user makes a post that is highly insulting. The moderators should investigate what lead the user to make such an insulting post. The user will be temporarily banned while the investigation is carried out. If the incident appears unlikely to happen again, then the ban will be lifted, and if the incident was preventable, efforts to prevent such incidents in the future will be made. If the incident is likely to happen again, the user will be banned until they can convince mods that they will not post in the same manner again.
6. The following are what I think should be the key responsibilities of the new moderators in terms of their behaviour.
- I think that moderators should treat all users with the utmost respect, at all times - even when performing their duties - regardless of how the user has behaved towards others, or the moderator themself. In this way, the moderator is leading by example, which I believe is the most effective way of promoting almost anything.
- Moderators should make an effort to build a strong rapport with individual users and the debate subforum community. It is important that users feel comfortable approaching mods with any issues that they have. Every time a user tries to handle something on their own, the moderators should be questioning why this user didn't come to them about the issue first.
- Another idea that I'm quite keen on is making a rule that no discussion may contain all moderators. With at least one moderator absent from each discussion, users will have at least one mod who they can contact who is less likely to be emotionally involved in the discussion.
7. I personally think that any user that wishes to engage in the debate subforum should have the responsibility to read over a number of suggestions designed to help them navigate what it certainly going to be a challenging environment. I came up with the following list, but I'm not completely happy with it and I think it could be refined. I would welcome discussion on these if the debate subforum is eventually allowed.
- Try to familiarise yourself with the various logical fallacies. Accusing others of making fallacious arguments will often cause offense and is therefore rarely helpful, but it's a good idea to gain an understanding of them so that you're less likely to make them yourself. Apart from not being valid arguments, arguing with someone who constantly makes fallacious arguments can be very frustrating, and this frustration often turns into hostility. Everyone will make a fallacious argument every now and then, but those who make an effort to educate themselves will won't make them as often.
- Understand that while attacking a point of view is not (usually) a personal attack, it's very easy for such attacks to be taken personally by the people who hold them. As such, it's helpful to express your criticisms of ideas using the most sensitive language possible to avoid causing offense. As well as trying not to cause offense, we should also do our best not to take offense when sensitive language is not used by others.
- Whenever you feel that someone is has become personally invested in winning an argument, then I would personally recommend exiting the discussion. It's not worth arguing further as they are likely too biased to accept any points that you make, even if they are clearly valid.
- Effort should be made to detect when you, yourself are becoming personally invested in winning an argument. If you suspect that you have become personally involved, I would recommend taking a break from the discussion for a while. If you decide to return to the discussion, read over your own posts and apologise for anything that you regret saying, as well as any other mistakes that you may have made. That way you can start fresh.
- Understand that offending people will usually cause them to be blind to any valid points that you make and is therefore counter-productive.
- If you do have an issue with something that another user has said, or even if you suspect that a thread is heading in a bad direction, report it. Moderators have access to various tools that standard users do not have. You might be capable of dealing with an issue yourself, but moderators should be even better equipped.
Even if this system would work, it still should not be implemented unless there are clear advantages in doing so. One of the big advantages that I see is that I know for a fact that certain members of this forum are a wealth of information on certain topics. I believe that I, as well as many other users, have a lot to learn from them, but unfortunately, not allowing controversial topics restricts the ability of these users to share the wonderful pieces of knowledge that they have acquired. The other reason that I would like to see controversial topics allowed is because these topics actually matter. I think it's important for us to discuss and educate ourselves on these issues as they are central to the way we live our lives, and they will effect not just ourselves, but the people around us too.
Apologies for the length. I hope some of this was helpful.
(Wow, what a textwall! I really need to learn to format these things so they're a little easier on the eyes!)
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Login
