Forum moderation policy

[Horkabork]

<--- I'd like to be able to see the date someone signed up, without having to visit their profile page.

I don't think this forum needs registration date elitism. People already have enough excuses to insult and fallaciously disregard other people's arguments. We don't need people to think that the points of idiots are more valid or truthful just because they've been her awhile and we don't need people to think that new people are idiots and their opinions shouldn't be acknowledged just because they're new.

Jesus. This forum is scaring me. Usually, I'm the wackadoo on any particular forum, but lately I've been reluctant to post because I've been out-crazied. You know that you're insane when you see a hobo with crap-ridden pants backing away from you slowly.

Also, anyone who is ragging about free speech and censorship needs to understand that those principles don't apply in internet forums any more than they apply to me if I take a sharpie to your apartment walls. Those are governmental concepts. This forum is not run by the government. You have no right to free speech here only so much as they can't censor based on a user's characteristic of being part of a special group (E.G., you can censor me for being gay if I'm posting about bitcoins within guidelines that apply to non-gays).

This isn't even specifically about moderating offensiveness or spam, but relevance. Deleting someone's thread that says "Sell sell sell" is no different, in terms of free speech, from deleting a thread I might make featuring the entirety of the amino acid sequences for trypsin family proteases compared between various key animals so we might talk about concerted evolution with nary a mention of bitcoins.

[Alex Beckenham]

<--- I'd like to be able to see the date someone signed up, without having to visit their profile page.

I don't think this forum needs registration date elitism.

I agree. I was just thinking it would have been handy for that time I gave away coins to newbies about a week ago and had to make sure people weren't suddenly signing up multiple times to the forum just to get in on the giveaway. I had to click through to each member's profile page to check.

[bitcoinminer]

unemployed, part of free speech means you get to choose where to speak, meaning, somewhere else if you wish

[unemployed]

unemployed, part of free speech means you get to choose where to speak, meaning, somewhere else if you wish

Same to you.

[£]

1. Free speech - you can say anything as long as it is relevant and presented in a calm and polite manner. Swearing, SHOUTING etc. make your post more likely to be removed.

2. No zero value posts or threads, like "SELL SELL SELL"

3. No pointless or uninteresting threads.

4. No referral code spam

5. No NSFW content


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


These all sound reasonable to me, harmful but reasonable, number 1 is the most likely to be harmful to building the character of a robust community.

I can see any number of posts that would be worthwhile and add to the character of this forum (to any forum) yet would fall foul of many of these caveats.

For instance swearing is so culturally divisive that what might be seen as a genuine transgression by one person is simply humor (or more precisely 'humour') to another. From personal experience I know that - for example - Americans are can be offended by language that people from the UK are indifferent to, or even see as endearing, what to one person imbues a post with spirit and character to another renders it offensive.

But of course nobody wants to have to 'listen' to someone hurling unnecessary and unwarranted abuse at another poster, so there is a real need to keep a check on this kind of thing, at least to some degree.

I suggest you make a distinction between swearing per se and ad hominem, for example here are two examples . . .

A) Oh, for fuck's sake I can't believe they've increased their fucking charges for THE SECOND TIME in a freaking month! This is really starting to piss me off, they are just going to drive business elsewhere . . . (and so on)

B) It's clueless people like you who think you know it all, running around like some kind of genius telling everyone who will listen how great you think you are. Yet time after time you get it wrong and end up with the whole forum laughing at the sorry spectacle you have become, mostly through your own stupidity . . . (and so on)

. . . example A contains swearing yet is (to these ears at least) not in the least bit offensive, example B is pure ad hominem, likely to elicit a similar response and is corrosive to the conversation.

If on the other hand there is simply going to be a list of censored words then why not just use the BB software to track and change them, much like a US religious forum, so 'shit' becomes 'poopy' - and 'no fucking way!' becomes 'no damn way'.

Personally I think this kind of thing is a move in the wrong direction, I am a member of a cycling forum in the UK that has zero moderation and the tone and sense of community is something even the best drawn up list of rules could not come close to, the forum has grown from nothing to 50,000 + and suffers none of the problems lists of rules like these seek to address.

It's fucking great !

 

[unemployed]

What happened to my thread "how to send many emails"? It was full of useful information related to bitcoin. Is this how free speech looks on this forum??

[Alex Beckenham]

Is this how free speech looks on this forum??

Ask Horkabork:

[The] principles [of free speech and censorship] don't apply in internet forums...

I agree forums (and servers) are private property and it's perfectly reasonable for the owners of such to impose whatever rules they feel like it. Then we as members are free to comply or simply leave.

[TradersEdgeDice]

Okay…

No "moderators for life".  Moderators -even the ones responsible for maintaining the site- are required step back and let the current "Congress" handle things.

That way, we have citizen moderators.  Unlike cesspools like slashdot, becoming a moderator is not a lucky break that lasts for all of 5 minutes.  If someone is invited to be a moderator, they've already met certain thresholds and maybe placement on the OTC web of trust.

This is a site about monetary philosophy, after all.  If you have no contribution to the economic activity of bitcoin, it might reveal a deficiency in the requirements of moderating for a few days.

You guys need the help and you cannot afford to either burnout or burnout random forum members. Use the spirit of volunteerism that is already here.

There should be a way for removed postings to be meta moderated.  A sort of appeal process.

Anyway, that's my two bitcents.

[unemployed]

Is this how free speech looks on this forum??

Ask Horkabork:

[The] principles [of free speech and censorship] don't apply in internet forums...

I agree forums (and servers) are private property and it's perfectly reasonable for the owners of such to impose whatever rules they feel like it. Then we as members are free to comply or simply leave.

Well, the previous rules were nearly unlimited free speech. Things were put in FAQs like "some users here have prickly shells, but we've grown to love them". Now it changed overnight. Sure, everyone is free to leave this forum (and in effect leave bitcoin, because bitcoin is very linked to this forum). But it is unfair to mislead people so grossly. One day the biggest bitcoin forum is advertised as free speech, the next day there is no free speech.
First the whole bitcoin is advertised as a libertarian currency in global media, then it quickly changes, because some early adopters from the United States want to safely cash out. If bitcoin is something different than everyone thinks, maybe you all should advertise it as another Facebook Credits or another World of Warcraft coins, or Second Life money, and stop misleading people and wasting people' time.

[dennis_sweden]

There is definately a lot of ranting going on that would not be suitable for work, which is being allowed. However, as long as it doesn't step into a degenerating personal abuse sphere, it's just silly and impracticible to moderate it constantly. The real danger is, as many have pointed out, nr 3 "pointless or uninteresting threads". No-one can impose their conception of pointless and uninteresting upon others; and if a thread is pointless and uninteresting it will quickly disappear, unless some "pointless and uninteresting" people continue such a debate. It would be much better to state clearly what kind of topics are off-limit (i.e. subjects that belong in other sub-forums) and allow a free debate as long as degenerating abuse is prohibited.

[Amechan]

Is this how free speech looks on this forum??

Ask Horkabork:

[The] principles [of free speech and censorship] don't apply in internet forums...

I agree forums (and servers) are private property and it's perfectly reasonable for the owners of such to impose whatever rules they feel like it. Then we as members are free to comply or simply leave.

Well, the previous rules were nearly unlimited free speech. Things were put in FAQs like "some users here have prickly shells, but we've grown to love them". Now it changed overnight. Sure, everyone is free to leave this forum (and in effect leave bitcoin, because bitcoin is very linked to this forum). But it is unfair to mislead people so grossly. One day the biggest bitcoin forum is advertised as free speech, the next day there is no free speech.
First the whole bitcoin is advertised as a libertarian currency in global media, then it quickly changes, because some early adopters from the United States want to safely cash out. If bitcoin is something different than everyone thinks, maybe you all should advertise it as another Facebook Credits or another World of Warcraft coins, or Second Life money, and stop misleading people and wasting people' time.

I agree with everything you have said so far. "useless" posts would very much be decided based on opinion. If there is going to be moderation, I would say limit it to the MOVING of posts to off topic and what not. Perhaps even make a "trash bin" where all the sailor mouthed people can hang out and throw fecal matter at each other. Seeing as this is an international community and there is no way to satisfy everyones sense of morals due to differences in culture/religion/age/upbringing etc, my vote is that ALL posts may not be deleted and only moved.

[£]

- - -

[makomk]

"zero-value" "entertaining" "pointless" "uninteresting"  
All these words are opinion based. they do for the forum what the term "terrorist" did for america. I agree, honest is best, remove "free speech" from the list.

I have an uncomfortable feeling that's the entire point of this exercise, though :-(. We've already had one thread closed because "The valuable posts in this thread occurred in the first three pages, the quality of posts have declined since.", where not valuable seems to mean posts questioning MagicalTux's story. Meanwhile other users have got away with tediously repetitive claims that the person whose 500,000-bitcoins were sold must've been plotting to undermine the market, copy-and-pasted multiple times in bright colours in the same thread.

[The] principles [of free speech and censorship] don't apply in internet forums...

There's no constitutional requirement for free speech in forums, but the principles are still important in some form if you want a workable forum. While forum moderators may technically have the right to moderate arbitrarily, it's basically impossible to have a meaningful discussion or trust the forum threads to actually represent the opinions of the users in any way whatsoever if they abuse this. Worse still it's impossible to tell when they are abusing it as an outsider, so at the slightest whiff of dubious moderation you basically have to assume all discussions are tainted.

[oneforall]

The rumor is that the guys over at www.bitcoinforums.net agree to not censor/delete posts or lock conversations. That would be what free speech is. not this "Say what we like and don't speak ill of our friends" free speech crap.

[MoonShadow]

The rumor is that the guys over at www.bitcoinforums.net agree to not censor/delete posts or lock conversations. That would be what free speech is. not this "Say what we like and don't speak ill of our friends" free speech crap.

I'm sure they would be happy to have all this gainful conversation.

[JohnDoe]

The sole purpose of this forum is to further the Bitcoin agenda. Free speech has a lower priority so it should be ignored by moderators when it works against the primary goal.

[rebuilder]

I don't mind moderation, when done in, well, moderation. I do mind when I cant judge whether the mods are doing their jobs well or not. I can't judge for myself if I agree a thread was out of line if it's been deleted.

Mods, if you feel you need to shut a thread down, why not just lock it? Some other forums feature a "trash bin" section where "deleted" threads go, still available to read, but not cluttering the main forums. Maybe this would be something to look into here?

Can anyone give a good reason why deleting a thread would be preferable to just locking it, absent legal reasons and other force majeure?

[giszmo]

while i'm always pro transparency i see it's the right of the owners of this forum to delete as many posts as they want. you are free to leave. in fact i hope there will grow competition as with just one forum only, there is quite some power to manipulate the market by just randomly going offline.

[£]

Heh, I would be glad for bitcoinforums.net to get ALL the trolls, spammers, and ideologues that this forum is overrun with.  If that is in fact their policy, they will soon be swimming in an ocean of deep shi...erm, feces (much like this forum of late).  Thank goodness the moderators here have decided to step up and...well, MODERATE.  After hanging around this place for a while, I was beginning to wonder if the title "Moderator" actually meant anything on bitcoin.org.

Oddly those who are most vocal in their support for the new policy ('I support the new policy 100%.") seem to be the ones most casually in breach of the new policy.

Section one asks us to keep our posts calm and polite, but here we see people who are against these new rules labeled as 'ideologues' and dumped in the same bucket as 'trolls' and 'spammers' - and are invited to go elsewhere and swim in an ocean of shit.

If you are in support of the new policy "100%" how do you square your use of 'shouting' (capitalized text) when it's clearly discouraged by the new policy ?

To be honest I am not looking for an answer, my question is rhetorical, (it's not even aimed at you in particular), I am just making the point that even during the early birth pangs of this new policy those most supportive of it are already in breach of it.

Add in a moderator (not now perhaps, but in 6 months or 2 years) who you end up in disagreement with and you, yourself, might find your posts deleted as you have already met the criteria.

[rebuilder]

while i'm always pro transparency i see it's the right of the owners of this forum to delete as many posts as they want. you are free to leave. in fact i hope there will grow competition as with just one forum only, there is quite some power to manipulate the market by just randomly going offline.

I don't understand why this argument keeps coming up. Yes, of course it is their right to do what they please. I don't think wanton despotism is anyone's goal here, though. I'd like to discuss things instead of just having a hissy fit and leaving. Isn't that what forums are for - discussion?