This Forum Doesn’t Need Moderators

[Elliott]

18 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@Elliott Your theory on how this site would function with zero moderation, and your projection of your own bad boundaries around acceptable behaviour, are combining to perpetuate a delusion.

Overall, as a person and not just a moderator, I worry about you.

You can perceive this as an attack, but I assure you it isn't. You don't even have to care. 

Because you don't understand what's being discussed, you keep on going on about emptying, we're talking about how dialogue is moderated. I'm not suggesting we'll be nicer if we're unmoderated, that's your delusion, fake niceties are unnecessary and impediments. The reactions you're seeing in this thread alone highlight the lack of basic social understanding as kindergarteners say "words will never hurt me", in an "advanced" forum lol. Yes it's generally immature to name call, but what happens in public when someone calls you a name, you call the police?

Edited 1 hour ago by Elliott

[Natasha Tori Maru]

12 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

The good parts might get buried sometimes, but they would also resurface. I think freedom always brings both destruction and creation. Rules make people behave like robots.

I don't mean to be rude - but this could be a 'you' thing also. Rules are there for a reason - but they can always be bent and broken. The whole gig of moderating is flirting with this grey area (for me anyway). You could ask @Leo Gura for his opinion. Ultimately as much as we would love for this to be a democracy - Leo gets to call all shots. And he can break or make any rule he sees fit. We just arbiter them with best judgement. You could always ask Leo what he looks for. Dunno!

8 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Because you don't understand what's being discussed, you keep on going on about emptying, we're talking about how dialogue is moderated. I'm not suggesting we'll be nicer if we're unmoderated, that's your delusion, fake niceties are unnecessary and impediments.

I mentioned emptying as a possible way to incorporate @Monster Energy's idea. I did not 'keep talking about' emptying. And this does not mean I missed the point. You have no idea what I understood as to what you are talking about. Non-acknowledgment doesn't mean what you think it means. But you are wrong in your assessments of what I quoted.

Take care.

Edited 1 hour ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Elliott]

We're just having a discussion, it's not like we're rioting. Jesus

 

Monster Energy trying to have a philosohpical discussion

 

 

What the moderators feel he's saying

Edited 1 hour ago by Elliott

[Monster Energy]

9 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I don't mean to be rude - but this could be a 'you' thing also. Rules are there for a reason - but they can always be bent and broken. The whole gig of moderating is flirting with this grey area (for me anyway). You could ask @Leo Gura for his opinion. Ultimately as much as we would love for this to be a democracy - Leo gets to call all shots. And he can break or make any rule he sees fit. We just arbiter them with best judgement. You could always ask Leo what he looks for. Dunno!

 

I appreciate that you actually took the time to listen and respond. You’ve been fair with me and I respect that. I’ve listened to your perspective too. At the end of the day we’ll probably just have to agree to disagree. And of course I understand that Leo ultimately decides since it’s his forum.

 

[Monster Energy]

@Elliott 

I thank you for backing me up

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Monster Energy

[Natasha Tori Maru]

4 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

I appreciate that you actually took the time to listen and respond. You’ve been fair with me and I respect that. I’ve listened to your perspective too. At the end of the day we’ll probably just have to agree to disagree. And of course I understand that Leo ultimately decides since it’s his forum.

Its all G  

I learned a while ago when in brainstorming or design meetings at work that shooting someone's idea down isn't good. It can polarise them against you, or just demoralize em'. It is much better to try to find a way to make it work with adjustments or proposals and build from there. The best ideas always form this way.

Of course there are times when a total slap-down happens - usually when there is some rudeness or impolite shit necessitating boundaries being drawn in how the idea is expressed - but that is different entirely. Or when the idea is really not grounded in reality and totally unfeasible. Occasionally it is also difficult to address an idea that is so so wrong it isn't worth the time going into just how many which ways it is crazy!

I haven't ever seen any sort of problematic stuff from you anyway, fwiw. Just the AI use, but that is totally different to this discussion.

[integral]

1 hour ago, Monster Energy said:

The good parts might get buried sometimes, but they would also resurface. I think freedom always brings both destruction and creation. Rules make people behave like robots.

I have the freedom to kill, rape and keep you as my pet in my basement. 

So we create a rule against this.

This causes the benefit of being able to walk down the street with relative safety. 

One rule creates the freedom to walk outside.

Rules CREATE freedom.