Moderation: Too much or too little?

[SC_Hoaty]

In the social forums...who cares....

 

[ScubaSteve]

OK, I am out. I'll try to not continue to derail the thread. I've said my piece. Sorry for the side bar folks.

 

[DebbyDiver]

I wasn't raised in a bubble honest, I took it to be a light hearted joke, like 'tomfoolery" or being silly but in a harmless way or something, is it nasty?

I've seen it used to insult someone's intelligence, or at least that's how I perceived it. And aren't most of the posts in this thread about "perceived offense"?

That was indeed the spirit in which it was created. Not to repeat myself but:

Taking offense should be listed as an All American past time. It seems to be ingrained in every facet of our society. A few smilies were removed and now I am bludgeoning flies with a sledge hammer, depriving good honest crooks of their screw drivers and fomenting shenanigans outside of Ireland. It gives way to my continuous observation that no good deed will go unpunished.

I fail to see how the smiley is more offensive than the :gans:.

I think the point is, that telling someone they are performing shenanigans (when in fact they are just trying to get through someone's thick headed skull) constantly is far more offensive than a popcorn smilie. This is just another example of.........

EXACTLY.

I've often found it to be demeaning ... particularly when used against an honestly-expressed opposing viewpoint. In the context it's usually used it's a statement that the person you're responding to lacks sincerity ... or more often, lacks intelligence ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

EXACTLY. I found it to be very demeaning to the intended target (BTW, I've never been a target of it).

Exactly, Pete ... and I'll ask a question you asked me earlier ... where do you draw the line?

Is it your intent to wipe out everything that someone on ScubaBoard finds offensive? Because if that's the case, there won't be anything left ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

True that. And if we're going to wipe out offensive smileys, there are many more offensive than . I always thought was pretty cute (and I've been a target of that one more times than I can remember). I always took it as "I'm waiting to see where this goes". How is that offensive?

 

[Bob DBF]

Originally Posted by NetDoc
So far, it seems to be working and the protests are coming mostly from those who routinely abused it. It's just a tad ironic, doncha think?

I don't know if I count as protester, but if so - I definitely don't see myself as a routine abuser. Wouldn't routine indicate like at least 5-10 uses (and abuses)? I think I used just a couple of times before this thread. I just liked it. I get it's gone, and I'm not asking for it back (pushing a rope and all that).

But - before this thread I would have never voiced my opinion that I was sad it was gone - and somehow seems representative of something bigger - so I am voicing an opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.

Katepnatl said it rather well, but I would like to add that I have very rarely used smilies and, unless my memory is worse than I know it is, have never used . I look at it as a read on the poster useing it, and found it to be a lot less offensive than a number of other smilies that are still in play.

My reason for even posting, now twice, is that am offended when anyone in authority has a legitimate problem with someone(s) and, rather than deal with them directly, imposes new rules on everyone. Sure, it's within your authority and you have every right to do as you will, but the offenders will continue to cause issues as time goes on and will never see it was fault because no one called them on their behavior. I am not as upset as I might sound because, over my life, I have seen this a multitude of times and am not supprised, only disappointed.


As for shenanigans, it is a nostalgic term for me as my Grandmother used to call my brother and I on them constantly when we were young. Heard it a lot from age 5 to 15 but, not again untill here on the board, look foward to having it used on me in the future.



Bob
------------------------
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously" -Dave Barry

 

[HowardE]

Personally I think Pete and a bunch (not all) of the moderators continue to get their panties in a bunch about the little emoticons because THEY are the problem! Not the emoticons!

You don't even know who voted for or against this action. Do you?

"Popcorn Eating - Waiting to See what happens next"

and

"Popcorn has arrived and this smiley is gonna kick back and watch the entertainment, trolls anyone?"

Exactly. These sentiments are not permitted in certain forums. While it's clear that you want people to be able to fight. The fact is, that SB doesn't allow bickering (or trolls) in some areas.

I think it's just a "we're in control" kind of issue.... your "perfect forum world" doesn't exist, kinder gentler posting will never happen...Some people need a kick in the butt to get something through to them, and being kinder and gentler could get you dead and rather quickly!

In the social forums...who cares....

Right. Who cares? If you don't care then why do you continue to post about this?

You don't want a kinder gentler SB. You obviously want something else?

While I don't disagree with your comment about the social forums, there is no way to enable certain smiles in certain areas. The fact is (as has been stated ad nauseum) none of these smiles are prohibited, just not available from the list of preferred smiles.

---

FWIW (and I'm sure this will blow your mind) - I didn't vote for or against the smile removal. Personally, I don't care. But the fact is... SB and the advisors make decisions as a group.

 

[The Chairman]

Exactly, Pete ... and I'll ask a question you asked me earlier ... where do you draw the line?

Where it's at right now.

Is it your intent to wipe out everything that someone on ScubaBoard finds offensive?

In spite of conclusions, extrapolations and conjecture to the contrary: No, that has never been my intent. However, the real control freaks can't stand the fact that we made a decision about a very minor smilie without their permission. I doubt that I'll contact them on the next smiley addition/retraction either. No matter what I do, they will be sure to be offended.

 

[gypsyjim]

No Pete ... that's not my logic at all.

My logic is that you're making decisions that affect all 200,000 users of your board based on the actions of maybe a dozen members.

A couple years back you made the same decision when you disabled the "Thanks" feature ... based on the fact that a handful of members were using it in ways that you considered abusiive. Basically, they were Thanking each other for posts that struck you as "dogpiling". And therefore everyone lost the "Thanks" feature.

Now, if you look at who's been using the popcorn smiley in a way that you have decided is unfriendly, you'll discover that it's basically those same people. And so once again you're responding to what you perceive as their bad behavior by removing the means they're using to express themselves. And once again, the vast majority of people who are affected by it weren't using it in the manner you've based your decision on.

So what makes you think this same small group of users won't just go find some other smiley ... or some other feature ... that will enable them to continue doing the same thing again? What's next, Pete ... remove the "Like" function? I've already seen a couple of people complaining that people who make snarky comments get "Liked" by their friends ... and once again, they're complaining about the same users who misused the Thanks and the popcorn smiley.

You can't change someone's behavior by taking away their toys, Pete ... they'll just find something else to play with. You have to address the behavior at the source ... and the source isn't the tool, it's the person who's misusing it. What you're doing amounts to TSA management practices ... one guy gets on a plane with explosives in his shoe, so now everybody has to take their shoes off. It doesn't address the problem ... it just gives the appearance that you're doing something about it.

If the board looks "unfriendly" because a handful of people are misusing a tool, you aren't going to make it any friendlier by removing the tool ... you have to address it at the level of those who are misusing it.

And for the record, I own a drawer full of screwdrivers ... and I've never once used one to break into someone's house. I'd be mighty upset if someone decided to ban screwdrivers ... or even make it harder for me to own one ... because of the actions of a few people who misused them.

Also for the record, I'm not the least bit concerned about the smiley ... I almost never used it anyway. I have other ways of expressing myself. My concern is that the manner in which you're trying to resolve the problem is ineffective, and basically treats everyone as though they were the ones who were misbehaving. In that respect, Pete, it isn't the miscreants that are making the board less friendly ... it's the management team that behaves as though they are assuming that no one is capable of using the features of the board responsibly ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

All threw this discussion the "Thanks" button fiasco has been on my mind. My sledgehammer and fly analogy has been in reference to exactly that knee jerk response to a perceived abuse of SB tools, by a handfull of users that some folks find annoying, and even disruptive. Removing a tool does not address the underlying issue at all, but effects many more users who are not abusing apps on SB at all.

Despite how many tools Mods have chosen to remove from play for everyone here on SB, they are still being bothered by the offending "flies". This might suggest that another approach to solving these issues might produce better results?

Just my opinion, of course.

 

[electrix]

I still think :gans: is the most offensive smiley...yet nobody responded to my statement about that earlier.

What do you think it means ???

 

[Bob DBF]

:gans:

she·nan·i·gan   /ʃəˈnænɪgən/ Show Spelled[shuh-nan-i-guhn] Show IPA
noun Informal .
1. Usually, shenanigans.
a. mischief; prankishness: Halloween shenanigans.
b. deceit; trickery.
2. a mischievous or deceitful trick, practice, etc.


Working it's way to be an archaic word, untill now.

Bob
--------------------------------------
"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously" -Dave Barry

 

[The Chairman]

look foward to having it used on me in the future.

:gans:

In fond memory of your Grandmother!​

"No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously" -Dave Barry

Tru dat!

they are still being bothered by the offending "flies".

Actually, the flies are being bothered by the offending mods!