Concerns about moderating policies

[Storker]

What is "veiled" into saying to somebody that he is a "liar" or "dishonest"?

No. Just that it isn't spelled out.

 

[jhnmdahl]

I can say with certainty that Netdoc give people a much longer leash than almost any other forum I've been involved with, and I've moderated several and run a couple myself. Personal attacks usually get a time-out, if not an outright ban.

 

[Captain Swoop]

I am a long term Mod on an Astronomy and general science board called Cosmoquest, it used to be known as Bad Astronomy and Universe Today. Some of you may have heard of it.
We have strict rules on no religion or politics and special rules for anyone posting 'speculative' theories.
We use a points based 'infraction' system that allows penalties to be 'ramped up' and it keeps a record thst shows any patterns of behaviour and identifies persistent offenders and those 'treading the line'.
Mods aren't allowed to moderate threads they are taking part in. Infractions and suspensions are discussed by the mods and a consensus of three mods is usually called for unless an offence is egregious.
Suspended members can appeal to one of the Admins.
We still get complaints that we are too harsh or too soft in equal measure.

 

[Bubblesong]

[QUOTE="Captain Swoop, post: 7859059, special rules for anyone posting 'speculative' theories.
.[/QUOTE]

What might special rules for speculative theories mean?

We have here on Scubaboard many threads that are sensitive because someone died, it is hard to get full facts, so temptation is strong to speculate. I am not judging, as I have speculated too, although I call it what it is. In addition, people get "symptoms" or problems they want answers to and people post theories, but again, often with disclaimers.
How would those special rules work in these cases?

 

[Captain Swoop]

In context of Cosmoquest 'speculative' means against the Mainstream if science and is polite for Cranks and Pseudoscience .
It's a science board, anyone wanting to come in and challenge currently accepted and supported scientific theories is held to strict rules regarding answering questions snd providing dupport for their ideas. Plus such subjects are only allowed in the 'Against the Mainstream' forum.
These rules have been evolved over the years in response to cranks spamming their ideas in to mainstream threads. They still cause the vast majority of Moderator work.

 

[jhnmdahl]

Speculating as to likely causes based on information available seems like a valuable part of the accidents threads here - if we're going to talk about them, we might as well try to learn from them.

I thin in Swoop's case, he's talking about theories like "gravity isn't really wave-based or field-based at all, but is entirely caused by subatomic particles I've named putons, the existence of which can't be confirmed by you fools in any way."

 

[Captain Swoop]

Exactly that.

 

[The Chairman]

What is "veiled" into saying to somebody that he is a "liar" or "dishonest"?

What's the point? When it comes to calling people a liar, it almost always mean you don't like what they say. As MMM pointed out, show us how it's wrong rather than ascribing malfeasance to the poster.

 

[sierrakilo]

I made it to page 9, then TL;DR I rightly or wrongly assumed the next six pages would be more of the same.

However, I would like to say that I enjoy SB tremendously, largely due to the effective moderation that is run. Discussions can get heated from time to time, but when there is just too much snark the mods step in and clean things up. I think it's generally done prudently and with the right patience and balance. I think the mods do a STERLING job, and one they receive very little vocal appreciation for from the community. Threads like this one would truly make me feel depressed as a mod trying to do something good.

I am sure a critic will comment I am kissing ass. I couldn't care less - I don't know any of them! But I do know that they are trying to do their best, for free, and than when they fail, they are just human. The mods of SB clearly deserve to have their posteriors smooched with a bit of appreciation! Thanks

Ok, my 5c

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

All these at least to me are the same thing.
Johny dives with split fins. Johny is a moron.
Johny dives with split fins. Johny diving with split fins makes him a moron.
Johny dives with split fins. Anyone who dives with split fins is a moron.

These are all clearly about Johny and calling him a moron and all mean exactly the same thing (at least in my minds eye). Why should one be moderated and the other not?

I wouldn't moderate any of them. They all say more about the person who wrote them than they do about Johny ... (probably one of them DIR types) ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)