• Baden
    8.9k
    The general lack of punctuation didn't help his case, but he wasn't banned for that or his love of Charles Manson, but overall low quality.
  • deletedmemberMD
    590
    A shame about omnicient, although after reading what someone posted about the Manson and Hitler comment and the awful one line responses to my long responses to him it completely makes sense to me.

    Good Moderation there. 10/10

    RIP ON. Maybe one day you'll find your place but with the FB ban and the Ban here you have a lot going against you.

    Btw Baden how does banning even work, as I noticed you were still able to tag OM? Do you guys delete accounts if they are banned or offline for a certain long period of time?
  • Baden
    8.9k


    No, the accounts just stay there. Anyone can go look at their comments and that often helps to explain why (although the very worst of banned posters contributions tend to get deleted).
  • Artemis
    1.5k


    Phew! His posts were really making me question how seriously the mods take the basic grammar and spelling requirements.

    I don't know if it was just me, but it certainly seemed like the more his posts slipped into drivel, the worse his writing got as well.
  • deletedmemberMD
    590
    How many inactive accounts do you have? I only ask because I'm curious about the technical logistics of this site. It occurs to me, that if there is a large amount of inactive accounts over say 2-3 years innactive or banned would it not be better to clear space every now and then? Also; one of my closest friends (quite literally, born same day same hospital) is ome of the best full stack developers in the business (some of his work can be seen on the Elder Scrolls online website and apex suite) and honestly I feel the design of the forum is really smart and would suit an app potentially. If we had an app that was say, linked to the Gutenberg project or other free libraries with an appropriate scrape and search and direct quote function; I could see discussion on the forum reaching a whole other level! He's a really busy guy and we currently have our own app and game in our personal schedules still to do but I'd honestly love to do an intellectual forum app at some point!

    Maybe pitch it too the other moderators. My work would be free but he would probably need some form of payment however I could sort that out and do a long term reimbursement through member donations until I'm made whole financially, barring my own contribution of about 10% of whatever he'd charge. I love this forum so would be happy to pay for us to have an app. :)
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    He didnt state any opinions in the history you “looked” through? How does that work?
  • DingoJones
    1.4k
    Injustice against Manson? Yeah, that's some Helter-Skelter, racial wars, end of the world poop.Wallows

    Ya, his opinions. You wanted Baden to intervene because you didnt like his opinions.
  • Wallows
    9.6k
    Ya, his opinions. You wanted Baden to intervene because you didnt like his opinions.DingoJones

    Well, I'm sorry if you found his comments insightful. Can we get a show of hands, to this matter?
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    I didnt say that, I offered no opinion about his statements at all. I was noticing that your problem is his opinion, not his post “quality”.
    What would a show of hands matter? Are you trying to get people to agree his opinions are bad, to reinforce your own opinion about his opinions being bad? Why? You are entitled to your opinion, regardless whether or not you can get it popularised. I think everyone should be so entitled, din’t you? Or is it just the opinions you like that should be allowed?
  • Artemis
    1.5k
    intellectual forum appMark Dennis

    I just check the site on my Android's Chrome app. What do you think a special app would add?
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    Im not trying to be difficult here but what is the relevance of what you said to the banning?
    Are you suggesting that he should be banned cuz he was boring, or had boring “opening moves”?
  • Wallows
    9.6k
    I didnt say that, I offered no opinion about his statements at all.DingoJones

    And, if I may be so bold, why shouldn't we shouldn't voice opinions towards a position that is untenable?

    Go read the post I quoted. It's pretty clear, that tolerance towards intolerance was violated deeply, due to guarding one's self from scrutiny by an appeal to "free speech".
  • fdrake
    2.9k


    Eh, fair, I'll delete the comment. :up:
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    Ive already read it, I was following along. You were more than voicing your opinion on what he said, you made an implicit call for moderator intervention.
  • Baden
    8.9k


    Read what I said then reread what you said. If you can't work out where you've gone wrong, turn on a few more bulbs on the Christmas tree.
  • Wallows
    9.6k
    Ive already read it, I was following along. You were more than voicing your opinion on what he said, you made an implicit call for moderator intervention.DingoJones

    I really don't see why this is becoming a personalized attack towards my taste on the matter of Charles Manson being quoted in a meme that got deleted. The only reason why I'm so vocal about this is that had Charles Manson invited his family to attack a house 2 blocks away from my own at the time, my parents would be dead.
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    Oh, well thats your prerogative, I was honestly asking if that was something you advocated. (Ok, like, 20% making a point as well.)
    I could see moderators not wanting really boring contributors.
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    Its not a personal attack, and its not about Manson and the sort of batshit comment that Omni-guy made about him. Its about whether or not you think people should be banned (or otherwise dealt with by mods) for opinions you do not like.
  • Wallows
    9.6k
    Its not a personal attack, and its not about Manson and the sort of batshit comment that Omni-guy made about him. Its about whether or not you think people should be banned (or otherwise dealt with by mods) for opinions you do not like.DingoJones

    No, my opinions shouldn't be a factor in the decision to ban OmniscientNihilist. And, this was made clear by Baden deciding to ban him on the ground of poor quality posts.
  • deletedmemberMD
    590
    Good question.

    I mentioned Project Gutenberg which is a free online library of 1000s of out of print books and classics that are still in print today; like Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, Descartes, Machiavellis principles and lots lots more on any subject you can think of.

    What an app can do really, especially with Chris designing it; is provide streamlined quick easy custom functions and features that would suit a philosophy app. I've only just started conceiving of the idea so I'm thinking out the Project Gutenberg connection at the moment but I might start a discussion and ask the community for ideas and sughestions on what they would like to see from an app for this forum.

    There could be Ted connections, news on current events and publications, maybe even a mechanism where members could pitch in for community owned Ebooks, subscriptions for philosophy related content and the ability to incorporate and share all these easily into related discussion threads at the push of a button or two.

    I feel this could greatly enhance the quality of our debates and discussions as well as accelerate our learning potential and save us a lot of time into the bargain which we can spend focussing on our contributions more or just being able to handle our free time better.

    Lots of possibilities and potential in it I feel :)
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    Sure, Ill guess as to which posts you meant me to review, correct me if these aren’t the comments you are referring to.

    You said:


    “I looked through his history. He didn't make the grade. I don't really know much about his opinions.“

    So you looked at his posts, which is what I thought you meant by “history”. Then you say you didnt know much about his opinions.
    So I said:

    “He didnt state any opinions in the history you “looked” through? How does that work?“

    Since it seems dubious that you were able to properly judge the quality of the posts without “much” noticing what those posts said, I wanted to know how that works. How did you miss his opinions but locked down his post “quality” so thoroughly that you were comfortable banning the guy?
    Im not sure why you think you needed to be snarky with your response, Im just asking questions. I want to know what im potentially allowed/not allowed to say, thats all.
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    Yes, I know Badens stated reasons for banning the guy. I was asking you, not him. I was careful not to mix up his banning with your call to intervention, That was what was intended by including “or otherwise dealt with by mods” but I see now that I could have been more explicit.
  • Baden
    8.9k


    He was banned for low quality, more specifically for a stream of poorly written, badly punctuated, largely vacuous posts, not his opinions, which I didn't take much notice of seeing as there were none of significant moderation relevance in his history.

    I want to know what im potentially allowed/not allowed to say, thats all.DingoJones

    You'll have to be more specific.
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    Right, you mentioned that already. My purpose in quoting those posts was to review them and perhaps clarify them but also to understand what it is you think I was too dim to comprehend.
    What exactly was your Christmas bulb comment referencing? Those posts?
    As to what Im potentially allowed/not allowed to say, I meant in the sense that a moderator (I guess you specifically in this case) would consider ban worthy. Since I sometimes say unpopular things and sometimes make posts that are less than polite shall we say, and since I do not want to be banned, I am curious about the kinds of things people get banned for. This one seemed to happen quickly, and at the behest of another poster whose only reasoning is that he didnt like the opinion expressed. (Although I understand that might not be the case, and that you have more information than I do with which to act upon)
  • deletedmemberMD
    590
    Speaking from my experience of speaking to ON; It was pretty frustrating writing moderately lengthed responses to him to get barely one or two lines back. I can only really call this foundationless disagreement which makes me not take people seriously. If people have good arguments for their views I want to know and everyone has nuance they need to share to be effectively understood.

    @Baden I'm also assuming ON had a few warnings about his etiquette and effort here before being banned, am I correct?

    Dingo I don't think its worth getting into an argument with them about this unless no warnings were given.

    You are fine in my opinion. We don't always agree but you have raised good constructive points with me in the past which I appreciate; take my advice and just keep doing you and try not to take offense from the moderators as they get easily swamped and don't always mean to be callous or short with you. Time is precious and in too short supply these days.
  • VagabondSpectre
    1.6k
    I want to know what im potentially allowed/not allowed to say, thats all.DingoJones

    There are actually very few limitations on what you can say here in this forum. More important is how you say it, and that there is some philosophical value in the content. Hard limits pertain to things like racism and bigotry; we will not let people argue in favor of nazi policies and other blatantly harmful crap; that's a banning... So if you aren't nazi-esque, you really don't need to worry about having your actual ideas censored. You can explore controversial topics, and you can even take controversial positions, but if they even vaguely appear to border the pure hate ideologies that we refuse to see promoted, then you really should go out of your way to delineate your position clearly.

    One of the consistent issues that leads to banning seems to be hostility... Conversations can quite easily become heated (anonymity disinhibiting our road internet rage). When hostility, ad hominems, and vulgarity are concensually reciprocated by two posters in an argument, it's not necessarily a problem, but when one poster is consistently vulgar without provocation, they become toxic to the forum. If such a poster refuses moderation, or is a prolific re-offender, that's a banning... If you can keep your verbal cool, this facet of the ban hammer is not a threat...

    Finally there is post quality, which I'm guessing is the most consistent issue for the mod team...

    Here there can be no precise rules or rulings, because quality of this nature is subjective and relative. When the grammatical/verbal quality of posts are too low, it's generally uncontroversial to delete them, but that said, non english natives should be given a bit more wiggle room when it comes to grammar and such.The important thing here is that people are actually putting effort into their posts.

    So if your posts aren't bigoted, aren't unprovokedly hostile, and are amply coherent, why then could they have been removed?

    "Philosophical value" is even more subjective than writing quality. When people post one-liner questions better fit for google, there's no philosophical value in the post. When people hastily smear their shower-thoughts onto our forum walls, there's no philosophical value. @Baden put it succinctly in one of his recent posts regarding how to build a quality OP: you can explore a subject, you can take a supporting or critical position, but you can't just thrust us all into a dark room; original posts must shine a light on the subject matter they address (otherwise you're leaving all the work to the respondents).

    I think the most important thing is simply that effort be put into original posts, because it's quite obvious to veteran readers when posts are thoughtfully considered vs lazy afterthoughts. NOS4A2 is an example of a poster who toes the line of philosophical value vs effort. His posts are intellectually bankrupt, but they're also coherent and not poorly written. He genuinely seems to believe his ideas, and he definitely puts some degree of effort into posts. He could actually be a paid Russian troll, but even if that's true, his posts still meet that good-faith "effort" requirement, and he otherwise colors inside the aforementioned hostility lines, so even if we knew he was getting paid to write his posts, it might still be worth letting him stick around.

    P.S: I'm not privy to the moderator forum or the going formula behind their decisions. My take is just based on what I've observed. Also, I don't mean to suggest that you're a nazi (I'm not aware of if or why you might have been censored); I intend this advice to apply to everyone.
  • Baden
    8.9k
    Since I sometimes say unpopular things and sometimes make posts that are less than polite shall we say, and since I do not want to be banned, I am curious about the kinds of things people get banned for.DingoJones

    You'll have to be more specific.Baden

    Or read the guidelines.
  • DingoJones
    1.4k


    Im not taking offence, and im not intending to argue so much as get clarity...as I mentioned to Baden the banning came off to me in a certain way.
    Anyway, its nice to know my comments are constructive to someone at least!
  • Baden
    8.9k


    It's understandable that it came off to you in a certain way. But there's not much I can do about that except point to his comment history. You are not on our radar re bans and as far as I know haven't been.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.