BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Jeri
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 10:00 PM

Joe, Gandhi was Victorious because the people he opposed had faces and names and consciouses (or at least understood public shame). It won't work on invisible, anonymous (maybe not so much) terrorists. You might feel more righteous as the place goes to Hell, but it's still going to go to Hell, no matter how happy your own personal conscious is about it.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Janie
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 10:04 PM

Jeri,

Not sure I am correctly understanding your post when I take it that you are expressing an opinion that Mudcat is going to hell. Don't want to beg to differ if that is not what you mean.

Clarify please?

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: catspaw49
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 10:40 PM

Probably worth mentioning that MLK also employed non-violence in the south working for civil rights. However, it is also a fact that those same tactics were a failure in the northern cities where Malcolm's ideas worked better although more violently.

That's another one of those subjects which would make a good thesis (like the lock-step paths of big time TV wrestling and big time TV religion--(;<))).


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: catspaw49
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 11:24 PM

But having said that......let me add this bit as well.

Perhaps all of you who are strongly and rightly wishing to oppose the BNP might learn from some of the things that have happened here. I think the BNP has. They have probably seen how successful the Klan has been in employing non-violent tactics of their own over the last 25 years. Its true. What became a huge problem here was those who came to Klan rallies to protest the Klan were goaded into starting the violence.   Since the Klan acted entirely peacefully and made their illogical and bigoted views sound completely sensible, the protesters came off as raving idiots instead of the other way round.

I know you all probably won't bother but if you really want to see an effective combatting of groups like the BNP and Klan, go read a history and the current activities of Mo Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Rowan
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 11:42 PM

Last night (Oz time) I was reading an article in New Scientist about the origins of spite in human behaviour. The gist of it seemed to show that those individuals who tried to increase their own rewards at the expense of others who 'played more fairly and equitably' were quickly brought back into line when a short bit of punitive behaviour (defined as "spite") was unleashed at them by the otherwise equitable rest of the group. The relevance of that article (early May, 2009) to this thread seems, to me, to be that individuals that the community regards as 'miscreants' bring their behaviour closer to the community's favoured norms when everyone sees that objectionable behaviour incurs visible retributive response.

To me, that suggests that Mudcat moderators could make their moderations more frequently and obviously public. Several posters in the thread have suggested such a move as a putative improvement at Mudcat, and others have suggested that this might remove favouritism in the treatment of particular 'catters. I can't say I've noticed anyone being treated more or less favourably that others but I might be too new (or too selective in the threads I peruse) to have experienced it.

Normally I abhor retribution as a behaviour but the evidence in the article was impressive. If it were canvassed I suspect that then we'd be entangled in quarrels about standards, real or imagined, and "rights". In the meantime I enjoy the vagaries brought to our community by the varieties of outlooks and individuals in it. And try to write in terms I'd be happy to see against my name in the Final Ledger. Assuming there is one, of course.

Keep up the good work, Joe.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: katlaughing
Date: 31 Oct 09 - 12:37 AM

Good points, Spaw.

It is ludicrous(sp) to me, given the parameters Max has articulated, that people hold the mods. responsible for the behavior of themselves or others beyond a very limited mandate.

Thanks for that, Janie.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 Oct 09 - 01:31 AM

Right, kat and Janie-
- we're still part of Max's experiment in "civilized anarchy," or whatever it was called Way Back When. The idea was that this would be a largely unmoderated Website, with conduct controlled mostly by the societal pressure of our community. I see many comments above that set expectations that Mudcat be more tightly controlled, but we have survived quite well with minimal moderation for 13 years now. We are indeed a wonderful community, where people go out of their way to show concern for each other and to share themselves with one another. We're not perfect, but a lot of good things happen here.

With few exceptions, most people whose identity is known, behave quite well. Most identified people who post, can be assured that their posts will almost never be deleted or altered. If a post from a known Mudcatter is objectionable for some reason, it usually won't be deleted unless it is a personal attack and the target of the attack complains.

Somebody above said that if there were a thread on child pornography, that the thread and its participants would be eliminated - I'm not so sure of that. If it had been started by a visitor, then yes, it would be deleted. But most of the time, we do not make judgments on the content of posts, and do not delete or edit unless there are precedented reasons for doing do.

And despite what some may see as our negligent lack of moderation, we do pretty well. The stuff I complained about above, is nothing I would ever consider deleting. Still, I think it's worthwhile saying something about it, when it disappoints me.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: CarolC
Date: 31 Oct 09 - 02:25 AM

When conduct is left to be controlled by the societal pressure of the community, that societal pressure will conform to whatever the norms of the community are. If the norms of the community are ganging up on people and scapegoating them, that is the societal pressure that will control the conduct. I have seen many people, who don't conform to what some members find pleasing, not because their behavior was inappropriate, or because they were breaking the rules, but because people just found it unappealing (one example would be the poet who has been so abused by so many people), or for other reasons having more to do with esthetics than anything else, be literally hounded off the site altogether.

This is not a lack of rules or moderation. What it is, is two sets of rules - one written and acknowledged set of rules, and an invisible set of rules that are never posted or articulated, but are enforced with even more rigor than the written rules, and moderation by mob rule. This is clearly not working.

The solution to this problem is not necessarily more rules. The solution is to enforce the rules that already exist fairly and consistently. The solution is to not allow the mob run the show.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 Oct 09 - 03:32 AM

Well, as I said, I intended to allow this thread to run a limited time, to give people a chance to say what they have to say. Now we're back to our usual policy of not allowing such discussions, because they always seem to end in animosity. I cannot answer those who believe there is some sort of conspiracy in our moderation practices, and that we intentionally play favorites. If there is such a conspiracy, I haven't noticed it. I can't really see a reason why there would be.

I think we do the best we can, within our tradition of free speech. We can't satisfy everyone, but we try to keep the peace with limited moderation.

G'nite. Thead closed.

-Joe Offer-