Timeline for We're more aggressively enforcing self-moderation in chat
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 2, 2018 at 8:42 | comment | added | Zoe - Save the data dump | I agree with @Cerbrus. The tools were present, but there was never any enforcement of it. | |
| May 1, 2018 at 6:59 | comment | added | Cerbrus | @rekire: You could've told the users to stop posting gifs. You could've kicked them if they continued. The tools were there. | |
| May 1, 2018 at 2:43 | comment | added | TheLittleNaruto | You guys had too much time to look into this mere post, while we must not encourage post like this: meta.stackoverflow.com/q/366665/1944896 , but you don't have time to look into this. @Brad Very nice. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 23:43 | comment | added | Robert Longson | Never got a final answer? You didn't think that -20 on your question was a pretty resounding no from the community for reopening? | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 21:56 | comment | added | rekire | Dear @Cerbrus yes I think so. If I would have be able to suppress gifs I would have been more active in the chat. Since my felt risk of getting bad attention (in the office) for flickering images on my second screen I stopped having the chat always open. So if that is not possible kicking 1-3 people out of the room would have also gave me the power to keep that toxic people out of the chat. Problem done. I know that you don't see that this is causal dependency, but I do. It cannot be so hard to understand why I think so. FYI I'll avoid to look here again as I don't want to get upset by you. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 21:42 | comment | added | Cerbrus | ”In the end Iam sure that the room was closed by missing moderation tools” — There, you are implying the problem was the available tools. I commented in order to correct that. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 21:38 | comment | added | rekire | @Cerbrus hey it's you again. Great that you are still active. I really thought that I pointed that out of my view, it's really not worth for me to wast more time regarding that. We should just agree that we will never agree regarding that room. It's somehow funny I guess you are the only person where I think so. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 21:33 | comment | added | Cerbrus | If you have to bring up that room: the problem there wasn’t lacking moderation tools. It was lacking moderation. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 21:27 | comment | added | rekire | @BenjaminGruenbaum I didn't felt banned at all. So yeah I was thinking about to open a new room, but as a clear statement that I take the consequences I never opened a new room again. I also guess that I don't have the time to moderate a room today. The spirit which I mentioned earlier is gone and also my motivation. The good old days... I feel old. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 21:23 | comment | added | rekire | @BradLarson yep the room had downsides which are absolutely correct that it was closed on one hand. On the other hand there was initially a very cool atmosphere which is gone for ever and cannot be recovered, however it is very likely that a theoretically reopening would never bring that back. Just to clarify I don't fight for the room. However with the history in mind I feel bad to write anything non absolutely relevant to the room, since I really want to avoid that I am somehow part of that a room get closed. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 20:33 | comment | added | Brad Larson | "So, if we see rooms where: Offensive stuff that violates our CoC isn't flagged, Offensive stuff that violates our CoC isn't just allowed (however tacitly, through nobody flagging it), it's encouraged, People are berated, kicked or otherwise harassed for holding a room's culture to our code of conduct: We're going to shut the room down permanently. And this isn't the first time we've done this." - Android Era with Kotlin and Java ticked the box on two if not all three of those, so shutting down the room permanently fits within the described policy. Multiple warnings were issued before this. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 20:08 | comment | added | Benjamin Gruenbaum | Just open a new (and positive) room? Just so you know - the policy of Stack Overflow is very relaxed towards bans. At the Node.js org users who are abusive in any way are usually banned for life (or until they reach out respectfully and discuss how to regain our trust). If you want to make amends then prove it - you can open a new room and build a great constructive and culture of it. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 19:46 | comment | added | rekire | @Catija possible. I don't know the rooms, I'm just talking here about my historic view. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 19:43 | comment | added | rekire | @AndrasDeak with great powers came big responsibility like in moderation in general. Take e.g. the smoke bot it is very helpful. In my opinion it was somehow fun to use the bot. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 19:43 | comment | added | Catija | Some rooms do have very strict per-room rules and they are codified on a webpage (or GitHub Gist) and the ROs are expected to enforce those rules. But that doesn't necessarily require any additional support from the network. For example the "chatiquette" for the PPCG main room, The Nineteenth Byte. Also, be aware that there's a great chat room for the SOBotics group where many users work together to create bots for chat. If you haven't talked to them, consider it! | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 19:40 | history | edited | rekire | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
more background
|
| Apr 30, 2018 at 19:37 | comment | added | Andras Deak -- Слава Україні | "For fun" is where problems would start to pop up first. | |
| Apr 30, 2018 at 19:32 | history | answered | rekire | CC BY-SA 3.0 |