Free Expression and Moderation Reform

Exactly, that was my point - Coco was the one who made the statement that her income as a writer made someone else's opinion's irrelevant. I was just pointing out that if she is going to go on some kind of arbitrary scale, then her own opinions could be marginalized the same way.

Linden Labs! Let the citizens moderate your forums. (Oh no. I feel another thread coming on.)

I will do it, provided we can get some technological checks in place. First, no one can moderate in a thread it which they've posted. Second, we should be able to metamoderate to keep things running smoothly. Free expression (provided it doesn't interfere with the freedoms of others) will pour like rain from the sky.

~Ulrika~

That would herald my last post here ever...

If I wanted to be moderated by other users, I'd go to a 3rd party forum site.

Siggy.

that's kinda niave, since i think some of the moderators (now also lindens) were drawn from the resident pool.

which is to say lindens are users.

if your going to bang on cocoanut for doing the victim thing... you should bang on ulrika for repeating her "'benign post' that she got a warning for" thing. i didn't see it as particularly benign when she did it. i think ulrika skirts the tos/cs by covering her complaint about her formal warning with a topic of free expression.

ulrika believes in free expression for herself, but not for prokofy. she hems and haws about how to judge was is harmful to other people. and yet she defends something that deemed offensive to another resident endlessly.

it stinks of hypocrisy.

this thread didn't start out pure. i don't think cocoanut citing her experience is inappropriate; it is topical to how the thread started. however, i do agree the drama she surrounds it with is quite noisome.

LOL, StoneSelf, I like your list up there!

Cristiano, I think pulling the plug on them, we might be closer to that than we think.

ESPECIALLY since I believe as I understand it anybody's blog plus these columns will soon (can already be?) be allowed to be read inworld?

Plus, without "official" forums, people would be free to go to which forums they chose, and probably wouldn't stay around a forum where people were calling for their heads on a platter and for their posts to be reported.

But as this is supposedly the official forums for ALL players to use, as long as they follow the TOS (as on any other forum), that doesn't leave me much of a choice.

If the forums went poof (except for the classifieds, linden hotline, technical questions, and the like), then it would be a free market sort of thing, where people could read the website forums they wished to, and nearly everyone could find a place to speak on one or the other of them.

coco

P.S. Now that I read above, StoneSelf, thank you for your post. I know the drama is tedius - I can't help it. Fortunately, when I get excited about something, like the videos on the front page or Touchstone Fair or something - the drama in the other direction is pretty noisesome, too, and that's a good thing.

i don't see an upside to pulling the plug on the the forums for ll.

ll gets alot of ideas from the forums; and they get to see what people think of those ideas to some extent.

it would be good for ll to publish the ideas they intend to implement in such a way that non-forum readers could know about it better.

Is the thread getting that boring? Let's poke Ulrika and see if we can turn her into the Hulk!

Sorry, I'm in deep-thought mode today. You'll have to go after my argument that a single-post mindset coupled with the unwritten Linden policy to be impartial, conspired to prevent moderators from singling out Prokofy. Questioning my true motivations and core values aren't doing it for me today.

~Ulrika~

Questioning the status quo is all fine and dandy. If that was all it was I'd probably still have found him unbearably annoying but not necessarily harmful. The problem was that he didn't just question, he made assertions and stated them as fact about things like favoritism, stalking, conspiracies, and malicious motives. I'm sure it wasn't being contrarian that got him banned. It was the repeated slander of other residents.

Wow. This thread moved me from the 28th highest poster to the 25th. Look out Eggy, here I come.

~Ulrika~

a contrarian position is hard to hold without crossing the line from time to time. jake, cocoanut, blaze, and ulrika mostly manage. some people can't manage, or learn to manage.

opposition to the status quo comes up in various forms. some people hold to it more than others.

the notion of opposition is nothing new to the forums. most of the time in the past it has been a civil opposition.

Yeah, ultimately I feel the same way, Chip, Forseti, and anybody else who commented on this statement of mine (hence the reason I voted the way I did in the poll). Ulrika's list of pro-ban reasons in this thread was pretty comprehensive, too.

Generally, I support the forum changes... but then again, I've never received a warning. Uh-oh, I wonder if making this statement is akin to daring the gods to strike me down!

No. I noticed it. I don't think you intended to say two wrongs make a right, although I imagine some readers might find it comes to mind. It could also be perceived to say something along the lines of, "Ma, she started it!" It could even be perceived as hypocritical, with the view that it's a case of complaining that someone is posting attacks on you while you retaliate by doing the same thing. I could even take personal umbrage, believing it to be a condescending twist on, "Haven't you been paying attention?" or "Don't you know how to read?" However, I don't want to project those suppositions on you -- just wanted to mention them to point out the challenge to constructive discourse this sort of thing poses. It perpetuates the situation. As a pro writer, you know that it doesn't matter whether or not the facts in a piece are true or what the author's intent was, if the reader doesn't react as intended.

I really hope your intent was only to question the fact that I addressed my post directly only to you. Coco, the thing is, you're the only one here who really seems upset. You're the one who's really got good reason to try to change your behavior in order to end this, so you're the one who's most likely to act. As well, just in general, it's easier to talk to and convince one person than many. And of course, maybe someone else who sees this will find it useful.

Yeah, I know, then the obvious response would be that it's not fair, why should you enact the forums equivalent of a unilateral ceasefire? Because it'll work, if you stick to it. And yeah, that might appear to require "giving up" or "giving in" or a blow to your ego . . . but that's not actually true. It'll be noticed, recognized, and respected.

Anyhow, I still didn't find any chocolate. I wish I could teach my cat to shop.

i'm not questioning your movtivations. you clearly think prokofy doesn't deserve free speech in the sl forums; you've said as much. but you think that you deserve free speech because you don't think you deserve the formal warning you got for that offensive post that got edited (and you skirt the tos/cs by bring it up over and over again).

that seems rather unequal. free speech for some. none for prokofy.

i'm not thrilled with the idea that prokofy got banned from the forums. it bugs the hell out of me that someone was silenced. but i am glad the invective and harm caused has ended.

prokofy bought up very important topics (not necessarily new topics), but important ones. it's a shame prokofy couldn't do it without attacking everyone left and right.

we don't win by silencing people. but in this case, i don't think it was a huge loss either.

idealism and pragmaticism eventually reach a compromise, otherwise nothing would get done.

You might take heat for it but it's easy to manage without violating the TOS. When you start fabricating things that aren't true in order to prop up your viewpoint, then you have a problem

Just wanted to remind everyone to stay on topic and to not attack the person with whom you disagree.

I see the party's turned personal again while I stepped out.

Good night, all.

Basically in the context of these forums I see free speech as a priviledge and not a right. As long as the debate remained civil, it seems the lindens were willing to allow any idea to be expressed and discussed, even ideas that put LL in a poor light.

It is important, as 2500 years of democracies know, to allow an opposition voice to be heard. In a society that is rule of the majority, the polity is entitled to make a decision. To only allow one view to reach the people is not democracy (this was the theory of the soviet union-everyone gets to vote but all parties besides the communist party are illegal). In many ways it is very much in the lindens interest to encourage a lively debate in these forums, becuase by reading them, they can see what issues affect their customer base. Thus I don't see them killing off the discusion forums, they are a gold mine of customer service.

On the other hand they need to ensure that all users feel equally safe from assault and marginailzation, and thus the TOS. The core concept of the TOS is that LL does not have to hyper-moderate the forums because, in theory, the users will behave like rational adults and follow the age old guideline: if you can't say something civily then don't say anythiung at all. The TOS clearly contemplates that users will rise above responding to attacks and avail themselves of the ignore button. That is how a community of adults deals with problem individuals, or a single adult deals with a person they don't like.

My objection to the shunning of the gadfly was not because I blamed people for ignoring him, but because people were so vocal about placing pressure on everyone to ignore him. The lindens expected us to moderate ourselves. They still do, onl now they have a bigger hammer. But as long as we useser keep sniping at each other in a effort to score points, or by shouting down as moronic anyone who disagrees with our own position, then we will all be causing undue tension in the forums.

If someone says something you don't like, ignore, abuse report it or put that person on ignore. But people who put a hand on a hot burner can't then complain that being burned.

I don't actually care how strict LL makes the posting rules - its their right to do so. However, it would be nice if they were indeed applied consistantly.

-AP

I really was wondering if you had noticed that, Kim; I wasn't at all meaning it in some sort of "don't you know how to read".

And of course, two wrongs don't make a right. Your point is well taken about starting a ceasefire, "ma, she started it," and all that. You're right about all that, too.

There is another consideration, though. I do overlook a lot, and not rise to a lot of bait. But at some point, I think people start thinking a person is some sort of patsy.

I don't want anyone to think that I can be pushed around easily, and always turn the other cheek. I'm just not that much of a saint. In this case, where I thought I was reaching out to Ulrika, and that she had reached out to me - to then be called a troll just makes me look like a fool. To add a writing lesson to me on top of it, well...I don't give writing lessons to any posters, and I sure as heck don't think I need one from Ulrika.

So much for all that. I'll try to be a tad more impervious. Ain't easy.

coco

Coco, for the record, I don't know about anyone else, but I didn't think that way about you. Nothing that has been posted about you, nothing that anyone has said has made you look like a fool.

I think you are giving people too much credit and giving the rest of us too little credit. I judge by your own actions, not by what anyone says about you.

Thank you, April!

coco

Did you ever notice that when people tell you what you're thinking that it's always used to ascribe something negative?

While I am thrilled that we managed to engage in one of the most constructive General-forum threads I've seen since my arrival, I admit that it's degenerating into personal attacks (like the one above). I think I'll pack it in now. Thanks for the great conversational all!

~Ulrika~

And? The Pope was once a child - The President was once a citizen.... I fail to see how that holds up.

They are employees of Linden Lab.. I pay Linden Lab to use their service (Second Life) and other associated services that go with that (such as these forums). As such I try and abide by their rules and regulations..

I hold this whole idea in much the same way as an online 'Government' having a say in what I can and can't build. I don't see very much difference between the two.. If you wanna play Kingmaker, go buy a sim --- wanna moderate a forum, go make one.

An employee of Linden Lab is accountable for thier decisions in a very real way - if they do a poor job, they could lose thier livelyhood.. I think this is a great balance to the amount of power they have...

As opposed to maybe losing 'Moderator Status'...

Nope, I don't think I'm being naive at all... I'm being very realistic...

here you clearly state your feeling that you thought your post was benign, and since you are appealling it... that would indicate you think your formal warning was unwarranted.

and you have clearly stated you thought prokofy should be removed.

thus i think it's fair to say you don't support free expression for prokofy, but you do support free expression for youself.

that's only free expression for some (and is seems especially for yourself).

this called two points of your call for free expression and moderation reform into question:
1) would such rules apply to everyone?
2) who will judge?