An interesting idea that could be applied to forum moderation

Forums are a place for public speech. If we dont want others to hear /read what we have to say then we goto IM/PM. We dont have to listen to what other people say so Mute/Ignore. I think blocking other people from hearing what we have say in public is not good. Public meaning all who care to listen.

Asking for this capability in a public forum is the same as asking for the ability to block avatars of our choice from hearing what we have to say in public chat inworld and I think is not a very good idea.

Mob rule=icky. IMO.

If this place were a small Transylvanian town, I'd agree. "Dead thing pie! Dead thing pie!"

Do you know how difficult it is to build up a good mob on this site? Very very hard. The only one I can think of is a very small handful of people who have agreed to ignore one particular person, and that's after literally months and months of him being a complete asshat. And even then, it's only for one specific thread.

No, a clique being able to run someone out here is next to impossible.

only because there is no admin/mod to ally themselves with.
if this forum were to implement OPs suggestions they would become the moderators themselves.
i can see this being abused in the worst ways. i have zero faith in internet communities. the collective IQ of a group of people diminishes the larger the group gets.

I really enjoyed the Transylvanian reference. And I'll admit that I'm still new in the (specific) thread, so I've not had time to build up any enmity (and, I hope, to not have earned too much). I was objecting to the concept of mob rule because I enjoy the company online of those that differ from me in quite a few respects. And "Dead thing pie!" -- I am interested! Because I am actually into the icky. Another reason to fear the mob I'm thinking.

The case of SLU is insidious, as the biased moderation is kept under the radar, as it were, most of the time. It's disguised as "light" moderation quite well. Perhaps deliberately, perhaps not.

The intriguing idea raised here would not allow a small group to run anybody out. At worst, it would merely insulate them within themselves. And to that I say, go for it. Have fun!

Having said all of that, I'm not sure it's a good idea either.

What I do know is this: the way to calculate the collective IQ of a committee is to take the IQ of the stupidest person in that committee, and divide by the number of people in the committee.

This is the part I do not understand. In what specific way can it be abused? No one can force anyone else to mute someone, even if a clique conspired together to mute someone, there are many more people here to talk to. IF I was the person being picked on by a clique then I damn sure wouldn't care what they had to say anyway. If a clique decided to all gang up and mute someone and it showed as a red flag to a moderator, It doesn't take much digging to see if there is any validity to it.
I do not know about anyone else but I am not a clique and I am not a mob. No one can force me to put someone on ignore or take them off or tell me how long to keep them there. Can anyone tell you and control you in such a fashion?
That is the part that no one seems to get outside of a couple so far. Everyone raise their hands that are so weak willed that you are going to let someone else control your actions?

Yep, I've seen the moderator protect some people by instantly locking threads while other people will be fed to the wolves.

This is life though. Some people we like, some we don't. But it is a shame to see somebodies business or reputation get trashed by a few misguided folk.

Welcome to the internet.

its not about a clique forcing others to mute a particular person. its about people being demonised or forced to feel unwelcome by a group. a group that with mute them then bash them, allowing the victim to see only snippets within quotes, a victim that will not be able to refute false allegations because they likely wont even know they have been posted. i think any sort of forum group empowerment can only lead to bad things. i cant see this stopping trolling. in fact, i think it would only help to breed trolls, or to turn people into trollish types out of contempt.

LMAO -- Well this explains a whole lot about government offices.

Along the same lines.....

Caught a few words today, from a person that I almost put on ignore many months back....that totally changed my opinion about that person....in a positive light. (and no, not the resident troll)

My opinion of that person won't matter to that person....and it shouldn't....but your opinion of how you view someone matters to you.....and how you go about using that to relate to other people.....in that case...it will matter to other people you run into.

Very limiting to put people on ignore. (unless they have exhausted all opportunities to find a redeeming quality...which is rare in a human being)

Judging someone from 10 posts....100 posts....1000....maybe post number 1001 will show you a different light....same thing goes with the words and conversations you use inworld.....or RL. Can anyone really present themselves effectively in 100,000 words or less? If they weren't able to do that in the 100,000 words.....is that their fault or shortcoming..... or is it yours?

Is that fair? Mostly to yourself?

Good point...This is exactly what some people elsewhere would do just so that they could talk crap about you without your seeing it except if/when quoted.

Nope - it doesn't work, as I have pointed out before.

Pep (Unless the vigilantes have the power to identify and ban all possible identities that might be used to read their "hidden" posts)