Brian Diaz wrote:
That's great in theory, though no one has yet proposed an objective way to moderate human language effectively.  Language is inherently subjective.  I would petition for Soapbox to be opened tomorrow if someone gave us a set of rules that eliminated all subjectivity.  Seriously.  Send in your proposal in CAM, or if you prefer, PM.  I would absolutely get behind something that would make moderating more fair for members and easier for mods.

Lightcraft Studio wrote:
Same rules as they use in the other forums. No outing, no unsolicited critiques, no personal attacks, etc.

Why do there have to be different rules than any of the other forums?

Excellent point.

Why did MM choose to discriminate against Soapbox?


Brian, if you want a ''set of rules that eliminated all subjectivity'' then eliminate all rules for Soapbox and -- whoosh -- no subjectivity or moderation needed.  Add a click-through warning (adults only - proceed at your own risk) for access to the forum.  Require paid memberships to access Soapbox, if desired.  Problem solved but I doubt you will do it -- even though you just said you would.

Jay  Edwards wrote:
Soapbox would be open and the brig log and locked log would be public again.

These were fun things to read on MM

Vote

ernst tischler wrote:
If you start out with rules that are subjective, you end up with a lot of subjective calls and that's where it goes south quickly.  The rules must be simple and few, that let the participants know specifically what is prohibited.  The other thing is defined consequences to the prohibited items.  First, the post is removed, no discussion, no fanfare, no comment, it is just gone.  Second, after a set number of post removals (perhaps 3) the person is suspended for a specified period of time, no discussion, no fanfare, no comment.  There is no "brig" or "brig list", the person just cannot post on the forum.

Brian Diaz wrote:
That's great in theory, though no one has yet proposed an objective way to moderate human language effectively.  Language is inherently subjective.  I would petition for Soapbox to be opened tomorrow if someone gave us a set of rules that eliminated all subjectivity.  Seriously.  Send in your proposal in CAM, or if you prefer, PM.  I would absolutely get behind something that would make moderating more fair for members and easier for mods.

I proposed changes to Soapbox back when it was in peril, shortly before it was removed.  At the time, I was told that because my proposal would require a few programming changes to the forum (which would cost money) it would not happen.

The programming changes are a necessary part of my proposal because that is what makes it easier on the mods and also removes the fanfare currently associated with removed posts, locked threads and the brig.  The current system draw attention to and gives recognition to the jerks for being jerks.  What good does it do to remove a post if in it's place the mod leaves a highlighted marker saying it was removed?  What good does it do to lock a thread when the thread is still there for all to see?  What good does it do to suspend someone from a forum when their name is put on a list that the jerks wear like a badge of honor? 

A cornerstone of my proposal is to never draw attention in any way to the trouble makers.  This removes all the fun out of stirring up shit.  Take the fun out of being a jerk and the jerks go away.  Those who are able to stay on topic and not get personal when they discuss, debate or argue their side of a topic will enjoy the freedom of expression while those who cannot will quickly be filtered out.

J Jessica wrote:
I would capitalize everyone's sentences, fix everyone's spelling and grammatical errors, and fix punctuation.

Then I'd leave a moderator's note that reads the specific grade I gave to them followed by the reason they received such a low grade.

i don thank u hav thet mush time; ta do awl thet stuf, u jest lised own hear

i maid a hunnit, rite  ?

ernst tischler wrote:

i don thank u hav thet mush time; ta do awl thet stuf, u jest lised own hear

i maid a hunnit, rite  ?

F!!!   

ernst tischler wrote:
i don thank u hav thet mush time; ta do awl thet stuf, u jest lised own hear

i maid a hunnit, rite  ?

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
F!!!   

da F!!! iz stans fore Fabilus!!!

i haz Fabilus!!!

ernst tischler wrote:

da F!!! iz stans fore Fabilus!!!

i haz Fabilus!!!

F-

ernst tischler wrote:
da F!!! iz stans fore Fabilus!!!

i haz Fabilus!!!

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
F-

i not votes fer u 2 b modarater

LOL

Jay  Edwards wrote:
Excellent point.

Why did MM choose to discriminate against Soapbox?


Brian, if you want a ''set of rules that eliminated all subjectivity'' then eliminate all rules for Soapbox and -- whoosh -- no subjectivity or moderation needed.  Add a click-through warning (adults only - proceed at your own risk) for access to the forum.  Problem solved but I doubt you will do it -- even though you just said you would.

It used to have the same rules as the other forums... pretty straightforward.

What went wrong is the fact that some of the mods got too invested in the actual discussions, and they would come to the rescue of those who's side they were on and they would brig opponents for vague violations of already vague rules.

It got to the point where people could freely say things about some politicians, while others would be brigged for saying the exact thing about other politicians. The mods started to feel that they could control the direction of the conversations/debates, and that power became too much for them to handle.

Lightcraft Studio wrote:
It used to have the same rules as the other forums... pretty straightforward.

What went wrong is the fact that some of the mods got too invested in the actual discussions, and they would come to the rescue of those who's side they were on and they would brig opponents for vague violations of already vague rules.

It got to the point where people could freely say things about some politicians, while others would be brigged for saying the exact thing about other politicians. The mods started to feel that they could control the direction of the conversations/debates, and that power became too much for them to handle.

That's exactly what happened to Soapbox. 

''Uneven moderation'' due to political bias and personal favoritism.  It continues to this day.

Heck, I was brigged for simply saying that I thought someone in a linked article (a person not on MM) might be a Democrat -- I stated no other opinion about the person and then posted with a link showing that the person was indeed a Democrat (I had seen a newspaper article about the guy a few days earlier) with -- again -- no opinion attached.  Result:  four days in the brig for my very first brigging offense.  Two other posters who made negative comments about the political right were not brigged or even reprimanded.

heehee