I think that is a great idea. It was brought up and discussed in the Moderation thread.
If Mako had been moderating this thread, how many people would have been sandboxed?
- 28 votes.
- Started by bobn2 on May 2, 2023.
-
-
What's your starting configuration? If you meet someone that you don't know, will you treat them with respect or disrespect? The idea that it must be 'earned' sounds like you'll start-off disrespecting them until you decide that they've earned respect. Now put the boot on the other foot. How about if you start chatting with someone and they disrespect you from the get-go. How's that feeling for you?
-
Sharing a condo with Elvis.
-
identical treatment, but never banned. except for the last week where i did tell them what my real feelings were towards them😁
-
deleted = duplicate post
-
I haven't been 'defending' him at all. I have never once sought to justify what he has done to the various people here who have said that they were victims of his moderation. I was one of those. What I have done is point out the great service that he did this forum in the startup times. I wasn't 'conned'. 'Surprised' would have been a better word. Whilst I was going about getting sandboxed, warned and once banned by admins and other mods trying to build this place, that wasn't coming from his side, instead a commentary explaining what was happening and what turned out to be very good advice as to how to negotiate it. That's simply an empirical fact which I could prove in a court of law if I had to. It needed to be said. Saying it is in no way 'defending' his moderation actions, it's just making clear what happened. And if it doesn't fit in with the picture you want to have of the man, sorry about that, but real people are more complex than the cartoon villains some people want to deal with here. I should say as well that I am in no way acting as a 'spokesperson'. Never been asked, so far as I know, never wanted. I'm just putting out some facts that needed to be out there, if people really want to discuss this person.
-
He had the right to sue, just not the right to win. Simple principle at work there - if you plan to make some money by suing someone much richer than you, first work out how you're going to afford better lawyers than him. My tip, find a rich guy who never pays his lawyers. Then no decent lawyer will work for him and you'll win the case with the guy you met in the bar acting for you.
-
yes.... a great "thumb up" on this sentence
" this site value" is the leverage point that makes a huge difference.
You've got an odd conception of what going on in this thread
" this site value" is the leverage point that makes a huge difference.
@bobn2, is nailing down this on all readers from the beginning making a lot of precise and clear affirmations of his creed on freedomI'm really grateful to the foundation guys for that
I think you missed an important point, but @bobn2 has already answered directly.
I can tell you something important as a normal member:
All the mechanisms you know, may be called with the same name here as elsewhere but they will have different meanings and action scope." this site value" is the leverage point that makes a huge difference.
And @bobn2, nailed that pretty hard in this really useful thread
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
Yep and that is why facilitators won't be able to permaban members.
Members will also have a much easier and accessible appeals process to have decisions made against them reviewed.
-
[deleted]
-
That is all speculation at the moment because we haven't seen a draft for the proposed roles, responsibilities and powers for the facilitators.
-
Hiring is generally done confidentially, according to a defined process. What you don't get is communications between everyone in the company saying 'if xxx applies for a job, don't hire him.' By and large one leaves considering whether or not to hire someone until after they've applied.
-
[deleted]
-
And there are other tools, rules and people that work against that danger. I believe you have this false premise that there is some model working as intended. No, people come in, try to change things, try to rock your boat, try to ruin stuff. But it is the presence of power, that guards these values, that has the same capabilities to harm as the evil party has. It´s absolutely inevitable. Without power structure, there still will be unstructured power, and you can absolutely forget about any safety.
-
I highly doubt that, and I witnessed the process many times.
I am not saying that it is what you are doing, but letting the fox into the hen house, because we discart history, that is great recipe for failure.
No interest in the current issue with a person, just responding to the thought process you laid out.
Although not having the right words, healthier "middle ground" is to be found. -
Of course the vast majority of people would treat someone they never met before with respect.
But that is not the case here because Mako2011 is at least somewhat known to members through his interactions with them at dpreview. Therefore it is totally reasonable for members who have had dealings with Mako2011 to decide for themselves how much respect they will give him here on dprevived based on their experiences with him at dpreview should he decide to become a member here.
If I used your logic then that means just because I have never met DonaldB in person then I should respect him here at dprevived........yeah right 😉 ............I think hell will probably freeze over first 😊
Not in the case where I had no dealings at all with that person. See above.
In the case where members know Mako2011 through their dealings with him at dpreview and for whatever reason have little respect for him, then yes it is totally reasonable that Mako2011 would have to earn those members' respect back if he was interested in rebuilding bridges here on dprevived.
If they had reason to disrespect me from past experiences then I wouldn't be surprised. If I had never dealt with them before then it would reflect very poorly on them as a person.
