Important: Member Issues Forum and Related New Policy (Cross-posted from main forum)

We've had an interesting set of posts lately. We've had a non-ancap lecturing ancaps about how they should and should not post to elevate discourse. In spite of his alleged concern for elevating discourse, he then deems it fit to call LvMI-affiliated people some very ugly names. After he is temp-banned for doing so, the moderators get called out for censoring him. Yet in another thread, we get called out, it seems, for not censoring enough; an ancap would like us to ban "not teachable" people. This dovetails with a few posters repeatedly, over the past month or so, flaming opinionated non-ancaps, and calling for their banning. So on one side we're being accused of silencing dissent in order to promote a certain worldview. And on the other side, we're being asked to silence dissent more, so as to make people of a certain worldview more comfortable. Let me just say again, contrary to the accusations of former, and the requests of the latter, the moderators do not, and will not, ban or delete posts for ideological reasons. Yes we do have a mission: to advance the scholarship of liberty in the Austrian tradition. But advancing a school of though is not the same thing as cosseting it. In fact the two things are antithetical. We do not refrain from silencing pro-war or pro-intervention posts in order to be fair to war-mongers and etatists, but rather because the best way to discredit their arguments is to openly, and civilly debate them. Even if they themselves are "not teachable", then continually refuting them in debate will serve to teach others. I know this won't convince the people it is primarily addressed to. And I know the mods, the "accusers", and the "demanders" could go around and around regarding this forever. But enough is enough. I believe there is a silent majority of readers and members out there who are sick of all this. The value of the forum for people only interested in learning (and not in personality clashes) is severely dilluted by all this moaning and groaning back and forth by certain regulars. I can only imagine how much of a turn-off it would be to come here interested in learning about Austrianism, and to constantly see "drama posts" at the top of the page. (Actually, I don't need to imagine; I distinctly remember what it was like being a newbie, and constantly being bombarded by gladiatorial ego clashes.) That is why I've created Community group called "Member Issues" for people to vent there. If you want to call a member out on something, then "take it outside"; meaning, post in the Member Issues forum, and let your adversary know about the post. That is the one and only place for drama now. The main forum is reserved for discussions about ideas themselves. Complaints in the main forum about the members expressing those ideas, and the manner in which they express them, will now be considered off-topic, and deleted. That includes: accusations of trolling, accusations of dishonesty, accusations of insanity, questioning another person's credentials, and questioning another person's character. And as always, schoolyard insults are always out of bounds, no matter where they're posted. Subscribe and unsubscribe as necessary to deal with issues with other members. Subscribe permanently, if you like to tune into member drama. Feel free to stay unsubscribed if you want to tune it out. But please, let's stop yelling at each other on the forum front page, potentially ruining the learning experience for the silent (or at least less-vocal) majority.

I would support banning people who were ancap but just trolled whatever minarchists/lost socialists here. Rettoper... it is good he stays in that one thread. It is very very bad.

Snowflake could you link me please?

Aw man formatting seems broken on this. No paragraphs. The thread is here. http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/16562.aspx?PageIndex=9 NirgrahamUK and Olvetto have been following it.

There is no text editor here. Couldn't you integrate this with the real forums? Testing if html works...

---

I've said this a million times. This isn't about "silencing opposition" because of their ideology. It's about being sick of people making false claims, fallacious arguments, not citing sources, etc. You should be deleting the posts that derail threads. Take the positivism thread as an example. Giles comes in with 3 sets of false claims about Hoppe and the whole thread is about begging him to cite his source. It isn't like you have to be anywhere near 100% strict about it. People are new, make mistakes, or whatever. The problem comes about when it is a pattern of behavior and absolutely nothing is done about it. There would be a lot less flamefests if you also delete posts like Rettopper's in the Hiroshima thread where he has several blocks of 4-6 posts in a row and repeatedly calls anarchists "faith based jihadists". I don't see how you expect people to report stuff like this when nothing gets done about it.

Nice to know you care so much about forum issues to respond to my post Herr Lilburne.

Why did you call me "Herr Lilburne"?

Well you've ghettoized and ignored dissent. You could be a little more lord-like, but that would be boring.

If true, what would that have to do with the word "Herr", given that "Herr" is equivalent to "Mr." in German?

True, but it comes from a link to lordship and nobility. Are you capable of addressing the points of my original post or are you going to try to distract things?

"Are you capable of addressing the points of my original post or are you going to try to distract things?" I am capable of addressing your points. However, such a disrespectful tone makes me less than obliging.

"I am capable of addressing your points. "

I don't believe you. How about manning up and addressing them throughout my uncivil tonal barrage. I mean seriously dude, if there is one place to emit an uncivil tone, I would think it is here.

This is a place for member issues, not a safe haven for incivility.

"This isn't about "silencing opposition" because of their ideology. It's about being sick of people making false claims, fallacious arguments, not citing sources, etc. You should be deleting the posts that derail threads. Take the positivism thread as an example. Giles comes in with 3 sets of false claims about Hoppe and the whole thread is about begging him to cite his source. It isn't like you have to be anywhere near 100% strict about it. People are new, make mistakes, or whatever. The problem comes about when it is a pattern of behavior and absolutely nothing is done about it. There would be a lot less flamefests if you also delete posts like Rettopper's in the Hiroshima thread where he has several blocks of 4-6 posts in a row and repeatedly calls anarchists "faith based jihadists". I don't see how you expect people to report stuff like this when nothing gets done about it."

I'm going to send an email to Mr. Tucker.

"Take care, ERO."

That seems like you are about to ban me Mr. Lilburne. I asked you to define "uncivil" in private, because I really can't tell the difference between your use of this term and "one holding an unassailable position".

How does "take care" imply an impending ban? In your PM, you called me "snarky". Saying "take care" in response was nothing more than turning the other cheek.

.

You deleted lots of posts. Here is one more.

Ghettoizing dissent. Good on you for thinking up this phrase. This is how I feel about the creation of this group, but I couldn't find the right words. I start a dispassionate thread to try to influence moderating policy by suggesting a change and it gets quoted as the straw that broke the camel's back and prompted the opening of a special 'containment area' which opens up with a post about how "enough is enough", how there is a silent majority of readers "who are sick of all this", how it is one example of "moaning and groaning", and a "drama post". I don't really see how a post which tries to influence moderating policy belongs to a "Member Issues" group or the "one and only place for drama now". If the main forum is going to be "reserved for discussions about ideas themselves" then there should at least be a separate group opened titled "Suggestions" or even "Suggestions & Complaints". Any forum should have place where members can legitimately voice their views about the moderating policy and suggest changes without it automatically being stigmatized as a "drama post" that has to be kept away from the eyes of the newcomers by banishing it to the 'keeping the crazies in the cellar' group.

Marko, I am simply not going to let topics like this distract on the front page from discussions about economics, political theory, history, and philosophy anymore.

Olovetto, just so you know I did not delete the content your post quoted below. Did you? E.R. OLOVETTO WROTE: " You are vacuous and crotchety, beyond my comment of "embodying the term snarky".. Can you address the issues I was really talking about or is all you can do peer down upon us plebs and "turn the other cheek"? Oh hey, some other terms are coming to mind like "distant and disinterested politician", "faux libertarian", and "terrorists win." There is nothing I could say to get you to acknowledge your errors, right?"

Well, just in case it wasn't you, I've restored it.

I deleted it because it is obviously uncivil, although I meant what I said. I don't see how you can expect people to not get pissed off when you ignore their points and instead focus on their "uncivil tone".

You did this in some other thread too, ignoring some incredibly easy suggested improvements to the forum, something not even really debatable that any good moderating staff would do like make a sticky about the quote workaround, or rules, or a collection of topics so there isn't a new one every week on nukes.

Compare what you chastise me for as uncivil to what we get from bloom, who can't even mount any sort of logical argument. There is more to moderation than just deleting curse words. bloom has stated publicly before that at that time all he cared about was making stupid responses and pissing people off, and he was just wasting time until the store opened so he could go buy some video game.

Also, where is my MVP tag? It should have been taken off 5 weeks ago, except you guys neglected the monthly awards. I don't really care if I have it, or never get it again, but you selectively removed mine and left everyone else's, and for what? You've yet to explain how the image I posted was not an entirely appropriate response to bloom's hypocrisy.

I have a limited amount of time, and I am not beholden to responding to every single one of your many, many complaints. If you give me more incivility to deal with, I have less time (and desire) to respond to your points. Again, allegedly faulty argumentation is not going to be an object of mod action here. It reflects poorly on the forum to have "MVP"s posting such images as the one you posted. The image you posted associated an entire religion/culture/familial tradition with Nazism. It has no place here.

ERO: "The problem comes about when it is a pattern of behavior and absolutely nothing is done about it. There would be a lot less flamefests if you also delete posts like Rettopper's in the Hiroshima thread where he has several blocks of 4-6 posts in a row and repeatedly calls anarchists "faith based jihadists". I don't see how you expect people to report stuff like this when nothing gets done about it."

ERO, report posts like his using the report function (it should work, unlike the quote function :D). Thanks.

"Marko, I am simply not going to let topics like this distract on the front page from discussions about economics, political theory, history, and philosophy anymore."

What avenue do we have open to make suggestions regarding moderating policy?

You will not permit them on the front page. Where will you permit them?

You can make them here. That doesn't mean we have to do as you say.

This isn't a real avenue. Its creation was announced in a post describing it as the place for "moaning and groaning" and "drama".

This is as if a government proclaimed that if citizens wish to communicate to it that the media they should use was scheisse porno.

By insisting the place for member's views/suggestions/initiatives is a whining group you reveal what you think of such efforts.

I only think of the incessant complaints of certain users, who seem to have developed an excessive sense of entitlement with regard to these forums, and who have made the front page chock full of drama, as "moaning and groaning". But I can't make a policy that only applies to them. At the same time I won't let them dominate the front page with drama anymore. So here we are.

Then it would be good if the post with which this group was opened made it clear this group is meant for legitimate posts as well.

The only suggestion that I can think of at the moment is to extend certain rules of conduct to the titles as well. I recently reacted to one poorly titled thread and, consequently, had part of my response labeled as an "ad-hominem ." In hindsight, I should have worded my response better and therefore apologize. But I still don't see how my post could have been more offensive than the discussion's title. I don't mean to suggest that the disciplinary action was partial. After all, two subsequent posts were also altered, and those could have been directed toward my post. Still, the title idea might be something to consider. At any rate, I just needed to vent here, as this is the most appropriate avenue available.

Marko, I think that's implied in the fact that a sub-forum would never be created for "illegitimate" posts.

Hi econ student, That topic was really really old. It would be far too much work to go through every old thread and make sure it complies with the new policy. There's only time to apply the policy to new posts.

Thank you for the quick response (I slightly edited the post above during your reply). Yes, I suspected that the thread in question had opened prior to the new rules. I don't think that anyone could expect you to go through all the old posts and correct them. That would be, as you stated, far too much work. It's still discouraging to see them, though. That's why I reacted.

So lilburne, you deserve an excoriating response for your incoherent BS, but my one "hugely racist" comment ever has prevented you from doing anything to fix these forums. Since us plebs don't know what goes on behind the scenes here, could you please clarify what one thing, if anything, you have ever done to improve the state of the forums?