(Lack of) moderator team

[shawn]

The language (and the tone of it) used in many discord channels is not acceptable here.

Such languages are not exclusive to discord:
viewtopic.php?p=968000#p968000

[chrisw]

The language (and the tone of it) used in many discord channels is not acceptable here.

Such languages are not exclusive to discord:
viewtopic.php?p=968000#p968000

Que? Non-sequitur. Do you understand why the postings were moderated? The type of language that Graham is referring to? The type of language that is not acceptable here?

[chesskobra]

I think implementing downvotes is not a solution, because people don't care about downvotes. Insulting, aggressive language must be cracked down upon by moderators, with increasingly harsher time outs if necessary after warnings. That kind of language is unbearable even when it is directed at somebody else.

Also, for those of us who are not moderators, the correct way to respond to insults is simply to report.

[Dann Corbit]

Moderation is a tedious thankless job with no real rewards when people are not listening to the pleas for decorum.
There is a tone of harshness found on the internet in general today.
That is not something new, as this group was formed to get away from the trolls on news:comp.chess.programming
Profanity, denigration and aggressive behavior are actually evidence that the one acting in a harsh manner has run out of logical ideas and has shifted to ad-hominem.
I suspect that most people who want better moderation would not enjoy being moderators. I have acted as moderator many times, and I never really liked it. I did it because I was asked to do it.
The last time I was moderator, I could not handle the job because my pleas for civil behavior were ignored by the majority and I felt like I was wasting my time shouting into the wind.

The real answer to the problem is simple. We treat each other with the same sort of dignity we would like to be treated with. We consider the viewpoints of others as equal to our own. We base our discussions on logic over emotion.

But well, this is the internet. That is why moderators are necessary. I won't do the job again. I am not cut out for it.

[hgm]

In my experience most people that 'want better moderation' would actually like to have moderation power in order to abuse it for settling arguments in their favor by censoring or banning people that withspeak them, offer opinions different from their own, or otherwise have triggered their lightly inflammable ire. Or simply for the kick of doing it. They then get angry when existing moderators won't agree to do that on their behalf when they order them to do so.

They often have a narrow-minded view of how the world should look, in particular that it should not be tolerated that there exist people who have other interests and might not want to do exactly what they are doing.

[chrisw]

Next task for the moderators, in my opinion, is to put a stop to the weaponisation of signatures. I count four of these at present, each targeting a specific individual or group. It’s a kind of my-tank-is-on-your-lawn statement, an aggressive challenge, repeating every post. Again they create a bad atmosphere, implying the existence of armed provocateur(s), just waiting for conflict and implying that this here is a fighting place.
Some date back to events or perceived events of several years ago. Kind suggestion to those with weaponised signatures, your signature is if you wish to impart a little information about yourself, anything else, in particular implied conflict, is undesirable and should not be there. If you want to make some kind of point, kindly do it in one post, not every post you write, forever.

[Rebel]

+1
.

[Dann Corbit]

+1.