Hey all, hereās a quick reminder of some relevant Forum norms, since this is a bit of a heated topic, and we might have some new users taking part:
- Be kind.
- Stay civil, at the minimum. Donāt sneer or be snarky. In general, assume good faith. We may delete unnecessary rudeness and issue warnings or bans for it.
- Substantive disagreements are fine and expected. Disagreements help us find the truth and are part of healthy communication.
- Mass downvoting - itās a potentially bannable offence to downvote a userās posts faster than you could read them.
- And just to seco
Mod here. It looks like this thread has devolved into a personal dispute with only tangential relevance to EA. Iām therefore locking the thread.
Those involved, please donāt try to resurrect the dispute elsewhere on this forum; we may issue bans if we see that happening.
Discussion of this topic can be heated or emotionally difficult for some. We would like to remind everyone to adhere to forum norms: be respectful, interpret others' comments charitably, and avoid personal attacks. Please donāt assume other peopleās values or backgrounds.
As Richard notes at the end of the post, reproductive rights are an orthogonal conversation ā you can be worried about low fertility rates and population decline without it affecting your view on abortion, contraception, or social conservatism.Ā
However, some readers may come from cont...
We're issuing @NobodyInteresting a warning for the above comment. The comment does not meet the expectations for civility and engaging in good faith. I would not recommend a public warning for this comment on it's own (though I would downvote it for the above reasons, and recommend a discrete DM), but we have less tolerance for users who have not yet shown that they can engage productively.
The moderation team is issuing @Eugenics-Adjacent a 6-month ban forĀ flamebaitĀ and trolling.
Iāll note that Eugenics-Adjacentās posts and comments have been mostly about pushing against what they see as EA groupthink. In banning them, I do feel a twinge of āhuh, I hope Iām not making the Forum more like an echo chamber.ā However, there are tradeoffs at play. āOverrun by flamebait and trollingā seems to be the default end state for most internet spaces: the Forum moderation team is committed to fighting against this default.
All in all, we think the ...
The moderators have reviewed the decision to ban @dstudioscode after users appealed the decision. Tl;dr:Ā We are revoking the ban, and are insteadĀ rate-limiting dstudioscode and warning them to avoid posting content that could be perceived as advocating for major harm or illegal activities. The rate limit is due to dstudiocodeās pattern of engagement on the Forum, not simply because of their most recent postāfor more on this, see the āthird considerationā listed below.
More details:
Three moderators,[1]Ā none of whom was involved in the original...
This thread seems to have gone in an unhelpful direction.
Questioning motivations is a hard point to make well. I'm unwilling to endorse that they are never relevant, but it immediately becomes personal. Keeping the focus primarily on the level of the arguments themselves is an approach more likely to enlighten and less likely to lead to flamewars.
I'm not here to issue a moderation warning to anyone for the conversation ending up on the point of motivations. I do want to take my moderation hat off and suggest that people spend more time on the object level.... (read more)