The moderators have reviewed the decision to ban @dstudioscode after users appealed the decision. Tl;dr: We are revoking the ban, and are instead 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 dstudiocodeâs pattern of engagement on the Forum, not simply because of their most recent postâfor more on this, see the âthird considerationâ listed below.
More details:
Three moderators,[1] none of whom was involved in the original...
Moderation update: We're issuing dstudiocode a one-month ban for breaking Forum norms in their recent post and subsequent behavior. Specifically:
The post in question, which asked whether murdering meat-eaters could be considered "ethical," crosses a line in terms of promoting potential violence.
As a reminder, the ban affects the user, not just the account. During their ban period, the user will not be permitted to rejoin the Forum under another account name. If they ...
The closing sentence of this comment, âAll in all, bad ideas, advocated by the intellectually weak, appealing mostly to the genetically subpar,â breaks our Forum norm against unnecessary rudeness or offensiveness.
The âgenetically subparâ part is especially problematic. At best, it would appear that the commenter, John, is claiming that the post mainly appeals to the less intelligentâan unnecessarily rude and most likely false claim. A worse interpretation is that John is making a racist remark, which we view as strongly unacceptable.
Overall, we see th...
The moderators have removed personal information from the above comment. The Forum's policy is to allow anonymity, and even if you believe someone has misbehaved or misled, it is still not allowed to identify them or related parties.
Weâre issuing SuperDuperForecasting a one-month ban for breaking strong Forum norms in several comments (1,2). Specifically:
To be clear, Iâm not commenting on the more complex questions discussed elsewhere in the thread, such as whether or when itâs appropriate to speculate about someoneâs psychology. But I do want to flag that mental illness is often stigmatised and we should probably ...
I think this kind of discussion is important, and I don't want to discourage it, but I do think these discussions are more productive when they're had in a calm manner. I appreciate this can be difficult with emotive topics, but it can be hard to change somebody's mind if they could interpret your tone as attacking them.
In summary: I think it would be more productive if the discussion could be less hostile going forwards.
I think some of your recent comments raised valuable points but, unfortunately, too many do not follow Forum norms. Specifically, norms around assuming good faith, staying on topic, not being unnecessarily rude or offensive, and avoiding deliberate flamebait.
Some examples:
Also noting that this is your 14th comment on this thread, in a very short span of time, and your comments appear to be becoming incr...
Hey folks, a reminder to please be thoughtful as you comment.
The previous Nonlinear thread received almost 500 comments; many of these were productive, but there were also some more heated exchanges. Following Forum normsâin a nutshell: be kind, stay on topic, be honestâis probably even more important than usual in charged situations like these.
Discussion here could end up warped towards aggression and confusion for a few reasons, even if commenters are generally well intentioned:
Update: this user returned to the Forum yesterday to re-post the same piece. I've banned that account as well. Bans affect the user, not the account.