[Suggestion]zero-tolerance on Flamebaiting

[Kaystein]

I'd like to suggest expanding an existing rule as a counter to the average griefer that likes to bait newcomers into flaming on the forums, then filing reports here to punish said newcomer.

It's a common occurrence, if this dispatch is credible. I haven't fallen victim to this since creating Kaystein, and I'd want to reduce the chance of that ever happening for any reason.

My suggestion is straightforward, to adopt a zero-tolerance policy regarding flamebaiting. If two people get into an argument, one person reports it and it's visible that the reporting party is the one to initiate the conversation, they get a warning for flamebaiting, regardless of the content. This is to put more responsibility on the involved parties to sort their own mess out, or for anybody involved to abandon the conversation entirely, their failure at doing so would see both players punished when a third party reports them both. No longer would a griefer be able to make a frivolous report in bad faith without consequence to harm others. Reducing the number of reports would allow moderation a few more moments of spare time to scour the forum for more serious threats, increase reaction times to spam, etc.

Mostly it will eliminate the leg of a toxic element in NationStates. Please consider this.

[USS Monitor]

I'd like to suggest expanding an existing rule as a counter to the average griefer that likes to bait newcomers into flaming on the forums, then filing reports here to punish said newcomer.

It's a common occurrence, if this dispatch is credible. I haven't fallen victim to this since creating Kaystein, and I'd want to reduce the chance of that ever happening for any reason.

I'm not sure why you're trusting some random dispatch unless this is something you've witnessed firsthand.

My suggestion is straightforward, to adopt a zero-tolerance policy regarding flamebaiting. If two people get into an argument, one person reports it and it's visible that the reporting party is the one to initiate the conversation, they get a warning for flamebaiting, regardless of the content. This is to put more responsibility on the involved parties to sort their own mess out, or for anybody involved to abandon the conversation entirely, their failure at doing so would see both players punished when a third party reports them both. No longer would a griefer be able to make a frivolous report in bad faith without consequence to harm others. Reducing the number of reports would allow moderation a few more moments of spare time to scour the forum for more serious threats, increase reaction times to spam, etc.

Mostly it will eliminate the leg of a toxic element in NationStates. Please consider this.

That doesn't make sense.

Picture this:

The Sherpa Empire writes: "Sherpas are cooler than Nazis."
The Evil Reich responds with: "You're an idiot! Nazism is way better than anything those useless brutes have ever contributed to humanity."

If the Sherpa Empire reports that, you want them to get a warning for flamebait?

[Jebslund]

The only part of that dispatch that is credible, in my experience, is the vets having no respect for newcomers, and even that bit isn't universally true.

Your suggestion is also a poor one that would lead to people with no intention of flaming getting warnings for flaming. Zero-tolerence policies in general are doomed to fail due to the lack of nuance. They tend to be a bit like trying to hammer in a thin nail with a jackhammer.

[Frisbeeteria]

Zero-tolerence policies in general are doomed to fail due to the lack of nuance.

This. There's a reason almost all mod actions rely on human judgement. Otherwise we could simply be replaced by automated scripts. I suspect our forum and RMB posters would very rapidly get deleted and then DOSed for minor violations that a human would judge non-actionable.

vets having no respect for newcomers

In a game where long-time players often create new puppets on a daily basis, there's zero way to tell a newbie from a veteran. I don't see how anyone can make generalizations about how newbies are treated without knowing their puppetry history.

[Jebslund]

vets having no respect for newcomers

In a game where long-time players often create new puppets on a daily basis, there's zero way to tell a newbie from a veteran. I don't see how anyone can make generalizations about how newbies are treated without knowing their puppetry history.

Oh, there's ways to tell who's new. Usually, it's the people that don't understand the culture here yet, or the rules and customs of the different boards. It may not be apparent at a glance, but you can usually tell from their posts even without knowing the puppetry history.

I've found that many of the vets seem to be in favor of harshly putting down the newbies when they screw up, instead of gently correcting them or at least explaining what they're doing wrong.

Edit: Why did no one tell me I'd fucked up the quotes?

[Kaystein]

I'm not sure why you're trusting some random dispatch unless this is something you've witnessed firsthand.

---

That doesn't make sense.

Picture this:

The Sherpa Empire writes: "Sherpas are cooler than Nazis."
The Evil Reich responds with: "You're an idiot! Nazism is way better than anything those useless brutes have ever contributed to humanity."

If the Sherpa Empire reports that, you want them to get a warning for flamebait?

Yes, I've seen this behavior first hand, and it wouldn't surprise me if you've been used as a weapon by the player I'm thinking about, USS Monitor.

The reason I suggest this is because i see this problem behavior increasing in frequency.

While it's a poor idea now, there will be a more popular thread, at a later date, created by somebody else more influential when the problem becomes a big enough issue. An idea like this will be suggested in that thread too. I'm certain of this.

When that happens, remember this thread. This suggestion is a simpler solution, even if it's draconian.

That's all for now, I put out my idea and anybody that reads this knows it. I'm content to let this rest for now.

[True Refuge]

I'm not sure why you're trusting some random dispatch unless this is something you've witnessed firsthand.

---

That doesn't make sense.

Picture this:

The Sherpa Empire writes: "Sherpas are cooler than Nazis."
The Evil Reich responds with: "You're an idiot! Nazism is way better than anything those useless brutes have ever contributed to humanity."

If the Sherpa Empire reports that, you want them to get a warning for flamebait?

Yes, I've seen this behavior first hand, and it wouldn't surprise me if you've been used as a weapon by the player I'm thinking about, USS Monitor.

The reason I suggest this is because i see this problem behavior increasing in frequency.

While it's a poor idea now, there will be a more popular thread, at a later date, created by somebody else more influential when the problem becomes a big enough issue. An idea like this will be suggested in that thread too. I'm certain of this.

When that happens, remember this thread. This suggestion is a simpler solution, even if it's draconian.

That's all for now, I put out my idea and anybody that reads this knows it. I'm content to let this rest for now.

I think you’re inflating this suggestion’s importance in the grander scheme of NS. It’s essentially asking the mods to punish players for making reports, as per your response to the sherpa example above which is pretty clearly not baiting. The OSRS makes it perfectly clear that baiting and flaming are actionable, and those rules are enforced pretty well.

Players are regularly punished for baiting, and the best way to deal with it is to report it. If you’re seeing it so often, then why haven’t you been making frequent reports? If you haven’t been making frequent reports, what evidence do you have that the mods are too lenient on baiting? That dispatch makes wide assertions and provides basically no evidence aside from ‘we all know it’s true’, so I don’t think it counts.

[The New California Republic]

When that happens, remember this thread. This suggestion is a simpler solution, even if it's draconian.

It isn't though, as posters who are entirely innocent would fall foul of such a disregard for context.

[Kaystein]

Players are regularly punished for baiting, and the best way to deal with it is to report it. If you’re seeing it so often, then why haven’t you been making frequent reports?

Its a waste of my time. Nothing I would report would be actionable. The players getting away with baiting and reporting have been here a while and know what to do to avoid trouble.

[Jebslund]

Players are regularly punished for baiting, and the best way to deal with it is to report it. If you’re seeing it so often, then why haven’t you been making frequent reports?

Its a waste of my time. Nothing I would report would be actionable. The players getting away with baiting and reporting have been here a while and know what to do to avoid trouble.

Either put up or shut up, as the saying goes. If you're not going to report them, complaining about them does no good. Report them, and you'll at least get an explanation for how and why it's not actionable (you may simply be wrong about the situation). Complaining and suggesting policies that would do far more harm than good even if they did any good at all isn't going to help anyone.

[Reploid Productions]

While it's a poor idea now, there will be a more popular thread, at a later date, created by somebody else more influential when the problem becomes a big enough issue. An idea like this will be suggested in that thread too. I'm certain of this.

When that happens, remember this thread. This suggestion is a simpler solution, even if it's draconian.

Yours is not the first, nor will it be the last impractical or poorly-thought out moderation suggestion to be made in the game's 15+ years of existence. Moderation policy is not a matter of popularity (frequently the opposite, if I'm being honest.) and as already noted by Jebslund and by Fris, zero-tolerance policies are, quite frankly, complete trash due to their lack of flexibility and nuance. In a site with such a wide variety of often extremely contradictory opinions and viewpoints, flexibility is essential; a "simpler", more draconian approach would result in a very dead community very quickly.

If you see something you feel may be actionable, report it. The worst that happens is after looking at it we decide that it is not. And if it's borderline, then at least it starts to build up a paper trail highlighting a pattern of problematic behavior.

As this idea is dead on arrival, I see little purpose in keeping the thread open.


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku