⬆️
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (114)
sorted by:
⬆️
Um, pretty simple, if the mods remove the political tag with credible evidence that an apolitical standard is being applied, then the admins will either let it go or raise their objection. I suppose it's possible for the admins to do nothing and leave it out even with community effort, but they can continue being appealed to. But we have a few steps to take before we can test them on that, don't we? And (ad) voting for moderation would allow a moderator to remove the tag, wouldn't it?
Wouldn’t that actually be a case of the oft-mentioned “wheel-warring”? The founding mods weren’t even involved in the initial decision.
That said, please do attempt work your charm on the admin to extract anything of value, namely the flicking of the switch for this board, or some kind of cogent reason not to.
Well, I've been engaging this with an assumption of lack of continuity with the current mod team.
The current team is names inactive over one year, plus Doggos and C who reserve the right of indefinite silence. I would presume those two accounts are responsible enough to let matters proceed when they've been informed and remain silent.
I don't know how the initial decision arose, but if it was by admin without full agreement by all the founding mods then at least those mods didn't war. However, 5 years later a changed situation that prompts mod action due to community consensus, if not opposed overtly by admin, would not be a wheel war. If admin undid something without public deliberation that mods publicly deliberated over, that would be wheel war (but if that description applies to anything then it would be like forums clearly created in bad faith and rapidly nulled).
I don't think charm is what works here. Personally it's still hard for me to justify making a case that the community is unified on any change, because discussion hasn't run its course and analysis of consensus may not be straightforward, and then there remains the question of what ruleset the community would favor for moderation. When I first implied ease of moderation of this community looked average, I think I was wrong, because there's a lot more going on than I realized. If I have time and desire to report it fully then I would try to account for all views expressed (no matter how trollish) and hope that some consistency of consensus can be gleaned therefrom. Perhaps I'll have enough vision to make a proposal that can get it over the hump, but for now it's the threads that have arisen.
The only case needing be made is the case for hiding it in the first place. Considering that’s never been done, nothing further is needed to undo it but for the admins to remove their heads from their asses. Simple as.
“Politics” has never been defined by them, therefore seeking “consensus” on the subject is impossible
While you’re at it, you should probably get c/Christianity unhidden too
Hmmm, why? Do you want to lay out for me the benefits and deficits of such a change?
Besides the fact that was never done in the first place, to justify the initial change?
Embers need air to kindle
Flowers often need cross-pollination to bloom
Frankly I couldn’t care less, considering I stopped subscribing a while ago because of how claustrophobic and cloistered it had been allowed to become. I wonder (/s) if that’s related.
So the deficit of moderators enforcing apoliticality is an insignificant deficit to you, and the air and exposure is a benefit. I guess I figured that but will need to pray on what a clear valuation would be.
Your words seem to mean that the initial change from apolitical to political, if there was one, didn't have the benefits laid out. My recollection, which is not logged, is that when I was asked to join the mods about one month after the community's founding there was no doubt to any of us that the community declared sufficient authority over politics. Now, the first mod action, on the day of the community's founding, was to approve a post about "never forget" J6, and the next action the second day was to delete a meme that used AOC's political posture in a nonpolitical context (which I didn't wheel-war later). So I'd agree the line has always been very blurry, but I don't think it was something that admin was prepared to micromanage upon that first community rollout, and so the status a month later is the more normative.
If there was no discussion then, discussion now is certainly fine! But, before praying on it in more depth, I can say my first reaction is that to add apoliticality to our civility rules would be pretty similar to the state regulating political speech in a 501(c)(3). Hard sell, which is why I asked you.