I mention it only to illustrate that I am in fact intimately familiar with what is involved in being a moderator. Not some brain-dead “do what I say” user. There are many things I think you should change, but not because I say so. Because it makes sense.
Not because I think you should “submit to greater power” or something. That, I am not.
Since you keep wanting a label, I’ll give you one. You’re a prude. But that’s fine. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Only the way you handle people who aren’t, like me, needs some serious work. And tbh being a bit less of one would probably be good for you. Especially since you’re a moderator.
Along with your seemingly quite thin skin, I’m left questioning your suitability to be one. Another source of frustration for me, seeing as you are in a position to control something I care about.
Also, we’re having two different conversations, one about what nsfw is, and one about how to be a moderator.
Stop confusing my arguments about what is and isn’t nsfw as claims that I should get to decide what I’m allowed to post in your communities, without repercussions. Those are two different conversations.
Do I need to keep repeating that I ALWAYS and UNCONDITIONALLY adhere to the way the leaders of a given community want it to be run?
I blundered twice, but they were blunders. That is not up for discussion. You may interpret intent, but that does not change the fact that there was none.
For gods sake, I volunteered my active alts, and DIDN’T use one of my inactive ones to circumvent the ban. I got about as angry as one can get, and still didn’t blow up your inbox or community.
On moderation, you do not have grounds to ban me for as long as you have done, and you have no actual reason to believe I would not follow your rules were the ban shorter or cancelled.
The only thing my behaviour shows, is that I get mad when wronged, and complain when I think things can be done in a better way.
My animosity stemmed from perceived malice and incompetence on your part. The malice you all but admit to feeling, and allowing to affect your decisions. The incompetence I see was partly a misunderstanding, but also not entirely. Yet that is still far more forgivable, than the malice.
I check danbooru because I don’t believe in superiority of my opinion.
Neither do I. But you don’t respect my opinion, nor do you ask or seemingly care what your own users think.
In fact you basically admit to using what I’ve had to say as license to think less of me, to the point of considering me undeserving of fairness.
If I only ever used my own feelings, I’d be posting without ever using the nsfw tag. Everything I post is stuff I would and do use as wallpapers.
What I do and don’t tag is instead based on the comments and reports that I’ve received over the last year, as well as voting patterns. It is an attempt to tag things the way Lemmy specifically wants it. I’m about to hit 10 000 posts, so I think I have an ear for it by now.
Like I said in our original exchange, using nsfw tags when unnecessary harms community visibility and discovery. I am very intentionally trying to accelerate the growth of federated social media. As such, maximizing how well it does its jobs of congregating people into its communities, matters to me.
Maybe it doesn’t matter for you, but I think at least some of your users care about this.
As for your claim that image boards represent any kind of average, here I have to vehemently disagree. Image-boards are populated by a TINY minority, creating entries and entering metadata for each image. The voting system is in no way attached to the accuracy of this metadata, and generally, each entry is only ever created/edited/approved by two or three people.
That handful interprets the guideline for the formerly three, now four, ratings, not some “what does the average person feel” metric. And as I also mentioned in the original exchange, due to the differences of interpretation that those guidelines allow, each rating on danbooru has significant overlap with its neighbors, which becomes an issue when translating those ratings into a binary yes/no for another community of users.
My own script by default tags everything in the questionable and explicit category as nsfw, when posting to lemmy. But images rated general and sensitive, I set manually. Both because sensitive is often something no-one on lemmy will have an issue with, and because sometimes something obviously explicit has accidentally been rated general.
Their rating system is great “as a rule of thumb”. But it is fuzzy enough, that on the edge between sfw/nsfw you can’t just go “this goes here, that goes there”. It doesn’t match what users on lemmy expect. That lies somewhere in the middle of what danboorus moderators consider “sensitive”.
Image boards, next to an actual social media platform like the fediverse, are representative of absolutely nothing. They do a good job of creating internally consistent databases, maintained by a handful of users, but to claim that it is a representation of world averages is a massive reach.
It is like claiming Wikipedia is representative of the worlds general political leaning. It is a excellent internally consistent database of information. But it is not a good benchmark for what the average person thinks or believes. Because the average person does not write wikipedia articles.
In the same way, the average person is most certainly not rating and tagging images on image boards. What the average person DOES do, is report, comment and vote on social media.
The way you write that suggests that you still think that you bringing here misogynism and “hangups concerning the human body” is completely fair and not to just put a label. So I would like to know where do they start and end, because it just seams that you are using these terms to frame peoples that does not agree with you. I don’t think that topics about being a moderator and sane online communications are much different.
The only thing my behaviour shows, is that I get mad when wronged, and complain when I think things can be done in a better way.
There is more to it. Like actively expressing how mad you are through your speech tone.
But you don’t respect my opinion, nor do you ask or seemingly care what your own users think.
Agreeing and respecting are separate things. Latest changes were done, because user suggested it, and you know it. Also every change to the rules (maybe except some old ones) is documented in post descriptions.
In fact you basically admit to using what I’ve had to say as license to think less of me
Yes, I judge peoples based on their actions. I said it explicitly. Based on what I have seen at the time I believe my actions were fair.
… the way Lemmy specifically wants it.
I’m not sure if there is a Lemmy as a group with uniform mindset. Maybe more like an individual instance or even community or group of communities. I won’t be surprised if political, tech and anime parts of Lemmy are like completely different worlds. The same story with Twitter, someone knows it for mind numbling political debates, someone is there to just look at some pics.
Like I said in our original exchange, using nsfw tags when unnecessary harms community visibility and discovery …
To what extent rules should be soft to minimize NSFW rated images, when tags are necessary? I still think that NSFW filter is useless and nobody knows what user might expect being NSFW or not, even if we are talking just about Lemmy userbase. Instead they should filter communities and instances, and have expectations what can be put under NSFW in particular community. That’s how it already is in Twitter and Mastodon.
Take that danbooru is might be moderated by small group with hot takes is understandable.
What the average person does do, is report, comment and vote on social media.
Then we at touhou at LW are fine. It’s just you not liking the fact that your disrespectful behavior wasn’t tolerated. I would rather stick with peoples who can voice their opinion without disparaging anyone or being snarky. And you doesn’t seem to acknowledge issues in what you have written under two last posts at LW or prove that what you free of these issues.
Yes. I think the world in general should get over its hangups around sexual and physiological reality, I think the villification of these, prevalent in many cultures, should end. Because it is harmful.
We don’t shy away from the reality of violence to anywhere near the same extent, and the world would not be better for it, if we did.
You’re not going to invalidate that view by claiming it’s merely an attempt to lable people who disagree.
Like actively expressing how mad you are through your speech tone.
I have no idea what you mean by this. Again, no emotion was involved in our initial discussion on my end, but apparently you thought there was some secret insult in it, then?
Please do not interpret meaning where none exists. That isn’t fair to me, or yourself.
I’m not sure if there is a Lemmy as a group with uniform mindset. Maybe more like an individual instance or even community or group of communities.
Every single post ever posted, shows up in the “all” feeds of all instances with at least one subscriber of the relevant community. Excluding users only browsing their subscription, or users that have a bunch of things blocked, everyone has a chance to see anything/everything. And therefore also to comment, report, or vote.
In fact, the more active a community becomes, the more people outside it will see its content.
Federated social media does not sequester users into separate “echo chambers”. There is always overlap. That’s kind of the point.
Then we at touhou at LW are fine.
Are you? Again, I dare you to announce how you’ve handled my ban.
It’s just you not liking the fact that your disrespectful behavior wasn’t tolerated.
I never got rude until after I thought I was unfairly banned.
Even then it was mostly because I thought you deliberately shut down communication. That was incorrect, and learning that I had no difficulty dropping the anger.
You’re the one having a hard time treating me fairly, despite learning my side of things.
I would rather stick with peoples who can voice their opinion without disparaging anyone or being snarky.
So would I. Unfortunately you mod a community I care about, so I’d rather have you do better, than put in the work of replacing you.
But, since you made that choice for me, here we are.
And you doesn’t seem to acknowledge issues in what you have written under two last posts at LW or prove that what you free of these issues.
And you apparently can’t handle dissent, or accept criticism that isnt sugar-coated.
People can still have a valid point, even if they’re pissed as hell while saying it.
If you get to let the “feeling” someone gives you affect whether you try to improve their behaviour, or just banish them outright, I get to write in a way that shows I’m annoyed, when I’m annoyed. That was the Marisa post.
Up to about a 30-day ban, and I’d have just gone “oops, guess I got on their nerves, gotta be nicer”.
A year-long ban was more of a “wow, this person needs to get over themself”.
I dropped the swears and agression the second you told me you never got most of my DMs. Why can’t you drop a year-long ban when you find out you were wrong about someone intentionally breaking the rules to screw with you?
As for whether I could have been nicer in the Youmu post… Sure I could have. But why should I have? I was neutral. I did not attack you. I presented arguments, not insults. I initially expressed disbelief, but only because that is what I felt. After that my goal was to understand your position, and if possible, change it.
There was no ill intent. I simply did my best to change someone’s mind. Asking me to be nice beyond that, is to ask for special treatment. Do you want special treatment?
Having someone try to change your mind can feel like an attack, but it isn’t one.
Perhaps you should ask yourself whether it is you who are refusing to take me seriously, because you’ve “labeled” me.
Earlier, you used the “your behaviour confirms my suspicions” argument which is a classic come-back when a troll goes off the rails, but that only remains valid with people who don’t calm down and come back to logic when shown they were wrong about something.
It’s also the kind of come-back I avoid using myself, because it’s a “I know what you are” argument. Meaning, it’s an attempt to invalidate what someone is saying, because of what they are.
Are you? Again, I dare you to announce how you’ve handled my ban.
I mean that expectations of what is NSFW align with comments and reports (you mentioned votes, but idk how there are related here), that’s what I am replying to. But ok, I will consider doing a post.
I think we can put an end here? There are still things that I do not agree with, but it can go indefinitely long and I’m not very motivated to continue in the near future.
I am removing the ban. I hope it will help resolve this situation. I admit that Marisa post could be handled differently and from third person view my actions can be viewed as unreasonable.
I mention it only to illustrate that I am in fact intimately familiar with what is involved in being a moderator. Not some brain-dead “do what I say” user. There are many things I think you should change, but not because I say so. Because it makes sense.
Not because I think you should “submit to greater power” or something. That, I am not.
Since you keep wanting a label, I’ll give you one. You’re a prude. But that’s fine. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Only the way you handle people who aren’t, like me, needs some serious work. And tbh being a bit less of one would probably be good for you. Especially since you’re a moderator.
Along with your seemingly quite thin skin, I’m left questioning your suitability to be one. Another source of frustration for me, seeing as you are in a position to control something I care about.
Also, we’re having two different conversations, one about what nsfw is, and one about how to be a moderator.
Stop confusing my arguments about what is and isn’t nsfw as claims that I should get to decide what I’m allowed to post in your communities, without repercussions. Those are two different conversations.
Do I need to keep repeating that I ALWAYS and UNCONDITIONALLY adhere to the way the leaders of a given community want it to be run?
I blundered twice, but they were blunders. That is not up for discussion. You may interpret intent, but that does not change the fact that there was none.
For gods sake, I volunteered my active alts, and DIDN’T use one of my inactive ones to circumvent the ban. I got about as angry as one can get, and still didn’t blow up your inbox or community.
On moderation, you do not have grounds to ban me for as long as you have done, and you have no actual reason to believe I would not follow your rules were the ban shorter or cancelled.
The only thing my behaviour shows, is that I get mad when wronged, and complain when I think things can be done in a better way.
My animosity stemmed from perceived malice and incompetence on your part. The malice you all but admit to feeling, and allowing to affect your decisions. The incompetence I see was partly a misunderstanding, but also not entirely. Yet that is still far more forgivable, than the malice.
Neither do I. But you don’t respect my opinion, nor do you ask or seemingly care what your own users think.
In fact you basically admit to using what I’ve had to say as license to think less of me, to the point of considering me undeserving of fairness.
If I only ever used my own feelings, I’d be posting without ever using the nsfw tag. Everything I post is stuff I would and do use as wallpapers.
What I do and don’t tag is instead based on the comments and reports that I’ve received over the last year, as well as voting patterns. It is an attempt to tag things the way Lemmy specifically wants it. I’m about to hit 10 000 posts, so I think I have an ear for it by now.
Like I said in our original exchange, using nsfw tags when unnecessary harms community visibility and discovery. I am very intentionally trying to accelerate the growth of federated social media. As such, maximizing how well it does its jobs of congregating people into its communities, matters to me.
Maybe it doesn’t matter for you, but I think at least some of your users care about this.
As for your claim that image boards represent any kind of average, here I have to vehemently disagree. Image-boards are populated by a TINY minority, creating entries and entering metadata for each image. The voting system is in no way attached to the accuracy of this metadata, and generally, each entry is only ever created/edited/approved by two or three people.
That handful interprets the guideline for the formerly three, now four, ratings, not some “what does the average person feel” metric. And as I also mentioned in the original exchange, due to the differences of interpretation that those guidelines allow, each rating on danbooru has significant overlap with its neighbors, which becomes an issue when translating those ratings into a binary yes/no for another community of users.
My own script by default tags everything in the questionable and explicit category as nsfw, when posting to lemmy. But images rated general and sensitive, I set manually. Both because sensitive is often something no-one on lemmy will have an issue with, and because sometimes something obviously explicit has accidentally been rated general.
Their rating system is great “as a rule of thumb”. But it is fuzzy enough, that on the edge between sfw/nsfw you can’t just go “this goes here, that goes there”. It doesn’t match what users on lemmy expect. That lies somewhere in the middle of what danboorus moderators consider “sensitive”.
Image boards, next to an actual social media platform like the fediverse, are representative of absolutely nothing. They do a good job of creating internally consistent databases, maintained by a handful of users, but to claim that it is a representation of world averages is a massive reach.
It is like claiming Wikipedia is representative of the worlds general political leaning. It is a excellent internally consistent database of information. But it is not a good benchmark for what the average person thinks or believes. Because the average person does not write wikipedia articles.
In the same way, the average person is most certainly not rating and tagging images on image boards. What the average person DOES do, is report, comment and vote on social media.
The way you write that suggests that you still think that you bringing here misogynism and “hangups concerning the human body” is completely fair and not to just put a label. So I would like to know where do they start and end, because it just seams that you are using these terms to frame peoples that does not agree with you. I don’t think that topics about being a moderator and sane online communications are much different.
There is more to it. Like actively expressing how mad you are through your speech tone.
Agreeing and respecting are separate things. Latest changes were done, because user suggested it, and you know it. Also every change to the rules (maybe except some old ones) is documented in post descriptions.
Yes, I judge peoples based on their actions. I said it explicitly. Based on what I have seen at the time I believe my actions were fair.
I’m not sure if there is a Lemmy as a group with uniform mindset. Maybe more like an individual instance or even community or group of communities. I won’t be surprised if political, tech and anime parts of Lemmy are like completely different worlds. The same story with Twitter, someone knows it for mind numbling political debates, someone is there to just look at some pics.
To what extent rules should be soft to minimize NSFW rated images, when tags are necessary? I still think that NSFW filter is useless and nobody knows what user might expect being NSFW or not, even if we are talking just about Lemmy userbase. Instead they should filter communities and instances, and have expectations what can be put under NSFW in particular community. That’s how it already is in Twitter and Mastodon.
Take that danbooru is might be moderated by small group with hot takes is understandable.
Then we at touhou at LW are fine. It’s just you not liking the fact that your disrespectful behavior wasn’t tolerated. I would rather stick with peoples who can voice their opinion without disparaging anyone or being snarky. And you doesn’t seem to acknowledge issues in what you have written under two last posts at LW or prove that what you free of these issues.
Yes. I think the world in general should get over its hangups around sexual and physiological reality, I think the villification of these, prevalent in many cultures, should end. Because it is harmful.
We don’t shy away from the reality of violence to anywhere near the same extent, and the world would not be better for it, if we did.
You’re not going to invalidate that view by claiming it’s merely an attempt to lable people who disagree.
I have no idea what you mean by this. Again, no emotion was involved in our initial discussion on my end, but apparently you thought there was some secret insult in it, then?
Please do not interpret meaning where none exists. That isn’t fair to me, or yourself.
Every single post ever posted, shows up in the “all” feeds of all instances with at least one subscriber of the relevant community. Excluding users only browsing their subscription, or users that have a bunch of things blocked, everyone has a chance to see anything/everything. And therefore also to comment, report, or vote.
In fact, the more active a community becomes, the more people outside it will see its content.
Federated social media does not sequester users into separate “echo chambers”. There is always overlap. That’s kind of the point.
Are you? Again, I dare you to announce how you’ve handled my ban.
I never got rude until after I thought I was unfairly banned.
Even then it was mostly because I thought you deliberately shut down communication. That was incorrect, and learning that I had no difficulty dropping the anger.
You’re the one having a hard time treating me fairly, despite learning my side of things.
So would I. Unfortunately you mod a community I care about, so I’d rather have you do better, than put in the work of replacing you.
But, since you made that choice for me, here we are.
And you apparently can’t handle dissent, or accept criticism that isnt sugar-coated.
People can still have a valid point, even if they’re pissed as hell while saying it.
If you get to let the “feeling” someone gives you affect whether you try to improve their behaviour, or just banish them outright, I get to write in a way that shows I’m annoyed, when I’m annoyed. That was the Marisa post.
Up to about a 30-day ban, and I’d have just gone “oops, guess I got on their nerves, gotta be nicer”.
A year-long ban was more of a “wow, this person needs to get over themself”.
I dropped the swears and agression the second you told me you never got most of my DMs. Why can’t you drop a year-long ban when you find out you were wrong about someone intentionally breaking the rules to screw with you?
As for whether I could have been nicer in the Youmu post… Sure I could have. But why should I have? I was neutral. I did not attack you. I presented arguments, not insults. I initially expressed disbelief, but only because that is what I felt. After that my goal was to understand your position, and if possible, change it.
There was no ill intent. I simply did my best to change someone’s mind. Asking me to be nice beyond that, is to ask for special treatment. Do you want special treatment?
Having someone try to change your mind can feel like an attack, but it isn’t one.
Perhaps you should ask yourself whether it is you who are refusing to take me seriously, because you’ve “labeled” me.
Earlier, you used the “your behaviour confirms my suspicions” argument which is a classic come-back when a troll goes off the rails, but that only remains valid with people who don’t calm down and come back to logic when shown they were wrong about something.
It’s also the kind of come-back I avoid using myself, because it’s a “I know what you are” argument. Meaning, it’s an attempt to invalidate what someone is saying, because of what they are.
That is not a valid counterargument.
I mean that expectations of what is NSFW align with comments and reports (you mentioned votes, but idk how there are related here), that’s what I am replying to. But ok, I will consider doing a post.
I think we can put an end here? There are still things that I do not agree with, but it can go indefinitely long and I’m not very motivated to continue in the near future.
Votes can tell you lots.
Here I received 3 down to 8 up, for asking a nsfw post to be tagged.
Here I got 8 down against 16 up, for explaining my rationale in an asklemmy thread about the subject.
It’s a snapshot of how the users seeing a post or comment feel about things.
How many you get total is just an indicator of user volume, but the ratio is useful as a datapoint.
Oh, I was asking to mark as NSFW in direct messages. Bad idea.
I am removing the ban. I hope it will help resolve this situation. I admit that Marisa post could be handled differently and from third person view my actions can be viewed as unreasonable.
Thank you.
I will need to think about whether I want to contribute to it anymore, but at least I can sub and upvote posts again.