Insidb on 30 January 2017
| RolStoppable said: I don't think that harsher rules are needed. The ones we have need to be used, that should basically do the trick. A lot of the controversy in political discussions stems from hypocritical behavior, so you start by bringing the banhammer down on them. Does it really matter if such people do it deliberately or because they honestly don't realize it? I'd say no, because it's disruptive to discussions either way. Someone who doesn't or can't respect the other side of an argument doesn't belong in such discussions. Another important point is that people of a known political bias try to rally up other people for their cause, often by posting questionable material. Is that really any different than, say, a known Nintendo fan posting anything negative they find about Sony and Microsoft? Once again I'd say no. The problem in political discussions is that the moderation is too lax, so scumbags are left alone because the mod team fears that their moderations could be viewed as too biased towards one side. But what's the difference between banning the aforementioned Nintendo troll and a political troll? Other Nintendo fans won't be upset that a scumbag got dragged to the chopping block, just like people with similar political leanings won't be upset if someone who clearly went too far is removed from discussions. The only people who will band together in either scenario are scumbags, and scumbags are usually unable or unwilling to make a substantial case against the mod team. Even in a worst case scenario, the mod team still has the Mod Thread. The mods don't need to put up with unreasonable demands, because such demands will already be slammed down by other community members. |
Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
