Currently Online 
I have been critical of the mod team in the past over what I think is a level of political bias but compared to other forums or subreddits it's night and day. It's a minor issue compared to the absolute lunacy found elsewhere so overall I think the moderation situation is good. I truly have no idea how anyone could think things are ban happy here, as it's been said it's quite light lately and I vastly prefer it being overly light than overly heavy so I wouldn't change how moderation is done here that much. Despite my past criticism the mod team is doing an overall good job I'd say so I wanna give props for debating and giving chances to retract insults instead of instantly banning.
the-pi-guy said:
a - we use a progressive system. Someone who has been good for 5 years, and then says something terrible is taken less seriously than someone who is repeatedly telling users to fuck themselves. b - I also think the latter is more personal. I would care more about someone being a bully to several users than someone generically saying something terrible to the wind while being emotional. Some of the other mods might disagree with me, but I think I would have a hard time being quite so offended if someone generically said "kill all libs". c - personally I think if someone can be reasoned with, I prefer not to ban. Even if they say something really terrible. Then again, I'm a very naive person who thinks that racists and homophobes can just be reasoned with. |
I have brought this case up before and while I don't quite agree with handling that sort of rhetoric in this way if this standard is applied consistently I can accept that.
For the last part it's not naive at all actually. Daryl Davis shows that dialogue is always worth trying when things aren't violent and the amount of people who have stopped being homophobic in the past 20 years also shows that.
