ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
Live!
I'm not sure it's a huge improvement because now it looks a bit cluttered, but it's better, at least.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
Not as well as I'd want. I need to wire up the quality contributions to Twitter in an attempt to attract more people.
It's not catastrophic or immediately existential, but if it's not solved, that'll probably be what kills this place in the end.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
The markdown parser honestly sort of sucks :/ We've had "improve it" on the list for a while, but it's a long list.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
This is now also fixed!
(No credit to me, all credit to the same person who fixed the previous bug, who I appreciate greatly.)
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
This may now be fixed - someone submitted a review that plausibly fixes the issue. Thank you, contributor!
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
This is part of what I'm slowly approaching with the volunteer system, although I have had no time to work on it lately :/
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
Yeah, I could've sworn we fixed it, but it appears to have shown back up again. Unfortunately it seems very difficult to intentionally replicate, while very easy to accidentally stub your toe on, which makes it a pain to fix. If you can figure out reliable repro steps I would love to hear them :V
In general, you're welcome to PM me with reports, or post them in whatever thread seems most reasonable and ping me.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
Alright, I was gonna quietly let the ban evasion slide if you were willing to take correction, but instead you're right back to antagonizing mods who are telling you to shape up.
Re-applied permanent ban.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
Probably, yeah. Nobody reported you, don't worry about it too much, we'd appreciate picking one of the other options next time :V
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
Unless I'm misunderstanding, "You must adhere to progressive orthodoxy on pronouns or avoid them altogether" does not sound to me like the middle compromise position you're making it out to be.
There's also "you can use 'they' regardless of whether the person in question is OK with it".
I'd say the strong trans-approving position would be "you are required to use the pronouns they want, and if you try to avoid those pronouns, you're a bad person for doing so". We're providing two different ways to avoid that, both of which the extremist left would disapprove of.
I hope, for my unblemished account's sake, that some story about a trans person doesn't become the culture war topic du jour any time soon. I also think that you'd see immense pushback from the community if those rules you propose were actually enforced. I suspect people just haven't read your comment above because it's buried in the previous week's culture war roundup thread.
For what it's worth, this has come up a few times now, and trans has occasionally been in the news between now and then, and it's just never been an issue. I do think you're overstating the issue here.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
The general antagonism clause applies as it always does, as do a bunch of adjacent rules. No individual word is banned, no individual word makes you exempt from the rest of the rules.
I could write both bannable and perfectly-fine comments with any of those above phrases. If you want to come up with a more specific example, I can tell you how I'd judge it.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
self-identification as the only criterion which determines which pronouns are OK in the opinion of mods is the the trans activist position, not a neutral one
This is not the only criterion which determines which pronouns are OK. I recommend going and reading it over again.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
As I said, "everyone finds them slightly uncomfortable". I'll take that over "one side is perfectly happy with it and the other side is not happy at all".
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
Because people tend to use these things as a way to reinforce their beliefs and make it a hostile environment for others.
I think this falls generally under the "don't be antagonistic", "don't enforce ideological conformity", and "provide evidence in proportion to how partisan your claim is" clauses.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
There are literally people disagreeing with you in the replies. Read those, and don't make universal moral statements if people are going to disagree with you, because then it's not fact, it's opinion.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
We’re supposed to check the history of a person’s consent to pronoun before we refer to them in the simplest way possible, come on. Just let the pronouns go free.
Honestly, if it's a legit mistake, I'm not going to care much. I'm probably just going to say "hey don't use that for that person, thanks". It's more when someone is doing it intentionally and repeatedly that I start telling people to knock it off. I'm not sure we've ever given out a warning for this, let alone a ban.
And remember that gender-neutral pronouns are always acceptable, as is not using pronouns - if you don't want to keep track of what people's identity is, there's two easy global solutions.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
I'm honestly trying to figure out what to do with the sidebar; right now it's kinda just overly cluttered, and I'd like to slim it down. But I'm not sure how.
I've refrained from putting this up just because it doesn't come up often and doesn't seem worth the clutter right now.
Yup, exactly.
(You could also use "she" for the entire history if you wanted.)
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
Man, you've been around here long enough to know that this doesn't fly. Three-day ban and frankly this is lenient because you've been here so long, but, like, that won't last forever, calm down with the accusations.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
This is both low-effort and building consensus. Put more effort into your arguments and avoid this kind of flat evidence-less claim, please.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
Mod intervention!
It's totally fine to express disagreement with the general concept of trans. It is less fine to make statements that flat-out imply trans is a thing. Not everyone agrees they're "male", and I think this falls under the whole building consensus rule.
ZorbaTHut
1yr ago
I'm not sure we've ever actually had to enforce this, but the official policy with Motte pronouns is:
- You are always allowed to use the person in question's preferred pronoun.
- You are always allowed to use "they", regardless of whether the person accepts that or not.
- You are always allowed to twist yourself in knots to avoid pronouns even if it looks really silly.
- If you're doing something historical, you can also use the person in question's officially preferred pronouns at that time in the story, but don't cleverly split hairs on this one; if you write a story about the Wachowskis, and start out by referring to them as "he", but then switch to "they" when they transition, the Eye of Sauron may look down upon thee.
The good news about these policies is that everyone finds them slightly uncomfortable, which is probably about as good as we can get.
So, here, lemme quickly explain.
We've (okay, "I") have a general policy of not demodding mods merely for inaction. I'm happy for them to come back, I'm also happy to have them giving feedback in the Mod chat channel. All of that is useful!
The downside is that this means we have a list of mods and a significant number of those mods don't really do anything. They're still valued people who I'm happy to respect, we just don't get a lot of work done, and the work needs to be done.
Before inviting new mods we were basically down to two mods who were commonly active and another two who were occasionally active, but one of the commonly-active mods was mostly active in doing the quality-contribution reports (which is valuable!) and so practically one mod was doing most of the moderation work. They were doing a good job but I'm always really leery of a bus-number-of-one situation:
In addition, it's a lot of stress on someone's back, which of course increases the chance that they decide they're done and they want to move on. Worse, they know they're a column, so maybe they end up feeling obliged to keep doing this when they don't want to, which pushes us right back into "start turning toxic" and "value drift" territory. It's a bad scene all around.
My main goal here was to take that bus-number-of-one and turn it up to two or three mods, entirely just to solve the problems with having a single mod.
When I've added mods before, my general experience is that for every two mods you invite, one accepts, and for every two mods who accepts, one contributes. If I want one active mod I gotta invite four mods.
So I invited four mods and they all accepted.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I'm honestly quite happy about this - maybe this means we'll have a healthy mod population until I can finally get some of the next set up updates to the Volunteer system done. But it still wasn't quite intended.
The tl;dr:
More options
Context Copy link