The tedious truth about consistency
in Feedback & Suggestions ·
Nicholas King said:Just a desperate attempt to save this thread: this isn't a discussion about being rude. Let me repeat: this isn't a discussion about being rude...
I'm going to take this literally and assume we're talking about consistency, which is what the title implies anyway 😁
----
I won't comment on this specific case, though, personally, I think when someone is punished, there should be some consideration for who started the fight and who was just reacting. But that's just my opinion.
What really needs to be made clear is—well, what the moderator's stance is 😁
I don't have any particular issues with individual moderators; actually, I don't have any yet since I haven't been here long enough. My issue is more about the obvious difference in how different moderators perceive who gets banned—in this case, whether it's the instigator, the person reacting, or both.
Differences might be okay between different subreddits, but within one community, they should be kept to a minimum.
When it comes to back-and-forth arguments, there needs to be a uniform way to handle bans.
a) ban everyone using profanity, provocations, or insults—regardless of who started it.
b) ban the instigator, and for the person responding to the provocation—give them a warning or a yellow card instead of a red one (that seems like the fairest way to me).
c) don't ban anyone; just issue a moderator warning and shut down the argument.
d) something else entirely.
It would also be good to have some consistency regarding offensive, provocative, or trolling comments in terms of:
a) when comments are deleted
b) when comments are deleted and the user is banned
c) when comments aren't deleted and are tolerated
d) when a moderator warning is issued directly on the thread.
My personal take is that it feels unfair when, for example,
- an instigator insults someone, the person reacts, the instigator insults them again, and then a moderator steps in and says, "enough arguing." In my view of justice, the instigator should at least be banned, or if nothing happens, all the insulting comments should at least be removed.
- an instigator insults someone, the person reacts, and both get banned. That feels wrong to me—deleting both comments, giving warnings, etc. It just seems unfair to treat both actions as equal.
But honestly, it doesn't matter what my personal opinion is or what should happen. What matters is that the moderators provide a unified stance on these situations, at least within the same subreddit.
Sometimes people show up to a thread just to insult a specific user because they don't like them. It's easy to say, "just report them." But often a report ends in just a moderator warning rather than a ban—and we can't know that, so the person reacting often doesn't know if the instigator will actually be punished.
When we respond to a provocation, we know we might get a red card. But I think it would be good if we knew for sure whether we were going to get one, or if our comment was going to be deleted.
For instance, I responded to a troll yesterday who came to the thread specifically to be abusive to others. I knew I would almost certainly get a red card. And that's fine; I deserved it. But I wasn't sure if my comment would stay up or be deleted in the process. There's a big difference—if I'm already heading for a red card, I at least want to know if my comment is going to remain visible on the thread.😁
-----
To be honest, I don't really have any issues with specific moderators. It's more about the lack of coordination among them when it comes to stuff like this. I have my own thoughts on what would be fair, but I'll respect whatever the moderation team decides if they take a different stance.
I just think it would be helpful if they could clarify what their official policy actually is. 🙂 And then, of course, they should probably try to apply it consistently across the board.