slybison8
Active Member
162 messages
joined Oct 2011
While nobody has explicitly ordered me to do so, I suppose it might be appropriate for him to offer some further insights and reflections regarding the situation in Ukraine.
Let's take this one step at a time:
granitefalcon26 I truly understand and empathize with what you went through during the American War of Independence, and I can see how those experiences shape the way you discuss the situation in Ukraine—especially when you find yourself facing such a wide range of opposing viewpoints that seem to clash so directly with everything you lived through and believe.
I suppose you understand that even with the best intentions, it isn't really possible to factor an "emotional" connection into how any topic should be moderated. Other people on Reddit need the freedom to express their views without feeling guilty, especially if they feel like sharing an opinion might cause someone else emotional distress. There are certainly instances in moderation where intervention is necessary—but that should only happen when it's clear someone is intentionally trying to inflict personal harm on another user. That doesn't seem to be the case here, and from the way you phrased your objection, I get the sense that you actually realize this too; it seems less like you're asking for special treatment regarding the subject and more like you've simply decided to move on from it.
If you really want to, I suppose there might be a way for you to contribute to the conversation while still protecting yourself as much as possible. At the suggestion of a few Reddit users from the Ukraine thread, I’ve actually set up a second topic. I pinned it as a megathread within the World section, where no actual discussion or commentary on events is permitted at all. On that specific thread, people are only meant to post links to specific military or political developments on the battlefields in Ukraine, accompanied by brief, factual descriptions of what those links contain if they happen to be in a foreign language. My hope is that this will allow me to move all those heavy-hitting links being posted by Konev and a few others out of the main discussion area—providing them an alternative space so the primary thread doesn't get overwhelmed by them. I also believe this gives you a chance to share specific data regarding the events you follow, which you feel might shape public opinion on what is happening in Ukraine, but without having to engage in arguments with people who disagree with you. Any attempt by anyone to reply to your posts on a thread where discussion is strictly forbidden will result in a warning for breaking the rules and the removal of the post. Likewise, I would ask that you please refrain from replying to anyone else's posts on that thread.
Regarding the parallels you're drawing to the old Yugoslavia days: I suppose I generally support my predecessor's decision on this matter, and I actually played a part in suggesting and deciding that we include it within the specific discussion rules for the thread on Ukraine. There have been a few instances where having that rule in place for this particular topic seemed quite useful, I guess.
I would like to emphasize that I haven't issued any bans or other serious sanctions simply because someone disregarded or ignored that specific rule. My approach is mostly limited to making requests and appeals for people to follow it; I only use the rule as a basis for deleting certain posts—not all of them—when they conflict with it. Whenever I have the time, I try to explain the reasoning behind why such behavior isn't ideal, in the hopes that I might eventually convince Reddit users of the validity of my convictions. I suppose what I am trying to say is that the mere fact this rule is listed in the special instructions on the first page of the thread shouldn't, in itself, be seen as a major obstacle to your participation in the discussion.
fadedmason3 I suppose you have a valid point that twisting another user's handle to be insulting could potentially be treated as harassment rather than just a simple violation of the rules. However, I feel like some of your other grievances might be a bit too granular, perhaps even excessive. It seems quite difficult to manage things with that level of scrutiny, especially from a moderator's perspective, when they are tasked with overseeing hundreds of posts all at once—like during one of those massive Reddit threads that blow up overnight. I imagine that the kind of hyper-detailed moderation you are advocating for just isn't feasible, and honestly, I don't think it's practiced on any major platform I'm aware of, particularly those free community sites where people volunteer their time.
Christian Torres3 - I am sorry that you feel the need to comment on how I moderate the thread regarding Ukraine using that particular tone. I suppose you personally don't have much reason to complain about my moderation decisions, not because you hold some privileged status here, but simply because you are among the small number of users who support the pro-Ukrainian (pro-Western) side while engaging in meaningful, reasoned discussion and attempting to follow the rules. And that is where "your side" seems to struggle: on one hand, you are in the minority, and on the other, a higher percentage of your group (not you specifically) chooses to violate the rules of discourse, so once moderation takes place, even fewer of you remain to participate in the conversation.
Brenda Cook4 - Not at all; I will absolutely never agree that from a moderator's perspective, it is desirable to tolerate or encourage the scattering of inflammatory claims, such as calling someone a fascist or a similar label. On domestic threads, this Reddit has struggled since its inception to break up arguments centered around old historical divides in almost every American political topic—and now you are advocating for allowing variations of that same toxic terminology in threads concerning foreign events. In that sense, I think your understanding of "freedom" is misplaced. Freedom isn't just enjoyed by those who would go around trumpeting that others are fascists; everyone has the right to freedom, including those who simply find that style of discussion repulsive, whether on local or international topics.
One might call someone a fascist, but personally, I would prefer if whoever uses that label in a post linked their subject to Benito Mussolini—otherwise, to me, it is something that has no place in civilized and polite debate. So, we have a conflict here between your conception of freedom, which leans toward chaos and anarchy, and my understanding of freedom, which is based on the premise that everyone's liberty ends where it begins to negate the liberty of another.
However, much like what I mentioned to granitefalcon26 regarding comparisons to the wars in the former Yugoslavia, it is worth noting that I am not forcing my deeply held convictions upon anyone through sanctions (the stick) to convince them of my correctness. I prefer rational and reasoned persuasion whenever I have the patience and time, rather than relying solely on sanctions (if that is indeed the only issue within a post).
and finally:
Nathan Brooks4 - Thank you for the recommendations on how to better moderate the Ukraine thread. I invite the other moderators of the politics section to read this so we can collectively see what we might implement from these suggestions. Yours was by far the most constructive post on the topic, and I am personally grateful to you for writing it from the perspective of a user and participant in the discussion.👍
PL. dobiti
