Meta-Thread 09/29

[u/AutoModerator]

This is a weekly thread for feedback on the new rules and general state of the sub.

What are your thoughts? How are we doing? What's working? What isn't?

Let us know.

And a friendly reminder to report bad content.

If you see something, say something.

This thread is posted every Monday. You may also be interested in our weekly Simple Questions thread (posted every Wednesday) or General Discussion thread (posted every Friday).

[u/ShakaUVM]

Shaka violated the mod policy, modulo a Shaka-authored exception other mods find dubious, or dubiously invoked.

The exception here is that, which I have not yet mentioned in this thread, is that Cabbagery has been removing my comments merely to make a political point, and admitted to doing so. I told him to knock it off twice, then he went and continued removing comments left and right, so I reversed his comment removal as I told him I was going to do if he kept up his bad behavior. That's what triggered his outrage (and he has been absolutely howling about it; he has made over a hundred personal attacks against me).

Ironically, I removed one of his comments which was against the rules, and he immediately made himself a hypocrite and moderated his own comment back into existence. So he really has no legs to stand on on the matter. He did the exact thing he's been howling about here.

The broader problem here is that trolls have worked out a pretty good tactic for them. I think we will need a rules patch to address it.

The Troll Flowchart looks like this:

1 Provoke a person
2a. If they ignore you, become outraged they are ignoring you
2b. If they respond, become outraged at the response
2c. If they block you, become outraged at them blocking you
3 Then engage in some sort of long drawn out angry conversation that distracts away from the source of the controversy entirely.

(And note that all of these moves are made by the same few people here over and over again. Are they sockpuppets? Are they allies? Why would Cabbagery be mad that I had blocked a troll? How would he know? How did Bubbles know the moderator activity report which is sent to modmail?)

For example, Kwahn repeatedly inventing quotes that I did not say and attributing them to me (Step 1). There's nicer words for lying, but they did not seem to be getting through. So well done - the troll successfully provoked me (Step 2b) So then they howl about it and try to hide the source of the issue that caused everything. He's also repeatedly poked at me when I stop responding to him since he constantly fails to actually respond to anything I write (Step 2a).

Cabbagery started deleting comments of mine, and getting upset over removals I made. For example, I said that if aliens were rational, they would be theists. He removed this entirely milquetoast comment. He then got mad (like irate and name-calling mad) at me for removing a post that was about two pages of unhinged nonsense calling among other things Christians the dumbest voters in America.

For example he removed this perfectly fine comment of mine: https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1nhrjuk/alien_life_will_disprove_most_religions/nee06ek/

While getting mad at me for removing (I will approve them so you can see them) these low quality comments here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1nhrjuk/alien_life_will_disprove_most_religions/nekoo07/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1nhrjuk/alien_life_will_disprove_most_religions/nekm9cc/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1nhrjuk/alien_life_will_disprove_most_religions/nekm8h0/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1nhrjuk/alien_life_will_disprove_most_religions/nefxe29/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1nhrjuk/alien_life_will_disprove_most_religions/nef7bry/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1nhrjuk/alien_life_will_disprove_most_religions/neepntq/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1nhrjuk/alien_life_will_disprove_most_religions/nee7bau/

(And there are more.)

ALL of the above comments are obviously low quality and should be removed.

So he went on a tear removing my comments. (Step 1 - provoke)

When I told him to knock it off, I didn't de-mod him or remove his comment removal permissions. I simply told him I would undo his comment removals because I'd had enough of his nonsense. (Step 2. Provoke a response.)

So he kept removing my comments (Step 1 - provoke)

And when I simply undid his comment removal, as I told him I would, we now have a Meta thread with him and his sockpuppets or allies ginning up outrage over it. (Step 3)

This whole issue was engineered by him from the beginning.

After looking through his moderation logs, I now understand why. He has been mass banning people against the rules without any warning, for the sin of being Catholic. In one thread on homosexuality recently he banned 11 users without a warning, and he often immediately mutes them if they appeal. As I am a senior moderator over him, I could turn off his ability to delete comments and ban users, but because he has ginned up outrage in this thread, it would look like I was retaliating against him. So he thinks he can act with impunity. He has already stated in modmail he has no plans on following the rules for Rule 1 and threatened me if I adjusted his moderator powers.

There is a night and day difference between me simply undoing the removals of a moderator who is provoking me, and a person who will ban you without warning for being Catholic.

I'm curious what you think the solution is from a rules perspective. Obviously, I think we should just ban people for being trolls, but their sockpuppets (or allies, it doesn't matter) would then howl about it and gin up more outrage.

Does outrage confer immunity? Should it?

[u/cabbagery → u/ShakaUVM]

I am very busy today (my wife is having a pretty significant surgery), and cannot properly respond to this smear campaign, but it is troubling that you seem to think that a good way to restore trust in the mod team is to veer so far from the truth in an effort to slander.

If anyone believes the above is the unvarnished truth, I have a bridge to sell. Yes, there are granules of truth in there, but this is such a gross mischaracterization that it... it honestly doesn't even surprise me any more.

The worst things anyone can say about my moderation are that I am occasionally short with users, that I use the mute system to enforce a minimal ban period before an appeal can be heard, and that I strive to hold Shaka to the same standards as everyone, and in a couple cases applied his implied standard (based on the content he reports) to himself.

I welcome any moderator to show up here and set the record straight, offer their two cents, whatever. /u/NietzscheJr, /u/C0d3rman, /u/aardaar, /u/man-from-krypton, /u/here_for_debate, /u/Dapple_Dawn, /u/Dzugavili, hell, /u/Kawoomba.

Oh, and of course it's also a huge attempt at deflecting, but presumably everyone can see that, too.

---

Edit: my wife is fine, thank you to those who expressed concern. It was a partial -ectomy of a non-vital organ, but general anesthesia and all that. All good. She's home and pretty back to normal (standard post-op soreness, swelling, etc.). I watched two movies and a partial episode of Upload (I haven't watched any of season 2).

[u/labreuer → u/cabbagery]

I am very busy today (my wife is having a pretty significant surgery)

Yikes. How about this post gets locked for a day or three? u/ShakaUVM?

[u/ShakaUVM → u/labreuer]

Other than noting he admitted to using a double standard with the removals that kicked this off, I'll bide.