Another thing. Rules upon rules upon rules is how they tried to kill gamergate. That and the constant crying about good pr. The only rule should be don't link to cp directly. Other than that let the community decide what is important by their up and down votes and participation through comments.
The less rules the better IMHO, more rules permits the petty mind to manipulate things via interpretation.
The other thing that happened with GG was the widening of scope to allow relevant discussion on the phenomena that brought GG about.
Pizzagate is the event that unearthed a phenomena, and that initial spark is very important as a foundation.
In the coming months as the 'cancer' is rooted out we shouldn't be afraid to allow the scope of discussion grow to match the scale of the issue
let the community decide
This is a must at all levels, something I've been advocating for a long time.
Much of this rule discussion fails to state plainly the intent of the rules.
Which is: to keep the community active through meaningful participation and limiting interactions from those that wish to stop participation.
This makes it very hard to formulate rules that actually do that without accidentally stopping participation
The truth doesn't need PR, and I laugh at the constant attempts to control how other people think through pushing PR and tone policing. It's what killed Occupy.
let the community decide what is important by their up and down votes and participation through comments
This, so long as us mods don't get our heads torn off every time we delete (and ask to resubmit) a post from disruptors who want none of these things.
view the rest of the comments →
smokratez ago
Another thing. Rules upon rules upon rules is how they tried to kill gamergate. That and the constant crying about good pr. The only rule should be don't link to cp directly. Other than that let the community decide what is important by their up and down votes and participation through comments.
VictorSteinerDavion ago
The less rules the better IMHO, more rules permits the petty mind to manipulate things via interpretation.
The other thing that happened with GG was the widening of scope to allow relevant discussion on the phenomena that brought GG about.
Pizzagate is the event that unearthed a phenomena, and that initial spark is very important as a foundation.
In the coming months as the 'cancer' is rooted out we shouldn't be afraid to allow the scope of discussion grow to match the scale of the issue
This is a must at all levels, something I've been advocating for a long time.
Much of this rule discussion fails to state plainly the intent of the rules.
Which is: to keep the community active through meaningful participation and limiting interactions from those that wish to stop participation.
This makes it very hard to formulate rules that actually do that without accidentally stopping participation
The truth doesn't need PR, and I laugh at the constant attempts to control how other people think through pushing PR and tone policing. It's what killed Occupy.
This, so long as us mods don't get our heads torn off every time we delete (and ask to resubmit) a post from disruptors who want none of these things.