| 4 Nov 2021 |
 @zimbatm:numtide.com | it reflects really well how nice Andreas Kling is as a person (if you watched any of his videos) | 16:14:47 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | In reply to @jonringer:matrix.org
In my moderation RFC was going to define a banning process where people could be banned for 48hrs to 72hrs before making a longer more official one I'm not really a fan of timed bans, personally, for a few different reasons:
- they perceptually devalue bans from a "last resort" to an "obvious tool", because "it's temporary anyway"
- problematic behaviour does not magically become unproblematic after 48 hours; if the same person still has the same views and same (lack of) adherence to social norms, they will reoffend afterwards, and so the practical result of this is that you're just giving problematic people more 'free airtime'
- it also fails in the other direction; in the rare event that a ban is the event that makes someone go "... fuck. I really was in the wrong" (it does happen!), if the times are set in policy, one cannot be unbanned earlier without at the very least invoking the ire of the community who feel betrayed, and this in turn might make the banned person frustrated and turn their opportunity for reflection into an opportunity for their anger to build further
| 16:15:33 |
 @jonringer:matrix.org | I would still like a moderation process, where you can say. "Hey, one of our statutes is to do XXXX, and your behavior <here> is unacceptable" | 16:15:50 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | Jonas Chevalier: I've tried to avoid taking specific communities' policies as a 'model to follow' (with the exception of the PTIO comrep thing, for which I could present a full cause-and-effect chain), because realistically most people in here will not be familiar with whatever community you end up referencing, and so will not be able to judge for themselves how well their policies actually work - especially the more deeply-rooted problems 'under the surface' are often only visible once one has been an active member of a community for a while | 16:17:38 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | I think it can be informative to learn from other communities and their policies, but only in a context of "why specifically did they choose this policy, and what specific effect did it have", not in a sense of "these guys seem to be doing pretty well, let's take their approach" | 16:18:18 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | that's just another case of "understand, don't just clone" I suppose, which is a parallel to software dev I had not anticipated :p | 16:18:52 |
| @zimbatm:numtide.com | I know what you mean, we have to own our own policies and internalize them | 16:18:56 |
 Ellie | The desire for an explicit set of statutes has been raised several times. I think the general response has been that it invites people to tread right up to the line of acceptable behavior; consistently doing this could very much constitute a problem. | 16:19:07 |
