Moderation philosophy posts started out as an exercise by myself to put down some of my thoughts on running communities that I'd learned over the years. As they continued I started to more heavily involve the other admins in the writing and brainstorming. This most recent post involved a lot of moderator voices as well, which is super exciting! This is a community, and we want the voices at all levels to represent the community and how it's run.

This is probably the first of several posts on moderation philosophy, how we make decisions, and an exercise to bring additional transparency to how we operate.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] StrayCatFrump@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

From a logistical standpoint: we simply cannot privilege your personal discomfort over anyone else’s, and we cannot always cater specifically to you and what you want. Your personal positions on right or wrong are not inherently more valid than someone else’s when weighing most questions of how we should moderate this space. There are often plenty of people who do not feel like you that we must also consider in moderation decisions.

This doesn't take into consideration forces of oppression, and is thus incorrect and very badly constructed. Was this jointly authored, or is it one admin's take alone?

[–] Gaywallet@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you have questions, I would suggest asking them and not making assumptions. This response is incredibly vague and I don't know how to address it. Help me to understand your concern?

[–] StrayCatFrump@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"Right and wrong"—as it is being used here—must always take into consideration hierarchies of oppression (e.g. white supremacy/racism, patriarchy/sexism, hetero-normativity/homophobia/queerphobia/transphobia, capitalism/classism, etc.). The quoted statement seems to ignore this, and take a reductive view that such issues are simply a matter of personal "discomfort". While the quote alone might be taken more...forgivingly, the context within an article presenting a binary choice of either removing "bigoted or distasteful content [to make it a] sanitized space" vs. letting such content be and letting the community simply try to change minds on it does not lend confidence in that kind of forgiving interpretation.

[–] Gaywallet@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is not a document standing by itself. We've talked explicitly at length about bigotry and oppression in the past. We do not allow them. Please read the other philosophy documents and take them into context.