patrick.net

NuttBoxer says

It wasn't Dan's thread. How do I know? Because I was allowed to post on it.

Ah, so say what you really mean then:
"I'm sad that Dan is censoring me, but I really don't have a good case to make, because what I posted was uncivil."

WookieMan says

I just don't get why we're grabbing the pile that is petrified after sitting there a year, in some attempt to prove a point that was originally missed by the uncivil clicker.

Couldn't care less. Someone cleaning up a dead thread. (shrug) Doesn't seem like priority feature work ... unless you are ...

... NuttBoxer. :) HMMmmmmm. Interesting. And other Anti-Dan fans are inline? Yes. Very telling.

Ironman / CIC ... also the biggest of whiners about any forms of moderation and decorum.

Rew says

Doesn't seem like priority feature work ...

Nothing is a priority here. I think you know that. Let alone calling any of it work (except for what Patrick does).

Rew says

Couldn't care less. Someone cleaning up a dead thread. (shrug)

Can I at least ask why? I know you may not care, but why would someone want to go back to a thread, one which they've likely already read, and then mark something uncivil? In the grand scheme of things I think we're on the same page about caring about this issue (if that's what you want to call it, an issue) but it just seems childish to me.

Rew says

HMMmmmmm. Interesting. And other Anti-Dan fans are inline?

I assume you're talking about some of the other posters in this thread? While I would probably agree they seem negative to Dan, I just don't understand the uncivil marking of comments months after the fact by him. Like I said earlier, I actually have no problem with him or what he writes a majority of the time. I'll say it can come across as condescending at times, but I think that may be his goal some of the time.

Rew says

Ironman / CIC ... also the biggest of whiners about any forms of moderation and decorum.

Why is this guy even being talked about anymore? He's obviously won at this point. I'd say he's brought up in at least one thread/comment per week. Maybe more often. It's rather annoying. Am I glad he's gone, absolutely. Are you going to catch me posting about him? Hell no. Everyone needs to move on from that patnet chapter.

Yes, please just imagine you're at a public debate on stage and think about what would be acceptable.

"You're a fucktard." -> definitely uncivil

"Only someone like you would believe that." -> not quite civil, but not so awful

"You're wrong." -> civil, but would be nice to show some good will

"I assume you mean well, but you're wrong about this point." -> very civil

NuttBoxer says

I was directed to comment jail, but my comments weren't there.

Sorry, that's a bug. Old comments would be off the end of the page and there was no pagination.

Going to limit comment jail to some period of time, and then delete truly uncivil comments older than that, to keep the current jail smaller.

Dan has entertainment value. All of the "crazies" do. If you are on PATNET, thinking that your opinion matters or that you are going to change the world, I think you are delusional. PATNET has probably saved a few marriages by having a place to vent instead of at your wife.

I let most shit slide, but when people mark my far more civil responses to uncivil posts as uncivil, I return the favor to the original post.

Also, do we really need weekly "I hate Dan because he banned my immature ass" threads? If you want to get unbanned, just show some maturity and civility like Patrick says above. It's actually not that hard.

The fact is that trolls are ruining PatNet and driving potential contributors away. At least Reddit is so large that you can just move to a different subreddit. If you are going to have to put up with trolls, it just makes sense to go to a large forum where you hop to sections where trolls are less common. That's not an option on PatNet.

komputodo says

Dan has entertainment value. All of the "crazies" do.

Again, how is this not exactly what the "uncivl" link is meant for? And the trolls falsely claim that I banned them for having different political opinions. Bullshit.

I really don't give a shit what the trolls think or write about me, but I don't want to continue getting into flame wars. It's a waste of my time. So yes, I'm going to start marking every troll comment as uncivil. I've been too tolerant. As the jail page clearly states, you can edit your comment to make it civil.

It's a spectrum. I was hoping that the uncivil link would be used mostly to filter out the harsh insults.

rando says

I was hoping that the uncivil link would be used mostly to filter out the harsh insults.

That goes against the pettiness in human nature, pettiness that is on ample display on PatNet.

There are many interesting things to be learned in watching a forum.

Looking forward to getting anon.patrick.net up soon to see how a totally anonymous forum works. Still grinding through the translation of the php code to node, but getting near the end. Then you see a bunch of subsites of patrick.net.

rando says

subsites of patrick.net.

There's a problem to be aware of. Subsites really only work when you have a sufficient number of users to generate content for the subsites. PatNet does not have enough users for more than two subsites: left.patrick.net and right.patrick.net.

(Insert negative comment about Dan here)

This is dan's problem.
He thinks that the two sentences below define him as one of the 'crazies'.
Yet that is dependent on how one interprets it.
Interpretation #1: Dan has entertainment value. In addition, all of the crazies do also.
Interpretation #2: Dan has entertainment value, so he must be one of the crazies.

I would guess snowflakes with thin skin would always interpret as #2.

Dan8267 says

komputodo says

Dan has entertainment value. All of the "crazies" do.

Again, how is this not exactly what the "uncivl" link is meant for?

The interesting question for me is how to keep people focused on the topic of debate, and not on the individual user.

Leaving out usernames helps in with that, but it also makes people less invested in the forum.

What is the ideal format and set of rules to allow maximum civil expression of ideas while minimizing personal attacks?

BlueSardine says

He thinks that the two sentences below define him as one of the 'crazies'.

The intent is clear.

Deleting history is par for the course for leftists and one of the reasons they are so dangerous. Similar to the SJw's proclaiming Teddy Roosevelt to be racist and wanting to remove his statue.

rando says

The interesting question for me is how to keep people focused on the topic of debate, and not on the individual user.

Leaving out usernames helps in with that, but it also makes people less invested in the forum.

What is the ideal format and set of rules to allow maximum civil expression of ideas while minimizing personal attacks?

Aside from learning from your mistakes, what is the value in a bad investment?

If the only thing keeping people around, is knowing which usernames to fight with, you will never meet your goals of civility and minimizing personal attacks.

They're obviously incompatible

Personally, I seek out opposing ideas and opinions. There's little to no value in piling on with others who share my beliefs. If professional gambling taught me anything, it's that to be successful and find the truth, you absolutely must thoroughly understand the other side, at least as well as you think you understand your own. It's the difference between success and failure

Dan8267 says

That goes against the pettiness in human nature, pettiness that is on ample display on PatNet.

Dan excusing his level 2 uncivil abuse.

rando says

What is the ideal format and set of rules to allow maximum civil expression of ideas while minimizing personal attacks?

Without automated or manual moderation, the users matter far more than the format. Pure anonymity might help, but it might also just give license to the trolls to be complete assholes.

The rules for civil and productive conversation are common sense, but without honest enforcers of the rules, they are worthless. But here's they are anyway.
1. No rudeness.
2. No dishonesty about your opponent's position including straw men.
3. No posting of "facts" you know are false or already debunked lies.
4. No poisoning of the well.

Good luck in getting the trolls to police themselves on these or any other rules. They won't. Civil and productive conversations is the last thing they want.

Rew says

"I'm sad that Dan is censoring me, but I really don't have a good case to make, because what I posted was uncivil."

It fell into Patrick's level 2, which is borderline. Your missing the point here. Who waits for three months, then goes back and revives a thread no one cares about anymore?

Rew says

Couldn't care less. Someone cleaning up a dead thread. (shrug) Doesn't seem like priority feature work ... unless you are ...

... NuttBoxer

NuttBoxer says

For anyone wondering why I care. If I didn't get an email telling me my comments had been jailed, I wouldn't.

NuttBoxer says

Rew says

"I'm sad that Dan is censoring me, but I really don't have a good case to make, because what I posted was uncivil."

It fell into Patrick's level 2, which is borderline. Your missing the point here. Who waits for three months, then goes back and revives a thread no one cares about anymore?

Petty, vindictive people, with far too much time on their hands.

NuttBoxer says

Who waits for three months, then goes back and revives a thread no one cares about anymore?

You are assuming intent. Your assumption is false. Why does it piss you off so anyway? The flagging was valid. Date is irrelevant. And if it pisses you off so much, just stop being a troll. It's real easy.

Dan8267 says

So yes, I'm going to start marking every troll comment as uncivil.

Who defines what a troll comment is... The all powerful DAN! Kneel before his singular grasp on ultimate truth in this universe!!

Seriously, how conceited/delusional can you be to post this stuff?

Dan8267 says

when people mark my far more civil responses to uncivil posts as uncivil, I return the favor to the original post.

THREE MONTHS LATER

NuttBoxer says

Who defines what a troll comment is... The all powerful DAN!

A straw man argument and utter hypocrisy. Plenty of people flag posts as uncivil. I've let far more things slide than they have.

NuttBoxer says

Seriously, how conceited/delusional can you be to post this stuff?

Again, this is exactly what Patrick means by uncivil. Now if I respond by calling you an immature asswipe, you'd mark my response as uncivil. If I then mark your post an uncivil, you'll open a thread to complain like a #whinnyLittleBitch. It is you who are conceited and delusional.

You can't have it both ways. Either every turd fling is allowed and PatNet devolves into a kindergarten and all good content providers leave, or all uncivil comments are flagged and removed. This entire thread and your butthurt demonstrates how effective flagging troll's posts are. The one thing that pisses off trolls is having their trolling deleted.

@Patrick, the solution is probably to have a few trusted users do all the flagging, and have them be very, very aggressive in flagging and deleting posts. Give the moderators two options: flag a post and put it in jail for minor infractions and outright delete posts for major infractions. Also let the moderators block trolls from posting at all for periods of time if they do act uncivil. Start with a week ban, then a month, then a year, then permanent. This is the only way to deal with trolls.

errc says

Petty, vindictive people, with far too much time on their hands.

Pot meet kettle.

Dan8267 says

You are assuming intent.

Dan8267 says

Who waits for three months, then goes back and revives a thread no one cares about anymore?

Please, point out where an assumption exists in that statement?

Ohh, the no one cares part, because you do, obviously. Forget about the first part that shows you have enough time on your hands that you have dug up a three month old post and attempted necrophilia in order to expand your safe space, and win an argument everyone else has forgotten about. Nothing creepy or disturbing about that part at all...

Dan8267 says

Plenty of people flag posts as uncivil.

The ONLY time I've ever marked a post was in response to you marking one of mine. THE ONLY TIME Dan. Anyone else care to chime in on Dan attempting to rationalize away his deviant behavior?

Dan8267 says

Seriously, how conceited/delusional can you be to post this stuff?

rando says

"Only someone like you would believe that." -> not quite civil, but not so awful

Dan8267 says

Now if I respond by calling you an immature asswipe

rando says

"You're a fucktard." -> definitely uncivil

NuttBoxer says

Dan8267 says

So yes, I'm going to start marking every troll comment as uncivil.

Who defines what a troll comment is... The all powerful DAN! Kneel before his singular grasp on ultimate truth in this universe!!

Seriously, how conceited/delusional can you be to post this stuff?

Same person that defines what is funny. I pointed out how bad some of his attempts at humor are, and he was so butthurt about it that he permanently banned me from his threads, lol!

He was both surprised and offended that I shared the obvious truth with him, that 100's of similar posts about fucking goats was not only not funny, but off putting to most people.

He threw a fit, and banned me, somehow defining it as trolling. At least he thought on what I said, and listened to me, because it stopped. But dude is so worried about what others think, and finding a tribe to call home like the conservatives he claims to hate, that he must identify every screen name as friend or foe, and act accordingly.

I don't get it. I couldn't begin to parse through all the screen names, just to emote like a ragging broad over who is my friend and who is my enemy. He regularly says about how user X "hates " him, which I find peculiar. Hate is such a toxic and strong emotion, I could never evoke it upon an internet stranger.

But people are fucking wierd, and most all of them will fight change and self reflection to the death, even if it causes themselves harm. Bizarre behavior indeed

Dan8267 says

If I then mark your post an uncivil, you'll open a thread

Yes. Because anyone who won't let go of something THREE MONTHS LATER, needs to be shamed.

NuttBoxer says

Please

If your butthurt lasts more than an hour, you should see a doctor.

NuttBoxer says

Yes. Because anyone who won't let go of something THREE MONTHS LATER, needs to be shamed.

I didn't even notice the date, because unlike you, I'm not petty and obsessive. And why should I even care about the date? You're the only one with butthurt here, and you deserve it.

@errc I think this is a very bad trend in our society today. No one debates civilly anymore. Everything is a shouting match, and quickly devolves into threats, or acts of violence. I have liked comments by Dan, even after he's banned me. A good comment or post deserves recognition, regardless of who wrote it. I don't think people like Dan understand this kind of rational though. They'll sacrifice the thought for personal, selfish reasons every time.

NuttBoxer says

I don't think people like Dan understand this kind of rational though.

I fully do and I've occasionally like the non-trolling comments of trolls. It's pretty rare though.

Once more you are making false assumptions about me. I'm a die-hard rationalist. You should have figured that out by now.

Dan8267 says

I didn't even notice the date

You are in such denial. There's no way you "just happened" to stumble on a three month old thread. It would have been buried in your email, buried in pagination, buried! That's why they call it zombie threading, because you have to dig it up. The fact that I'm stating such BASIC, OBVIOUS, standards just shows how ridiculous your attempts to excuse your behavior are. I sound like your mom explaining how the internet works to you.

NuttBoxer says

@errc I think this is a very bad trend in our society today. No one debates civilly anymore. Everything is a shouting match, and quickly devolves into threats, or acts of violence. I have liked comments by Dan, even after he's banned me. A good comment or post deserves recognition, regardless of who wrote it. I don't think people like Dan understand this kind of rational though. They'll sacrifice the thought for personal, selfish reasons every time.

You find this to be true in real life? In my experience, people are very civil, in person. It's the Safe Space they enjoy from their keyboard, on the interwebs, that tends to bring about all the uncivil behavior. Although we tend to see things only through our own personal lens, so maybe I'm a rare exception here.

Dan is a smart dude, but he's flawed like all of us. He seems lonely, and insecure, so he doesn't do well with criticism. It's odd because he will type all day about the flaws of tribalism, yet he can't even begin to apply it to himself. We're often our own worst blind spot. Self reflection is a lost art.

When was the last time you were involved in conflict, and your first reaction was "what did I do wrong, and how could I change?" . Rather than always demanding to find fault in everyone and everything else.

Dan8267 says

I fully do and I've occasionally like the non-trolling comments of trolls. It's pretty rare though.

Again, bullshit. Patrick has eliminated the need to assume by sending me an email every time someone likes my comment. And he's never sent me ONE SINGLE EMAIL saying you like my comment Dan. No one is going to back up any of your assertion, because they've never received that email either. You're just a liar, and a creep trying to excuse his creepy, lying, vindictive, hypocritical behavior.

You think me uncivil now? Even though I haven't called you an asswipe, or whiny bitch(see your comments)? One thing Patrick omitted from his levels Dan, is sometimes the truth is harsh, and your earn your uncivil responses.

If there was a metric that showed how often you earned the uncivil response, you would be leading this site.