Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
36 minutes ago, ionel said:

But what if some random anonymous poster starts calling you Jim Bob or CinnaDole?  🤷‍♀️  Asking for my friend @PortaJohn

Why are you trying to get me thrown into the Zoo cage with you again? 

I Don't Agree With What I Posted

Posted
2 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

Why are you trying to get me thrown into the Zoo cage with you again? 

I enjoy your company.  

.

Posted (edited)

Problem is that 99% of us don't have time to truly and objectdively vet out what is accurate vs inaccurate. So, it's a nice concept, but in reality it doesn't get done and most of these people just believe what they choose to believe and reinforce their confirmation bias. 

Definitely best to just rely on reliable sources of news. How can you tell what is reliable? They tend to be the more boring sources. 

Edited by red viking
  • Bob 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, red viking said:

Problem is that 99% of us don't have time to truly and objectdively vet out what is accurate vs inaccurate. So, it's a nice concept, but in reality it doesn't get done and most of these people just believe what they choose to believe and reinforce their confirmation bias. 

Definitely best to just rely on reliable sources of news. How can you tell what is reliable? They tend to be the more boring sources. 

Agreed

Posted

None of us are truly objective.  It's unattainable.  The best we can do is acknowledge it and accept that our aligned ideology is neither absolute truth.  I myself have grown from the young libertarian who acknowledges the need for stop signs.  

  • Bob 1
  • Brain 2

I Don't Agree With What I Posted

Posted
5 hours ago, BobDole said:

I'll go into more details. This is great, you can make all the guidelines in the world, but you can't fit everything into the square hole. Who decides if someone has went against these guidelines? Maybe I feel someone went over them, while Willie says no that's fine. This isn't a 55mph speed limit, this is "reasonable speeds should be taken at all times." We aren't always going to agree on what a reasonable speed is.

The people who have been banished from the website usually haven't posted anything against the guidelines per se, however they have been increasingly annoying and making this place less enticing to frequent. How do we make guidelines to not be annoying? Should we censor annoying people who are intolerable to visit?

Tending to social media is not an easy job and I can't even imagine what goes on an the big dawgs. Do we let people be idiots and potentially ruin our product or do we censor people?


An attempt at standards.  It could be tweaked 

Acceptable Behavior:

  • Respectful Communication: Be polite and avoid insults. For example, instead of saying, ‘You’re always wrong,’ say, ‘I disagree because…’
  • On-Topic Contributions: Keep your comments relevant to the discussion. If we’re talking about tech, stick to that topic and avoid discussing an unrelated subjects.
  • Constructive Feedback: When giving feedback, focus on the idea rather than the person. For instance, instead of saying, ‘You never get it,’ you might say, ‘This approach might not work because…’

Unacceptable Behavior:

  • Personal Attacks: Don’t belittle or insult others. For example, avoid saying, ‘You’re an idiot.’
  • Trolling: Refrain from intentionally making inflammatory statements designed to upset others or start arguments.
  • Reporting Misuse: Don’t report posts just because they offend you personally. For instance, if someone compares a pro-abortion stance to pro-murder, it might be provocative but it is not a personal attack.  If someone says that a particular climate change viewpoint is akin to ignoring science, it might be a heated opinion but it’s not a personal attack.

Consequences:

  • Violation of these standards may result in being banned or moved to the zoo. The member name, consequence, and reason for consequence may be posted, and you may be allowed a community discussion to potentially restore your member rights.
  • An IP address may be banned.
  • A warning(s), consequence, and member rights restoration are at the sole discretion of Forum moderators.
  • Brain 1
Posted
16 hours ago, scourge165 said:

LOL...holy shit, you REALLY do struggle with reading comprehension! 

"So seeing a video of someone speaking is a bad way to tell how they feel about the issues."

 

Jeeesus...did you read what he wrote at all? Are you just dumb or is this honestly a good faith attempt to characterize what he just said?

Something happens and social media has SO many false and misleading stories. YOU'RE pretending Social Media is ALL just videos of people sharing their policy positions. 

why do i have to arbitratily find the truth... if i listen to the words.. that would be what the person said.

 

  • Brain 1
Posted

I joined a Wrestling Forum on Facebook and was appalled by the TMZ-like sensationalism over a senior member’s DUI. When I criticized this gossip, I was banned. I encountered similar behavior on Twitter and was blocked by the same man for calling it out. It’s a stark reminder of a conversation I once had with college students at a gym: When does a man truly become a man? It’s not just about having the physically developed mind at 25 years old; it’s about taking responsibility and guiding the next generation. Sadly, many people, even in their 50s, behave like children, despite having their own kids.

  • Bob 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, jross said:

Personal Attacks: Don’t belittle or insult others. For example, avoid saying, ‘You’re an idiot.’

But what if someone on this board did advocate drinking bleach to cure cancer?  I call him an idiot and get moved to the zoo?  

  • Bob 1

I Don't Agree With What I Posted

Posted

Yes, exactly.

Instead of resorting to insults, you could say: “Drinking bleach as a cure for cancer is dangerous and incorrect. Please consult reliable medical sources for accurate information.”

Then, ignore the person spreading harmful advice.  Darwin’s law wins.

  • Bob 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, jross said:

Yes, exactly.

Instead of resorting to insults, you could say: “Drinking bleach as a cure for cancer is dangerous and incorrect. Please consult reliable medical sources for accurate information.”

Then, ignore the person spreading harmful advice.  Darwin’s law wins.

That's obviously an intelligent response but sometimes someone deserves to be called an idiot.

  • Bob 1

I Don't Agree With What I Posted

Posted
1 hour ago, jross said:

An attempt at standards.  It could be tweaked 

Acceptable Behavior:

  • Respectful Communication: Be polite and avoid insults. For example, instead of saying, ‘You’re always wrong,’ say, ‘I disagree because…’
  • On-Topic Contributions: Keep your comments relevant to the discussion. If we’re talking about tech, stick to that topic and avoid discussing an unrelated subjects.
  • Constructive Feedback: When giving feedback, focus on the idea rather than the person. For instance, instead of saying, ‘You never get it,’ you might say, ‘This approach might not work because…’
Unacceptable Behavior:
  • Personal Attacks: Don’t belittle or insult others. For example, avoid saying, ‘You’re an idiot.’
  • Trolling: Refrain from intentionally making inflammatory statements designed to upset others or start arguments.
  • Reporting Misuse: Don’t report posts just because they offend you personally. For instance, if someone compares a pro-abortion stance to pro-murder, it might be provocative but it is not a personal attack.  If someone says that a particular climate change viewpoint is akin to ignoring science, it might be a heated opinion but it’s not a personal attack.

Good luck with this, no one wants their full time job to be patrolling the depths to check every message for adhering to these guidelines. No way I'm reading every topic, hence why some get out of hand until it gets reported or I stumble across it. 

You also did not address people who are just making this place unbearable to come to. They don't always post negatively, but nag, annoy, and provoke others to be annoying. Is there a rule for that or do we just allow it until no one comes here?

1 hour ago, jross said:
 

Consequences:

  • Violation of these standards may result in being banned or moved to the zoo. The member name, consequence, and reason for consequence may be posted, and you may be allowed a community discussion to potentially restore your member rights.
  • An IP address may be banned.
  • A warning(s), consequence, and member rights restoration are at the sole discretion of Forum moderators.

IP Address banning is worthless when people use multiple addresses a day and by banning them you can also ban users that are not delinquents. 

In your world, everything is black and white, yet patrolling a board like this or even the huge social media platforms is not black and white. As stated previously you can't fit everything into a square hole.

  • Brain 1
Posted
53 minutes ago, jross said:

Yes, exactly.

Instead of resorting to insults, you could say: “Drinking bleach as a cure for cancer is dangerous and incorrect. Please consult reliable medical sources for accurate information.”

Then, ignore the person spreading harmful advice.  Darwin’s law wins.

All is good until someone sues InterMat for allowing that kind of advice to stay on the website without being taken down.

Posted

No need to censor here.   That is why we have these boards.   I think personal attacks and bad language are all that should be considered. 

Personal attacks does not include jokes about BobDole being dead or floating around or being six feet under or speaking with other deceased individuals.   By the way, how is Amelia Earhart doing?  Had any conversations with her lately?   Has George Washington looked you up since you were a one time candidate for President, compadres you know?    

mspart

Posted
3 hours ago, BobDole said:

nag, annoy, and provoke

That's an example of trolling and unacceptable behavior.

  • Bob 1
Posted
3 hours ago, BobDole said:

Good luck with this, no one wants their full time job to be patrolling the depths to check every message for adhering to these guidelines. No way I'm reading every topic, hence why some get out of hand until it gets reported or I stumble across it. 

How good are the Invision moderation features?  How often do you get reports about comments and blogs?  Some behaviors and language patterns might be possible for auto moderation.  Content or members might have automatic consequences based on the number of reports, etc.  Who are some regulars that are trusted posters?  Ask them to take on restricted moderation responsibility such that they address problems according to the forum behavior guidelines.

Nobody needs to check every message but coverage through responsible members that ready most things anyway would spread the moderation load.

If you ever go this route, I'd encourage a pinned discussion on Moderation.  The post description could list content and moderation expectations.  The comments allows open discussion for moderators, the accused, and the members with transparency in most cases.

Moderation isn't a fun task.  Thank you for doing it.

You know I wonder if you can run a report that indicates which members are ignored by the most members.  This is a good start list for which members to consider restrictions on, etc.  Any new member that shows up quickly on the ignored list is auto flagged.

  • Bob 1
Posted
3 hours ago, BobDole said:

IP Address banning is worthless when people use multiple addresses a day and by banning them you can also ban users that are not delinquents. 

Have you looked into the logs for user accounts to determine if there is a common IP pattern? 

Combining IP lookup services, reverse DNS, ASN information, and behavioral analysis can indicate if a member is on a mobile phone, home network, work network, etc.  Users with the savvy to mask their connection type and location are unlikely to be the members that nag, annoy, and provoke on a wrestling forum.

Members are likely to connect from a phone most often near work or home.  The same cell tower and perhaps IPs will hit more often during certain hours.  Perhaps there is a pattern for AT&T, etc. for folks at home.  You wouldn't want to do this for PSU university or a large corporation with lots of potential members.  You wouldn't want to ban IPs that multiple members share.

If there is any consistent pattern over days for a user, and you block that IP address, the user will become frustrated and may move onto a different vice.  If there is no pattern, its a waste of time.  

I assume the need for this is few and far between.  I have 8 people on my ignore lists... a smallish number considering the overall member count.

I wonder if you can turn a trick like making certain members login five times to gain access.  Certain members are required to utilize dual authentication and validate they are not a robot.  You configure the system to slow down and annoy them to move to a different vice.  Scam the scammer 🙂 (if only that easy).

  • Bob 1
Posted
4 hours ago, BobDole said:

All is good until someone sues InterMat for allowing that kind of advice to stay on the website without being taken down.

Is the Intermat Forum protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which means it isn't liable for user posted content?

Even with this protection, dealing with lawsuits would be expensive and time-consuming; not worth it.

It’s your forum, so you should do what you think is right. I’m just discussing it since the topic came up. Being transparent about your rules and actions is key to managing concerns and minimizing risks.

This is a small community that doesn't really have major problems; just embarrasses itself from time to time with jerkish member behavior.  Less that than of a high school...  Its cool to keep doing what Bob wants when Bob wants.  Its nice to have a like-minded community (wrestling) to chat about whatever whenever.  There is name calling and annoying behavior... but there isn't much censorship... the ignore feature works... 

Posted
14 minutes ago, jross said:

Is the Intermat Forum protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which means it isn't liable for user posted content?

Even with this protection, dealing with lawsuits would be expensive and time-consuming; not worth it.

It’s your forum, so you should do what you think is right. I’m just discussing it since the topic came up. Being transparent about your rules and actions is key to managing concerns and minimizing risks.

This is a small community that doesn't really have major problems; just embarrasses itself from time to time with jerkish member behavior.  Less that than of a high school...  Its cool to keep doing what Bob wants when Bob wants.  Its nice to have a like-minded community (wrestling) to chat about whatever whenever.  There is name calling and annoying behavior... but there isn't much censorship... the ignore feature works... 

But we can sue the Robert J. Dole Estate correct?  🙂

.

Posted
1 hour ago, jross said:

Have you looked into the logs for user accounts to determine if there is a common IP pattern? 

Combining IP lookup services, reverse DNS, ASN information, and behavioral analysis can indicate if a member is on a mobile phone, home network, work network, etc.  Users with the savvy to mask their connection type and location are unlikely to be the members that nag, annoy, and provoke on a wrestling forum.

Members are likely to connect from a phone most often near work or home.  The same cell tower and perhaps IPs will hit more often during certain hours.  Perhaps there is a pattern for AT&T, etc. for folks at home.  You wouldn't want to do this for PSU university or a large corporation with lots of potential members.  You wouldn't want to ban IPs that multiple members share.

If there is any consistent pattern over days for a user, and you block that IP address, the user will become frustrated and may move onto a different vice.  If there is no pattern, its a waste of time.  

I assume the need for this is few and far between.  I have 8 people on my ignore lists... a smallish number considering the overall member count.

I wonder if you can turn a trick like making certain members login five times to gain access.  Certain members are required to utilize dual authentication and validate they are not a robot.  You configure the system to slow down and annoy them to move to a different vice.  Scam the scammer 🙂 (if only that easy).

As I stated banning IP addresses these days is risky and doesn't do much as users can use multiple IP addresses each day with work, home, and cell networks. And then again, even if you go after their IP addresses they can always get a VPN and then you play that game too. 

This was much easier 15 years ago when most cell phones didn't access the internet, but these days it is fruitless.

Posted
3 hours ago, mspart said:

No need to censor here.   That is why we have these boards.   I think personal attacks and bad language are all that should be considered. 

Personal attacks does not include jokes about BobDole being dead or floating around or being six feet under or speaking with other deceased individuals.   By the way, how is Amelia Earhart doing?  Had any conversations with her lately?   Has George Washington looked you up since you were a one time candidate for President, compadres you know?    

mspart

So accusing others of illegal behavior is something you would allow? What about posting of pornography? Do you want that allowed?

Posted
1 hour ago, jross said:

How good are the Invision moderation features?  How often do you get reports about comments and blogs?  Some behaviors and language patterns might be possible for auto moderation.  Content or members might have automatic consequences based on the number of reports, etc.  Who are some regulars that are trusted posters?  Ask them to take on restricted moderation responsibility such that they address problems according to the forum behavior guidelines.

Nobody needs to check every message but coverage through responsible members that ready most things anyway would spread the moderation load.

If you ever go this route, I'd encourage a pinned discussion on Moderation.  The post description could list content and moderation expectations.  The comments allows open discussion for moderators, the accused, and the members with transparency in most cases.

Moderation isn't a fun task.  Thank you for doing it.

You know I wonder if you can run a report that indicates which members are ignored by the most members.  This is a good start list for which members to consider restrictions on, etc.  Any new member that shows up quickly on the ignored list is auto flagged.

Thanks for your suggestions even though you blatantly refuse to answer my questions about censorship. I will just close by saying, this isn't my first board to moderate and I fully understand how to do it. 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Latest Rankings

  • College Commitments

    Calli Gilchrist

    Choate Rosemary Hall, Connecticut
    Class of 2025
    Committed to Brown (Women)
    Projected Weight: 124

    Dean Bechtold

    Owen J. Roberts, Pennsylvania
    Class of 2026
    Committed to Lehigh
    Projected Weight: 285

    Zion Borge

    Westlake, Utah
    Class of 2026
    Committed to Army West Point
    Projected Weight: 133, 141

    Taye Wilson

    Pratt, Kansas
    Class of 2025
    Committed to Little Rock
    Projected Weight: 165, 174

    Eren Sement

    Council Rock North, Pennsylvania
    Class of 2025
    Committed to Michigan
    Projected Weight: 141
×
×
  • Create New...