...though I will just come out and say that I do not believe that there is such a thing as 'the philosophy of Trump'. — unenlightened

I don't have the issue you think I do.

Someone said that the internet is the domain of the id. I've come to agree with that. There are places here and there that try to raise themselves up from that state, but the id doesn't care.

And maybe that's really a positive sign about how we are to each other in real life. Or not. I'm not really sure.

Thanks for the response!

Unfortunately however, diversity often dies in a slow painful death and groupthink takes its place.
— praxis

Why does that happen? — frank

A natural attraction to order, I suppose.

Implants can really speed up the process, my geeky side imagines.

A natural attraction to order, I suppose. — praxis

Or maybe there just isn't enough social glue to go around?

I do not believe that there is such a thing as 'the philosophy of Trump'. — unenlightened

This wasn't my concern. As I explained, I think Baden wants the members to flag moderators if there are concerns. I found that to be odd. My view was well expressed by Praxis: that's not how most forums work, so it's not likely that someone wandering in off the street would think of doing that. I didn't until Baden suggested it.

But why not a philosophy of Trump? What other things are resistant to philosophy in your view? Bananas?

I should say that I've never seen an instance where I thought a mod should be flagged on this forum.

That's good.

I found that to be odd...that's not how most forums work, so it's not likely that someone wandering in off the street would think of doing that. I didn't until Baden suggested it. — frank

It's written in the Guidelines, which I hope everyone wandering in off the street or off anything else would read: :)

"Moderator conduct:

In discussions, a moderator is subject to the same guidelines as everyone else...You can report a moderator or ask that a moderator be moderated in the same way as you would any other poster by flagging their posts or by sending a private message to another moderator."

There's no great mystery here.

Was that seriously always there? That's funny.

Authority should always be granted and monitored with caution. The application of any such system must be carefull tended, edited, and made exactly transparent or candid for all parties. In order to continue such a system of crude and unfathomable persons who clash and crash into one another, there must come a definite vigilance against abuse and corruption. I have found that this is a fairly generic prescription for the preservation of democracy, but the sentiment remains a befuddling one. It is arduous to prevent corruption by puissance in any system, but the most challenging one is that of intellectuals. These discussions may so swiftly be entangled in clever manipulation, ideological wars, or empowered factions. Even those empowered should be held to equal standards of respect and academia.

These discussions may so swiftly be entangled in clever manipulation, ideological wars, or empowered factions. Even those empowered should be held to equal standards of respect and academia. — AR LaBaere

Indeed. Unfortunately, it requires some lack of apathy to hold anyone to a standard.

It's written in the Guidelines, which I hope everyone wandering in off the street or off anything else would read: :) — Baden

As with all guidelines, I'm guessing the rules are a tad malleable if @frank has some of that $100 million dollar super pac money to throw your way, or if he happens to be cousins with the owner of the site. :lol:

I'm not familiar with jamalrobs's family tree.. :)

Fellow members: how do you decide to flag a moderator? — frank

Whenever I see them, I flag them. Simple really.

Firstly, sites like this are tyrannies, not democracies, and the site owner rules absolutely. Secondly, there is no justice system, but an editorial one.

So the final recourse of us peasants is only to find or create somewhere more congenial to cast our pearls, or put up with the foibles of the local executive.

But in the meantime, we assume that our dictator is benevolent and seeks to appoint benevolent servants. I'm pretty confident that such is the case here, and by and large, the regime succeeds in fostering a lively debating community with a minimum of unpleasantness and folly. I think it should be encouraging that a couple of mods have been found unsuitable for the task and reduced to the ranks.

From the pov of the administration, as the site expands, they can no longer be on top of everything, and have to rely more and more on their undercover agents, which you can join by flagging stuff that needs attention. Since, by hypothesis, the administration is benevolent, they are concerned to know from us what we think needs attention. If nobody ever complains, they will think they and the site are perfect.

So flagging, pms, and feedback are important ways to influence them and guide the conduct of the site, as petitions to the tyrant and his minions. At the same time, one should be a little cautious not to get a reputation as a constant moaner and unreliable witness, who will likely be ignored.

In the case of a thread being moved, merged, or some such decision, I would think a reasoned appeal by pm is the best course, though I will just come out and say that I do not believe that there is such a thing as 'the philosophy of Trump'. (I think that is your current concern?) But hopefully, such matters can be discussed and minds can change or not without any acrimony. Its not a personal matter on either side, is it?

So say what you want and don't want, complain about decisions you disagree with, argue politely, and then don't bang on forever about it, but decide to live with it or not.

Here endeth the old fart ramble. — unenlightened

:up: :up: :up:

I should say that I've never seen an instance where I thought a mod should be flagged on this forum. — praxis

Really? You know that part about moderator conduct was unofficially known as The Sapientia Clause?

And officially.

It's there in its current form since @Sapientia went rogue and was neutralized. Can't remember when that was. About a decade ago I think, was it, Sap?

Sometime during the war anyway.

Don't mention the war.

:zip:

I didn't read the guidelines. How stupid is that?

Whenever I see them, I flag them. Simple really. — Agustino

What does the flag icon mean and what is its purpose? I clicked it thinking I will be asked something or given some options, but nothing of all that. The icon just greyed out! Horrible!
I searched all over the place and couldn't find anything! I hope it's not something bad!

(Note: As you must have guessed, I am relatoively new here.)

So you've never flagged a moderator's post? — frank

I've never flagged any post. I'm not sure why any adult would.

I've never flagged any post. I'm not sure why any adult would. — praxis

One day you'll be an adult and you'll understand.

To protect the non-adults from reading naughty words and ideas?

To protect the non-adults from reading naughty words and ideas? — praxis

I guess so.

I have on occasion asked myself that question when it appeared that others were flagging my posts.

But I've never flagged moderators and I doubt that it actually works as they tend to enforce a forum's agenda and do as they are told from above. So they aren't exactly impartial, are they?

We just get a message that the post has been flagged. That's it.



To make this world a better place, ser.

To make this world a better place, ser. — Baden

That’s adorable.

We just get a message that the post has been flagged. That's it. — Baden

Thanks. But ... Flagged for what purpose? To indicate what? Who sees the flagging and what does it mean to him/her? If, onthe other hand, is just a kind of "bookmark", how can I find it back?