Skip to main content

View Diary: How do I say this without seeming anti-Semitic? (267 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Another question (6+ / 0-)

    should be: why would anyone comment in this diary at all if they are afraid they will be punished now or in the future? Bolding mine:

    First: as part of the Community Self-Moderation (CSMAS) process, people will vote not only on the question of whether comments should be hidden, but on the question of whether commenters should be punished.

    Second: the votes on whether commenters should be punished will be determinative rather than advisory information given to management.

    Third: there will be a "volunteer jury," members of which appoint themselves to be involved in conflicts in which they is interested.

    Fourth: someone will be judged right and someone will be judged wrong; there is no "safe haven" good-faith verdict such as "not proven" and no "the offense was either not malicious or not so grave as to require punishment" outcome like a suspended sentence.

    Fifth: the party found to be in the wrong will be punished.

    Sixth: those who coordinate their votes to promote certain outcomes -- even if they do so in good faith and act out of legitimate belief--may be punished.

    Those who were previously sacked have been sacked again...

    •  Fair question (0+ / 0-)

      Maybe I misunderstand the new procedures, but I think they're fairly described.

      In my avatar, the blue bars show how many want Reps who COMPROMISE; the aqua bars show who wants Reps who STAND FAST no matter what. (Left=Overall; Center=Democrats; Right=Republicans.) And there's the problem!

      by Seneca Doane on Tue Sep 20, 2011 at 08:06:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Your description perhaps doesn't make it clear (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Seneca Doane, EdSF

        That if a comment is deemed to be acceptable, those who would be punished would be the ones who flagged it as inappropriate, sending it to adjudication, not those who voted against it in the "trial".

        It also minimizes the proportionality of punish.  As I understand, kos leans towards bad commenting as being punishable by a suspension of commenting privileges and bad flagging punishable by taking away flagging privileges.  

        •  I will never flag any thing under these rules... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sychotic1, Seneca Doane

          just not worth it.

          One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." -- Plato

          by Jane Lew on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:26:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It does seem like an obvious personal solution (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Clem Yeobright, Jane Lew, CaliSista

            to the problem, doesn't it?  In lots of neighborhoods, people don't call the cops for similar reasons: no good comes of it and it can blow up in one's face.

            In my avatar, the blue bars show how many want Reps who COMPROMISE; the aqua bars show who wants Reps who STAND FAST no matter what. (Left=Overall; Center=Democrats; Right=Republicans.) And there's the problem!

            by Seneca Doane on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 07:53:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Some rules are bad rules, and I think this is one. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              CaliSista, Seneca Doane

              To put the whistle blower in the same dock as a potential violator is just not right.

              This rule is designed to decrease the number of complaints.
              That is why it is set up the way it is. When people do not flag,  it is a deliberate function of the rule.

              If people do not report, change the rule.

              One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." -- Plato

              by Jane Lew on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 11:51:40 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I T-h-i-n-k I Like the Rule (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Seneca Doane

                Censoring another member's speech is a pretty extreme step, I'd like to see that it isn't done flippantly or for simple disagreement on policy or tone as is very commonly done presently.  People who routinely do so should lose the ability to continue doing so.  But of course it's all down to how it's implemented.

                Advisors for President-Elect Barack Obama feared the new administration would face a coup if it prosecuted Bush-era war crimes, according to a new report out this morning.

                by Kurt Sperry on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 12:23:55 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  "Good-faith exceptions" (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Jane Lew, ricklewsive, Clem Yeobright

                  That's most of what's missing.  A good faith challenge that fails should mean no punishment.  If someone keeps on challenging the same things and failing, then the presumption becomes that they lack good faith -- or else they'd be adapting.

                  In my avatar, the blue bars show how many want Reps who COMPROMISE; the aqua bars show who wants Reps who STAND FAST no matter what. (Left=Overall; Center=Democrats; Right=Republicans.) And there's the problem!

                  by Seneca Doane on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 03:16:43 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

    •  Do you trust people to be fair? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      EdSF

      If you don't, then why bother hanging out here?

      Do you trust kos to be capable of noticing groups trying to game the system?  That's a different question.  I tend to say yes, but I can see how someone might disagree....

      •  The question, I'll suggest (5+ / 0-)

        - illuminated by much of the commentary here - is not fairness but knowledge, awareness, and sensitivity. I don't think people here - or elsewhere - are 'unfair' when they respond to a survey about whether the Higgs boson will be detected or not; they just have no foundation to answer the question. (The Onion has great fun with its 'on-the-street interviews' on such topics; so does Jay Leno.)

        There is also a question of consistency.

        I am very uncomfortable ceding the final authority in these matters to the unqualified masses. I think it is fine to allow the community to express itself advisorily, as long as there is an understanding that an 'appeals court' can legitimately  and without controversy reverse the communal decision in the interests of knowledge, awareness, sensitivity, and - most of all - consistency.

        [This roughly encapsulates SD's call for a 'common law' at Dailykos, administered by knowledgable people to enforce 'fairness as consistency'. Or something like that.]

        Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

        by Clem Yeobright on Tue Sep 20, 2011 at 09:24:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I understand those concerns (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Clem Yeobright, EdSF

          Heck, I often cringe when someone cites popular support in a poll as a reason why a policy choice is a reason why the policy is good.  And, yet, at the same time, I call for the Democratic Party to be more open to populist fervor.

          I do think kos is working under certain constraints.  One, he doesn't with to permanently hold the mantle of uber-moderator.  Two, he's not hiring anyone to be a moderator.  Three, he's not going to rely on a volunteer team of moderators.  I also believe that he wants something that mimics the notion of bottom-up rather than top-down.

          And there is an appeals court with a membership of one.

          •  Four, a self-imposed restraint: (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Clem Yeobright, milton333

            He doesn't want to develop a "printed and bound" set of examples that could be used to guide such decisions -- say, by inducing people to err on the side of free speech in close situations.  Unlike the others, that is a "reform" that would cost him nothing in terms of time or money.  It would just mean generating an informed jury rather than a capricious one.

            In my avatar, the blue bars show how many want Reps who COMPROMISE; the aqua bars show who wants Reps who STAND FAST no matter what. (Left=Overall; Center=Democrats; Right=Republicans.) And there's the problem!

            by Seneca Doane on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 07:56:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It is sort of amusing, in a way. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Seneca Doane, milton333

              He won't write down what the rules of the site are, and won't hire moderators to moderate it.  

              Instead opting for the himself-admitted capricious model of moderation, either his own or that of the local mob.

              What sort of way is that to run a community, one that has made him a fairly well off fellow?

              It's a bit baffling to me.

              "Blind cheerleading of the president will create jobs and get him to stop droning on and on about deficits no one cares about to the point that his numbers have tanked among independents?" - Markos Moulitsas 8/20/11

              by Rick Aucoin on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 10:18:48 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Consider Athenian ostracism (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Seneca Doane

                Every year in the sixth month the populace was asked if it wanted to have an ostracism that year. If the vote was positive, then in the eighth month everyone was permitted to write a name on a shard, the shards were counted, and the citizen receiving the most shards was exiled for 10 years, with no further penalty (loss of property, for example).

                There were no accusations and no defense. There was no expectation of having to justify one's vote. And there was no association with the concept of 'justice'.

                It's just a blog, ferxrissakes.

                Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

                by Clem Yeobright on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 10:49:17 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Great (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Clem Yeobright, Oh Mary Oh

                  Now you're giving Markos ideas.  With a Greek provenance, yet!

                  In my avatar, the blue bars show how many want Reps who COMPROMISE; the aqua bars show who wants Reps who STAND FAST no matter what. (Left=Overall; Center=Democrats; Right=Republicans.) And there's the problem!

                  by Seneca Doane on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 11:21:09 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'd hoped we'd evolved past that. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Seneca Doane

                    Athenian "democracy" was a huge step forward.

                    For 500BC.  

                    "Blind cheerleading of the president will create jobs and get him to stop droning on and on about deficits no one cares about to the point that his numbers have tanked among independents?" - Markos Moulitsas 8/20/11

                    by Rick Aucoin on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 11:30:10 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Ouch. Is that how you see it? (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Seneca Doane

                      I think I need an expansion from you on 'evolution'.

                      What aspect of Athenian democracy is obsolete?

                      Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

                      by Clem Yeobright on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 11:36:45 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Obsolete? (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Clem Yeobright, Seneca Doane

                        That's an interesting choice of words.  :)

                        I don't know obsolete, but I'll pass on Athenian democracy only being available to the "in group".

                        Sadly I suppose that isn't technically obsolete, looking around here.

                        "Blind cheerleading of the president will create jobs and get him to stop droning on and on about deficits no one cares about to the point that his numbers have tanked among independents?" - Markos Moulitsas 8/20/11

                        by Rick Aucoin on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 11:48:45 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

              •  His "guest in someone's house" rule last week (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Clem Yeobright, CaliSista, milton333

                was a good start.  He did have rules expressed in there -- even though, left to our own devices, they may end up being scattered.  But he has to realize that community moderation will work best if people believe that the system is just, and that that trust in non-capriciousness needs to be earned rather than being an entitlement.

                In my avatar, the blue bars show how many want Reps who COMPROMISE; the aqua bars show who wants Reps who STAND FAST no matter what. (Left=Overall; Center=Democrats; Right=Republicans.) And there's the problem!

                by Seneca Doane on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 10:49:39 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  There's a problem there, Seneca. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  milton333

                  Kos himself has declared local justice to be capricious.  Even bragging referred to it as such.

                  And subjective rules like "someone's house" won't cut it for rules of a community this diverse, we all know it.

                  I've STILL not been told why I got NR'd.  I don't want to argue the thing, I'd just like to know WHY.  

                  For instance.  :)

                  "Blind cheerleading of the president will create jobs and get him to stop droning on and on about deficits no one cares about to the point that his numbers have tanked among independents?" - Markos Moulitsas 8/20/11

                  by Rick Aucoin on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 11:03:10 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yep -- that's why that comment of his sent me (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Clem Yeobright

                    into a frenzy.  It was 180 degrees in the wrong direction.

                    Have you written Markos to ask why your ratings were pulled?

                    In my avatar, the blue bars show how many want Reps who COMPROMISE; the aqua bars show who wants Reps who STAND FAST no matter what. (Left=Overall; Center=Democrats; Right=Republicans.) And there's the problem!

                    by Seneca Doane on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 11:20:15 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  No, I've not. (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Seneca Doane, milton333

                      I've considered it, of course, but just like when MB was moderating I'd rarely message him about stuff like retributive HR's and whatnot.  

                      It all seems rather petty, when it comes to actually kicking up a stink about it.

                      I imagine I got NR'd for uprating somewhere that was inappropriate?  But I can't know for sure, and I can't guess what uprates were inappropriate, 'cause they don't tell us.

                      It's like a guessing game.  Capricious is exactly the right word, my hat is off to the KosMan for accurately using it.  

                      Maybe I should message him to just ask why.  I don't intend to contest the thing, not really.  He's defined the community moderation as capricious and unfair, deliberately, so it is what it is.

                      I DO find it a very odd way to treat a community that makes you pretty good $.  I've been a moderator and manager of several online groups over the years (decades? argh) and I understand Kos HATING that aspect of his business.

                      But jeez, it's his BUSINESS.

                      "Blind cheerleading of the president will create jobs and get him to stop droning on and on about deficits no one cares about to the point that his numbers have tanked among independents?" - Markos Moulitsas 8/20/11

                      by Rick Aucoin on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 11:28:01 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

    •  Additionally, it looks to me like Groups will to (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Seneca Doane, capelza

      a significant extent be able to set their own rules so I foresee a situation in which a comment about the role of AIPAC in American politics could be acceptable in a personal Diary posted to DK, but the same comment might be HR'd if posted to a Diary in Team Shalom because it appears Team Shalom is adopting a definition of anti-Semitism that is much broader than we will see in Daily Kos.  I think the same situation is evolving as regards Black Kos and RKBA.  I suppose that is OK but I imagine discussion in those groups will be become pretty sterile if any dissent from the party line is defined as bigotry.  I may be mistaken but that is the way I read the rules that Markos is proposing.  Anyone commenting in a Group Diary is going to have to step very carefully to live within the "when a guest in someone else's house" rule.  I think the prospect of two sets of rules will cause problems.

      Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a Republican. But I repeat myself. Harry Truman

      by ratcityreprobate on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:00:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site