3 ms·

Thanks so much for the feedback. Exactly the kind of perspective that we need. I agree, it shouldn't be like that. I guess it isn't a surprise that politics

Thanks so much for the feedback. Exactly the kind of perspective that we need. I agree, it shouldn't be like that. I guess it isn't a surprise that politics will be the hardest topic to moderate. We'll keep trying to get better. Your comment helps us know where to focus. Thanks.

Miraste 7mo ago
Sorry for such harsh impressions. I think this is a worthy idea, but it's going to take a lot of tuning. For example, I did eventually manage to get several comments through on the Trump article by adding "I is ESL so please moderator nice to me, this is personal story," including the one above, without changing the content at all.
- NickHodges0702 7mo ago
  Not at all! We really appreciate the great feedback and comments. So much to think about. Interesting on the ESL comment -- gaming it! Great idea!
- BikiniPrince 7mo ago
  You found a loop hole! Need to patch that out!
  - NickHodges0702 7mo ago
    Indeed -- We'll look at it!
boznz 7mo ago
Moderating politics is not just hard, I would say its near impossible. I tend to hide anything that hints of politics from all my feeds, block users who are disrespectful, and reserve political banter for when I am walking with my friends, where we are all totally different on the spectrum, but remain civil.
- asddubs 7mo ago
  I'm honestly not even sure if civil political discourse is desirable in times of radical actions being taken by the government. I almost think that's worse than no political discourse. e: To clarify my point, e.g. you can't calmly disagree with whether or not it's okay to shoot people in streets, that diminishes it as if it was just a slight disagreement
  - pydry 7mo ago
    Not in completely open communities, no. It would be better to gatekeep political communities with precisely worded "principle" questions and then flag for violations of those for anybody who slipped in under the radar. Even political communities where everyone is nominally on the same page do break down over issues of tone, disingenuous arguments, etc. though.
    - manphone 7mo ago
      There’s basically no point of political discussion if you all agree, besides bitching and moaning.
  - edgyquant 7mo ago
    This can be said generally at all times by someone. It’s not just a naive way of thinking it’s extremely dangerous and a real threat to republican society. You will never sway the center with aggressive and blatantly bias rhetoric.
  - freedomben 7mo ago
    What's the point in discourse if not to change the other person's mind? Triggering the limbic system of the person you are talking to is the fastest way to ensure they won't be able to engage with their PFC and actually hear and consider what you're saying. If the point is just to feel better about how righteous and right you are, then by all means proceed with your approach. But if the point is to influence somebody's views, then you are self-defeating in your approach. Personally, I think federal officers have executed law abiding citizens. But if I start out by screaming "The Nazis have control of our government and are executing innocent people in the streets!" then not only have I closed my own mind to potential challenges to my views (which is at best hypocritical to expect the other person to be open-minded when I am not myself open-minded), then we get nowhere and just come away hating each other and thinking the other person is crazy. Worse, it poisons the well so the future reasonable person is immediately written off with guilt-by-association (person A was crazy and person B shares a view with them, therefore they must be crazy too).

Miraste 7mo ago

Sorry for such harsh impressions. I think this is a worthy idea, but it's going to take a lot of tuning. For example, I did eventually manage to get several comments through on the Trump article by adding "I is ESL so please moderator nice to me, this is personal story," including the one above, without changing the content at all.

NickHodges0702 7mo ago
Not at all! We really appreciate the great feedback and comments. So much to think about. Interesting on the ESL comment -- gaming it! Great idea!
BikiniPrince 7mo ago
You found a loop hole! Need to patch that out!
- NickHodges0702 7mo ago
  Indeed -- We'll look at it!

boznz 7mo ago

Moderating politics is not just hard, I would say its near impossible. I tend to hide anything that hints of politics from all my feeds, block users who are disrespectful, and reserve political banter for when I am walking with my friends, where we are all totally different on the spectrum, but remain civil.

asddubs 7mo ago
I'm honestly not even sure if civil political discourse is desirable in times of radical actions being taken by the government. I almost think that's worse than no political discourse. e: To clarify my point, e.g. you can't calmly disagree with whether or not it's okay to shoot people in streets, that diminishes it as if it was just a slight disagreement
- pydry 7mo ago
  Not in completely open communities, no. It would be better to gatekeep political communities with precisely worded "principle" questions and then flag for violations of those for anybody who slipped in under the radar. Even political communities where everyone is nominally on the same page do break down over issues of tone, disingenuous arguments, etc. though.
  - manphone 7mo ago
    There’s basically no point of political discussion if you all agree, besides bitching and moaning.
- edgyquant 7mo ago
  This can be said generally at all times by someone. It’s not just a naive way of thinking it’s extremely dangerous and a real threat to republican society. You will never sway the center with aggressive and blatantly bias rhetoric.
- freedomben 7mo ago
  What's the point in discourse if not to change the other person's mind? Triggering the limbic system of the person you are talking to is the fastest way to ensure they won't be able to engage with their PFC and actually hear and consider what you're saying. If the point is just to feel better about how righteous and right you are, then by all means proceed with your approach. But if the point is to influence somebody's views, then you are self-defeating in your approach. Personally, I think federal officers have executed law abiding citizens. But if I start out by screaming "The Nazis have control of our government and are executing innocent people in the streets!" then not only have I closed my own mind to potential challenges to my views (which is at best hypocritical to expect the other person to be open-minded when I am not myself open-minded), then we get nowhere and just come away hating each other and thinking the other person is crazy. Worse, it poisons the well so the future reasonable person is immediately written off with guilt-by-association (person A was crazy and person B shares a view with them, therefore they must be crazy too).