Thread-specific moderators

[daifo]

Just hit ignore... ? Though i think a particular poster is breaking the rule of just posting multiple similar article/links consistently without any commentary.

 

[Topazchen]

We need this for Chinese economics thread.

The Indian Economics Thread should be renamed Jai Hind Circle Jerk Economics Thread

 

[56860]

The Indian Economics Thread should be renamed Jai Hind Circle Jerk Economics Thread

Disagree completely. Indian economics thread has a lot of good takes.

 

[LawLeadsToPeace]

The War in Ukraine thread required thread specific moderators since it is a discussion about a war which obviously will factionalize many people and generate arguments that can end up involving dehumanizing verbal attacks. Such a thread must be policed. The others don’t require that much policing since, like others said, they are extremely technical.

 

[Blitzo]

The moderation model in the Ukraine War thread has shown some success. The volume of blatant trolling has declined significantly and discussions have been generally more productive. I propose expanding this model to the semiconductor thread with thread-specific moderators selected.

The aim of additional moderation for the Ukraine war thread was to reduce the amount of mutual animosity between both sides of the usual argument.
For that topic, it is often also very clear what is and is not suitable points of discussion (racism, calls for violence, etc).

For something like semiconductors (or indeed economics), expressing skepticism or "low morale" views is not inherently trolling behaviour at the first instance, and if a user is to be penalised on the basis of poorly productive contributions to a thread/forum then it requires a consistent long term tracking of such posts -- i.e. by design, it will not be immediate.

That's because we do not want SDF to be an echo chamber and we also want to avoid any risk of moderators abusing power for the sake of "winning an argument".

 

[T-U-P]

Problem is mods are sometimes slow to ban and he ends up derailing 8 pages of discussion because people here don't know how to use the ignore button and must respond to every provocation. If he derails even a single page of discussion before getting banned, he's won. The ban must come immediately.

There is no way for a ban to happen immediately. Posts that doubt China's progress are not inherently against forum posting rules. When it comes to SleepyStudent it is repeatedly arguing in bad faith that gets him banned.

Additionally, there's no way to definitely prove someone is a SleepyStudent's alt. The most reliable (though not perfect) is through IP matching, but we have not seen good matches in the last few "alts" that we've banned. It can be easily circumvented via VPNs.

 

[Fedupwithlies]

There is no way for a ban to happen immediately. Posts that doubt China's progress are not inherently against forum posting rules. When it comes to SleepyStudent it is repeatedly arguing in bad faith that gets him banned.

Additionally, there's no way to definitely prove someone is a SleepyStudent's alt. The most reliable (though not perfect) is through IP matching, but we have not seen good matches in the last few "alts" that we've banned. It can be easily circumvented via VPNs.

These folks are pretty far beyond just posting china skeptic posts. In fact they they post in exactly the bad faith posting style that sleepy does, in that it doesn't allow for discussion, its cherry picking data, extrapolates based on false premises and does so with a gery high volume that makes it hard to debunk point by point.

Just because they're not sleepy doesn't mean they're posting in good faith.