adept7777

Trans Mermaid

  • she/mer

Tired lesbian barely able to do much outside of survive work.


alyaza
@alyaza
This page's posts are visible only to users who are logged in.

sharksonaplane
@sharksonaplane

Speaking of that usernamenotrequired asshole, after I mentioned how they were trying to start additional fires, I was contacted by someone who not only confirmed my read on that person, but also mentioned that the way the user talked was similar to a previous user who had been incredibly toxic in sitewide stuff, as well as harassing people and resharing unrelated posts to fuel the flames. So even if the first username had been blocked, it clearly didn't stop usernamenotrequired from coming back again to do more fuckshit. And after MONTHS of that they were still harassing people, and the only way I could tell is because people were bringing their name up again. Nothing about "just blocking and curating" would make this better unless I decided to block the people who were victims of the harassment. We can see why that would be a problem, right? We can see the issue with openly wondering why people "didn't just" do that?

(I never quoted that story before because I did not want the person who was being harassed to continue being targeted, I've tried to keep the details vague for their sake)


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @alyaza's post:

yeah, the community should be the best it can be, with everyone able to safely participate, not forcing a subset of people to lock up and disengage as a means of protection from other members of the community. like, that's just Twitter!

There's a few of these criticisms I don't really have context for, but the "perceived" ones I'm having trouble understanding. Is that implying that they did moderate but it just wasn't visible enough? Or that idk, accusations of favoritism should have been more strongly denied?

I'm not trying to do a twitter reverse-logic attack thing here, I'm genuinely trying to understand.

I feel there wasn't enough moderation, which is a reflex of only having a single person working on moderation iirc, and that was @kaara . I really don't understand the option to not accept volunteer work, I think it'd have helped a lot but they'd have to be overseen. Idk I'm not running the site and never had to run a company, so take my opinions with an unhealthy amount of salt.

no transparency with the moderation. once you reported a thing that was it. there was no way to know what was decided or why. or even if anyone even looked at the report at all.

I did get a few actual updates on tickets, but I think I got...I wanna say 7? Tickets with notes, some of which were vague, out of 30 something reports.

Which makes it extremely hard to tell if it's even worth reporting something, because you don't know if the thing you were reporting is seen as against the rules. If you get a reply that says "this isn't against the rules" you know not to report it next time. Quietly closing it means you have no idea. Its always better for users to get some idea of how the rules as written get applied to real situations.

Having seen this play out on other networks, it also makes people on the site look incredibly stupid and racist to their friends. They come to follow you on whatever site at your urging, and see that it's a cesspool of awful people that you mysteriously never talk about.

And it only gets worse over time, because everybody worth talking to is hiding in their doomsday bunkers insisting that they have no problems.