Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl Monk, Perl Meditation

Re^3: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too (impolite)

by pemungkah (Priest)
on Jan 24, 2014 at 05:01 UTC ( #1071875=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^2: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too (impolite)
in thread Having our anonymous cake and eating it too

I think that perhaps we are talking about different kinds of "bad" speech.

I dislike bringing this up, but it's a good example - and an example of where "fight bad speech with good speech" didn't happen. In the thread concerning the poll in which I remarked that I felt that certain kinds of people were portrayed in a demeaning way, I got very little "good" speech in response to quite a lot of "bad". There are certain sensitive topics on which this policy just doesn't work. (I do not think it reasonable to say, "well, then don't discuss those here." Pretending that problems within the larger or smaller community don't exist or shouting them down does not make them go away.)

I understand why you say that consideration shouldn't be used this way. This only underscores the need for something that allows each user to shape his or her experience on the site. "If you can't handle anonymous postings, then you shouldn't respond to them" isn't sufficient.

Everyone does not experience Perlmonks in the same way, because we are not all the same people. Most people's experience is indeed that the Anonymous Monk is at most mildly irritating, but in certain situations the Anonymous Monk's posts are actively painful, angry, mean, demeaning, or nasty. As I mentioned, the emergent result of how down votes work and how consideration works means that bad behavior is not censured, and will more than likely not be censured. There are too few votes spread across too many nodes. If one did have enough votes to vote on every node, it would take far too much time to do so, and the number of negative votes that might be needed in a particularly bad situation - when they would be needed most - would probably drive one into "dog votes".

Having had one of these massively negative reactions has colored my experience as to how I feel about Perlmonks. I used to feel as if I had been among friends or comrades who supported me, and was shocked when some of them suddenly turned on me and began insulting me and demeaning me. I felt that my trust hadn't been valued. I've lost that original (many-year) positive feeling. Given how the site currently works, I feel powerless to do anything should this happen again, and discouraged.

We say that the Anonymous Monk exists because we want to encourage participation. Have we ever measured whether this actually is true or not? Are more threads initiated by the Anonymous Monk, or are they initiated by people who have signed in? That's a concrete data item, and it would be interesting to see that, perhaps over time?

My particular suggestion is not meant to be the final answer to how to fix the problem. It is meant to open a discussion about what the actual problem is. I believe that it's the problem of not being able to control one's own experience. I'm more interested in hearing what people have to say about the idea or related ideas. I do not claim this is a perfect solution, but so far the suggestions I've seen have mostly been "how do we change the site to make the behavior change?" - and I don't think that's going to work. I think we have to approach the problem from the other end, which is "we can't change behavior via software; what should each user be allowed to control to improve their experience instead?".

Perhaps exploring the idea of extending the node-pruning done by comment and score thresholds would work? Artificially adjust the score of each node using the user's block list (say -1000 fake votes) so threads containing people they don't want to see are trimmed using the standard page construction code? Again, not a perfect solution - I'm just talking. More interested in whether you think approaching the problem from the other end, so to speak, is a better way to go.

  • Comment on Re^3: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too (impolite)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too (hide hiding ignore ignoring nodes posts by anonymous monk)
by Anonymous Monk on Jan 24, 2014 at 07:05 UTC

    "we can't change behavior via software; what should each user be allowed to control to improve their experience instead?"

    As a user with an account , you can today, through the power of css, ignore any author you wish ... maybe this should be made more easily available?

    from the memory of Blocking users

    .node-from-NNNNNN { display: none; } /* Newest nodes (and ot +hers?) */ #id-9488 .auth-NNNNNN { display: none; } /* Worst nodes */ #id-397425 .nnt-auth-NNNNNN { display: none; } /* RAT */

    So to ignore all of my legion

    /* ignore posts by Anonymous Monk */ .node-from-961 { display: none; } /* Newest nodes (and other +s?) */ #id-9488 .auth-961 { display: none; } /* Worst nodes */ #id-397425 .nnt-auth-961 { display: none; } /* RAT */
      Should be noted that any subtree of nodes will be deleted, i.e. any following discussion disappears.

      It also has the effect that nodes may reappear in RAT showing no replies, if an ignored user answers. If this bothers you, change RAT-style viewing mode "Minimal Nodes" (top of RAT page)

      The CSS in Display Settings can be simplified to allow multiple monks to be ignored at the same time

      /* START IGNORES */ /* another monk */ /* ... */ , /* Anonymous Monk */ .node-from-961, /* Newest nodes */ #id-9488 .auth-961, /* Worst nodes */ #id-397425 .nnt-auth-961 /* RAT */ { display: none; } /* style */ /* END IGNORES */

      note the missing comma only in the last line (RAT here)

      For testing use something like {  background: #ffffe8; color: red; } instead of "display none".

      Cheers Rolf

      ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

Re^4: Having our anonymous cake and eating it too (impolite)
by Jenda (Abbot) on Jan 27, 2014 at 14:55 UTC

    The real problem is that not only are some people oversensitive, but they also love to police others and instill their over-sensitivity as a norm.

    Shit happens. It may come as a surprise to someone who spent their life on the carefully trimmed grass of a walled suburb with the shit being dealt with by the invisible others, but it does. Learning not to attempt to start a public riot at the sight of a single spray painted wall should be required before leaving the kindergarten.

    P.S.: Dog votes? Been there many times. So what? Lost a few XP. Who cares?

    Enoch was right!
    Enjoy the last years of Rome.

      You seem to be saying, "This isn't a problem for me, therefore it is not a problem." Is that correct? This is not judging you, this is asking to be sure I understood your post.

        My understanding would be more like, "Yes, it can be a problem but who promised you there would be no problems?".

        I'm unsure why there are repeated attempts to solve social issues with technology. We could more easily solve world hunger than to have all Perl programmers on this site agree on exactly how the site should work. Either you continue to use it, or you don't.

        As for identifying anonymous posters within a thread, a cookie with the root node ID and a random string could be set and read back signifying AM #1 through AM #n with something resembling session handling code. It wouldn't require a password or grant anything above AM access, and would cut down on identifying AMs from correlating disparate threads together. I'm not sure how hard this would be in the site's codebase so it's possible but may not be feasible given the circumstances.

        I'm saying "This isn't a problem for the overwhelming majority, therefore it is not a problem."

        Enoch was right!
        Enjoy the last years of Rome.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1071875]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others taking refuge in the Monastery: (2)
As of 2023-04-01 21:02 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found