How we will break the culture of rule breaking and incivility on DU.

[Skinner]

Most of the members of this message board have no difficulty treating other people with respect, and participating in a positive manner. For that, I am grateful. Unfortunately, there is a small minority of members who either cannot control themselves, or have chosen not to control themselves. These rude people make Democratic Underground unpleasant for the rest of us, and have shown little inclination to change their behavior, despite repeated pleas from the administrators, the moderators, and the members of this website.

We believe that Democratic Underground has enough rules, and we will not noticeably improve DU by creating more rules. Our problem is that we have a small minority of people who refuse to take responsibility for their own actions, because they have no real incentive to do so. There has been no accountability and there have been no consequences for disruption. Until today.

Today we are unveiling a new enforcement system, which will help encourage all of our members to be productive members of our community. We are confident that it will provide a real incentive for all of our members to learn and follow the rules. We call it the Moderator Messaging system.

Here’s the great thing: If you are part of the vast majority of members who follows the rules and treats other people with respect, you will rarely, if ever, have any problems with the system. In fact, you can probably stop reading this post right here. But if you are part of the small minority of people who repeatedly cause problems, your DU experience is going to change a little bit. Here’s how it works:

When a moderator deletes one of your posts, you are sent an automatic notification to let you know. (Note: you will not get notifications for harmless infractions like duplicate postings.) When you receive such a notification, you are temporarily unable to post. In order to continue posting, all you have to do is review the notification, acknowledge that you received it, and give us your word that you will follow the rules. If you do not wish to follow the rules, that is your choice, however, you will not regain your ability to post on the board.

The moderators can also send you messages using this system. When you receive such a message, you are unable to post until your review the message, acknowledge that you received it, and give us your word that you will follow the rules.

If you receive a notification in error, we have the ability to remove it from your record. Simply send an email to the administrators, with the text of the post, and we will review it. Please do not waste our time with rude messages, baseless accusations of moderator bias, or complaints about deleted posts that include obvious rule violations. If you do send us such message, we will add an additional warning to your record.

If you receive five notifications, you get an automatic 24-hour time-out, during which time you will be unable to post on the message board. You will also get automatic 24-hour time-outs at 10, 15, 20, and 25 notifications. When you get 30 notifications, you are automatically banned. If you have promised 30 times to follow the rules, but still continue break them, then we can reasonably conclude that you have no intention of keeping your word. You get a special tombstone to indicate that your account was shut off automatically because of your own behavior.

I fully expect to hear a great deal of complaining about this new system, which will try to paint me as unfair, biased, fascist, censorious, or Ashcroftian. These complaints will be loud and disruptive for a few days, but ultimately they are wrong. This system puts the power in your hands. If you are the type of person who tries to treat others with respect, and makes an effort to be civil, you will never have any serious problems with this system. Based on our analysis of deleted posts over the last six months, the vast majority of members would never even get one time-out. However, if you are the type of person who is intentionally rude, or if you scour the rules looking for loopholes which give you an excuse to be disruptive, then you put yourself at risk of being banned.

The power is in your hands. The only person responsible for your own behavior is you.

I look forward to participating on a more civil Democratic Underground.

Skinner
DU Admin

Important notice: We understand that this is a significant change for our members and for the moderators, and we realize that many of you will need some time to adjust. Because of this, we are starting off with a “learning period” that lasts until January 1, 2004. On that day, we will wipe everyone’s slate clean so you can start from zero again. However, please be aware that if you get a time-out during this learning period, you are stuck with it, and if you get automatically banned during this learning period, you will stay banned.

Also, there will likely be a number of technical glitches and bugs over the next couple days as we implement this system. Please be patient.

This is thread number 2 in the GD forum. The first is here.

[RedEarth]

1. 30 is way too lenient

If people can't figure out how to be civil after a few warnings they should be banned.

[cosmicdot]

2. just a tongue-in-cheek, out-of-DU observation ... how can we break ...

... 'the culture of rule breaking and incivility' in society-at-large ... it seems to have permeated our fabric and every institution; ergo, pervasive in all aspects of our daily lives

[John_H]

3. I love these rules but it also increases the Admins' responisibilities

I fully admint that paranoia may be setting in as the 18 hr. pre-primary days begin, but it seems to me there is a danger that ultra stringent enforcement may increase the danger of rules being used selectively by too-loyal moderators to help silence attacks on their candidates.

We've all read the charges that X mod allows inflamatory posts about candidate Y while deleting posts that bash candidate Z.
While most of those charges are untrue, IMHO, I would just ask the admins to keep a extra close eye as the days of reconing draw near.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

11. I doubt moderators will do that but I can see posters hunting down posters

[sistersofmercy]

4. Thanks Skinner

I believe most of the uncivility is displaced anger and being passionate about who people feel can and will fix our broken country. There is much to be angry with the misadministration over, it's overwhelming at times, I think, just so many issues. However, we should not lash out at one another but rather collectively utilize this outrage constructively to find the issue that will take the misadministration down.

[rumguy]

5. What is an uncivil post?

Won't each moderator have a different standard? Honestly I don't see much of a problem...the only thing is all the negative attacks on other candidates, but even most of that is civil.

Everyone keeps saying it's so uncivil - maybe I'm uncivil and don't even realize it.

[Skinner]

6. Read the rules.

It's all in there, and pretty clear.

The moderators discuss enforcement amont themselves, to minimize the chances of uneven enforcement because of different standards.

[DeepModem Mom]

7. I applaud your efforts -- as DU becomes more widely known,

and observed by outsiders, I think a more civil forum not only helps us as DU participants, but our Democratic cause.

[dreissig]

8. Culture of Incivility

There's so much incivility on the Internet that this effort is a bit like trying to keep people from tracking mud into the house. When I post stuff on newspaper websites I make an effort to be thoughtful. Unfortunately, responses like Stick it up yer ass! are typical.

Good luck on this. It's going to take a constant effort to remind people to leave their Internet manners outside. Take those muddy boots off, dudes.

[GinaMaria]

9. 30 notifications too much

This allows for an a lot of disruption. If by 10 the person doesn't get it, they aren't going to get it. The mods shouldn't have to work this hard. They are volunteers. Just my 2 cents.

Sorry you have to go to all this trouble over a few people. This site is your private property, like your home. I hope I never do anything that would make me unwelcome. Thanks for hosting so many of us 24/7.

Peace
Gina

[psychopomp]

10. Good work

I hope it elevates the discussion.

[Ishoutandscream]

12. Thank you. There is incredible hatred from some toward Texans

I have found this board to be very uncivil when it comes to those of us in the south, particularly Texas. Several have openly shown their hatred toward us in their writings and messages, making it very personal. It is not only uncivil, but bigoted as well. I appreciate your message, and hope this gets through to those who harbor a deep hatred for those of us from Texas, even though we are in the same boat politically and want to get rid of George Bush.

[edzontar]

13. Will a more systematic effort be made to identify conservatives?

And other disruptors?

The stakes for provocation have just gone WAY up.

[Code_Name_D]

14. Best of intentions gone ariy.

Rest assured, I will complain most bitterly - when I see the mods going over board. But the changes your propose are long over door. And the "wage the finger" feature will help. Believe it or not, old timers do run afoul the rules now and then, and its good to get a reminder, without any accompanying harsher consequences for innocent mistakes or just an over heated moment and a laps of judgment. 30 infractions may be a bit high though, but lets just leave that up to the mods to play with.

Unfortunately, while this new protocol will help, I fear it will do little to address the real problem we have in regards to civility. Lets face it here folks, the GD is becoming a cesspool. And its not just the civility that is the problem. We have some freepers there too. Freepers who know how to stay in by following the letter of the law while still violating the spirit of the law.

The mods are going to have to start going after some of those more subjective posters. I will make these suggestions (again).

1) Raise the new post threshold. The current number is obscenely low, and is easily circumvented by disrupters. The point of the threshold is to give others a chance to review the politics before they start posting, to weed out the disrupters before they start to foul the message board. But not only dose this number need to be raised, but a number of days also needs to be set so a new poster can not simply "sprint" through the threshold with a few hours worth of tiny posts. This threshold also need to be flexible, or even frozen at the mods discretion to take into accost the political situation outside the board. Such as when the Pig Man calls for ditto heads to flood the board. It also needs to be flexible so the freepers are kept guessing what the threshold is at. Once they learn what the threshold is, this information is distributed, and we have another freeper invasion.

2) Look for the soft disrupters. Those posters, while obeying the rules, still manage to disrupt the board. This is where most of our civility problems come from. Persons like hecklers and spamers. But spotting these requires a more subjected examination of the posts, and looking at a poster's history. Some hints of soft disrupters.

Refusing to answer specific questions directed at them, usually while claiming they have already answered it. Being caught in a lie, then repeating the same lie later to a fresh audience. Arguing semantics. Clones (When more then one poster posts exactly the same article.) Spamming. (Posting a thread in more than one room. Usually they will post in the Latest braking news, and then in the GD room.) Trying to change the subject. And parroting (using the same lame argument, over and over and over and over and over again.)

This is where most of our civility problems are coming from. The neo-con's strategy isn't necessarily to win arguments, as much as it is to keep having us running around in circles. And many of us are getting frustrated. And the discourse is starting to suffer. Flaim wars are now common place in the GD room, as well as in many of the issues rooms. For crying out loud, they are starting to pop up in the lounge!

The mods are simply going to have to start working closer with the other posters to start picking out and removing these soft disrupters.

3) Letting the neo-cons debate. Yes, we actually do have some open and self declared neo-cons floating around. Some actually behave themselves. They may be trying to argue their case, only to fail to do so. Its my opinion that we should welcome them in.

But more often than not, they are not here to have an honest debate. One more than one occasion, several new posters have come into the Economics room spewing supply sidrs clap. They don't last long as they are quickly shut down. Only to pop up later in the GD and LBN rooms. And this incenses me. Deliberately seeking out the uninformed to debate with is vial. And those caught doing it need to be expelled. But senses they "follow the rules" our efforts to get them kicked usually falls on deft ears.

4) Encourage the use of the alert button. Our Skinner needs to make regular reviews of the GD room and try to find the "hot spots." He then tacks up a post up to the top (just like this one) telling the other posters about what kind of behavior to look for. Is the alert key being under utilized, or over utilized? Give us the heads up when we have freeper invasions to be on the look our for them.

The mods need to talk to the posters. You don't have to crack the whip, but you do have to at least ask. The posters that I talk to on a regular bases are more than prepares to do what ever it takes to protect the DU. You need a human chain around the server, you got it. Evil DUers are fanatics of the best kind. A little extra vigilance is hardly a problem.

A lot of us got quite the scare with some of the proposed changes regarding the Clark/Dean posts. But the mods, and Skinner especially, has shown the ability to rise above the fray, and putting the DU first. The mods and sops have shown there color. Time to ask the posting community to do the same. I am sure they will come through.

[Selwynn]

21. Yeah that's just what we really need - subjective rule enforcement...

brilliant.

1) Nice idea but no one has the time to individuality subjectively analyize whether or not every new members posts were "long" enough to warrant them being able to post, and I don't want some outside group "judging" the value of a post anyway. Sometimes short posts are twenty times as valuable as long ones.

2) This is the absolute worst idea ever. "Soft" disruptors? This isn't 1984, subjective paranoia should not run rampant.

-People don't get caught in lies here, not usually - its too subjective, what you might call I lie I might argue is in fact the truth, people call each other liars all the time, that doesn't make it so.

-People may repeat something you believe to be a lie (like for exmaple an unflattering opinion about somone or something you believe in) and that doesn't mean that it is a lie.

-Arguing semantics is important. As a philosopher and a man interested in linguistics, its important some times to define terms, to clear up equivocation, to get to the details of an argument. Sometimes discussing the form that an argument takes is as important as discussing the argument itself.

-Clones happens for different legitimate reasons. Sometimes an ariticle is relevant to and deserves to be mentioned in more than one discussion - big deal.

-Spamming the same post across every room on DU might be a problem, but there is NOTHING wrong with a post of important news that goes to both Latest Breaking News and the GD boards. I am very, very greatful when posters bring an important breaking news story to my attention like that, so big deal.

-Trying to change the subject is in the eye of the beholder - many people are accused of changing the subject when they try to address a point from a larger discussion that someone else doesn't want to talk about. There's nothing inappropriate about that, and even in the times where there may be something inappropriate about that, its too subjective to do anything about and would end up innocently punishing ten times as many people as it rightfully dealt with.

-And Parroting? I'm sorry but if I believe in an argument, I'll use the same argument until I draw my very last breath, whether YOU like it or think its lame or not.

3) No. An open conservative, is a banned conservative. This is not a forum for public debate, its a forum for like-minded community. There are enough problems with civility without turing it into that.

4) The alert button is frequently abused by people who just simply don't like what someone else posted. And moderators do not have clear and responsible guidlines for what consitutes abuse, therefore you get this HUGE swings in what moderators choose to moderate and don't choose to moderate. I'm sure there has to be an Alert button, all I'm saying is that it gets abused - a lot.

[Skinner]

24. I don't understand the Alert button paranoia.

It's not like the Alert button actually causes a post to be deleted. All the alert button does is bring a post to the attention of the moderators. They disregard dozens and dozens of alerts each day.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Code_Name_D]

38. Case in point now underway.

With the recent news of Saddam's capture, we are now seeing a rash of brand new posters, posting nothing more than total clap. Agrument (and I used the term losly) about how this Dooms Dean and the Democrats.

The mods reactions here need to be swift to stay a head. A post needed to be tacked up placing the du on "HIGH ALERT". The posting threshold needed to be suspended. And the posting comunity to be alerted andinstructed to make libirl use of the alert button.

[Skinner]

39. We have shut off new user registration. (nt)

[Code_Name_D]

40. Just take charge, and keep us informed.

And I know we will do just fine. :)

[Endangered Specie]

15. Indeed, 30 is way too leniant, and I expect

their will be alot of Iron Fists needed in the next few months.

Mainly because ive noticed a GREAT deal of hatred between supporters of candidate X and Y. (The majority is anti-Dean, naturally). I hope that once the nominee is decided all negative stuff will be silenced.

And if the nominee is Dean, well then.. Call the undertaker, Ill bet by the time yall are done over the next few months you will have started your own graveyard! Get the tombstones ready! LOL!

You know, that would be a fun thing to have, a virtual graveyard (THE DU Graveyard), with tombstones and all. One for every banned person. What yall admin think of that, it would be kinda fun. Do it by username in alhpa order, people can mourn over fallen comraderie.

[Dr Fate]

16. Cool- but 10 or 15 warnings is plenty. n/t

n/t

[cliss]

17. Thanks, Skinner & mods.

I for one am in favor of this new approach to dealing with rudeness and incivility here. Of course, you're always walking a fine line when you attempt to deal with large groups of people.

However, there was a thread from Skinner about 1 month ago which reviewed the general nature of complaints. This was around the time when we had an enormous amount of hostility in the 'Meeting Room' and the astrology threads. Lots of fist-fighting there!!

Anyway, he made it clear that there were plenty of 'alerts'. Out of the thousands of alerts, it was discovered that there were really only a FEW chronic troublemakers. At that time, it was decided that, while life would be better without these few troublemakers, it was decided to let them continue, rather than showing them the 'Exit' sign, in a true democratic fashion.

I believe that this will be an improvement. Someone asked if they were being obnoxious without realizing it. There is a BIG difference between being inadvertently rude, versus someone who has made it their agenda to go after certain people, or the astrology threads, for example. It doesn't take long to figure it out.

Thanks, guys!

[rasputin1952]

18. Once again Skinner....

yor generosity is showing; 30 is a bit high. But you are the boss.

Most of us know who the perpetrators are and generally avoid them.

In any case....do what you have to DU will be better for it.






:kick:

[Skinner]

19. Yes, 30 is quite generous.

We reserve the right to change that number when we wipe the slate clean on January 1.

You'd be surprised how many people rack up more than thirty deleted posts in one month.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Selwynn]

23. On Edit - through the proper channels of course.

[MoonRiver]

20. I think this is a good and necessary move.

It is all too easy to become uncivil when passionate political committment combines with the relative anonymity one has on Internet message boards. I've never been an active participant on a board that didn't have to institute serious crack downs on personal attacks and flaming.

[Paladin]

25. Sounds Good

I'm looking forward to these new rules being applied down in the J/PS Gun Dungeon, where things have been really ugly for some time, despite the concerted efforts of some first-rate moderators.

[legin]

26. It's this an I/P issue again ?

A forum by forum breakdown on the number of deleted posts per Forum would be appreciated to give an indication of which posters are most 'at risk'.

[legin]

29. I/P posters should have different rules

as an example this thread has 23 posts of which 6 are deleted, aprox a 1:4 deletion rate.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=35086

So safely assuming an average 1:10 deletion rate for posting in the basement, all the present posters there will be tombstoned within 300 posts, probably about 3-6 months.

[Violet_Crumble]

30. I mentioned the same thing to Skinner...

I wasn't asking that I/P should be treated any differently under this system, though, because I don't think it should be, but I did point out the possibility of an empty forum after a year. Skinner was right with what he said about that being the point of the new system - that if people can't or won't modify their behaviour when they are violating the rules, then they're the folks that the new system will affect. I know back before the system started I'd every now and again post something that I pretty much knew in advance might end up deleted and that the worst that would happen is it would be deleted and life would go on. Now I think much more about what I'm posting and while before if I was in a crappy mood from having a bad day I didn't care if my crappy mood spilled over into my posts, now I'll be more inclined to steer clear until my crappy mood has passed. So my guess is some folk in the forum will clean up their act and others won't want to or be able to. I think the system is a good idea if it's carried out with consistency, and apart from hopefully making the I/P forum more readable with less and less deleted posts, it might in the end mean less alerts for the mods because people aren't going to be doing personal attacks and violating the rules and stuff...

Violet...

[legin]

31. Thanks Violet_Crumble n/t

.

[Selwynn]

27. Rules are only as affective as the check and balances on those who enforce

Let me try this again, in a rephrased way:

I concede that perhaps it is mecessary to "crack down" on "incivility" on the boards. But it certainly is a shame. Everytime things get more and more regulated, rule-obsessed and orchestrated DU becomes less and less the great community it could be. Sometimes you have to accept the bad for the sake of the good. I hate lots of rules on "discussion" boards. I mean I really hate them. The more and more rules there are the less and less it is a "discussion" board and the more and more it is a propaganda tool.

Every time there is yet another announcement of new regulation I want to rebel - I guess that's the way to put it that doesn't get my post removed. But I should emphasize how forcefully I want to rebel. But, I don't run the place. It is what it is, and what's done is done.

However, with new rule enforcement should ALSO come more rules and guidlines for the moderators. There should be a real system of checks and balances that we can believe in, and right now it *feels* like decisions on what to lock and when are so subjective that it almost makes any rule structure irrelevant. So - I'm fine with new rules, but before the new rules there was nothing at steak of a moderated locked a post. That's probably a problem and needed fixed. However, if the guildines for moderators are not also just as riguously fixed and enforced, with genunine accountabily on that side of the fence as well as ours, then it is pointless. So now I will absolutely rigorously contest any instance where I feel moderation has been unfair, every time, no exceptions. That's the price I guess we pay for rules, in my opinion.

And if there's something wrong with this written opinion here, then why bother even putting up a "discussion" thread? Just make a declarative statement and lock it.

[Code_Name_D]

32. Your point?

I concede that perhaps it is mecessary to "crack down" on "incivility" on the boards. But it certainly is a shame. Everytime things get more and more regulated, rule-obsessed and orchestrated DU becomes less and less the great community it could be. Sometimes you have to accept the bad for the sake of the good. I hate lots of rules on "discussion" boards. I mean I really hate them. The more and more rules there are the less and less it is a "discussion" board and the more and more it is a propaganda tool.

Every time there is yet another announcement of new regulation I want to rebel - I guess that's the way to put it that doesn't get my post removed. But I should emphasize how forcefully I want to rebel. But, I don't run the place. It is what it is, and what's done is done.

Actualy, not only do I expect this. But I embrace it. This sort of evolution is in fact part of the progresive pholosify, that change is natral and to be expected. As we salve old problems, now problems shall arise. Some will be completly new issues, while others will be an unintended consqence of the solutions to older problems. So long as she contiue to change for the better, than change is good.

[Selwynn]

34. My point is it is not change for the better, in my opinion, unless...

that change is not accompanied by subjective rule enforcement.

[slackmaster]

37. The standards are by nature subjective

I've seen posts that look just like personal attacks to some yet seen as mild sarcasm or New Jersey-style friendliness by others. If the person giving the more generous interpretation happens to be the moderator, the post stays.

:shrug:

[janx]

33. This system is a good one, but it is being abused already.

I guess I should send an email to the administrators. Please watch out for people who are taking unfair advantage of it.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RandomUser]

36. I can finally log in again! Hooray!

I've deliberately kept myself logged out for awhile now, because I've found that the hate and sniping on GD was seriously getting to me. But it's now safe to log back into DU, hopefully! Thank you, thank you, thank you, Admins! I can finally log back into DU again!

[JohnGideon]

41. Don't Let DU Get Like MoveOn's ActionForum

Many of us have used MoveOn's ActionForum as a place, like DU, to discuss relevant issues. There have always been people from all political spectrums involved in those discussions and they have been heated at times.

Now a few Conservatives and Neo-Cons have taken over. It began with a program of posting pornographic pictures and has now changed to a constant spamming.

Most of the more active posters have quit in disgust. Emails and petitions to MoveOn have done no good. The "Great Goals" forum that this is happening on is supposed to be MoveOn's testing ground for issues they may want to work on. It is apparent that they don't look at this forum.

So, thanks for doing what you can to keep things under control and for being responsive to the members.

[farmbo]

42. Kick back...relax...and wait for the Primaries to wrap up.

Too many DUers feel too passionately over too many candidates. Its a receipe for bedlam!

But it ain't no big thing.

[CWebster]

43. incivility...Ha!

Interesting that it has become an arbitrary designation. On the "Ask the Administrators" forum, the question was asked. "Why was Rage's 'Stop Dean Movement' thread unlocked?" to which their was a somewhat sketchy response about the primaries being an ugly affair, followed by an immediate locking. The thread in GD is littered with deleted posts protesting the antagonistic nature of the thread and the divisive intentions, questioning such efforts as being more at home on the oppositions side than our own. I have to wonder at the motivation of the administrators who would allow such a questionably biased demonstration of the ultimate incivility as legitimate. Fi.

[DemCam]

44. I applaud this effort

Let's hope it can be enforced and the rest of us can have a meaningful discussion about meaningful issues. It may not be as exciting to those who are addicted to the Rush...but it will be grand for the rest of us.

Thanks.

[BackDoorMan]

45. Another boring day in Gereral Discussion.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mouse7]

47. Moderators are anonymous with this?

So moderators can put a strike on your account with no accountability? That's not too democratic.

Also, I looked at the rules. There nothing in the rules about suggesting people don't blow their temper on the board as well as refrain from making uncivil remarks in a regular front page features being deletion material. Yet I have some nameless moderator put a strike on my account and delete a post on a thread that SPECIFICALLY asked for feedback on how to make the board a more civil place.

I didn't place that comment on General Discussion. I placed that comment on a thread specifically asking for feedback. Either you want the feedback or you don't. But don't start giving strikes to the people who give you the feedback you specifically ask for.