Comments on: Scale and Community Matter http://www.whump.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whump.com%2FmoreLikeThis%2F2006%2F10%2F24%2Fscale-and-community-matter%2F&seed_title=Scale+and+Community+Matter The more you know, the more jokes you get. Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:45:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Teresa Nielsen Hayde http://www.whump.com/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whump.com%2FmoreLikeThis%2F2006%2F10%2F24%2Fscale-and-community-matter%2F&seed_title=Scale+and+Community+Matter#comment-3150 Teresa Nielsen Hayde Wed, 01 Nov 2006 13:54:18 +0000 http://www.whump.com/moreLikeThis/2006/10/24/scale-and-community-matter/#comment-3150 It's true that ML started out with a fair number of readers who were at least glancingly acquainted from other venues: SF conventions, GEnie, rec.arts.sf.*, the Well, etc. That helped: no question about it. But our readership has outgrown that original population without a breakdown in basic conversational civility in the comment threads. Some things I believe: 1. You can't have a good online discussion venue without moderation. 2. After a while, your commenting readers know each other from conversations in your comment threads, as well as other venues. 3. New readers' reactions to the venue are heavily conditioned by what they find going on there. Civil order can to some extent become self-perpetuating, provided you back it up with muscle when necessary. 4. Occasional outbreaks of brilliance are useful for keeping people on their toes, which encourages them to be on their good behavior. (Yet another reason we miss Mike.) 5. Suppressing misbehavior is a public act. Its function is only partly to suppress the misbehavior. It also tells the onloookers what does and doesn't count as misbehavior, and how much of it will be tolerated before the axe falls. === I had a moment of real pride in ML's civic culture a few months back. We had a tussle going on with a guy who's been kicked off a number of message board. He was being a jerk, and wasn't paying attention to suggestions that he amend his behavior. I was just coming to the conclusion that he'd have to go, when someone in the comment thread told him, "Guy, can't you tell when you're being lit up by targeting radar?" Another commenter cheerfully posted, "[Opens popcorn, sits back, waits for the disemvowelment.]" My problem case promptly replied with unnecessary rudeness, and was just as promptly disemvowelled. What was great about it was that those readers not only knew that the guy's behavior was over the line; they knew how much and when. That's my definition of successful moderation. The best rules are the ones people know without having to think about them. It’s true that ML started out with a fair number of readers who were at least glancingly acquainted from other venues: SF conventions, GEnie, rec.arts.sf.*, the Well, etc. That helped: no question about it. But our readership has outgrown that original population without a breakdown in basic conversational civility in the comment threads.

Some things I believe:

1. You can’t have a good online discussion venue without moderation.

2. After a while, your commenting readers know each other from conversations in your comment threads, as well as other venues.

3. New readers’ reactions to the venue are heavily conditioned by what they find going on there. Civil order can to some extent become self-perpetuating, provided you back it up with muscle when necessary.

4. Occasional outbreaks of brilliance are useful for keeping people on their toes, which encourages them to be on their good behavior. (Yet another reason we miss Mike.)

5. Suppressing misbehavior is a public act. Its function is only partly to suppress the misbehavior. It also tells the onloookers what does and doesn’t count as misbehavior, and how much of it will be tolerated before the axe falls.

===

I had a moment of real pride in ML’s civic culture a few months back. We had a tussle going on with a guy who’s been kicked off a number of message board. He was being a jerk, and wasn’t paying attention to suggestions that he amend his behavior.

I was just coming to the conclusion that he’d have to go, when someone in the comment thread told him, “Guy, can’t you tell when you’re being lit up by targeting radar?” Another commenter cheerfully posted, “[Opens popcorn, sits back, waits for the disemvowelment.]”

My problem case promptly replied with unnecessary rudeness, and was just as promptly disemvowelled.

What was great about it was that those readers not only knew that the guy’s behavior was over the line; they knew how much and when. That’s my definition of successful moderation. The best rules are the ones people know without having to think about them.

]]>