Public question to the moderation team

Meta
1

I would like the moderation team to publicly define what they consider “an attack on Monero”

  • Is it any opinion a Monero community member might find upsetting eg, “XMR is tanking tonight”
  • Is it any sourced fact that a Monero community member might find upsetting eg. Fluffypony defrauded Monero community, then laughed at them
  • Is it any research that paints Monero in a bad light eg. this topic or the one they just removed
  • Is it anything about Monero that a CAP member pings the moderation team to remove?

Hopefully @daira is reading this and laughing as to why removing neo-nazi posts is a controversial issue to the moderation team, but this isn’t.

1 Like
2

While theres nothing funny about it, you do make a good point. There is an aire of social acceptability about it that I think stems from it being reciprocal, as though it were some sports team rivalry. It becomes more ambiguous about whether whats being said was in any amount good spirited and we probably should be more shunning of such things.

3

Sorry there, I was projecting my own dark nihilistic brand of humour there. Still I’m more interested in “Monero situation”. Having an arrangement where Monero fanboys can call up the moderators to clobber whatever they deem to be an attack on themselves is not really conductive to healthy discussion.

1 Like
4

The post was flagged as off topic which I declined & I personally flagged the post as inappropriate because of the “publishing of IP addresses & porn habits” content of the post. not necessarily because it was an “Attack on Monero”.

1 Like
5

Ok, so it sounds like a simple mis-communication between the two of you and me. I assume you don’t mind if I repost without “publishing of IP addresses & porn habits” content?

6

There has not been any miscommunication.

I just followed the moderation policy according to the Community Guidelines.

This is not about Monero in particular. Change Monero with anything else and the feeling is the same.

The website name you posted is obviously derogatory and an attack.

This is not that kind of community. Here we want to be inclusive and respectful to others, not attack them. If there needs to be a public response to other projects, the ECC and the ZFND are perfectly capable to do that.

1 Like
7

Please do explain how 0xbadcaca or 0xdeadbeef are “derogatory and an attack”? I have been using them as bad pointer values for 20 years.

I assume you are ok then if repost without the website name, right?

8

There is no secret science here. Just follow the Community Guidelines :slight_smile:

4 Likes
9

Ok, I will repost while following the guidelines. I’m an aspie, it would have been easier if you were very specific about what you consider to be a violation of those guidelines :slight_smile: I will avoid mentioning the keywords that both of you objected to.

1 Like
10

Sorry, but what triggered a moderation and what community guideline specifically were you referring to ?

11

I just want to say that I agree with the decisions made by @anon16456014 and @decentralistdan regarding this issue.

The CoC specifically states that derogatory comments (ie: accusing someone of incest or worse as mentioned on that site) is not acceptable here on the forums. Further, I would say that it also violates the rule against doxxing, ie: publishing someone’s personal information without thier permission.

Since those two subjects are not acceptable here on the forum, posting a link to a site which make those kinds of accusations and publishes that kind of information is also not acceptable.

1 Like
12

Let me note here that this is factually incorrect. The site does not accuse anyone of incest.