Rule 4?

submitted by fschmidt from self.SaidIt

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

No response yet, and I have an additional question. As human IQ plummets into the abyss, it becomes increasingly difficult to determine what is "in good faith and on-topic". For example suppose I have an astronomy sub. An increasing number of morons believe that the Earth is flat. Suppose these morons flood the sub with moronic posts arguing for this. Would it violate rule 4 to ban them?

[–]brickfrog 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think your example is the same as the earlier one, right? It's still an opposing opinion (your sub claims earth is round, others are claiming othewise). Hence 4b applies.

Also may want to see the earlier post, there was much discussion on rule 4 there

https://saidit.net/s/SaidIt/comments/w6s/saidit_rules_for_moderators/

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think your example is the same as the earlier one, right?

Not exactly. In this case the issue is stupidity. So even making a true statement but using stupid reasoning would be grounds for banning, while making a false statement intelligently defended would be fine.

I want to understand the relationship between rules 4a and 4b since they seem to contradict each other. Does 4b override 4a? Does 4b only apply to opposing opinions or can it apply to bans for any reason (like stupidity)?

[–]brickfrog 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So even making a true statement but using stupid reasoning would be grounds for banning, while making a false statement intelligently defended would be fine.

It's only a false statement because you say it is and you would be moderating to remove that opposing viewpoint. So 4b would still apply.

Note that Saidit itself leans anti-moderator, and it also leans heavily into conspiracy theory. So while I get what you're saying that there's a real true/false, you're basically wanting to ban people that tell you their theory is correct and yours is wrong (yes I know, it shouldn't even be a theory but this is Saidit after all). And technically you can remove those posts/comments but you'd need to follow the rule 4 conditions.

Flipping your example around, it's like a flat earther having a sub and you keep posting trying to explain the earth is in fact round. Those mods could leave your posts up & it might dilute discussion of a flat earth if the sub is just filled with opposing viewpoints. Or those mods could remove all those posts & adhere to the rule 4 conditions.