So what exactly has upset Pavel?
I'd provide a link but Juggling Rock is now a closed group so not much point...
Pavel posted a link to a game design contest (I believe) and if he got 200+ votes he'd make a new video. Someone called him out for spamming the group and asked if he would delete it. Pavel didn't like that and deleted him and everyone who liked his comment. I never read what the person said exactly and it's now deleted.
Maarten Wills or Willis was the one who replied to the game design thing.
He can probably tell you what he wrote.
I read it myself but didn't pay a lot of attention since it didn't seem important.
It was not very subtle but not insulting either, the message was something like
Please do not spam, if others posted this you would delete the message."
Pavel then seemngly went on a power trip.
ADMIN SMASH THEN ADMIN BAN THEN ADMIN JUGGLE
I believe that jugglingrock had close to 6000 members at a point, now there are 5004 so there's probably more to it then this.
Pavel just posted the following: ( I think he is pretty upset and hope he calms down and reconsiders soon)
hey Guys who really knows me, understand what i am not doing something just like that! because i want etc. or have a power, or i am "a childish admin"))Norbi Whitney why you not say it here? guys smell from you in all internet space! i don't know you and all haters stay away from me , don't forget take your friends with you!
you see the message from Jacques Dupond THIS IS SPAM and this shit i delete everyday ! if you hear something, that not means you really know, what happens or becouse somebody say it to you.
No one of you will not telling me what to do!or what i have to do!
This Guy who write comment say what i have to delete my post?Really? who is he? my friend?no!he made this group?no! maybe he something did for this group(exept using?)no! because he thinking i am SPAMing here ADMIN SPAMING?1st i am not asking about his opinion,people who wants help me they will help,don't like roll down page thats easy))I warned him not speak with me like that! if you like use this page Welcome! NOT NEED TO SPECIFY what to do and how to manage page, I know my business!
This is my house and who don't like something delete yourself from here!
(I have no time for discussion)
As Gatto once said (in an almost identical situation):
Internet jugglers don't feed my family or pay my bills
or something like that
Maarten gives his description of what happened at www.facebook.com/groups/191720694192524/permalink/694357223928866 not viewable to non-facebook user (but prob not of interest either as it is about a facebook group dispute)
And *this* is precisely what happens every time a forum has active moderation... yet how many people have begged for moderation on rec.juggling over the years (not that it's needed anymore it's so low traffic)
I for one welcome Orinoco's light touch approach.
I don't think I do any moderating really. I've refused to invite a juggling ball wholesale manufacturer a couple of times (tip if you want to sign up: don't tell me that you are going to hawk a container load of juggling balls to the group in advance), but that's it. I provide a way to ignore people you don't want to see so it's all up to you. If you can't moderate yourself, the internet is not for you.
If you can't moderate yourself, the internet is not for you.
Now, I won't criticise the moderation policy here because it's clearly working fine right now and nobody here is being obnoxious to anybody else that I noticed and jugglers are lovely, etc.
But in general I think this sentiment is poisonous. _The internet is for everybody_. Without any moderation, it's like watching while half the juggling club stop coming because they can't stand the one new guy who tells off colour jokes loudly the whole time. OK, maybe you let people "mute" this guy so they don't see him, but now every new person who walks through the door gets an earful of the inappropriate jokes AND ALSO sees that everyone else there says nothing and apparently thinks this is AOK.
As part of the 50% of the population that can't speak openly in large parts of the internet without receiving tirades of misogynistic insults and graphic rape threats I am biased on this issue. So what, the internet isn't for me?
On the other hand one of the reasons I like the juggling community is the total absence of that kind of bullshit, long may it continue.
Would you ban the people who make misogynistic insults & rape threats from using the internet? You stop short of saying you would because I think you realise that would directly contradict your statement that the internet is for everybody.
There are lots of people who I disagree with & some I outright hate. By the same token there are lots of people who disagree with & downright hate me. The same will apply to you. Which party gets to choose who can use the internet? I certainly don't think I have the right, because do you know what? Sometimes I'm wrong.
Nor do I feel I should be expected to look after you or anyone else. It is completely unfeasible to expect a moderator to protect everyone's sensibilities. Every single visitor will have a different level of tolerance, how am I supposed to know what is acceptable to who? The only person who can know your limit is you, which is why you must moderate for yourself.
If someone signed up to the Edge & started being offensive, I probably wouldn't ban them, but I would lay into them, & I expect most other Edge members would too. This is what makes the juggling community so good, there is very little tolerance of arseholes. Feedback is much more important than moderation. I remember as a teenager, at a time when I'd only been going to TWJC for a few months, someone tried to tell a racist joke. One of the guys just said with a subtle sneer, "I don't want to hear this" & walked off. This simple act of defiance had a really profound effect on me & I knew that TWJC was a great place. Before then I never would have had the confidence to stand up like that. If I visited your hypothetical juggling club I wouldn't go again not because of the offensive person but because it was full of people that tolerate offensive behaviour.
Out of interest, which large parts of the internet populated by misogynists & rapists are you visiting? I don't deny there are online communities of overly hateful people (Stormfront comes to mind) but I'd hardly call them large or successful & I struggle to believe a community comprised of arseholes is capable of functioning.
I struggle to believe a community comprised of arseholes is capable of functioning.
I've got 4chan on line 2 for you...
Would you ban the people who make misogynistic insults & rape threats from using the internet?
No. I have no idea how we have got from "moderation is a good idea on forums" to "ban people from the internet".
Which party gets to choose who can use the internet?
The internet is for everybody. Everybody can use the internet. What they should not be able to do is make the internet intolerable for other people with impunity.
Every single visitor will have a different level of tolerance, how am I supposed to know what is acceptable to who?
The usual way this is done is to start with common decency and a reasonable sense of empathy, and combine that with listening to people when they mention that something or other bothers them, and taking a common sense approach to the whole thing overall.
I probably wouldn't ban them, but I would lay into them
This sounds exactly like active moderation to me, so I am confused as to what we are disagreeing about.
I struggle to believe a community comprised of arseholes is capable of functioning
I am literally completely taken aback that there is anyone existing on the internet who is oblivious to this! I mean, I would think you were joking or trolling but you don't seem to be. Many communities moderate the shit out of that stuff so it doesn't linger on stinking up the place, but Reddit, Twitter and Youtube are the biggest counterexamples that spring immediately to mind. See https://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/women-arent-welcome-internet-72170/ for the most recent article I saw on the subject, but a swift google turn ups millions more.
I don't suggest that communities are actually comprised entirely of arseholes; only that arseholes are plentiful, that failing to moderate them results in a hostile community, and that community owners and community leaders can't absolve themselves of responsibility for the results.
"No. I have no idea how we have got from "moderation is a good idea on forums" to "ban people from the internet"."
Ok, please read, "ban people from using a part of the internet", ala Pavel.
"This sounds exactly like active moderation to me, so I am confused as to what we are disagreeing about."
Sounds like we disagree about what moderation is. If I stop you from seeing an offensive post(er) I consider that moderation. Me expressing my opinion that the post(er) is unacceptable is not.
"I am literally completely taken aback that there is anyone existing on the internet who is oblivious to this!..."
Ah right, I don't consider Reddit/Twitter to be one community but hundreds of thousands of communities. To say otherwise is too broad a stroke for me.
Also my urlfilter blocks embedded facebook, twitter, G+, Youtube comments, disqus etc. which is why I probably find the internet to be a much nicer place than you. I assure you there are thousands of oblivious people like me who do the same.
Unfortunately you will find me a very irresponsible community leader. From my experience moderation causes the very behaviour it hopes to stamp out. If you start banning people then it becomes a game to circumvent the moderators & you end up with a load of anonymous accounts where consequences don't matter.
My experience of moderated communities is that the majority of most moderation work is in being present on the site setting the tone, in chatting to people and asking them to kindly knock it off, or deleting individual comments, and that banning people is an absolute last resort when offenders refuse to knock it off - which is pretty much a failure of moderation. Instabanning people for expressing disagreement with the moderators is not something I'm upholding as a paragon of modly virtue!
Nevertheless I'm pretty sure you'd ban someone if they spammed the house down, the same as you'd probably ban someone eventually if they showed up every day to berate people with offensive language.
Ah right, I don't consider Reddit/Twitter to be one community but hundreds of thousands of communities
I'd agree with that but don't see what it has to do with my actual point, which is that the (absence of a) moderation policy in those places allows the proliferation of really unpleasant shit which spoils everyone's day, apart from apparently the dungeon dwellers who write it.
This is what makes the juggling community so good, there is very little tolerance of arseholes
"Little tolerance of arseholes" is exactly what I would like to see. To me, saying "moderation is a bad thing" sounds like "The official policy of this site is that arsehole behaviour is welcome, and if you don't like it that's your problem". Which makes me sad, especially coming from a demographic disproportionately affected by that shit.
On the upside I am still pleased that this discussion is thus far academic as we do not seem to have been visited by any arseholes.
I am still pleased that this discussion is thus far academic as we do not seem to have been visited by any arseholes.
There are apparently only 3 people on ignore, out of 578 registered users. That's not bad going.
Yes, setting the tone is one of the most important aspects of any online community & which is helped here by the invitations system but I don't feel that is moderation, that is just being a good citizen & should be the responsibility of everyone, not just a moderator.
"I'd agree with that but don't see what it has to do with my actual point"
Well when asked for an example of a large part of the internet that is a no go area for women, you kind of scoffed at me & suggested Reddit & Twitter, but I think there are huge parts of those sites that are most definitely female friendly zones (in fact of all the Twitter users that I know personally are overwhelmingly female), you yourself said they are not all bad. So... (I think Steve is in the same boat as me here) what large parts of the internet are no go areas for women?!
However, no need to answer because I see now that the existence or non existence of such a community is unimportant because you believe it is moderation that makes the large communities bearable. I also see that you have a much broader definitition of moderation than I do, & by your definition the Edge most certainly is a moderated community.
"But in general I think this sentiment is poisonous. _The internet is for everybody_."
Oh, wait, that wasn't what you meant?
"As part of the 50% of the population that can't speak openly in large parts of the internet without receiving tirades of misogynistic insults and graphic rape threats I am biased on this issue. So what, the internet isn't for me? "
What are you speaking about and where, that gives you an experience of constant misogynistic insults and rape threats? Perhaps those particular parts of the internet aren't for you if it bothers you so much. I'm sure there are more places in the real world you can go to literally get raped, robbed, beaten, murdered etc. and I'm sure you would avoid those places. I've learned that lesson the hard way many'a'time, and I know not to leave my house at night anymore. I get the idea of "why should the nice people leave because the assholes ruined it?" but also, why hang around somewhere full of assholes? And why waste the effort to try to get everyone on the same page as to what should or shouldn't be allowed or tolerable? That'll never happen!
And Orin, surely you would ban somebody if they started being pointlessly offensive to the extreme. Like multiple posts per day of senseless personal attacks or something like that. At least I hope you would block them. Luckily we never see much of that on juggling forums :)
Banning people just causes sock puppets. I have features available that would er... help a troll reconsider their behaviour. But short of them posting a Womble mutilation video I don't think I'd ban them. In fact I think I'd only ban someone if it was really funny to do so.
"Banning people just causes sock puppets."
True, I guess I hadn't thought of it that way. I think your attitude toward the way this place is moderated is why I like it here :) Thinking back, I remember all the sock-puppetry on the Gatto and old WJF forums when people would get banned or whatnot. It does seem like a huge waste of everyone's time.
I suspect there are enough intelligent thinkers here to discourage crazy a**holes with challenging conversation. Over the years I've engaged some youtube trolls leaving A-hole comments on my videos, and in some cases it would eventually turn into a conversation and they would actually watch some of my other vids and leave nice comments. But, again, I haven't seen any A-holes here yet :)
The example was give of offensive jokes, and recently I've been introduced to an effective way of dealing with them, which is to just say. "Nope, I don't get it. Can you explain what's funny?" and repeating that requesting an increasing amount of detail each time .
It's effective because you're not contradicting them, or enforcing your view on them, or giving something they can argue/pick holes in ... but it doesn't take long to get the message across that you're not the right audience for that sort of thing.
I've only had to use it a couple of times since I heard about it, but I'm enjoying it as an approach so far
One of my favourite troll abatement tactics which works best on threads started by a troll is to reply with a question that completely ignores the original poster's point. With a bit of luck it will be a good question & you can steal the limelight. It's especially effective if there is some sort of notification of a new post because every new notification is a new reminder that people are not interested in whatever diatribe was put forward & also gives a positive example of what people are interested in.
Haha! I do that exact same thing with "ball jokes", when someone compares my juggling apparatus to a part of the male anatomy, I act really confused and make them explain. Most people become uncomfortable really quickly when they realize they literally just started talking about testicles for no good reason. Totally turns it back on them. And you're right, in doing that I'm doing nothing more than asking them to explain what THEY are talking about.
What are you speaking about and where, that gives you an experience of constant misogynistic insults and rape threats? Perhaps those particular parts of the internet aren't for you if it bothers you so much
Already covered in another comment further up.... And indeed it's quite obvious that those bits of the internet are not for me. Fifty years ago my job would have been not for me and a hundred years my house and my vote would have been not for me. Things are getting better.
And why waste the effort to try to get everyone on the same page as to what should or shouldn't be allowed or tolerable? That'll never happen!
I've seen productive discussions before about community norms and moderation, and I think in general most people are able to talk about things in good faith and learn to understand where other people are coming from. Is it really completely impossible that I could say "look, here is a point of view you probably haven't considered" and have someone or other go "oh well I hadn't really seen it like that before!" ??
"Already covered in another comment further up"
I still don't see it.... perhaps I need my eyes checked? If you meant the article you linked to I clicked it and it wouldn't load for me.
"Is it really completely impossible that I could say "look, here is a point of view you probably haven't considered" and have someone or other go "oh well I hadn't really seen it like that before!" ??"
That is fully possible and quite common, and great, too! However, your scenario involves two people considering different points of view, my point was about all of humanity coming to a concrete agreement about what is acceptable on the internet. What were we talking about?
perhaps I need my eyes checked
You need https://www.streetcred.biz/accessories-c2/contact-lenses-c39/funky-lenses-c40/checkered-contact-lenses-p501
The article I linked was this one https://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/women-arent-welcome-internet-72170/
but there are plenty more at the end of a quick google.
my point was about all of humanity coming to a concrete agreement about what is acceptable on the internet. What were we talking about?
You were directly replying to me, asking me what was the point of trying to get humanity to come to a concrete agreement about what is acceptable on the internet. Assuming it wasn't a random non sequitur, I suppose that you were suggesting a) that I was doing that and b) that it was pointless. I suggested that what I was in fact doing was a) something else and b) not pointless.
Well that's what I was talking about anyway.
Reading my original post again, my point was rather vague, and parts of it were just thoughts on the topic and may not have been directly aimed at you, my apologies :)
I think I was mostly agreeing with Orin that everyone has to moderate themselves to some extent, and I was also genuinely curious what topic you're into and where you discuss it on the internet that has given you such a bad experience with threats and such.
"also genuinely curious what topic you're into and where you discuss it on the internet that has given you such a bad experience "
Also, link still isn't working for me and I was interested in your point of view rather than googling why women aren't welcome on the internet. Did you write the article? Is that what I'm missing?
no, but I don't really want to derail a juggling forum any further with what was intended to be a trivial aside to explain why moderation is nice and benefits some people even more than others.
Happy to discuss this shit somewhere more appropriate with anyone somewhere else, so long as the anyones can keep the discussion in good faith and we are on "try to understand another point of view" and not "make Emily defend the entire minority population of the internet" or "massive debate about the precise detail of the wording of a comment rather than discussing the actual point".
"massive debate about the precise detail of the wording of a comment rather than discussing the actual point"
isn't that how internet arguments are supposed to work?
The link worked for me, it's by a reporter that gets death and other threats via twitter. Harrasment on the internet is an old story. I think it broke into the non-internet in 1993 https://www.juliandibbell.com/texts/bungle_vv.html It's a little long by today's standards. LambdaMOO still operates but few people visit.
Defamation and harrasment require a communication channel and there is no law in physics that says the internet is any different. Community requires shared values.
If you can't moderate yourself, the internet is not for you.
Prolly better to think of this as "running a forum on the internet is not for you". The Edge is great, partly because Orinoco is a moderate moderator.
Any person operating a system that accepts user input must filter it at several levels if they want to maintain operations. Some are there to protect the server. There are character strings you cannot enter into this box and have them appear on this forum. Some filters are there to prevent massive advertisement. And any system run by identifiable people must moderate defamation and the promotion of illegal activity. r.j only filters at the first level although most web portals also filter the second level. But r.j does not have a person or sponsor with something to lose if people or government entities object to what is posted.
If we are counting protecting the server from attack as moderation then I make Darth Vader look like a hippy.
If only he'd lived just a little longer I think he would have found his inner hippy.
sigh. i was coming from an experience many years ago in a nearby galaxy when I ran a bbs that would accept any ascii character and you could, for example, write strings that said one thing and then back-spaced ^H over it for an impressive effect on your screen. In the really early days we could do that without passwords.
The point is it's all filtered or moderated, it's all about where you draw the line. I trust you to do the right thing, I think we all do or we wouldn't be here.
Oh no, I joined the dark side.
I've been made a moderator on the new 'juggling in Europe' group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/191720694192524/)
You are all welcome to join and remind me not to **** things up.
I hope jugglingrock pulls through but it seems that some changes Pavel made are irreversible.
...& to further confuse everyone there is now a new group called Juggling Home which has just popped up. I think I'm a member of all these groups but it's all just making my head spin at the moment.
I think everyone would benefit from having a nice cup of tea & a sit down for a while.
I suggest joining whatever pops up and review in a months which groups flourish and which wither.
For those who haven't found juggling Home yet : https://www.facebook.com/groups/1514667295424548/
I thought juggling in Europe was an alternative group created by Maarten but it seemed to have a history before that.
Instead of stealing juggling in Europe away from the original members it was decided creating a new group with a more global name was a better option.
Now as long as nobody asks me who decided what and where did he/she get the authority I can pretend to know what's going on.
(Illuminati have plans for the juggling world, Jason Garfield's secret plot splinters facebook groups, jugglers crawl back to WJF forums, Pavel asks for asylum inside Gatto's forums , bans keep protesters at bay.
Michael Bay acquires movie rights. )
There was a poll on Juggling in Europe to decide the name of the new group and Juggling Home won, so that group was created. The idea is to have quite a large number of admins from all over the world.
anything on facebook will always have the potential audience smaller than anything not on facebook.
so why do people keep trying to drag things onto facebook?
Because it feels as though the opposite is true. Also, in terms of time spent on activity x, if activity x is on Facebook, although less users might be on it, there's a good opportunity that people will spend a great deal of time on it.
Potential audience is very different to the realistically potential audience. JugglingRock was a lot more active than any other juggling internet community I've ever used - and I've used most of them.
I started using facebook because I checked jugglingrock.
I had an account for ages but even now I mainly just read the groups there.
You use an account here so I don't really see the problem with making an account on facebook for a group there.
"so why do people keep trying to drag things onto facebook?"
It's a lot easier than coding your own!
Lolz, sounds like he's on some kind of power trip, I left juggling rock cause I was sick of seeing it in my Facebook feed 24x7, and this just re-affirms to me that it was the right decision.
People like that really grind my gears, he could do with a good smack no doubt, but failing that for everyone to leave "his house" and let him fade into obscurity.
So I understand it got to the point where everyone who 'liked' the responses of people complaining about Pavel posting spam got banned from the group...
On top of that, when I read the title "What upset Pavel" I had to think of his performances:
He was performing for Christmas in my home town. I went to see the show with the people from the local youth circus and it was really great! However, also everybody was talking about how the juggler was so visibly upset about the many drops he had during the performance.
I talked to some people who went to see the show later who also noted that he dropped a lot.
So I can imagine.. If you are a Russian juggler who tries to make a solo career in the west, and you feel a big pressure because the internet thinks you are one of the best in the world, you can get very upset if thinks don't work out as you wish they'd did!
Poor Pavel... I've had to deal with upset people far away from their homes before, and life can feel really hard if there are expectations you can not meet!
Subscribe to this forum via RSS
1 article per branch
1 article per post