You must log in or register to comment.

DaisyDisaster wrote

I think there needs to be made a clear line between calling someone out for bad behavior and harassment, whatever the guidelines end up being. The dunking on ziq was frequent between certain people and it grew to a level where I was becoming uncomfortable with participating in the chat. People make mistakes but that shouldn't be used as a way to alienate them from the rest of the community, as long as they don't pose a danger to anyone.


ziq wrote (edited )

These are the guidelines I tried to add to the old room before they hijacked it:

For 3 months that room was used to slander and attack me, raddle and anyone that dissented from the pony clique's hate train.

Guidelines to put a stop to their stranglehold on the channel were sorely needed as it had descended into something resembling - nothing but a reactionary circlejerk of vicious personal attacks, witch hunts and vote brigades against the site, its management, and users.

From the screenshots I was being sent, it had literally become #antiraddle and #fuckziq and I should have stepped in long before I did to put a stop to it. They drove away so many users with their behavior and stressed me out especially; it's no fun being under constant attack for months in your only social space.

Now they have their own channel (where they've doubled down on this behavior, increased the witch hunts against random raddle users, and are now openly discussing hacking raddle to take it offline). I want guidelines to stop this disaster from repeating in the future. Specifically to tackle noxious cliques from monopolizing a space and pushing everyone else out.


ziq wrote

One of my first concerns is to ensure no one with authoritarian politics is able to get onto the admin team in the future. We should only appoint admins and mods that have proven to be mature, trustworthy and reliable; with solid politics.


ziq wrote (edited )

It's also important that people engaging in continued personal attacks and deliberate malicious acts against the site or channel are dealt with swiftly before a clique forms around them. That means not asking their permission to take action, because that will just lead to their friends voting to protect them.

Instead, mods should have the right to break up drama at will, and give the people involved time outs from the channel without having to fear the clique then turning on them for intervening.


ziq wrote (edited )

At the same time, democracy in f/meta and the meta matrix needs to be involved too. Just not in cases where the users in question are directly flaunting the guidelines we decide on. Mods are afraid of retribution and users are afraid to vote against people that spend all day everyday ranting about their enemies in a chat room. No one wants to get sucked into that drama.

The culture of fear, distrust and disinformation created by ingrained cliques needs to be addressed.

For this reason, mods and admins should be required to give time outs to people directly breaking the guidelines.

Being removed from a channel for a week isn't the end of the world.

And hopefully it will stop the in-group/out-group victims/villains dynamic from ever forming.


TheLegendaryBirdMonster wrote

Since you've lived a forced time-out yourself, do you think it helps?


ziq wrote (edited )

Yes, except the people I took the time out for (shiningwing and the other 2) refused to accept my apology and instead villainized me to such an extent that I started mustache-twirling in my posts in f/memer just to give them the over-the-top villain they were presenting me as.

So these three months of unbridled rage, witch hunts against innocent people that pleaded with them to stop the drama, and constant personal attacks / privacy violations on me (something I never did to them - I only ever criticized their ideology) showed that sending out defasher whenever they said something reactionary was probably not the worst decision in the world. Their politics have actually gotten far worse since my apology.

But I stopped using defasher and a strawman (to avoid engaging them directly) to make my point about their politics and now I just say what I want to say to people with my account, for better or worse... It was a lot easier for me when their boogeyman wasn't an account that has been throughly doxxed (ziq).


ergdj5 wrote

you missed the part where you rejoined the room as administrator a position of power you should not even have and banned people

You have been called out for it already in arguing about how you decided that you would ban everyone


ziq wrote (edited )

Why shouldn't I be an an admin in my own room? What are you on about? I never quit as admin of the channel and I never even got into any arguments on there.

I don't need your permission to ban 2 noxious trolls from my channel that were attacking me and others endlessly for 3 months and openly organizing to damage this site.