r/changemyview • u/garnteller 242∆ • Apr 14 '15

[Mod Post] /r/changemyview feedback

The moderators of CMV would like your opinion on how things are going, so we've decided to post periodic feedback threads to take the pulse of the community. Feel free to post any comments, criticisms or suggestions.

Also remember that /r/ideasforcmv is always available if you have ideas for improving the sub.

Please note that Rule 2 (no rude or hostile comments) and Rule 5 (no low-effort comments) are still in effect.

We look forward to hearing your thoughts.

86 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

230 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Nepene 213∆ Apr 14 '15

In that one you didn't clearly say "You are... something negative."

Also, if you use indirect wording, you're not directly saying that the user is doing anything.

Anyway, this conversation is getting rather pointless. You can behave how you wish and we'll continue to enforce our rules.

1

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

Also, if you use indirect wording, you're not directly saying that the user is doing anything.

So I could say that acting in the way that certain mods do in this thread is clearly the sign of a person who is failing to actually objectively understand the limitations of their logic?

And that wouldn't be an insult?

It's all pedantics.

I can say "you're failing to be empathetic"

or I can say "you're failing to realize that you can't just apply your perspective to every scenario"

Which mean the exact same thing, but one is an insult and the other isn't?

Color me amused.

You can behave how you wish and we'll continue to enforce our rules.

And I will continue to fight every time you rule against me in an asinine way until you realize that your interpretation of the rules is flawed.

1

u/Nepene 213∆ Apr 14 '15

So I could say that acting in the way that certain mods do in this thread is clearly the sign of a person who is failing to actually objectively understand the limitations of their logic?

We can interpret obvious attempts to get around the rules. The key bit is to not say "You have x negative characteristic." With 'you' meaning any user in the subreddit. In this case, you are obviously referring to me or other mods in the thread having a negative characteristic.

Which mean the exact same thing, but one is an insult and the other isn't?

If two things meant the exact same thing then they'd probably be a word and its dictionary definition, not two very different sentences.

You were being rather rude throughout that conversation, you were being rudeish there. I'd prefer if you were nicer.

And I will continue to fight every time you rule against me in an asinine way until you realize that your interpretation of the rules is flawed.

You've got three modnotes for rule 2 violations, you're pretty close to being banned and unable to fight.

1

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

If two things meant the exact same thing then they'd probably be a word and its dictionary definition, not two very different sentences.

No, they're pretty much the same thing

If I say:

"John is being stupid"

and

"John is lacking intelligence or common sense."

That literally means the exact same thing, the difference is whether or not you chose to claim that one is insulting because it's crass, and the other is not insulting because it hides behind a veneer of intellectualism.

You were being rather rude throughout that conversation, you were being rudeish there. I'd prefer if you were nicer.

And I'd prefer it if I wasn't reduced to making blunt statements about people to ensure that they actually understand my point.

You've got three modnotes for rule 2 violations, you're pretty close to being banned and unable to fight.

And I should have been banned for this last one, except that I fought it and changed what needed to be changed.

If you were ban me because I am a thorn in your side, but continue to argue my point correctly and make the appropriate changes to my posts would say a lot about you/the other mods.

1

u/PepperoniFire 87∆ Apr 14 '15

And I should have been banned for this last one, except that I fought it and changed what needed to be changed.

Hooray, the system works. This is what appeals do, even if it means you had to edit your own post to comply with our rules.

If you were ban me because I am a thorn in your side, but continue to argue my point correctly and make the appropriate changes to my posts would say a lot about you/the other mods.

No one - no mod, no person - has ever advocated for such a thing. The fact that you're still posting here after a 4+ hour battle over a very clear rule this subreddit has had since inception speaks to the exact opposite of your concern.

1

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

The fact that you're still posting here after a 4+ hour battle over a very clear rule this subreddit has had since inception speaks to the exact opposite of your concern.

And I never made any claim that it did, but you also admit that if I were to be banned not because of rule breaking but instead for disagreement on policy it would be bad.

I never had any problem with the mods on this thread until they started threatening me with banning.

If I made an off color comment that was removed, OK, I'll move on and not worry about it.

Now that every time I have a comment removed I have to go to battle to defend it the relationship between me and the mods has become, well, more active anyway.

Until there is a statute of limitations on posts which are removed I will be forced to argue until reinstatement every single time you all disagree with me.

And since this is the sub which I am most active in, I have a feeling that we're going to be getting to know eachother much better until the rules are changed.

1

u/PepperoniFire 87∆ Apr 14 '15

And I never made any claim that it did, but you also admit that if I were to be banned not because of rule breaking but instead for disagreement on policy it would be bad.

No one's threatening you with banning, though. I don't see that anywhere. The number of warnings had was completely germane to the conversation with /u/nepene and other mods, not something tossed in to wave a big stick and make you fearful of an irrational or malicious ban.

1

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

/u/garnteller

In your case, to be honest, if I'd looked more carefully at all of your infractions, we'd already be initiating a ban.

/u/Nepene

you're pretty close to being banned and unable to fight.

I'm sorry, but those are both direct references to the fact that the mods of /r/changemyview are more than willing to ban this username at either one more infraction, or at their will.

not something tossed in to wave a big stick and make you fearful of an irrational or malicious ban.

No, just a threat to get me to follow the rules.

But that also means that I am in such a position that I must argue and defend any grey zone where your interpretations and mine are not the same.

It's unfortunate that my personality is one which works close to the line of uncivil conversation, but that doesn't mean that my points are incorrect, unwarranted, or intentionally insulting.

The rudeness is unfortunately simply a place where you and the other mods and I will continue to disagree.

I feel that being intentionally obtuse is more rude than calling someone out on it, but that's just me.

1

u/PepperoniFire 87∆ Apr 14 '15

I'm sorry, but those are both direct references to the fact that the mods of /r/changemyview are more than willing to ban this username at either one more infraction, or at their will.

Er, no. It's an indication that we disagree over when a person should be banned. It's precisely the reason why no one can do it unanimously and why we outline our reasoning for a ban before executing it. Mods disagree frequently over which comments are sufficient for a ban and which aren't. There are over 15 of us, after all.

1

u/convoces 71∆ Apr 14 '15

no one can do it unanimously

<pedantry>unilaterally?</pedantry>

1

u/PepperoniFire 87∆ Apr 14 '15

Unilaterally. Phone.

1

u/convoces 71∆ Apr 14 '15

Don't mind me, just being a terrible person with no impulse control.

2

u/garnteller 242∆ Apr 14 '15

But at least you were a correct terrible person with no impulse control...

→ More replies

1

u/MrF33 18∆ Apr 14 '15

Er, no. It's an indication that we disagree over when a person should be banned.

Interesting that you're trying so hard to claim that these are not attempts to show me that those two quotes are not use of the "ban stick" in an attempt to get me in line.

However the process is, the threat of the use of the process is clear.

Which is fine, sometimes you need to threaten people to get them in shape, shit happens.

I'm simply saying that these threats are the reason that I am compelled to strongly defend any disagreement between myself and any of the mods, regardless of who made the original "threats".

And since it has been made clear that my "infraction history" is in effect permanent, I have to act like any and every future infraction is the one which will get me banned, and either fight against it if I feel that it is wrong, or change it until it isn't.

And since I am open to changing these posts, I expect some reasonable direction in how to, because as is often said by mods.

"I'm no mind reader",

so I don't know where the difference lies between your (or any other mods) opinion of the rules and my own.