Online Community Moderation Thread Part 93819: the same story going round and round forever

Been watching this Scott Cawthorn thing play out (the Five Nights At Freddy's guy, who it turns out was secretly donating the game's profits to far-right abusers while publicly donating to useful groups to give himself a veneer of respectability).

If you've been moderating for a while you'll see the same social mechanics play out over and over like clockwork, and you'll feel frustrated at this.

You'll be like, "This only last happened a couple of years ago, don't people learn?"

Remember, your site has new users since the last spin of the merry-go-round. Some of them are in their teens!

The FNAF community is handling their Milkshake Duck situation poorly because they trend so young that for many of them, *this is their first Milkshake Duck.* Their first ever! You remember how much you flailed and how much of an ass you made of yourself during *your* first Milkshake Duck, don't you?

You'll continually go through the same stories over and over until a portion of your userbase is old enough to recognize these cyclic events, and then you'll keep going through them because you have new users, but the old users will roll their eyes and go "Pfft, kids today."

The solution - I'll say it again! - is to list common harmful social mechanisms *right there on your website,* so people recognize and derail them on the fly.

(surfing random waves of algorithmically-amplified emotion is not a healthy thing to do during a traumatic event. A Community Consensus will attempt to form within literal minutes of the news breaking, regardless of whether anyone's had time to sit with their emotions or not.

Of course shutting down a subreddit while it's at the absolute peak of its traffic is unthinkable, because corporate-owned internet wants us to think that numbers going up is good.)

One wrinkle to the "Shut it all down and let people think for a minute" approach is that for a non-zero portion of the userbase, this community IS how they think, how they process, how they identify themselves, and suddenly yanking that away and forcing them to sit with their own emotions would be cruel to them. I'm aware of that.

I said earlier in this thread, "You will have to deliberately hurt someone." That's important to keep in mind if you want to run a community website.

Online Community Moderation Thread continued, red flags for an early ban:

* using "god" or "hero" or "deity" or other wanky self-aggrandizing crap in their username. You'll wanna be up to speed with the semi-obscure names of almost-forgotten gods that undesirables tend to use, including spelling variants (we had a guy who named himself Asmodius who ended up in prison, you can probably guess why but it's actually worse than you think).

A common denominator between many of the folks you'll want to ban from your website is that they all want to see what they can get away with.

More often than not, they treat everyone around them the same way. That includes work colleagues, intimate partners, you get the idea.

Someone who consistently bends the rules will eventually victimize your other users, if they're not already doing so. You'll find out when half a dozen come forward at once.

Ban before that point.

(me, early in Improbable Island days, a twentysomething dumbass who thought he knew better despite being in the internet's Edgy Cringe Is Cool Actually era: "Haha lol I have a cult"

me, very shortly thereafter: "oh shit I have a cult, this is Bad Actually"

me now, a latethirtysomething dumbass who thinks he knows better but at least does know better than he did ten or twelve years ago: "Don't let folks turn you into a cult leader kids, it's Awful Actually")

(lotta Actually going on here huh)

Earlier on I said "If it's make a new rule for one person or ban the person in question, just ban" - I also wanna make clear that codifying your community norms, writing them down as part of your CoC in a descriptive (as opposed to prescriptive) way to remind you and others of what the community is like when it's at its best is Good Actually.

I also wanna reiterate that online community management is tricksy and subtle and sometimes contradictory

Online community management thread part ten billion: hobby degradation

Another awful online social dynamic I wanted to highlight (in case you hadn't had enough of those by now) is the zombie-consumerism takeover of the hobby forum.

It works like this. Rich guy joins the forum and starts posting pictures of their massive collection of gerbil tanks, admin doesn't say "Hey this site is "look how nice I am to my gerbils," not "look at my huge bank account," piss off Richie Rich," trouble ensues.

Many hobby communities end up like this.

If the "I'm rich, look at my stuff" posts are left up then they'll inevitably become popular because folk like shinies. Popular posts set the tone, especially if you've been shortsighted enough to attach visible engagement numbers to posts.

(adding a "high score" to casual social interaction is a really bizarre thing to do with predictably awful results but sites do it anyway for quick dopamine hits)

You'll get more of these sorts of posts.

Thread housecleaning:

This thread is long and unwieldy and hard to process and neverending because the subject is long and unwieldy and hard to process and neverending. If you're intimidated by its length then consider this a taster for what you'll have to deal with as an admin!

This is a stream-of-thought thing where I just toot out whatever comes to mind as I think of it, it doesn't have a table of contents or chapters. I might write a book one day, I might not, consider this a draft.

Thread housekeeping (housecleaning was a brainfart) part 2:

Some folks are asking again if they can turn this into a blog post; by all means link to the thread as it evolves but hold off for now 'cause I'm by no means finished, also be considerate of others replying who don't want that. Check earlier housekeeping posts for my stance on screenshotting etc

Popping this onto the end of the community moderation / admining thread because it's tangentially related and there's notes of responsibility to audience etc.

I'm writing an MotD about COVID-19, trying to encourage those of my players who haven't yet gotten the vaccine to get the vaccine.

This isn't the sort of thing you'd expect a game website to do, and I'm... kind of wondering why that is, and trying to deconstruct my hesitation and figure out why this makes me uncomfortable.

Whether I like it or not, whether I'd normally do it or not, these aren't normal times and if I've got an audience, some of whom could be persuaded to get a vaccine, some of whom wouldn't get a vaccine otherwise, then I've got an obligation to make the best attempt I can.

Next consideration, how many minds am I likely to change... probably not that many, but if it's even potentially non-zero then I've kinda gotta make the effort.

I wibbled around a lot, typed out some very long MotD's and deleted them, and ultimately went with something shorter:

"A rare serious update here, especially for those of us in the USA: the Delta variant of Covid-19 is here, and it's not fucking around.

"If you live in a country where vaccines are available, and you've been putting off getting one, I implore you to ask your doctor about it.

Plenty of folks figured they had a low risk of getting or spreading the disease and were putting off getting the vaccine so as to let the elderly and immunocompromised get first dibs.

"If this describes you, I applaud your patience, but those of us at most risk have all had the jab now and Delta is killing and hospitalizing people who previously didn't have as much to worry about.

Again, ask your doctor, they (usually) know what they're talking about - don't trust me, I'm just a stranger on the internet, and the internet is full of bullshit."

Adding onto the community moderation thread:

I just saw a guy in another thread do the whole Let The Lies Spread argument: instead of banning misinformation and propaganda from your site, allow it to stay up because your users will argue it and show it to be nonsense, and anyone watching will see it debunked and form a sensible conclusion.

If that's a thing you believe is true, still, in 2021, when people are eating sheep deworming paste, then you should NEVER run a social website.

If you let the sheep worm paste posts stay up and put the responsibility of debunking it onto your users, then random bystanders (who would have never thought of eating sheep worm paste) will see two people arguing about sheep worm paste.

They won't think LOOK AT THIS DINGDONG EATING SHEEP WORM PASTE, they will think THERE IS AN ARGUMENT ABOUT SHEEP WORM PASTE.

And they'll be right. Because you hosted that argument. You facilitated it. You paid for it to happen on your property.

Your regular users don't want to argue with weirdos about sheep worm paste, but they will, because they like your website and don't want it to become a rabbithole into the upside-down.

They'll resent you for putting this labour on them. Many will leave and the ratio of normal to sheepwormpastebrain will go in the wrong direction.

"The best solution to bad speech is more speech," bullshit. That's been tried by facebook and reddit and twitter for a decade and it's ruined whole countries.