[MeFi Site Update] June 8th June 8, 2022 2:11 PM   Subscribe

Hi there, Metafilter! Happy wednesday! You’ll find some updates regarding the site below. I’m looking forward to your feedback and questions.

- MeFi User Survey
Remember you still have until June 12, 2022 to complete the MetaFilter User Survey. More details about the transition team efforts can be found here.

- Site expenses and Revenue
The latest changes in mod coverage have reduced our monthly expenses significantly, other than that I have been doing some housekeeping to reduce our monthly expenses (G Suite, Slack, Zoom, etc…) I will meet with the Transition Team on Sunday to go over revenue and expenses and report back to the community.

- Site Ownership Changes
Transfer is still in progress and we’ll report once it is 100% complete. Jessamyn has been super helpful to help me prioritize our efforts so I’m terribly grateful to her for the contribution and guidance.

- Signup flow, Site changes.
It might take a few weeks but progress is being made, frimble already started making some changes and updating the automatic emails that were previously sent to Cortex.

- Marketing efforts.
Jessamyn and I will be meeting with a few members with a deep background in startups and marketing who have expressed interest in helping with this. Also,as I mentioned before, I’ll go over this with the Transition Team on Sunday as well.

- BIPOC Advisory Board
The 5th BIPOC Advisory Board meeting was a big success, Thyme will share the meeting minute soon but for now here are the most important highlights:

-> We covered the ongoing changes to the site structure and future projects we have.
-> We’ll be meeting once a month from now on, the meetings have been scheduled already.
-> For the next session we want to review and get feedback on moderation decisions in previous threads, that way we can use the feedback to start coming up with concrete plans to improve internal moderation practices and policies.
-> We want to invite more members to join the Board. More details below.

- Joining the MeFi Global BIPOC Advisory Board

If you're interested in joining the Global BIPOC Advisory Board please let us know by filling out this form.


If you have any questions or feedback not related to this particular update, please Contact Us instead. If you want to discuss a particular subject not covered here with the community, you’re welcome to open a separate MetaTalk thread for it.
posted by loup (staff) to MetaFilter-Related at 2:11 PM (58 comments total) 18 users marked this as a favorite

Thank you!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 2:27 PM on June 8


THANK YOU for this great update, loup! It sounds like great progress in every category.

Applause, gratitude, and appreciation to everyone working to make each of these things happen!
posted by kristi at 2:30 PM on June 8 [2 favorites]

For the next session we want to review and get feedback on moderation decisions in previous threads, that way we can use the feedback to start coming up with concrete plans to improve internal moderation practices and policies.
Are you only going to be talking with the BIPOC Board about moderation decisions? Or are you also going to be talking to a cross-section of users?
posted by Violet Blue at 7:01 PM on June 8


Mod note: Are you only going to be talking with the BIPOC Board about moderation decisions? Or are you also going to be talking to a cross-section of users?

Just the Board for now as this is part of a larger project, more details will be made available once the meeting minute is posted.

posted by loup (staff) at 7:36 PM on June 8 [1 favorite]


Well then, the honest answer is that it's basic equity to be intentional about involving people from marginalized groups when making decisions.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:53 PM on June 8 [19 favorites]


Based on loup's response, it sounds like more information on the specific purpose of this particular inquiry into moderation is forthcoming, so maybe just wait for that. In the meantime, the survey is of course open for those who want to be represented.
posted by Miko at 7:56 PM on June 8 [4 favorites]


Loup said:
we want to review and get feedback on moderation decisions in previous threads

It's reasonable to interpret that to mean they want feedback specifically from people most directly affected by specific decisions in specific previous threads. We don't know what the next step will be, we just know that some material has been brought to this board - a board painstakingly established for just such a purpose - for feedback. I suggest we let the process proceed as intended and see what the next steps are going to be before we leap to assumptions of exclusionary practice. This sounds to me like information gathering, and I see no reason to be concerned.

Again, for airing any concerns, all users have access to an open survey; a contact form; and MetaTalk. No one is voiceless here.
posted by Miko at 8:11 PM on June 8 [20 favorites]


Great update, thank you!
posted by ellieBOA at 1:28 AM on June 9 [1 favorite]


I'm not suggesting this is what other that user meant, but what VioletBlue's initial comment brought to mind for me:

I think it's fantastic that the BIPOC board is having input into moderation of threads that pertain to BIPOC issues and people. (Apologies if that's clunkily worded, open to correction.)

I wonder if there are plans in the future to gather together other groups of marginalised users for input into moderation- say LGBTQ+, gender diverse, or neurodivergent groups, to name some. I'm not saying this should be done immediately (resources are finite after all) but it seems to me that the model being used/trialed currently might be found useful in the future with other groups.

Thanks for the update! This one seems punchier than some of the past updates, thanks for the changes being made.
posted by freethefeet at 3:21 AM on June 9 [1 favorite]


(oh no I just re-read this thread and my comment and hope it doesn't sound like I'm advocating for segregation of threads. I am trying to say: good call getting BIPOC board input on moderation to improve how metafilter is moderated, especially regarding racism etc. Recognise that racist issues can arise in any thread not just threads explicitly by/about BIPOC. )
posted by freethefeet at 3:28 AM on June 9 [1 favorite]


The BIPOC Board choosing to look into a topic doesn't preclude anyone else from looking into the same topic. Responding to line items from the BIPOC Board meeting with "and can white people do this?" seems off-topic/derail to me. Even if it was done with the best of intentions, I find it unpleasant and inappropriate. I would feel the same if other groups were trying to address issues they have and someone came in to say "what about men?" or "what about straight people?"

I appreciate the update and I'm glad to hear the BIPOC Board is really rolling now.
posted by snofoam at 4:31 AM on June 9 [20 favorites]


Maybe the board could help come up with some policies on how to deal with users who keep spouting tired racist dog-whistles in thread after thread.
posted by octothorpe at 5:17 AM on June 9 [29 favorites]


I'm not suggesting this is what other that user meant, but what VioletBlue's initial comment brought to mind for me:

I think it's fantastic that the BIPOC board is having input into moderation of threads that pertain to BIPOC issues and people. (Apologies if that's clunkily worded, open to correction.)

I wonder if there are plans in the future to gather together other groups of marginalised users for input into moderation- say LGBTQ+, gender diverse, or neurodivergent groups, to name some.


A reflexive reply along the lines of Well, I think that all lives matter! whenever anyone says Black lives matter is not actually the result of legitimate, good-faith, heartfelt concerns about the treatment of LGBTQ+, gender-diverse, neurodivergent, or other historically underrepresented and underserved groups. It is an attempt to throw chaff in front of any attempt to engage the historical inequities suffered by a particular group of people.

Publicly defending anyone who expresses such a reflexive reply -- especially when other people have already alluded to a history of such behavior -- is not extending them the benefit of the doubt. It is helping them spread the chaff.
posted by Etrigan at 5:47 AM on June 9 [31 favorites]


This is great to hear. Thanks!
posted by The corpse in the library at 8:06 AM on June 9 [1 favorite]


I don't have a history of racist behavior. I have a history of calling out bullies after which I became a target myself. I think moderation affects us all, so I was rather shocked there was no discussion site wide about it — and yes, I'm familiar with the survey. That folks immediately assume bad faith, leap into a pile-on, and outright call me racist is reprehensible. But it's also reprehensible that the mods have not moderated these comments, which is precisely the kind of mod behavior that led me to ask the question to begin with!

The only purpose to the call-outs of my "racism" is to get me to shut up — and assert control. How does that advance the conversation? What does that do for Metafilter culture? How many new users does that attract? Why do the mods think that's okay? This is poisonous behavior. You don't have to like me. But I don't understand why folks **are allowed** to not even meet basic standards of civility.
posted by Violet Blue at 9:00 AM on June 9 [7 favorites]


cold_cuts made three comments, the second one was removed without a note. I believe there may have been a reply comment removed from another member but I’m not certain, but I do know for certain I commented after the third cold_cuts comment.

It’s extremely disorienting when comments disappear without any sort of mod note and/or zero indication (“comment removed” with a timestamp is a good start) that there had been something there, or any transparency that a mod had seen the comments at all.

I’m glad the missing comment is gone, but we deserve more transparency to be able to follow the threads and understand the responses that were made to comments that no longer exist.
posted by mochapickle at 9:11 AM on June 9 [36 favorites]


Violet Blue you kinda do have at least a history of derailing MetaTalk threads by adding extremely divisive if not outright offensive borderline-trolling comments and then make it all about the reactions to said comments and turning it into some kind of act of VB the victim of "bullies", where you seem to define bullies as simply everyone else who responds to you pointing out you are kind of borderline trolling. Maybe the problem is not everyone else, maybe the problem is your comments?
posted by bitteschoen at 9:28 AM on June 9 [26 favorites]


Anyways, just wanted to say this was a good update and I'm glad to hear about the progress being made. Thanks to everyone involved!
posted by bitteschoen at 9:30 AM on June 9 [2 favorites]


I'm not clear why it's borderline trolling to ask a straightforward question, which Loup responded to in a straightforward way. If Loup took it at face value, why can't others?

As for my prior history, anyone who wants to look at my past comments is welcome to.
posted by Violet Blue at 9:41 AM on June 9 [1 favorite]




is it racist to try to center the concerns of white people every time the conversation strays too far from them? i think so, but i guess it's an arguable point.

what is not disputable, however, is that doing it over and over again and then getting huffy when you're called out on it is bloody tedious.
posted by murphy slaw at 10:11 AM on June 9 [27 favorites]


Thanks for the update, loup! I feel like we're headed into a new era of MF, and am excited to see where it goes. I'm happy to hear the BIPOC board seems to have a bit more momentum.
posted by Sparky Buttons at 10:51 AM on June 9 [12 favorites]


(that's an effort to re-rail this thread)
posted by Sparky Buttons at 10:52 AM on June 9 [18 favorites]


In the absence of of a clear mod policy on All Lives Matter trolling, can we all make an agreement to collectively ignore this type of threadshitting? Letting a single user who's demonstrably unwilling to learn new things or center the lived experience of anyone besides themselves derail thread after thread is bad for the site and overwhelms legitimately interesting, generative conversations that ought to be happening but have far more trouble getting off the ground lately. We've all been on the internet for a couple decades now; we can do better than feed the trolls--even the trolls whose dumbfounding earnestness makes them seem like they might someday hear the chorus of other users attempting to teach them something about the world they actually live in, rather than the world of 1962.
posted by knucklebones at 10:54 AM on June 9 [21 favorites]


Some things in this update that I think are particularly great:

The work folks have been doing to publicize the user survey!

"housekeeping to reduce our monthly expenses"

"Jessamyn and I will be meeting with a few members with a deep background in startups and marketing who have expressed interest in helping with" marketing efforts!

"review and get feedback on moderation decisions in previous threads"!

Thanks for the update and glad to hear of this work!

I am curious what improvements new/potential users can expect in the signup flow, if there are any parts of the work that change what screens/emails new users signing up will experience, and if those changes are fairly easy to describe.
posted by brainwane at 11:00 AM on June 9 [11 favorites]


Mod note: Hi everyone! I have removed several comments and replies to those comments from this thread because they go against the Community Guidelines, or because they are outside the scope of this thread, in which case you can Contact Us or open a separate MetaTalk thread for it.

I apologize for the delay between some of those deletions and my comment here, but that is bound to happen when it gets busy.

One of the things I would like to address is if there are plans in the future to gather together other groups of marginalised users for input into moderation- say LGBTQ+, gender diverse, or neurodivergent groups, to name some. For now I can say that the BIPOC Advisory Board is one of the first steps towards improving and strengthening the site's moderation and policies. So, while this is not our only effort, it is pivotal for the future of the community.

The main goal of the site is to be a place where anyone can contribute, and for that, intersectionality plays a huge role.

We started working on this by establishing the Board and by bringing more diversity into the staff (representation DOES matter). After that, the changes in the Community Guidelines linked above, the implementation of a Content Policy and the rewriting of the Microaggressions page have been next in line.

Currently, there are two main efforts going on as well: driving more resources and effort towards the BIPOC Advisory Board and managing the site's finances and resources better so that the site is not only sustainable but also able to invest in more initiatives that will help this community stay inclusive and healthy.

As you know, all of this is a process, but all of these efforts are very much aligned with the same goal.

posted by loup (staff) at 12:05 PM on June 9 [21 favorites]


Mod note: Addendum: We do have a clear mod policy on "All Lives Matter" comments. They definitely fall under trolling and violate more than one of the guidelines.

That being said, the site updates are a place where we've been particularly lenient about what gets removed and what does not, and the reasoning for that is simple:
- I am, most of the times, the only mod actively monitoring these threads.
- We want these threads to be more open for members to voice their feedback, questions and concerns.
posted by loup (staff) at 1:56 PM on June 9 [5 favorites]


Thanks, loup!
posted by mochapickle at 3:24 PM on June 9 [2 favorites]


It makes sense to me that this area is moderated in a lighter manner, in that it allows for a wider array of perspectives, but it seems self defeating in certain instances, especially when every update thread seems to become the same argument with the same person due to the same thing happening over and over.
posted by bootlegpop at 3:42 PM on June 9 [15 favorites]


Great update thanks. It seems as if things are moving and in the right direction and it looks as if the BIPOC board is finally working.
Also this is particularily welcome as it has been suggested so many times in the past and seemingly ignored.
Jessamyn and I will be meeting with a few members with a deep background in startups and marketing who have expressed interest in helping with this.
posted by adamvasco at 4:23 PM on June 9 [2 favorites]


(timezones- apologies for harking back but thanks for pointing that out Etrigan, I definitely wasn't extending benefit of the doubt and can see that my comment wasn't clearly phrased. I'm annoyed with myself for buying in there.)

Thanks loup, appreciate your reply.
posted by freethefeet at 11:55 PM on June 9 [1 favorite]


Jessamyn and I will be meeting with a few members with a deep background in startups and marketing who have expressed interest in helping with this.

This is me, smiling at this update with heart-shaped eyes. Thank you for this, and thank you to the members who are meeting with them.
posted by kimberussell at 7:23 AM on June 10 [8 favorites]


great update and great work loup, thank you
posted by lazaruslong at 7:37 AM on June 10 [1 favorite]


I wonder if there are plans in the future to gather together other groups of marginalised users for input into moderation

Also in case it is useful I can answer this with a flat: YES. Loup is driving the day to day and I trust them in terms of timeline and approach; just wanted to make sure this was unambiguous.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:49 PM on June 11 [13 favorites]


Also this is particularily welcome as it has been suggested so many times in the past and seemingly ignored.
Jessamyn and I will be meeting with a few members with a deep background in startups and marketing who have expressed interest in helping with this.


+1 to loving this, and another THANK YOU to all of the people putting their time and effort into this place!
posted by Meatbomb at 5:43 AM on June 12 [2 favorites]


hey yo yo yo mods why you enabling this racist all lives matter bullshit meanwhile Eyebrows McGee is fucken banning lifetime banning people involved in this conversation?

Why don't you crack down on the white fragility bullshit and the mod (who was supposed to be leaving) who is still shitting all over this site
posted by angrycat at 1:34 PM on June 12 [1 favorite]


Mod note: To be clear, I'm not the one who did the banning; I just answered the email when it came in. But if someone wants to take me answering an email as a sign of a vendetta against them, and then rope in third parties to complain about it in metatalk, that's up to them, I guess. Anyway, I continue to cover some weekend shifts.
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 2:24 PM on June 12


Not entirely sure what you are talking about, but I do see that the racist troll whose racist trolling comment was deleted earlier now has a disabled account.
posted by ActingTheGoat at 2:25 PM on June 12


The comment from angrycat and the mod, Eyebrows McGee both seem to have a set of assumptions or not publically shared or known information in their statements.

Speaking only for myself, I think it's best to stick with factual information when making and responding to comments.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:46 PM on June 12 [6 favorites]


Mod note: In the announcement of my partial departure, I noted that I would still be working weekends and subbing when needed.

I admit I'm a little confused about how I've been pulled into whatever argument this is; I was on vacation with my family for the past week for the first time since before covid, so I haven't been online in several days, and I probably have considerably less information than everybody else involved in this conversation. I just answered an email that came in on my shift. I did not do anything else in the past week, because I was not here, so I'm not totally sure what I'm being accused of, but I'm the only staff member around right now, so I can't really get a rundown on what I missed.

I have gotten several kind-of abusive emails since yesterday because someone appears to be very angry with me about something that happened while I was on vacation that I know nothing about, but that they appear convinced is my fault, but I've just been kind of ignoring it until Monday when people are around.

I'm operating in an unusually information-lite situation this weekend, because I was offline all week, and I'm now the only person around on weekends. I didn't want to leave the thread hanging when I was called out by name and I'm the one on shift, but I don't actually know what's happening here. Sorry guys!
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 3:08 PM on June 12 [4 favorites]


Could a mod say who was banned, and why? Having more transparency around this would be really helpful — it’s confusing to just have comments disappear out of the blue.
posted by buntastic at 3:08 PM on June 12 [1 favorite]


Mod note: I mean when you said, "Eyebrows McGee is fucken banning lifetime banning people involved in this conversation?" I assumed it was because the person whose e-mail I responded to complained to you, and you came to call me out here, is that not correct?

I'm really unclear on why you're so angry at me, but I am sorry you're upset!
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 3:17 PM on June 12 [5 favorites]


Mod note: If the question is about the e-mail, when I got an e-mail asking why they were banned, I looked at the user's page, saw the ban reason, and transmitted that information to the user. I left their more detailed followup question for Monday, because I was not actually able to answer that.
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 3:22 PM on June 12


Why is it important that you don't say who was banned? Why won't the non-mods say what's going on, rather than being extremely oblique and ragey?
posted by sagc at 3:24 PM on June 12


why am I angry?

because I've been following the train of EM's bad treatment of users for a while now. I (I guess obviously) was not banned, so I am hearing details of the banning from the banned person. They, obviously, cannot speak up in this thread, because they have been lifetime banned.

The details I think are pretty damning, and I would share them, but it's not really my place. EM knows what she did. Or if this is as presented, EM following up on another mods decision, then that mod knows what they did.

I'm also angry because I'd sort of thought that there was a consensus that EM was going to step away, and I was very glad, because I think EM has egregiously screwed up too many times, with overreactions, with wild accusations that are fucking astonishing coming from a lawyer.

Everybody shits the bed occasionally. But you, EM are making a pattern and practice of it.

If the other mods are backing you up, it's enabling a sad fucking situation
posted by angrycat at 3:34 PM on June 12 [3 favorites]



At this point it seems clear that angrycat has a complaint about EM, but the whole story isn't clear and EM was on vacation last week, so EM may not have been involved.

I'd advise angrycat to revisit the issue on Monday, when at least another mod, who was here last week, can clear up the situation. Until then, it doesn't seem as though anything will be solved.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:48 PM on June 12 [10 favorites]


EM: I haven't been online in several days, and I probably have considerably less information than everybody else involved in this conversation. I just answered an email that came in on my shift. I did not do anything else in the past week, because I was not here, so I'm not totally sure what I'm being accused of, but I'm the only staff member around right now, so I can't really get a rundown on what I missed.

If you weren't around, didn't know the background, and needed a rundown on what you missed, then maybe that email should have been just that. "Sorry, I can't reply. Please wait until Monday when loup is back."

Which basically applies to this whole thread. The only thing worse than the lack of communication at times on Meta past by having loup be the moderator in charge of these, is EM or previously cortex coming in hot after email(s?) based on what? Incomplete information.

I see no improvement in the moderation practices around here. That will take time, but step one would be to have EM step away from the keyboard.
posted by Gotanda at 4:08 PM on June 12 [10 favorites]


I am also now back to wondering what got memory-holed from this MeTa while I was away. That lack of confidence in the integrity of the site is not the way I would like to see this community go.
posted by Gotanda at 4:10 PM on June 12 [13 favorites]


If you weren't around, didn't know the background, and needed a rundown on what you missed, then maybe that email should have been just that. "Sorry, I can't reply. Please wait until Monday when loup is back."

I was thinking about this too, Gotanda, and I think it might have been one of those situations where you're doomed either way. If you have a member who is writing to you very upset about being banned and is demanding immediate transparency from site management, then it makes sense that the mod on duty would try to be helpful by passing along whatever information they had notes for, even if they hadn't personally been online during any of the activity of concern. This puts that mod in a position where they're unequipped to help with detailed followups and address the questions a banned member might have, leaving that banned member feeling even more upset by the lack of a full explanation.

On the other hand, if you say, Sorry, please hold the line for a few days for the agent who can assist you, that banned member who is contacting you is probably going to feel stonewalled. I mean, in that member's place, I would feel completely stonewalled. And depending on my read of the situation, I might even suspect that this information was being malevolently and mockingly withheld.

It's really tricky. Like lots of others here in metafilter, I've done my share of customer service, and in EM's shoes I probably would have done the same thing she did -- try to address the initial questions as best as I could in the interest of transparency and with the intention of not leaving a former member wondering and worrying and upset all weekend about what exactly went wrong.
posted by mochapickle at 4:48 PM on June 12 [20 favorites]


The comments in this thread from loup and Jessamyn have been clear, helpful and positive. It is really a pleasure to get input from mods/management like this and I think it sets a great tone for the site in general. It makes me hopeful about the site and grateful to have thoughtful stewards. Considerate comments from the transition team are also very welcome. Together, this all shows that it is possible, even necessary, to always seek constructive ways to deal with issues and continue improving the site.
posted by snofoam at 5:17 PM on June 12 [25 favorites]


Hey there, mochapickle, thanks. I can see your take on things. And, all of that would probably apply except for EM's history here of angry screeds and attacking members (such as it is, except where it has been deleted for her own protection).

Which begs the question why should this "I mean, in that member's place, I would feel completely stonewalled. And depending on my read of the situation, I might even suspect that this information was being malevolently and mockingly withheld." be even a remotely reasonable expectation in this place?

Trust has been lost. In this thread, it has been further degraded rather than rebuilt. Rebuilding is what is needed, and demonstrably EM has not been capable of doing that. I would like to see the newer moderation team be able to get down to the task of regaining the confidence of users.
posted by Gotanda at 6:22 PM on June 12 [7 favorites]


Which begs the question why should this "I mean, in that member's place, I would feel completely stonewalled. And depending on my read of the situation, I might even suspect that this information was being malevolently and mockingly withheld." be even a remotely reasonable expectation in this place?

That's a really good point, Gotanda. To be clear, I don't think it's a reasonable take on it, but reactions to things like a ban can make you surprise yourself, especially if you feel the banning was unjust. Things for me have been generally pretty level here at metafilter, but when I got /kicked from my beloved guild in WoW years ago, I went from a mild mannered casual guildie to a raving conspiracy theorist a lot faster than I'd like to admit, and then floored it into flames on group chat for the better part of an hour. It happens. I was a lot younger then, and a lot less tired.

But yeah, if you're banned and angry and confused in the heat of the immediate moment -- and this particular user had an immediate history of commenting unusually emotionally in this very thread AND was unsettled enough by the ban to take the issue up with angrycat offline -- then it's fair to consider that their thoughts could be richocheting in any direction, deserved or not, realistic or not, due to the power of shock and emotions running high.

I'm not part of the transition team so I don't know what the future holds in terms of a newer moderation team, what that might even look like, or who that might include. I'm pretty sure that as we move toward a more community-based model, all of us as members are going to have to step up and help maintain the tone and keep threads on track to some degree, which means we're all working together. It's going to be a challenge, I think, but a worthy one.
posted by mochapickle at 6:56 PM on June 12 [5 favorites]


Can we try harder not to delve into our perceptions of emotional states of people who aren't even here?
posted by Etrigan at 7:11 PM on June 12 [10 favorites]


i'm so tired of the passive-aggressive and aggressive-aggressive cold war that a subset of members appear to be waging against [insert mod here, this time EM?] and really wish that conversation could be contained somewhere so it stops leaking into other threads. the axe has been ground to such a fine edge that the reflections off it are blinding me when i least expect, like the tail end of a site update thread.
posted by lazaruslong at 3:34 AM on June 13 [34 favorites]


Agreed, lazaruslong. It used to be an occasional thing, but now every single MetaTalk seems to devolve into an inquisition over some perceived betrayal, or some esoteric complaint that I don't even understand.

It's hard to imagine how this will be sustainable as MetaFilter transitions into its new era. (Is it any wonder that longtime mods are leaving?)

There are a thousand and one opinions about how MetaFilter should be moderated – many of them very strongly held – and it's 100% impossible to satisfy all of them.

And even if the occasional moderation decision is objectively bad – for God's sake, it's just a message board. People act like the issues we discuss here on the Gray are life-and-death. And they just aren't.

For all the talk about "best of the web", some of the most active participants in MetaTalk sure do seem to hate it here.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 4:19 AM on June 13 [43 favorites]


It's relevant to the point lazaruslong was making about people determined to pursue a perceived slight or betrayal. I made a comment that was sympathetic to EM's response to a member and Etrigan found a tangential, though technically justifiable, angle to publicly rebuke me.

By making that comment, the message Etrigan was sending to me, to others, is that if you stand up to the angry mob railing against the Outrage Of The Week, we'll very cheerfully nitpick you into silence or submission, and we'll do it by following the rules to the letter.
posted by mochapickle at 9:36 AM on June 13 [12 favorites]


Metafilter: Only people I agree with are allowed to speak to me
posted by CyberSlug Labs at 9:58 AM on June 13 [1 favorite]


Mod note: I agree that lighter moderation in these threads allows for a wider array of perspectives, but can be a problem in certain instances. Particularly, that seems to be the case in the last few comments from yesterday and I want to address them. While they have been flagged several times (as they are clearly unrelated to the topics covered in this particular update) I will leave them here for the sake of context.

1. Eyebrows, did not ban anyone. I did ban a member who was active in this thread, for reasons unrelated to the site update itself. The reasons behind this have been discussed with the member in question and they replied saying they understood the reasons behind this. For privacy reasons we can't discuss more details about why someone was banned, please rest assured that this was done in accordance with our policies and discussed with the affected member already.

2. If you have any specific problems or complains about a moderation decision, please feel free to contact us directly or reach out to me, just bear in mind, again, that we can't discuss an issue with a third party.

3. If you want to have an open discussion about moderation practices, feel free to create a separate thread for this.

4. I will now close this thread to avoid further derails. If you have any questions or feedback regarding this specific site update, please contact us directly or reach out to me and we'll take it from there.

Thank you for understanding.

posted by loup (staff) at 1:13 PM on June 13 [18 favorites]


« Older Metafilter does Adult ADHD   |   LM retiring Newer »

This thread is closed to new comments.