Da (muckefuck) wrote in linguaphiles,


Am I the only member of this community who would like to see more transparency in the comm's moderation process? I had issues with what I felt was less-than-evenhanded treatment of the posters commenting on this entry, so I brought it the attention of another moderator. He eventually followed up with this generic entry on civility, which doesn't allow comments. (Thus the reason for this post.)

Today I went back to see what additional comments the moderators had made under the original entry and found it locked in such a way that the only comments I can view are my own. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect this means that community members who only became aware of the entry (or at least the debate which erupted in it, since this didn't really get rolling for a day or two) can't see any comments at all. How are they supposed to know why the moderators felt they had to intervene or what they said to whom?

I understand that this action was likely motivated by the desire not to see further flamewars erupt over the topic or to waste too much bandwidth on metadiscussions. But isn't some metadiscussion healthy? The moderators enforce community standards, but how do we know what those standards are if we the community never discusses them?

Feel free to talk amongst yourselves (and to contest my opinions to the furthest degree that civility will allow).

ETA: I'm really pleased with the discussion which has resulted from this entry and I'd like to thank everyone who has contributed so far. I've always thought of linguaphiles as a place where intelligent people could productively debate difficult topics. It's good to see my faith confirmed.
Tags: administrative

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →