Jatland: Free Market of Ideas?

[kapdal]

Free market of ideas- That is an interesting phrase I read on Jatland today. Is this site a free market of ideas? What do fellow members think?

I think it is far from being there. Unfortunately, most of the blame is put at moderators' door, rather incorrectly at that. They don't have any magic wand. Most of them are only doing this part time (What else does one expect? Everyone has to earn bread and butter). They are also flesh and blood people, with same emotions and human failings as everyone else. They end up executing rules arbitrarily and disproportionately. The guy whose post gets deleted or gets infraction finds it unfair when he sees the same crime being committed by so many others who go scot-free. And as the protests become vociferous, the person gets banned. But Moderation is not the cause of the problem. It is an ineffective solution.

So what is preventing the free market from being formed? Us only. Many discussions become an exercise at mud-slinging as people lose sight of the topic and the arguments being given on the topic and start targeting the person instead. Leg-pulling is in our nature. Some harmless leg-pulling is fun as long as everyone enjoys it. I am sure I have been guilty of sarcastic remarks and not saying that they'd have been enjoyabale to everyone. It also depends on the topic in question- some topics are relatively harmless and leg-pulling doesn't hurt anyone.

But as far as more serious topics are concerned, how can a free market of ideas develop when all efforts are to ram down the opposition rather than win it over? If one says that people who have married in the same village shouldn't be killed and gets retorts like "go, marry your sister"- that is not my idea of a free market. It is more of a fish market. Or when one says that girls in pubs shouldn't be beaten, and it is met with "go with your daughters to the pub". Or if you are arguing against reservations, then you are told that you are a betrayer of the community. The common idea is to make the person giving the argument as the argument. Which is followed by cheap digs and taunts. And of course one person starts it, probably thinking that it is just a joke or probably because of desperation, but before you know, everyone is doing the same and much more seriously. Because everyone is a Jat here and won't just sit down when attacked!

The best debates are possible when they are held independent of the identity of the debaters. What else is the purpose of an argument? Certainly we are not in kindergarten where we need to prove "my dad will kick your dad's ass". If I come to a debate and go back without taking anything from the opposition, then I am the person who has lost the most in the argument. Having spent time and energy just trying to prove something I believe in to someone who doesn't want to believe it and about who I personally don't care dog's sh*t and in the end having a cheap fight with him over it. Who is giving an award here for twisting someone's arguments out of context and then using them to ridicule the person? Maybe it gives a temporary feeling of satisfaction, but that should be more than offset by the final tinge of bitterness which everyone is left with.

Free market of ideas can only be formed when the most fundamental principle of free speech is practised ruthlessly.
"I may not agree with what you say, but I shall still defend till death your right to say it"

[sidchhikara]

Free market of ideas- That is an interesting phrase I read on Jatland today. Is this site a free market of ideas? What do fellow members think?

I think it is far from being there. Unfortunately, most of the blame is put at moderators' door, rather incorrectly at that. They don't have any magic wand. Most of them are only doing this part time (What else does one expect? Everyone has to earn bread and butter). They are also flesh and blood people, with same emotions and human failings as everyone else. They end up executing rules arbitrarily and disproportionately. The guy whose post gets deleted or gets infraction finds it unfair when he sees the same crime being committed by so many others who go scot-free. And as the protests become vociferous, the person gets banned. But Moderation is not the cause of the problem. It is an ineffective solution.

So what is preventing the free market from being formed? Us only. Many discussions become an exercise at mud-slinging as people lose sight of the topic and the arguments being given on the topic and start targeting the person instead. Leg-pulling is in our nature. Some harmless leg-pulling is fun as long as everyone enjoys it. I am sure I have been guilty of sarcastic remarks and not saying that they'd have been enjoyabale to everyone. It also depends on the topic in question- some topics are relatively harmless and leg-pulling doesn't hurt anyone.

But as far as more serious topics are concerned, how can a free market of ideas develop when all efforts are to ram down the opposition rather than win it over? If one says that people who have married in the same village shouldn't be killed and gets retorts like "go, marry your sister"- that is not my idea of a free market. It is more of a fish market. Or when one says that girls in pubs shouldn't be beaten, and it is met with "go with your daughters to the pub". Or if you are arguing against reservations, then you are told that you are a betrayer of the community. The common idea is to make the person giving the argument as the argument. Which is followed by cheap digs and taunts. And of course one person starts it, probably thinking that it is just a joke or probably because of desperation, but before you know, everyone is doing the same and much more seriously. Because everyone is a Jat here and won't just sit down when attacked!

The best debates are possible when they are held independent of the identity of the debaters. What else is the purpose of an argument? Certainly we are not in kindergarten where we need to prove "my dad will kick your dad's ass". If I come to a debate and go back without taking anything from the opposition, then I am the person who has lost the most in the argument. Having spent time and energy just trying to prove something I believe in to someone who doesn't want to believe it and about who I personally don't care dog's sh*t and in the end having a cheap fight with him over it. Who is giving an award here for twisting someone's arguments out of context and then using them to ridicule the person? Maybe it gives a temporary feeling of satisfaction, but that should be more than offset by the final tinge of bitterness which everyone is left with.

Free market of ideas can only be formed when the most fundamental principle of free speech is practised ruthlessly.
"I may not agree with what you say, but I shall still defend till death your right to say it"

Bhai Kapil free ka te bera nahin ... haan par they are worth 2 cents.

[kapdal]

Wow, no one replying apart from Chhikara with his usual quick wit. There should be some place for the least popular threads and I am sure this would come out tops :)

I atleast expected the originator of the phrase and the idea itself to join with his contribution. And just to be clear, the trigger for posting this thread may have been some recent events, but I have been careful not to refer to them here so that everyone feels welcome to contribute. The idea is not to point fingers as with one finger that I point, three would point back at me. The idea is general enough and I guess most people would have felt it at some point or the other.

[VJ]

Bhai Kapil.....bilkul number 1 baat kahi sai tainnne.....arrr 10/10 number tere tai.....(mere tai teh kade kise ne diye nahi :( )

Bilkul free market sai yaaa.....Idea ka teh bera kona bhai ...we teh kadde mainne liye nahi.....haa par bata ka jarror bera sai......

Kisi situation me kisa reply karna chaiye....yu jarrror sikh gaya mai......naare example aawe sai yade....koi bhai kisse baat me phasa pada sai....arr koi kisse baat pe rola kar raha hai.....:D

Baata ki issi tissi karna sikh gaya mai yade aa ke.....:) arr or bhi chiz shikhan lag raha hooo......

[navdeepbudhwar]

kapil ji you are right indeed......
hm sabhi jaat hai........n we all are agressive..
to arguments to hote hi hai.....and as one thing leads to onother to vo thodi violent ho jati hai......

[aryasatyadev]

Kapil bhai, you are right and there are many other threads dealing with JL like it's being boring etc..... but the free idea theory is unique and well put down by you.

As i can preceive, the members, except a few, are either not having time or dont want to share what is required from a grown up person. They put one liners and then fled away, providing the food for others to bounce back.

It is like putting one post one day and then never following what is happening in that thread and another day they came and with some other post in different thread...... so there is no continuation of the healthy discussion.
If some member is agrieved by the thoughts of another member, and he responds in the thread, it is the duty of first poster to clear the doubts.

[kapdal]

Kapil bhai, you are right and there are many other threads dealing with JL like it's being boring etc..... but the free idea theory is unique and well put down by you.


Satte bhai, thanks for your input. Just to be clear, the idea is actually Sumit Dahiya's as mentioned in one of his posts elsewhere. I just gave my 2 cents on it.

[sidchhikara]

Kapil bhai ... Free Market se Jatland ..... eka ek Gordon Gekko sein aade.
Garmiyaan ke mausam mein ghane idea aawe sein logan ne aade. Bijli gayab ho jyaa se din mein 8 ghante .. UPS pe internet challa ke latth baja le se aade .. frustration door ho jyaa se.

[aryasatyadev]

Siddharth, if the members are taking so much pains to write something there ideas should be respected or atleast give a chance to them......
However, some people seems to be having ideas from Punjab Kesri and India TV..... they are ridiculous........ but what can we do... bear with all

[Samarkadian]

Free market of ideas- That is an interesting phrase I read on Jatland today. Is this site a free market of ideas? What do fellow members think?

I think it is far from being there. Unfortunately, most of the blame is put at moderators' door, rather incorrectly at that. They don't have any magic wand. Most of them are only doing this part time (What else does one expect? Everyone has to earn bread and butter). They are also flesh and blood people, with same emotions and human failings as everyone else. They end up executing rules arbitrarily and disproportionately. The guy whose post gets deleted or gets infraction finds it unfair when he sees the same crime being committed by so many others who go scot-free. And as the protests become vociferous, the person gets banned. But Moderation is not the cause of the problem. It is an ineffective solution.

So what is preventing the free market from being formed? Us only. Many discussions become an exercise at mud-slinging as people lose sight of the topic and the arguments being given on the topic and start targeting the person instead. Leg-pulling is in our nature. Some harmless leg-pulling is fun as long as everyone enjoys it. I am sure I have been guilty of sarcastic remarks and not saying that they'd have been enjoyabale to everyone. It also depends on the topic in question- some topics are relatively harmless and leg-pulling doesn't hurt anyone.

But as far as more serious topics are concerned, how can a free market of ideas develop when all efforts are to ram down the opposition rather than win it over? If one says that people who have married in the same village shouldn't be killed and gets retorts like "go, marry your sister"- that is not my idea of a free market. It is more of a fish market. Or when one says that girls in pubs shouldn't be beaten, and it is met with "go with your daughters to the pub". Or if you are arguing against reservations, then you are told that you are a betrayer of the community. The common idea is to make the person giving the argument as the argument. Which is followed by cheap digs and taunts. And of course one person starts it, probably thinking that it is just a joke or probably because of desperation, but before you know, everyone is doing the same and much more seriously. Because everyone is a Jat here and won't just sit down when attacked!

The best debates are possible when they are held independent of the identity of the debaters. What else is the purpose of an argument? Certainly we are not in kindergarten where we need to prove "my dad will kick your dad's ass". If I come to a debate and go back without taking anything from the opposition, then I am the person who has lost the most in the argument. Having spent time and energy just trying to prove something I believe in to someone who doesn't want to believe it and about who I personally don't care dog's sh*t and in the end having a cheap fight with him over it. Who is giving an award here for twisting someone's arguments out of context and then using them to ridicule the person? Maybe it gives a temporary feeling of satisfaction, but that should be more than offset by the final tinge of bitterness which everyone is left with.

Free market of ideas can only be formed when the most fundamental principle of free speech is practised ruthlessly.
"I may not agree with what you say, but I shall still defend till death your right to say it"

Kapil Bhai, you have answered your valid questions very well. It is a virtue to retrospect and introspect honestly about oneself.

Jatland is not free of ideas in any sense when it comes to discussion.Reactionary post can't be taken as idea. Yes! people are mostly in pro-react mode even before reading a post. It is merely a group of few literiate active members who has accessiblity to internet[and other forms of media] and share a common community. Face of the any group depends upon maturity of its discussion.Maturity per se comes with patience and patience hardly sit in the lap of Jats. It is not at all a proud or virtous trait of a progressive community.
Mostly, ideas presented here are borrowed, read somewhere, listened somewhere.Thats okay everyone can't be an Einsteen.

Free market of ideas[in case it is] can be developed when all those efforts of tearing a discussion would be ceased. Onus MUST be on author of thread or discussion to keep it on track. Dealing the non-sense with cooperation of editing staff. Author of single thread infact is its self-moderator. If this would be practised, I have no doubt that discussion would start concluding. Anil Singh Dalal, Brahm Tewatia started this trend of concluding threads for which they shall be highly appreciated.

Analogy to fish market is not apt here. It is a village where every kind of people are found. Everyone's motive is different for browsing here. One more point comes to mind is that people irrespective of site loves indulging in sensational/spicy topics instead of some genuine ones.One possible reason to it could be avoidance of thinking or everyone likes comfort zone and humour at other's expanse. It is not sad/bad/good , it is simply what it is. But yes, scope of improvement is always around but How, it can be debated and practised. One solution could be 'delete the conent as soon as it appears which is purely personal in taste.It also has variables but discerning point could be WHAT has been written not by WHOM. It is effective but gradualy.

This thread becomes more significant in response to the one statement present on main page: Jatland is the site for Interaction of Jats: Either administrative staff or members now should think about searching an 'adjective' to interaction because Jatland is out of infancy stage. When youth have brought the improvement everywhere, why we are behind and messed at initial stages only. There is never too late in life.

Kapil, practising freedom of speech comes with the responsblity of practising right speech. I disagree with your use of word ruthlessly.You shall elaborate it.

I do not know about other ideas but certainly, one idea that has become an ideology from this plateform is Janjagiriti and Adaa.They are kind of a movement now in social service. Navin has proven it on grounds without complaining. That is a gift of Jatland which has brought smiles on many faces in real sense. Its our collective moral responsblity to support that ideology and replicate that success in every arena of life be it business, political, adventure or anything.

[anilsinghd]

First of all apologies to Kapil on not being able to reply to this one earlier. I must have read your post 3 times , formulated my views a bit and started to write but then something or the other popped up at work. :)
Anyways , let me try it again and pardon me if I am not able to complete this one as well to my own benchmark levels of quality!:)
Anyways , disclaimer is now out of the way.


As usual Samar put forward very right words and calmed down the "raged" Kapil , thanks for that , Samar is right when he says its not about sad/good/bad , but its about what it is. Many a times in life you see things which you do not agree with , you can try to chnge things for good but if they can't try and live with it , at least I have learnt that.
It's almost 4 years of intense "virtual world interations" for me and it has taught me a great deal about the variety that is inherent in people around you. In some sense it validates the "uniqueness" principle! :)

Though it does not convey in any sense that we must not strive to improve :) Samar has quotes an example of Navin and hats off to that person for the great work that he is doing , we all must try and support him in wahtever ways we can.

Coming to the point of free market of ideas , Kapil , I kind of disagree with you , I think in some sense Jatland is a free market of ideas , but you need to put appropriate filters in place. Let me give you an example in you terms as well , being on CDO trading desk and having focussed on Markets for quite long now , I am pretty sure you do not go through all publications / research / journals etc. Sorry for using the tag , but being an IITian , sure thing you would be great at "googling"! Now what is that ?
That is an art of filtering that has come by experience! :) Similar thing is there when it comes to reception of ideas, you should not be expecting each one to be in syc with what the "discussion" is. Your motive is to gain knowledge , discuss , improve but that is not everyone's motive is! ( Samar mentioned the same thing).

That said , I would still put forward a couple of points for the general audience on waht can be done to have an improved environment:

1) Dont be Markov-ish , yes , that's a term I use to describe when people jump into a discussion with ear and mind closed. It hardly matters to a person practising Markovish behaviour of what the arguement is or where the discussion is heading , what matters is that how better he/she can put forward his/her arguements to win , That kind of defeats the whole purpose!

2) Leg pulling or pulling someone down can be satisfyin g and exciting in the short term but in the long term that is going to come back and bite you real hard and it can be really scary because its all fine till you do it or till it happens with the people who you are not so concerned with ( virtual world interactions ) , but what if it becomes a habit and you do the same with you loved ones ? ( Note : It is not kind of obvious for the people who do it , that they actually practise such a behaviour , so there are no warnings so to say! ).


I would end with saying that yes there are a few steps that I have iterated time and again and similar ideas come from Samar , Brahm and all to make JL better. :)
As Bloomberg quote for today says:
Every day in every way, I am getting better and better.


So we should practice the same for the JL as a whole :)!



===========================


@ Kapil : yeah , a couple of distractions but I managed to post it this time around !

[kapdal]

Kapil Bhai, you have answered your valid questions very well. It is a virtue to retrospect and introspect honestly about oneself.

Jatland is not free of ideas in any sense when it comes to discussion.Reactionary post can't be taken as idea. Yes! people are mostly in pro-react mode even before reading a post. It is merely a group of few literiate active members who has accessiblity to internet[and other forms of media] and share a common community. Face of the any group depends upon maturity of its discussion.Maturity per se comes with patience and patience hardly sit in the lap of Jats. It is not at all a proud or virtous trait of a progressive community.
Mostly, ideas presented here are borrowed, read somewhere, listened somewhere.Thats okay everyone can't be an Einsteen.

Free market of ideas[in case it is] can be developed when all those efforts of tearing a discussion would be ceased. Onus MUST be on author of thread or discussion to keep it on track. Dealing the non-sense with cooperation of editing staff. Author of single thread infact is its self-moderator. If this would be practised, I have no doubt that discussion would start concluding. Anil Singh Dalal, Brahm Tewatia started this trend of concluding threads for which they shall be highly appreciated.

Analogy to fish market is not apt here. It is a village where every kind of people are found. Everyone's motive is different for browsing here. One more point comes to mind is that people irrespective of site loves indulging in sensational/spicy topics instead of some genuine ones.One possible reason to it could be avoidance of thinking or everyone likes comfort zone and humour at other's expanse. It is not sad/bad/good , it is simply what it is. But yes, scope of improvement is always around but How, it can be debated and practised. One solution could be 'delete the conent as soon as it appears which is purely personal in taste.It also has variables but discerning point could be WHAT has been written not by WHOM. It is effective but gradualy.

This thread becomes more significant in response to the one statement present on main page: Jatland is the site for Interaction of Jats: Either administrative staff or members now should think about searching an 'adjective' to interaction because Jatland is out of infancy stage. When youth have brought the improvement everywhere, why we are behind and messed at initial stages only. There is never too late in life.

Kapil, practising freedom of speech comes with the responsblity of practising right speech. I disagree with your use of word ruthlessly.You shall elaborate it.

I do not know about other ideas but certainly, one idea that has become an ideology from this plateform is Janjagiriti and Adaa.They are kind of a movement now in social service. Navin has proven it on grounds without complaining. That is a gift of Jatland which has brought smiles on many faces in real sense. Its our collective moral responsblity to support that ideology and replicate that success in every arena of life be it business, political, adventure or anything.

Sorry Samar for not responding earlier. I am re-energised about the topic because of the new activity on "About Jatland" forum...:)

Thanks for your valuable comments. I have bolded the points that I completely agree with.

When I say freedom of speech should be practised ruthlessly, I don't mean to say that it should be practised without any restraint. Certainly, it should not be abused or allowed to be abused. What I meant was that people should be open to listening anything, even if it is totally opposite to their own views. Instead of reacting with personal comments on the person authoring opposing views, they should respond to him with demerits of the idea. Freedom of speech becomes ruthless, yet productive when everyone wants to respect it, rather than just exercise it.

Based on this, I can think of only one rule that should govern the discussion. You can say any thing as long as it is not directed personally against any individual (disclaimer being that you can comment on public figures, though there too you shouldn't be allowed to defame them without substance).

Based on what you said and this rule, I propose the following approach:

1. Give moderation right to the author of the thread. There are simply too many posts for moderators to read and moderate. Give them the right to moderate based on only the above rule. They can't edit anything without the permission of the author of the post, unless if they regard it as a personal comment.

2. One can appeal against any action (or inaction) of the thread starter vis-a-vis moderation (deleting posts, etc.) to the main moderators, whose decision should be final. If some thread starter is systemically found abusing his right to moderate, the right should be taken away.

3. The thread starter should appeal publicly on the thread if someone is derailing the thread against the wishes of the thread starter. If someone wants to talk on a different topic, he should be encouraged to start a thread of his own. If the appeal fails, the thread starter should have the ability to escalate it to the main moderators.

4. The right to moderate one's thread can be given after some experience at JL (in terms of time, posts or such metric). Main moderators should continue to moderate the threads of all those who don't have this right. They should also have the right to not grant this right to any member who they think is unfit (Spammers, trollers, etc.)

5. There can be some forums (probably time pass, humor, etc.) where thread starters don't have this right. Anyone who wants to have a free-for-all, unadulterated fun can start his thread here.

6. The thread starter can share the moderatorship with someone else who is contributing significantly to the thread.

I think these steps can take away the pressure from the moderators, while not diluting their authority. Right now, they can't act without appearing to be partisan or aggrieving some member and his friends. Also, there are quite a few people who don't believe in complaining to moderators (Have never done that yet myself), but here the responsibility would be on thread starter to keep the thread clean. This way with a clear rule on no personal comments, and a directly accountable person to enforce it, it'd be difficult for incidents to let pass. As you said, the onus would be on WHAT has been said and not WHO said it.

That is the broad outline of my proposal. These can be refined by fellow members and if generally acceptable, we can request admins to have a look.

[kapdal]

First of all apologies to Kapil on not being able to reply to this one earlier. I must have read your post 3 times , formulated my views a bit and started to write but then something or the other popped up at work. :)
Anyways , let me try it again and pardon me if I am not able to complete this one as well to my own benchmark levels of quality!:)
Anyways , disclaimer is now out of the way.


As usual Samar put forward very right words and calmed down the "raged" Kapil , thanks for that , Samar is right when he says its not about sad/good/bad , but its about what it is. Many a times in life you see things which you do not agree with , you can try to chnge things for good but if they can't try and live with it , at least I have learnt that.
It's almost 4 years of intense "virtual world interations" for me and it has taught me a great deal about the variety that is inherent in people around you. In some sense it validates the "uniqueness" principle! :)

Though it does not convey in any sense that we must not strive to improve :) Samar has quotes an example of Navin and hats off to that person for the great work that he is doing , we all must try and support him in wahtever ways we can.

Coming to the point of free market of ideas , Kapil , I kind of disagree with you , I think in some sense Jatland is a free market of ideas , but you need to put appropriate filters in place. Let me give you an example in you terms as well , being on CDO trading desk and having focussed on Markets for quite long now , I am pretty sure you do not go through all publications / research / journals etc. Sorry for using the tag , but being an IITian , sure thing you would be great at "googling"! Now what is that ?
That is an art of filtering that has come by experience! :) Similar thing is there when it comes to reception of ideas, you should not be expecting each one to be in syc with what the "discussion" is. Your motive is to gain knowledge , discuss , improve but that is not everyone's motive is! ( Samar mentioned the same thing).

That said , I would still put forward a couple of points for the general audience on waht can be done to have an improved environment:

1) Dont be Markov-ish , yes , that's a term I use to describe when people jump into a discussion with ear and mind closed. It hardly matters to a person practising Markovish behaviour of what the arguement is or where the discussion is heading , what matters is that how better he/she can put forward his/her arguements to win , That kind of defeats the whole purpose!

2) Leg pulling or pulling someone down can be satisfyin g and exciting in the short term but in the long term that is going to come back and bite you real hard and it can be really scary because its all fine till you do it or till it happens with the people who you are not so concerned with ( virtual world interactions ) , but what if it becomes a habit and you do the same with you loved ones ? ( Note : It is not kind of obvious for the people who do it , that they actually practise such a behaviour , so there are no warnings so to say! ).


I would end with saying that yes there are a few steps that I have iterated time and again and similar ideas come from Samar , Brahm and all to make JL better. :)
As Bloomberg quote for today says:
Every day in every way, I am getting better and better.


So we should practice the same for the JL as a whole :)!



===========================


@ Kapil : yeah , a couple of distractions but I managed to post it this time around !

Anil- thanks for your response and sorry for responding late. I agree with most of your points. Just to be clear though, the reason for this thread is not quite the disappointment at my expectations not being met. Frankly, I am not expecting anyone or everyone to be in sync with what the discussion is on a particular thread. I appreciate that everyone's motive is different and frankly, a healthy diversity of views and styles is needed to ensure that the discussion doesn't become boring. So witty one liners, humorous anecdotes, sarcasm, etc. are all on- as long as they don't attempt to ridicule someone specific. If you look at my examples in the original post, the problem is when people make personally offensive statements without being provoked, when they confront an idea that doesn't suit their sensibilities. I also know that it is not really a big deal, people are different, etc. and in the bigger picture, it doesn't really matter. But one consequence is that many people would think twice before making an unpopular point (We can argue that they should be brave and all, but no one comes to an online forum to win bravery awards). This is what stifles a free market of idea from developing. Another consequence is that people feel disgusted when their ideas are trashed through personal comments and leave the forum for good. These are the two consequences which are quite avoidable.

I liked the couple of points you put forward. Based on what I have read on this thread, I have come up with a rough proposal in the preceding post. I hope the proposal captures your suggestions. Feel free to refine it.

[anilsinghd]

But one consequence is that many people would think twice before making an unpopular point
Another consequence is that people feel disgusted when their ideas are trashed through personal comments and leave the forum for good.

Pretty much agree with what you said mate. I ahve always been of the opinion that membership of such a site should be taken as a privilege rather than being casual about it. What i mean is that thread starters must have the obligation to get something const ructive out of it , summary of the discussion , getting valid points to the fore , implementing the good ideas should be the way to go.

Yours is very idealistic and for a very amture process that each creator can moderate , I would start with a few senior pros to do the job first and show the way ! :)

[annch]

Hi Kapil,
Regarding your suggestions on moderation, I have a few reservations for the following reasons-
#Its not easy for people to rise above taking things "personally"....a dialogue between the author of the thread and the member whose post the author deletes might result in a stalemate and worsen the situation....
#A certain anonymity for the person who deletes/reports an objectionable post helps in keeping the tempers down....
#Most of the people on JL are here for a break from the routine...too many rules and regulations will take out the fun from it...and people will think twise before starting a new thread with all that responsibility of moderation....and those who are serious about starting a thread do it today as well without worrying about the trolls and all...
Sincere regards,

Based on what you said and this rule, I propose the following approach:

1. Give moderation right to the author of the thread. There are simply too many posts for moderators to read and moderate. Give them the right to moderate based on only the above rule. They can't edit anything without the permission of the author of the post, unless if they regard it as a personal comment.

2. One can appeal against any action (or inaction) of the thread starter vis-a-vis moderation (deleting posts, etc.) to the main moderators, whose decision should be final. If some thread starter is systemically found abusing his right to moderate, the right should be taken away.

3. The thread starter should appeal publicly on the thread if someone is derailing the thread against the wishes of the thread starter. If someone wants to talk on a different topic, he should be encouraged to start a thread of his own. If the appeal fails, the thread starter should have the ability to escalate it to the main moderators.

4. The right to moderate one's thread can be given after some experience at JL (in terms of time, posts or such metric). Main moderators should continue to moderate the threads of all those who don't have this right. They should also have the right to not grant this right to any member who they think is unfit (Spammers, trollers, etc.)

5. There can be some forums (probably time pass, humor, etc.) where thread starters don't have this right. Anyone who wants to have a free-for-all, unadulterated fun can start his thread here.

6. The thread starter can share the moderatorship with someone else who is contributing significantly to the thread.

I think these steps can take away the pressure from the moderators, while not diluting their authority. Right now, they can't act without appearing to be partisan or aggrieving some member and his friends. Also, there are quite a few people who don't believe in complaining to moderators (Have never done that yet myself), but here the responsibility would be on thread starter to keep the thread clean. This way with a clear rule on no personal comments, and a directly accountable person to enforce it, it'd be difficult for incidents to let pass. As you said, the onus would be on WHAT has been said and not WHO said it.

That is the broad outline of my proposal. These can be refined by fellow members and if generally acceptable, we can request admins to have a look.

[kapdal]

Hi Kapil,
Regarding your suggestions on moderation, I have a few reservations for the following reasons-
#Its not easy for people to rise above taking things "personally"....a dialogue between the author of the thread and the member whose post the author deletes might result in a stalemate and worsen the situation....
#A certain anonymity for the person who deletes/reports an objectionable post helps in keeping the tempers down....
#Most of the people on JL are here for a break from the routine...too many rules and regulations will take out the fun from it...and people will think twise before starting a new thread with all that responsibility of moderation....and those who are serious about starting a thread do it today as well without worrying about the trolls and all...
Sincere regards,

Hmm..I used to think similarly till a while ago. Now I have changed my views. We won't ever know which one is right until we try the other one. One can't call the current system perfect and not requiring change.

Also, there is only one rule. And I guess it is there even now- "You can say any thing as long as it is not personally offensive to any individual". It is just the responsibility to enforce that gets a bit more distributed, making enforcement practical and effective. Rest of the things remain as they are. There is no harm trying. If it leads to fresh problems, repeal the changes.

[annch]

Hmmm...ok, we can give it a shot...

Hmm..I used to think similarly till a while ago. Now I have changed my views. We won't ever know which one is right until we try the other one. One can't call the current system perfect and not requiring change.

Also, there is only one rule. And I guess it is there even now- "You can say any thing as long as it is not personally offensive to any individual". It is just the responsibility to enforce that gets a bit more distributed, making enforcement practical and effective. Rest of the things remain as they are. There is no harm trying. If it leads to fresh problems, repeal the changes.

[anilsinghd]

#Its not easy for people to rise above taking things "personally"....a dialogue between the author of the thread and the member whose post the author deletes might result in a stalemate and worsen the situation....


Agree , that is why making a neutral person as the moderator seems more reliable and logical to me ! Still each one must make an effort to rise above personal things! No harm in that!


#A certain anonymity for the person who deletes/reports an objectionable post helps in keeping the tempers down....

True! But it may also give rise to people asking too muh questions on why of things , if a visible person is thee who deleted , they can probably try and understand and ask in person rather than just shouting on the whole moderator brand!
Pros and cons both exist!


#Most of the people on JL are here for a break from the routine...too many rules and regulations will take out the fun from it...and people will think twise before starting a new thread with all that responsibility of moderation....and those who are serious about starting a thread do it today as well without worrying about the trolls and all...

Disagree , JL Admins have been kind enough to provide a humour , time paas section and are open to new kind of forums , sports was added after i joined in.
We must maintain some sanctity in some threads , I never go and talk crap on history becasue i dont know things and then i am not interested!
So disinterested folks can stay away , if they not , they must be ready to pay some price!

Lastly , humour is no slave of foul language , erratic behaviour and likes! So just becasue people come here on JL for fun does not mean they are free to do anything they like!




Comments inline!

[annch]

Anil,
Lets not be at loggerheads over the pros and cons.
We will lead the horse to water and hope that it drinks....

[kapdal]

Anil,
Lets not be at loggerheads over the pros and cons.
We will lead the horse to water and hope that it drinks....

Tum donon ko har jagah seeng uljhaane hi hote hain...:D

[anilsinghd]

We will lead the horse to water and hope that it drinks....

You can use "wish" if that appeals to you!

[annch]

"Wish" is no better than "hope"....give me an action verb!!!

You can use "wish" if that appeals to you!

[annch]

Anil nahin maanta!!:)

Tum donon ko har jagah seeng uljhaane hi hote hain...:D