![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icon_uk posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
scans_dailyA subject that has been brought to the Mod Team's attention lately is the use and impact of the "Ban User" blocking function, and we have been discussing how we wish to address it within Scans_Daily.
Let us state, first and foremost, that your privacy and security should always be paramount. No member should ever take action which might, in any way, make then feel unsafe.
The "Ban User" functionality on Dreamwidth is very straightforward, hovering over a users avatar will show "Ban User" as an option. This is not a group dependent function, it's automatically available to anyone with a DreamWidth account.
We, as a Mod Team, will never use "Ban User" on a member (Our ultimate sanction for members is temporary suspension/permanent expulsion from the Scans_Daily community as part of the Disciplinary process, but "Ban User" is not part of that process).
In turn, members are not expected to use "Ban User" on a Mod, as we have a requirement to be able to reply to any and threads and posts if/when the need arises.
As and when Mod's change, the same will be true for any new Mod coming on.
If you have concerns over a particular Mod, then they can be raised with the Mod Team for discussion, we're not a monolithic entity and will seek to address any concerns fairly and equitably.
Please note that Mods cannot undo someone's "Ban User" choices, that is linked to your own account, not the Scans_Daily account.
However, something to bear in mind is that "Ban User" is VERY powerful.
If you have used "Ban User" on someone then they not only cannot reply to you directly, but they cannot reply to anyone's comments on any post you are the creator of.
Thus if you reply on a post, then someone on your "Ban User" list cannot reply to you, and if you have made a post, someone who is on your "Ban User" list cannot interact with any comments on that post.
So, whilst who you choose to block is your own affair, we would ask that it be kept to a minimum amongst scans_daily members wherever possible. Blocking prevents conversation and the general flow of discussion, which is a large part of our raison d'etre, and can also cause stress to the person who finds that they cannot comment, especially if the person you have blocked is unaware that you have done so, or the reasons you might have done so.
If members have concerns on this topic please feel free to raise them here, or contact the Mods via our usual contact of scansdailymod[at]gmail[dot]com . We can't promise we'll know all the answers immediately, but we'll do our best to address them.
Thank you
The Scans_Daily Mod Team
aeka / icon_uk / sistermagpie
Let us state, first and foremost, that your privacy and security should always be paramount. No member should ever take action which might, in any way, make then feel unsafe.
The "Ban User" functionality on Dreamwidth is very straightforward, hovering over a users avatar will show "Ban User" as an option. This is not a group dependent function, it's automatically available to anyone with a DreamWidth account.
We, as a Mod Team, will never use "Ban User" on a member (Our ultimate sanction for members is temporary suspension/permanent expulsion from the Scans_Daily community as part of the Disciplinary process, but "Ban User" is not part of that process).
In turn, members are not expected to use "Ban User" on a Mod, as we have a requirement to be able to reply to any and threads and posts if/when the need arises.
As and when Mod's change, the same will be true for any new Mod coming on.
If you have concerns over a particular Mod, then they can be raised with the Mod Team for discussion, we're not a monolithic entity and will seek to address any concerns fairly and equitably.
Please note that Mods cannot undo someone's "Ban User" choices, that is linked to your own account, not the Scans_Daily account.
However, something to bear in mind is that "Ban User" is VERY powerful.
If you have used "Ban User" on someone then they not only cannot reply to you directly, but they cannot reply to anyone's comments on any post you are the creator of.
Thus if you reply on a post, then someone on your "Ban User" list cannot reply to you, and if you have made a post, someone who is on your "Ban User" list cannot interact with any comments on that post.
So, whilst who you choose to block is your own affair, we would ask that it be kept to a minimum amongst scans_daily members wherever possible. Blocking prevents conversation and the general flow of discussion, which is a large part of our raison d'etre, and can also cause stress to the person who finds that they cannot comment, especially if the person you have blocked is unaware that you have done so, or the reasons you might have done so.
If members have concerns on this topic please feel free to raise them here, or contact the Mods via our usual contact of scansdailymod[at]gmail[dot]com . We can't promise we'll know all the answers immediately, but we'll do our best to address them.
Thank you
The Scans_Daily Mod Team
aeka / icon_uk / sistermagpie
no subject
Date: 2021-07-14 04:46 pm (UTC)I brought this first to the Mod's attention because a significant amount of content in one theme week was from a user who had blocked me, thus keeping me from interacting with the content.
no subject
Date: 2021-07-14 05:52 pm (UTC)At least for me, making a post takes a non-insignificant amount of time and effort at a time when I'm already severely lacking in spoons to begin with, and if I had to do it knowing that it would forcibly require me to interact with a person I am not fond of, I would definitely just throw my hands up. I'm on scans_daily to relax and have fun, and have negative interest in being anybody's captive audience.
Conversely, if the person I'm not fond of is creating a narrative I strongly dislike, that could be the trigger to make me get off my butt and post something about that particular topic. Just because they have so far been the only person here who posts scans about that topic doesn't mean it has to keep being that way. There is absolutely nothing preventing a banned user from making their own posts to change the narrative.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-14 11:04 pm (UTC)Yes, that would be a desirable outcome on my part. Thank you for articulating my wish, probably better than I could.
As to your other comment, when the creator of the narrative that I strongly dislike is spitting in the face of this community's supposed "anti-racist ... woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free" atmosphere, and you're all letting them do it, I'm not all that motivated to help the rest of you.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 02:37 am (UTC)Me, even if I personally dislike someone, I still very much don't want them to stop posting. Scans_Daily is the one (1) Community I'm left with after LiveJournal went the way of the dodo and every other social media embraced the streaming and hate-click models. You ever tried to have a multi-person discussion on Twitter? On Instagram? On Facebook? On Tumblr? Would. Not. Recommend. And Scans_Daily lives or dies depending on the post flow. So a reduction in flow because I literally annoyed someone out of contributing to it is most definitely not a desirable outcome on my part.
Also I was referring to "changing the narrative" as in offering alternate character interpretations or highlighting a writer's strengths and weaknesses, not fighting with the other poster. If they are being a bigoted bully, dealing with them is the mods' job, not mine. And frankly I'm calling bull at your implication that they haven't been doing their job or that you could do any better.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 02:52 am (UTC)If they are being a bigoted bully, dealing with them is the mods' job, not mine. And frankly I'm calling bull at your implication that they haven't been doing their job
And yet cyberghostface goes right on posting here.
or that you could do any better.
Don't recall implying that, not responsible for your inferences.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 03:07 am (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 03:26 am (UTC)You have made your bigotry against Muslims very clear through your support of Miller's 300 and Holy Terror, and your obvious misogyny is also readily apparent. If you are, as has been implied elsewhere, a woman, then you are one of those types who writes love letters to serial killers, putting you in the same exalted company as Ayn Rand which I'm sure makes you very happy, and you doubtless watched the scenes of [i]Daredevil[/i] and [i]Jessica Jones[/i] featuring the only characters you found interesting -- the rapist and the murderous gangster -- with one hand very busy.
You are a plague on this board.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 03:52 am (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 03:58 am (UTC)And yeah I stand by my views that religion is not above criticism regardless of which one.
Edit: And now he’s going to my other posts to troll. That’s what you get for giving someone a chance. Blocked again.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 04:04 am (UTC)I always find the villains interesting.
You find the villains interesting as long as they're men who hurt women. The female villains you pour boundless contempt on.
And wanting to engage in genocide is not criticism.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 04:29 am (UTC)I’ve never condoned any form of genocide. You are lying as you always do.
You are also lying about my interest in villains. They run the entire gamut from Magneto to Leatherface (and no liking Leatherface doesn’t mean I want to eat people). As for my issues regarding female villains, you are once again being a liar. I think I’ve called out characters like Mystique for being awful and treated like heroes after but I’ve said the same thing about Daken and Punisher.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 04:36 am (UTC)I unblocked you and within minutes you went and tried to harass me in an unrelated topic like a child.
I was expressing my genuine opinion that I feel disgusted to have enjoyed the same thing as you. If you view my self-disgust as harassment, that's a you problem.
Given that you defended Hannibal as well as admitting to liking Leatherface, I'd say the odds of you fantasizing about eating people are pretty high. Also, these are my sincere and genuine thoughts. If they are mistaken, that's life. But they are not falsehoods. I am not lying.
And now you are replying to me while preventing me from replying to you. How mature.
Before you say that I can easily stop you from replying -- I don't censor people. That's one more way that I'm not a fascist, like yourself.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 04:50 am (UTC)(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) (no subject)
From:(frozen) Mod Note!
From:(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 03:11 am (UTC)Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooookay.
You know what, I don't think we can ever understand each other, so I'm backing off. Addio.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 04:18 am (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 05:08 am (UTC)Please never reply to me again, because I find you genuinely upsetting.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 05:26 am (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 05:27 am (UTC)Generally I have a very favourable view of Cyberghostface because they are the only one who thought of reaching out with kindness to History79 and talk with them in DM, instead of shit talking them over differences of opinion in amount and priority of posts.
Plus, in the old days of pre-Under The Red Hood, when bashing my comfort character Jason Todd was a popular past time and I couldn't check a single post about him without seeing scores of people talking wistfully about his painful death and bragging about voting yes on the phone poll and victim blaming the literal 14-year-old for being sold out by his mother, I appreciated that Cyberghostface was always defending him.
(frozen) no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 05:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 09:44 am (UTC)On the whole, I broadly agree that it is useful for posters to be able to curate their own viewing experience. However, thie can come at the expense of the whole community experience. Dreamwidth is not designed to be a forum, as others have pointed out. I have dozens of users set to Ignore on a forum, but it just hides their content from me, rather than stopping them form posting in threads I began. That functionality would be preferable, but sadly not possible with the Dreamwidth tools.
Finally, I understand and appreciate your point about how much effort goes into making good quality posts. You undermine that point with your final paragraph saying that nothing is stopping other people from making such good quality posts to redress the balance. This also does not account for one user reaching the posting limit of a book very early, thus locking any other users out of creating their own posts in the topic
no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 10:33 am (UTC)My idea is that, if you are really frustrated about the way a different poster is curating a series/character, then you are motivated to do something about it. That motivation is absent if you have to create the posts in the first place and there is nothing to respond to. Same reason a lot of people normally don't write fanfiction, but decide to write a fix-it after canon does something especially irritating.
It does not account for that because it has nothing to do with the topic of blocking. Even if nobody is blocking anybody, the page limit is still there.
no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 11:35 am (UTC)And you are correct that the existing community posting limits (which I wrote) can serve to limit the number of people who can make posts related to a particular title. However, being banned from the only discussion happening on this community and with no community sanctioned outlet to begin your own discussion does not do much for community engagement.
The debate between you and I seems to be over the conflict of what is in the interests of posters and what is in the best interests of the community.
no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 11:58 am (UTC)I know we have never been fond of each other due to very different personalities, and I'm even kinda salty that a couple of times I tried getting friendly by asking you questions in your own posts and you never replied and left me hanging even if it was a topic you were apparently passionate about, but now I'm feeling insulted that you just automatically jumped to the worst possible conclusion.
In any case, my take is that the interests of posters and the interests of the community are intertwined. Because the community lives and dies depending on the post flow, and we LJ veterans have all seen what happens when the post flow dries up. So anything that worsens the posters' experience here (such as being made to interact with somebody they don't get along with) risks driving people away, or at the very least turning them into passive lurkers, and consequently killing the community.
I think there is a balance to consider, and ultimately I believe there are decent enough outlets for the scenario you describe. For example, if you are very frustrated with the ongoing narrative about a series or character but the page limit has already been reached and you can't comment on those posts, you could make your own no_scans posts. Throw in a few fanart/commissions/cover art to make the post more visually inviting and put in your thoughts about the storyline and characterization in exam.
no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 12:35 pm (UTC)This is not exclusive to you when I say that I don't pay too much attention to the personalities of the big name posters. I know that somebody uses contractions excessively, and somebody posts scans with completely no context ever, but even with a multiple choice quiz I would struggle to match names to posting habits. Some posters are even less distinct.
Please be reassured that this isn't a case of being mutually antagonistic and I do not and have not borne you any ill will.
no subject
Date: 2021-07-15 03:46 pm (UTC)