Restraining Order rework suggestion | Forum

#1

In DART restraining orders were a problem for most people, the reason they were a problem was because mods got to decide if interactions between 2 people were worth a restraining order, however this is a flawed concept for 3 reasons

1: This is an online website, not a actual real life situation where there is provable and real world evidence of need to restrain a person from physical and emotional contact from another person.

2: Conflicts are only verbal, not physical. There can be escalation of verbal assault, abuse and harrassment to the point of potential doxxing or real world consequences. But in general a restraining order is not made in concept to restrain words, but physical contact.

3: bias dependent on moderators. And no, its not suppose to be, humans are naturally biased, why would a person have to contact a moderator to let them know they dont want someone talking to them? You introduce a human element that affects bias and communications that dont need to be had, and will shape their opinions of others, because they do not have the same training and neutrality as a real life judge has.

That being said, blocking someone should be more inclusive to fulfilling these needs, by simply writing the code to make it where you dont see the posts of the other person. This is a website under free speech (supposedly) so it doesnt dictate that a person MUST speak to people they disagree with, much less to have that disagreement to be interpreted by a 3rd party.

My suggestion is just to make blocking all inclusive, where you cant debate with them, cant private message them, and cant see their comments on forums. This will remove the need for bias and judgement on both sides, and you wont have as many complaints regarding spamming, trolling and other issues, as the people can block them.

And if they feel like its a personal attack, they can choose to be more civil and kind, or choose to leave.

Edit comment

Mentions Text*

In DART restraining orders were a problem for most people, the reason they were a problem was because mods got to decide if interactions between 2 people were worth a restraining order, however this is a flawed concept for 3 reasons1: This is an online website, not a actual real life situation where there is provable and real world evidence of need to restrain a person from physical and emotional contact from another person. 2: Conflicts are only verbal, not physical. There can be escalation of verbal assault, abuse and harrassment to the point of potential doxxing or real world consequences. But in general a restraining order is not made in concept to restrain words, but physical contact.3: bias dependent on moderators. And no, its not suppose to be, humans are naturally biased, why would a person have to contact a moderator to let them know they dont want someone talking to them? You introduce a human element that affects bias and communications that dont need to be had, and will shape their opinions of others, because they do not have the same training and neutrality as a real life judge has. That being said, blocking someone should be more inclusive to fulfilling these needs, by simply writing the code to make it where you dont see the posts of the other person. This is a website under free speech (supposedly) so it doesnt dictate that a person MUST speak to people they disagree with, much less to have that disagreement to be interpreted by a 3rd party. My suggestion is just to make blocking all inclusive, where you cant debate with them, cant private message them, and cant see their comments on forums. This will remove the need for bias and judgement on both sides, and you wont have as many complaints regarding spamming, trolling and other issues, as the people can block them. And if they feel like its a personal attack, they can choose to be more civil and kind, or choose to leave.

#2

@melcharaz

My suggestion is just to make blocking all inclusive, where you cant debate with them, cant private message them, and cant see their comments on forums.

So if you block someone, they cant see your comments?

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#3

@melcharaz

My suggestion is just to make blocking all inclusive, where you cant debate with them, cant private message them, and cant see their comments on forums.

I agree with this except for "cant see their comments on forums", I think that would make it hard to follow the conversation. One thing I would add, is when you block someone you also block yourself from being able to comment on their posts. A lot of people will block you but continue to comment on your posts, which is bullshit, if you block someone it should be blocked both ways.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#4

Basically they cant tag you, it wont show up if they did tag you. Its not a new feature.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#5

My idea is they also make it where they cant post on YOUR topics in forums.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#6

My suggestion is for people not to be such big wusses.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#7

@melcharaz

These are honestly great points. IMO restraining orders were / are an absolute nightmare. The moderator team will discuss this.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

"Kohai, your entrance to the thread was legendary, you had a solve and a winning PoE right when you showed up, super impressive stuff, even more so considering it wasn't even your objective!!" - Zrein

#8

Thanks for feedback. I honestly thought this would be ignore.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#9

"My idea is they also make it where they cant post on YOUR topics in forums."

Any update on that?

@kohai

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#10

I think that people across the entire world both irl and online don't realise something;

when you have toxic scum doing evil things the solution is not to just ignore them and let them keep doing it.

I don't know what amoral people came up with this utter nonsense but that is a lie. The axiom of 'mind your own business until you don't need to' is the total opposite to what actually is best to do in life, morally and even strategically. You should mind other's business as much as is sustainable until and/or unless it clearly is a good idea to mind your own business. How we come to when it is or isn't a good idea is the real debate.

I do not mind my own business, I do not believe in this mentality. I never did but I used to think I did. I mind if someone is doing bad things on a site I participate in, even if it isn't my direct business. I always have and I never ever not once ever in my life as I foresee it intend to change that mentality and approach. It's the morally right thing to do, feel and be like.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

I think that people across the entire world both irl and online don't realise something; when you have toxic scum doing evil things the solution is not to just ignore them and let them keep doing it. I don't know what amoral people came up with this utter nonsense but that is a lie. The axiom of 'mind your own business until you don't need to' is the total opposite to what actually is best to do in life, morally and even strategically. You should mind other's business as much as is sustainable until and/or unless it clearly is a good idea to mind your own business. How we come to when it is or isn't a good idea is the real debate. I do not mind my own business, I do not believe in this mentality. I never did but I used to think I did. I mind if someone is doing bad things on a site I participate in, even if it isn't my direct business. I always have and I never ever not once ever in my life as I foresee it intend to change that mentality and approach. It's the morally right thing to do, feel and be like.

The US is a definitively secular nation, founded on complete separation of the State and religion. The Left Wing of US realise this but don't realise that pure freedom requires as low tax and free access to guns as possible. The Right Wing of US don't realise that secular pure freedom means the LGBTQ+ and abortion agendas both end up in line with US's liberty-first ethos.

It is left-wing to be pro-life. You are backing poor babies being born at the inconvenience of the already-born. Go figure.

#11

When is IRL not IRL?

So I am currently online and therefore not in real life, is that what you are suggesting?

And who has the authority to decide who is and isn't "toxic scum".

I would suggest that dictators assume the authority to decide.

And so, I question your authority, and in your head you generate a reaction.

Who has the authority to assume that your reaction is righteous and my stimulus was not.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#12

God alone.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

The US is a definitively secular nation, founded on complete separation of the State and religion. The Left Wing of US realise this but don't realise that pure freedom requires as low tax and free access to guns as possible. The Right Wing of US don't realise that secular pure freedom means the LGBTQ+ and abortion agendas both end up in line with US's liberty-first ethos.

It is left-wing to be pro-life. You are backing poor babies being born at the inconvenience of the already-born. Go figure.

#13

I don't know what amoral people came up with this utter nonsense but that is a lie. The axiom of 'mind your own business until you don't need to' is the total opposite to what actually is best to do in life

If you minded your own buisness, you would still be a moderator. But you stopped being moderator because you didnt follow the axiom of minding your own buisness.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#14

tho I can understand how person gets easily confused by the urge to "punish the evil" constantly everywhere. I blame the false teachings which created such urge, the false teachings which come from movies and dont work in real life. In fact, in real life, most people are evil, so trying to punish all gets you destroyed.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#15

If GOD ran this website.

But I don't see much input.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#16

@GreatfulGoy

Even scripture says to leave certain people alone. Pharisees for example, who value tradition more than God.

There are people who are like swine, that when you give them knowledge or wisdom the trample it and rend you.

The bible advises us that if possible to live peacably with all men, and sometimes ignoring them gives you and them peace.

The precept you are talking about, to mind other people's business, applies to brethern in christ, not everyone.

Galatians 6:1-5

1 peter 3:8

Romans 14:19

Edit post

Mentions Text*

#17

@melcharaz

Sure.

However, some of those are my own family irl. Some are not but matter to me to try to either save or protect others against.

You do your thing. I am me.

Edit post

Mentions Text*

The US is a definitively secular nation, founded on complete separation of the State and religion. The Left Wing of US realise this but don't realise that pure freedom requires as low tax and free access to guns as possible. The Right Wing of US don't realise that secular pure freedom means the LGBTQ+ and abortion agendas both end up in line with US's liberty-first ethos.

It is left-wing to be pro-life. You are backing poor babies being born at the inconvenience of the already-born. Go figure.

#18

I have a lot of thoughts about restraining orders on a Debate site. Ultimately there are better solutions than restraining orders. I also think if two users can’t ignore each other it’s a user issue then we need to have discussions about a sole user. I can also just see getting so abused like it did on DART

Edit post

Mentions Text*

Kick logic to the curb and do the impossible!

Conversation

Edit comment

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post

Edit post