Finickyfeedee:
I also want to say I think a good idea might be to require people to answer questions before joining the website and go through an approval process by a real person reading their answers - NO personally identifiable information or photos should be required because it’s not a safe space if people have to risk being outed if information leaks, but short-answer questions about appropriate conduct (e.g. “Why would it be inappropriate to send this message to someone?” or “Give an example of a respectful way to approach a person you’re interested in”). This would serve the dual purpose of weeding out creeps who are foolish enough to say things like “Actually, I think it’s fine to send unsolicited sexts,” and weeding out creeps who are lazy or impatient because it would take time and effort to fill out the questionnaire and then wait for it to be reviewed and approved. Of course, some would still get through, but they’d be in smaller numbers and therefore easier for users to block and moderators to ban before things got out of hand.
Thaynor:
I kinda disagree with an application form style for two reasons:
A. Those who would potentially be abusive would happily lie on such a form.
B. It would weed out neurodivergent people who may not have the social skills to navigate such an essay form. This could be a slightly good thing only in the sense that neurotypical people absolutely do not have a monopoly for bad behaviour, but it would inevitably weed out neurodivergent people who need such a safe space but are unable to pass a form due to lacking the ability to articulate their thoughts in isolation of someone else to talk to.
However, I absolutely agree that heavy moderation and deeply ingrained moderation tools would be key to it working.
I also want to say I think a good idea might be to require people to answer questions before joining the website and go through an approval process by a real person reading their answers - NO personally identifiable information or photos should be required because it’s not a safe space if people have to risk being outed if information leaks, but short-answer questions about appropriate conduct (e.g. “Why would it be inappropriate to send this message to someone?” or “Give an example of a respectful way to approach a person you’re interested in”). This would serve the dual purpose of weeding out creeps who are foolish enough to say things like “Actually, I think it’s fine to send unsolicited sexts,” and weeding out creeps who are lazy or impatient because it would take time and effort to fill out the questionnaire and then wait for it to be reviewed and approved. Of course, some would still get through, but they’d be in smaller numbers and therefore easier for users to block and moderators to ban before things got out of hand.
Thaynor:
I kinda disagree with an application form style for two reasons:
A. Those who would potentially be abusive would happily lie on such a form.
B. It would weed out neurodivergent people who may not have the social skills to navigate such an essay form. This could be a slightly good thing only in the sense that neurotypical people absolutely do not have a monopoly for bad behaviour, but it would inevitably weed out neurodivergent people who need such a safe space but are unable to pass a form due to lacking the ability to articulate their thoughts in isolation of someone else to talk to.
However, I absolutely agree that heavy moderation and deeply ingrained moderation tools would be key to it working.
You do make a good point about the application process, but there *should* be some kind of screening processes. I know FF screens IP addresses and emails, but would that be enough?
2 years
