Morbidly A Beast:
Bro. It’s not that deep. This is a place for fat people and their admirers to talk about things in a judgment free zone. Conflicts generally only arise when people spout bigotry or talk about engaging in nonconsensual kink.

This isn’t a philosophy political debate forum.

Enas:
Look, it is certainly even more deep that what ive described. The question, i guess, is is it worth the effort to get there, or is it preferable to ignore all that if its too... expensive, in the sense of time and effort. I assume, you would say it is not worth the effort?

Enas:
I think ive formed a few thoughts and refined them enough to write them here now.

My first point is about conflict resolution. There has been no demonstration of an adequate understanding of what a conflict between two people or groups of people. So there needs to be a discussion / research on that. In an ideal world this should be done by all members, not a handful of mods who then are tasked to moderate a mass of people that dont have proper communication abilities. If you want me to clarify any of this, i can, at a later time.

The second point, which may be even more importand, is narcissists. Im not sure how aware the moderators (but also people in general) are of this, the society at large seems to be almost entierly unaware of the depth and scale of this problem. So, i think the mods need to be *very well* educated on this specific issue. This will take a lot of time, but if it is done, it will make them able to act in much better-targeted ways.

Both of these, yes, are theory and thought. But i think they can greatly help us in understanding the situations we are currently. I would like to hear the opinions of the mods on this.

Enas:
I was planning to open a discussion about moderation myself but i wasnt super motivated. Now that i see one, i should intervene before it goes horribly wrong.

If we are going to have a discussion about moderation, which i hope this is one, we first need to actually understand clearly what moderation is in the first place and agree on a single definition. We can, and we should debate what definition we should proceed with, that is something that needs to happen. Thats because we cannot have any discussion, with which we will reach a helpfull logical conclusion, if Everyone's definitions contradict each other. I think a good way to do this would be to define what are the needs of a community that moderation is an attempt to satisfy, from which we can easily figure out what should the goals of moderation be, and then we can finally figure out how FantasyFeeder should be moderated, so that these goals will be achieved. I think this is a good outline of what we should be really doing, so i would like us to (hopefully) proceeded with that,unless someone can come up with a better idea.

So, what is everyone's thesis on the first question "What are the needs of this community that moderation ought to cover"? (Let’s put the Hegelian dialectic to work, and see what are the good points that people bring up, and use those to synthesize a more developed thesis!)

Morbidly A Beast:
I think when people are being openly racist and being called out for it being let run loose is a bit different than having a very tame gentle criticism of someone.

C00kie:
Could you please provide more details or specify which threads or posts you're referring to? That way, I can investigate the issue further and ensure we address any concerns appropriately.

Thanks,
c00kie
FF Team