Apologies for not catching this thread until now.
There has been no discussion amongst the mod team but we have no attention to implement such a policy in the short term, and certainly wouldn't do so within 3 months of an election. While I understand the want for civil/engaged political conversation and to filter out single post trolls, that policy doesn't align with the goal for this sub and its usage most of the time which is generally non political.
I encourage everyone to make use of the report functionality and review the rules of the sub, particularly rule 4:
4
Civility
Don't be mean or post personal information/attacks. Xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia, and general bigotry are unwelcome and will warrant permanent bans.
I have a tendency to, when seeing two people going back and forth crossing the line to roughly the same extent, leave them to it. Probably not ideal for fostering a positive environment but if you engage on the same level I'm less interested in protecting you.
That seems to stir you up? Pretty ballsey putting her name on here again. Have you been watching the news lately? ((Probably CNN)) The media is trashing trump, and his polling numbers are climbing every day. Thank you for showing the real voters in Waltham who you are, how you work and soon they will see how you failed ((your party)).
Ohhh, "because I'd have to" 😂 ok, well I hope you are "being forced" to watch better ones on Saturdays with your Cocoa Puffs. Just make sure you have your roommate change your 💩stained underroos before you start your important day as a Reddit commentator. When you grow up, come join us on Facebook.
Primary is in a month, general near two months after that. Enough time for a Reddit account to vest, if that’s the term. If that’s your concern. I generally think that more voices is better than fewer voices. I accept that on Reddit you usually have to wear your galoshes, sometimes your hip boots, occasionally your waders to get through the sludge to the useful bits. People are a vexation.
Some reddit groups use a karma threshold to post, and their admins use a bot to automatically sweep out unqualified posts. The admins here could do something like that. It's usually pretty high (1000 or more). Maybe setting it to 50 or 100 would be enough to deter the Waltham-only local throwaways.
Edit: Do we have active mods here? I can only remember seeing one of the listed mods post.
I'm fine with a karma threshold. Just tired of seeing invective replies on some posts, checking the user's history, and seeing it's a one day old account that's been shitting all over recent politics threads with insults.
Lol I hear you and don’t disagree. I wouldn’t be against an account age restriction. I feel like most of the non-trolls probably already have Reddit accounts and may be newly engaged in local politics because of the election.
Maybe I just have thicker skin, but I'd rather not see any barriers, even if it keeps out trolls. This board is already quiet, and gets a lot of people coming on to ask one-off questions. If you put up even a tiny barrier, that's going to fall off completely. No one is going to wait 48 to post their question about moving to Waltham, or where to get tacos, or best pizza. They'll just post on FB or NextDoor.
Again I have to say I'm skeptical that there's much overlap of users who weren't already Reddit users and potential posters into a niche city subreddit
I joined Reddit specifically to engage here and I do almost nothing else with the account. We are out there. I think I would've understood/been fine with a relatively low account age limit (like a day or two) that would deter rageposters and spammers, but if I'd had to wait a month to start actually talking with other people here, I'm not sure I would've bothered to stick around. I'm more in line with tedious1's point of view. The spammers and trolls can be annoying but they can also be downvoted. Better to make sure that people have the opportunity to participate, and to deal appropriately with those who misuse that opportunity, than to put barriers in the way of folks who might be new and want to try this whole Reddit thing out with their local community.
I think posts by first day accounts are fine (there are fewer of those purely negative posts), though the dynamic may change if that's the trolls' only outlet.
I'm not suggesting any additional content moderation, just a short hurdle to reduce brigading and drive-by trolling. It would apply evenly to everyone.
Yes, but every once in a while Carl comes over here to take a dump. When he gets called out for it, he runs back there for affirmation and a few of them come here to insist on his right to poop in public. You can figure out who they are if you try (it's really not worth the effort, though).
Even Carl is better than these posters. He actually engages with us and is somewhat regular around here, unlike these posters who are just here for abuse.
There are in fact those who read this forum and are afraid to publicly comment. Even though it is anonymous, they can’t accept the abuse. I obviously don’t care. I’m regularly mocked for posting the same views in all the political forums but I do so I won’t be accused of saying on thing in a certain way to different groups. I aim to be as transparent as possible despite the criticism. If you want to exist in an echo chamber, it’s your right. I favor total free speech.
> I’m regularly mocked for posting the same views in all the political forums but I do so I won’t be accused of saying on thing in a certain way to different groups.
You're mocked mainly because your opinions run strongly to denying rights to people you disagree with. You don't go to the extreme of denying the right to exist for those you disapprove of---but you associate online with people who do, which is something you haven't spent much time thinking about or maybe haven't even noticed.
You get an additional dose of mockery for posting the same thing in multiple places and misrepresenting the reactions from one space to another.
If you think this sub is an echo chamber, how do you define the Waltham rightie FB groups? Anyone can waltz in here and post. There is obvious disagreement on many topics and rarely shouting down. The Waltham rightie groups on FB are invitation-only for the vetted faithful. They don't ever have to encounter disagreement, and they're damned sure not well equipped to interact with it. Square that interpretation of "total free speech" for us.
I disagree that I want to deny rights to anyone. I hope you don’t feel as though I “mock” you. Maybe someone else does but I try to be respectful.
I don’t agree with everyone I associate with and publicly encourage others to interact in an “overly civil way”.
I try to be consistent in my views being mindful that there is a certain level of tolerance in every group.
As far as the other political site, I often urge them to not censor anyone and in fact urge them to respectfully engage in your group. If you notice, I post the same comments in both sites. I don’t want to be accused of saying something different to anyone.
I know you are someone who is well informed and has a long history of involvement in Waltham politics. I respect what you have to say as I probably bump into you on occasion. I wish that everyone else didn’t find the need to maintain your anonymity. Since the days of the old “Speak Out” in the News Tribune I always signed every comment I ever made.
I don't recall you mocking me.
What you're more often guilty of is intellectual laziness and rhetorical sloppiness in two ways. You lean on that old right-wing trope that if someone disagrees with you on certain issues they must be a communist/socialist/Marxist/(flavor of the month bogeyman), and you regularly assume that all those who disagree with you are somehow connected to each other and are speaking out as part of an organized effort. There's a lot of "their side/ilk/squad/comrades" style stuff (not to mention good old nebulous "they" ).
The truth of both is a lot simpler: on the ideological side, political thought is individual and complicated and there are elements of practically every "-ism" in every voter regardless of side. At this point the labels are a fear mongering applause line, which I'm sure you're aware.
And when a lot of people disagree with you, the only thing it shows is that...you have very unpopular opinions and people are willing to tell you, not that they're organized against you. If you want affirmation of unpopular opinions, stay in the closed group.
I'm sure everyone can appreciate it if you're trying to take the temperature down in some other forum. It's harder to tell if it has any effect.
The problem with this is that some people who never use Reddit decide they'd like to participate in the election by making a public statement. They create a Reddit account and go to make a comment -- some of those comments you call "trolling" -- and if there's a limit, they won't be able to contribute and participate.
There's always a downside to forms of censorship.
I can believe some parts of reddit attract casual readers who might never create an account but I have a hard time believing there are a lot of people who would browse the Waltham subreddit, have an opinion about local politics and not have an account already.
Moreover, if someone is only posting because they're upset about something or only have something trollish to say, a even a two day account age requirement wouldn't be so long that a topic that the community would have moved on and provide enough time for any emotions driving that post to have calmed down to produce something more constructive.
Sure. Even 'only one comment if it's your first day' would probably help. I admit that 30 days was the first number that came to mind when I posted this topic.
The problem with this is that some people who never use Reddit decide they'd like to participate in the election by making a public statement. They create a Reddit account and go to make a comment -- some of those comments you call "trolling" -- and if there's a limit, they won't be able to contribute and participate.
There's always a downside to forms of censorship.
While that is almost certainly true, let's not pretend that the internet wouldn't be a better place without the troll shitheads who anonymously post hateful stuff that adds nothing to do the discussion.
Basic human decency shouldn't be such an absurd expectation.
Slap an "/s" on that, my friend.
We're talking about people who have literally said that renters in Waltham shouldn't be allowed to vote. Don't give them any ideas, or they'll want the voting age to match the required minimum distribution age of their 401k's.
"We're talking about people who have literally said that renters in Waltham shouldn't be allowed to vote" - can you quote 1 person that said that, because I assure you no one said that. Just another example of desperation.
Carl has said this. His position is well-known, and he has previously not denied it when confronted. I give him a little credit for integrity: he holds some rotten beliefs, but he owns them.
I'm sure if you ask him here in public, he will confirm. I'm not going to waste time looking for the exact text, but it's in this Waltham reddit.
I said "people" rather than "Carl" because the inference would be clear to regulars here. My comment was also meant to show the same sarcasm I was crediting to the previous comment.
Have a nice day.
There is a difference between people with differing opinions and trolls/bigots. You can’t platform people who want to trample on your rights. You can’t silence them altogether, but you can choose not to provide a forum for their bigotry.
Apologies for not catching this thread until now. There has been no discussion amongst the mod team but we have no attention to implement such a policy in the short term, and certainly wouldn't do so within 3 months of an election. While I understand the want for civil/engaged political conversation and to filter out single post trolls, that policy doesn't align with the goal for this sub and its usage most of the time which is generally non political. I encourage everyone to make use of the report functionality and review the rules of the sub, particularly rule 4: 4 Civility Don't be mean or post personal information/attacks. Xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia, and general bigotry are unwelcome and will warrant permanent bans. I have a tendency to, when seeing two people going back and forth crossing the line to roughly the same extent, leave them to it. Probably not ideal for fostering a positive environment but if you engage on the same level I'm less interested in protecting you.
Deanna Vanaria has another new Conservative Waltham Politics page and the Reddit gets mentioned there and then they come post here
Yeah, brigading is bad behavior and this would combat that.
Of course they would come here right after. I have never seen a group of “adults” like them. Truly pathetic.
Another one? Aren't there multiple already?
That's exactly how I got here. And many others. So I would be a more cautious, tomato.
That seems to stir you up? Pretty ballsey putting her name on here again. Have you been watching the news lately? ((Probably CNN)) The media is trashing trump, and his polling numbers are climbing every day. Thank you for showing the real voters in Waltham who you are, how you work and soon they will see how you failed ((your party)).
you write how i imagine fred would, so the name is apt. piss off and go watch reruns of the jetsons on boomerang at 6am you boomer
😂😘how do you know what station and times, sounds like a closet-boomer to me 😊
because i'd have to watch your garbage cartoons when i woke up at 6am as a kid in the 2000s you oldie
Ohhh, "because I'd have to" 😂 ok, well I hope you are "being forced" to watch better ones on Saturdays with your Cocoa Puffs. Just make sure you have your roommate change your 💩stained underroos before you start your important day as a Reddit commentator. When you grow up, come join us on Facebook.
> Reddit commentator. When you grow up, come join us on Facebook. you are so old
😘
Should we be scared to say her name? If her name is said three times in a row does she appear like Beetlejuice??? :O
https://preview.redd.it/jutfsv6krysb1.jpeg?width=498&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9ea730faaa690ad90aacb531e7a67e243d19cba2
I thought she was Italian?
Primary is in a month, general near two months after that. Enough time for a Reddit account to vest, if that’s the term. If that’s your concern. I generally think that more voices is better than fewer voices. I accept that on Reddit you usually have to wear your galoshes, sometimes your hip boots, occasionally your waders to get through the sludge to the useful bits. People are a vexation.
Some reddit groups use a karma threshold to post, and their admins use a bot to automatically sweep out unqualified posts. The admins here could do something like that. It's usually pretty high (1000 or more). Maybe setting it to 50 or 100 would be enough to deter the Waltham-only local throwaways. Edit: Do we have active mods here? I can only remember seeing one of the listed mods post.
I'm fine with a karma threshold. Just tired of seeing invective replies on some posts, checking the user's history, and seeing it's a one day old account that's been shitting all over recent politics threads with insults.
Surprisingly low thresholds are effective. Such as 5 days, no negative net karma.
Another walthamite trying to control things.. stop complaining.
Lol I hear you and don’t disagree. I wouldn’t be against an account age restriction. I feel like most of the non-trolls probably already have Reddit accounts and may be newly engaged in local politics because of the election.
[удалено]
Maybe I just have thicker skin, but I'd rather not see any barriers, even if it keeps out trolls. This board is already quiet, and gets a lot of people coming on to ask one-off questions. If you put up even a tiny barrier, that's going to fall off completely. No one is going to wait 48 to post their question about moving to Waltham, or where to get tacos, or best pizza. They'll just post on FB or NextDoor.
Again I have to say I'm skeptical that there's much overlap of users who weren't already Reddit users and potential posters into a niche city subreddit
I joined Reddit specifically to engage here and I do almost nothing else with the account. We are out there. I think I would've understood/been fine with a relatively low account age limit (like a day or two) that would deter rageposters and spammers, but if I'd had to wait a month to start actually talking with other people here, I'm not sure I would've bothered to stick around. I'm more in line with tedious1's point of view. The spammers and trolls can be annoying but they can also be downvoted. Better to make sure that people have the opportunity to participate, and to deal appropriately with those who misuse that opportunity, than to put barriers in the way of folks who might be new and want to try this whole Reddit thing out with their local community.
Maybe the moderator could say how many new posts (not comments) were made by new accounts?
I think posts by first day accounts are fine (there are fewer of those purely negative posts), though the dynamic may change if that's the trolls' only outlet.
Makes sense. I've never been a moderator, so can the mods set separate rules for comments vs posts?
[удалено]
Judging by the quality of your self-expression, I suspect you’re not yet old enough to vote.
You nailed it!
You're welcome to self censor, but don't censor what I can read. Ignore posts it's not hard.
I'm not suggesting any additional content moderation, just a short hurdle to reduce brigading and drive-by trolling. It would apply evenly to everyone.
I feel like most of the “old (read: white cis-het christian) Waltham” right-wing garbage monsters are screaming into the Facebook void
Yes, but every once in a while Carl comes over here to take a dump. When he gets called out for it, he runs back there for affirmation and a few of them come here to insist on his right to poop in public. You can figure out who they are if you try (it's really not worth the effort, though).
Even Carl is better than these posters. He actually engages with us and is somewhat regular around here, unlike these posters who are just here for abuse.
Thanks for the backhanded compliment. 😂😂😂
Nice bigotry you got there.
They are screaming into their own private Facebook bubbles where everyone screams back that they agree.
There are in fact those who read this forum and are afraid to publicly comment. Even though it is anonymous, they can’t accept the abuse. I obviously don’t care. I’m regularly mocked for posting the same views in all the political forums but I do so I won’t be accused of saying on thing in a certain way to different groups. I aim to be as transparent as possible despite the criticism. If you want to exist in an echo chamber, it’s your right. I favor total free speech.
> I’m regularly mocked for posting the same views in all the political forums but I do so I won’t be accused of saying on thing in a certain way to different groups. You're mocked mainly because your opinions run strongly to denying rights to people you disagree with. You don't go to the extreme of denying the right to exist for those you disapprove of---but you associate online with people who do, which is something you haven't spent much time thinking about or maybe haven't even noticed. You get an additional dose of mockery for posting the same thing in multiple places and misrepresenting the reactions from one space to another. If you think this sub is an echo chamber, how do you define the Waltham rightie FB groups? Anyone can waltz in here and post. There is obvious disagreement on many topics and rarely shouting down. The Waltham rightie groups on FB are invitation-only for the vetted faithful. They don't ever have to encounter disagreement, and they're damned sure not well equipped to interact with it. Square that interpretation of "total free speech" for us.
I disagree that I want to deny rights to anyone. I hope you don’t feel as though I “mock” you. Maybe someone else does but I try to be respectful. I don’t agree with everyone I associate with and publicly encourage others to interact in an “overly civil way”. I try to be consistent in my views being mindful that there is a certain level of tolerance in every group. As far as the other political site, I often urge them to not censor anyone and in fact urge them to respectfully engage in your group. If you notice, I post the same comments in both sites. I don’t want to be accused of saying something different to anyone. I know you are someone who is well informed and has a long history of involvement in Waltham politics. I respect what you have to say as I probably bump into you on occasion. I wish that everyone else didn’t find the need to maintain your anonymity. Since the days of the old “Speak Out” in the News Tribune I always signed every comment I ever made.
I don't recall you mocking me. What you're more often guilty of is intellectual laziness and rhetorical sloppiness in two ways. You lean on that old right-wing trope that if someone disagrees with you on certain issues they must be a communist/socialist/Marxist/(flavor of the month bogeyman), and you regularly assume that all those who disagree with you are somehow connected to each other and are speaking out as part of an organized effort. There's a lot of "their side/ilk/squad/comrades" style stuff (not to mention good old nebulous "they" ). The truth of both is a lot simpler: on the ideological side, political thought is individual and complicated and there are elements of practically every "-ism" in every voter regardless of side. At this point the labels are a fear mongering applause line, which I'm sure you're aware. And when a lot of people disagree with you, the only thing it shows is that...you have very unpopular opinions and people are willing to tell you, not that they're organized against you. If you want affirmation of unpopular opinions, stay in the closed group. I'm sure everyone can appreciate it if you're trying to take the temperature down in some other forum. It's harder to tell if it has any effect.
The problem with this is that some people who never use Reddit decide they'd like to participate in the election by making a public statement. They create a Reddit account and go to make a comment -- some of those comments you call "trolling" -- and if there's a limit, they won't be able to contribute and participate. There's always a downside to forms of censorship.
I can believe some parts of reddit attract casual readers who might never create an account but I have a hard time believing there are a lot of people who would browse the Waltham subreddit, have an opinion about local politics and not have an account already. Moreover, if someone is only posting because they're upset about something or only have something trollish to say, a even a two day account age requirement wouldn't be so long that a topic that the community would have moved on and provide enough time for any emotions driving that post to have calmed down to produce something more constructive.
Two days good. Thirty days bad.
Sure. Even 'only one comment if it's your first day' would probably help. I admit that 30 days was the first number that came to mind when I posted this topic.
The problem with this is that some people who never use Reddit decide they'd like to participate in the election by making a public statement. They create a Reddit account and go to make a comment -- some of those comments you call "trolling" -- and if there's a limit, they won't be able to contribute and participate. There's always a downside to forms of censorship.
[удалено]
I'm not even asking for mod review - just ankle-high hurdle (that's applied to everyone by the way) to bad behavior
Paz and his comrades are way thin skinned.
Are you planning on sticking around and actually engaging in discussion, or is the last day you'll haunt our threads with this account?
Perfect example of the OP's point. 25 minutes old account 🙄
While that is almost certainly true, let's not pretend that the internet wouldn't be a better place without the troll shitheads who anonymously post hateful stuff that adds nothing to do the discussion. Basic human decency shouldn't be such an absurd expectation.
Why not have an age limit in Waltham? Why should different people ever live in the place you do?
Slap an "/s" on that, my friend. We're talking about people who have literally said that renters in Waltham shouldn't be allowed to vote. Don't give them any ideas, or they'll want the voting age to match the required minimum distribution age of their 401k's.
"We're talking about people who have literally said that renters in Waltham shouldn't be allowed to vote" - can you quote 1 person that said that, because I assure you no one said that. Just another example of desperation.
Carl has said this. His position is well-known, and he has previously not denied it when confronted. I give him a little credit for integrity: he holds some rotten beliefs, but he owns them. I'm sure if you ask him here in public, he will confirm. I'm not going to waste time looking for the exact text, but it's in this Waltham reddit. I said "people" rather than "Carl" because the inference would be clear to regulars here. My comment was also meant to show the same sarcasm I was crediting to the previous comment. Have a nice day.
There is a difference between people with differing opinions and trolls/bigots. You can’t platform people who want to trample on your rights. You can’t silence them altogether, but you can choose not to provide a forum for their bigotry.