0
$\begingroup$

This evening I have been kicked twice from chat, apparently for not acting in "good faith." All I said is that my primary concern is whether my messages will be flagged or not. I don't see what's wrong with that, flagged messages are offensive so if I'm not posting offensive messages what is the issue? I also stress that I said it's my primary, not my sole concern. Clearly my messages are meant to be thoughtful, educational, etc.

What exactly did I do wrong?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ chat.stackexchange.com/admin/annotations/134170 $\endgroup$ – Robert Harvey Oct 7 '17 at 0:16
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @RobertHarvey I can't access whatever that is $\endgroup$ – Ryan Unger Oct 7 '17 at 0:19
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Alright, well if you can't see it, I can't tell you. Suffice it to say you should already know what it contains. $\endgroup$ – Robert Harvey Oct 7 '17 at 0:22
  • $\begingroup$ It might be handy to say which room, and what might have been said $\endgroup$ – Journeyman Geek Oct 7 '17 at 0:25
  • $\begingroup$ @RobertHarvey I actually have no idea. Can I get a hint please? $\endgroup$ – Ryan Unger Oct 7 '17 at 0:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It is a list of chat annotations attached to your account. There is one annotation for each time you've been kicked. $\endgroup$ – Robert Harvey Oct 7 '17 at 0:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ despite the SE obsession/insistence with objectivity similar to the wikipedia so-called neutral pov, the chat moderation is an inherently subjective affair more so than anywhere else on the site, and some mods are more hands-off/ freewheeling vs on than others; there are as many boundaries as there are humans engaging in the chat, and it increases significantly beyond the mods including that anyone can flag msgs, etc.; my feeling is physics modding can be too heavyhanded/ inflexible at times and some evidence in meta for that eg physics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9596 $\endgroup$ – vzn Jan 7 '18 at 16:28
12
$\begingroup$

I kicked you, twice, and I said:

If your sole concern in posting something here is whether it might get flagged or not, I might suspect you are not partipating in good faith in the first place.

The Be Nice policy, and indeed every sort of rule for behaviour expected of you both on the Stack Exchange sites themselves and in their chats, are not burdens imposed on you on a whim. If you try to adhere to the letter of these rules but not their spirit, then, frankly, you are in the wrong place.

When I attempted to start a discussion about why you might post something in the first place, you flat out refused to engage, deflecting the topic to whether or not it might get flagged. This shows you are not engaging in good faith: You are trying to avoid getting banned from chat, not trying to be the sort of person who doesn't have to be worried about getting flagged in the first place.

This is not the sort of behaviour we want to see in our chat rooms. You have been suspended (in the short or long term) 71 times for posting inappropriate messages. This is exceptional - though not quite a record - among all users across the SE chat network. If you cannot stay away from inflammatory controversy, then chat is not a place for you. The kicks were intended to reinforce this message:

Do not concern yourself with whether or not your messages might get flagged. Concern yourself with whether they are necessary to post, with whether they are kind and compassionate, with whether they contribute to a welcoming and constructive culture. Extend to others the good faith you wish were attributed to you. Do not antagonize people needlessly. Swallow your pride and recognize that others may disagree, do not ridicule them, do not invalidate their opinions simply because they are different.

Failure to show any of that, failure to show any sort of willingness to change or to adapt, failure to respect the Be Nice policy as a statement of intent rather than a legalistic piece of policy is what keeps you getting kicked and suspended from chat.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ total # of flags vs suspensions is a valid metric, but also total # of flags vs suspensions vs total msgs in chat is something to consider. highly active chat users have a higher probability on avg of getting flagged if flags are somewhat randomly distributed etc.; and longtime contribution to chat ("regulars") should be weighed, as far as encouraging use of chat, drawing in users, making chat/ overall site more "sticky", esp since very many SE users never chat, and those that do tend to not become regulars etc $\endgroup$ – vzn Jan 7 '18 at 16:56
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @vzn The Be Nice policy applies to all users regardless of the quality or quantity of their contributions. Assuming flags are in any way randomly distributed is assuming bad faith on the part of the flaggers and contradicted by the many chat users who have never been suspended. $\endgroup$ – ACuriousMind Jan 7 '18 at 17:02
  • $\begingroup$ stated that flags are somewhat )( randomly distributed & think various other chat users have pointed that pov out, incl 0celo7, it seems to be the pt of his post. there was a sleight of hand there, flagging is not the same as suspensions, flagging is converted in some part into suspensions by mods, and there is some subjectivity in that judgement but dont really feel like discussing it further. $\endgroup$ – vzn Jan 7 '18 at 17:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .