Admiral Valdemar wrote:So what do we do?
On the one hand, with have the ability of free speech at stake which otherwise differentiates us from other webboards. And on the other we have the fact that some people, no matter how much it hurts people and how many times they are warned, will voice their opinions even if they are derogatory and even racist or homophobic etc.
Do we moderate with extreme prejudice and outlaw such comments or do we ban or take action against the persons who cause such a ruckus?
I think our current system works. We pretty much allow people to say as they please and as time goes along, a consensus is built. We as a community tend to notice troll-ism and respond to it-- first as individuals in threads (Ted's actions with Zaia for example) and then alerting others if it persists.
People noticing possible troll behavior tend to ask others-- "Is this person a troll?" and post links or copies of messages. Others concur or argue, bringing up relevant points. Many of us act as advocates and try to see possible explanations for irritating behavior; others are natural prosecutors and see through flimsy excuses.
The end result is usually a consensus, tempered by past experience with the offender. DarkStar got no extra chances, Shep will be back with us because he has a track record of being a better person. But it is very democratic, and we only turn to the mods as a last resort. We also have titles and the Four Horsemen and HOS'ing to act as further crash barriers.
This is especially ironic considering the "intolerant" accusatory whines of so many Trektards and other assorted losers. They get booted as a result of a long process of benefit of the doubt, alternative punishments and hints, and finally democratic selection for expulsion. There is nothing dictatorial or tyrannical about it. A society has a right to define its limits, and we do so in an amazingly tolerant fashion.