Moderation on the thread "core team and governance structure"

It was anything but constructive. There’s a clear distinction between disagreeing while trying to actually resolve the problem (this is what the other thread is for) and continuous harassment. You don’t always get to keep your posts, especially when you’re repeating harassments. This is real world, it isn’t a little league baseball…

Moderator is being out of line and over moderating = on topic

Security guy in the core and governance structure doesnt publicly contribute anything meaningful to a massive security issue = on topic.

You guys are ruining grin, i wish igno never left the reigns to a bunch of thin skinned, emotional, horrible leaders.

News flash… you can be constructive and be destructive to the current structure of this shit show.

1 Like

No, moderation on the forum is not on topic. I find it hilarious that you keep blaming others for your harassments. Unfortunately, we’re not as tough as you are.

A core member moderating the dissenting opinion of core on a thread about dismantling core… totally on topic, but keep pretending otherwise.

1 Like

A wise man once said:

guys you are so wierdo all of you :slight_smile:

4 Likes

I do think we need to do something about the constant energy leeching of certain individuals. It’s very demotivating and will inevitably end with people leaving the community.

2 Likes

I think Lehnberg deserves a rise for time and energi alocate to this hard moderation

1 Like

Unfortunately, money won’t solve this problem. People don’t like being harassed and will move elsewhere in the same way that people don’t ‘enjoy’ being in abusive relationships and leave. I’ve seen talented people leave other communities for far smaller reasons than what is happening here and had the opportunity to talk to them about why they left. It turns out that they just don’t like being around abusive people and move on. I’d be willing to bet that some core members will eventually leave because of it if this continues. I’d also argue this behaviour hits a few emotional abuse points as well. Let’s remind ourselves that mental/emotional abuse is no different than physical abuse. I’m assuming we all agree that “you have a thin skin” is not the victim’s fault when they get beaten up, right? so why are we doing nothing when we see the emotional version of it?

I really do believe that these individuals are very harmful to the community. When I look back, I’d prefer if they were never around because of all the destructive behaviour they bring with them and cause to many community participants that actually try to be nice.

P.S. I know that I’m not being nice with my statements. It really bugs me that they don’t care about the feelings of others, and when a certain threshold is reached, I stop caring about theirs as well.

P.S.2. I’m fully aware that I’m starting this conversation when others have stopped. This is because I really don’t want this being swept under the rug again. That’s really not ok and we need to get better if we want any kind of sustaining community.

3 Likes

Pfff, i was ironic …

1 Like

It seems that core members are leaving the project over the time?

Yep, it mostly validates what @oryhp said above. Sadly.

it is not true what @oryhp say totally. You cant blame community with abusing,destructive behaviour.

Grin community is one of the most,modest and informative community i seen. But i wont say those for some members.

if you cant take some verbal attack from random guys,you stressed too much or cant answer communitys problem or look at them from high tower. Then you arent for the Grin project.

I can fully understand, that being on the receiving end of aggressiveness does not feel nice and think that it is in most situations not fair.

What I cannot understand is taking that as a reason to leave and I also don’t think that this is the reason for most departures that we are experiencing.

Because:

A) Every community has some aggressiveness, especially on the internet. It is probably not fair to classify some people as aggressive and others as non-aggressive, because most people are non-aggressive in some situations and aggressive in other situations, but let’s assume that some people are fully aggressive and other people are not aggressive at all. Let’s also assume that a fixed percentage of community members is aggressive. Say 2%. Then when the community grows, the number of aggressive people grows too.

B) You cannot just ban all aggressive people, because there is no way to fairly label people as aggressive if they did not engage in aggressive behavior yet. At least you have to wait until they broke some rule or overstepped some border. So there will always be some occasional aggressive behavior in a community, because it can only be sanctioned after it happened, not before. In a larger community such sanctioning has to be more frequent than in a smaller community.

C) Because of B) people who cannot deal with occasional aggressiveness will have a hard time to be in the center of attention in a larger community. I think the only things that help are 1) growing a thick skin, 2) having clear rules with consistent enforcement and 3) appreciating the fact that for 2% aggressive people there are 98% non-aggressive people, even though the aggressive people are the vocal minority that can dominate the discussion, which of course can be annoying. But that’s why you have a thick skin, consistent enforcement and appreciate the fact that 98% of people are not aggressive.

I am a moderator in a community that is quite a bit larger than this one and I went from banning no people at all to banning multiple people per week as the community grew 30x over multiple years. My first bans were a huge moral dilemma for me, but now I don’t give a lot of fucks anymore, because in most cases it is totally clear that people were just not respecting boundaries. Also, the most aggressive people have the tendency to react even more aggressive to a ban. This is something that can be expected and it is possible to learn not to be bothered by that. The bans usually are for things that are worse than everything that I have seen in this community. I actually would describe this community as very calm and respectful!

Also, I only ban people temporarily in most cases. In my experience, most aggressive people have been tamed after at most 3 bans. If not, there is still the option of permanent bans, but it is very easy to circumvent that and I like the idea that people can be re-socialized if they haven’t murdered someone. In most cases these people are not inherently trolls, but had just a poor understanding of community culture or they were a bit too passionate over a certain topic.

tl;dr: Don’t take occasional flames personal, because they have to be expected. Deal with them in a calm and consistent way. Don’t demonize people over a heated argument and allow them to re-socialize, because they are usually not really evil. Also, don’t generalize over the entire community, because 98% of people are just genuinely curious and these people should not be forgotten, because of some emotional arguments.

1 Like

I think a better community handling would be that nobody should take shit from other people. If people can’t behave nicely then they should be excluded from the community. Ofc that doesn’t mean that after a person does something bad we should perma ban them, but they should apologize or at least not repeat such behaviour many times. Therefore I’m completely against the “freedom of speech” rule in some organized community, where people think that “freedom” means they can do whatever they want, even if it hurts other people. Freedom must have its limitations otherwise one could just kill everyone else

1 Like

Yes, “freedom of speech” needs to be limited where it affects other people’s freedoms in an unfair way. In most cases there are ways to express an opinion without attacking people personally. If people don’t know how to do that, they need to be sanctioned until they know how to respect certain boundaries.

2 Likes

So sad to see the community splitting in different point of views. Hope everyone calm down and contribute a hand, otherwise we might not have popularity like beam.

What kind of popularity can we talk about? I am here to get a lot of money and anonymity. If we coped well with the second part, then the first part is lame. How much will a smirk cost in 2025? 10-20 $? Yes, you are laughing. No, seriously, this is hollow shit. I am 1998, I found bitcoin when I was still a small age and bought a game for it. What can I buy with Grin? So much time has passed, and we are standing still … we are not moving. Nobody needs it to hell. There is no profit here, only losses. I give another 2 years to Grin. Today I stop investing in the project and become a holder. This is the fault of the pricing policy.

I will continue to support Grin. However, you can forget about financing. Developers don’t work well. Long and boring. If they worked the way they work with projects for which they are paid money, then we would have become a top 50 project long ago. Now in the ass. Thanks to the laziness of the developers. Yes, I will hate developers. Because your rivals have done several times more in a year than you. I also want to thank the people supporting Grin. You are really great, if not for you, the project died long ago. Consider ZeroCool, which has created the best PR for Grin in its small town. Moreover, you were thrown off 50 btc. This is the same if I threw you 1/10 of my amount. Are you laughing? Is 50 btc not enough to make a project better than Monero?

@igno.peverell is dissatisfied with the work, you may know this. He believed that he gave the project to people who could make a replacement for bitcoin out of it. Not a fork of Ripple.

Why so serious son! :smiley: