Clojurians Log v2

I am having trouble knowing what is allowed to be talked about. I have talked about certain tech topics and still been accused of being a troll.

I try to just talk about tech topics for the most part. And stay away from any channels about politics, news, opionions etc… I’ve been accused of trolling just because I suggest a certain tech library over another one.

my issue is… Slack has turned into a community where moderators ban people just for disliking what a person says, opinion about a tech subject, nothing to do with harassing

trolling is a style of discourse, and has little to do with the content

Be careful to distinguish between specifics -- specific communities that seem to have that behavior -- and generalities: Slack is not inherently the problem and different communities have different standards of acceptable behavior.

If you find a specific instance here that needs discussion, that's fine.

if you show up in a channel devoted to technology Y and spend all your time recommending people use technology W instead, that can seem like a rational thing to do, because you have used Y and prefer W, but to everyone else in the channel interested in Y it is abuse of the channel

@hiredman so I cannot recommend a certain library versus another?

that is what I mean, it depends on the context

I agree with that. But I do have general preferences.

so do we all

but for example, if you go in to #boot and talk about #leiningen all the time, that is trolling / abuse of the channel

ok, but a lot of times, people just give recommendations on that

ya, well there could be a lot of situations/context where it is wise to use 1 over the other

very difficult to quantify that (all the time versus sometimes)

many times, through 1 day, people post unrelated topics, in a channel… I don’t agree that is trolling

I’d have to look up the definition of trolling…

speaking to your interactions that I've seen here, there are two things I would note: 1) the first message I saw from you in #beginners said something about "bashing on Rails". in general, we don't want people to "bash" on any group of people indiscriminately. it's easy to complain loudly about a person or person's work when they happen to be in earshot, and all that does is make people feel bad. Making technical arguments about why one thing is better t han another however, is perfectly reasonable. 2) in both the #beginners thread (which spiraled into other topics) and the #announcements thread, you seemed to be talking about topics that are outside what people expect in those channels. In both cases, people politely asked you to move to other channels better for the conversation (note, they didn't ask you to stop talking about those things, they asked you to change to a better place for the discussion). Yet, in both cases, you continued. I believe some people would consider that inconsiderate.

I meant bashing on ideas… not people

I moved the discussion to a thread, and deleted the post

You asked, so I'm trying to explain how people are perceiving your behavior

bashing on the rails community about some of the ideas going on

when you say "community", I hear "people"

well, this is the problem, there’s lots of different ways to perceive words

so there needs to be very clear rules and definitions

for example… I don’t even know what trolling means 100%

many people just use the word to define something they disagree with

in addition, not everyone has English as their first language

I don't think that's necessarily true. Clearly in this case, multiple people are perceiving your words in a certain way. So I think maybe it's worth thinking about why that is.

but that is rule by consensus, and means 10 people have the rule

afaict, no one has banned you from participating here, or said mean things to you. multiple people have suggested that you discuss things in a different way or change venue of conversation.

I am sure I could say “good” and find 10 people to perceive it as “bad”

I was accused of trolling which leads to being banned

so I want to hash this out before I am accused of trolling… which has no clear definition

again, context is what is important, the "definition" doesn't matter, what matters is the interpretation of your actions within the context of the place where they happened, in this case #beginners (and this slack in general) tries to be a positive welcoming place, and bashing on some other community is not that

I really do not know what trolling even means, 50% of the slack group is probably trolling for all I know

definitions do matter

context is often taken out of context

people make context errors, quite often

indeed, which is why it is useful to make the effort to give people the benefit of the doubt

if multiple people are perceiving your words in a way different than you intend, then I think that's a good time to maybe step back and choose different words

well, that doesn’t work

once again, that’s rule by consensus

for example gently nudging them towards better behavior

we are talking 3 or 4 people, at most

isn't that enough?

this is starting to sound like a behavior modification program

no, because someone will always be offended in a group of 1000's of people

that is how social spaces work, to be part of them you need to modify your behavior within them to match the norms expected

the 3 or 4 people talking to you are moderators and/or heavy users of this forum

rule by consensus never works, someone is always offended by something

ok, as moderators, what is the precise defintion of “trolling”

so far, I heard, it is posting in the wrong channel, which happens quite often

Trying to define human behavior with all the nuances is a difficult endeavor.

it's not posting in teh wrong channel

it's posting in the wrong channel, and then ignoring repeated suggestions to move that conversation elsewhere

which appears like willfully ignoring the social norms of the forum

ok, in my case, I moved it

so if 1 person makes the request, to move the conversation, it is trolling?

even if it is on topic?

also, how does one know if someone is a moderator? it’s not clear on the UI>

because I think moderators should only be allowed to make this request

I would say that your persistence over this topic, in the face of push back from everyone who has politely responded with opinions and suggestions, is moving into the area commonly described as "trolling behavior".

Is it fair to describe trolling as generally communicating without humility\accountability and a perceived intention of valuing conflict over resolution?

so I am trolling? right now?

You are drifting very close to what a lot of people would consider trolling behavior.

but you just told me to talk about this in this channel

now you are saying I am trolling?

basically, I am perceiving this as “just be quiet”

I simply asked for a definition of the word “trolling”

You raised a topic, you got feedback. Trying to get this community involved in a discussion about bad behavior in other communities is not going to be received well here -- since we have a general "no bashing" etiquette here.

sorry, but you are avoiding my question, and that was days ago

I don't get the impression that you are trying to understand why people are reacting negatively to your behavior and make any changes

and I clarified bashing ideas, not people

you have mentioned being banned from other forums

I asked for a defintion of a word

right now, I get the impression, anyone can be banned just because 3 or 4 people dislike their ideaas

We keep telling you that is not the case.

I get the impression that you are asking solely so you can disagree with whatever answer is given and I have other things to do with my time than that

I cannot agree without defintions

I was just told defintions do not matter

so we cannot agree

we're not asking for you to agree or disagree with anything

yes, the CoC

we're asking you to take social cues of the forum

if you wish to participate in the forum

it sounds like the CoC does not govern the decision to ban people

but that social cues do

what is your goal here?

my goal is establish definitions… and what governs decisions to ban people

people need to be up front as professionals, if trolling is not permitted, it needs defined, and added to the CoC

This is Clojurians' Code of Conduct: https://github.com/clojurians/community-development/blob/master/Code-of-Conduct.md

Here's the closest piece that is appropriate here "Harassment includes ... sustained disruption of discussions"

Emphasis on sustained.

But none of that precludes someone being asked by a moderator to change their tone, move a discussion to another channel, or even drop a discussion topic completely.

I don’t see trolling on the CoC

and I cannot read the minds of moderators… I don’t even know who the moderators are… it is not clear on the UI

They are listed in the Code of Conduct.

is Alex a moderator?

Read the Code of Conduct -- the moderators are all listed there.

https://github.com/clojurians/community-development

?

where is it again?

I am not a moderator here, although I am a moderator in other Clojure forums.

I found it…

can we add the CoC as the link to the top of the channels?

and can we add trolling and a precise defintion?

The CoC covers everything it needs to.

I don’t agree with that. people are being banned for things not covered in the CoC… that is going to hurt the Clojure community as a whole

People are not being banned from this community for things not covered in the CoC.

trolling

I was warned about it… and it’s not in the CoC o r defined

It is impossible to define the precise limits of what a maliciously-minded person might invent in the way of trolling. That’s why forums need moderators.

so it’s just left to a moderator’s opinions, discrection

if that’s the case, that’s going to really hurt the entire community

Only if you have malicious moderators, which this community does not.

in my opinion, this sounds like tyranny

that is not objective, it’s subjective

It is the nature of communities to be subjective.

yes, that's how forums work

you are free to start your own forum that is run any way you like

I have encountered malicious moderators with political motives… not here… but other groups

The remedy in the case of a forum with a malicious moderator is to find other forums and participate in those.

there are many Clojure forums on a variety of technologies. they all have different sets of moderators. afaik very few people have ever banned from any of them.

well, I was accused of trolling, and approaching trolling… and I do not know what it means 100%

so I am going to be quiet… like I imagine a lot of people do, withdrawal and silence their contributions

it’s probably why quiet often, slack groups are just 10-15 of the same cliq talking, and 1 person on occasion asks a tech question

back to the top of this conversation, I mentioned two explicit things - 1) make technical arguments rather than people arguments, 2) if someone suggest changing channels, do so

on one hand, that’s a way to build one’s reputation, on the other, it’s a sure way to turn a huge % of a community against one

how about you try those and see how it goes?

nope, I am just going to be quiet… I need clear rules before I can agree to behavior

I won’t subject myself to opinions of others, for behavior modification

sorry

I am going to keep using stackoverflow… I don’t lose my entire account just because 1 person disagrees with me

I have a remedy… I am going to raise the issue on github, clojure…

the licensing needs to require more strict controls over who can start communities using the Clojure copyright, without training and proper CoC’s

I will request a rememedy

that is definitely trolling

like, on an impressive number of levels really

I don’t know… there is no defintion. and there’s no issues tab on clojure github,

that is one of the levels of trolling there, clojure doesn't use github issues

Anyone can start a Clojure community and they can run each community however they please. Clojurians/Clojurists as a whole try to follow the community etiquette (on http://clojure.org) and are used to conferences, mailing lists, and online communities that have a CoC in place.

I understand, but I think that needs to change

under GPL V3, there are more strict controls on this

The "clojure github" project is about the core software itself. Nothing to do with how this (or any other) Clojure communities are run.

I know. But there isn’t a contact link on their website

https://clojure.org/

Software licenses are nothing to do with community behavior.

GPL v3 does cover behavior

the creator is allowed to control how communities use the software

https://clojure.org/community/license

but I do not even see the legal contact for the clojure project

this is not a personal matter. I want to see Clojure thrive. And I feel that unregulated communities where rules are not defined is going to hurt the community. That is my intention. I will write a legal letter to the lawyers.

I’ve been working in this field a long time, and have seen a lot of different communities and forums. The Clojure community, in general, and the moderators of the Clojure Slack in particular, are remarkable for their openness, fairness, patience, and inclusiveness. My experience in the Clojure community leads me to regard it as the best I’ve ever seen. A part of that is the absence of disruptive and toxic behaviors, which is not something that happens by accident. The moderators are doing an excellent job and are maintaining a forum where people can freely participate and share their questions and experiences working in and with Clojure.

Part of that involves detecting and correcting behavior that begins to tend towards the disruptive.

I agree. It’s much better than other communities.

but the word “troll” still needs defined… because it’s a very popular word in my generation.

All communities involve give and take. This is not “behavior modification,” it is merely being a “good citizen,” so to speak.

but as it stands, it is left up to consensus, opions of a small group

Douglas Crockford just went through this same stuff

he was banned from a conference over 1 little sentence in a speech

Those who wish to receive the benefits of participating in the community must at the very least make their own contribution of a good faith effort to abide by community guidelines.

well, I was threatened to be banned over trolling which is not in the guidelines

that’s my point

The moderators here are a very good guide to how to do that, especially in such grey, undefinable areas as what constitutes trolling.

I didn’t come in here and start posting porn

I agree, the moderators are super nice. much nicer than the Rails community

but words still need to be defined, especially when people are banned from an OSS community

this cannot be treated like a private company

We (the moderators) do not feel that "trolling" needs to be rigidly defined. If we feel someone is engaged in that behavior, we will discuss the specific instance of it and may ask the member to adjust their behavior.

well, you are risking ruining your reputation if it’s not defined up front

Someone who is repeatedly asked to adjust their behavior may have their account deactivated, if they show no signs of adjusting to common courtesy of this particular Slack.

so this is a behavior modification program… that’s my point

Everybody is risking their reputation, then, because it’s not possible to give a strict definition of trolling. It would be like defining exactly how many trees are required before you have a “forest.”

yes, so either leave or modify your behavior

You are the first person to come in here in the four or five years this community has existed and threaten to write to lawyers if we don't change the CoC to define certain phrases...

The word “forest” still has a meaning, even though you can’t specify the exact number of trees it takes to make one.

I might be the first, but it doesn’t negate my point

because next, it will be something else. not trolling but some other behavior.

If members complain to the admin team about specific behavior by specific individuals, we will discuss that on a case-by-case basis. We cannot exhaustively exclude all "bad" future behaviors.

Calling something “behavior modification” is meaningless. Speed limits? No smoking signs? Laws against stealing and murder? Those all are intended to prevent harmful/undesirable behavior. Calling them “behavior modification,” as though that were some kind of immoral ethical breach, is just a slur.

For example, the CoC doesn't specifically exclude someone sending unsolicited commercial DMs here -- because it is a rare occurrence. But members here generally consider it to be unacceptable behavior and will complain to the Admin team when it happens, with the expectation that the offending member will be asked to stop, and will be removed if they don't stop.

well, right now, I am having trouble trusting this subjective feedback… because I was told to enter into this channel… now I am being told I am trolling

Most people understand what is common courtesy and respectful behavior.

recruiters send unsolicited DM’s, quite often

you are definitely trolling, and it is amazing to watch

how am I trolling? by stating that I receive DM’s?

If members don't complain to the Admins about that, we are not going to proactively take action (since we don't know about other people's DMs by definition).

once again, kind of hard to agree without definitions

no one has ever asked you to agree, just told you how it is

wait… I need to look up if hiredman is a moderator

I am not

I lost the link

I thought you'd have the CoC memorized at this point, or at least bookmarked for ease of reference...

it’s not easy to find

good thing too, I very likely would have lost my patience and banned you (although really, I am kind of bouncing back and forth between annoyance and awe at the trolling)

exactly my point

good thing, you aren’t a moderator

like, you should take this show on the road, charge admission

it is something

I feel this is turning personal with you

please do

when I am simply discussing the CoC

you sure are

and that’s a problem in this channel?

is it?

well, isn’t that why the moderator told me to discuss it in this channel?

did they?

actually owner

yes, they did

I suggested you raise the topic here. It has been discussed. It's pretty clear what the consensus is. I suggest you move on to a different topic.

4 people

let me look up how many # are in the group

It's a topic that been endlessly discussed in the past, always with the same consensus.

A lot of people here just aren't going to bother engaging with this topic since they consider it a "done deal".

There are others who are watching and silently agreeing. Making this more than 4.

I got my answer. rule by consensus and opinion. not the CoC

and speak for everyone

personally, I feel this is a form of bullying, calling people a troll

I am simply talking about an idea, I was told to talk here…. now I am being told to be quiet, and being called names

Not true. Your behavior is being described in terms of other behavior which it strongly resembles.

it’s all subjective

You are choosing to ignore the feedback people have given you.

it’s just 1 group picking on 1 person, at this point

the very thing the CoC is designed to protect

because bullying is most often conducted by groups

and I have not ignored the feedback

I had deleted my post, moved to a thread, and asked for clearn definition

and I moved to this channel, like asked to do

And you are not going to get a clean definition. That much should be clear.

ok, I got my answer

and my opinion is… the very behavior that the CoC is designed to prevent, is happening right here

You are correct, however it is not the moderators who are engaging in the behavior.

the CoC was designed to protect minority opinions, from attacks of groups of people who agree by consensus

Trolling is not a minority opinion, it is a disruptive and antisocial behavior.

that is your opinion at this point

Do you disagree?

Haven't read the whole logback, but it should probably be thrown into to the discussion that we (and I for one) have also very much enjoyed your contributions and questions to the group, @nathantech2005

agree with what?

we have no formal definition of the word “trolling”

from my experience, trolling is used when 1 person has a minority opinion

Do you agree that trolling is not a minority opinion, it is a disruptive and antisocial behavior.

a person is called a troll, because of 1 opinion

And what opinion would that be.

that we need to define the word

before we ban people

that is my minority opinion

The CoC is not going to be changed to include "trolling".

ok, I cannot change that. but then I think there’s probably mountains of other items not in the CoC, that people can be banned for

which does not give me confidence to say much

If you want to participate in a community that has a CoC that explicitly includes trolling, with a definition, and that people will be banned for trolling, then feel free to create one. Everyone is free to create new communities run under their preferred rules.

I don’t know what all the rules are, at this point

The reason you cannot define trolling is that it cannot be defined. To insist on a definition of the indefinable is pointless and possibly malicious behavior.

There are some online Clojure communities that have no CoC at all.

I am malicious?

for asking to define word that can result in a ban

Are you demanding a precise definition for something that cannot be precisely defined?

then how do we know if someone is trolling?

because 50 out 50 people will tell a different definition

How do you know if you’re in a forest, when you can’t specify exactly how many trees it takes to make one?

> I don’t know what all the rules are, at this point The "rules" are what the CoC defines. Above and beyond that, members may complain to Admins about individuals or behavior that will be discussed by the Admin team and a decision made about that. Members who have caused complaints will generally be asked first to change their behavior so they stop causing complaints. Persistent violation of that will likely lead to deactivation.

I was banned from Rails for 2 violations in 2 years

If you don't like the way this community is run, try another community, or start your own. That's the freedom everyone has.

it needs to describe the time frame

well, the damages are my contacts are lost on the slack

there is monetary damages

The reason 50 out of 50 people will give you different definitions for trolling is because trolling cannot be precisely defined, since it can change at any time to suit the purposes of the person doing the trolling.

I think the sad truth is the "no asshole" rule can't have a good definition, and it it really just allows communities to boot super assholes

If someone here gets deactivated, they will likely not be reactivated.

No perfect definition can be had though

how many warning in what time frame?

because if it’s too strict, I will think about how much time I invest here

I cannot afford to lose a lot of time, contacts. when I banned over 1 incident, based on no defintiion

That would depend on how many complaints the Admin team get about an individual.

so it’s all just subjective

basically, I am hearing, there are no concrete rules

Yes. That's life, unfortunately. Someone who persistently annoys members of an online community is going to have a poor reputation.

we cannot agree without definitions

honestly, people don’t act like this in life

life is much better than this

There’s a difference between saying “X cannot be given a precise definition,” and saying “there are no concrete rules.” Again, nobody can tell you exactly how many trees it takes to make a forest, but there are still forests, and you can tell when you’re in one.

when someone states an opinion in life, people don’t call others a troll or trolling

in actuality, calling people troll/trolling has become trolling in itself

it’s circular logic

When I was at university back in the early nineties, we had to ask for permission to start posting to USENET. With the permission came a note that reminded us to reflect upon the fact that anything we wrote on USENET would not only be a reflection of ourselves, but also of the university. It further went on to note that being able to post to USENET was a privilege that could be withdrawn at any time. This has formed my interactions with people on the internet ever since.

Similarly, people can come up with infinitely many creative ways to introduce disruptive/malicious behavior into a community, which means you can’t write a rule that says “X and only X is trolling.” Nevertheless, trolling exists, is detectable, and is best removed from the community.

well, my reflections is… in order to engage with me, I need definitions

that is how language works, rules and definitions

not circular definitions

Anyone's set of definitions can get gamed though, can't they?

sure, but still need to start at a definition

no definition, that definately leads to ambiguity

There’s nothing wrong with how language works. We use terms like “trolling” and “forest” in perfectly meaningful ways even though neither can be defined precisely.

In a bar, if a bouncer tells you you’re being to loud/noisy/whatever that’s the the exact definition of being to loud/noisy/whatever. You then choose to adjust your behaviour or you leave.

but trolling has adopted a very wide defintion, far past the patter recognition of seeing a forest

and the dictionary does define “forest”, even if its open to multiple perceptions

The fact that some people misuse a term does not mean that the term itself has no meaning.

that’s my point

how does one know when it’s being mis-used?

I could understand “spamming” a lot easier… but “trolling”, no

the internet does not even have a defintiion of it, there’s like 10 different definitions

Generally, people who enjoy trolling enjoy persistent trolling. Patterns will form around people like this: they’ll frequently be in discussions that become derailed, disruptive, antagonistic, etc. And it will be the same people, over and over. The longer the pattern continues, the less likely it is that the term “trolling” is being mis-used.

honestly, I do not understand any of that

persistent? I have no idea what that means

persistant is opposite of derailed

if a conversation is derailed, it’s not persistant

so if the conversation is persistant, but one disagrees with it, they will certainly call it “derailed”

ok… I am going to take a break… but I can say this… I am very worried about investing too much time, only to have it lost, because everything is so subjective

have a good day, everyone

and please do not refer to me unless I am present in the room