I have chosen to abandon all the major changes I had planned. This post will be used for feedback and suggestions. Since I’m the only mod I need community feedback.
i think you need to clarify what you wanted to achieve with the changes you were trying to make. there was an ideological motive behind them. make that motive clear to people. and then you should hold some sort of mod selection process so that you’re not the only mod, or not mod at all if it turns out that you don’t have the trust of members. suddenly taking control of the community under difficult circumstances, and making major changes that compromise the integrity of the community, before having to reverse them due to general outcry from members, is ambitious, in quite a concerning way.
I’ll start choosing new moderators soon
i didn’t mean you should choose new mods. i mean the remaining members should choose new mods.
and again, what were you trying to achieve? what was the ideological motive?
what were your ambitions?
seriously, the way you’re responding to feedback does not give anyone the slightest bit of confidence.Agreed, I think decisions about this community should be in the hands of the community and fully transparent, not random and unexplained.
I thought the motivation for the changes was obvious. The interpretation of the rules by the former moderator was so narrow, the community ended up (banning people for having left-wing views) and enforcing liberalism. There was no room for discussion, because if you had a discussion, the worst was assumed and you were banned. It went against the core ethos of the community. It seems that Kittenzrulz only wanted to bring the enforcement of the rules more in line with their spirit. There was never any wish to allow liberal points of view, only points of view from people further to the left like soulists and other schools of anarchism.
the community ended up banning people for […] enforcing liberalism.
That’s because this explicitly goes against rules 2 and 5
No defending oppressive systems or organizations
No genocide denial or support for genocidal entities. Anyone that supports the mass murder of civilians will be banned.
You’ve misread that sentence. The community ended up banning people. The people had left wing views. The community ended up enforcing liberalism. I understand how grammatically that sentence was ambiguous, but surely you could have extended the benefit of the doubt to My intentions and realised I was against liberalism.
People were banned for bringing liberalism where it’s explicitly stated to not be allowed.
The sentence was confusing because it’s the complete opposite of what actually happened.
Unless soulism preaches a different definition of liberalism, because midtraveler also has a strange definition of liberalism.
you’ve been getting a constant stream of feedback over the past 48 hours, but surely, this time, it’ll make a difference.
This is what gives me no confidence, there was feedback none of it was addressed and they didn’t even interact with anyone offering it. Imo that’s no way to run a community…
So, this is good. Thank you. the transparency you’ve had so far is nice, please keep it up!
I’d say try to do things like libertyhub has been going from before? come back and ask for feedback after you’ve been running it for a while ♥️
oh and yes, like others suggested a moderation team might not be bad 😅
I’m not subscribed to this community, nor do I feel that I would be interested in contributing/interacting on any regular basis. All that said, I’ve seen the drama unfold, and I have to express my respect towards your willingness to course-correct to meet the wants of the community.
From the outside looking in, I think you’re doing right by the folks who interact here.
I got a tad bit too ambitious for my own good :3
