Note: The thread currently has a limit of one post every two hours for non-mod users. Currently, this is hard-coded by the admins, but there are plans to give mods the ability to toggle it without admin intervention. After mods are given the ability to do that, the time limit may be further reduced or removed entirely.
This thread is for discussing the following topics:
- Questions and clarifications about the site's rules and policies pertaining to wiki editing, forum posting, trope launching, and so on.
- If you have an idea for a thread on another part of the forums but aren't sure if creating it would be allowed, feel free to ask here.
This thread is not for any of the following:
- Reporting complaints or concerns about specific moderation decisions (e.g. suspensions and thumps). Report these directly to the admins via the contact form
. Selecting "The Staff" sends your message to the admins only, without making it visible to moderators.
- Queries about thumps applied to your own forum posts, including contesting the validity of a thump. Reply to the relevant moderator via PM for these matters.
- Ban appeals (use the "Edit Banned" thread
in this forum).
- Reporting problems or requesting moderator action in the wiki or forums (use Ask The Tropers or Hollersnote or specialized threads such as "Locked Pages"
).
- Queries about locked On-Topic Conversations (OTC) threads or banned discussion topics. OTC has its own moderation discussion thread here
, and the latest statement on the locked US Politics thread
and other banned OTC topics is here
. Bluntly, when certain OTC threads and topics have repeatedly caused problems, we're not going to provide forum space to discuss them again until the moderation toolkit is equipped to handle those conversations.
- Cut List challenges and queries (they have their own thread here
).
- Requests for changes to the site's code or discussion about such changes, as mods cannot change the code; only the admins can do that. Please direct tech requests to Query Bugs or Tech Wishlist (for bug reports and suggestions for feature additions/changes, respectively), and take other tech-related discussion to the Changelog thread
.
- Crowner actions. Please use the holler function instead.
- Discussion about changing or implementing policies. Please use Wiki Talk for that. (Asking whether it's OK to make a specific thread is acceptable; using this thread in place of such a thread is not.)
- Asking about the whereabouts of inactive mods (or other inactive users) before they return, if they return at all. Use the Absent people thread
for discussing inactive users.
Posts that use this thread in place of the sections listed in the bulleted list above are off-topic.
We're aware that the Edit Banned thread has a Non-Indicative Name, due to it also covering non-editing suspensions. We're not sure whether the name for that thread can even be edited without breaking the special coding that keeps posting restricted to mods and suspended users, so we're leaving it alone for now, because better safe than sorry.
(Edited Mar 28 2024, adding bullet about OTC and amending layout a little)
Edited by GastonRabbit on Oct 11th 2024 at 3:20:25 AM
I get thumping posts that are just snarking about or insulting Elon Musk without adding anything else to the conversation (I've been guilty of it and been deservedly thumped for it). But I agree that the current heavy-handed approach is chilling legitimate discussion of how Twitter is currently being run. Musk is the head of Twitter; he's inextricably linked to the platform now and a lot of what he does reflects on Twitter.
That's essentially my position on it, yes. "Trump says something evil on Twitter" is not news for Social Media, and really, there's (usually) no point in discussing it anyway; "Musk says something evil on Twitter, the platform he owns" can be a bellwether for where he intends to take the platform's moderation, monetization, or public policy.
I understand that Twitter is liable to be spiraling for a long time, and that long periods of "another bad thing happened today" in a thread can get tiresome. But if only bad things are happening with Twitter, then the options are talk about the bad things or don't discuss Twitter at all. And talking about the bad things at Twitter is, by Musk's intent and design, talking about what Musk is doing.
(For what it's worth, Macron, I don't envy your situation, and I appreciate that you're not actively seeking out occasion to thump; if people reading the thread see something they feel the need to holler, it's not like that can just be ignored.)
Like Riverstyx, I've definitely said things myself that warrant a thump, and I will in the future too - I don't believe Musk warrants civility given the harm he's done and continues to do to human rights, and the hate he continues to prop up. But I'll do my best to do that on posts that properly connect to news items about social media.
Edited by RedSavant on Apr 4th 2023 at 6:39:57 AM
It's been fun.FWIW, I agree that given that Twitter's increasing use specifically as a vehicle for Musk's views means he's created a murky situation where discussion of his social media use, current or past, is pretty tied to the company direction.
Flip side, I think we could also do with not bringing up the cave diver thing at every opportunity. We aren't goldfish.
I saw the two posts immediately before the thump, and neither of them even mentioned Twitter - both were about Musk's personal history. I was anticipating at least a warning to stay on topic.
Musk is not actually synonymous with any of the companies who've given him a title, as much as he'd prefer everyone treat him that way.
ERROR: The current state of the world is unacceptable. Save anyway? YES/NOOK, I am more rested now so I decided to double back and look at the four posts I thumped and honestly...I stand by my decision to thump them. They either weren't about Twitter at all, Musk's shady history in general, or Twitter was just an afterthought. I will say that this derail (semi derail?) wasn't as bad as the other ones I have seen.
Thumping consecutive posts for off topic isn't really my style but given the that the thread is known for such derails, the fact that OTC is supposed to be harder on derails than other factions of the site, and that the mod posts weren't sticking by themselves is what led me to incorporate more thumps.
Also, yes, it's true that Musk's image is tied to Twitter so the lines are blurred but there still should be some balance. As I have said that I intend to step back from OTC moderating (not solely because of this), how the thread is being conducted or modded will no longer be a concern of mine. I think that's all I have to say regarding this situation.
Edited by MacronNotes on Apr 4th 2023 at 12:20:48 PM
Macron's notesElon Musk drama is how the December moderation incident started. I don't want to go down that path again.
2025: the year it all ends?Personally, I think the thumps deserved the offtopic. I will agree that Elon's jackassery directly affecting Twitter should not be thumped, but those were not about that. Why even bring up the cave diver thing?
I feel like Musk is now synonymous with Twitter to a sufficient extent that discussing his character in general is on-topic, but I also kind of agree with RainehDaze that the specifics being mentioned (I didn't actually see the most recently thumped posts myself) are a little redundant. Like, the point of bringing up the cave diver thing seems to have been to show that he's got a very frail ego and lashes out when it's threatened, but... that's not exactly news at this point?
I likely wouldn't have thumped the posts if I were a mod, but I do think I might have done a mod-hatted post reminding people that it's a thread for social media in general, not just Musk's Twitter.
It was in the context of trying to identify the point when his ego started to damage his public reputation. (I hope this is general and relevant enough not to constitute repeating content from thumped posts.)
ERROR: The current state of the world is unacceptable. Save anyway? YES/NOI don't remember if I've asked, but what if there was a thread about Musk and Tesla specifically, and The Social Media / Electric Vehicles / Self-Driving Cars / The Space threads had pins to it?
TroperWall / WikiMagic CleanupNot an OTC guy but I’ve heard of a Musk thread idea being shot down fast for I think being too contentious.
Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper WallUh that would devolve into pure bashing really fast.
"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."Okay, nevermind then. I just see no way to make sure this problem stops reoccurring.
TroperWall / WikiMagic CleanupYeah, threads about specific individuals are banned.
My musician pageWe do have two solutions;
- If it's a tiny slew of members starting the off-topic, we can remove them as they're the problem. Key term being "tiny". But that requires a ton of look into the topics for the original posts and who keeps starting it off. I don't find this a good solution though, as it's more the user of Musk is the problematic component. Also noted is that while some do devolve into bashing, it requires a catalyst to start, so you'd have to remove the people who start the off-topic part. Though again, that's pretty difficult.
- Just ban Twitter as a subject as it cannot be discussed civilly(that does include non-constructive posts that are just repeating ways to bash on Musk) and without off-topic problems constantly coming up. We have tons of others Social Media stuff to discuss, so it's far easier to do so. Musk cannot be outright banned as a topic, obviously. That's impossible. His relevance is reduced more than enough, but the concept obviously didn't work right.
Either works, but I don't like the idea of the first one either way. Not just cause it throws a huge amount of work towards the moderation to look at every thumped post to know who actually started it(we have over 20 pages of these kind of off-topic problems too), but considering that it might be more than a few people causing this, it also throws too many people out of OTC for rehabilitation instead of removing the volatile subject which blatantly has many on edge too.
Edited by Irene on Apr 4th 2023 at 2:15:26 PM
Shadow?![]()
A General Techbro Thread would probably rapidly run into the same problem even if it wasn't technically dedicated to a single person.
Edited by Noaqiyeum on Apr 4th 2023 at 7:41:58 PM
ERROR: The current state of the world is unacceptable. Save anyway? YES/NOI disagree that Twitter isn't discussed civilly, that is not the problem here.
I think perhaps we can try to limit talk about Musk about major news stories that actually have impact on Twitter. "Musk tweets something stupid/racist" may be tangentially relevant, but will generally not directly impact the business. It also keeps people from being exhausted about hearing about him, which is also a problem for Trump stories, I think.
I think what also might help is to not just post tweets directly, but instead post reputable news stories.
Edited by Redmess on Apr 4th 2023 at 9:07:00 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesReading the context of the thumped posts, I agree that things not related to his handling of Twitter currently should not really come up in that thread. The cave divers incident shows how he is as an individual, but we see enough of that from how he is taking care of Twitter and easily falls off topic. Tesla, while a view into how its like to deal with him, is sadly not exactly meant for that thread either.
If its something to do with Twitter, it's fine to talk about him. Meaning talks about Twitter or him getting sued or fined for how he is handling the site, that is 100% fine and on topic. Stuff about Tesla stocks going down due to his handling of Twitter...is a really thin tightrope walk that could go either way, and is definitely something the thread should be warned over rather than just thumped. Now if it continues despite the warning, thump away.
I'll quickly change to clarify more what I mean, but I do consider any kind of bashing entirely uncivil as a conversation. Call it non-constructive if you want. Twitter does not get discussed constructively whenever Musk comes up in general. That's a major problem and it won't solve itself because people refuse to listen and are actually justifying acting non-constructively towards him. There's absolutely no reason to allow that.
I don't care if it's draconian either. That's good. Bashing should never be allowed like that. Not when it's completely non-constructive in every way and never brings anything useful to the table. If it doesn't directly affect what's going on on Twitter, it has no reason to be brought up. And considering his past stuff rarely has any relevance to a new rule, it's still not worth mentioning almost every time. We've had plenty of useful posts... when they don't become non-constructive bashing afterwards, anyway.
The idea of reputable sources only does sound good, though. That might help. As long as we focus on that and less the bashing.
Edited by Irene on Apr 4th 2023 at 2:20:18 PM
Shadow?
That I can agree with, though Twitter is in such a bad place right now I'm not sure a constructive conversation can be had about it.
![]()
I think Tesla stock is tangentially relevant to Twitter due to being tied to its finances. I think the best way to resolve that is to only bring it up primarily in relation to Twitter's finances.
Perhaps that is the better way to view this: whenever something shows up, first decide whether the story is about Twitter the company, then bring up relevant topics like Tesla's stock value or Musk's comments.
Hope shines brightest in the darkest times
Exactly. If it's not hard related to Twitter the Company, then it's not actually about Social Media in itself.
That's the divide that's being gotten.
That said, yeah, I'm doubting it'll stay constructive... if only cause we have had over 20 pages of nonconstructive comments as evidence, but I'm more than willing to give it another shot. Especially if we can make it even more clear that it already is.
Though I'm honestly not sure where the confusion is myself on what counts as "about Twitter the company", but if this new look does the job, I'm all for it. The less needing for stuff like hollers the more it improves, imo. As in, the less we need the Moderation to step in, the more it ultimately is better for the forum.
Shadow?That was the build up of a long, long list of grievances against Fighteer across several threads and topics. We're not really going down that path again.
Some initial thoughts from me on this
- While Musk isn’t technically a political figure like elected officials are he’s close enough to warrant some tolerance of brief “god he’s an idiot” sets of posts.
- Musk bashing tends to go on longer and chill other conversations more than bashing of other figures does in other threads. Originally this was because we had Fighteer around making it a debate, but that’s not the case anymore and it’s still happening, just to a lesser extent.
- Musk has so deeply tied his personal identity to his brand (probably more so than any businessperson other than Trump) that’s it’s never going to be possible to discuss one without the other, so there needs to be some tolerance of discussions about his as an individual.
- There seems to be a trend of people bringing up Musk’s past idiocy not because it’s relevant to the conversation, a natural tangent or unknown to people, but because they get a kick out of bringing it up. This feels like a sentiment that dates back to Fighteer pushing a golden image of Musk that posters felt a need to fight against (and which for a long time had people wanting a Musk specific thread) and for some posters bringing up bad things about Musk was frankly a way to push Fighteer’s buttons. But Fighteer isn’t around now, so it’d be really nice if people could stop so we could have conversation of value.
All in all it’s a tough one to moderate in large part because the thread does not have a good history. The US Politics thread has a history of self-regulating, but some OTC threads (the Ukraine Conflict one in relation to nukes, the Pandemic one in relation to doomerism as easy example) don’t and need that stricter enforcement.
A suggestion for me would be that we try for a reset on the Social Media thread. Not a physical one but a personality/cultural one. We could try and put aside both expectations on posters of how well they can self-regulate, but also put aside assumptions from posters the assumption that the mods want to suppress talk about Musk. Try assuming that the thread can self-regulate small derails but also assume that when the mods get involved it’s because things have genuinely got out of hand.
Edited by Silasw on Apr 4th 2023 at 10:15:50 AM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranNo, it's about the constant bashing that only Fighteer recognized was an outright problem and called it out. He didn't act properly towards it, but he is correct that it was inappropriate and non-constructive and always has been.
We already saw it massively derail the Social Media thread, so it's not even Fighteer's fault at it being a problem. It is a problem.
I agree we need to figure out a good medium as an alternate solution, but as I noted, we've failed miserably at that. We shouldn't actually be allowed to be outright bashy towards any subject to begin with, so that idea doesn't make sense to me in any way. That outright creates a negative and poor atmosphere. It encourages people to be bashy about anything they don't like. It's never actually constructive once it goes below the point of properly pointing out issues without being inflammatory. The second it becomes inflammatory, it's outright uncivil behavior and lacks the constructive part. Being too critical can be a thing too, but that's a different story.
I'm fine giving another try, but we've had 20+ pages of tons of thumps(of which even if you were to slight adjust it, would still be mostly correct ones), so there's quite a bit of evidence we need to severely cap the options of what there's to discuss. At least without going into more extreme measures(removing problematic participants or removing anything related to Musk).
The notable point is Tesla has been far less bonkers, and that's because it's simply a different situation. Social Media decisions have a much more detrimental effect on people because more people simply use them than electronic cars. It's understandable it's going to be a much bigger thing to deal with. Thus, it's going to have more issues to discuss as well.
As for moderating ourselves much better... it's been proven time and time again it's barely feasible. More hollers don't seem to be common enough and the moderation is smaller than before. This makes both ideas far less of a useful solution, as much as it would be nice.
Speaking of, how many active mods do we have that can respond to the hollers now? If we barely have any, we cannot rely purely on that too to get things back on-rails. More than one regular troper has asked people to get back on task. It never worked till the thumps got out. That's something to keep in mind. This also means we could be dealing with some problematic users who refuse to stop bringing up irrelevant stuff. But as I noted before, if the amount of people is quite a lot(not maybe like 3-5 people at best, which is still fairly high), then that becomes less feasible over banning the subject(as the last resort of course).
A reset might be good, actually. With much harder rules to ensure civil discussion about subjects(which means no bashing in general), and keeping it extremely clear what we want and don't want. It's worked with threads before, after all. So a worthy try, imo.
Edited by Irene on Apr 4th 2023 at 4:26:38 AM
Shadow?

True, but if I recall correctly, those were indeed cases of going off-topic.
Hope shines brightest in the darkest times