Constructive thread has kept going on and on about NFTs, hitting critical mass when the "Line Goes Up" video thread was closed.
Eventually, the serfs have rabble roused enough that Hecht comes in to lay down the law:
Ok, I'm going to state how we're doing things again, and this is the end of it. We're not going to hash this argument out over and over just so users can see how close they can get to the line without crossing it.
First off, the rules are going to stay in place. What was said in the initial policy will continue to be the policy. We aren't changing it. If you really want to talk about some random NFT idiot losing money, Twitter is only a URL away. We are still going to hold to the rule of "is this news?" There is no reason for a megathread, because at some point it becomes completely useless - hell, we have one megathread that is literally just one user posting news articles over and over when they come up. It's not like there's any discussion actually happening...because...what's the discussion? "I'm gonna point and laugh?"
Yeah, we know. We know.
Second, I thought it was pretty clear that when I mentioned that there was a level of subjectivity when it came to the allowed threads, that some threads are fine and some are not. I thought it was clear that the examples I gave, as ridiculous as some of them were, that it gave, at the bare minimum, a baseline for acceptable threads. Someone mentioned the WWF NFT topic - sure, go for it! That sounds like it's substantial enough to have the topic! If you make a thread and it's locked, the worst outcome is that your thread is locked. It's not like we've warned/banned anyone for making a thread on this topic that was locked. Apart from spamming the forum with a ton these threads, or we notice a pattern of that sort of thing, go ahead and post it. Eventually you'll hone in on what the idea is here.
Third, it's really not that hard. I know there was some leeway when it came to the subjectivity in the policy, but I was hoping people could read between the incredibly obvious lines. I'll reiterate the policy in the form of a few questions:
a) Is it just something to make fun of some random person or d-list celeb?
b) Is it something that doesn't affect anyone aside from the idiots that invested in it (I mean directly, I'm not referring to things like environmental impact), or is it not insanely hypocritical (e.g., the WWF thread I mentioned)?
c) (and this is really a forum rule, not really an NFT/Crypto rule) Is it not being reported by a reputable news outlet?
d) RE: Gaming, is it completely separate from game mechanics?
If the answer to any of these is "yes," then there's no need for a thread. That is the bare minimum. I'm sure I haven't covered everything, because the amount of effort I want to put into this is directly correlated to what I want to know about crypto, but that's the basic state here.
Surprisingly, people don't appear to be bowing to the sage and measured wisdom of the infallible moderation staff.
Morrigan (who's posted repeatedly finding issues with the new NFT rules) provides a dose of irony poisoning while seemingly testing her post-mod punishment immunity:
Third, it's really not that hard. I know there was some leeway when it came to the subjectivity in the policy, but I was hoping people could read between the incredibly obvious lines.
This is really condescending and uncalled for.
Also this:
a) Is it just something to make fun of some random person or d-list celeb?
b) Is it something that doesn't affect anyone aside from the idiots that invested in it (I mean directly, I'm not referring to things like environmental impact), or is it not insanely hypocritical (e.g., the WWF thread I mentioned)?
c) (and this is really a forum rule, not really an NFT/Crypto rule) Is it not being reported by a reputable news outlet?
d) RE: Gaming, is it completely separate from game mechanics?
If the answer to any of these is "yes," then there's no need for a thread. That is the bare minimum. I'm sure I haven't covered everything, because the amount of effort I want to put into this is directly correlated to what I want to know about crypto, but that's the basic state here.
This is honestly ridiculous. No other topic needs to meet such a specific set of criteria to exist. There are a non-insignificant number of threads here that definitely make fun of people and/or definitely aren’t being reported by reputable news sources that aren’t being closed. The only way things as poison and predatory as NFTs got properly shot down is if people are able to point out how poison and predatory they are. Every avenue here has been closed off. Nothing qualifies apparently.
On the game mechanics point, there are a *massive* number of threads for the business practices of publishers and developers that have literally nothing to do with game mechanics. Or should threads about something like EA, a company that only publishes video games, talking about getting into NFTs be posted to Etcetera because it’s not 100% clear how exactly they’re going to rip people off? Or just not exist to warn people that EA is doing the hot new predatory thing?
It totally comes off as trying to shut down NFT/Crypto criticism. Sure feels like that’s the point.
It totally comes off as trying to shut down NFT/Crypto criticism. Sure feels like that's the point.
What on earth are y'all reading. I even explicitly say, "call it a scam if you want." I sure as hell do.
The gist of the rest of what y'all are perceiving as the "rules" for the anti-crypto "side" is - don't be an asshole to other users. That's it. If you think someone is actually shilling crypto or something, report it and we'll handle it - don't get into a shouting match and derail everything.
Yeah, I'm done. I can't explain it any simpler than I already have or teach y'all how to read.
The policy is the policy. Make your threads, and we'll lock them or we won't lock them. I can't force you all to critically think about the threads you create.
We have reached the "just try it and eventually you'll learn to read the tea leaves of our whims" phase of moderation. Not really sure how the staff could have bungled the NFT situation more--the current approach isn't going to stop people asking for shit to be banned, since this effectively was, and it didn't make the people asking for the ban happy since in this case the one approved quarantine thread is explicitly pro-crypto.
Also:
Ok, I'm going to state how we're doing things again, and this is the end of it. We're not going to hash this argument out over and over just so users can see how close they can get to the line without crossing it.
NFT thread policy is literally try stuff until you can intuit how close you can get to the line without crossing it.
