Before beginning, I know this is not apprpriate question, and there may be better places to ask these questions. I also know that I as a mod am kinda abusing my powers 9not pinning the post, but still breaking the 1 important rule - to post a uplifting news, and this post is neither upliftiing nor a news. I also do not know how it is decided in other communities, I am a relatively new mod, so I do not know how to act in certain situations. But by the powers that have been vested to me by the gods (previous mods), I want to ask a lot of questions.
Also for the time being, lets say the world has 2 major groups, martians, and venusians, there are other minority groups too, but if funded govts can not bother to listen to them, how can i, a under paid corrupt mod do that. (/s just in case people do not get it).
What I am basically asking is, is please help me make a ‘constitution’ (for the galactic rulings, obviously) on how should I (or maybe others if they choose to accept it) moderate, certain galaxy.
More seriously, please help discuss democratically, what should be the rules. To you questions may seem to have obvious answers, they did to me too, but what was not obvious, that different people have different obvious things (mind blown /s). And you all will get a chance to be “immortalized” by getting your name in the constitution drafting committee.
- What deserves a deletion of content (a comment or a post)?
-> my current understanding -> anything that breaks obvious rules. Lets say a martian, non sarcastically says - all venusianns are morons, illeterate wild animals who do not deserve to live. I would consider this as hate speech, and delete it. If someone posts something nsfw, but does not mark it appropriately, i should delete it. But what if someone posts something stupid - lets say someone thinks venusians have seven legs, when they actually have 4, and say, i want all 7 legged venusians to die. What should i do - should i upvote it, considering it is a attempt at humor, and support them, or delete it since they are still killing “hypothetical” venusians, or ignore them (that is what i have been doing right now for some reports)
- what deserves a ban?
-> similar to prior, so not explaining any further. Sometime back, i had a discussion with another mod, that we should have a strike system - something like, post hate speech 3 times, or something alike, then we ban, because you were given ample chances to figure out that you are doing something wrong (there comments would still be deleted, they would still get the downvote beating, just not a instant ban)
these questions were general, and not community specific, but following are
there are going to be lots of situations, to which you have to vote yes or no, is it uplifting or not (you are welcome to write 20 para replies too, but atleast 1 letter is required, something like 1 y, 2 n)
- a female dog gave birth to ten little cubs
2a) cure to cancer has been found, and the researchers have patented it, and selling it for 1 million usd (for each patient) (and i know there is no 1 single cure to cancer, consider a hypothetical situation)
2b) cure to cancer has been found, and they make it free for all
3a) linux market share grows by 5 times, used by 30% of desktop users
3b) microsoft windows is now open source
3c) apple makes all their hardware designs open
Also, for the following part - any resemblence to reality is purely coincedental and unintended, i do not even live in mars or venus to know much about their politics. 4) (this question requires context) - We all know about the martian leader, he is currently leading everyone, some martians love him, others are ok with him, but he absolutely hates all venusians, and does not even acknowledge existence of saturnians, and calls them confused folk (because saturnians wear rings on them). He lies, he robs, he takes away the very last saved bite you keep while eating the food (the best bite™).
4a) the martian leader is defeated in a peaceful manner
4b) the martian leader has been taken down in a millitary coup
4c1) people march to martian leaders door, and he leaves under pressure
4c2) people march to martian leaders door, and he leaves after a bit of riot (a “few” people become “martyrs”)
4d) the martian leader today opened amusement park
4e) the martian leader finds cure to cancer, and makes it free
4f1) martian leader is sad because his house has been a lot less “dusty” lately (he loves sand, because it coarse, rough, and gets everywhere)
4f2) martian leader is sad because his house has been a lot more “dusty” lately (he hates sand, because it coarse, rough, and gets everywhere)
4g) he is sad because his dog died
4f) he is sad because his business is making less profits.
I will not reveal my answers here, not to bias you people, but i would leave my general strategy in the spoilers section below
spoiler
To me something is upliftng, if i can tell it a youngling, a growing learning mind. Their brain is pure, maybe not ready to comprehend the vast world. To them, there are only simple rules - you see someone injured, you dress them. You see someone crying, ask why, if you can not help, ask someone else, and so on. This should be enough to get most questions answered from my perspective
… What?
I find this post incomprehensible. The fictional veneer makes it more unclear what you’re trying to ask and the examples (?) seem like a random selection. The voting pattern seems to indicate that there are issues here for several people, maybe a clarification would be in order.
i am sorry, but the fictional stuff was necessity. Essentially the post is trying to ask you define uplifting things. But a subjective definition of a human emotion is very hard to base objective rules on, so i have posed many questions. basically questions would define a this is not uplifting limit for posts. It is mostly about politics, and when people bring in political preference and alignment for and against, they basically stop thinking. For more context, please go through other comments where i do go a bit more direct, but some amount of haziness was intentional.
Basically this post stemmed out from a post regarding “musk being depresssed” (now deleted) which is not uplifting to me, and so i asked in comments does this post belong here, and i also got down voted hard there. So i made this post trying to understanding what do people expect when they mean uplifiting. If i would have used words musk or trump people swing hard, and even if you make a statement not related to them, but somewhere they or anyone made any related statement, people swing hard again. I somewhat get why people do this, they are mad at them, which is fine, but they just do not really want to have a constructive discussion.
If you can help me draft a better way to put all this, then that would be very welcome and appreciated, languages (speaking and writing) is definitely not my best skill, i keep going away from my main points, and i really suck at drafting concise and neat stuff.
I think starting from a point of clarity in your own mind would help you here. “Uplifting” can mean many things, and the question is partially which concept of it you want this community to be about.
Is it good when someone responsible for so much suffering is experiencing hardship? Obviously. But the source of that goodness comes from a place where an evil person experiences something negative, and the only reason for this to be good is because of that starting evil. This also means that it is innately a bit of a reminder of the badness, which for many people can make it not-uplifting. There is no solution to this. Either reaction is valid, and you have to choose which type you want to foster here.
Politics is not a game and alleviating suffering is at its core political, and a staple of upliftingness. But this type of upliftingness is predicated on suffering. Choose, knowing that you can only ever please a subset of the population.
“Do you want this community to be about good things happening to people only or should it also include bad things happening to bad people?” would be more clear.
that is close, but that is not quite exact. To a bad person, bad can happen, but through a just way, what i look to say is, we should not loose our humanity in the worst situations, and one of its parts is empathy. so bad happening to bad person maybe is bad because it is not through a just action, but lets say someone causing them personal trauma. If it happens by their own doing, that may still be “just” (in a self serving manner).
thank you, that is very much helpful. You have put what i have been feeling in a very clear manner