Heavy-handed moderation

So, I just had a discussion closed right out from under me while we were in the middle of a conversation, because:

This topic is about F36, a lot has changed since. Even if an issue feels comparable, you need to get new data and cannot rely on old still being comparable. Blurring such topics by mixing data and analysis of different eras is likely to hinder problem solving. Therefore, please open a new topic. You might reference this old one in the new one if you think it is comparable, but that way data of both attempts remains comprehensible and separable without blurs.

Here’s the thing:

  • The discussion was not about F36, it was about kernel issues which span releases
  • The issue was not just “comparable”, it was the same, which persists into F41. It really does.
  • I was one of the original participants in the discussion back when it was opened.
  • We were in the middle of a conversation!

This kind of heavy-handed slamming shut of active discussions, even if they’re older and seem to be outdated or no longer applicable, is not serving anyone.

1 Like

Hi Frank,

Sorry about that. I can see how that would be annoying. May I please still ask you to even then please remain calm and not resort to cursing and so on? Moderation is also done by humans and we’re likely to have situations where users disagree with moderation decisions—it’ll all get sorted once it’s been pointed out.

@py0xc3 : I totally see your point about it being an old thread, but perhaps given that it’s a continuing issue, it’s better to make a note but leave the topic open? If it is established later that it’s a different issue with a new Fedora release and so on, we can then split it out into a new topic?

I’ve re-opened the topic for the moment.

Edit: tweaked my text to focus on the situation

2 Likes

I see it critical to mix F36 and F41. We have had a lot of issues that felt the same but later have proven to be something new, and not seldomly the lack of being able to separate data that comes from different environments (and F36 is a far different environment than F40/41) contributed to the problem.

Keep in mind that we agreed on this way of action also because earlier participants are that way “forced” back to the discussion by getting emails, and we have to assume that if people don’t post in 2 years, the issue has been closed for them.

That’s the point: you were discussing not the topic the original author has opened (already in the topic referring to F36), which is a person who has not mentioned their issue in 2 years. We have received in the past already complaints in such cases that people feel spammed by opening such old topics.


My suggestion is thus to close it again, also to stick with common consensus and past experiences. Opening a new one and create a reference ain’t a huge burden.

1 Like

Frank, I’ve edited your post now to bring it in line with the CoC. Please do keep in mind that even when disagreeing, we must remain excellent to each other.

2 Likes

@ferdnyc we had discussed how to tackle such cases in future and if and how we adjust, but we started to discuss more fundamentally how to do moderation in future. That shall not be your problem, and we already agreed that your topic can remain open so that you can continue your discussion.

However, two things to point out:

  1. I hope you see that we take such complaints serious and discuss them. Opening a topic here is a good idea for such cases: but I hope you agree that limiting oneself to elaborating the case neutrally has generally best chances of getting heard.
  2. Keep in mind that if the original author asks us to close the topic, we have to follow their wishes. In the majority of cases that does not happen, but keep in mind that it can (I elaborated earlier about the issue)
3 Likes