I agree with everything that Kit has said here. This post might have been in sufficient violation of the Forumâs rules to remove (being slightly inaccurate and slightly unkind), but Iâm leaving it up (without asking the author to consider changes, as I typically wouldâsee following comment) because I think Kitâs comment suitably addresses my concerns.
EA orgs arenât run by angels. Any community where money changes hands will attract people who want to deceive others, with or without good intentions. But itâs really good to reach out to people before accusing them of deception; they could be making an honest error,you could be making an honest error, or the issue could simply be a difference of opinion within a moral gray area. Weâre working in a field with many complex questions (moral and logistical), and the best first reaction to confusion is communication.
I should have been more clear on that pointâthanks for the comment. Iâve changed my reply to add the phrase âwithout asking the author to consider changes, as I typically wouldâ. I can see how the original reply could have been concerning.
On handling posts that may violate Forum rules:
My first act for any post that seems to violate rules is to contact the author and express my concerns; Iâve done this ~20 times in the last two years. (The exception to this is for a post that is in stark violation of rulesâe.g. an insult with no further content, or obvious spam.)
If the ensuing discussion doesnât lead me to change my view on whether the post violated a rule, and the author declines to make changes to the content in accordance with the Forumâs rules, the post might (again, might) be moved back to âdraftâ status (we donât delete non-spam contentâwe want the author to be able to share things elsewhere even if the Forum doesnât permit them).
Of the aforementioned ~20 instances, I removed content one time when the author never replied (this was a comment that shared provably false and inaccurate information about a named person in a way that was hard to correct with a reply). On one or two other occasions, authors chose to remove their work.
In every other case, I was convinced by the author, the author made light edits (generally of the âsoftening tone without changing substanceâ variety), or a discussion developed that seemed valuable enough for leaving the post up to be a net positive.
On private vs. public communication:
The big difference is that, in most cases, you can move from a private to a public discussion more smoothly than vice-versa. Once a public accusation has been made, confusion and concern tends to linger, whatever the substance of the accusation. You can see this in action when a false Tweet gets 50 times as many retweets as the correction.
Public accusations also tend to lead to bitter fights that could have been avoided with a private conversation: Forum User A leaps to defend the accused, Forum User B fires back, and meanwhile the person/âorg in question would have been happy to clarify their point/âedit their website/âetc. if only someone had told them.
(On that note, Iâve sent this post along to Lucius of the GivingMultiplier team.)
I donât want to argue for what to do in general, but here in particular my âaccusationâ consists of doing the math. If I got it wrong, am sure other got it wrong too and it would be useful to clarify publicly.
On that note, Iâve sent this post along to Lucius of the GivingMultiplier team.
I agree with everything that Kit has said here. This post might have been in sufficient violation of the Forumâs rules to remove (being slightly inaccurate and slightly unkind), but Iâm leaving it up (without asking the author to consider changes, as I typically wouldâsee following comment) because I think Kitâs comment suitably addresses my concerns.
EA orgs arenât run by angels. Any community where money changes hands will attract people who want to deceive others, with or without good intentions. But itâs really good to reach out to people before accusing them of deception; they could be making an honest error, you could be making an honest error, or the issue could simply be a difference of opinion within a moral gray area. Weâre working in a field with many complex questions (moral and logistical), and the best first reaction to confusion is communication.
I agree with what Kit said as well.
But that the only reason youâre not removing it is because of Kitâs comment makes me pretty concerned about the forum.
I also disagree that private communication is better than public communication in cases like this.
I should have been more clear on that pointâthanks for the comment. Iâve changed my reply to add the phrase âwithout asking the author to consider changes, as I typically wouldâ. I can see how the original reply could have been concerning.
On handling posts that may violate Forum rules:
My first act for any post that seems to violate rules is to contact the author and express my concerns; Iâve done this ~20 times in the last two years. (The exception to this is for a post that is in stark violation of rulesâe.g. an insult with no further content, or obvious spam.)
If the ensuing discussion doesnât lead me to change my view on whether the post violated a rule, and the author declines to make changes to the content in accordance with the Forumâs rules, the post might (again, might) be moved back to âdraftâ status (we donât delete non-spam contentâwe want the author to be able to share things elsewhere even if the Forum doesnât permit them).
Of the aforementioned ~20 instances, I removed content one time when the author never replied (this was a comment that shared provably false and inaccurate information about a named person in a way that was hard to correct with a reply). On one or two other occasions, authors chose to remove their work.
In every other case, I was convinced by the author, the author made light edits (generally of the âsoftening tone without changing substanceâ variety), or a discussion developed that seemed valuable enough for leaving the post up to be a net positive.
On private vs. public communication:
The big difference is that, in most cases, you can move from a private to a public discussion more smoothly than vice-versa. Once a public accusation has been made, confusion and concern tends to linger, whatever the substance of the accusation. You can see this in action when a false Tweet gets 50 times as many retweets as the correction.
Public accusations also tend to lead to bitter fights that could have been avoided with a private conversation: Forum User A leaps to defend the accused, Forum User B fires back, and meanwhile the person/âorg in question would have been happy to clarify their point/âedit their website/âetc. if only someone had told them.
(On that note, Iâve sent this post along to Lucius of the GivingMultiplier team.)
Thanks for the clarifications.
I donât want to argue for what to do in general, but here in particular my âaccusationâ consists of doing the math. If I got it wrong, am sure other got it wrong too and it would be useful to clarify publicly.
Thank you.