Hello everybody
Following question. Can I do anything that my posts don’t need myriads of hours till they get approved? Is there a way to publish them faster? Unfortunately, it’s not possible to me to follow and answer a discussion in an adequate way or time.
Kind regards, Uwe
I don’t get it too… The forum is mostly dead because of these approvals.
Approving 6 to 8h are absolutely no exception regarding my experience.
For creating this topic, it took longer than 1d! More than 24h! I hadn’t expected it to come out anymore.
I’ve kind of lost my enthusiasm for it.
Here is a comment in my PM.
“It feels strange being censored in a forum about circumventing censorship.”
I get it that it is all volunteers and it allows a certain level of civility in the conversations but when someone has to approve a post then that someone also has the power to NOT approve a post.
Well, there is a TOS: Terms of Service - Tor Project Forum
which includes the code of conduct
Things could be much faster if there was no approval. Another algorithm could be: some volunteers checking for flagged posts and banning users, who violated the TOS.
I’m not sure what “they” (the mods/suchlike in charge) think we’re going to do. The worst that happens is someone makes a really offensive post, lots of people flag it, and it’s taken down anyway. I am not expecting such a post in a rather niche support forum for a tool that most people don’t use (even though they should!) The Rust-lang forum doesn’t have this approval process, and it seems just fine to me.
I understand that waiting a few hours to see your posts published is annoying, especially in a society where we are used to instant messaging. But remember:
I don’t think the forum is dead. Mind you, I do think it is suboptimal and there is much room for improvement - but censorship accusations based on this really feel out of place. Waiting a few hours to see your messages on a public board is annoying, but censorship is when you can’t criticize or speak against those with power. Based on some threads on this forum, I’d say moderation leans towards freedom of spech and assumption of good faith.
Once again, I understand being annoyed and loosing enthusiasm.
But I also believe expectations should be tuned to be reasonable in their context.
Agreed about the volunteers. It’s not something I would want to do.
Here is the definition of the verb censor. “to examine” is the operative word.
censor
transitive verb
: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable
censor the news
also : to suppress or delete as objectionable
censor out indecent passages
You know anyone who has read that or any other TOS anywhere and understood it.
How about all the agreements for all those social media sites or any piece of software you have bought or used.
I never expected that quote from my PM to pass.
I think the point that is being made is that there is little requirement for every post to be carefully curated.
Once past the “babysitting” stage in Discourse, the number of egregiously inappropriate posts shold be relatively few. These can be dealt with on an ad-hoc exception basis. Delete the post, set that poster back to moderated until the poster has been assessed.
Discourse already has this capability baked in, to have moderation for new/unproven users and open posting for the adults.
You are criticizing complaints based on the fact that it is volunteers performing the curating, when the requirement to curate is entirely of this forum’s own making.
A more open, exception-based posting format is a more appropriate model for a place like this.
Out of curiosity, it would be nice to know how many time posts have to be taken down because of TOS or something.
On the positive I just joined another thread and was able to post 3 times in next to no time. The original poster also… So…
Thank you for your feedback. The Tor Community unfortunately attracts a significant number of threat actors, maintaining active moderation in any public Tor space is something we consider essential.
We have an open issue dedicated to discuss moderation improvements. That said, we’ve already seen threat actors exploit the traditional Discourse trust level system, so we’re looking beyond that approach.
If you’d like to contribute, we welcome thoughtful proposals here: Evaluate the Discourse trust level to remove trusted contributors from the moderation queue (#40060) · Issues · The Tor Project / Community / Tor User Support Team · GitLab