Markos says that groups can create reasonable rules, as IGTNT did. Does this mean that Markos is giving groups some new authority to create rules that may conflict with our existing rules that moderate DK3? This is an important issue because, as elfling noted, if a kossack violates a group rule, any HRs "will have the same effect on mojo and banning and the like sitewide regardless of where it is accumulated." Next week we will probably see quite a few new groups created, so now is a good time to discuss what rules can be created by groups.
I discussed this issue with Markos to explore the parameters of groups' rules. Markos prefers that our "community work out its own rules" where he will "help guide the development of community norms," but he does not want to "mandate" rules. The upshot is that DK has one set of rules applicable to everyone, including groups. Groups in DK4 will not be starting from a clean slate in terms of the use of rules or community norms for moderation. I have been involved with groups (known as diary series and group projects in DK3) since around 2006 – We have years of "precedents" of groups moderating their diaries just as individual diaries are moderated based on the general community rules.
The IGTNT Model of Group Moderation
Markos cited the IGTNT rule as a model of a group moderation rule. DK has a general rule of no HR for disagreement over content that conforms with progressive values of free speech and debate. One exception is that politics cannot be discussed in IGTNT and HRs can be used to enforce this rule.
I talked with blue jersey mom about the historical background for the IGTNT rule which developed gradually over the years. Since at least 2007, IGTNT has posted in each diary a request to not discuss politics. After around 2 years of requests, enforcement followed with HRs. A number of trolls kept hitting IGTNT, and then blue jersey mom wrote a diary in February 2010 requesting respect by ending the inappropriate comments in these diaries. Meteor Blades's recommend of this diary gave them some confidence of admin support for their request.
However, it was the general DK community's acceptance that transformed this request into a rule that is now recognized as a rule by our community. Our community participated in the creation of this rule by accepting the reasonableness of this request based on a logical nexus between the narrowness of the request and the underlying rationale. IGTNT provides a memorial service for our community to honor our troops and the diaries are visited by members of the family and loved ones. To violate this memorial service here is similar to those who protest soldiers' funerals. In the real world, the content of "free speech" can be regulated by reasonable time, place or manner restrictions and that is what IGTNT did.
Key factors in the IGTNT model are that the rule was (1) gradually developed over years; (2) IGTNT provided notice in each diary of its request to exclude politics and (3) there was general community acceptance of a narrowly tailored rule before HRs were used to enforce this rule. This is key because otherwise exceptions banning substantive issues from discussion would swallow up our general rule of free speech and debate. Moreover, if we have hundreds of groups that each has a few rules, then we might need a rules roadmap to work our way through a maze of conflicting rules (e.g., can discuss nukes in groups A, B, and C, but not in groups D and E).
Group Rules and Norms Are Either An Application of or Consistent With General Community Rules
Must group rules be consistent and not in conflict with DK community rules? That is, similar to federal preemption of conflicting state laws, do the general community DK rules preempt conflicting group rules, thus providing some guideline of what constitutes a reasonable rule? Yes, Markos indicated that groups cannot veto or decrease existing community standards, but can "ask that certain topics be off limits:"
Groups wouldn't be allowed to relax existing community standards (whatever those may be, and I understand that it's not always clear), but they could go above and beyond them.
So a trite example -- a group couldn't suddenly decree that "First!" and "Frist!" comments are acceptable. But they could ask that certain topics be off limits in those diaries.
I wrote two diaries that contain some of the DK rules that can be checked by groups to ensure consistency: Don't Need New Posting Standards and DK Rules: Sucky or Fair and who is that Disruptor? If a request is not viewed by our community as reasonable, it can not develop into a rule enforceable with HRs.
Group Community Norms Enforced by "Nudges"
Moderation does not require blasting full speed ahead to HRs. As Markos noted, a "gentle nudge" might be all the moderation needed to inform one of group norms. If requests and persuasion are ignored by the offender, then Markos indicates that HRs are appropriate for violating a reasonable rule or norm:
What i can see is a group's regular membership telling a first timer, "Dude, we keep it calm here", and trying to use persuasion to maintain the desired tone or focus. Over time, certain groups may develop reputations that help enforce those desired behaviors/rules. So, for example, a group of election junkies may build a polling- and demographic-focused electoral group, and ask people to keep the policy stuff out. They could argue, "we don't want to discuss how bad the Blue Dogs are, we just want to discuss Heath Shuler's reelection chances." People "violating" that rule (more like a desire, a plea, an ideal) could be gently chided, and if that interloper persisted, then the donuts could fly.
Group Moderation by "Boycotting" Offending Kossack
The IGTNT rule took a few years to develop because it involved creating a new rule that was an exception to our general rule favoring free speech and public debate of issues and policies. Other group rules that involve application of existing rules, such as trollish conduct or disruptive behavior, to new factual circumstances, have developed in a shorter time frame.
Another rule has developed due to some using their sig lines to attack other kossacks with lies, innuendo or harassment. Our community has moderated by various means ranging from requests to stop to excluding the offender from groups or projects to tossing HRs.
Discussions by the jotter community of High Impact Diaries regarding the use of sig lines to attack other community members reached community acceptance in a few days because the conduct violated so many existing rules. For example, sig line personal attacks, innuendos, and call outs have been recognized as a form of stalking due to their repetitive nature and bringing personal disputes onto the boards is also against the rules.
Last year, when someone started posting at jotter threads, using a sig line to attack and harass a member of our jotter community by referencing a personal dispute, the community members initially responded by "boycotting" the attacker by refusing to give recommends for any comments or diaries while the offending sig line was active. The community moderation also included requests to remove the offending sig line, discussion of the issue, and an increasing number of HRs over the 6 days. Community members discussed how the sig line was a divisive and disruptive community wrecker. Given that the sig line traveled with the offender, so did the discussion and moderation. On day 6, the sig line was removed.
Banning Users From Group Diaries
Markos indicated that it is not reasonable for a group to create a rule that certain users are banned from their diaries:
I would find that very hard to stomach. But I've seen how the most informative, well-mannered user can become a raging asshole in an, say, I-P diary. So if a user is being consistently abusive in a group (say an atheist disrupting a religion-centric group, or vice-a-versa), then what's stopping group members from troll rating that user? And that user can then a) keep trolling that group until she is autobanned, or 2) stop visiting that group.
MB agreed with this approach to HR the poster engaging in trollish conduct or what he called the disruptor rather than banning from group.
The existing DK rules provide all the rules we need now to moderate new groups as we have been doing for years with DK3 groups or diary series as well as individual diaries. DK provides us with probably the best online model of an impartial rules system based on progressive values. Meteor Blades has created/expanded our moderation process to provide a structurally fair process that includes elements of justice used in the real world for our online village, such as rules created by admins and community; notice of rules provided by diaries, comments and FAQ; a rules enforcement process that provides incremental penalties to enable options other than immediate banning, and transparency provided by moderation on the boards.
We might run into a unique situation, as happened in IGTNT. But most situations should be covered by applying existing rules to new factual circumstances, such as applying our existing rules to the new inappropriate use of sig lines. We don't need to ban people from groups because we have the trollish conduct rules. We don't need to censor what issues can be discussed in group diaries because we have existing rules that comments be on topic, rules against spamming and it is against progressive principles to censor or limit public debate. We don't need a rule demanding people provide facts to substantiate their claims because we have the existing rule of prove or retract.
We have our groups. We have tools to help us with online political activism. My Part 3 on DK4 Groups is about what take action-items might work best for us to reach out and perhaps change the minds of lawmakers.
Additional resources on DK4:
DK4 Myths Unplugged
DK4 Tags for Dummies
DK4: Tips on Networking for Readers, Comments & Rec List
DK4 FAQ by sardonyx is a must read for all.
Using Groups in DK4 by elfling.
Markos posts:
DK4 open beta just days away, and why we did it
DK4 reaction, one weeklater
DK4 status update
Daily Kos beta: On trolls and unlimited diaries
DK4 update and responses to more community concerns
The latest from DK4 land