- community moderation. Many hands make light work; core moderators can focus on reviewing moderation actions to limit risk of rogue moderators, while community moderators take the initial actions

These two things, managed well, can make moderating even tens of thousands of users much more tractable

@liaizon @msh @vfrmedia

@bhtooefr automatic moderation causes more problems than it solves. However, there ARE two things that do work, based on my experience with large forums:

- moderator tools; automation that brings things to moderator attention, allows bulk moderation actions, and permits temporary restrictions (like locking registration, geo restriction, rate limits, etc for a specific period of time)


@liaizon @msh @vfrmedia

@TapiocaPearl the West does this a lot with stories about making or nature. Cosmos, Bob Ross, How It's Made, any of Adam Savage's videos (but especially builds), etc. But I can't think of any examples of Western fiction that fit that model

If I have to read one more news article, ad, or social media post that doesn't understand there's a big difference between bacteria and viruses, I may quite literally scream

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados And guess what? If you don't qualify for unemployment payments but don't have income, then you can qualify for a bunch of other programs that you couldn't if you were receiving unemployment payments

Could all these programs be better? Sure, lots of room for improvement and even overhaul. But misplaced outrage about UI reporting makes that less likely to happen, not more

But you've made up your mind, so

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados “You’re not allowed to even quit your job in Ohio.” you said. That's just absolutely wrong.

In fact, if you refuse to return to work because you're at high risk or living with someone who is high risk, you still get unemployment benefits. The only thing Ohio did that's different from any other state is be way behind on being able to have employers use the Internet to manage their unemployment claims, such that they had to fix that given the volume of claims rn

@psyklax Though all that said, all economic systems must struggle with the question of how to address necessary work that no one would freely choose — capitalism does it by making such work the only realistic option for a disposable working class. Socialism/communism (at least statist variants) generally rely on outright compulsion. Etc.

Have not yet seen any good solution

@psyklax What also sometimes works is to ask if they have hobbies, and why do they engage in them if they don't create income?

@psyklax Their question is no different than when a certain stripe of Christian asks an atheist "if there's no God, what keeps you from murdering people?"

The correct response is "ethics! And do you hear how frightening you sound? Is the only reason you help others to get a reward/avoid punishment?!"

RT @sarahbosetti
2015: „Macht die Grenzen dicht!“

2016: „Macht die Grenzen dicht!“

2017: „Macht die Grenzen dicht!“

2018: „Macht die Grenzen dicht!“

2019: „Macht die Grenzen dicht!“

2020: „Alter, wieso sind die Grenzen dicht? Ich will in den Urlaub fahren!“

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados you keep suggesting I’m defending the status quo. I am not.

I’m suggesting that your claim that simplifying changing UI status makes it illegal to quit is a dangerously misleading statement. And further that if you really support what you claim—taking care of people who are not working—then being mad at efficient UI is silly and distracts from working on the issue that other programs fall far short

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados I’ve been working on these problems for literally decades, and it’s frustrating when people who don’t understand how these things interact, what arguments against funding need to be overcome, etc. read an article for 5 minutes and start shouting nonsense

This isn’t “technocracy”; there’s no technology issue here, it’s about policy and program mgmt. It is “these programs have literally saved my life and I want to keep them from being undermined by poor understanding”

re: uspol, covid 


… AND contributing to age-old propaganda that people only deserve benefits if they’ve been employed at some point (since UI only applies to people who have worked), which undermines that important system

4. By singling out a system that lowers the cost of UI administration (which protects benefits) and expedites people getting into the appropriate program, you’re helping people who claim those other programs don’t need funding because they aren’t getting used

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados if you think that’s my argument, you’re really not reading carefully

My argument here is:
1. UI is not and has never been for taking care of people unable to work; other programs exist for that
2. If a person no longer qualifies for UI, that is not dooming them to starve
3. By arguing that employers, who pay the UI premiums, should not be asked to update the UI program with information about eligibility, you’re asking UI to carry weight for other programs …

@cat yes, but only because He’s no longer invited after the refusing to use dice thing

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados We should definitely be doing a fuck ton better than we are, but the way things are means tracking status so that the UI program doesn't go bankrupt covering needs other programs exist to cover is a good idea

You'd be better off putting energy to making sure those other programs stay funded and are easy to access rather than railing against competent administration of a UI program

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados changing unemployment insurance (UI) status doesn't force anyone to work. UI isn't a government funded social welfare program, it's a gov-administrated liability insurance program designed to protect workers who are *involuntarily* out of work

If you're choosing not to work, different programs apply (Eg disability programs, certain special COVID funds, etc)

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados I'm not saying you can't care about multiple things. I'm saying you're particpating in actively undermining trust in one of the few halfway decent protections workers have, and that you're spreading misinformative propaganda to do it

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados Any comprehensive program to care for people who aren't working will include — and limit the scope of — unemployment

Reporting recipient status based as it relates to that scope is normal, reasonable, and done everywhere in the world that has such a program

Your claim that it's somehow evil to make a good program function better is silly. Your assertion that the form in question is in any way suggesting restrictions on quitting is asinine

re: uspol, covid 

@garbados no, I'm saying the thing you're expressing concern over (and, incidentally, spreading misleading information about) — an unemployment status reporting form for employer use — has absolutely nothing to do with the thing you claim you're worried about

Unemployment insurance is 100% aligned with taking care of people when they can't work. It has a limited scope, though, because it's insurance and not a social welfare program

Show more

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!