Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage
-
@antiquarian I was inferring it from what looked to me like a general stance of “actually there’s no problem here, nothing needs fixing”. Though I’ve had enough other conversations where I’ve felt the same reaction (the “I’m perfect, it’s the rest of you that are all broken and that’s entirely your problem, fuck all of you”) where this was kind of baked in. See also the “whine more” comment.
I also can’t help but identify with Gaska. I certainly have self moderation issues, and I freak out disproportionately in response to fucking up and crossing lines that I hadn’t necessarily realised were even there. (See previous debate where I worked out I was pissing people off by accident and needed an external intervention.) But we react differently and mine doesn’t tend to turn into levels of anger, it becomes something else.
I understand that this is my problem to solve and to manage it as best I can. Which is why I suggested that if anything were to be done (as per the OP’s suggestion), what form it might take, on the theory that such measures might help me and people in a similar situation. I have no doubt that the OP was acting in a similar vein, that having observed a correlation, offered a suggestion that they thought could help such a situation from happening again.
To me, the reaction of “no problem here” does feel non-empathetic because I interpret it as “I have no problem, therefore there is no problem unless you have a problem, and well, that’s your problem, fuck off and deal with it.” At least that was how it came across to me here.
I don’t know if the suggestion, if it were implemented (and I suspect it’s a disproportionately effort intensive piece of work) if it would help. I suspect the answer is not (and have all the way along, both the OP’s version and my respin of it), but what it has done has brought a number of different viewpoints to the fore about what participation means and how strongly that different people feel about where the lines are for “not my problem” and “no problem here”. Which if nothing else was instructive.
I would also return to the fact that my suggestion was strictly opt-in on the behalf of an individual, thus at the barest of minimums consensual. Would it be active participation? Hard to say. People who don’t/can’t/won’t self moderate tend to react poorly when the moderation is enforced - even at their own request. But the concept was to give the individual the choice and to support that choice by actually enforcing it - the “don’t let me do x, I mean it” line of support.
Finally, I suppose I am annoyed and disappointed by the way parts of this conversation have gone. The OP was a well-meaning attempt to fix what was firmly perceived as a problem. My take was how to take that suggestion and make it palatable and in accordance with all of the concerns being raised, even phrased as “if you wanted to do something like this, here’s how I think it would have to work” - not actually pushing for it to be implemented.
The fact we’re still debating “is it opt in” feels like a complete failure of communication, as clearly I didn’t get that part across, and I am mindful that I feel close to some weird martyrdom for “wah you’re not listening to me” and I’m not sure how legitimately I should feel that. The fact is I do feel that - not because people disagree with the proposal (hell, I disagree with my own proposal) but if people are going to disagree with it, can they disagree with what I actually suggested?
Then again maybe I shouldn’t be trying to defend my own words here and just let the matter drop, because it’s not going to be implemented and it probably won’t solve the problem. I think partly why I’m pushing for “can you argue with what I said, not what you think I said” is because a) this feels too important to not at least try and b) I’m tired of having this happen where people argue against what they think I’ve said, especially because it just makes me feel like I must be that poor a communicator.
(I can’t help that I feel what I feel. I’m just trying to be honest about it without hitting too many unconscious biases.)
-
@Arantor just don't let it make you ill.
-
@Arantor said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
he fact we’re still debating “is it opt in” feels like a complete failure of communication, as clearly I didn’t get that part across, and I am mindful that I feel close to some weird martyrdom for “wah you’re not listening to me” and I’m not sure how legitimately I should feel that. The fact is I do feel that - not because people disagree with the proposal (hell, I disagree with my own proposal) but if people are going to disagree with it, can they disagree with what I actually suggested?
I think you're forgetting who you're talking to - the "But mah freedom to kill myself" crowd. These are the same types of people who are against vaccines, even if it kills them.
-
@Arantor I think the best solution to the problem is just to understand that everyone in the garage is trolling hard, even if they believe their own bullshit and not get too upset about it.
-
@Arantor said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
Finally, I suppose I am annoyed and disappointed by the way parts of this conversation have gone. The OP was a well-meaning attempt to fix what was firmly perceived as a problem. My take was how to take that suggestion and make it palatable and in accordance with all of the concerns being raised, even phrased as “if you wanted to do something like this, here’s how I think it would have to work” - not actually pushing for it to be implemented.
The fact we’re still debating “is it opt in” feels like a complete failure of communication, as clearly I didn’t get that part across, and I am mindful that I feel close to some weird martyrdom for “wah you’re not listening to me” and I’m not sure how legitimately I should feel that. The fact is I do feel that - not because people disagree with the proposal (hell, I disagree with my own proposal) but if people are going to disagree with it, can they disagree with what I actually suggested?Do note that the Garage is a designated 1st Amendment area. That is, it is one the few places where people like myself can speak openly without having to conform to any external demands of allowed opinion or political decorum. This makes the Garage a lower tension area for me, not "highly charged". It's easier for me to talk in the Garage.
As to the resistance to any changes to the rules, do remember that the same people that like to frequent the Garage have been on the pointy end of several changes in both legislation and social media rules that gradually changed from voluntary to voluntold. So, many of us subscribe to the philosophy of "not an inch more". Thus attempts to reach a compromise, whether genuine or not, are easily seen as attempts at encroaching.
Also, do note that advertising tools to control your behavior also suggests that their use is expected by the environment. And if you don't advertise them, they'll go undiscovered and ignored. So it's literally impossible to offer help on the forum system level without looking like thought police.
-
@acrow That's the problem with extremism. Compromise becomes impossible. But I've said it before: Nothing is without limits and also nothing should be.
We've got freedom of movement. Doesn't mean that I can traipse into any building I want to. Also doesn't mean that I can walk out of jail because I feel like it.
We've got freedom of religion. Doesn't mean that I can sacrifice my firstborn because God told me to.And plenty of other freedoms which are limited where they encroach the freedoms of others.
I don't see why or how freedom of speech should be bereft of any limits.
I mean, I see plenty of complaints about misbehaved brats. You know how you get those? You do not set them limits. Think about that for a minute.
-
D'you like... bread?
I've got a French loaf!
-
It's a strange day when Gribnit's posts make the most sense and practical utility here, but this is one of those.
This topic is the usual mud slinging outside the actual garage being discussed, by the usual reactionary elements on both sides, and nothing more.
I'm hungry.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
by the usual reactionary elements on both sides
I'm more one of the usual inactionary elements.
-
I'll say a couple things.
First, I don't have a particular problem with @Arantor's alternate proposal. To be sure, I don't think it will have much positive effect. But I also don't see a significant negative effect (other than the dev time spent implementing it).
Second, I believe it's very possible to have empathy for someone and also realize that any action you take (especially without their willing and active participation and buy in) may (with some nonzero probability) make things worse for them. I reject the Politician's Syllogism. So disagreeing with means is not disagreement with ends (helping people) or an indication about lacking sympathy/empathy.
It's also important to have epistemic humility. Even if you think you know what someone else needs, consider that you might be wrong because you're not them. And implementing changes can hurt not only the person you're trying (honestly) to help, but other people as well.
This is all a longwinded way of saying "feature requests come in at -100 points."
-
@dangeRuss said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@Arantor said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
he fact we’re still debating “is it opt in” feels like a complete failure of communication, as clearly I didn’t get that part across, and I am mindful that I feel close to some weird martyrdom for “wah you’re not listening to me” and I’m not sure how legitimately I should feel that. The fact is I do feel that - not because people disagree with the proposal (hell, I disagree with my own proposal) but if people are going to disagree with it, can they disagree with what I actually suggested?
I think you're forgetting who you're talking to - the "But mah freedom to kill myself" crowd. These are the same types of people who are against vaccines, even if it kills them.
I think basic reading and comprehension should be the barrier to entry for the Garage but there's a reason I'm ignored. That and my hatred of weebs.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
It's a strange day when Gribnit's posts make the most sense and practical utility here, but this is one of those.
I can't see @Gribnit's posts (by my own choice and through my own actions), but my reaction is
. Very strange day indeed!
-
@HardwareGeek I can quote it for you, if you'd like!
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@HardwareGeek I can quote it for you, if you'd like!
I have mixed feelings about this. Ordinarily, reading one of @Gribnitwit's posts gives me a splitting headache, which I really don't need right now, but a post that is not only coherent but contributes positively to a conversation is a historic event.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
a post that is not only coherent but contributes positively to a conversation
Well... uh... let's not get ahead of ourselves.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
a post that is not only coherent but contributes positively to a conversation is a historic event.
They're not that rare these days.
-
@Rhywden You'll understand the problem with limiting freedom of speech when you eventually find yourself on the receiving side of it. Speech should never be limited.
Note that this is not to say that speech should be without consequence. An attack with words is still an attack. But at the same time, truth should always be a defense. When speaking out the unadulterated truth is restricted or punished, then there is no hope of keeping your other freedoms either.
-
@acrow slander, incitement, copyright, trade secrets, classified information. Never?
-
@acrow said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@Rhywden You'll understand the problem with limiting freedom of speech when you eventually find yourself on the receiving side of it. Speech should never be limited.
Note that this is not to say that speech should be without consequence. An attack with words is still an attack. But at the same time, truth should always be a defense. When speaking out the unadulterated truth is restricted or punished, then there is no hope of keeping your other freedoms either.
In that sense, you could perhaps say speech is being limited by something like the Great Firewall or the light version of it that is IP blocks, because it's the state preventing you from transmitting things you might want to say. Both other than that, is anything really limited? You can get on a soap box or rent some webspace and use them to call for genocide while showing your kiddy pr0n collection (faithfully depicting true events!) to everybody in the wide wide world. You can do that, it's just not without consequence.
Usually we do call things "forbidden" (a special flavor of "limited") though if the consequence is unpleasant and mandated by law.
-
This topic is drifting more and more towards the Garage. Maybe it should be Jeffed there before it gets too heated. Because it seems pretty clear that the feature request isn't going to be implemented, anyways.
-
@dangeRuss said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@Arantor said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
he fact we’re still debating “is it opt in” feels like a complete failure of communication, as clearly I didn’t get that part across, and I am mindful that I feel close to some weird martyrdom for “wah you’re not listening to me” and I’m not sure how legitimately I should feel that. The fact is I do feel that - not because people disagree with the proposal (hell, I disagree with my own proposal) but if people are going to disagree with it, can they disagree with what I actually suggested?
I think you're forgetting who you're talking to - the "But mah freedom to kill myself" crowd. These are the same types of people who are against vaccines, even if it kills them.
Literally none of this is accurate.
-
@boomzilla said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@dangeRuss said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@Arantor said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
he fact we’re still debating “is it opt in” feels like a complete failure of communication, as clearly I didn’t get that part across, and I am mindful that I feel close to some weird martyrdom for “wah you’re not listening to me” and I’m not sure how legitimately I should feel that. The fact is I do feel that - not because people disagree with the proposal (hell, I disagree with my own proposal) but if people are going to disagree with it, can they disagree with what I actually suggested?
I think you're forgetting who you're talking to - the "But mah freedom to kill myself" crowd. These are the same types of people who are against vaccines, even if it kills them.
Literally none of this is accurate.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
I'll say a couple things.
First, I don't have a particular problem with @Arantor's alternate proposal. To be sure, I don't think it will have much positive effect. But I also don't see a significant negative effect (other than the dev time spent implementing it).
Second, I believe it's very possible to have empathy for someone and also realize that any action you take (especially without their willing and active participation and buy in) may (with some nonzero probability) make things worse for them. I reject the Politician's Syllogism. So disagreeing with means is not disagreement with ends (helping people) or an indication about lacking sympathy/empathy.
It's also important to have epistemic humility. Even if you think you know what someone else needs, consider that you might be wrong because you're not them. And implementing changes can hurt not only the person you're trying (honestly) to help, but other people as well.
This is all a longwinded way of saying "feature requests come in at -100 points."
But it's often fun to discuss them. Kind of like setting up all your little green army man for a battle (which you'll never play through).
-
@HardwareGeek said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@Applied-Mediocrity said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@HardwareGeek I can quote it for you, if you'd like!
I have mixed feelings about this. Ordinarily, reading one of @Gribnitwit's posts gives me a splitting headache, which I really don't need right now, but a post that is not only coherent but contributes positively to a conversation is a historic event.
You're better off without in this case, since you'd just be allergic.
-
@loopback0 said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@HardwareGeek said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
a post that is not only coherent but contributes positively to a conversation is a historic event.
They're not that rare these days.
Libel! You're harming my brand!
-
@Gribnit said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@loopback0 said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@HardwareGeek said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
a post that is not only coherent but contributes positively to a conversation is a historic event.
They're not that rare these days.
Libel! You're harming my brand!
OK, Mike Patton.
-
I must be out of the loop. I thought the only things wrong with Gaska were those weird characters in his name and being from Poland.
-
@Zenith that's most of it.
-
@LaoC said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@acrow said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@Rhywden You'll understand the problem with limiting freedom of speech when you eventually find yourself on the receiving side of it. Speech should never be limited.
Note that this is not to say that speech should be without consequence. An attack with words is still an attack. But at the same time, truth should always be a defense. When speaking out the unadulterated truth is restricted or punished, then there is no hope of keeping your other freedoms either.
In that sense, you could perhaps say speech is being limited by something like the Great Firewall or the light version of it that is IP blocks, because it's the state preventing you from transmitting things you might want to say. Both other than that, is anything really limited?
I don't know. Could you tweet or post on Facebook about Hunter Biden's laptop in October of 2020?
Because a dude got fired from the FBI on Friday because Mark Zuckerberg told Joe Rogan that FBI agents came to Facebook during the 2020 election and threatened Facebook into suppressing information that the FBI knew to be true because the FBI wanted to influence how people voted in the 2020 election. Zuckerberg implied that Twitter got the same warning.
You can get on a soap box or rent some webspace and use them to call for genocide while showing your kiddy pr0n collection (faithfully depicting true events!) to everybody in the wide wide world. You can do that, it's just not without consequence.
That's not even true.
The People Who Rent Webspace To Customers will not let you rent webspace if you're someone who's getting censored. Maybe (probably) the FBI is threatening them into it. Maybe they're just smart enough to know better.
Usually we do call things "forbidden" (a special flavor of "limited") though if the consequence is unpleasant and mandated by law.
If the government can punish you for saying it, they are censoring you from saying it. To the extent that "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequences" is even true at all, that doesn't apply if the consequences come from the government.
-
...and here we go again. *sigh*
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear ok dude, category. Take it elsewhere. Please.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
Usually we do call things "forbidden" (a special flavor of "limited") though if the consequence is unpleasant and mandated by law.
If the government can punish you for saying it, they are censoring you from saying it. To the extent that "freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequences" is even true at all, that doesn't apply if the consequences come from the government.
That is exactly the point he was making.
-
If one would control one's self, all other avenues of control are to be closed. This involves defeating all fear. When one has defeated the fear of death, one has self-control. The fear of death is the same substance as the joy of living. Enjoy.
-
@boomzilla said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@dangeRuss said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
I think you're forgetting who you're talking to - the "But mah freedom to kill myself" crowd. These are the same types of people who are against vaccines, even if it kills them.
Literally none of this is accurate.
We do have people for whom the first sentence is accurate, I'm pretty sure. But the second sentence is inaccurate, both literally and the implication.
-
@jinpa said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@boomzilla said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@dangeRuss said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
I think you're forgetting who you're talking to - the "But mah freedom to kill myself" crowd. These are the same types of people who are against vaccines, even if it kills them.
Literally none of this is accurate.
We do have people for whom the first sentence is accurate, I'm pretty sure.
We do, but they were not the people
was talking to.But the second sentence is inaccurate, both literally and the implication.
And now you've met
.
-
Users can already limit the amount of time to zero by leaving trolleybus mechanics.
-
@PleegWat the theory is that there is a middle ground between “no garage” and “I can’t help myself spending forever in the garage”.
-
@Arantor said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@PleegWat the theory is that there is a middle ground between “no garage” and “I can’t help myself spending forever in the garage”.
Sounds fascinating, though far-fetched.
-
I've been tempted to poke my head in the garage recently, but I know that path ends with me ragequitting the site.
-
@error said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
I've been tempted to poke my head in the garage recently, but I know that path ends with me ragequitting the site.
I've actually been dipping my toes in, but very very carefully.
-
@PleegWat said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@Arantor said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@PleegWat the theory is that there is a middle ground between “no garage” and “I can’t help myself spending forever in the garage”.
Sounds fascinating, though far-fetched.
Not as far-fetched as you might think. I've worked on forum software systems on and off for the last 13 years or so, and multiple times in that span I've fielded requests and discussions for self-moderation tools, ranging from 'never show me this board' (you'd be surprised how many forums actually don't have this option and 'ignoring' is just 'don't tell me about new shit here') through to 'ban me for a month because I have a hard deadline at work and I can't keep posting here'
The Garage usecase is certainly not new in my head, and falls somewhere on the mid-range of the spectrum all in all.
-
Trimming your longer post to just the hard requirements:
@Arantor said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
But if you wanted to have some kind of future context where peoples' access to the Garage could be rationed, here's how I think it would have to work:
- By default, no restrictions applied once you get access to the Garage.
- Any restrictions are completely opt-in by the individual.
- The individual sets some rules by which they get access to the Garage, e.g. 2 hours a day starting at 6pm. Think of it like Windows Active Hours but actually working as intended.
- Outside of that time period, zero Garage access.
- Once the schedule is set, the user cannot widen the windows of opportunity, but arrange them - so if they set 2 hours/day starting at 6pm, they could move it to 4pm on a given day if that's what the schedule for their day would permit.
- Increasing hours per day would most likely be time-gated, perhaps a week at your current schedule per hour you want to increase it to, so if you're on 2 hours/day, you can't boost it to 4 hours until you've done 2 weeks at 2 hours/day.
- The intent of this is to help people with impulsive issues not just be allowed to smash the button and get in there full tilt.
I was just about to complain about #5, "can't expand your access, can only tweak it", and then I read #6, with time-delayed expansion. Which was what I was just about to suggest.
@acrow said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
Also, do note that advertising tools to control your behavior also suggests that their use is expected by the environment. And if you don't advertise them, they'll go undiscovered and ignored. So it's literally impossible to offer help on the forum system level without looking like thought police.
We've seen a few posters get increasingly worked up over the Garage over the course of months. Gaska is just the latest one. I think keeping this feature hidden in the bowels of the settings page works fine -- fellow users can introduce/remind anyone who's having a particularly bad week that this feature exists.
I really expect this feature to only be used by a handful of users, and that's okay.
-
@Arantor said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
@error said in Feature request: Limit time most users can be on the trolleybus garage:
I've been tempted to poke my head in the garage recently, but I know that path ends with me ragequitting the site.
I've actually been dipping my toes in, but very very carefully.
Yeah, I think it's a good idea to avoid subjects that are emotional for the general you, and people that can wind the general you up in the garage. I like the place, but some people go off the deep end there from time to time.
