An update to our Code of Conduct - removing second warnings


(Matt) #43

That would probably be a good thing


(Ben ) #44

In terms of the “we avoid” section of the CoC, what level of this is ‘enforced against’ - as some of this can seem somewhat subjective - and certainly see a number of these day to day on here:

These four, for example:

  • Replying in a confrontational manner when we see a post we think needs attention (use the flag feature to report it instead).
  • Deliberately derailing threads, or other forms of trolling.
  • Posting low-value content that doesn’t add to the discussion.
  • Repeatedly making the same arguments, instead of moving on. We’ll lock threads that end up going in circles.

These come up often in particularly Spicy Threads - is there a threshold for the amount of repetitive conversations that is OK before it’s problematic, for example? Given there could be an element of subjectivity, it seems harsh that (for certain things) warnings may be absolute and non-appeal-able.

My main concern is of the Flag button being used as a “Super Disagree” - which seemed somewhat common in the Trial thread. From the ones I saw at the time (and I’m sure many got moved) - there were flags on things that didn’t seem to be against the CoC. Just maybe prompted disagreement.


(MikeF) #45

Without the ability to see the reason for the flag it’s impossible to judge what the train of thought behind them is. A CoC ‘perceived violation’ only accounts for one category of flags so the two systems are largely separate.

Many of the flags may be for off-topic stuff since I’d guess since that would cover a multitude of otherwise harmless things?


(Brexit Day Is Gonna Be Shamayzing.) #46

If am flagged I wanna know why, I don’t care who did it tbh but a reason would be nice


#47

The first rule of Flagging is: You do not talk about Flagging. The second rule of Flagging is: You do not talk about Flagging


#48

Would it not be a good idea if you could only be a member here if you held a Monzo account? Or is that the case already in that if you don’t use the email registered on your Monzo acccount you can’t create an account here?


((╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻) #49

Anyone can be a member here regardless of if they have a Monzo account. Excluding those who don’t have an account would be hugely detrimental to the community.

EG.

  • People interested in Monzo ask questions and raise concerns here before applying.
  • Some are waiting on certain features to become available before applying, so they need to keep up to date.
  • Also, fintech companies get involved here too such as Flux for your receipts in app.

The list is endless.


#50

Fair points. I was just thinking it would be much easier to keep it civil if all members’ true identity was known to Monzo. Maybe certain categories restricted to account holders only?


(If there's the wrong end of a stick, you'll find me holding it.) #51

How about if Monzo Plus account holders were given a free pass to break the Code of Conduct three or four times a year?


(Brexit Day Is Gonna Be Shamayzing.) #52

I’d subscribe to that Trollol


(Michael) #53

The only possible way I could see to square all those points would be to only grant higher trust levels to Monzo account holders, but with one and a half million of them now this would probably only be more complication for an overall negative turn