Moderation Policy and Political Discussion

Vision, strategy, service, and activism. Web and social media planning and technical discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
MarcR
Mod
Mod
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:28 pm
Location: Camas, Washington, US

Moderation Policy and Political Discussion

Post by MarcR »

To date, the moderators have allowed this clause in the Community Guidelines ...
Humility. Refrain from posturing as an expert or relying on your professional status to make your point. Support your opinions with personal or clinical experience, your physician’s perspective, and/or published medical research. Avoid overreaching – we are most credible when we focus on our own personal experiences.
... to function primarily in an advisory capacity. We have relied upon discussion and respectful argument to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of ideas, and we have enforced the Respect clause to prevent devolution into acrimony. Implicitly, we have been using respectful communication as a proxy for quality.

Of course, correlation is not causation, and poorly supported arguments can be made respectfully. And when a health topic reaches the front burner of our ongoing national political conflagration, the endless supply of easily referenced talking points can overwhelm fact checking efforts and demotivate those who attempt to ground the discussion in data and the scientific method.

Going forward, we are going to be much more assertive about requiring high-quality citations to support claims that are outside the scientific consensus. Generally, this is going to require "published medical research" with a link. The TV shows, podcasts, blogs, and opinion pieces that influence many of our own personal opinions are insufficient - if you want to make a broad controversial claim, you need to make a great argument that directly refers to verifiable facts and scientific analysis.

As we do with Respect clause violations, we will edit or delete posts that fall short and leave a "Moderator's Note: " explanation. If a member persists, we may subject future posts to moderation or remove the member altogether.

Related, we are going to be much more assertive about enforcing the "world at large" element of the Respect clause when we notice conspiracy-oriented language and ideas. Broad political discussion is not our purpose here.
circular
Senior Contributor
Senior Contributor
Posts: 5502
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:43 am

Re: Moderation Policy and Political Discussion

Post by circular »

MarcR wrote:Going forward, we are going to be much more assertive about requiring high-quality citations to support claims that are outside the scientific consensus. Generally, this is going to require "published medical research" with a link. The TV shows, podcasts, blogs, and opinion pieces that influence many of our own personal opinions are insufficient - if you want to make a broad controversial claim, you need to make a great argument that directly refers to verifiable facts and scientific analysis.
Thanks Moderators! I will add my unofficial opinion as a non-moderator that someone's credentials--such as where they went to school, what their board certifications may be, or whether they are "internationally recognized" (who isn't in our shrinking influencers' world?)—aren't a substitute for high quality scientific analysis and explication.
ApoE 3/4 > Thanks in advance for any responses made to my posts.
Post Reply