Thanks for sharing this, @codinghorror. It sparks a lot of thoughts for me. As someone who tends to stand more in the middle of the political spectrum than at either of the ends, I personally have felt the need to navigate these types of conversation very carefully. It’s difficult as it can feel like walking through a minefield.
This article brought up a number of ideas to mind in regard to moderation.
- Set the example. Leaders set the culture by the example (not the rules) they set. If you want a community that values open-minded, thoughtful discussion, make every effort to act that way yourself. Don’t get tempted to hop on the personal attack train. Ask great questions instead!
- Don’t allow ad hominem attacks. It’s perfectly normal to build up or tear apart a position in political discourse. Have strong opinions! However, when the discussion devolves into attacking a person (can be a candidate or a person involved in the discussion), allowing the conversation to continue only further fosters the divisive rhetoric causing so many problems.
- Cut off the discussion when needed. Your community is not a democracy. Set the expectation for civil conversation, but if it is not followed, do not hesitate to close the topic. And if users get particularly problematic and do not respond to moderator feedback, it’s perfectly acceptable to silence or suspend them for a while to give them a chance to cool down and re-approach their engagement.
I noticed this from the article, too. That’s kind of sad. Empower the people, I say! 