# Proposal for conflict resolution section

+ 2 like - 1 dislike
477 views

I propose to create a new section of PO called 'conflicts'.

The purpose is to have a clean separation between discussions of official and technical issues (in 'meta') and discussions about complaints and violations of user rights or etiquette (in 'conflicts').

Any serious violation of user rights should be posted and discussed in the section 'conflicts'. Any serious violation of etiquette should also be posted and discussed in the section 'conflicts', but only if it couldn't be settled through editing and/or private discussion.

A number of the old discussions on meta could be moved to 'conflicts'.

retagged Apr 2, 2015

I better question would be to ask how Meta should be modified generally, given the problems that have arisen over the past year to do with the smooth running of PO.

If implemented, I think this section should be hidden behind some wall in order not to provoke external trolls to fool around there.

@VladimirKalitvianski Do you mean blacklisting it from search engines? That would be very easy.

No, I did not think of search engines, rather of external visitors. For example, I do not see actually "Categories" with its tree containing "Closed questions", so "Closed questions" are inaccessible to me if I do not know where to find them. Something like this.

@ArnoldNeumaier Done.

@dimension10: Thanks. I think it is hidden enough.

Yes, I am quite satisfied too.

I do not exactly understand the purpose of the Moderation Complaint category:

I thought is should only contain discussions of specific moderation actions, but now I see several posts recategorized into Moderator Complaints that are just regular discussions about site policies or the future of the site? For example the following posts should not be in Moderation Complaints:

There are more posts I am not sure that they should really be in the Moderation Complaints category, as they do not complain about specific moderators, moderation actions, etc ...

@Dilaton As stated by Arnold in the post, the category is not merely for discussion on specific moderator actions, but also on specific user behaviour (my personal opinion is that any discussion on user behaviour is worthless, but that's irrelevant here). Two of the three discussions that you pointed to regard user behaviour.

I agree about How do we revive PhysicsOverflow?, though, and have moved it back.

@Dimension10 but the proposal says

The purpose is to have a clean separation between discussions of official and technical issues (in 'meta') and discussions about complaints and violations of user rights or etiquette (in 'conflicts').

As I read this, the conflict resolution section now called moderation complaints (I would have preferred the original name as edit condflicts could then be resolved there too for example), the section is meant to contain discussions about specific violtions or disagreements, and not so much general discussions about policies or guidelines concerning user behavior. Maybe @ArnoldNeumaier can comment on what his intention was?

@Dilaton OK I've renamed it to conflict resolution. The discussions you linked to are about specific disagreements rather than general policy.

@dilaton: I also prefer the name 'conflict resolution'. I don't mind that general discussions about how to handle conflicts are also there. Indeed it makes sense to me, as those interested in seeing how user complaints are handled will most likely be the same as those who are also interested in seeing (and perhaps contributing to) the discussions about the corresponding policies.

 Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead. To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL. Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post. This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button. Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview Your name to display (optional): Email me at this address if my answer is selected or commented on: Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications. Anti-spam verification: If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:p$\hbar$ysicsO$\varnothing$erflowThen drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds). To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.