This may be unpopular, but I am getting tired of all the questions to enter a space or create an account, not just in the lemmygrad-sphere, but basically every leftist space on the internet.

I wanted to create an account on ProleWiki, but to do so I need to pass an exam.

FIRST SET (please answer all 8 questions)
SECOND SET (choose 5 questions to answer)

I have already answered pretty much the same questions to get on lemmygrad and matrix. If I knew I’d be asked the same things over and over, I would have saved them from the first (or second) time I typed them all out. Mind you, lemmygrad isn’t the first place I visited/joined, so I have answered a similar set of questions probably 6-7 times in the past few years.

The biggest problem with the questions is that they don’t work. As in, they’re not going to filter out any bad actors, because people intent on joining for destructive purposes aren’t going to be deterred by a few questions they can answer with a quick google search. Bad actors will also know what answers you expect to see and write those. It’s a bit like when the US border control gives you the green form with the question “Are you a terrorist?” But the questions will turn away people like me who are simply tired of writing an exam just to create an account on a webpage.

I have always had problems with tests/exams as in I have a problem they exist and I literally have traumas from them lmao. The pressure, the uncertainty, the doubt… I mean there’s a reason people still have anxiety dreams about missing a test or not studying long after they have left school.

By all means, have questions in the signup forms, but:

Fewer questions

Two to three questions max. You don’t need theory questions, they can be googled. You don’t need LGBTQ questions, that should just be a statement “Here we respect LGBTQ people and their right to exist, use pronouns people ask, don’t discriminate, etc. violation of this rule will result in a ban, possibly permanent.” Done.

Right kinds of questions

If you want a theory/reading question ask something like: What was the book/article/work that got you into Marxism/communism and why? or What’s the most recent work of communist literature (book, article, novel, pamphlet, zine, etc.) that had an impact on you and why?

People will tell you more about themselves by actually talking about themselves rather than answering questions about theory. Not to mention it’s harder to fake being a communist when you have to give your own personal understanding of something that’s not a big issue. Asking about Palestine, DEI, culture war topics doesn’t make sense because again they can look up what you want to hear. But if someone says the most recent work they read is the Capital or Manifesto and they think everyone should be equal then that should raise a red flag (not for being wrong, but for not being genuine).

No wrong kinds of questions

There are some questions you simply shouldn’t ask as a matter of principle.

For example, you have this is number 3 of the mandatory questions for ProleWiki: “3. Have you read our principles? Comment your agreements or objections to their points.”

Since a person filling this out is only requesting an account, asking for comments on the principles may come across as you simply rejecting anyone who doesn’t agree or will want changes. This shouldn’t be a question, but a statement: “These are our principles, joining means you agree to them.” I don’t know how ProleWiki is run if there are meetings where principles are modified/added/removed or if they are set in stone. If set in stone, then it definitely makes no sense to ask.

Questions that are questions, not several questions hidden as one

Asking things is easy, but whoever wrote the questions has no respect for people’s time. This is just way too much work, people have things to do. The time spent answering questions could be spent writing an article for the wiki. There’s an idea! Instead of answering all those questions, just have a list of topics people can write a wiki article on. That wiki article is the entry form. Simple, elegant, dare I say… beautiful?

What’s there now though:

Where did you find ProleWiki from?(1) How familiar are you with it?(2) Comment what made you want to join ProleWiki(3) and what areas you are interested in contributing to.(4)

That is 4 questions.

What current of Marxist thought do you uphold? Describe as thoroughly as needed your path towards your current political perspective.

That is 2 questions, one of them an “essay question”.

Have you read our principles? Comment your agreements or objections to their points.

There are ten subheadings in the principles, with more sub-subheadings. That’s a question and an essay question. Q: 6 E: 2

What is your understanding of gender? Should Marxists support the LGBT community?

2 questions.

What is your position on Joseph Stalin(1) and Mao Zedong?(2) How would you describe their historical role?(3,4) Share any comments or critiques you have regarding them.(5)

5 questions.

What are your thoughts on China,(1) Vietnam,(2) Cuba,(3) DPRK(4) and Laos?(5) Do you believe any of these countries is socialist?(6) Why or why not?(7)

7 questions.

What is settler-colonialism,(1) are there any countries that still fit that description(2) and what should be done regarding them?(3) Further, what is to be done about the decolonization and liberation of indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities, and immigrant groups in your country?(4)

4 questions.

What is your analysis of the situation in Palestine?(1) What do you think of the 2023 October 7 events(2) and the groups involved from both sides of the conflict?(3)

3 questions.

I count 23 regular questions and 2 essay questions. And that’s only the “8” mandatory questions.

TL;DR too many questions to get an account (like ProleWiki, lemmygrad, matrix, but other leftist spaces too). ask fewer (2-3) but more poignant questions. rules about LGBTQ and other rules that aren’t up for discussion shouldn’t be a question but a statement to be accepted or not. answering so many questions is mentally taxing/exhausting.

  • MarxMadnessEnglish
    41·
    2 days ago

    I tend to agree. I’d love to hear a mod perspective – if these sorts of account filters seem to actually reduce the amount of bad actors we see – but I can also see a situation where the price of reducing that is too high in terms of legitimate users who decide it’s not worth the effort to make an account.

    The best approach is probably:

    1. Low barriers to creating accounts
    2. A super quick trigger on maybe three-day temp bans, especially for new accounts
    3. Fairly casual usage of permanent bans
    4. A site culture where a ban is not some existential scandal and an excuse for a big slap fight, but rather a brush back pitch, where banned users are encouraged to learn from it and create new accounts

    The last could be accomplished by adjusting whatever automated message accompanies bans, and by mods taking this line when they leave a comment after a ban/comment removal.

    • ☭ Comrade Pup Ivy 🇨🇺
      8·
      2 days ago

      I am a mod on GZD and over on the GZD matrix. I can say on the lemmygrad community we tend to mostly rely on the Lemmygrad entry form so I cannot speak much from that, however on the Matrix, I can tell you that the questions stop an astonishing amount of bad actors from getting in, and it is not as if we assume that there is no cost for answering questions, that is a frequent topic of discussion, however it has become an invaluable tool in preventing bad actors from joining.

      as for your points, I can speak to them from my personal experence

      1. I do not think anyone here is agueing for a “high barier to entry” what we are arguing is where that barrier threshold is, the danger with setting it too low ontop of spammers, is that it is easy to get people who are not even bad actors but not a fit for the comunity (think “nordic model socialists”) from entering and changing the dinamic sudenly, especialy when mods cannot be everywhere all the time, we have lives outside of this, and needs for sleep too
      2. bans are generaly distructive to culture building, aswell as what is seen as “over moderation” it is generaly better and more of a learning experence if things can be tought by individuals to each other. if we go around banning new accounts frequently what you get is 2 things an unwelcoming attitude, or atleast preseption of such, and you will start to get people scared to post anything untill after they hit said threshold, and that leads to … does the new account timer count up while banned, does it count if they only lurk? what if they are a frequent poster but with an unmemorable username? all of these exist when modding normaly but become a bigger deal when it becomes explicit policy that there is a fast trigger on new people
      3. First look above, and second a perma ban is a full severing of ties with a comunity and a person and should not be handled lightly, sure you may have appeal rules, where an individual may come back and apeal the ban later saying they have learned but it is still drastic. This is also how you start to get mass group think when mods and admins are willing to not just ban but perma ban for any infraction or going out of line
      4. that is advocating ban evasion, not only does ban evasion now remove any real power from the moderator, besides removing comments, but it is now explicitly allowing the people who had to be banned to re-enter, and with your very low barrier to entry, there is now no check or appeal, you have created a revolving door of bad actors and now every mod action is just a battle of attrition between the mod and the bad actor, ontop of the game of hide and seek
      • MarxMadnessEnglish
        3·
        2 days ago

        it is easy to get people who are not even bad actors but not a fit for the comunity (think “nordic model socialists”)

        it is generaly better and more of a learning experence if things can be tought by individuals to each other

        Frankly, I think we should be open to that sort of “left-ish” person with the aim of bringing them around to a more ML line. They’ve already taken some steps further left from most liberals, and places like this can speed their progress in the right direction if we let them in.

        As for the ban strategy, it would take a concerted effort to change bans from “not to be handled lightly” to “take a break, learn from it, and start clean,” but I think it’d be a positive for the site culture overall. It’s a forum – steps that feel “drastic,” an appeals process, and the like are distractions and drama (and mod work), tailor-made to produce bitter disagreements. From other mod comments, it sounds like the truly bad actors out themselves fairly easily, and the good-faith users who get banned from a slap fight but learn from it are users we want back anyway.

        • ☭ Comrade Pup Ivy 🇨🇺
          6·
          2 days ago

          Usually those users only get temporary bans anyway for the time out, but they are not trigger given, it is important that people are able to talk and work out there differences. Perma bans should be reserved only for people who are unable to contenue or have shown they are operating in bad faith, or where one of the few people who did not fit and sliped through anyway

          I am also not saying nor will I ever say we should disallow people who are curious, I am refering to the people who in there application forms will say something like “I am a socialist, I like what norway does, but I hate tankies they are just as bad as the Nazis” Given we are a community of ML’s would someone who thinks ML’s are akin to nazis be a good fit, for the people inside or for them themselves? I would say no, that would result in a ban fairly quickly, and the ban would only add to an athoritarian world view of us. What would be better is to direct them to a place they can learn more, and when they have learned more let them in