Solution Proposal: Community Conflict Resolution Policy & Anonymity Use Policy

I kindly ask everyone here to consider the proposed two policies, that may help to make the Forum a better place compared to how it was over the last 3 days.

Let’s work together on these draft policies, which is part of the solution.

Closing / Deleting threads don’t make the issues go away.

Banning peope also don’t solve the problem.

SOLUTION Proposal:

Community Conflict Resolution Policy:

I would add a prefix to all the threads, which end up in mud fight (MUD_) and maybe have a policy that they are closed 5 days a week and open only on weekends. This also makes sure people only engage if it’s really worth their prescious weekend time.

It would warn any member of the Community that it’s not a fun place to go, and they should do it with their own responsibility.

It would make sure these topics drop down the sequenced list of topics due to inactivity in the weekdays.

This would possibly bring some balance back to the Forum, but also let the issues be settled somehow.

It would also have a cool down period for emotions and promote constructive resolution instead of personal insults.

It would also encourage to settle things outside the Forum in private during the cool down period.

It would still give our free speech and opinion, which is currently under severe censorship.

It would still bring the publicity certain topics deserve no matter how painful and difficult for the stomach they are.

We are discussing really important issues here about Community Power Centralization, Ambassador fitness & title, usage or Anonymity, Ambassadors publicly lying & humiliating other members, etc.

No matter the toxicity around these threads the core problems are really important and you can’t just ignore them.

Now you would only need a reliable protocol how to declare a thread muddy :slight_smile:

Next to this I would implement the Community Anonymity Usage Policy below, which needs a bit of work, but would limit the constants misuses of the Anonymity status for political and other bullying tactics.

Next to these two policies we need fully transparent Forum moderator logs, which should be shared on a daily basis upon request.


@rjmcoin maybe you could copy-paste here your constructive proposal from the other thread to the Anonymity Policy?

I don’t agree with this part, because I feel the “censorship” is because of people being rude, making personal attacks and braking other forum guidelines. Not because different opinions.

That being said: I think your suggestion about the so called MUD topics may work. It will keep the forum a nicer place and still give people the opportunity to voice their opinions on sensitive subjects.


I am pro censorship as well when things are crossing a line you need it.

However my problem with censorship is that it has to act with integrity & neutrality to know where is the line, when and what to censor.

At the moment it is fully biased, one-sides and misused as part of tactics.

You had many obvious examples of this over the last 3 days, but last month as well.

For good censorship you require independent, adult & professional censors. So what happens when the censors are involved in the mud fight …

Thanks for your feedback.

1 Like

I really like the idea, freedom with responsibility. Love it! I think this is a positive move.

1 Like

Oh god!

Ok, I like the muddy idea but please keep the protocol simple.

Who is going to keep track of all this and enforce it? It looks to me like it would be a full time job. I think this is far to complicated.


I like the structure, just I feel #123 shall grant to everyone including anonymity.

Personal attack shall be never allowed though.

1 Like

My proposal is we all treat each other with respect and consideration and leave it at that.


In an ideal world, we can be civil to one another. I wish it would be realistic to expect this to just be the way it is.

Sadly, it’s not though. Look around if you need proof.

A simple civility code would only ensure quality discourse. I think this is part of building towards the future as well at the platform (not on the same magnitude, but related).

A code like this also establishes a base mutual reality. It creates space for productive ideas to grow. It contributes to a strong group.

Someone with an agenda can’t use ‘free speech’ as a shield to breed fear and uncertainty into this space.

The point is, is that it is not harmful and will only help. I don’t see an objective down side.


Man I just cannot believe you would continue to push for restrictive measures that are against the idea of liberty and freedom, over and over again you push for measures that restrict people’s freedoms, its insane in my opinion!

This simply would exclude someone like myself from viewing and contributing to conversations at my leisure, cuz IRL I focus on workplace obligations for 14 days straight so that my safety and the safety of others in my workplace have undivided attention, and if a day in my life at work happens to allow me the time to participate and everything is locked then I am personally restricted by your proposed design during my work period.

Get out of here, this would only serve your idea of limiting the conversation or making it more restrictive so that it fits you and what you think others could conform to easily - what about the guy that works 5 day’s a week with Tuesday & Wednesday off? And in his workweek of 60+ hours should he be limited? Too bad, he needs another profession to fit inside what fits Bertalan’s idea, right? Shame on you! The forum should be enjoyable for community members that utilize it as a place to interact with other members.

This is much aligned with politician’s well thought out resolutions to how to change the world to fit their agenda, not an unknown tactic to have topics drop out of public view so that laws pass without public opposition.

I suppose the activity of the opposition you face in your personal ambitions to be a part of the ecosystem is the direct reason that you think a balance can be found at certain times and you might be found on the favorable side of settled issue’s, right?

Lol! Coming from someone that in my opinion instigates controversial conversation disguised as a discussion to entrap others with very well crafted argument and then is willing to cry over the results of where the discussion leads…hahaha! We are humans and our emotions seem to drive us to truly be who we are and there is a place for it now and hopefully, hopefully, the construction of new idea’s for our children will also be driven by it, passion has been credited to most of the achievements that drive society to the next level and without emotions involved in our interactions then we might as well say goodbye to the human side of civilization and let AI take over.

Sure reach out to me in private as I try to cool down after I see you trying to form the community opinion concerning who I am and my honesty, I have a few things I would like to share with just you outside of the view of everyone else.

This simply is not true, you would like to censor free speech with your proposal, free speech has no designated time limit.

I suppose someone struggling to make ends meet should take time away from where they earn their livelihood to fit inside of your planned censored community forum, it makes no sense, maybe something like this could be instituted in a private level chat, but for a majority of the population - it makes no sense, yet I am sure with expensive words and well thought out explanations it could surely be a possibility that it could be realized, much like access to government is now.

Make it a discussion and not a “Bertalan want’s this” topic and let’s see where it goes from there dude.

What kind of solutions does your company have that can help us sort through all of the core problems? Come right out with it Bertalan, is there some type of tech solutions that can help us to create a non-toxic environment that negates the human interaction side of everything that is clearly driven by experience and emotion?

Well if you decide to push for such a protocol then call it what it is: a centralized solution to limit the content of prospective mud makers - good and bad -

Right, 1 more proposal, cause you have demonstrated that you cannot effectively counter an anonymous actor and their contributions and so any restrictions that could be placed on them is a great idea as it fits into your idea of accountability through revealing everything about who all participants are and against the idea of privacy that serves as a great protection against harm from bad actors who could possibly inflict on someone.

This seems to me to be simply one more step of you and your group in your march against the triumvirate of Cardano to upset and redirect the focus, and further to upset active members of the community that want to continue to be a part of something positive, and could be viewed by new and/or prospective members as a bunch of dogs barking at the entrance of a festival their friend invited them to which they might possibly turn around and not attend cause of the mangy dogs they observed.

Hmmm yes many people would choose to censor the internet, all of your proposals seem to be inline with at least one corrupt government policy somewhere.


Well, I know a forum here that really works. At least most of the time. Why does it work? Probably it’s the combination of different requirements. There the freedom of speech and the opposing statements are not mistaken for throwing mud. Throwing mud has fast consequences. Moderators are “moderate” and never to be found of throwing mud. Moderators never intervene if a topic is about themselves. That forum has a separate corner where “muddy” topics are shifted if they occur. That’s really nice because they are completly out of sight if you don’t go there by yourself. And people inclined to trolling and mud-throwing know that they will not have attention any more if that happens.

In my opinion your proposal would add a lot of additional administrative effort for administrating this forum. Some parts of your bunch of proposals like this one

feels absolutely strange to me.

This is something everyone can do by himself. If you feel that you have strong emotions about something, switch off th computer, go for a walk, do something different and just answer the next day. It will be better for you and for everything else.

I absolutely agree! :+1:

I have the feeling that you are pro censorship when it comes to others but you don’t see your own line crossings.

I’m afraid that after the fall of the wall in Germany 30 years ago and the breakdown of Sovjet Russia, all professional censors have found different jobs in the meantime. Maybe there are some at Fox News which could be headhunted? No, I don’t agree with you here.

Yes! Never forget KISS.

I absolute agree.

I’m not a native english speaker but I feel this is depreciativ. So why is it necessary to add this? You have a lot important things to say. Derogatory adressing other people does not help but just produces more toxic response.

I was thinking about that too. I already thought of switching off for a month or so and have a look afterwards if I feel like reading and contributing again. How many people habe been detered from participating by the fights of perhaps ten people? Everyone has to care about his own behaviour, this can not be transfered to a censoring forum. When writing, think about if it helps or damages Cardano. Not everything has to be published.


Chris, what company do you mean?

1 Like

Isn’t it easier to create a smaller subset of a community with your own rules instead than empower the same set of rules over the whole ecosystem?

As more larger we get the harder it will be to have consensus on ANYTHING.

The high-level rules should be very generic, like “do no harm”.


You have some very good observations here Yanik.

Yes you need rules & policies, which are sustainable and may scale if the Community grows.

Wise words!


I would also like to follow up on @yanik 's suggestion to create a new (sub)forum or discussion platform elsewhere, where you (Topic starter and supporters of TS) that support the above mentioned, can implement the exact ideas of said proposal(s). Leading by example is always a good, from the ground up start, and approach and it’s also as decentralized as it can get.

In addition, if this attracts interested people and newcomers, then that’s great! Everybody wins, everybody happy. :slight_smile:


I like the concept here of a subset thread specifically for this purpose. Members would only go there to contribute to that effort and those not interested Just don’t.


I think what he’s getting at is that all the rules and systems and formalities put in place don’t do squat fundamentally. It’s the people involved. If the people in the system have ego issues it won’t matter what system is in place.

Having spent literally thousands of hours witnessing my own mind from the thought-free state, I can see this very clearly. The human ego is the source of all problems. All of them. It’s not the system. These systems are put in place in an attempt to artificially force people to act in a healthy, natural way. It’s ass-backwards and has never worked and will never work. But it sure keeps a person busy…


Yes! The system has the problem now.

Elite group, centralism, favoritism, neoptism, censorship and all kinds.

I started to realize no matter how small a group is, when the system collapsed human nature revealed.


That would be the ideal, but realistically, C’mon.

I will go to my grave hopeful regarding the human condition.

1 Like