We have made an adjustment to DU's "No bigotry/insensitivity" rule: please read

[PTWB]

225. This is a good change.

Hopefully it will be enough of a change that the juries begin to hide the offending posts with more regularity.

Would it be possible to allow an alerted to explain what the violation is in a particular post? It might go a long way if the alerted could point out that the post they’ve alerted in is bigoted because the poster in question used incorrect pronouns after being told what the correct pronouns were, or deadnamed someone, or anything else really.

Maybe some context from the alerted about the alert would make it easier for jurors to more accurately and fairly analyze the post?

I suppose the flip side of this is that someone could mischaracterize the post they’re alerting to try to bias the jurors and get someone’s post hidden when it didn’t break a rule.

Perhaps we could have a modification to the jury process where after an alert (with context from the alerted) is submitted, the poster whose post was alerted on is given a notice that one of their posts has been sent to the jury, and that poster has 15 minutes to respond to the context given by the alerted, at which point the jurors are selected, can weigh both the alerter’s context and the poster’s response, and then make their decision?

After writing that out it seems like it would be a lot to code in. Just brainstorming.