[perching_aix]

Is that a moderation issue? Because to me that's more of a system / culture issue.

You can't argue in people's stead. If most dissenting commentary is hurtful, inciteful, manipulative, generally demagogue, etc., it's going to get culled, and you get a situation where "dissent isn't thriving".

[Teever]

Moderation drives culture and should in the very least offset the worst tendencies of culture.

Otherwise, what exactly is moderation for?

[perching_aix]

Moderation does participate in the culture of course, but I disagree that it would drive it necessarily. You can only do so much by reminding people to align with the posting guidelines and removing ill fitting posts and individuals.

[Teever]

This place would look like 4chan if it wasn't for the moderation.

Moderation absolutely drives the culture, by setting a tone that drives away certain users while attracting others.

In other words what ever issues a site has are inherently due to moderation whether it be a choice on the part the moderators or a lack of resources to moderate as they would like to.

[perching_aix]

I don't think we're actually disagreeing. Yes, moderation is key, but ultimately people post the content. As you say, it's a matter of attraction. But if the target group of attraction is empty, there's no amount of moderation that can help that.