the Magicball Network Forums

the Magicball Network Forums (https://forum.magicball.net/index.php)
-   The site and forum (https://forum.magicball.net/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   The Official Future of The Forum Thread!!! (https://forum.magicball.net/showthread.php?t=11364)

Atresica 2006-08-21 15:40

The Official Future of The Forum Thread!!!
 
A lot has happened recently and probably all members here have heard or felt it.

So instead of having all these different discussion threads about the same thing, I feel it might be useful to have a general discussion about the current events and the future of the forum itself.

So mamatresica is here with her take on the situation

1- Infractions
We recently got a new system (infractions), which has made things quite even more confusion both for moderators as for members. I would have prefered if our forum guru would have made a post about it, or at least inform the moderationteam, but alas.
Now as far as I'm concerned, I do like the system because now actual warnings can be given without giving the "warned" status. I don't expect that the system has to be used often in normal circumstances, but a nice addition non the less.

2- Nonsense threads
Sure, everything is fine within reason. I'm just getting rather sick of people reacting so incredibly harsh against people who disagree with them, even when they don't get the point of the thread.
Where is the decency to explain someone in a polite matter what the thing is about? Why not respond someone with actual points instead of the usual amount of flames.

This brings me to:
3- Flames/Insults.
The main reason why the modteam became very sensitive regarding insults is simply the massive increase of them. Currently it is being regarded among members here that it is perfectly fine to flame anyone, anywhere in any way you want. But no one stops at just flaming, ganging up on a single person with 3 or 4 people at the same time seems quite common here too, and perfectly acceptable amongst people here. No, that's a nice community we're having!


4- Current Moderation
If rules aren't posted, people blame the team of inconsistancy.
If the rules are posted, it's a police state. Now what the heck do you want?

Conclusion: I really want to get rid of that entire insult-punishment what ever system that's currently running, but I need some help :(

My suggestions:
- Lessen the whole insult thing as a community.
- Get rid of the freaking insult system. We're not the morality police.
- Grave flames (and yes, that includes Double J's nazi statue, get over it) will still be punished.
- Clearer moderation.
- Clearer team moderation. Like opening a thread before putting out a punishment (unless it is a spammer).
- Think before you post... which kind of should be obvious.

So what are your suggestions?

Jasiek 2006-08-21 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atresica (Post 284253)
My suggestions:
- Lessen the whole insult thing as a community.
- Get rid of the freaking insult system. We're not the morality police.
- Grave flames (and yes, that includes Double J's nazi statue, get over it) will still be punished.
- Clearer moderation.
- Clearer team moderation. Like opening a thread before putting out a punishment (unless it is a spammer).
- Think before you post... which kind of should be obvious.

I agree, this sounds resonable. Giving bans and warnings for insults is ridiculus.

Q-Wi-Q 2006-08-21 15:52

I agree. A forum where people think "fuck you" is a way of saying "I don't agree with you" is not a nice and cosy place to hang out.

Double-J 2006-08-21 17:20

Maybe we need...new mods who haven't done it before, so that we can start with a clean slate, free of previous precedents or prejudicial decisions?

Perhaps we could start by:

1.) Having moderators read everything. (I thought this was obvious).

2.) Adhering to the letter of the law when deciding to moderate, rather than prejudicial, unilateral decisions. (i.e. if someone insults someone with a sig that is deliberately inflammatory and a flame, it's not dismissed or ignored with a slap on the wrist)

3.) Adhering to the punishments as they are laid down, not arbitrary, or prejudicial, decisions. This way there is no complaints of bias or favoritism.

4.) If you're "not going to be the morality police," then don't tell people posting a Nazi statue is a grave insult, and then ignore "fuck you's" or intentionally flaming sigs.

Really, I can't imagine being a moderator is that hard.

Step 1: A thread if formed by Person B.
Step 2: Person A says something to Person B.
Step 3: Person B responds by telling Person A to fuck off.
Step 4: Person B is reprimanded according to the rules.
Step 5: Everyone is happy.

Currently, we have too many arbitrary decisions, gray areas, and inconsistency to have such a basic, simple system. This is why, perhaps, new moderators, or at least, a new era in moderation with the same moderators, is necessary.

Darkflame 2006-08-21 17:42

What if person A says something person B finds insulting though, and thus responds with "fuck off".
Is a verable "fuck off" worse then a psycological insult, that that dosnt use any actual swear words?
There isnt any "simple system" that can be applied, each situation is unique, and must be dealt with as such.

Incidently..what on earth is "the letter of the law" in this context anyway?
You want us to write a more extensive rulebook that everyone has to follow OR ELSE?
Is it really worth the effort, when almost every flame war really isnt much beyond the mentality of the majority of a playground fight?
==

Personaly I think everyone should just relax and a heck of a lot more, and stop getting so uptight over the smallest things.
Really, this forum is an extramly nice, friendly place, and theres more "wars" and "discusions" ABOUT posts and moderations then there is wars and discusions to start with. :D

Id rather spend my time getting on with my project, and trying to think of LBA relivent threads for the forum members to talk about. :)

Double-J 2006-08-21 18:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkflame (Post 284284)
What if person A says something person B finds insulting though, and thus responds with "fuck off".
Is a verable "fuck off" worse then a psycological insult, that that dosnt use any actual swear words?
There isnt any "simple system" that can be applied, each situation is unique, and must be dealt with as such.

Incidently..what on earth is "the letter of the law" in this context anyway?
You want us to write a more extensive rulebook that everyone has to follow OR ELSE?
Is it really worth the effort, when almost every flame war really isnt much beyond the mentality of the majority of a playground fight?

A "psycological [sic] insult?" You mean, like an inflammatory sig?

There is a simple system. If it's something that is designed to be inflammatory, it should be marked, reviewed by the mods, and penalized appropriately as per the now-established infraction system.

What is the "letter of the law" in this context? What Lightwing is discussing in his thread. What the new infractions are and how they are applied.

I didn't really think that this was that complicated...

Lightwing 2006-08-21 19:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double-J (Post 284278)
Really, I can't imagine being a moderator is that hard.

Ahahahahhahahaha.

Oh grasshoper.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasiek
I agree, this sounds resonable. Giving bans and warnings for insults is ridiculus.

Insulting other members is about the worst thing you can do on a text messageboard, other than posting viruses/illegal content. It's worse than advert spam, because spam can be ignored. When someone insults you it's not easy to ignore and most people don't.

We've had people leave the forums (temperarily) because of how they got insulted and considering that the LBA community is tiny, the last thing we need is less members.

On numerous other message boards insults are not tolerated nearly enough as they are here. I got permenantly banned from a forum because I cussed, not at anyone in particular, just used a cuss word. And this is while there were many many adults on the forum (as well as kids).

EDIT: I propose a new rule everyone -- If a moderator does not spot a flame/insult in the forum, then it is the offended party's job to report the event.

Seriously. We love this forum as we've been here forever. We do the best west we can. But we're not getting paid, and most importantly, we aren't robots that we can check every single post. We're humans, we make mistakes (that is, not spotting every insult that pops up), and it should be the offended party's responsibility to report of he/she has been offended.

Darkflame 2006-08-21 19:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double-J (Post 284286)
A "psycological [sic] insult?" You mean, like an inflammatory sig?

There is a simple system. If it's something that is designed to be inflammatory, it should be marked, reviewed by the mods, and penalized appropriately as per the now-established infraction system.

What is the "letter of the law" in this context? What Lightwing is discussing in his thread. What the new infractions are and how they are applied.

I didn't really think that this was that complicated...

It is.
As not everyone finds the same stuff insulting.
Its easy to pick certain words, or groups of words, as insults/flames/unacceptable...and then stick by those words.

Its much harder to write fixed rules for when the insults are not the words used, but the meaning behind them.
Also, its hard to write rules for circumstances where someone might have done wrong, but appoligised and there was circumstances that were understandable. (X insulted Y, Y insulted X...both did wrong, but one did wrong as a response to something else....do we punish them the same?..which may seem unfair Or do we always have to try to work out "who started it"..which can be petty and difficult)

Im just saying Im not a fan of big elaborate rule books.
My insinct says, in general, a few simple general rules are better then complex detail rules.
Heck, Id be happy in society everything was done by Jury :p
(no, not pratical for the forum, NO..people would have far too much fun)

Panda 2006-08-21 21:34

I know I'm no angel and I flame people sometimes - my justification is that they deserve it by acting stupid, by whinging, by attention seeking or otherwise. I don't claim this is the right reason to do so, it's just my reason. Might make me seem like a cunt but those who have met me will vouge for me being a decent enough person in real life.

As for this "insult system". Jesus, it's a stupid idea. There is no need for a system of points and shit. What we need is a group of mods in charge who make sure rules aren't being broken. Rule-breaking once or twice should result in a three day ban (one day really isn't enough or even a week. Persistance should result in longer bans (from a week to permaban) depending on the member, the offence, etc.

It really would be a better system, i think. What do the current mods think of that?

Jasiek 2006-08-22 00:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightwing (Post 284290)
Insulting other members is about the worst thing you can do on a text messageboard, other than posting viruses/illegal content. It's worse than advert spam, because spam can be ignored. When someone insults you it's not easy to ignore and most people don't.

Well, personally I don't care if someone insults me, mostly I just live by the rule that "conversating with a drunk man is an afront to the clear-headed ones". Policing grown ups is a bit dumb, but I guess that insults should be kept to a minimum becouse:
A)this is an all age forum
B)boards with all that cussing just don't look nice and esthetic to browse, however, when you look at the members here, you can be sure that they can keep the discussions at a very high level.

But I believe that insulting that does not involve cussing should be, by all means allowed, if you want to say something about someone no one should have the right to stop you. Same for non direct insulting, Political correctnes should stay outside the boards, if someone finds something you wrote insulting, it's his problem, as long as you're not insulting him in person, or breaking the law.

Things like threats, slander, harassment should get your ass banned, couse that's in conflict with the law.

And I think that mods should discuss every case, when you have to take some measures against someone by voting, one person policing everyone sounds sick.

Lightwing 2006-08-22 00:30

Pandy: Ignore the points system, it's really just another way to say how long you're warned/banned, it's just that this time the warnings end automatically, stuff is catalogued/recorded automatically, etc...

I think that three day ban for breaking a rule once or twice is a bit too much.

For example, things get out of hand and sometime people make remarks in the heat of the moment ("go f#$@ yourself"). If the person meant to do it once, then he only deserves a warning, which is what happened with Double-J, Anakin, Medur, and you. If during those three days the person cusses again, then we ban him/her for one day. This seems fair because maybe the person lost control again / didn't really mean to say it and the punishment isn't all too severe.

However, if the user persists to insult time and time again, I agree, the penalty needs to go up. I just don't think that we need to write out penalty for persistance rules.

They will probably be rare cases that will need unique penalties. Most of the time, after giving people 3 day warnings for flaming, members stopped. Those who've ignored warnings usually went on flaming sprees (remember kissiekissie?) and got perm banned.

Penalties for persisting insults should be discussed among the staff. Minor persistances will probably get 3 day bans and major ones could go all the way up to perm banishment. The cases will probably differ in severeties and will most likely be rare.

Jasiek: While I largely agree that not every form of insult should be punished, I'd have to say that foul language isn't the only form of vulger offense. For example, calling someone a "bitch" is wrong, yes, but (in mine, Atresica's and El Muerte's opinions) calling somebody a "Hitler" is just also severe. I personally feel that calling somebody "Hitler" is 10 times worse than calling someone a "bitch" but whatever.

Panda 2006-08-22 00:41

I think you're looking into this way too deeply. Just take each case of abuse as it comes. Forum rules should say "no flaming, no trolling, no whatever" or whatever the rules are, and that's it. There's no need for descriptions of punishments or points or what warrants a warning as it leads to sneaky bastards finding loopholes or whatever.

Lightwing 2006-08-22 01:23

That's pretty much how it is.

The only penalty laws we have (aside for suck puppets and spam adverts) is for minor flames: 3 day warning, 1 day ban.

Everything else that follows will be discussed by the staff.

Double-J 2006-08-22 15:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkflame (Post 284292)
It is.
As not everyone finds the same stuff insulting.
Its easy to pick certain words, or groups of words, as insults/flames/unacceptable...and then stick by those words.

So then...just to clarify:

A nazi statue is apparently universally insulting.

Having a homosexual flame against another member in another members signature isn't.

Just checking. http://images.corvetteforum.com/imag.../rolleyes5.gif

elmuerte 2006-08-22 19:08

Well... it's Godwin's lay

Q-Wi-Q 2006-08-22 19:49

(who oh who cares enough about that law to record it? boggles my mind)

Lightwing 2006-08-22 22:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double-J (Post 284357)
Having a homosexual flame against another member in another members signature isn't.
http://images.corvetteforum.com/imag.../rolleyes5.gif

Oh god. For the last freakin time:

It was two years ago!

Two years!

Double-J 2006-08-23 13:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Muerte (Post 284376)
Well... it's Godwin's lay


Was Godwin's "Lay" in the rulebook? No.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightwing
Oh god. For the last freakin time:

It was two years ago!

Two years!

Congrats on your superior grasp on chronology.

Nonetheless, it sets a precedent.

Since you seem to be fond of Constitutional analogies, we don't just start putting blacks in chains again and say, "well, that 13th amendment was almost 150 (150!) years ago..." :rolleyes:

elmuerte 2006-08-23 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double-J (Post 284450)
Was Godwin's "Lay" in the rulebook? No.

You clearly misunderstood the idea of Godwin's Law. It's like Murphey's Law. It's not a real law, it just happens to turn out like that.

Lightwing 2006-08-23 19:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double-J (Post 284450)
Nonetheless, it sets a precedent.

Since you seem to be fond of Constitutional analogies, we don't just start putting blacks in chains again and say, "well, that 13th amendment was almost 150 (150!) years ago..." :rolleyes:

How does that analogy even work?

What happened with OBras wasn't a law, it was an event. The rule in this case ("13th amendment") is trying to stay enforced, not overruled.

If our conversation can be compared to anything in US history, it'd be more close to:

You:
"So not allowing black people to vote in White Primaries is allowed despite the 15th Amendment." <--- Not enforcing the supreme rules.

But letting black people to run for president (today) isn't. " <--- Enforcing supreme rules.

Me:
"Yes, but the last time we prohibited black people from voting in all White Primaries was in 1944!"

Double-J 2006-08-23 22:22

Incorrect. The analogies relate because you keep mentioning the fact that the issue with Obras took place over two years ago (much like the 13th Amendment was almost 150 years previous). It's as if, because of its age, you've made it correspond with irrelevance, when in fact, it is quite relevant because it is an example of moderators not applying the rules as they are written and/or irresponsible, "arbitrary" moderatorship.

To fix what you've said:

Me: "We can't prosecute that man under that law, since it wasn't written or ratified until after he had committed the crime.

Here is an example of a precedent: someone threw rocks at this person, and the judge completely ignored it. In other cases similar to which we've been accused of, all before the law was ratified, the punishment was much milder if there was punishment at all."

You: It doesn't matter. The case(s) you're discussing as evidence took place over two years ago. They are now irrelevant because I say so.

the_angry_monkey 2006-08-24 03:35

I agree with what you're trying to do there Tresi. The community of this place does seem somewhat splntered with many of the older members splitting from the newer ones in a somewhat unhealthy way... it is interesting to watch from outside but not good for the mbn community

Atresica 2006-08-24 11:03

Yeah, but I guess people prefer to drone on about trivial matters instead of coming up with a solution to the problem.

So, any other ideas?

Personally, as I said before, I'm in favor of getting rid of the cussing-points. It doesn't serve any use at all.

the_angry_monkey 2006-08-24 12:29

Go on a case law system... If someone finds something offensive they should report it. The mod team can decide what to do about it and that then sets the precident for other similar cases thereafter

Panda 2006-08-24 12:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atresica (Post 284553)
Yeah, but I guess people prefer to drone on about trivial matters instead of coming up with a solution to the problem.

So, any other ideas?

Personally, as I said before, I'm in favor of getting rid of the cussing-points. It doesn't serve any use at all.

I also agree. Sod the points and just use a system of looking at each individual case as a separate case, rather than trying to fit it into a rule category.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:16.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, the Magicball Network