Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

I just want to say that I quite appreciate the thankless work of moderators -- but that I also think, in the style of MetaFilter and other successfully moderated sites, a very few no-tolerance rules combined with a number of flexible "principles" and a whole lot of moderator transparency seems to breed good community practices.

Also, clearly defined outlets for things like self-linking or inter-community sales (like the Buy and Sell forum here) can defuse problems elsewhere.

And before anybody tags me -- my store isn't even open right now, I don't have a dog in this fight.

Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

I stickied that thread and also had one stickied for the other commercial publisher of Maemo games that requested one of me until it was no longer appropriate to do so. It was my stated intent to allow an announcement thread per publisher in Games.

Obviously we need to have some specific anti-spam rule (using the unsolicited commercial mass communication meaning of "spam") but the current strictness of wording is not mine to eliminate. Perhaps Reggie will comment on his choice of wording and whether we can just pare it down. In the meantime, here's my proposed alteration:

No Business Advertising
Creating threads, posts, or signatures that serve solely to promote your business (whatever that may be, personal blogs excluded) is not allowed. Maemo-specific services, products and software are allowed one active thread per major product, which is subject to the same rules that apply to other threads. Referral links and viral marketing are not allowed.

Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

Where does sarcasm fit in all this?

Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

Again, use common sense when making judgement calls -- the moderators will do the same. Sarcasm is definitely allowed, as long as the things you say aren't insulting nor rude.

Though, don't forget this is a written message board; sarcasm is very difficult to convey through such a "basic" medium. I for one should know, considering that more than one of my posts have been reported to moderators for being offensive, when really it was sarcastic (and I was even using the ":P" smiley, which indicate the tongue-in-cheekness of the sentence at hand).

Also, it is very difficult to imagine the shoes in which another user is standing. Sometimes they are really fed up with things, and misunderstood sarcasm may ignite a whole series of things no-one wanted and no-one even imagined. Be careful, and assume good faith.

Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

this is also the rule I have most problem with.

A cottage industry around our devices is welcomed and people like Fake and craves1 etc are doing each and every one of us a service, and thats not even mentioning the games and apps!

There are many more apps/trinkets that are possible with our devices.
Perhaps the rule should be based around community engagement - I certainly count Fake as an upstanding member of this community who has helped many.

At the same time, I cannot find set of words to describe keeping anyone on the right side of them.

Perhaps it could be the "signup/spam/spam/spam" cycle could be identified anyway with the other rules and we could just remove the specific rule about business advertising?

Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

The rules don't frown on anything. The person who applies them may. :)

In a following post Flandry restates this guideline as " Creating threads, posts, or signatures that serve solely to promote your business"

The words solely to promote are key here. :)
Generally if Valve were to do as you said, a member will find it and make the announcement. If someone like Valve joined solely to make this announcement and will contribute nothing more then your argument has merit if in fact we as a community would not know this unless they did.

But we do not live in a monetary.

Going a step further and using your example of:
In addition to making that announcement, Valve could create a new account in order to drive eyeballs to his commercial site every time he sees a member developed "Game" Announcement thread or any post that mentions a game. Rather than provide useful feedback he instead posts under this "personal identity" with the dubious claim that:
"I'm just a regular guy who is supporting a fellow member and found the games on Steam are much better", does not provide a reason or examples to support this claim, and then provides a link to Steam followed by his signature which reads:
"OMFG STEAM ROXORZ TEH BIG111!" in big red blinking letters.

:D

("Steam" only used as a common place holder in my example...)

Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

One way to address both this and the multiple-vote rule could be to "link" accounts. That is, upon registration (and later in the profile) one enters username and password of one's main account to tell the system "Look, I'm the same person".

This link would NOT be visible to regular users, but both the system (when it comes to voting) and the moderators (in order to check whether those multiple accounts are abused) can see it. For moderators, underneath a linked account all other accounts sharing this link could be shown - so when someone posts twice in a thread, it would be quite obvious.

And (staying with the Valve example), it would be rather obvious when someone writes STEAM FOREVVA! and their Username displays "AverageJoe, linked to: Valve"... :D

Of course there still would have to be a system to find people who have multiple accounts that are not linked (which would be breaking a rule then - though here I would also rather go with the friendly reminder first, for those who already own multiple accounts and didn't know about the new rules). But without a linked accounts system this would still remain.

Never modded vBulletin, but since it's a big name in forum software I guess it has a decent plugin system, so it should be fairly easy to implement a system like that.

Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

I couldn't disagree more. That's exactly what this is, and that's a good thing. Ideas flow more freely in this type of environment. What this isn't is a public toilet for anyone to leave what ever infantile excrement enters their mind. But for the a*sholes sphincters that think it is a dumping ground, we have these wonderful, selfless janitors to keep the place clean.

So, a big thank you to all the moderators. Keep up the great work. This place would be post-apocalyptic without you.

Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

Free-flowing doesn't necessarily mean anarchy, daperl. A domain of anarchy wouldn't have any janitors keeping it clean. That's anathema to anarchy. Post-apocalyptic on the other hand IS anarchy.

So I really don't understand your disagreement, and am taken by surprise that Reggie agreed with it. That leads me to suspect I may not have a clue how to moderate here at all. : /

Re: Community input for new t.m.o. policy
 

And that's why anarchists are not proclaiming anarchy, but anarchism... ;)

And the thing almost all paths of anarchism have in common is the belief that without fixed rules common sense will take over to regulate things. Much like the forums have been working until now.

"Janitors" are actually quite okay in a system of anarchism, as long as, instead of "ruling" or "playing police" they are just getting rid of those who are trying to break the system.

(Sadly, like with most instances of anarchism, the constant influx of people who are trying to abuse the lack of rules because "common sense" doesn't mean anything to them is slowly killing this system now.)