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

I generally dislike ignore lists. If we all ignore someone for being a pain, and they then continue on their path unchallenged, newcomers will come in, see the mess and be less likely to stay. Newcomers don't have a default ignore list. If you came into a forum and saw a handful of people being jerks, and nobody responding to them, or noting they were wrong, would you stick around?

Because I know to some degree he is still reading it. And frankly, when someone makes a false claim (like "mods are picking on me") and repeats it often enough, and is unchallenged, people start to believe it. It's the way all political groups in the US survive: Spread a lie or a spin, have people repeat it ad-nauseam, and because it's heard so often people accept it as true even if there's factual evidence to the contrary. (This is, for example, why +20% of Americans believe their current president doesn't have a US birth certificate.)

In fact, if you would prefer to strip out my posting (or two) above this as well to another thread I would not object. I purposely tried to keep my on/off topic threads separated in case that happened. :rolleyes:

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

Overall, I think this is a Good Thing™ and it might persuade me to visit more often.

I have a few thoughts though, having modded and admined on a forum with a similar code of conduct.

1) process?

Poster Fred commits and infaction in the middle of a thread. The mod clicks the right buttons to issue the points. Is the post to be removed? This removes the evidence for the reason for the points: If poster Fred wishes to contest the points, it will be his word against the mod's as to what the post originally said. If the post is not removed, is some comment to be made to the effect that the post has been issued with infraction points? (So that others can see that action has been taken). Does this risk the thread being derailed if Poster Fred objects? (Hint, you can have all 'reports' posted to a subforum in your mods area, thereby retaining the evidence as long as someone - even the issuing mod - remembers to hit notify before removal. Don't know details of how this is done but it's possible in vBulletin.) (Hint 2, you can tell poster Fred to bring any objection direct to the mods PM and make derailing the thread a further offense.)

2) Appeals. With the best will in the world, mods can occasionally mis-interpret or make errors. Since infractions now have a penalty, there needs to be some sort of appeal system, whereby Poster Fred can request the mod - or better still the community of mods - to review the points. When an infaction has been borderline, this can be a useful process both for the mods (in getting on the same page) and for the poster in seeing what was wrong in the post.

What you do NOT want to end up with - trust me on this - is a Moderator Actions area where everyone and his dog in the peanut gallery can second guess every infraction issued, where mods are assaulted in ways that make them reluctant to issue the infractions, and where Mr Godwin makes a permanent home.

3) A few exceptions - we've already started looking at exceptions for the 'no business' rule. I'd like to suggest one for the sigs rule, namely people who use their sigs for board business. Otherwise this rule will kill the 'Greeters' programme, for example.

(Reggie, I suggest Psalm 137 vv8-9 as a good example of Biblical racial hatred!)

By the way, I have more free time now. If this place is going to be like this, I might be around more.

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

This thread is useless, almost a fiasco, although I believe it was not intended to be such. But if you see it from a little far away this sums it up:
The officials here come up with new rules and ask the community to post their opinions on them. Posts that suggest minor changes or stricter rules are being considered and discussed. On the contrary everyone who disagrees with the spirit of those rules or challenges their usefulness, is kindly reminded that this is not a democracy, that this is a private place and the owner can do what he pleases. Thank you but you asked for our opinion. If you want to do what you please go ahead and do it, you can close this place down if you want. But don't claim later that these are the community rules. They are the officials' rules maybe with a change or two inspired by some members.
PS when we start modifying the rules word by word means that we have missed the point. Next thing is to have community lawyers, study the criminal post word by word and make an appeal.
________
MostWantedTS69 live

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

I thought forum software always keeps histories because of index issues - that's why users are never pruned. Some forums even allow you to see diffs on edited posts, so if someone edits the post (several times), you see a history of mods, what has been modified and how, when, and to what purpose. This could net an even sweeter "childish attempt to fool grownups" achievement.

If we don't have that, we should get it. I always assumed it's just not public.

Also, @woody:

Agreed in at least one spot. It is very hard to distinguish leeway in opinion expression from acceptance and business-as-usual-here.

Sometimes unchallenged affirmations gain a life of their own. OTOH, feeding trolls. Tough call.

ETA:
@qwazix

So rules have a lower limit below which there is no negotiation. What's wrong with that? Not all negotiations go both ways. Au contraire, most if not all negotiations of a higher level begin with both parties having a minimum that is considered a deal-breaker, and optimum and a desired level.

The fact that the forum has a zero-tolerance for certain behavior doesn't make it wrong. I, for one, could live very well with no spam, no adverts and as little flaming and trolling as possible.

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

there is a difference between:
-Kids, shall we eat ice-cream? what do you think?
-I don't like ice-cream
-I am your mother and I decide what you eat
and,
-Kids, I decided we will eat ice cream and you get to choose a flavor.
________
Vapor Info

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

That summary is in error. In fact, significant community contributions have been incorporated. That's exactly why they were solicited in completely open fashion.

The point about democracy is that, ultimately, this isn't one-- and that protests about supposed violations of free speech completely miss the mark. Ergo, responses were directed specifically to people who wanted to complain about the concept of even having guidelines, NOT the actual content..That said, the preference of "officials" is to fully engage the community as much as possible and practical. Some members would rather grandstand and feign martyrdom than actually participate... well, that's life, virtual or physical. But a community doesn't cater to that mindset. It can't.

Useless thread? Only to those refusing to be objective.

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

Well, it depends.

First, I'd like to clarify a point. "Normal moderators" (read that as non-super mods nor admins) do not have the ability the fully delete a post. The only option we have, as I remember from the time I spent moderating here, is what is called "soft-delete". This means that any moderator and above still sees the post, sees the reason why it has been deleted, it is simply invisible to normal users and guests.

Thus, the "proof" is never erased. I expect that super-mods and admins do exactly the same (there frankly is never any reason to fully delete a message fully). It would be good that people understood this, so I'll repeat it one more time:

Moderators do NOT delete anything. We simply hide it, when required.

As for the "it depends" statement I used to open this post, I would say that as with all the rules we are discussing, it will be up to the appreciation of the moderator, and will depend on the level of infraction. If someone is posting heinous comments, things which can actually hurt people, then the thread should be cleaned (this means, the post be soft-deleted, and the quotes be cleaned out as well.

If, however, someone is just being off-topic, as always, moving from a thread into a new thread is highly recommended over anything else.

BTW, Thanks Kathy for swinging by. Much appreciated to see your input.

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

Thanks for the clarification and modification here. I appreciate this approach and think it will work well. Time will tell...

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

Ahh, right. I think that's probably a fancier version of vBulletin than I was familiar with. So that leaves the post empty (or with a 'post removed' from the mod) visible to all, with the original content visible to other mods? Or the fact of the post invisible to all except other mods? Either would make sense - as long as the original is retained.

As for swinging by, I'm never far away. I spent too many years modding elsewhere, and enjoy the ability to simply close my browser when I encounter a trolling post, which has meant that my visits here have been short of late! I missed a few days this week cat-sitting, but am usually around reading every couple of days. I even considered a long post explaining why I'm around less... but somehow lost the motivation! Thanks for the welcome. ;)

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

Say someone's posted an outright personal attack. A moderator would hit Delete Post. Plain old moderators only have the ability to soft delete, so in the eyes of the general public, there is no trace of the post except for anyone who's quoted it. But when another moderator looks at it, they'll see