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

There's an "Infractions" tab on the user profile page. I'm not sure if it appears when the user has no infraction points for those without mod privileges, but that's where you would look

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

I don't see anything in that post that's not covered in the proposed policy. Do you have any concrete, specific suggestions for changes?

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

You should be fine. It only becomes an issue when members with infractions or banned members start creating new accounts, thus:

"If a member who has accumulated infraction points is proved to be posting on a second account (via IP address), the account with a higher number of posts will get the additional infraction, and the newer account will be banned permanently."


The rules apply to everyone, including moderators: "If you have any problems with any of the staff, please PM or email the Administrator(s). "

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

Oh no it isn't, unfortunately, and you've hit the nail right on the head there.

This is not (only) the unruly mob of clueless newcomers swamping the forums after a mildly successful new device hits the market, and getting on the old-timers' nerves.

We already saw that on ITT when the N810 came out, and survived. How ? Mostly because the core hackers sat tight, and there was still a lot of good content around, even if you had to look for it. It was also a time of doubt (yes, already) about Nokia and the future of Maemo, but community Nokians (qgil et al) stepped in and gave a hand.

What we're seeing here is yet more times of doubt, about the future of the N900, Maemo, Harmattan, Meego and whatnot.

Only this time the community Nokians are silent (or busy over at Meego.com), and increasing numbers of core community members are nowhere to be seen. Maybe finally disheartened by yet another round of fine hardware with eternally unfinished software, corporate turnarounds and broken promises. Or maybe they just don't know what to think (and post) any more.

I don't disagree with Flandry's proposal at all, after all it's just basic forum management like everywhere else, even if we didn't really need it before. However I don't believe it will do much good: if the forums are drowning in drivel it's mostly because there aren't enough people left with interesting things to say.

And that's not the newbies' fault.

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

Just edited my signature to comply with the new signature size rule :)

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

In conjunction with Hemuth's and b-man's posts: How are you going to go about people who unintentionally already broke the not-really-offensive rules simply because those rules did not apply until now?

While you're comforting Helmut right now, let's face it: All of us know the overzealous kind of moderator that will follow the rules to the point, so can we expect a mass-banning sometime in the future because people who've had a second account for years suddenly are considered rule-breakers?

And what about people who've had a 6-line-signature ever since they joined and who don't even KNOW they are breaking the rules now?

Why make those rules, anyway? Someone having a second account (not just for spamming and flaming) doesn't hurt the community at all. And I've seen signatures twice as long with lots of (useful!) information in them that did not break the flow of a topic in the least. Unless someone feels like putting three hyperactive GIFs in their signature (which, btw, would be well within the new rules), I don't see any harm in those.

Wouldn't it be sufficient to keep the common sense rules in there (no flaming, no spamming, no warez and so on) while keeping the rest to "don't try to annoy other members"? I know those additional rules are found on a lot of other forums, but that doesn't make them sensible in the least - and especially on a forum like this I think they might actually hurt since they target a lot of "useful" members instead of getting rid of the flamers.

Thanks for that - I began to feel uncomfortably unwelcome already thanks to some replies here in this thread. Not sure where people get the idea that nobody who recently joined has common sense and something useful to say. ;)

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

Cmon guys, the mods won't turn into monsters overnight..
And these rules are made to protect 'us' anyway..

I'm sure there'll be some reasonable grace period for this to take into full effect and friendly reminders/warnings for unintentional rule breaking.

....right?

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

I would like to make an example. Please do be honest when you judge. I have read this thread. What would if these thoughts and or policies gets implemented, what would be my punishment for posting these posts.

-------

http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...1&postcount=22

http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...4&postcount=23

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

inidrog,
I have made similar posts and IF i were moderator i would have gave myself couple of times week bans for just pure trolling.

So about those posts. I would say pretty much they are trolling because they are off topic and not specifically giving nothing to that topic. If they were posted to off topic they pretty much would be okey. This is just my opinion :)

So IMO warning and couple of points from those.(even tough i agree/sympathise on some level with those posts)

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

Proposed addition:

• No Abuse, Insults or Personal Attacks
  Abuse, insults and personal attacks directed at any member, person, or group are unacceptable. If you disagree with someone on some point, please do not resort to name calling or personal attacks; instead, argue the merits of their points. Please note that attacking people you perceive to be "trolls", "fanbois" or "flame baiters" still counts as a personal attack, and your posts will be removed as such.
  
  • Trolling example: "Just sell your N900 and get an iPhone 4!"
  • Flaming example: "Members with nothing to say should just shut up and leave this forum!"
  • Personal attack example: "You are an idiot."
  If you have trouble refraining from taking "bait", consider making use of the built-in ignore list functionality.
  
• No Foul Language

Any objections?