Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ToadMan

Moderator Policies

Recommended Posts

A very reasonable, well thought out post. Finally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, let's start with the first. I don't believe that Spritzup even said the words 'no matter what the excuse' in he's statement about being gone for extended periods of time. I got the suggestion, if you didn't and feel a need to explain your points, that's fine, but don't blame us for bringing up valid points.

 

Second, of course there are different scenerios of leave. The reference I was to referring to is the fact that if employees are absent for a long time without giving a reason then that is definent grounds for termination. Obviously, no one would be fired if a vaild explanation is given.

 

Third, I believe the point for an election is to see the census of the population. Simply, from there Anton could see whom most people voted for. If this does not satisfy him, he could make a decision from there. And I also don't believe there was any mention of Anton picking the voters. He just mentioned Anton could have the final say.

 

It seems you're the one grabbing and stretching at ideas that are not present.

 

 

Now stop with that insanity.

Edited by matrix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually agree with the some of the ideas given yet still I do not like the comparison between here and a job. The idea of the forum is to have fun and to talk about the awesomness which is Matt Good. Now I must say that the metaphor to a buisness and the bickering over who can police what people can say kills it.

 

On the other hand I have not been around enough to see if there is a problem with the moderators or not. ALSO! If you feel so strongly about an election why don't you organize one yourselves? Maybe Anton would look and see what the results are and possibley put someone everyone likes as a mod. But there are a hundred possibilities

 

To put it simply I will quote a teacher I once had "Complaining only works if you plan to fix your complaints yourself."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to stat, I'm not complaining. I've never had a problem with the mods or board. The problem is, I'm trying to point out some of the faults in Mav's rebutles. He seems very stubborn.

Edited by matrix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh alrights then ;) I guess I missread it then. I have been a tad out of it lately

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, let's start with the first. I don't believe that Spritzup even said the words 'no matter what the excuse' in he's statement about being gone for extended periods of time. I got the suggestion, if you didn't and feel a need to explain your points, that's fine, but don't blame us for bringing up valid points.

 

Second, of course there are different scenerios of leave. The reference I was to referring to is the fact that if employees are absent for a long time without giving a reason then that is difinent grounds for termination. Obviously, no one would be fired if a vaild explanation is given.

 

Third, I believe the point for an election is to see the census of the population. Simply, from there Anton could see wnom most people voted for. If this does not satisfy him, he could make a decision from there. And I also don't believe there was any mention of Anton picking the voters. He just mentioned Anton could have the final say.

 

It seems you're the one grabbing and stretching at ideas that are not present.

 

 

Now stop with that insanity.

No, he didn't say, "no matter what the excuse." But his original post was clear about removing moderators based on their absence. That was what I have been responding to. Why? Mainly because that was the original suggestion. He was the one who suggested that I had nothing to rebuttle his almighty ideas. Furthermore, he doesn't seem to be concerned with the reasons for absence either. In fact, his main rebuttle was, "If you're not here to moderate then you don't need those powers." I guess the point here is that, if you're not going to be online, you shouldn't be a mod. Yes, that's valid. Alas, we're referring to people who are going to be away and will return. In this case, we shouldn't just automatically displace them based on their absence. Whoever doesn't agree with that, I will be more than happy to have words with them. Indeed, I agree with the second paragraph of your statement. Because then they are proven to be unreliable and not deservant of their job. The fact that they have no valid excuse must only equate to the fact that they are not willing to complete their tasks. This is all very obvious.

 

As far as the so-called elections are concerned:

 

If the point is to see a general census, I think that's foolish. A popularity contest or a battle between morons who make bad decisions but are the majority because they are so plentiful around here. Then you refer to the fact that if Anton is not satisfied, he could just veto the decision. Well, I ask, what's the point. As I've mentioned earlier, we might as well not have a vote if this is going to be the case.

 

Now would you like to make a comment about how I'm grabbing and stretching for my arguements...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I think that was a very articulated point.

 

If I might add, your previous post seemed rather abnoxious and blunt. Now that you've better explained your point, it makes sense. Do I agree with everything? No. But you point out valid arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why thank you. All I needed was that little bit of appreciation. I shall be leaving now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crap, that got a little hairy.

 

I want to clarify something. I'm not interested in an outright debate. I'm not blaming anybody, but if you have something to say, then say it. Let's not beat around it, trying to win arguments. This whole discussion is fairly productive.

 

I would like to share something with you all:

 

(19:10:51) Jon:  I think we should create a Charter review Forum.

 

hold I'll explain

 

(19:16:28) Jon:  we create a new section that consists of a two forums: the forum and the parliament. The entire section should be hidden until X number of posts.

 

The system is base on users having the ability to suggest amendments, and addendum's to the existing charter. Suggestions can be posted in the forum section, where they can be discussed. If somebody wishes to send an idea to the vote, then they post a poll only (no replies) in the parliament section. Then voting will be open for a fixed period of time, at the end of which voting is closed and the proposition is either accepted or defeated. There would be a no resubmit rule, requiring a certain amount of time to wait before a topic can be resubmitted in the parliament.

 

As the administrator, you would have the ability to change the charter without a vote, however you would have to post the change in the parliament. In theory a change made by you could be contested by the parliament, and have your ruling changed.

 

That is a quotation from my IM log. The message is to Anton. As you can see the idea of a democratic system has been kicked around before. We never defeated the idea totally. The board got a little overwhelmed with craziness and the idea slipped under the rug.

 

One of the facets I considered in coming up with the idea would be that the parliament would also elect moderators (when new moderators where required). This would function by existing moderators nominating members. There would be a vote, and the winner would become a new moderator.

 

Currently moderator selection is on a shoulder tap basis. I only became a moderator since there was an influx of people from the (former) Metro. This created a requirement for more people to enforce the rules.

 

Peace

Edited by ToadMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to any so called argument, I felt it more of a discussion. I felt Sprirtz had some good ideas and thought they should be discussed, if I got off topic I apoligize. That was not my intent.

 

I don't feel, however, that a democracy is in need. I believe this place is in wonderful working order. I don't know details, but to me it seems that the people who complain are the ones that have been warned or suspended and such.

 

I also don't feel there is any problem with censorship on a message board. People are in charge of this place just as much as the CEO is in charge of ABC or CBS. You can plainly see what happened after the Janet Jackson debacle.

 

Free Speech is a sham. You can say whatever you want, but when so called 'Free Speech' can get you thrown in jail, hounded by the Secret Service, ostracized by the Gay and Lesbian Coalition, or killed; it's no longer 'Free'.

 

You can all say, 'If you don't like the thread or post, don't read it'. That maybe true, but there are many threads in here that start of nice and friendly, and turn into pure perverseness. It's the exact same thing as people tuning in to watch a good old fashion football game and got treated to Janet's good old fashion saggie titties. Now, had someone been doing there job, that wouldn't have happened. Apperently, it's the moderators job to view posts and deem what needs to be censored or who needs to be warned. Of course there's going to be problems with that. Of course there's going to be personal opinions. It would be like that with any moderator. And without mods, there'd be complete chaos.

Edited by matrix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I win the Internet. Then how come I'm still on 56K and surfing the net at a remarkably low speed? Don't just make shit up, it's disturbing.

 

EDIT: Yes, I live in Hamilton. I don't know Saturnine. I think we're polar opposites though. He's some bum on the mountain... I'm in the Valley and actually go to what is called university. A strange term to sat, no doubt.

 

Now I hope I meet him in an alley way so he can beat the shit out of me. It would be amusing for the both of us.

yeah.. exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(19:10:51) Jon:  I think we should create a Charter review Forum.

 

hold I'll explain

 

(19:16:28) Jon:  we create a new section that consists of a two forums: the forum and the parliament. The entire section should be hidden until X number of posts.

 

The system is base on users having the ability to suggest amendments, and addendum's to the existing charter. Suggestions can be posted in the forum section, where they can be discussed. If somebody wishes to send an idea to the vote, then they post a poll only (no replies) in the parliament section. Then voting will be open for a fixed period of time, at the end of which voting is closed and the proposition is either accepted or defeated. There would be a no resubmit rule, requiring a certain amount of time to wait before a topic can be resubmitted in the parliament.

 

As the administrator, you would have the ability to change the charter without a vote, however you would have to post the change in the parliament. In theory a change made by you could be contested by the parliament, and have your ruling changed.

 

That is a quotation from my IM log. The message is to Anton. As you can see the idea of a democratic system has been kicked around before. We never defeated the idea totally. The board got a little overwhelmed with craziness and the idea slipped under the rug.

 

One of the facets I considered in coming up with the idea would be that the parliament would also elect moderators (when new moderators where required). This would function by existing moderators nominating members. There would be a vote, and the winner would become a new moderator.

i don't know about that...

 

the whole idea of having elections and things like that seems a little convoluted to me. i realize people take this seriously, but how many actually do? there are probably around only 20 regular posters a day in here, so that hardly makes it a fair vote for the rest of the bored.

 

i don't even think elections of mods is a better idea, mainly because people can still abuse the 'powers' given to them once they get a title. politics 101. i doubt we'll actually get anywhere by following through with this.

 

the initial arguements posed were against censorship, but now we're suggesting more mods. i hardly think that's a solution to the problem. moderators seem to abide by the "out of sight, out of mind" approach, which i don't necessarily agree with. hiding what already exists, for the sake of 'morality' or worrying too much about what is offensive or what's not. if things i said were being censorred, i would feel uncomfortable to be here because i would no longer be able to be myself. the mods would be telling me in a nutshell, that they do not accept who i am and that i need to change that in order to post here.

 

the whole point of having a forum is to encounter different opinions on matters and to meet individuals who are different than yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

k.

 

Toadman, I like you. You're intelligent and mature, and you're an asset to the bored, but you do take things a little seriously. I'm not referring to anything specific, just in general. You need to understand that we're not all as mature as you, and some of us do find stupid things funny, but i understand your position. I wonder if a "Not Work Safe" forum could be created. A forum where you enter at your own risk, lol. Like an 'General NWS Discussion' forum. But, this is not my board, so whatever. Censorship doesn't really do much except make people angry, but i understand that it must happen from time to time.

 

I think everyone needs to choose their battles carefully.

 

As for electing mods, that would end terribly. And it's not our board, so the non-admins don't really have a spot to bitch too much. I'm sure Anton wants to keep the bored in his image, and not have it highjacked by people he doesn't agree with, people that possibly incude myself. That's why these are merely suggestions.

 

science

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The internet. Corrupting your children for 20 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I refuse to mull over the Mav/Spritz/Matrix pages. Did he even touch down on one solid reason censorship [and furthermore, moderation of topics] is needed? If he did I missed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

uh.. chad the mod has 17 posts and hasn't posted in over a year. that should be cleared up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but from an administrator perspective the dormant accounts cannot change their password every so often and can become a security risk. If they come back, it takes about two seconds to recreate the account/status.

 

Meaning? We remove mods because of a paranoia that someone will steal their account and start abusing the board. Okay.

 

I don't even know what you're talking about in that last second. I'm just saying that they shouldn't be removed as a moderator. I don't care whether or not we delete their account and let them come back as someone else. They should still be a moderator if they have a reason for their absence.

 

Maybe I'm not comprehending your argument here.

 

I refuse to mull over the Mav/Spritz/Matrix pages. Did he even touch down on one solid reason censorship [and furthermore, moderation of topics] is needed? If he did I missed it.

 

Thanks for that fact of irrelevancy.

 

It's the parents job to watch their kids, not everyone else's.

 

Don't put him in charge. It's like, "let's be crude, out of line, etc. take no responsibility for our actions.... then we'll say it's not our fault that the parents don't hand cuff their children"

 

I think we need to take some responsibility. If we want to be credible. I guess that's not the goal here, though. Let's look like a bunch of morons, instead. Atleast I've got us well on the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

man, if you don't like it here, which is quite evidently the case, take a leave of absence. i know it's more fun to be an ass full of negativity, but you're boring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for that fact of irrelevancy.

No, seriously. I have no idea what tangent you're running off on, but the thread was about whether or not moderation outside of spam control was even necessary. I think what you're raving about needs to be split into another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all honesty.

 

If I have something to say in response to a post in a thread, then I'm going to make my comments here and now. Making a new topic and all that b.s., to me is irrelevant. If you've got something to say in response to someone else, you respond. But, you can be all technical and shit if you want. I'm not going to be bothered because people believe that what I say is off topic and they point that out just to prove to themselves that they can follow the rules to a "t". Thanks for the info, hot shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, seriously. Start another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, seriously. Start another thread.

lol. That won't be happening. I think I've explained myself pretty clearly. I guess there's no other option, you'll have to ban me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not my call, but I wouldn't ban you if it was.

 

Anyway, as long as you've got no real arguments, I'm done here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got nothing to argue. I've made my statement. Unless, you've got a rebuttle (other than, "those are the rules" or "seriously, start a new thread"), I'm out of here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to hear. Ciao.

 

 

So Toad's parliament and mod voting system sounds interesting. Anyone know if Anton would be up for it? A similar mock-government system is setup on the dreamsforsale.net forum, but how the board itself is run is pretty well locked. Non-confidence votes could be cast when mod actions are questioned, etc.

Edited by Jaded Monkey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.