Customize

A humble proposal.

Discussion in 'Support Questions' started by Anonymous, Oct 21, 2010.

  1. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Like I said - Burnt umber.
  2. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Just want to add one thing mostly in agreement with thelastanon's post: it's extremely hard to infract consistently--especially for a group to do so. We can and should try to designate a few clearcut offenses for infractions, but it's amazing how few of the offensive posts fall neatly into a category. The first few months of moderating are overwhelmingly confusing, and it's mortifying to look back EACH DAY at all my bad decisions. Infractions are by far the hardest part of the job for me and the least enjoyable, though some other mods are much better at them. But no one really fits the rules. When you give infractions you realize how hard it is not to make a mistake, and that much of the time all you're really doing is giving a poke or prod in a general direction.

    and burnt umber is absolutely the perfect color.
  3. rof Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    You should just hire professional assholes to tell faggots when to shut up.

    It would be like the A-Team only made from obnoxious loners with a temper.
  4. xenubarb Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Kinda like having an exchange with Barbara Schwarz?
  5. 3rdMan Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Best post evar.
  6. grebe Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Aw don't take away stuff I complain about... Whinging is fun!

    I'm having a hard time imagining how sucking speculation out of a conversation would actually work. I assume no one would bother reading a forum devoted to speculation, as it might cause retinal injury.

    Follow up posts to heavy moonbat with amusing pics of ferrets?

    The "tiny Davy" stuff looks goofy to me, like the speaker is over-personalizing the fight. But I don't really care that much.

    If I was a mod I'd delete the vague digs at rockyj and the other one I can't remember, and the "Barb is an old drunk" thing. Crosses the line from banter to mean in a way that creeps me out a little. But maybe I just need moar booze for it to all to make sense.
  7. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    WTF? You are volunteers presumably with day jobs.

    Maybe you guys need a self preservation policy, like: "We reserve the right to expose the username and content of any hate PMs sent our way. Threats of harm, however vague, may result in a public posting of the sender's IP and email address."
  8. Skeptic1337 Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I always find the talk of "how to moderate a community" threads to be so compelling.

    It's like watching crossing guards trying to enforce immigration legislation.

    I'll be serious, the infraction concept failed day one. Primarily because of it's chilling effect on sheeple who like to respect authority of some douche nozzles on the internet. Some times you need those sheeple to be able to express an idea so they can be thoroughly mocked by "the community" so that they may learn from their mistakes. An infraction is a very crude tool for this. You need group think to properly sort people out! (there is a tinge of sarcasm here but it is to illustrate the point that infractions are at their core meant as behavior modification tools...I would say why not give users that power, ie ignore features as opposed to making it some dickbags call, to keep a forum viabrant it's the only way).

    Any ways if your community can't self police (which it does and has been doing for 2+ years) and you want to throw away the best mod trolling device so be it.

    So carry on with illusions and shiny toys, I enjoy the circus as much as the next idiot.

    Also rockj and proxi are both humorless cunts so I vote yes to that one.
  9. rof Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

  10. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    To help you to M7 would be a complete waste of time.
  11. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Moderation has served its purpose in keeping the topics on key. As far as infractions being a crude tool, I have to disagree. Every one needs and wants a spanking for their digressions. We all know when we are being bad. Expecting users to use self discretion is asking way to much.
  12. Hokey Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    This.

    That solves your hatePM problem right then and there.
  13. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Maybe this is a joke but in case not... I don't think outing anons or publishing private information is a solution to hate mail, or to anything. Incurring resentment is part of the job, and so are mistakes. The biggest mistake is making it about oneself or trying to please people, and this community teaches that well. We get nice PM's too, sometimes from the same people, apologizing :p Besides, all those vitriolic PM's will make a nice, jaw-dropping e-scrapbook someday.

    I guess the up side to the invective is that it is a reaction, which can open up conversation even if it's heated. But I agree some changes to the infraction system should be made.

    And I agree that if we get too nit-picky about language we're missing the point or going counter to it. The idea of community guidelines rather than rules for that kind of thing seems appropriate. Also agree that up/down voting here would quickly become a toy or a weapon.
  14. Fuckeye Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    ^ Perfect for the job.
  15. moarxenu Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Everyone who posted ITT should be infracted for being a faggot.
  16. RightOn Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    lol
  17. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    So, you basically see mods as dominatrices and the posters as fat rich men who want to be whipped and told they've been a naughty, naughty boy. That's an interesting viewpoint.
  18. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I take offense to that. We're not all faggots. Some of us are subs who want a good dom. lol
  19. Re: A humble proposal.

    I've been out of this thread for a little bit, so pardon me for not reading the whole thing before chiming in....

    That said, I really like this anon's idea. I agree with Sue, it would have to be done in a way that prevents people from downvoting a person's post just because they don't like them. One thing I think would be possible (that is done on other forums) is to add a reputation feature. It doesn't have to be shown (in fact it would be better if it wasn't), but then when someone downvotes someone's post, their reputation figures into it. So if you're someone who has a 'bad reputation' (which, I assume, you would get from constantly being involved in drama/infighting/being an ass), your downvote doesn't weigh as much as someone who has good reputation. This way if people start downvoting posts sheerly out of spite, it won't end up showing up.

    The other thing, though, is that people have to realize what is and isn't retarded. There's a frightening amount of group-think around here that could ruin a feature like the one described above, because everyone tends to go the same directions with certain things. An example: whenever someone says something that is critical of Chanology/Critics/newsmedia/etc., there are immediate cries of OSA OSA OSA. Because I believe that OSA does frequently post on our boards, I usually check suspicious posts to see if its a user that's showing a specific pattern.

    90% of the time, its Herro. Now, I'm not going to turn this into a 'complain about Herro' thread, but I will say this: A) I really hope Herro isn't OSA because I've said some really embarrassing things to him while drunk, and B) Sometimes he actually has good points, he just expresses them poorly. However, he is not the point at all. The point is that as a community, if we're going to 'self-moderate' in any way, we have to agree to be a bit more tolerant of things that don't conform exactly to our viewpoint. For example, if someone says that.... oh, I don't know.... they think we should blow up Int... I would expect the community to immediately flag that post as retarded, and probably report it to the mods for removal. But if someone says something like 'hey guys, maybe we should stop making fun of Tom Cruise, because this site has a really good google index, and if a Tom Cruise fan googles and finds this site, they might be turned off to it instead of sticking around and learning a few things." Granted I can't imagine anyone still likes Tom Cruise, but you get the point. That would be an unpopular opinion, but its a legit one, and one that could actually help the community.

    Anyways I've said enough. Just my 0.02.
  20. RightOn Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I do not agree with a "reputation feature"
    or down/up voting posts
    I think both of those features would be trouble in the long run (even if you can't see the reputation feature or not)
    Someone who is not generally liked on the board for one reason or another will have a bad rep from the get go. This isn't about reputations, it's about people lending their thoughts and ideas and fighting together for one cause. (even tho we fight with each other on occassion, which of course is normal for any group)

    If this was a different type of community, perhaps those features may work.
    But I don't think they will work well here. IMO
  21. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    This sounds good.
  22. BusinessBecky Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    The problem is not so much the persons that is the problem as the persons post. A poster can have some good things to contribute and be useful although perhaps only less than 50% of the time. The issue can arise more of specific post that have very little relevance to the thread or is just simply abusive of other members. A ranking system might be more suitable at targeting individual posts.

    The font size of the bad post can become smaller where one down vote would make it 90% of the standard 10 or 12 point size. Once it reaches down 10 votes it visibility can be set to none. At 10 votes it is displayed based on the percentage of up or down votes. This would need to be limited to a set period of time to prevent posters from going back to previous posts and thumbing them down. Maybe a 3-5 days to have it locked. There would also need to be a feature that will allow people who are interested to see the post, and maybe a tooltip kind of function that will let them preview the first 20 words when they hover the mouse of the posts header.

    5 sequential post that have been voted to 10% could automatically ban the poster for several hours.
  23. rof Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    What if only a few people press the ratings things?

    And the majority ignores it like the thread star rating system.
  24. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I think it would require some work to make voting up/down work on this site. Maybe there's another approach that would accomplish similar objectives--?
  25. RightOn Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    exactly
    and some posters have good days and bad days with their posts. Everyone does.
    it would also turn into a popularity contest

    Rule of thumb?
    try to think before you post
    and if you are going to be a dick, you may get infracted.
    Seems good enough to me
  26. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    It might work a little better if only applied to anonymous posts--but that would be weird too.
  27. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Well don't have any specifically thing really sorry. The anon posted shit on Hartley comes to mind thou.
  28. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I don't feel bad about infracting personal attacks. That seems like a fairly serious offense to me. The question is where to draw the line between rudeness/opinionated disagreement, and attack. And some comments are more upsetting to some than to others. etc.
  29. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Good summary. If we weren't allowed to post anonymously, there would be a different level of accountability.
  30. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Any reputation feature, if implemented, must take into account Anon posts. I'm split on this question. If implemented, it certainly should NOT be visible except to the mods and the user, people chasing reputation are cancer. Perhaps a useful moderation tool, to give mods a quick idea of the reasonableness of less-known users.

    In this context, reputation could replace infractions. So a red/yellow carding, reduces reputation. (Red cards could also apply a (say) 30 minute posting time-out from next user activity)

    Which triggers a thought, re butthurt over cardings - use the sports analogy - getting a yellow card should be avoided, but is a part of normal game-play; a chat with the ref to challenge or understand why is normal; abuse the ref for more than a moment and your yellow card might turn red. The key is that everyone knows this in advance.

    or reputation affects their downvote quota (I like quotas/rationing - forces people to think before acting - puts an immediate stop to downvoting a post just because of the user)

    Education - simple rule: if you feel the poster deserves an answer as to why their post is less than brilliant, then it's insufficiently retarded.

    Admit it, you're feeling lonely 'cos you still loves him.

    Oh and Skep; pleased to entertain you. Yah, it's prob a futile discussion, but then so are lots of threads. I like meta.
  31. Paroxetine Samurai Moderator

    Re: A humble proposal.

    This is just my understanding but: I thought if you posted anonymously and that post got an infraction, it would infract you not an anonymous account.

    ^^^THIS

    I am guilty of being infracted twice and one warning for tinfoil. Still, I see nothing wrong with this current system. Every time I have been infracted and even after words, I try to think before I speak. Granted, people have pointed out errors in my logic or have assaulted my speak, but that is the beauty of free speech: We all have opinions and we have rights to disagree with them.
  32. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    That's true. I meant that other users would be more likely to objectively vote posts up or down if the posts were anonymous. But I think that's a useless truth. I don't yet see a way to make voting or reputation work here--it's just too easy to abuse for ego or "political" reasons or amusement.
  33. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Standard UI issue - no one uses thread ratings because they're not bang infront of you at the moment you might vote - so you firstly don't think about it, and if you do, meh can't be arsed scrolling to the menu or wherever it is.

    Plonk it visibly on the side of the post, and it will get used if it's useful.

    I really don't like the ideas of making posts hard to read, or hidden etc - apart from anything else, visibly flagging posts is a tool to educate other users (esp new) on what goes on and how it's regarded. I also don't like upvoting - if a post is good, better to encourage follow-on posting and development. Upvoting can inhibit people from contributing, because they feel they've made their point - when writing a post saying "Good idea" almost always carries on with "we could also ..." (sort of thing)
  34. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I don't like making posts hard to read either. The idea is to share information, not (lol) to make it physically hard to access. I do like the idea of shading posts that have been copied to a tinfoil forum. That doesn't get rid of them but is a signal that they're speculative. Sending that signal would reduce the need for other people to waste posts complaining about it. Also would reduce the need to infract for speculation.
  35. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I know for one that I'm particularly susceptible to posting what are seen as personal attacks when I'm having one of those days when I'm not feeling like being particularly nice. I (very) usually refrain from doing them to fellow Anons however.

    For example:
    Now, not trying to justify the above comment because I'm not entirely sure where I stand with it myself but I believe the first sentance to be, although harsh, not entirely an infractable offence. A slap on the wrists perhaps. Or maybe a tiny infraction just to prove as an example to others.
    The second part however, I do agree, is a bit extreme. Written it sounds worse than spoken because it's neigh impossible to gauge the seriousness of the poster with the written word. If you look in context the poster is attempting to make a humourous (but very dark) joke about how she objected to being called a whore and one would assume the link to "nearly raped on ED" from the word "raped" is him joking about the impossibility of raping a whore.

    Now, Mods, you know who I am, thus it would be both counter productive and plain silly to infract this post if I have somehow crossed a line.

    I for one agree with allowing thinking outside the box and a bit of tinfoil because this is Anon and abstract ideas are one of our specialities and, like the A-Team, we specialise in the ridiculous. Tinfoil also shouldn't be moved to a different forum or anything. But I also agree that there should be some way of guiding conversations away from infractable offences rather than watching them come and then slapping infractions down once the offence is commited.

    It would generally improve the mood between Mods and us plebs because we wouldn't feel we were just being constantly punished by you, and you wouldn't have to be constantly dishing out infractions. Thus reducing drama and faggotry. A post voting system of some kidn would be helpful to this end.

    tl;dr = I agree with 1st quotation. Only extreme tinfoil should be infractable, and even then not heavily. Prevention is better than punishment.
  36. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    It's true, I've gotten a number of PMs from people who got infracted during a bad day or "sometimes I just get crazy." Having my own bad days, I'm sympathetic. Depending on the offense, though, it may not undo whatever possible damage may have been done.

    And I don't see anything infractible about quoting the post in this context.
  37. Stalin Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    0oo4f.jpg
  38. incog712 Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99FDDLWz15Y&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - The Weather is a Dick[/ame]
  39. Re: A humble proposal.

    While I agree that there are issues with the proposed solutions, I don't think "don't be a dick unless you're willing to accept an infraction" works either, since that's the system we have in place now, and it doesn't work too well.

    However, I'm not suggesting that my, or any, idea in this thread is the final solution to all of this. Frankly, imo, wwp is always going to have a bit of nutty to it no matter how hard we try to fix it. It'd be great if we could all be a bit more conscientious though.
  40. Re: A humble proposal.

    This internet is serious business.

    Just let the communication go on without any power control and let individuals make up their own minds on what they want to respond to and what they don't.

    Infract only illegal things and personal attacks.

    If mods want in on conversations and discussion then don't use mods privileges to make their point or gain personal advantage on their view.

    Get rid of most of the stupid rules that don't pertain to illegal behavior and personal attacks. They are obviously the problem here. Get rid of them and those problems will go away.

    Don't base decisions or rules on people winging and complaining. It only encourages them. They have no right to get a decision based on their complaints (unless it pertains to illegal or personal attacks). This is an area where it is too easy for trolls to manipulate the free flow of free speech.

    We are still a bastard child of the chans, who's power was gained through the freedom of information. The enemy was always those that suppressed information which at the conceptualization of chanology became war with a group who tried suppressing information via taking down a Tom Cruise Scientology youtube video. Those that took themselves too seriously were the enemy.

    That is what i signed up for. Not to become like that.

    Obviously a public forum has more responsibility associated than a chan board, however within those constrictions the spirit of the movement should be protected, and if not, rights to having association should be wavered.

    The key word is "self governing"

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins