Customize

A humble proposal.

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

  1. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    While I'm with you on the generalities, this is a forum, not an imageboard where stuff slides off quickly, and the crap very quickly. The very fact of it being a different medium means the way it is 'managed' has to be different. Post some things on 4chan and the system will automatically instaban you for days - that wouldn't work here. Say something that pisses off an OP more than once and get kickbanned in some IRC channels.

    Forums left as a free-for-all rapidly deteriorate till the only people left are the turds that refuse to flush. Forums require a diet of less fat and more fibre than other mediums.
  2. grebe Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I've kinda forgotten what problem this thread is trying to fix exactly. Is it shitty posts?

    LOL, maybe we need to stage an intervention?

    We could rent out a large room at a pizza place. After a few brews maybe we'd get to the bottom of this anger thing of his.
  3. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I think this is more or less the point:

  4. Paroxetine Samurai Moderator

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Here is my 0.02 cents on this matter:

    I understand the logic and rational behind the whole "Don't add a $ in COS" and "Don't call David Miscavage things like 'Slappy' or 'Dwarf'". Granted, I am guilty of it just like a lot of other people. However, if it is or getting to be a problem, why not do like you do when somebody tries to post the words "moral" and "fag" together- change it to "douchebag"? Granted, that would be a trick considering all the possible ways it can be got around and may not be possible at the current level of technology within this site or hosting company.

    Another way would be to "borrow" some ideas from another site: Slashdot. Slashdot has a meta moderation system that allows users to give points for posts. If a user gets high points, they get rewarded (such as being able to disable ads). If a user gets low points, they get restricted access. To counteract trolling, a user is assigned X amount of times they can distribute points and they cannot keep rewarding points to the same post over and over again.

    Again though: I do not know how this site works behind the scenes so I have no real idea if that would be possible. Also, I am sure abuse and drama would still occur regardless.
  5. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    So grow a pair, you whiner.

    /irony.




    the current system works fine and doesn't need fixing. (IMO)




    this would help.




    something to do with Jonathan Swift, I assumed.





    christ, the mods get hate mail? in that respect the system isn't working then. instant ban IMO.



    which is kind of fun at times.


    please no "I have x points and am at level x. Only y more points until level z!" type popularity contest.



    tl;dr: hooray for the mods who do a good job, the current system works, no big changes needed.

    a 'hide this thread' button might be a good idea. that way users can just killfile a thread that annoys them.
  6. Lorelei Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    It would probably behoove all of us to worry more about the quality and usefulness of what we post ourselves, rather than getting all emo or aggro about unfunny jokes or discussion about topics we find drearily boring.

    Missing from most posts that list a set of WWP-related gripes or peeves is awareness that these posts about how boring they believe that their personal lists of gripes or peeves are happen to be, in and of themselves, on many people's "this is extremely boring" list as well.

    One way to improve the quality of posts on WWP is to start writing posts of better quality oneself. By doing so, you immediately improve the signal to noise ratio, if only by a fraction.
  7. Hokey Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Agreed.

    Brilliant.

    I believe these sum up everything that should be said.
  8. BusinessBecky Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    One of the interesting side effects of $ in COS, is being not so SEO friendly. If google and yahoo were able to see all the words that are next to 'Church of Scientology' and CoS like abuse, disconnection, ect... all those greats post that are made don't show up very well. The shit posts get easily filtered out from it all. Sometimes its better to use Google to search the forum than the forum's search functions.

    Slashdot has been infested by troll posters and left wing nuts so that's not a very inspirational model. Is see a lot of post on there getting buried out and bad ones being left alone. The point of making shit unreadable is so it takes up less space on the pages. Maybe when a shading systems gets put in the client can use some browser plugin that will let them do what they want to the post layer class or id. I don't know the depth of the mods specialization in coding is or how straight forward the board's framework is. So these are just some thoughts.
  9. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    firsties!!!
  10. theLastAnon Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    That may be the best post ever. I recognize the irony of this shitty post even as my fingers hit the keys....
  11. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    It seems to me that the stuff that deserves a serious response (such as infraction or ban) includes over the line personal attacks or threats, posting personal info, promoting illegal stuff, and using socks to wreak havoc. Things that I'd think of addressing with guidelines or suggestions would have to do with offensive language or useless/counterproductive posts, speculation, importing drama, and misusing functions such as reporting or anonymous posting. With the caveat that doing any of this stuff ad nauseum would fall in the first category. Do people agree, disagree?
  12. WhiteNight Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    isn't that basically the graded system of infractions we have at the moment?
    Why not stick an additional "infraction" list for the second grouping which isn't som much a warning or infraction, but more a label with which to highlight fuckwittery?
  13. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    It's similar to what we have now except that the stuff on the second list would not usually be infracted--it is now. Do you mean, label that stuff rather than just issuing warnings or PMing about it? That might make sense--a little more of a deterrent, maybe.
  14. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    That was kinda what I was first suggesting but under community control. I don't think it's a great idea to have mods subjectively determining what is fuckwittery - for their own sakes as much as anything else. (ref: 'this post is retarded' button)
  15. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    OP here. Seriously, can we at lest infract for bad puns?
  16. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Lol that should definitely be doable by the community.
  17. WhiteNight Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Yes, a deterrent is the intention to a certain degree, but also as a kind of indicator to the rest of the world that although this isn't actually an offence, it's either frowned upon or it's being classified as tinfoil or whatever. It's the equivalent of saying "steady now".

    You are posting Anon my friend. Quote the passage you're refering to please lol. Lots of anons in this thread.
    I do agree though. There should be some kind of template. When people know that they're going to be walking the line of being infracted they like to have a definate idea of what'd cross the line. This would also serve of a deterent.
  18. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    This is exactly the problem for mods, too. It's why a couple of us keep asking for responses from the community. The staff would benefit from some consensus about this--it would help us to avoid issuing seemingly arbitrary infractions. Where do people think that line is? Obviously no one can specify every possible kind of over-the-line post, but some feedback from people about what they personally consider to be out of bounds would be very helpful.
  19. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    difficult to do that without being patronising, so could be very counterproductive.
  20. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    IMO, over-the-line:

    - illegality

    - giving away personal details

    - spam

    - importing drama

    IMO, not-over-the-line:

    - anything else
  21. WhiteNight Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I'll give an example:

    Poster A: You guys heard about Iran banning 12 university courses because they're "too western"?
    Poster B: Really? What courses?
    Poster C: They're that kind of government. How's Anonymous Iran coming along?
    Poster A: Things like Law, Philosophy and "Womens studies". AI is going good but we could always use more hands.
    Poster B: I just googled it. They've banned Human Rights studies too.
    Dipshit: LOL, yeah but they don't deserve help because they were stupid enough to vote that government in!1!


    They haven't actually done anything wrong or derailed the thread, but they're being an idiot.
  22. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Well, y'know, sometimes people are.

    On the net as in life. Except more so on the net, obviously.

    I guess I'm saying, you can't legislate for stupidity.
  23. WhiteNight Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    They're not doing anything wrong, but it can lead to drama, thread derailment and it's generally counter productive.
    This system would encourage people to actually think before they speak, but it's also noob friendly (they won't be new to the site and then instantly get an infraction or something) and it makes the people who'd make drama over that kind of post feel that they don't need to because a Mod has highlighted it as prattish.

    After a few of these the poster should get a PM just saying that they're being highlighted (in burnt umber if I remember correctly) because a lot of people chip into a thread and then never look back at their previous posts, so it might go unnoticed that they're been highlighted. Doing this too often however would merit an infraction though, because they haven't taken the hint.
  24. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I think that's a really good idea. The follow-up PM would make sense too. I wonder if there would be a way to make that automatic after three or so lousy posts.
  25. Skeptic1337 Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Man there are a bunch of lonely fires out there looking for some one just like you.

    In my opinion there is no such thing as thread derailment. It takes two to tango and so on. I always find the "stop derailing the thread!!!!" post to be more distraction then some idiot spouting what ever.

    I can actually ignore walls of text, posters and posts at will. I can do this because my IQ is above room temperature and wasn't raised in a hugbox where mommie made sure nothing sharp would ever touch you!

    For an activism forum, these threads always go the same way:

    Sue: [not actually saying it but saying it] Moderating this dump is a pain the ass. I hate our needy (aka ramen donation bots) users. Time to ask if we can handle it like adults.

    Users: Yay less rules. Wait. Can you make some rules about the less rules so that we can still fee secure that should some one post something that hurts our delicate sensibilities some random third party will make it go away.

    Mods: Yeah, we like the status quo and would like more restrictive posting for this less rules methodology that you have suggestion.

    More idiot users: Hay yeah, the current infraction system just needs some lipstick and people shouldn't make fun of marty, infract for that.

    Any one with an iq over room temperature: Man chanology sucks.
  26. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Got anything to actually add to the discussion?
    No?
    thought so.
  27. Skeptic1337 Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Thanks for making my point :)
  28. Re: A humble proposal.

    everyone in this thread should receive an infraction for importing their drama.
  29. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    What point? That a non constructive ad-hom filled rant was all you could muster with your above room temperature IQ.
  30. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Another way to address the speculation problem and maybe to clarify "the line" would be to explain what is dox and what isn't dox. For instance, "I was there, I saw it with my own eyes" is useful anecdotally but it isn't dox in my opinion.
  31. Paroxetine Samurai Moderator

    Re: A humble proposal.

    May I ask this question to you: Why should I (or for anybody else in that matter) get punished for doing something trivial?

    It is like this: I do not like getting infractions at all. I do my best to avoid getting a red or yellow card even if they mean nothing in the long run. The ones I do get, I only have myself to blame and nobody else. I learn from it and move on...

    However, what is being suggested here is not good or productive at all. I am beginning to feel like each and every time I post, I must be concerned about it getting hit with an infraction. Even this post I am getting tinges of fear over another infraction. You proved that point in particular: Your OP was hit with a 1-point infraction because the mod agreed with you. Nothing more.

    Let me ask: Is that right?

    Look, like I said before: I agree that the whole idea that spelling CoS with a $ is counterproductive. I agree with the idea that calling David Miscavage "Slappy" has run its course and isn't funny anymore. In addition it gives them ammo against us in some minor way. But why should people get nailed with Red and Yellow over some old meme or bad pun?

    I strongly believe the mods have better things to do with their time than such penny ante things. If they want to infract over using a dollar sign in CoS or saying Slappy instead of David Miscavage, then ok: I will rethink before I post and maybe others will too. However, if they are going to infract over such trivial things as bad puns: Then what has Chanology become?
  32. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I agree.
  33. Miranda Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    In fairness, I don't think the infracting mod (not me) would mind me saying that that infraction was meant as a joke. If the OP didn't understand it that way, the OP should question it.

    Also, I don't think most people are arguing in favor of infracting for the relatively minor offenses that you mentioned--on the contrary, a few of us are arguing that these things DON'T warrant infraction.
  34. WhiteNight Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    thank you, and yes I agree. People need to be made aware that they're getting them, but the message should be phrased so as to highlight that they're not being told off, more just given a heads up.

    Meh, a tedious point is still a point.

    Well we bow before your superiority. In the mean time either we could all moderate ourselves or we could implement a softer, more prevention focused, system of moderation allowing mods to get one with their jobs in a more casual way (I think it will sadly be more work for you in some ways though mods) and posters can get on with constructive ideas and thinking outside the box a bit.

    Of course Skeptic, if we were all as refined and generous as you the forum would work perfectly and Scientology would've probably already fallen to bits by now, but Anon has a lot of it's strength in diversity and managing to pull of some pretty wierd ideas to our benefit and one of the challenges of having such a diverse group is it encourages diverse (wierd) people to join. Amongst those numbers are trolls.

    The system would allow for a bit of tinfoil and inventive ideas by ensuring that they don't get drowned by posts by prats.

    I am.

    Likewise.

    Lets say the topic in a thread has been exhausted and the thread wanders off into a different topic there's no reason for a Mod to pounch on it because the new discussion, despite happening in technically the wrong thread, might be going into some interesting places. Flexibility is good.

    I think it relies a lot on co-operation. Mods agree with some kind of template agreed between both us commoners and the Mods (new thread for that and voting on the systems proposed in this thread later I think) but with the Golden Rule that if it's constructive discussion or harmless chat there's no reason to start dishing out infractions or anything (pretty much like we have now).

    P.s
    I was genuinely torn whether to even justify this with a responce.
    No. That's as bad as censorship. Just becuase you don't like it (in terms of trivial things like jokes) doesn't mean you can ban it. The system I propose encourages people to be able choose what they do and do not listen to, it just protects the thread's line of discussion.
    If you want to talk about something else there's a new thread for that.
    If you don't like what someone's saying, there's an ignore button for that.
    If that was a bad pun/joke - well played and ignore this bit.



    tl;dr
    Emphasis on leveling the playing field between mods and posters in terms of discussion and it's moderation.
    More freedom for the individual to say what (s)he wants and listen to what (s)he wants within the more serious boundaries that already exist without them being punished for it.
    Sidelines trolls and encourages constructive discussion

    /long-winded post.

    p.p.s what do you mean lonely fires etc? I'm unfamiliar with the phrase.
  35. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Good thing to point out. I find myself regularly feeling ridiculously guilty for reporting things that aren't spam, because of that window. But obviously, reports aren't limited to spam. So maybe the note in the window should be rewritten.
  36. Anonymous Member

  37. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Nope, I post anon quite often. It's a useful way of putting forward an idea or opinion that you don't want to be associated with your name. Nothing wrong with that.
    Oh, and RE: people posting "300 get"; I think that should definately be an exception to any kind of punishment and it never derails a thread and personnaly I find it quite fun. But that's just my humble opinion.
  38. doughnutcop Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    I feel that 10 should be ruled out because we would be better off having an impact on the natural progress of the rules themselves; if people can't come up with new ideas then we're screwed.
  39. Anonymous Member

    Re: A humble proposal.

    Uhh, I think the question you should be asking is whether you deserve an infraction for total failure at recognising humour.

    More of this sort of thing!
  40. Re: A humble proposal.

    speculation is normal human inquiry and discussion and is healthy in any investigatory work. Further people are not stupid. They can discern information for themselves and do not need mother looking after there needs. Third, the hive mind is less stupid still as it contains many points of view. One mod or even a small group of mods can't have the ability to match it in intellectual strength and decision making. Lastly, people are free to think what they want. People are not free to deceive but they are free to speculate. Infractions, although obviously taken lightly, place a divide amongst admin and the hive and encourage asslicking instead of proper discourse. People who want certain perspectives will align themselves politically and all this destroys the true power of the hive.

    Admin and those who report to them, you have absolutely no rights in controlling information lest it is to protect your own legal obligations. Nor, if you call yourself anon should you ever want to, in which case you are misrepresenting.

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