Issues and Concerns

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on September 22, 2009, 02:11:12 AM

the only problem I have with the lower forums is that I think there's a bit too much spam.

I enjoy the spam, but I agree that it doesn't look particularly good. I would be fully supportive of making posts in CN and AR not contribute towards post count, and hiding those fora - or at least just CN - from guests.

I agree with hiding CN, I don't really care about my post count, although I don't post much anywhere else.

I think there should be a new rule pertaining to moderators of this site, and that is: a moderator must remove the stick from his ass before making a decision.

Marry me!

Lord Wilmore,

The more rules you make, the more rules you'll have to make.  Have a look at forums that have "constitutions", the members spend most of their time complaining about rule enforcement or lack thereof. They debate endlessly about making this or that against the rules.   

You say moderation should always be a common sense affair, but it isn't.  This very debate we're having now was moved into this thread from CN because some moderator didn't want people joking around about Jack constantly changing the rules.  We're not allowed to discuss the mods in any thread except this one, not even jest apparently.  I think there should be a new rule pertaining to moderators of this site, and that is: a moderator must remove the stick from his ass before making a decision.

I love when women take one instance and act like it is how things always are. You aren't allowed to discuss the mods at all anymore? What website are you on SCG. Please stop with the drama queening. I will gladly make a thread in CN where you can say whatever you want about me serious or not, and I'll bet most of the other mods would be more than willing to do the same. He brought that to this thread probably to make the discussion serious so that your point would be heard. Bawww harder next time.

Furthermore, if you lurked in the upper fora, you would notice that fights and spams were increasing recently thanks to W, Crustinator, and others. Threads get derailed fast by these misbehavior and, as a result, less people participated in the debate. Some people complained about the state of the fora, and so I thought I would bring this to the mods' attention. The mods understood that it needs to be changed, and thus a new rule was added to the section. As Wilmore have said, it is really common sense.

The problem is that you're expecting serious responses to nonserious questions, FESUCKSMYBALLS making the claim that "U GUISE AR SO STOOPID I HAD SECKS WITH YORE MAW. LOOK AT DESE PHOTOS OF TEH EART *Various pictures of Earth taken from Star Trek*" does not expect anything other that what they get from "W, Crustinator and others" because it would be absurd to do so.

If you're going to be so rigorous about rule changes why not make these debates over new rules available or at least viewable to everyone, so we can give our feelings on the matter when it's debate, rather than here afterwards in the form of bitching and screams of "OLIGARCHY!"? You clearly value our opinions, this thread and the changes it has led to stand testament, but it seems like a lot of time and butthurt to waste putting the rules in action then listening to us.

I'd just like to say that I honestly was just kidding around when I "complained" about Jack.  I really don't have a problem with him changing the rules at all, because, as he said, I trust him enough to know that he isn't going to make ridiculous changes to the rules without backup from the other mods and telling us.

Also, Kasroa, you've made it clear by now that you don't take this site seriously, but there are some people here who definitely do.  You aren't really helping by calling this site "spam".

Lord Wilmore,

The more rules you make, the more rules you'll have to make.  Have a look at forums that have "constitutions", the members spend most of their time complaining about rule enforcement or lack thereof. They debate endlessly about making this or that against the rules.   

You say moderation should always be a common sense affair, but it isn't.  This very debate we're having now was moved into this thread from CN because some moderator didn't want people joking around about Jack constantly changing the rules.  We're not allowed to discuss the mods in any thread except this one, not even jest apparently.  I think there should be a new rule pertaining to moderators of this site, and that is: a moderator must remove the stick from his ass before making a decision.

Jack said most of what I want to say. The only thing I'd add is that as I undertand it, there's no strict rule saying you can't discuss moderator conduct anywhere other than here. That rule was actually my suggestion, and what it states is that if a moderator tells you to stop doing something, e.g. thread derailing, you're not allowed to further derail the thread by having an argument about it. It annoys the hell out of me when people do that, because it just further ruins the topic and makes the initial (and hence all) moderation completely useless. Now, if you want to start a thread in EE or CN about how RAIST IS ABUSING HIS MAWD POWAZ, be my guest, but if you want a serious response, this is probably the best location to slag us off =)

The problem is that you're expecting serious responses to nonserious questions, FESUCKSMYBALLS making the claim that "U GUISE AR SO STOOPID I HAD SECKS WITH YORE MAW. LOOK AT DESE PHOTOS OF TEH EART *Various pictures of Earth taken from Star Trek*" does not expect anything other that what they get from "W, Crustinator and others" because it would be absurd to do so.

If you're going to be so rigorous about rule changes why not make these debates over new rules available or at least viewable to everyone, so we can give our feelings on the matter when it's debate, rather than here afterwards in the form of bitching and screams of "OLIGARCHY!"? You clearly value our opinions, this thread and the changes it has led to stand testament, but it seems like a lot of time and butthurt to waste putting the rules in action then listening to us.

The thing is, most people here are armchair anarchists. Any rule which might in any way apply to any of the regulars is going to be opposed. We have to decide if rules are needed or not based on our own experience and judgement. However, we're always open to criticism and suggestions. But in this instance (for example), the only valid criticism of the changes/new rule was based on a misunderstanding of said rule. Everything else was pretty much 'UGH, CHANGE'R COMIN'.


The other thing is, there really is no issue with changing the rules after the fact- it's not as if we have a complex bureacratic system to deal with. If there's a serious and genuine criticism, things can be taken down/adjusted. However, I'll take your point- from now on we'll make an effort to be more open about rule changes. Not sure what form that will take, but I'll chat with the other mods and try to do something.

I'd just like to say that I honestly was just kidding around when I "complained" about Jack.  I really don't have a problem with him changing the rules at all, because, as he said, I trust him enough to know that he isn't going to make ridiculous changes to the rules without backup from the other mods and telling us.

Also, Kasroa, you've made it clear by now that you don't take this site seriously, but there are some people here who definitely do.  You aren't really helping by calling this site "spam".

I know it doesn't really help but some things need to be said and not just once.

The thing is, most people here are armchair anarchists. Any rule which might in any way apply to any of the regulars is going to be opposed.

This didn't rub well with me. There are indeed some people here who feel regulars deserve special treatment or are exempt from rules, but we all know who they are and their baseless attacks can simply be disregarded or, if it gets serious, deleted. Calling us all as good as small children isn't going to help anybody's case here though, and it's only going to involve butthurt.

But in this instance (for example), the only valid criticism of the changes/new rule was based on a misunderstanding of said rule. Everything else was pretty much 'UGH, CHANGE'R COMIN'.

True, and that thread could equally be used for people to ask about rules before feeling forced to interpret new ones themselves, or change wording to make it clearer. If we felt more involved or at least knew in advance what was being discussed, we (I at least) would be a lot more comfortable with the changes.

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on September 22, 2009, 01:20:00 PM

The thing is, most people here are armchair anarchists. Any rule which might in any way apply to any of the regulars is going to be opposed.

This didn't rub well with me. There are indeed some people here who feel regulars deserve special treatment or are exempt from rules, but we all know who they are and their baseless attacks can simply be disregarded or, if it gets serious, deleted. Calling us all as good as small children isn't going to help anybody's case here though, and it's only going to involve butthurt.

I didn't mean to cause offence, but that's just how I see it. However, I wasn't implying anyone was behaving childishly with that 'armchair anarchist' remark (though that does happen). On most forums, just as in most societies, people are against what they perceive to be unnecessary rules. The trouble is that it can be very hard to understand what rules are or aren't necessary if you're not at the enforcement end of things, so members and moderators often have different ideas about what is 'necessary'.


As I said earlier, I don't have a problem with that, and I don't find it frustrating. I kind of expect members to be opposed to what they see as needless adjusments. It's part of the natural friction, and as long as it's all out open, I think it's actually good for the site. No butthurt intended, I assure you.

Wilmore, you realize all this debate is over about three posts Jack moved from COMPLETE NONSENSE and attached to this thread?  Robosteve started the thread in CN for a reason, and that is because it wasn't important.  No one was seriously complaining about Jack and his obsession with the rules thread.  It's just funny that he changes the rules all the time.  I can imagine him pouring over the rules searching for a misplaced comma.

I am on the enforcement end of the rules on several forums.  You act as if being a mod on a forum is an important job, when most of the time it's just cleaning up after bots spammers and trolls.  A forum is a form of entertainment, nothing more.  There's no need to be so serious. 

Jack, the world didn't end when FES was hacked, we didn't lose our minds over seeing a bit of gay porn.  Anarchy was fun for a couple days.  Lighten up. 





Raist, drink your cough syrup, the grown ups are talking. 

Wilmore, you realize all this debate is over about three posts Jack moved from COMPLETE NONSENSE and attached to this thread?  Robosteve started the thread in CN for a reason, and that is because it wasn't important.  No one was seriously complaining about Jack and his obsession with the rules thread.  It's just funny that he changes the rules all the time.  I can imagine him pouring over the rules searching for a misplaced comma.

I am on the enforcement end of the rules on several forums.  You act as if being a mod on a forum is an important job, when most of the time it's just cleaning up after bots spammers and trolls.  A forum is a form of entertainment, nothing more.  There's no need to be so serious. 

Jack, the world didn't end when FES was hacked, we didn't lose our minds over seeing a bit of gay porn.  Anarchy was fun for a couple days.  Lighten up. 





Raist, drink your cough syrup, the grown ups are talking. 

Wow, such a mature response. Throw an insult so that you don't have to admit to being a drama queen. Mod drama comes up and space cowgirl instantly is here.

My post was moved into this thread,  I responded.  Did you bother to read the thread or did you just want to troll a little?

My post was moved into this thread,  I responded.  Did you bother to read the thread or did you just want to troll a little?

I read your post, responded to it as it deserved to be responded to. Then you insulted me, and I responded again as you deserved. Continue your trolling of the mods though. I mean drama whoring is all the rage. You've gotten good at it.

Oh yeah I threw the first insult.  I believe you called me a drama queen because I have an opinion.  I don't see you saying the same thing to General Douchbag or Kasroa, and I think they agree with most of what I've said.   Are you gonna troll their posts too? 

The end. 

Oh yeah I threw the first insult.  I believe you called me a drama queen because I have an opinion.  I don't see you saying the same thing to General Douchbag or Kasroa, and I think they agree with most of what I've said.   Are you gonna troll their posts too? 

They're not the ones that bawwwed about a post being moved so it could be discussed seriously. They are also not the ones claiming that "you can't talk about the mods anymore" again, until one of us stops you from talking about us, shut up.

No one was seriously complaining about Jack and his obsession with the rules thread. It's just funny that he changes the rules all the time.  I can imagine him pouring over the rules searching for a misplaced comma.

I have no obsession with the rules thread, and I do not change it "all the time." I recommend you to either go back and read what I posted, or think before you post.

I am on the enforcement end of the rules on several forums.  You act as if being a mod on a forum is an important job, when most of the time it's just cleaning up after bots spammers and trolls.  A forum is a form of entertainment, nothing more.  There's no need to be so serious.  

Jack, the world didn't end when FES was hacked, we didn't lose our minds over seeing a bit of gay porn. Anarchy was fun for a couple days.  Lighten up.  

I'm curious, but do you act like this on every other board as well, acting like you're the only one that knows all the forum ethics and knows how to run a message board properly?


EDIT: missing word

Wilmore, you realize all this debate is over about three posts Jack moved from COMPLETE NONSENSE and attached to this thread?  Robosteve started the thread in CN for a reason, and that is because it wasn't important.  No one was seriously complaining about Jack and his obsession with the rules thread.  It's just funny that he changes the rules all the time.  I can imagine him pouring over the rules searching for a misplaced comma.

Yeah, god, Jack probably gets really anal over commas and spelling! Hehe, that Jack, he sure does get picky about that kind of stuff. Me, I'd certainly never do that, not me, no, never... <_< >_>
 

I am on the enforcement end of the rules on several forums.  You act as if being a mod on a forum is an important job, when most of the time it's just cleaning up after bots spammers and trolls.  A forum is a form of entertainment, nothing more.  There's no need to be so serious.

SCG, you have to understand. People who moderate it don't do it because they are warped by a false sense of power (well, I don't at any rate). They do it because they enjoy doing it, either because they want to give something back to the community they genuinely care about, or because they find the task enjoyable in itself. For me, it's a little bit of both. I absolutely love wording rules and regulations, and thinking about the forum layout and moderation to anal lengths you can't possibly imagine.


You know how some people find it fun to build incredibly detailed models of WW2 aircraft/battleships and Napoleonic battlefields? That is what some moderators are like, and I am one such moderator. I take glee in thinking of ways to make this place run better. It's fun! Don't presume we're super-serious assholes who dress up in Judge Dredd costumes at night. Believe it or not, some people actually enjoy moderating. We're born bureaucrats:


http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?title=bureaucrats-song&videoId=156361

You know how some people find it fun to build incredibly detailed models of WW2 aircraft/battleships and Napoleonic battlefields? That is what some moderators are like, and I am one such moderator. I take glee in thinking of ways to make this place run better. It's fun! Don't presume we're super-serious assholes who dress up in Judge Dredd costumes at night. Believe it or not, some people actually enjoy moderating.

Touche.

I have a few suggestions. This seems like the right place for them to go.

1) If you're going to ban someone for going off topic, make sure you ban the person that wilfully initiated the unacceptable deviance. I've never initiated a deviation, but if FE'ers want to take the debate in a new direction... fair enough...

One example:

John Davis deviates a question on the "infinite plane" into a debate on the variance of gravity...

Given an infinite earth, gravitation would not decrease with elevation.  Since you are so knowledgable, I assume you already knew this.  You must have simply forgotten.

John Davis is a senior member here. If he wants to claim that his proposition is valid because of some unrelated aspect, all I can do is follow.


2) If you're going to ban someone for posting images in the "upper fora" why not just disable image posting in the upper fora? This is a feature of SMF.

Here: http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=82548.0

Thanks guys! I know you mean well!

2) If you're going to ban someone for posting images in the "upper fora" why not just disable image posting in the upper fora? This is a feature of SMF.

It's not "image posting" that's really the problem, it's posting irrelevant or sarcastic images.  Debaters can post images of diagrams, maps, etc. as long as they add to the debate.  What we don't need, however, are people posting demotivational posters to illustrate "fail" or "facepalm" directed at another person.  I think some good rules of thumb to consider if you ever want to post an image in the upper fora are "Will this picture add constructively to the debate?" and "Is this picture intended to be humorous or insulting?" (in which case, you'd want the answer to be "no", obviously).

Debaters can post images of diagrams, maps, etc. as long as they add to the debate.  What we don't need, however, are people posting demotivational posters to illustrate "fail" or "facepalm" directed at another person. 

Or pictures of the earth from space.

Sorry, couldn't resist. 

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on September 22, 2009, 04:24:05 PM

No one was seriously complaining about Jack and his obsession with the rules thread. It's just funny that he changes the rules all the time.  I can imagine him pouring over the rules searching for a misplaced comma.

I have no obsession with the rules thread, and I do not change it "all the time." I recommend you to either go back and read what I posted, or think before you post.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on September 22, 2009, 04:24:05 PM

I am on the enforcement end of the rules on several forums.  You act as if being a mod on a forum is an important job, when most of the time it's just cleaning up after bots spammers and trolls.  A forum is a form of entertainment, nothing more.  There's no need to be so serious.  

Jack, the world didn't end when FES was hacked, we didn't lose our minds over seeing a bit of gay porn. Anarchy was fun for a couple days.  Lighten up.  

I'm curious, but do you act like this on every other board as well, acting like you're the only one that knows all the forum ethics and knows how to run a message board properly?


EDIT: missing word

(lol @ the EDIT)

Yes, I freely express my opinion on every board I actively post on. Is that not allowed and encouraged here?  I don't think or post as if I'm the only person who knows forum ethics and how to run a board.  I do have some experience as I am a mod (and an admin) on several boards, but I don't think this makes me an expert. 

I don't understand why you are so defensive about the fact that you edit the rules regularly.  You've probably edited them more in the last few months than in the entire time the thread has existed.  I'm just giving you a hard time about it.. but I can tell it is impossible for you to lighten up. 

Do you act this way on every other board as well?  Do you think the internet is serious business, and you're the only person who understands just how serious it all is?

Raist wants you all to believe I'm just trolling, and the fact is I was messing with Jack a little, but not to piss him off (this started in CN after all).  I think I've made some valid points about the rules and the importance of allowing the members to have some harmless fun in the lower forums.  I don't understand why some of you get so defensive when I post an opinion. 

Okay the following is all my opinion and shouldn't be taken as a whine or a complaint. I can put up with how the site is at the moment, I'm fine just living in my own world, pathetically trying to bolster my post count down in the off topic forums. I like to chip in on the serious ones too, usually when a topic has ran it's course or the OP is clearly retarded (or the debate and people debating it are). I don't spam because I hate it and find it boring, but off-topic banter, to me, is the heart of a place like this where the overall theme is one of hilarity. The People who claim to be believers have a right to their pseudo-serious discussions as much as anyone else though so I try not to interfere too much if the discussion is civilised.

What riles most people I think is that a forum like this even has rules that are on top of the usual general forum rules you get on any forum (no CP, no racism...etc).

There are two main types of forum I can think of. You've got your very public forums that need constant moderation in order to remove profanity, racism, spam, off-topic messages...ect, etc. Examples might be the 606 sports forum on the BBC sports website, or the SMF forums. You know what I mean, forums that generally have visitors who may not be adjusted to the kind of vile forum banter we all know and love, and also which may be owned by companies that could be liable for dodgy content or at least receive barrages of complaints when poor little Timmy repeats what he read to his mum and dad.

The other type of forum is one like this. It's of an obscure or not-mainstream topic, it has consistent group of regular posters and a fringe of never-stay-longs who spend most of their time in the FE discussion boards. Other examples might be the forum I post regularly on which is made up of a band of exiles from an old MMO we all used to play. We used to post on the official forum for the MMO ( which was a perfect example of the first type of forum: We had to be careful on there, it was moderated fairly strictly and rightly so) but when we stopped playing we made our own forum. We have two moderators, there's the site owner and then one extra who can keep on top of any spam if the admin aint around. When I say spam I mean bots and such. Apart from that it's a free for all. We're all mature adults and we can moderate ourselves. If one of my posts got deleted or unnecessarily moved on there I would be livid.

Now that's my opinion. Some may see this a serious forum that represents a serious organisation. Well fair enough and if that means we have OTT moderation then so be it but if there's one thing I wish people would learn it's that off-topic isn't spam and most people know when the right time is to derail a thread. There's nothing malicious about it, it's just the natural way for a lot of threads to go when we've seen the same discussion 34,000 times or when it gets to the point where the people debating are just going through the motions and starting to get petty.

If I had my way, the mods would just delete spam because I don't see any other use for them in a place like this. Having said that, the moderation isn't too bad most of the time and I can put up with it. Also I get the feeling that the mods here are a little tentative about joining in sometimes, especially in the on-topic boards. I'd love to see an end to that. I think it has something to do with a fear of accusations of hypocrisy but that's easy enough to dissipate.

So when is there going to be something new about all this that I haven't read at some point in the past year or so?

Can't complain.

Now that's my opinion. Some may see this a serious forum that represents a serious organisation. Well fair enough and if that means we have OTT moderation then so be it but if there's one thing I wish people would learn it's that off-topic isn't spam and most people know when the right time is to derail a thread. There's nothing malicious about it, it's just the natural way for a lot of threads to go when we've seen the same discussion 34,000 times or when it gets to the point where the people debating are just going through the motions and starting to get petty.

Most people isn't all people. The reality is that we need rules that cover all people. Everyone recognises that topics progress and evolve, and sometimes the discussion moves on quite naturally from the original point. However, one of main issues brought up (from newcomers and regulars alike) is that moderators don't do enough to stop thread derailing. We constantly receive complaints about this. Sometimes it's the case that person complaining really has no cause to do so, but sometimes members (in particular some regulars) are genuinely just trying to derail the thread as quickly as possible, so we need rules on the books.

Quote from: Kasroa Is Gone on September 23, 2009, 11:39:11 AM

Now that's my opinion. Some may see this a serious forum that represents a serious organisation. Well fair enough and if that means we have OTT moderation then so be it but if there's one thing I wish people would learn it's that off-topic isn't spam and most people know when the right time is to derail a thread. There's nothing malicious about it, it's just the natural way for a lot of threads to go when we've seen the same discussion 34,000 times or when it gets to the point where the people debating are just going through the motions and starting to get petty.

Most people isn't all people. The reality is that we need rules that cover all people. Everyone recognises that topics progress and evolve, and sometimes the discussion moves on quite naturally from the original point. However, one of main issues brought up (from newcomers and regulars alike) is that moderators don't do enough to stop thread derailing. We constantly receive complaints about this. Sometimes it's the case that person complaining really has no cause to do so, but sometimes members (in particular some regulars) are genuinely just trying to derail the thread as quickly as possible, so we need rules on the books.

Then moderate the minority. Which was my point.

1) If you're going to ban someone for going off topic, make sure you ban the person that wilfully initiated the unacceptable deviance. I've never initiated a deviation, but if FE'ers want to take the debate in a new direction... fair enough...

One example:

John Davis deviates a question on the "infinite plane" into a debate on the variance of gravity...

Quote from: John Davis on September 15, 2009, 12:51:27 PM

Given an infinite earth, gravitation would not decrease with elevation.  Since you are so knowledgable, I assume you already knew this.  You must have simply forgotten.

John Davis is a senior member here. If he wants to claim that his proposition is valid because of some unrelated aspect, all I can do is follow.

I backed it up with the appropriate and correct math to back my point up and heard no more from you.  My math was correct and showed the correct point.   Since one member asked, I suplied one that used a slab  instead of a plane and apologized admitting it was not the best choice to use a plane.

You had every right to ask why I stated it did not vary due to altitude.  You did not.  You stated that it did vary due to altitude on an infinite earth and gave no backing in a condescending manner.  You acted like a child and I will not apologize for my treatment towards you and will treat as such in the future if you act similarly.

Quote from: Crustinator on September 23, 2009, 06:29:26 AM

One example:

John Davis deviates a question on the "infinite plane" into a debate on the variance of gravity...

John Davis is a senior member here. If he wants to claim that his proposition is valid because of some unrelated aspect, all I can do is follow.

I backed it up with the appropriate and correct math to back my point up and heard no more from you.

You heard no more from me because I was banned.

(You do understand what that means?)

I'm not going to debate whether your maths was correct, we can do that elsewhere. You derailed the thread. I was punished for your derailment.

You acted like a child and I will not apologize for my treatment towards you and will treat as such in the future if you act similarly.

From a moderator, this kind of response to a reasonable post is troubling.