RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:Mon, Sending PM's to mods means lots of work for mods. Too much work for mods means it doesn't all get done. (In my opinion, looking at how it practically works out).
But anyway - I agree with beastie. Assuming that it's decided that anything should change, it'd be sensible to try an ignore feature before more 'drastic measures'...
EDIT: I'd also mention that this is the only board I have ever been on (EVER, anywhere) where the mods have no power at all to penalise people for breaking forum rules. I don't think most of these other boards consider themselves 'draconian'. At all...
Ren -- you don't want us to send PMs to mods for them to split off-topic comments but you want to enforce all sorts of rules and regulations that would have them working overtime to keep everyone happy?
This is the way I see it -- it's the internet. There's going to be some stuff that I don't want to see, what I don't want to read. If I have had enough I can turn off my computer or go to a different website.
liz3564 wrote:Shades and Keene are board administrators. They do have the admin rights to ban, if they choose to. Bond and I do not have those same administrative rights.
When I say 'mods' I mean you and Bond. Yeah - I see Shades and Keene as 'administrators' separately. But even then, their powers to 'penalise' don't get used..?. Or at least, I've never seen them used.
Again, I'm not talking about outright bans. Just 'some' form of penalty - not for what is posted, but for posting it in the 'wrong' place - according to the standards that have already been decided and 'enforced' by you guys...
But anyway - don't feel like I'm really pushing for this! As I say, I personally just ignore the stuff I don't wanna read. Myself, I'm perfectly happy doing that. I'm only clarifying my ideas really...
Moniker wrote:Ren -- you don't want us to send PMs to mods for them to split off-topic comments but you want to enforce all sorts of rules and regulations that would have them working overtime to keep everyone happy?
My argument is that using penalties will end up with not only less work for the mods, because people will then police themselves - but with the rules more closely followed at the same time.
I never said I 'don't want to send PM's to mods'.... (?!) Where did I say that? I said relying on mods to enforce everything - .via prompting whether PM or otherwise - leads to a heck of a lot of work...
Honestly - what I'm suggesting is what (in my experience) 99% of other boards do! Mods have the power to penalise people for breaking forum rules - it's standard practice.
Why is what I'm suggesting here being seen as so outrageous? I don't really get it...
Last edited by Guest on Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
And again - just so it's clear - I agree that, even if we decided that anything should change, that we go for something relatively small - like the ignore feature. And see how that works out. Again - I'm not personally bothered by scrolling past stuff - I personally don't care. The ignore feature by itself may keep everyone (or most people) happy...
If so, job done - and my daft ideas can be burnt and danced around with glee!
EDIT: Also - wasn't Pirate 'comdemned' to off-topic section for a while - quite recently? Or is my memory playing tricks on me?
RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:EDIT: Also - wasn't Pirate 'comdemned' to off-topic section for a while - quite recently? Or is my memory playing tricks on me?
I believe it was "suggested", but only enforced by moderators moving posts where appropriate. Her posting abilities were not limited by any function of the board itself.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
skippy the dead wrote:I believe it was "suggested", but only enforced by moderators moving posts where appropriate. Her posting abilities were not limited by any function of the board itself.
skippy the dead wrote:I believe it was "suggested", but only enforced by moderators moving posts where appropriate. Her posting abilities were not limited by any function of the board itself.
Ahh ok - fair enough.
Skippy is correct. Pirate was never "forced" to only post in Off Topic. We did strongly suggest that her random posts be kept to Off Topic, and after she understood what was meant by random, she complied. ;)
RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:And again - just so it's clear - I agree that, even if we decided that anything should change, that we go for something relatively small - like the ignore feature. And see how that works out. Again - I'm not personally bothered by scrolling past stuff - I personally don't care. The ignore feature by itself may keep everyone (or most people) happy...
If so, job done - and my daft ideas can be burnt and danced around with glee!
EDIT: Also - wasn't Pirate 'comdemned' to off-topic section for a while - quite recently? Or is my memory playing tricks on me?
Ren,
Just jumping in at the point of your post here, not having read all of the comments. I see at the top of the page that beastie mentions an ignore button and you do to. I don't know if what I have to say regarding that will apply to the format on this board but...on another board there was an ignore feature, a threaded view and flat view. (I include that incase my comment here is irrelevant in terms of format). There was a poster who used the ignore button in such a way that I could not respond to them. That same poster continued to attack me repeatedly and visciously while I couldn't respond to their attack in any way because of the ignore.
Could that be a problem here if there were an ignore feature?
skippy the dead wrote:Ideally you are correct. The problem I've seen (and it seems particularly pronounced as of late) is that an otherwise interesting thread degenerates rapidly into a mud flinging contest after a few "choice" comments, never to return back on track. After a thread devolves in such a way, recovery tends to be impossible. Ignoring posters doesn't do the trick - the thread can be destroyed easily by just a few.
Bingo, Skippy! Someone understands!
I'm not saying the majority, or even a very significant minority, of posters are consistent posters of screed and garbage. But there don't need to be very many of these folks to derail otherwise civil and promising threads.
Jersey and JAK have pointed out that there's a Celestial Forum for uppercrust discussion. I don't disagree. I'm just pointing out that there's a Telestial Forum for lowercrust discussion, and that it ought to be banished there, along with those who insist on posting almost nothing but such junk. Why should the forum for regular discussion be a place for utter vacuousness, baiting, and vitriol?
Also, while I'm not a believing LDS, but I dislike, greatly, to have to encounter temple content on this forum. I am offended on behalf of those who do believe. This, and Coggins7's lampoon ditties, and the like, are intended solely to deride and offend. That is not "discussion" in any normal or decent sense at all. It doesn't belong in a forum dedicated to such discussion.
I would hope this would be self-evident, and regret very much to see that it need be pointed out, much less argued.
Thanks for chiming in. :-)
Don
It was Jersey who pointed out the “Celestial Forum for uppercrust discussion” not JAK. (Don's words in quotation)
JAK suggested that you, Don, begin your own forum if you were dissatisfied with the present forum here and set it up to your liking as you objected to the forum on MDB.
Just jumping in at the point of your post here, not having read all of the comments. I see at the top of the page that beastie mentions an ignore button and you do to. I don't know if what I have to say regarding that will apply to the format on this board but...on another board there was an ignore feature, a threaded view and flat view. (I include that incase my comment here is irrelevant in terms of format). There was a poster who used the ignore button in such a way that I could not respond to them. That same poster continued to attack me repeatedly and visciously while I couldn't respond to their attack in any way because of the ignore.
Could that be a problem here if there were an ignore feature?
Yeah - indeed. The ignore function isn't perfect - things like that can happen.
I think maybe people are thinking there is some 'perfect' answer here. There isn't one. There are a whole bunch of 'answers' with different pros and cons.
I suggested the idea of the user being able to view threads in 'normal' view, or 'threaded' view where you can see who's replied and jump straight to those replies. So those who are in no mood to read through miles of junk, can jump straight to the reply they want to see and carry on. I have no idea if the board software supports it, but it's at least potentially possible, and I think that could actually be superior to an ignore feature in many ways.
You probably don't want to ignore somebody LITERALLY all the time. Probably, most often, you just want to 'skip over them' if you're not in the mood to deal with their bull. Or you wanna save time and get to the stuff you really wanna read...
Last edited by Guest on Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.