Post by FrithRae on Jul 13, 2005 18:07:20 GMT
See I told you I was working on something...
Believe it or not *gasp* I posted a similar suggestion to this not 12 hours before Arse came on as "Admin" to announce the change - she can verify as she told me to go ahead and suggest my suggestion I posted in the Sheriff's office.
Now this post will be LONG ASS but please I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TO REPEAT THIS SHIT..
So read it all . Please - I'm going to first discuss the current rules, then I'm going to discuss why I think the Sheriff's office needs to stay, and then I'm going to bring up my new suggestion for a new basic rule (along with a discussion of TOnic's suggestion of no thread hijacking...)
First off - the rules we presently have. They are there for a reason. I saw some of you thinking the whole "can't bash those who aren't here to defend themselves" is a stupid rule.
And you know what maybe it is - but apparenlty people are stupid.
How quickly so many of you forget WHY that rule had to be put into place. Now I don't know the details and unfortunately I think those who DO know the details now cease to come to this board. But I DO believe that at one point this boared was threatened with closure and Alge was threatened with Slander/libel/lawsuit due to comments being made about people who are not here.
As it stands- I thinik the rule should stay. As I don't feel Arse wants to be held responsible for a lawsuit anymore than Alge did - and we operate under the rules of the Main SITE this forum is attached to.
All the rule states is that if you want to call someone out let them know - if they refuse to come defend themselves then I believe you are in the clear still to insult them (if I'm reading that right). And don't bash banned people as they can't come back to defend themselves.
That rule was not in place until Alge got, I believe, a very formal little email from the owners of this "site" the forum works under and a threat of lawsuit.
Ok TWO - Sheriff's Office
I personally DO think there needs to be a place the mods can go and post to one another (and you guys would really be surprised how little posts go there I swear...). Because PMs aren't sent to multiple reciepients - its very hard to have a 3 or 4 or 5 way discussion Via PMs. Its very easy to have that, obviously, via a forum.
There ARE things I feel mods should discuss in private and not just "out in the open for everyone".
For example if they are simply saying "Hey everyone watch this thread it might get nasty" or "Hey this post struck me the wrong way but how do you see it" or "You know forum member XYZ came to me with a private concern that forum member ABC is harrassing them and wants to know our views on what we're reading".
These things do not need to be public. For one - even mentioning a forum was under watch someone might take as a threat or as action by the mods - even if no action was ever taken. If someone knows that post ABC is being "considered" by some mods as maybe crossing a line - then its not a discussion anymore by people who are SUPPOSE to be **OBJECTIVE**, but every one of you is going to feel you need to post your opinon on that "post" in question, or the poster themselves is going to get all up in arms offended.
Objective rulings need to be called down sometimes (or should be being called down) and that just doesnt function very well if everything is just "out in the open".
I can certanily see posters going off just at the mere MENTION that their post was being Looked at a bit closer or something like that.
I really dont thiknk that's a headache anyone here wants to read. Whereas if its between the mods and the mods decide that its nothing, then everyone goes about their merry way and noone gets all upset over literally - nothing happening.
The third example should certanily be kept in a private discussion and concerns noone else but the mods and the parties involved. If you open up for everyoen to be able to read their concerns then pepole won't come forward in the hopes of being viewed objectively.
So that's my vote - Sheriff office stays for mods. Every forum everyWHERE has a place for mods to communicate privately about common concerns so that there is a differnce held between "mod" duties and "personal" posts.
And sometimes Mods need a place to let off some steam but don't want to offend anyone in the general populace because its not about them its about mods being frustrated as being mods - and nothing else.
If they posted that as part of the genearl forum, it would be perceived as somemthing entirely different. Dont' even pretend it woudlnt' be, I think we've already seen how some of us can get.... (and more on that in the next part).
Ok - new suggestion I had already thought up but really is another rehash of an old discussion we had.
SO THREE!! - New Suggestion:
I remember back when we all voted on these rules, and had this discusion before the current rules ccame into place.
There was a discussion as to wether or not to make the "Religion/Politics" forum a bit more "restrictive" as far as personal attacks and flaming.
At the time that particular subset rule for that one forum was shot down - and the logic you pretty much were all using was that "hey we can keep our cool and police ourselves....let's not have to make that rule"
Well perhaps we can't police ourselves as well as we thougth we should.
So I'm opening up that for rediscussion again.
What I propose is that ONLY in the Religion/Political thread - that personal attacks and flames not be allowed.
I would propose that should a thread start to go that direction, the mod of course steps in and makes a warning post - both to EVERYONE involved to remind them not to let it degenerate into a personal thing. Also if it is one particular poster who has stepped a bit too far over that line, the mod can then either delete out of the post the personal rant attack (and PM the poster), or make a POST saying that the above will not be allowed and call on the poster to change it (and send a pm).
Basically I'm calling for a bit more "modding" responsiblity in that ONE forum to keep things more "civil" in discussions. Those are the discussions that tend to cause the most issues, so perhaps they are ones that should be by rule - watched more closely and kept "not ranting style"
For example in the recent "America Evil" thread I *almost* made the 2nd post warning that the topic could very well get out of hand fast and if it did I would immediately be locking it. But I didn't make that post, thinking it was not my job to prewarn and I had no basis as a mod for doing so other than my own personal "foresight" into the buttons such a topic could press.
I see now perhaps I should have made that post - but if we inserted a new rule for the religion/politics forum then I would be definitely given permission by you, the forum members, for making such comments as a mod.
Anyway discuss - we will call up a vote in a weeks time or something to decide this officially .
FOUR!!
OK subtopic - tonic I belive's suggestion - to not allow Off Topic Posts to remain in same thread (I belive that was the gist of the suggestion)
The discussion I see here is two fold.
1- to not allow off topic posts anywhere - that when off topic posts are made that the mod either delets post and sends PM to person to make another thread - OR the mod takes the post out of the thread and ...uhh..makes a seperate thread?
2 - to not allow off topic posts on the Religion/Political debate forum *only* - and take whatever action you guys discuss here as being apropriate
The problem I see with Solution One is that we got off topic posts all over these boards and everyone has a good time with them - generally. Sometimes even a serious thread getting a bit too serious is disolved by a silly "off topic" comment post or just a "Silly post" and everyone has some more sarcastic/silly comments and its all OK. In fact its part of the push/pull of this place and generally it seems that off topic posts aren't necessarily entirely "Unwelcome" in almost all the threads.
On the whole, people seem tohave a good time with them, and the thread gets directed back if its important - or talks about two subjects or whatever..usually fine.
NOW solution two may be more appropriate and fit into just being "Special Rules for the Religion/Politics" thread. Simply because we all acknolwedge that those debates are special situations in which the forum MEMBERS have decided to "forstall" the normal rules of a "rant" forum in the interest of - playing nice or not pissing too many off.
So I could certanily see how in that *one* forum we decide not only no personal attacks are allowed - but also if things get too off topic than action will be taken by Mod (what action is up to you guys).
As to the suggestion of a "Calling Out" forum - not sure why we have to divide things under categories so much around here . I mean if people need to call smeone out they look like they're doing a darn good job of it already.
But if you guys want another "Category" for a "Free for all bash fest on each other" to have a forum to call someone just on their personal shit - then by all means put it in place.
(however I would still insist in the interest of not being sued, no bashing by name people who aren't here to defend themselves....)
I feel ALLL these topics should be discussed and then put under a vote in say a week or 10 days - as you guys determine by how much this is debated.
And just realize that if you get rid of the sheriff's office, it does limit how well mods can get together and agree to do their jobs - Mods are counterchecks to other mods as well as to forum memebers. Its just something I feel strongly about that should stay.
The rest is all up to you guys - I shall implement my duty in the way you all feel comfortable with.
DEBATE ON!
(see...mm...15 minutes later..I told you I was working on it)
Frith-Rae
Believe it or not *gasp* I posted a similar suggestion to this not 12 hours before Arse came on as "Admin" to announce the change - she can verify as she told me to go ahead and suggest my suggestion I posted in the Sheriff's office.
Now this post will be LONG ASS but please I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TO REPEAT THIS SHIT..
So read it all . Please - I'm going to first discuss the current rules, then I'm going to discuss why I think the Sheriff's office needs to stay, and then I'm going to bring up my new suggestion for a new basic rule (along with a discussion of TOnic's suggestion of no thread hijacking...)
First off - the rules we presently have. They are there for a reason. I saw some of you thinking the whole "can't bash those who aren't here to defend themselves" is a stupid rule.
And you know what maybe it is - but apparenlty people are stupid.
How quickly so many of you forget WHY that rule had to be put into place. Now I don't know the details and unfortunately I think those who DO know the details now cease to come to this board. But I DO believe that at one point this boared was threatened with closure and Alge was threatened with Slander/libel/lawsuit due to comments being made about people who are not here.
As it stands- I thinik the rule should stay. As I don't feel Arse wants to be held responsible for a lawsuit anymore than Alge did - and we operate under the rules of the Main SITE this forum is attached to.
All the rule states is that if you want to call someone out let them know - if they refuse to come defend themselves then I believe you are in the clear still to insult them (if I'm reading that right). And don't bash banned people as they can't come back to defend themselves.
That rule was not in place until Alge got, I believe, a very formal little email from the owners of this "site" the forum works under and a threat of lawsuit.
Ok TWO - Sheriff's Office
I personally DO think there needs to be a place the mods can go and post to one another (and you guys would really be surprised how little posts go there I swear...). Because PMs aren't sent to multiple reciepients - its very hard to have a 3 or 4 or 5 way discussion Via PMs. Its very easy to have that, obviously, via a forum.
There ARE things I feel mods should discuss in private and not just "out in the open for everyone".
For example if they are simply saying "Hey everyone watch this thread it might get nasty" or "Hey this post struck me the wrong way but how do you see it" or "You know forum member XYZ came to me with a private concern that forum member ABC is harrassing them and wants to know our views on what we're reading".
These things do not need to be public. For one - even mentioning a forum was under watch someone might take as a threat or as action by the mods - even if no action was ever taken. If someone knows that post ABC is being "considered" by some mods as maybe crossing a line - then its not a discussion anymore by people who are SUPPOSE to be **OBJECTIVE**, but every one of you is going to feel you need to post your opinon on that "post" in question, or the poster themselves is going to get all up in arms offended.
Objective rulings need to be called down sometimes (or should be being called down) and that just doesnt function very well if everything is just "out in the open".
I can certanily see posters going off just at the mere MENTION that their post was being Looked at a bit closer or something like that.
I really dont thiknk that's a headache anyone here wants to read. Whereas if its between the mods and the mods decide that its nothing, then everyone goes about their merry way and noone gets all upset over literally - nothing happening.
The third example should certanily be kept in a private discussion and concerns noone else but the mods and the parties involved. If you open up for everyoen to be able to read their concerns then pepole won't come forward in the hopes of being viewed objectively.
So that's my vote - Sheriff office stays for mods. Every forum everyWHERE has a place for mods to communicate privately about common concerns so that there is a differnce held between "mod" duties and "personal" posts.
And sometimes Mods need a place to let off some steam but don't want to offend anyone in the general populace because its not about them its about mods being frustrated as being mods - and nothing else.
If they posted that as part of the genearl forum, it would be perceived as somemthing entirely different. Dont' even pretend it woudlnt' be, I think we've already seen how some of us can get.... (and more on that in the next part).
Ok - new suggestion I had already thought up but really is another rehash of an old discussion we had.
SO THREE!! - New Suggestion:
I remember back when we all voted on these rules, and had this discusion before the current rules ccame into place.
There was a discussion as to wether or not to make the "Religion/Politics" forum a bit more "restrictive" as far as personal attacks and flaming.
At the time that particular subset rule for that one forum was shot down - and the logic you pretty much were all using was that "hey we can keep our cool and police ourselves....let's not have to make that rule"
Well perhaps we can't police ourselves as well as we thougth we should.
So I'm opening up that for rediscussion again.
What I propose is that ONLY in the Religion/Political thread - that personal attacks and flames not be allowed.
I would propose that should a thread start to go that direction, the mod of course steps in and makes a warning post - both to EVERYONE involved to remind them not to let it degenerate into a personal thing. Also if it is one particular poster who has stepped a bit too far over that line, the mod can then either delete out of the post the personal rant attack (and PM the poster), or make a POST saying that the above will not be allowed and call on the poster to change it (and send a pm).
Basically I'm calling for a bit more "modding" responsiblity in that ONE forum to keep things more "civil" in discussions. Those are the discussions that tend to cause the most issues, so perhaps they are ones that should be by rule - watched more closely and kept "not ranting style"
For example in the recent "America Evil" thread I *almost* made the 2nd post warning that the topic could very well get out of hand fast and if it did I would immediately be locking it. But I didn't make that post, thinking it was not my job to prewarn and I had no basis as a mod for doing so other than my own personal "foresight" into the buttons such a topic could press.
I see now perhaps I should have made that post - but if we inserted a new rule for the religion/politics forum then I would be definitely given permission by you, the forum members, for making such comments as a mod.
Anyway discuss - we will call up a vote in a weeks time or something to decide this officially .
FOUR!!
OK subtopic - tonic I belive's suggestion - to not allow Off Topic Posts to remain in same thread (I belive that was the gist of the suggestion)
The discussion I see here is two fold.
1- to not allow off topic posts anywhere - that when off topic posts are made that the mod either delets post and sends PM to person to make another thread - OR the mod takes the post out of the thread and ...uhh..makes a seperate thread?
2 - to not allow off topic posts on the Religion/Political debate forum *only* - and take whatever action you guys discuss here as being apropriate
The problem I see with Solution One is that we got off topic posts all over these boards and everyone has a good time with them - generally. Sometimes even a serious thread getting a bit too serious is disolved by a silly "off topic" comment post or just a "Silly post" and everyone has some more sarcastic/silly comments and its all OK. In fact its part of the push/pull of this place and generally it seems that off topic posts aren't necessarily entirely "Unwelcome" in almost all the threads.
On the whole, people seem tohave a good time with them, and the thread gets directed back if its important - or talks about two subjects or whatever..usually fine.
NOW solution two may be more appropriate and fit into just being "Special Rules for the Religion/Politics" thread. Simply because we all acknolwedge that those debates are special situations in which the forum MEMBERS have decided to "forstall" the normal rules of a "rant" forum in the interest of - playing nice or not pissing too many off.
So I could certanily see how in that *one* forum we decide not only no personal attacks are allowed - but also if things get too off topic than action will be taken by Mod (what action is up to you guys).
As to the suggestion of a "Calling Out" forum - not sure why we have to divide things under categories so much around here . I mean if people need to call smeone out they look like they're doing a darn good job of it already.
But if you guys want another "Category" for a "Free for all bash fest on each other" to have a forum to call someone just on their personal shit - then by all means put it in place.
(however I would still insist in the interest of not being sued, no bashing by name people who aren't here to defend themselves....)
I feel ALLL these topics should be discussed and then put under a vote in say a week or 10 days - as you guys determine by how much this is debated.
And just realize that if you get rid of the sheriff's office, it does limit how well mods can get together and agree to do their jobs - Mods are counterchecks to other mods as well as to forum memebers. Its just something I feel strongly about that should stay.
The rest is all up to you guys - I shall implement my duty in the way you all feel comfortable with.
DEBATE ON!
(see...mm...15 minutes later..I told you I was working on it)
Frith-Rae