Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
banning policy
#11
It's a shame that Bjarne's thread never bore any fruit. Rules would benefit us all.
No one can pull anyone back from anywhere. You save yourself or you remain unsaved.
Reply
#12
I second that, lifestream.

-Teresa
Come away, O human child!
To the waters and the wild
With a faery, hand in hand,
For the world’s more full of weeping than you can understand.
-WB Yeats
Reply
#13
(02-08-2016, 03:14 PM)kamya Wrote: I made a thread similar to this about 5 years ago. Got closed. I was somewhat more antagonistic then. It's a topic that seems to come up a few times a year before the threads are closed. Same answers in here as always. The mods have their secret ways. As long as you don't do something especially rude or extreme you are usually fine. The rest is pretty grey.

(09-08-2007, 08:14 AM)bjarne Wrote: Just keep posting and voting to provide feedback on this idea (including ideas for what the rules might be). Rules are, basically, required and probably should be stated in some way on the site. There's already some implied rules like: no spamming, no excessive cursing, bashing or advertising (except for signatures or highly related resource tips). Some other rules might be taken from the http://www.moviecodec.com rules : ie. no encouraging of suicide (obviously), posting of peoples personal information. But rest assured, I do not wish to be strict and narrowminded when making the rules: just want to rule out certain things that are highly annoying to the majority of people (ie. pornography and spamming) and things that are illegal (ie. warez, suicide encouragements and death threats).

This is still the last official update so don't hold your breath doods.

This was the user agreement provided to me back then.

Quote:Whilst we attempt to edit or remove any messages containing inappropriate, sexually orientated, abusive, hateful, slanderous, or threatening material that could be considered invasive of a persons privacy, or which otherwise violate any kind of law, it is impossible for us to review every message posted on this discussion system. For this reason you acknowledge that all messages posted on this discussion system express the views and opinions of the original message author and not necessarily the views of this bulletin board. Therefore we take no responsibility and cannot be held liable for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy and completeness of every message.

By registering on this discussion system you agree that you will not post any material which is knowingly false, inaccurate, abusive, hateful, harassing, sexually orientated, threatening or invasive of a person's privacy, or any other material which may violate any applicable laws.

Failure to comply with these rules may result in the termination of your account, account suspension, or permanent ban of access to these forums. Your IP Address is recorded with each post you make on this discussion system and is retrievable by the forum staff if need-be. You agree that we have the ability and right to remove, edit, or lock any account or message at any time should it be seen fit. You also agree that any information you enter on this discussion system is stored in a database, and that "cookies" are stored on your computer to save your login information.

Any information you provide on these forums will not be disclosed to any third party without your complete consent, although the staff cannot be held liable for any hacking attempt in which your data is compromised.

By continuing with the sign up process you agree to the above rules and any others that the Administrator specifies.

Basically means nothing. There are plenty of people that knowingly violate those rules and get reported but nothing ever happens. Just gotta catch the mods on the right day.

Reading that old thread brings back memories. The smugness. The same people pulling the same shit to this day to get threads derailed and closed. Not much changes.

And those are the things that we enforce what he's posted in that thread. It's so split up between people who refuse to listen - because on many forums, the number one unwritten (and possibly even written) rule is to listen to the moderators/admins -to what they've been told because they just don't agree with it, and if they don't agree, to them, that means they have room to argue - when they really don't. And the other half of people who want to argue saying that there should be written rules because when they do want to argue, their first question (typically sarcastically) is, "Well, where is it in the rules?"

I'm sorry, but forums or chat rooms shouldn't have to keep altering their rules or rules list because a couple of people that come and go want to be smart asses about things when they disagree with something. They should be altered - and usually are on many forums - to the discretion of the moderating team at hand. People don't even consider this side of it, but some rules aren't given to us either. Many times, we, too, have to think on things and decide what should be done. And I'm sure we're not the only moderating team that has to lean on our senses for things.

Mind you, arguing is vastly different from suggesting something or inquiring about why something is.
Reply
#14
Would creating rules really be so bad, Vanilla? As it stands, ALL is technically in a state of martial law since the only standing rule is that the mods are the law. A set of guidelines and strictures that are enforced and freely accessible to every member would be massively beneficial to the forum and would make your job that much easier. If everyone is held to the same standard of behaviour and is duly chastised or punished for deviating from that standard, then nobody can complain about favouritism or the mods letting things slide. I can't claim to know Bjarne or his intentions for ALL but based on the thread that kamya quoted, I believe he wanted the forum to be governed by rules rather than the needs of the moment.
No one can pull anyone back from anywhere. You save yourself or you remain unsaved.
Reply
#15
It's not needs of the moment. Whatever is not written for us to use that we conclude ourselves is applied across all cases. There's very few exceptions. It's almost like what lawyers do. They go back to see past cases and what was done, and then see if that can apply to the case at hand.

Not comparing us to lawyers, by the way, if anyone wants to roll their eyes at that. I'm just saying; It's essentially what happens.
Reply
#16
Forgive me, but that seems like a somewhat arbitrary way of doing things. The thing about evidence is that it can be used to spin all kinds of bias and misinterpretations. A concrete set of rules which, if broken, are punishable by warnings or bans makes the issue far less vulnerable to human error.
No one can pull anyone back from anywhere. You save yourself or you remain unsaved.
Reply
#17
I feel like "acting abusive" needs to be clearly defined as well. I know that I've had several instances of asking a member with various degrees of politeness to leave me alone, all of which were refused. I wasn't called names or cursed out, but I still felt like it was more than disagreement. I felt insulted, harassed, and attacked.

I understand the mods can't catch or police everything, but while the "no insult" rule is clear and easy to understand, I just think it's not comprehensive enough. You can insult someone to the same effect without cursing them out or calling them names. There doesn't seem to be anything against agitation, or when one party is knowingly and obviously egging the other party on. I feel like this is a case in point about the gray areas in the rules and the problems that can happen when too much is left undefined or unclear.
Reply
#18
(02-09-2016, 05:07 AM)lifestream Wrote: Forgive me, but that seems like a somewhat arbitrary way of doing things. The thing about evidence is that it can be used to spin all kinds of bias and misinterpretations. A concrete set of rules which, if broken, are punishable by warnings or bans makes the issue far less vulnerable to human error.

Ah, you may be right. But, then you get people who, when they see fit, argue over how the rules are stupid and senseless to them. What would be your reply to that? Because we get both sides. "That's not in the rules. There are no rules. Where is that in the rules?" As well as, "Well, that rule is stupid, and it shouldn't be there because it's stupid."

This is not a new topic. It's an age-old one that just can't be won. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.
Reply
#19
I see your point and I agree that it is a problem, but you're always going to have people who cry injustice if they feel they're being treated unfairly.

Why not give people the choice to operate with rules, though? Take it to a poll or something, and if the wind is blowing towards 'yes', then we can try it out for a while and see where it leads us.
No one can pull anyone back from anywhere. You save yourself or you remain unsaved.
Reply
#20
(02-09-2016, 05:22 AM)lifestream Wrote: I see your point and I agree that it is a problem, but you're always going to have people who cry injustice if they feel they're being treated unfairly.

Why not give people the choice to operate with rules, though? Take it to a poll or something, and if the wind is blowing towards 'yes', then we can try it out for a while and see where it leads us.

And they'd cry "unfair" or "unjust" regardless of written rules or not. Because just like you say yourself, there's always going to be people who feel that way when they think they're being treated unfairly.

Why not give the people a choice? Because this isn't a publicly ran forum. Mind you, this is not my forum. So I'm not saying any of this because I think I'm the big hog. I know I'm not. I was chosen to help moderate this forum. I can distinctly separate the fact that I'm the help over thinking that this is my show to run.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The forum's Kismet Banning System Mouse 19 3,201 06-08-2012, 09:17 PM
Last Post: bjarne
  EVIDENCE OF THE RECENT MASS BANNING IN THE FLASH CHAT BOX!!! Knight 6 22,374 09-07-2008, 10:54 PM
Last Post: Bluey

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)