Infraction Allotment

[The Cheshire Cat]

So, posters have bitched about infractions and Nazi mods and so on a so forth. So, I figured this would be a decent idea. Give the moderators a pre-determined number of infractions for a period of one month. Kind of like the thanks system. I think it will help cut down on improper infractions and infractions for small stupid things. So, good idea or bad idea?

[-SpectraL]

Bad... because if a mod needed to use their allotted infractions on justified cases.. and then they met another justified case... all they'd have left to deal with it would be spitballs, finger-pointing and extremely imaginative name-calling. :D

[The Cheshire Cat]

Bad... because if a mod needed to use their allotted infractions on justified cases.. and then they met another justified case... all they'd have left to deal with it would be spitballs, finger-pointing and extremely imaginative name-calling. :D

Ah, I knew this would come up. Think of it this way though. How many times have we seen the infraction for ONE off topic post? Instead of using infractions, it will help moderators take another course of action. Thus saving those infractions for justifiable reasons.

[-SpectraL]

Ah, I knew this would come up. Think of it this way though. How many times have we seen the infraction for ONE off topic post? Instead of using infractions, it will help moderators take another course of action. Thus saving those infractions for justifiable reasons.... and if a mod was to encounter a greater number of page stretchers or personal information posters than the allotted number of infractions? Cross-forum moderating work-arounds? Silver posts and holy water? :D

[The Cheshire Cat]

... and if a mod was to encounter a greater number of page stretchers or personal information posters than the allotted number of infractions? Cross-forum moderating work-arounds? Silver posts and holy water? :D

Well, if there was that scenario, isn't that a job for a Super Moderator anyways? Remember, we are here to pick up the trash. Not arrest the people for throwing it on the ground in the first place. ;)

[DaGuru]

I say fuck the infraction system completely. Its silly and just adds to the drama. Why not just create a committee of the higher higher ups and have something in M & A...."Enemies of the website". Bam-slam-permaban.

Mods could make recommendations, add their arguments..... but let a select few determine who goes and who stays.

As for this idea though Expl0itz...it kinda sounds like Barney Fife and his one bullet, wandering around Compton in the dead of night. Once the kidiots realize just how much ammo each mod has left, it would be chaos.

[The Cheshire Cat]

I say fuck the infraction system completely. Its silly and just adds to the drama. Why not just create a committee of the higher higher ups and have something in M & A...."Enemies of the website". Bam-slam-permaban.

Mods could make recommendations, add their arguments..... but let a select few determine who goes and who stays.

As for this idea though Expl0itz...it kinda sounds like Barney Fife and his one bullet, wandering around Compton in the dead of night. Once the kidiots realize just how much ammo each mod has left, it would be chaos.

I've wanted out with the infractions system for so long now... This is one of the only alternatives that I could come up with to the "I don't like this post" *pushes infraction button*. It's a bit half baked, and I'm not going to deny it, but I figured I would throw it out there to see what could MAYBE come from it.

[-SpectraL]

I guess the point here would be the idea that maybe mods are handing out too many warnings/infractions. I would say that could be the case, but that most of the cards were well-earned by their recipients, and if there was a problem with it, the global mods would be reversing such cards and educating such wayward souls. How many cases of reversals do we have? How many wayward souls are actually living out their purgatories as we speak? Is there a lot of members who are receiving cards unjustly? In my opinion, these are all questions we need to answer first before limiting the powers and tools of the moderator-group.

The Committee thing is a great idea, DaGuru.. as long as bleeding hearts don't get on it somehow.

[The Cheshire Cat]

There have been multiple instances of infraction where the post could have just been deleted. Take for example a couple of the "page stretching" infractions. The posts just could have been deleted and it wouldn't have been a big deal. Shit, they could have even been edited so the page wasn't stretched. Instead, we just whack them with an infraction and move on to the next person that 'tests' our patience.

[-SpectraL]

I don't know man. I personally feel page-stretchers are rule-breakers, and as such, they should get their willies whacked. If we just start cleaning their droppings up behind them, we ignore the root problem. Page-stretching deprives certain others of their own enjoyment of the site content, and it would only encourage rule-breakers to be even more self-serving if we didn't respond to it diligently on behalf of such ones.

[DaGuru]

In regard to the "page stretching"....that is exactly what I was getting at with getting rid of infractions. To me, I don't understand the mentality of ANYONE that does it even once. "Derrrrrr hurrrrrr, look at me...I can pound on this keyboard and make all kinds of weird images/annoyances to the world".

Someone give me an explanation why anyone should have a second chance after that? CLEARLY they aren't part of a "thinking" or "informative" community, and are just kidiots taking turns pooping in the sandbox. One page-stretch SHOULD equal = immediate permaban.

Seriously, if you throw a rockin ass party and someone decides..."fuck it, I'll just take a shit in the hottub cuz I think its c00l and funny"....you ever want them at one of your shindigs again?

[DaGuru]

The Committee thing is a great idea, DaGuru.. as long as bleeding hearts don't get on it somehow.

Bleeding hearts OR indecisive people. In other words...keep Zok himself off of it.... because he would need polls, sub-committees, barometric pressure charts, and other assorted data just to organize the day of the meeting to discuss the outcasts. :(

[The Cheshire Cat]

I don't know man. I personally feel page-stretchers are rule-breakers, and as such, they should get their willies whacked. If we just start cleaning their droppings up behind them, we ignore the root problem. Page-stretching deprives certain others of their own enjoyment of the site content, and it would only encourage rule-breakers to be even more self-serving if we didn't respond to it diligently on behalf of such ones.

-SpectraL, I like the way you go about things, and I can understand your train of though, but step out of your box for a second. Here are a couple of things that I want you to read, and some of the users. Shit, if I get slapped for this post, oh well.


The “whip them into shape” approach: When a person is made a new moderator they often get the idea that they need to “whip the forum into shape” by being overly strict and not allowing borderline threads to occur. While this may work to keep some people in line, it only infuriates the others. People see it as a restriction on their freedom of speech (which it sometimes is and sometimes isn’t). The people who threats will not work against are going to give the moderator the most trouble. They will try the moderator as hard as they can to get them to close and delete threads and even apply bans. Though the troll is usually in the wrong and should be banned for their actions, it’s still an unnecessary situation. The entire problem could have been avoided by simply showing everyone in the forum some common courtesy and not threatening every troll with a ban/infraction.


This pertains to long time moderators, too. The "I'm going to clean this place up like a hospital" approach has done quite some damage to the community. IE: Meta. That was his approach and looked at the outcome of that.

If you haven't noticed. Almost every asshat that has been infracted for these instances (IE: getting a rise out of the staff) has come back to cause even more trouble. And the harder you push back, the harder they come at you. Just take a look around. There are quite a few posters that act like this.

The whole point is, that having an unlimited amount of infractions is hurtfull. A troll come along and starts shitting on a forum. Bam, infracted. He registers another account, bam infracted. So he makes two, and then the people start joining in. Then you've got one pissed off moderator infracting everyone who puts a toe out of line and in turn ruins a userbase.

[-SpectraL]

Bleeding hearts OR indecisive people. In other words...keep Zok himself off of it.... because he would need polls, sub-committees, barometric pressure charts, and other assorted data just to organize the day of the meeting to discuss the outcasts. :(Heck... all I'd need is about 16 feet of sturdy yellow rope and a old rickety rocking chair!...

... uhhh... wait a minute.. ILOVEZOK.. icwatudithar

*hides child-detector behind back... smiles innocently*

[The Cheshire Cat]

Heck... all I'd need is about 16 feet of sturdy yellow rope and a old rickety rocking chair!...

... uhhh... wait a minute.. ILOVEZOK.. icwatudithar

*hides child-detector behind back... smiles innocently*

I didn't follow you on that one...

[Shrike]

-SpectraL, I like the way you go about things, and I can understand your train of though, but step out of your box for a second. Here are a couple of things that I want you to read, and some of the users. Shit, if I get slapped for this post, oh well.

The “whip them into shape” approach: When a person is made a new moderator they often get the idea that they need to “whip the forum into shape” by being overly strict and not allowing borderline threads to occur. While this may work to keep some people in line, it only infuriates the others. People see it as a restriction on their freedom of speech (which it sometimes is and sometimes isn’t). The people who threats will not work against are going to give the moderator the most trouble. They will try the moderator as hard as they can to get them to close and delete threads and even apply bans. Though the troll is usually in the wrong and should be banned for their actions, it’s still an unnecessary situation. The entire problem could have been avoided by simply showing everyone in the forum some common courtesy and not threatening every troll with a ban/infraction.


This pertains to long time moderators, too. The "I'm going to clean this place up like a hospital" approach has done quite some damage to the community. IE: Meta. That was his approach and looked at the outcome of that.

If you haven't noticed. Almost every asshat that has been infracted for these instances (IE: getting a rise out of the staff) has come back to cause even more trouble. And the harder you push back, the harder they come at you. Just take a look around. There are quite a few posters that act like this.

The whole point is, that having an unlimited amount of infractions is hurtfull. A troll come along and starts shitting on a forum. Bam, infracted. He registers another account, bam infracted. So he makes two, and then the people start joining in. Then you've got one pissed off moderator infracting everyone who puts a toe out of line and in turn ruins a userbase.

This is a really good post.

[zombo.com]

The only problem i see with it is that we've got some mods who do a damned fine job skeet shooting spam bots and assorted crap, like dfg.
what happens when they run out of infractions?

[The Cheshire Cat]

The only problem i see with it is that we've got some mods who do a damned fine job skeet shooting spam bots and assorted crap, like dfg.
what happens when they run out of infractions?

If we fixed it so the fucking bots couldn't register, we wouldn't have to worry about that problem, right? That's a simple solution right. Instead of wasting time infracting all these hundreds of bots, let's just fix the root of the damn problem.

[-SpectraL]

I don't personally believe in this apparently popular philosophy of "we can't beat the kids anyways, so we may has well cave into their unbeatable demands and clever persistence". We need some backbone around here for once, and that's my opinion. You let these idiots overrun the site, let them know that they're in control here, and it will be no good for anybody but the spammers and clueless morons. We're in control of maintaining and enforcing the rules zok put in place, not them... and the sooner they get the idea through their very thick skulls the better. I don't have any problem at all in "waging war" on any one these spamming kidiots... they can come back with 900 accounts and I couldn't care less... I'll get every single one of them before the day is done. Reason? Ban evasion.

[The Cheshire Cat]

I don't personally believe in this apparently popular philosophy of "we can't beat the kids anyways, so we may has well cave into their unbeatable demands and clever persistence". We need some backbone around here for once, and that's my opinion. You let these idiots overrun the site, let them know that they're in control here, and it will be no good for anybody but the spammers and clueless morons. We're in control of maintaining and enforcing the rules zok put in place, not them... and the sooner they get the idea through their very thick skulls the better. I don't have any problem at all in "waging war" on any one these spamming kidiots... they can come back with 900 accounts and I couldn't care less... I'll get every single one of them before the day is done. Reason? Ban evasion.

Understood. You missed my point here, buddy. You ban one person for something that could have been let go. They come back and spam the place. You push back and ban them again and it turns into a viscous cycle. Next thing you know he recruits people and campaigns against you. Now not only are you stuck on edge all the time trying to keep the place clean, but you're losing users because of all the mess and bullshit. C'mon. How many times have YOU seen this happen. Again, case in point. Metaphysicist.

[-SpectraL]

Understood. You missed my point here, buddy. You ban one person for something that could have been let go. They come back and spam the place. You push ban them again and it turns into a viscious cycle. Next thing you know he recruits people and campaigns against you. Now not only are you stuck on edge all the time trying to keep the place clean, but you're losing users because of all the mess and bullshit. C'mon. How many times have YOU seen this happen. Again, case in point. Metaphysicist.No, I never missed the point, man. The point I'm making is that the "members" who would start spamming and breaking rules just because of the push-back we give others are "members" we don't want around here anyways. Anybody who would participate in this "cycle" need to get their dumb asses gone in a big hurry... PERIOD. We don't make that happen by pandering to their weak ploys.

[The Cheshire Cat]

No, I never missed the point, man. The point I'm making is that the "members" who would start spamming and breaking rules just because of the push-back we give others are "members" we don't want around here anyways. Anybody who would participate in this "cycle" need to get their dumb asses gone in a big hurry... PERIOD. We don't make that happen by pandering to their weak ploys.

This may be a mistake on me for not assuring you that I'm with you in getting rid of the kidiots, but when it comes to every day posters who just happen to change it up every once in a while with their posting habbits. I'm as sick of the kids as you are but I'm more sick of seeing infractions against users who haven't really done anything wrong and who contribute, but just because they stepped on a toe or pushed a button on someone they get cunt-punted.

Take for example this post


Just a reminder I will not tolerate shit in this thread or in any of my moderated sections. I will ban without any remorse and I will rape the fuck out of Multiple Account users.

So, be fucking warned. I will infract without fear bitches.


Seriously? The thread was moving along fine and conversation was a bit off topic, but still the thread was moving fine. Then that was posted? It's their section, whatever, but still... Threatening with bans and infractions just because? This is what I want to get away from. It's too easy to just push a couple buttons and kick a user for no damn reason. It may be me but when I'm enjoying myself, and someone comes along and TELLS me that I better watch out for no fucking reason, I'm going to cop an attitude.

It's like this... You and your friends are standing around outside talking and laughing. A cop pulls up and jumps out of his car, tells you to stand against the wall and starts searching you. He proceeds to tell you that he's going to bust your ass for loitering even though you're in a public place that PROMOTES that sort of thing. Then he goes on to tell you that he'll fuck your day up etc, etc. I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd feel fucking violated and I'd cop an attitude right away. Then you get arrested for almost absolutely NOTHING. So, you fight it because you feel violated and that it was unjust. Funny thing is, that if that same cop had just drove past, rolled down his window, and asked politely if you could move along then there wouldn't have been this problem.

And seriously, when Moderators get that gung-ho, bust your ass, fuck your day up for the smallest thing attitude, it makes the rest of us look like ABSOLUTE SHIT

Again, I'm all for punting the assholes that want to start shit and crap all over threads but I am severely against the "Well, you quoted him and took the topic in another direction. I don't like the way it's going so you're getting infracted" attitude.

[PuttinOnTheRitz]

if this happens dfg and spectral will cry

[Dfg]

if this happens dfg and spectral will cry

Not really. I won't mind 500 infractions per month.

:hrmph:

[PuttinOnTheRitz]

Not really. I won't mind 500 infractions per month.

:hrmph:

naw dawg, u gonna cry

[Dfg]

naw dawg, u gonna cry

Dammit, you got me.

:hrmph:

Anyway, just solve the bot problem and check the major infractions. I think 50 infractions per month or week depending on the users should be enough for everyone.

You can hand out warnings if you like but infractions will be limited.

[zombo.com]

I do agree with the main point though. Deescalation of the open warfare seems like a good thing.
We're not cops, we're not babysitters.
Hell as far as i'm concerned i'm just a user who occasionally has to take out the trash.
If i have a problem with a poster i'm a lot more likely to just make a rebuttal post and try to start an open dialogue about the issue. (on the flip side of that I don't have to deal with morons who simply spam stupid pictures 50 times and think that counts as posting).
I dunno, spectral's got substantially different issues then what i normally see in my section, but there has to be a way of handling it that doesnt alienate the users who may screw around once in awhile but do contribute as well.
In a perfect world, they'd jsut cease to be a cunt that other % of the time, but ofc this ain't perfect.
I still think rizzo's retard thread is the best compromise I've seen. delete posts, people get whiney, move it into the retard thread and it still gets seen, which is of course what they want.
NFHC has improved considerably and i don't think anyones gotten seriously butthurt. And if someone wants to bitch and say "this was a serious response" then the community can see the whole discussion and engage in it, on neutral ground.

[-SpectraL]

There is already a process in place to deal with mods who challenge members for no good reason. Not that I believe this process is cognizant of which mods are justified and which mods are not, but there is actually a process. Fix that process first and the problem disappears. It ain't hard math here, we just think it is.

[PuttinOnTheRitz]

yall some big babies

[slm33d]

I agree with the idea. Now but we do need the infraction system so people can see what not to do.

Peace.

[harry_hardcore_hoedown]

Okay, but what would you do about those accounts that advertise the media software if you run out of infractions?

[PuttinOnTheRitz]

Okay, but what would you do about those accounts that advertise the media software if you run out of infractions?

i like those niggas, they can stay

[SHH]

Do you think it would stop certain mods from making up rules and giving out infractions for breaking their made-up rules?

[harry_hardcore_hoedown]

Do you think it would stop certain mods from making up rules and giving out infractions for breaking their made-up rules?

I don't think they do that. Do you think calling you on your bullshit would stop you from making up stories?

[-SpectraL]

Sometimes, in the absence of a rule, moderators will in fact create a "field-rule" to satisfy the situation. For example, there is no specific infraction which says admitting to crimes in posts is against the rules, however, there is text on the site which specifically states it's not allowed... so even though there's no infraction for it, I consider it a rule which I will indeed warn and infract for. There's also no rule for threatening physical harm to others where there is demonstrated indication that such a member could, and would, in fact, do so, and yet I will judge that kind of thing as rule-breaking... even though there's no rule for it. Frivolous thread deletions, "stalking" other members, repeatedly creating blank posts, thanks parties, etc.... these are things for which there is no defined rules, and yet many moderators will simply use whatever is at hand to treat these cases as the breaking of rules, by creating "field-rules", which often apply to only one or more forums, but not the entire site. So, yes... sometimes mods really do make rules as they go along... but most times there is an actual need to create a rule which does not yet exist.

[BITCH TITZ]

There's also no rule for threatening physical harm to others


i'll break your nose you old bitch

[-SpectraL]

But the point ILOVEZOK is bringing out here is that there are, in fact, several mods who hand out warnings and infraction frivolously... in cases where the member is actually a half-decent contributor. Perhaps these mods feel they need a bit of ego boost... perhaps they crave the recognition of their "power", and so they like to "demonstrate" it at every possible opportunity. And I think ILOVEZOK is absolutely right. There ARE mods who do such things... and doing such things is definitely worthy of demodding. I know that ILOVEZOK has a keen sense of injustice... never seen it to be wrong once... and I know exactly where he is coming from on this. I've personally seen some half-decent members abused and hounded by mods... to the point where they said, "Fuck this!", and left in hurt and anger. This can NEVER be a good thing for our community as a whole.

However, limiting infractions is a bandaid solution at best... we must deal with the root problems first before we can make any headway on the integrity of the mod group. There is, in fact, already a process to address such cases, but even that process needs a whole lot of work, IMO.

Another thing on this is something zok himself brought up in some thread or other... the fact that we don't have the userbase Totse had, and as such, all of us who manage the community need to be extra careful of our decisions and actions, or we may not have any community at all to enjoy in the long-run. Pretty wise words for a computer geek :D.

[FireStarter]

I think its an excellent idea to put a limit on infractions. I'm sure lots of people have been unfairly infracted many times, then they have to go through the process of repealing it, and its just a big pain in the arse for them and the mod who gave it to them. Other people get pissed off and just spam up the place with fake accounts in anger. Either way, nobody wins.

There are oppressive moderators like SpectraL who should be kept on a short leash by limiting the number of infractions they can hand out so perhaps they'll think twice before going nuts with it. He likes to make up rules as he goes (none of which are in writing) and infract people for breaking his rules... He is so dead-set on teaching the kiddiots a lesson through force that it isn't a good thing. He is quite militant in his moderating and it needs to stop. We've got a borderline Meta on our hand... Both old men who got a taste of power moderating on an internet forum and decided to shit all over the members. I'm sure SpectraL has been the cause of many pissed off people coming here to spam... In fact, I know he is. I've seen more anti-SpectraL spam than against any other mod. In fact, I've never seen spam against another mod.

I love how hard SpectraL is fighting against this... He's getting all butthurt that he won't have his uber-internet-fighting infraction gun with unlimited ammo anymore.

[FireStarter]

there are, in fact, several mods who hand out warnings and infraction frivolously... in cases where the member is actually a half-decent contributor. Perhaps these mods feel they need a bit of ego boost... perhaps they crave the recognition of their "power", and so they like to "demonstrate" it at every possible opportunity.

Speak of the devil... That sure sounds like you...

[-SpectraL]

Speak of the devil... That sure sounds like you...No... that's not me at all. The only "members" I have had "dealings" with are known spammers, fail-trolls and outright troublemakers who like to disrupt community activities just to satiate their own lame egos. There's not one member on this site who was warned or infracted by me without due cause. Hey, they want to fuck around and bother people with their infantile idiocy? ... then they're gonna get challenged. Period. My job here is to maintain a balanced sense of order and fairness to all in the forums placed under my care, and if these deliberate and hardened space-cases want to cross the line between good ol' fun and blatant damage to community, I'll be right there every single time to shut their dumb hole for them.. and good.

[PuttinOnTheRitz]

i'll break your nose you old bitch

watch out, i heard spectral does mma

[-SpectraL]

watch out, i heard spectral does mmaOh, PuttinOnTheRitz... why.... oh, why... can ya tell me why, buddy... do you continually demand to be warned and infracted? Can you not post in the forums appropriate to your... errrr... "contributions"? This is Features and Ideas, son... a place for discussion only.... not your lame shitdrops against people you don't like. Know what I mean, Jelly Bean? I'll let you off the hook this time, but pleeeaaaase do not force me to have to kill six random grannies in the street because of you... nobody wants that... especially the grannies. Save some lives instead of doing bad; that's my best advice to you at this point in time.

[FireStarter]

Oh, PuttinOnTheRitz... why.... oh, why... can ya tell me why, buddy... do you continually demand to be warned and infracted? Can you not post in the forums appropriate to your... errrr... "contributions"? This is Features and Ideas, son... a place for discussion only.... not your lame shitdrops against people you don't like. Know what I mean, Jelly Bean? I'll let you off the hook this time, but pleeeaaaase do not force me to have to kill six random grannies in the street because of you... nobody wants that... especially the grannies. Save some lives instead of doing bad; that's my best advice to you at this point in time.

Point proven... Right there...

He makes one off topic post, and out comes the infraction/warning threat. :rolleyes:

What would be so hard about ignoring that post and just moving on? Its not big and obstructive, and its not bothering anyone on its own. Hell, you're a mod of this forum... Why not just delete it and forget about it?

[Midnight Sun]

Oh, PuttinOnTheRitz... why.... oh, why... can ya tell me why, buddy... do you continually demand to be warned and infracted? Can you not post in the forums appropriate to your... errrr... "contributions"? This is Features and Ideas, son... a place for discussion only.... not your lame shitdrops against people you don't like. Know what I mean, Jelly Bean? I'll let you off the hook this time, but pleeeaaaase do not force me to have to kill six random grannies in the street because of you... nobody wants that... especially the grannies. Save some lives instead of doing bad; that's my best advice to you at this point in time.

my contribution is that spectral likes black cock and should only be allowed one little infraction a week

[zombo.com]

Point proven... Right there...

He makes one off topic post, and out comes the infraction/warning threat. :rolleyes:

What would be so hard about ignoring that post and just moving on? Its not big and obstructive, and its not bothering anyone on its own. Hell, you're a mod of this forum... Why not just delete it and forget about it?

you know, coming into a thread that suggests some mods may be too nazi'ish for the simple purpose of proving the point that your a twat, could be considered counterproductive to the idea of toning down those mods.
Perhaps spec was simply asking that it stays on the playground boards and not in a serious discussion. there's plenty of playgrounds on the site, is it that out of line for him to ask that specialist and serious forums not be flooded with worthless crap?

I don't always agree with spectral, but he does have a point.

[FireStarter]

My point is, mods like SpectraL don't need to jump to manning the warning/infraction gun for one off topic post. A simple "Keep posts on topic" would do. He doesn't need to jump straight to threats and name calling. Its no wonder people don't like him... He is far too confrontational for his own good.

[ArmsMerchant]

Limiting in any way the number of infractions we can hand out would amount to surrendering to the trolls, and letting the inmates take over the asylum.

[Raziel]

letting the inmates take over the asylum.

Cough, Cough, Cough...

[SHH]

Sometimes, in the absence of a rule, moderators will in fact create a "field-rule" to satisfy the situation. For example, there is no specific infraction which says admitting to crimes in posts is against the rules, however, there is text on the site which specifically states it's not allowed... so even though there's no infraction for it, I consider it a rule which I will indeed warn and infract for. There's also no rule for threatening physical harm to others where there is demonstrated indication that such a member could, and would, in fact, do so, and yet I will judge that kind of thing as rule-breaking... even though there's no rule for it. Frivolous thread deletions, "stalking" other members, repeatedly creating blank posts, thanks parties, etc.... these are things for which there is no defined rules, and yet many moderators will simply use whatever is at hand to treat these cases as the breaking of rules, by creating "field-rules", which often apply to only one or more forums, but not the entire site. So, yes... sometimes mods really do make rules as they go along... but most times there is an actual need to create a rule which does not yet exist.

That was indeed long. Point is when your run ouyt of reasons to ban people you just make shit up and claim it's an official rule. Which was just a complete and utter lie. And fuck you for deleting my post.

[ArmsMerchant]

My point is, mods like SpectraL don't need to jump to manning the warning/infraction gun for one off topic post. A simple "Keep posts on topic" would do. He doesn't need to jump straight to threats and name calling. Its no wonder people don't like him... He is far too confrontational for his own good.

Evidently, you are unfamilair with the rules, and hence have no business posting here.

Be advised that the off-topic infraction is for "repeated" off-topic posts. People are allowed one freebie. However--as I interpret the rule--people with a history of making off-topic posts and who have been warned and warned and WARNED and warned can be infracted for the first off-topic post in a specific thread.

Trolling is different. We can hand out an infraction for the first troll post someone makes--and it is the responsibility of the membership to 1) learn exactly what the official definition for trolling is, and 2) to read and heed any specific guidelines that are peculiar to any specific forum. As has been pointed out, different forums rightly have different standards of acceptability.

Since a total of ten red flags means an auto-ban, I am less apt to infract than I used to, and more apt to simply delete , verbally warn, or yellow-flag an offending post.

Clear now?

[-SpectraL]

..And fuck you for deleting my post.Truth be told, I've not deleted a single member's post on this entire site. I've UN-approved many severely off-topic and obvious attention-whore posts which was distrupting the natural flow of discussion, but that's about it.

[Midnight Sun]

Truth be told, I've not deleted a single member's post on this entire site. I've UN-approved many severely off-topic and obvious attention-whore posts which was distrupting the natural flow of discussion, but that's about it.

you didn't un-approve mine, bRAH:D

[SHH]

Truth be told, I've not deleted a single member's post on this entire site. I've UN-approved many severely off-topic and obvious attention-whore posts which was distrupting the natural flow of discussion, but that's about it.

Why should I believe you when I know you're a liar?

[Shrike]

Sometimes, in the absence of a rule, moderators will in fact create a "field-rule" to satisfy the situation. For example, there is no specific infraction which says admitting to crimes in posts is against the rules, however, there is text on the site which specifically states it's not allowed... so even though there's no infraction for it, I consider it a rule which I will indeed warn and infract for. There's also no rule for threatening physical harm to others where there is demonstrated indication that such a member could, and would, in fact, do so, and yet I will judge that kind of thing as rule-breaking... even though there's no rule for it. Frivolous thread deletions, "stalking" other members, repeatedly creating blank posts, thanks parties, etc.... these are things for which there is no defined rules, and yet many moderators will simply use whatever is at hand to treat these cases as the breaking of rules, by creating "field-rules", which often apply to only one or more forums, but not the entire site. So, yes... sometimes mods really do make rules as they go along... but most times there is an actual need to create a rule which does not yet exist.

Like that time you got Ocular Gyric Crisis for "admitting to the crime" of planning to heckle at a metal gig? :facepalm:

Yeah that was some great "field ruling" there.

[harry_hardcore_hoedown]

Like that time you got Ocular Gyric Crisis for "admitting to the crime" of planning to heckle at a metal gig? :facepalm:

Yeah that was some great "field ruling" there.

You realize that if he got caught he was bringing the whole site down?

[-SpectraL]

You'd be surprised. If the venue owner/cops found out one of our members had used this site to organize people specifically to go over there and break the law and cause harrassment to the performers, we could be facing litigation. That ain't gonna happen on my watch. This site is a discussion-forum, not a convenient place for you to come to organize some criminals into committing a criminal act.

[DaGuru]

My point is, mods like SpectraL don't need to jump to manning the warning/infraction gun for one off topic post. A simple "Keep posts on topic" would do. He doesn't need to jump straight to threats and name calling. Its no wonder people don't like him... He is far too confrontational for his own good.

Actually, all you've done here by using POTR's idiocy as your "example" is just expose you are blinded by bias and can't examine any of this with a true sense of objectivity.

Because the way Spectral handled it WAS more than fair, and it was entertaining to boot. He made lemons out of lemonade, after POTR made a very simplistic and gradeschool one-liner comment that had no relevance or place in this thread in the least.

So instead of punting/infracting this pissant or deleting the post, Spectral instead took a moment or two out of his day to just verbally "warn" him publicly (OMGZZZZZZ, that text really hurt him...didn't it? :eek:)....and also gave several members a chuckle with that colorful warning and those lines of text.

And here you are STILL bitching at him for being "too harsh". :rolleyes:

*sniggers*

Spectral, you put any more notches in that belt, its just gonna fall apart and all you'll have is spaghetti-like pieces of leather to make shoelaces or something. Keep on keepin on......:thumbsup:

[-SpectraL]

...To me, I don't understand the mentality of ANYONE that does it even once. "Derrrrrr hurrrrrr, look at me...I can pound on this keyboard and make all kinds of weird images/annoyances to the world".

Someone give me an explanation why anyone should have a second chance after that? CLEARLY they aren't part of a "thinking" or "informative" community, and are just kidiots taking turns pooping in the sandbox. One page-stretch SHOULD equal = immediate permaban.

Seriously, if you throw a rockin ass party and someone decides..."fuck it, I'll just take a shit in the hottub cuz I think its c00l and funny"....you ever want them at one of your shindigs again?Man... I keep reading this post again and again... it's basically the entire problem we have here all written up in a great little nutshell. I wholeheartedly agree with you, Daguru. Chimps who pound on their keyboards, spitting out way-overdone graphic after graphic, with their totally lame one-liners and boring single smileys are simply attention-whores that need to get their stupid assholes gone in a big hurry. I always wondered the same thing: why the fuck do we allow these moron-children to keep posting when we've already established that they're useless members who could NEVER bring anything of worth to the table? Are we simply looking for bodies to fill the seats, or are we going to finally start getting down and dirty and start cleaning this place the hell up of these wastes of space? I'm often told, "Work with them... be an example.. encourage them... turn them around, etc, etc...", but how the fuck can you "work with" a drooling retard that simply doesn't even have the capacity to string two three-letter words together?

It's frankly ludicrous to think anybody could "turn" these mindless 10 year olds into respectable posters. Comes a time when you have to set aside "the perfect world"... and all the unrealistic pipe-dreams that go with... and get down to the actual facts.. and start doing something about it. It's all well and nice to spout these grandiose ideas about "good example" and "leadership", but it's another thing to face facts, accept them, and deal with it.

[DaGuru]

why the fuck do we allow these moron-children to keep posting when we've already established that they're useless members who could NEVER bring anything of worth to the table?

All great points as usual Spectral.....and I'll answer this one question for you.

This is where you get into a battle of "ideals" vs. "website hits".

Someone with purpose, integrity, fortitude and a sense of the bigger picture would never lose sight of their ideals.

Whereas, someone that is just a sellout with very little backbone will spend their days TALKING about empty rhetoric and colorful catch-phrases....and in the end overlook everything else to take the easy/greedy way out.

Not too hard to figure out which direction this site has been heading in the last year..... :thumbsdown:

[-SpectraL]

But think about it this way... zok is the system administrator.. sure... but he is really only a single member of this community... albeit a notable one. To be fair, a single member cannot evolve this community into all it can be... administrator, or not, King of Siam, or not... it takes the combined effort of the entire moderator-group and the bulk of the regular-contributor group to get some solid (as well as profitable) content and traffic going. This is the main reason I took the moderator position... because I can do much more as part of a team that I can working alone.

I've always said that zok owns the site, but he doesn't own the community, and by the same token, he can't be responsible for the plight of community either. Jeff Hunter always wanted Community to be a self-serving beast - an entirely self-sufficient entity onto its own - requiring very little input from The Gods. I also believe in such a philosophy. I only require that members give what they can give, no matter how little or seemingly insignificant that might be... and if they have nothing to give (not pointing fingers at all here *honesty*)... so be it! Community is well able to pick itself up off the ground with a penny in its pocket and be a man. Let's point the finger back at our own smiling faces as we stare back at ourselves from the ballroom mirror in a collective group... holding our glasses of champagne high, with and our multi-colored twizzle-sticks at the ready.

Let's walk this mile abreast, the son of a noble warrior lost to the annals of a better age... yea... a better time. Praise be to Jehovah, and may death be no more, neither shall mourning nor crying be anymore, nor pain any more, for the former things will have passed away. Amen and hallelujah. Good night and have a pleasant tomorrow.

[Shrike]

You'd be surprised. If the venue owner/cops found out one of our members had used this site to organize people specifically to go over there and break the law and cause harrassment to the performers, we could be facing litigation. That ain't gonna happen on my watch. This site is a discussion-forum, not a convenient place for you to come to organize some criminals into committing a criminal act.

Bullshit. Heckling is not breaking a law. You failed at that argument in the PEOO thread, and you fail with it now and your "field rules".

Basically, if there is no rule against something on this forum then you shouldn't do shit. You should not make up your own rules.

[zombo.com]

Bullshit. Heckling is not breaking a law. You failed at that argument in the PEOO thread, and you fail with it now and your "field rules".

Basically, if there is no rule against something on this forum then you shouldn't do shit. You should not make up your own rules.

did the heckling thread even mention a venue or a band name? I thought the guy was jsut asking for ideas about what he could do.

[Issue313]

"I don't like this post" *pushes infraction button*.

Greyfox only infracts to help the "Spiritual Development" of the users.

[Shrike]

did the heckling thread even mention a venue or a band name? I thought the guy was jsut asking for ideas about what he could do.

No, it didn't. Spectroll was just being a heavy-handed moron, as usual.

[DaGuru]

All the people pissing and whining about the band heckling nonsense, need to just drown in their tears already. Seriously, do any of you kidiots ever go out of doors and experience real life? :confused:

How can you possibly not understand that what is cool for one situation, isn't always good for other situations? Even if it is in the same venue, with the same security, same stage....what the fuck ever.

Simple example that even you morons could understand. Take whatever big arena in the city nearest you. Now if you were attending a Metallica concert that night....you would be perfectly fine standing on your chair for 3 hours screaming "Fade To Black" with a lighter in your hand. Try that at a Celine Deon show, and within a minute or two security will be on your ass...and if you don't comply you'll be tossed the fuck out and possibly charged with disorderly conduct.

Same exact place...... but completely DIFFERENT expectations of the audience's behavior. This also goes hand-in-hand with some of you people whining about different modding expectations from section to section around here. Same venue, different vibe.

Now STFU with your incessant whining about an issue that NEVER made sense....and the longer you keep crying about such petty silliness it is only exposing just how little life you've lived as well as how naive you are about the world. :eek:

[-SpectraL]

No, it didn't. Spectroll was just being a heavy-handed moron, as usual.Yes, it did mention a location... and furthermore, it invited PMs from other members in the same area to coordinate a heckling attack on the performer playing that night. Get your facts straight, son, then come see me.

[The Cheshire Cat]

How in the fuck did we get to heckling? :confused:

[zombo.com]

somewhere half a page back it became YASB (yet another spectral bash)

[PuttinOnTheRitz]

A known thread-derailer got in and took the conversation off-track.

who

[Issue313]

who

-Spectral refers to himself. Every thread he posts in he attention whores himself by saying something assholeish, so the entire thread revolves around him.

8 of the above 30 or so posts is -Spectral. In addition to derailing threads he also spams up the forum.

[ArmsMerchant]

Greyfox only infracts to help the "Spiritual Development" of the users.

Actually, there is a small grian of truth here, as there is a vast difference between punishment and chastisement.

[-SpectraL]

I'm getting an usually high rate of useless assholes in Bad Ideas who can't stay on topic and who can't cease fail-trolling, so don't be alarmed if you see several bodies floating by on your port-side windows.

[Dog]

Is ILOVEZOK actually Zok?

In any case, why not just allow mods to do their job and ignore the complainers? Do you actually think you'll satisfy them by doing anything short of letting them post like this is 4chan? Is it really that hard to just tell them to fuck off?

[zuperxtreme]

I've yet to use one, I'm an infraction virgin.

[-SpectraL]

http://www.zoklet.net/bbs/showpost.php?p=1474028&postcount=8


No, ILOVEZOK is eXpLoitZ... better known as, O_RLY.

[The Cheshire Cat]

Is ILOVEZOK actually Zok?



Nope. Try again.

[Crazy-Mofo]

What I dont get is why cant this place be more like a democracy. Make a thread somewhere where people post who should be mod and why obviously the one with most wins with smart responses saying why that person should be mod, not posts saying just cause hes cool andy shit.. Dont use the poll system because retards would just pound away as been said earlier. And if a mod is being a tyrant there should be a main thread where that mod can be put up for discussion, of course there will be occasional threads stating that the mod is just stupid or gay, but if they dont have a legitimate reason lock the thread or delete it. It will be up to all the mods to decide if that mod is being an unjust cunt. I think mods by the people for the people will cut severly the amount of spam and dickwads of course there will always be some. There is most likely many holes in my theory, but hey im just trying to come up with ways to have more likeable mods. Feel free to tear my thought apart.

[-SpectraL]

Well... my opinion is that the infraction-system is fine just the way it is. If there are mods that are not doing their jobs properly, that's up to the global mods to handle. If there are still mods who are warning and infracting users for no good reason, then the global moderators are at fault, not the entire moderator-team.

[Dog]

The problem with a democracy, as demonstrated by America, is that the country or organization in question is not just subject to the votes of intelligent and thoughtful people, but absolute morons as well. A dictatorship would be ideal if the leader was smart and invested in the well-being of his country. Unfortunately, Zok isn't (or at least, hasn't been) particularly smart when it comes to running a website, nor has he really cared much about the site.

[FireStarter]

What I dont get is why cant this place be more like a democracy. Make a thread somewhere where people post who should be mod and why obviously the one with most wins with smart responses saying why that person should be mod, not posts saying just cause hes cool andy shit.. Dont use the poll system because retards would just pound away as been said earlier. And if a mod is being a tyrant there should be a main thread where that mod can be put up for discussion, of course there will be occasional threads stating that the mod is just stupid or gay, but if they dont have a legitimate reason lock the thread or delete it. It will be up to all the mods to decide if that mod is being an unjust cunt. I think mods by the people for the people will cut severly the amount of spam and dickwads of course there will always be some. There is most likely many holes in my theory, but hey im just trying to come up with ways to have more likeable mods. Feel free to tear my thought apart.

I wouldn't leave it to the mods to decide if another mod is being an unjust cunt. I'm sure they'd stick together and defend their own to an extent.

I do think that if there is a moderator who has received particular resentment from members of the community, they need to be evaluated somehow. There is always a reason that people are complaining. It may be justified, and the feeling shared by the whole community, or it could just be a few people having a problem, and in that case the evaluation would be in the mods favor.

Perhaps if a moderator's methods/ability are challenged, a poll should be opened to the community as a whole for a set period of time (perhaps a week) and anyone interested could vote yay or nay for the mod in question. If the majority call for the mod's removal, there is obviously a problem with the moderator, and they should be de-modded. If the majority are in favor of the mod remaining a mod, they will be allowed to continue on as normal, and wouldn't be eligible for re-evaluation for a set period (perhaps 6 months to a year)

[Crazy-Mofo]

The problem with a democracy, as demonstrated by America, is that the country or organization in question is not just subject to the votes of intelligent and thoughtful people, but absolute morons as well. A dictatorship would be ideal if the leader was smart and invested in the well-being of his country. Unfortunately, Zok isn't (or at least, hasn't been) particularly smart when it comes to running a website, nor has he really cared much about the site.

Well thought responses for the mod would only count. Hopefully to cut down on the retard votes.

[-SpectraL]

,,, Perhaps if a moderator's methods/ability are challenged, a poll should be opened to the community as a whole for a set period of time (perhaps a week) and anyone interested could vote yay or nay for the mod in question. ...Nope. The kidiots would simply open up a bunch of socket puppets on proxies and PM their spamming little buddies to organize on the vote. You get even 5 of these 10 year-olds on proxies and they can sway the vote enough to do injustice to the moderator in question. Get rid of the juvenile-delinquents and your idea would probably have a lot more merit than it really does at this point in time.

[Crazy-Mofo]

I wouldn't leave it to the mods to decide if another mod is being an unjust cunt. I'm sure they'd stick together and defend their own to an extent.

I do think that if there is a moderator who has received particular resentment from members of the community, they need to be evaluated somehow. There is always a reason that people are complaining. It may be justified, and the feeling shared by the whole community, or it could just be a few people having a problem, and in that case the evaluation would be in the mods favor.

Perhaps if a moderator's methods/ability are challenged, a poll should be opened to the community as a whole for a set period of time (perhaps a week) and anyone interested could vote yay or nay for the mod in question. If the majority call for the mod's removal, there is obviously a problem with the moderator, and they should be de-modded. If the majority are in favor of the mod remaining a mod, they will be allowed to continue on as normal, and wouldn't be eligible for re-evaluation for a set period (perhaps 6 months to a year)

Polls wouldnt work, dumbfucks would just click anything. I believe mods are people as well and can think, so if the vast majority of the people dont like that mod, well hopefully they will see that, and might agree that the mod is unjust. Altough I do like the idea of the majority rules and the mod then gets de-modded as well.

[FireStarter]

Nope. The kidiots would simply open up a bunch of socket puppets on proxies and PM their spamming little buddies to organize on the vote. You get even 5 of these 10 year-olds on proxies and they can sway the vote enough to do injustice to the moderator in question. Get rid of the juvenile-delinquents and your idea would probably have a lot more merit than it really does at this point in time.

Well its too bad we can't get rid of shitty mods around here because people can't even use a poll properly. Perhaps there is a way of setting one up so only users with a certain number of posts are able to vote. Only people with at least 250-500 posts would know a moderator's ability anyways. Don't allow fake accounts to participate, because they wouldn't have the post count required to do it.

Its still a workable idea, and one that would probably be of benefit in getting rid of poor moderators if the postcount-limited poll could be made. I know its possible. We have the VIP lounge, and it can be restricted to people with less than a certain number of posts, so a poll could be too.

Polls wouldnt work, dumbfucks would just click anything. I believe mods are people as well and can think, so if the vast majority of the people dont like that mod, well hopefully they will see that, and might agree that the mod is unjust. Altough I do like the idea of the majority rules and the mod then gets de-modded as well.

I'm not so sure some mods do think... They carry on with their business despite what anyone else says, and will say anything to justify their behaviors.

Like I said above, hopefully a working poll could be made that restricts new accounts and those with few posts, so something could get done about shitty mods, and we would know the results weren't tampered with.

[Crazy-Mofo]

Well its too bad we can't get rid of shitty mods around here because people can't even use a poll properly. Perhaps there is a way of setting one up so only users with a certain number of posts are able to vote. Only people with at least 250-500 posts would know a moderator's ability anyways. Don't allow fake accounts to participate, because they wouldn't have the post count required to do it.

Its still a workable idea, and one that would probably be of benefit in getting rid of poor moderators if the postcount-limited poll could be made. I know its possible. We have the VIP lounge, and it can be restricted to people with less than a certain number of posts, so a poll could be too.



I'm not so sure some mods do think... They carry on with their business despite what anyone else says, and will say anything to justify their behaviors.

Like I said above, hopefully a working poll could be made that restricts new accounts and those with few posts, so something could get done about shitty mods, and we would know the results weren't tampered with.

Most users with high post counts either have been here long or spew anything out of their mouth at extremely high rates, that wouldnt work either.
I however am the exception I spew shit out of my mouth with low post counts.

[FireStarter]

Most users with high post counts either have been here long or spew anything out of their mouth at extremely high rates, that wouldnt work either.
I however am the exception I spew shit out of my mouth with low post counts.

And you think everyone who is over 18 is smart enough to vote in a real election? You can't make it perfect...

[Crazy-Mofo]

And you think everyone who is over 18 is smart enough to vote in a real election? You can't make it perfect...

Im going in circles with you. Only intelligent posts for why the mod should be a mod would be counted to hopefully weed out idiot votes.

[-SpectraL]

Take "my" forums, for example. I get LOADS of complaints on me, both to management and through my PM. So many complaints that it would make you dizzy. And YET... none of "my" forums (excluding Pissing Each Other Off), have a single spammer in it... not a single off-topic poster... not a single flooder... not a single fail-troll. This is because I run a tight ship... and I never indicated I would do otherwise, even before I became a mod. ALL threads in the forums under my care are FULL of open discussion... USEFUL discussion... discussion that makes ya want to come back and see what happened next. And the only way I could accomplish that was with warnings and infractions.

You can go into ANY thread in Bad Ideas and Features and Ideas and read something interesting, and you won't find a SINGLE piece of shit that you have to scroll over in either one. I had to use hundreds of warnings and dozens of infractions to get it done. Let's face it... determined asshats aren't going to quit destroying the forum just because you ask them nicely... if anything, they're going to take that as a sign of weakness. The moderator-group's primary concern should be to lead by example and deed, but there is also the reality of the situation to deal with. Ignoring the reality of the situation... throwing nice little ideals and pipe-dreams in there for good measure... is all great and good.... sounds real nice on paper... but that does very little to prevent the determined ass-clowns from ruining valid contributions and driving members away by the dozens.

The infraction-system is there for a reason.. and a very good one.. and it is the Global Moderators' duty to make sure it is used properly and within reason... not the duty of the mod-team or the members.

[FireStarter]

Take "my" forums, for example. I get LOADS of complaints on me, both to management and through my PM. So many complaints that it would make you dizzy. And YET... none of "my" forums (excluding Pissing Each Other Off), have a single spammer in it... not a single off-topic poster... not a single flooder... not a single fail-troll. This is because I run a tight ship... and I never indicated I would do otherwise, even before I became a mod. ALL threads in the forums under my care are FULL of open discussion... USEFUL discussion... discussion that makes ya want to come back and see what happened next. And the only way I could accomplish that was with warnings and infractions.

You can go into ANY thread in Bad Ideas and Features and Ideas and read something interesting, and you won't find a SINGLE piece of shit that you have to scroll over in either one. I had to use hundreds of warnings and dozens of infractions to get it done. Let's face it... determined asshats aren't going to quit destroying the forum just because you ask them nicely... if anything, they're going to take that as a sign of weakness. The moderator-group's primary concern should be to lead by example and deed, but there is also the reality of the situation to deal with. Ignoring the reality of the situation... throwing nice little ideals and pipe-dreams in there for good measure... is all great and good.... sounds real nice on paper... but that does very little to prevent the determined ass-clowns from ruining valid contributions and driving members away by the dozens.

The infraction-system is there for a reason.. and a very good one.. and it is the Global Moderators' duty to make sure it is used properly and within reason... not the duty of the mod-team or the members.

Thats not really the point... The point I was making with evaluating mods, is to act on those hundreds of complaints you receive. Not you in particular, but any mod who receives complaints. Just an example based on your post: Just because you feel you run a tight ship, and your forums are great, doesn't mean everyone feels the same. If you are so confident in your abilities, and how great your forums are, you should embrace the idea as ultimate proof that you are what you say you are.

[Crazy-Mofo]

Take "my" forums, for example. I get LOADS of complaints on me, both to management and through my PM. So many complaints that it would make you dizzy. And YET... none of "my" forums (excluding Pissing Each Other Off), have a single spammer in it... not a single off-topic poster... not a single flooder... not a single fail-troll. This is because I run a tight ship... and I never indicated I would do otherwise, even before I became a mod. ALL threads in the forums under my care are FULL of open discussion... USEFUL discussion... discussion that makes ya want to come back and see what happened next. And the only way I could accomplish that was with warnings and infractions.

You can go into ANY thread in Bad Ideas and Features and Ideas and read something interesting, and you won't find a SINGLE piece of shit that you have to scroll over in either one. I had to use hundreds of warnings and dozens of infractions to get it done. Let's face it... determined asshats aren't going to quit destroying the forum just because you ask them nicely... if anything, they're going to take that as a sign of weakness. The moderator-group's primary concern should be to lead by example and deed, but there is also the reality of the situation to deal with. Ignoring the reality of the situation... throwing nice little ideals and pipe-dreams in there for good measure... is all great and good.... sounds real nice on paper... but that does very little to prevent the determined ass-clowns from ruining valid contributions and driving members away by the dozens.

The infraction-system is there for a reason.. and a very good one.. and it is the Global Moderators' duty to make sure it is used properly and within reason... not the duty of the mod-team or the members.

No one says be extremely nice, but when i give advice to people i get on their level just like you wouldnt use complex grammar with a three year old. Most instances with people can be avoided with a simple joke on their level rather then telling them your better and they need to listen.

Thats not really the point... The point I was making with evaluating mods, is to act on those hundreds of complaints you receive. Not you in particular, but any mod who receives complaints. Just an example based on your post: Just because you feel you run a tight ship, and your forums are great, doesn't mean everyone feels the same. If you are so confident in your abilities, and how great your forums are, you should embrace the idea as ultimate proof that you are what you say you are.

I believe this makes perfect sense.

[-SpectraL]

Well.. one extremely on-topic thing zok brought out in another thread was that forums should have more than one mod... in order to balance out the decision-making on warnings and infractions... and to balance out the general direction a forum will take. I would certainly welcome someone to challenge my decision/reasoning on any given matter. I firmly believe that the things I do have merit, and I have the results to show for that belief, but I'd certainly be of the same opinion as zok that there should be a balanced approach to moderating forums.

[Fuck the FBI]

Bad moderating is a vicious cycle. People tend to lash out more and more when they get pissed off for some stupid little infraction and it escalates until it reaches the stage where its multiple accounts day and night spamming and hate PMing. The problem with infracting for off-topic posting is that there may actually be a subtle relationship that a mod doesn't catch or just sees the username and infracts. I'm not saying you should just let everything slide, but you need to learn to make more impartial judgments towards posts, because the meaning you derive may not be what the poster intended.

[-SpectraL]

Bad moderating is a vicious cycle. People tend to lash out more and more when they get pissed off for some stupid little infraction and it escalates until it reaches the stage where its multiple accounts day and night spamming and hate PMing. The problem with infracting for off-topic posting is because there may actually be a subtle relationship that a mod doesn't catch or just sees the username and infracts. I'm not saying you should just let everything slide, but you need to learn to make more impartial judgments towards posts, because the meaning you derive may not be what the poster intended.... and that all comes down to responsible posting habits. If you are not making yourself clear enough in your posts, it can be easily construed as garbage. One poster doing that is fine... three posters doing that is merely annoying for some... a legion of posters making oblique posts becomes a real problem for the community as a whole. The forums begin to lose cohesion... the soup gets watered-down... there's flies in the ointment.

[FireStarter]

Well.. one extremely on-topic thing zok brought out in another thread was that forums should have more than one mod... in order to balance out the decision-making on warnings and infractions... and to balance out the general direction a forum will take. I would certainly welcome someone to challenge my decision/reasoning on any given matter. I firmly believe that the things I do have merit, and I have the results to show for that belief, but I'd certainly be of the same opinion as zok that there should be a balanced approach to moderating forums.

Well perhaps another mod for Bad Ideas is in order then. Seems to be a busy enough forum to justify it. Other less popular forums have more mods.

You seem to be dodging the subject of evaluating mods to some extent though... I could be wrong. Would you be comfortable having people (only established posters) vote on your abilities, or are you afraid of what the results might be?

[FireStarter]

I'm not dodging at all. I've already presented my case on the evaluation of mods.

1. It is the Global Moderators' domain to evaluate mods and their actions, not the userbase or the mod group.

2. It is not physically feasible at this time to provide a valid representation of the opinion of the userbase on any given mod, as all such avenues can be easily manipulated by a very few.

I'd like to hear other moderator's opinions on the topic before it gets written off as unfeasible. You have strong opinions that often differ from what others think, so its only fair to let others speak too.

Whether or not you agree with me, or anyone else in favor of this idea, I believe the users make the community, and as such should have a say in who their moderators are. That doesn't mean the community is to be put in charge of picking mods, but they should certainly be able to evaluate their performance.

[zombo.com]

What I dont get is why cant this place be more like a democracy. Make a thread somewhere where people post who should be mod and why obviously the one with most wins with smart responses saying why that person should be mod, not posts saying just cause hes cool andy shit.. Dont use the poll system because retards would just pound away as been said earlier. And if a mod is being a tyrant there should be a main thread where that mod can be put up for discussion, of course there will be occasional threads stating that the mod is just stupid or gay, but if they dont have a legitimate reason lock the thread or delete it. It will be up to all the mods to decide if that mod is being an unjust cunt. I think mods by the people for the people will cut severly the amount of spam and dickwads of course there will always be some. There is most likely many holes in my theory, but hey im just trying to come up with ways to have more likeable mods. Feel free to tear my thought apart.


being a mod is a popularity contest? fuck, i'm screwed then.