But,

Idk what you mean by "that that wasn't really the question in the first place". Was the poll rephrased or something before I voted? Maybe I missed something, if so ignore my example.

Sure we can, and then we can make a poll to try and change it.

I wasn't going to reply to this thread, and I'm not sure if you'd want my opinion on things around here, but here it is anyway, and I mean no offense whatsoever:

I've only observed a few instances of people demanding change to the way things are run here, and for the most part the changes are brought up from someone who's presence here is a bit more stoic, which is uncommon for the majority of the other members, which are a bit more laid back. This, to me, seems like a control issue. Someone that won't allow a bit of youthful playfulness into a discussion, or needs their thoughts and opinions on what they believe to be taken very seriously by a group of strangers just seems a bit off. Sure, there are times when things get sketchy here, and there will always be trolls, and sometimes people feel the need for posting only one word, or a small phrase, and if you ask me, it's been handled with as much tact and grace as one could possibly expect from the few who are in the position to deal with it. I really only see this poll as an attempt at controlling something which is by nature, a chaotic entity, and is already being handled as such in a manner that not only nurtures fun and friendly discussion, but also addresses the intellectual side of things as well.

That's all I've got.

^ Yes, that 20-10 was a clear vote rejecting tore's infraction package. I don't think anyone is trying to overturn that; this poll is about various other issues too.
Anyway, I like you way too much to push the point, Roxy; I don't want to argue with someone who calls me "love." :laughing: :love:

In the long conversation about this topic in Tore's original thread, he kept framing the issue the loaded way it's framed in the part you quoted. But that's not an accurate description of the two sides. The question is really "should context be taken into account when enforcing the rules or not?" Making it about long term members receiving special treatment is a red herring that distracts for the real issue.

Pretty much this. Tore has complained that the chaotic nature of the board has attracted those who thrive in such an environment, and repelled those who don't, but he frames it in such a way that he takes it for granted that an atmosphere run by "noisy kids" is by nature inferior to a more serious one.

Of course a certain atmosphere attracts some and repels others, but treating the current vibe as if its something that's "gone wrong" as opposed to just an environment that you happen to dislike is to treat a subjective issue as if it's objective.

My biggest complaint that pushes me to Tore's side is that serious discussion gets derailed too often by drama/"having fun". There is a time and a place for both, and I think bolstering and setting up some new forum standards will help alleviate that.

Such as when? Musical discussion tends to remain on topic. Current Events-type discussion sometimes go off on tangents, but that's usually after they've run their course to an extent.

The fact that YorkeDaddy had to put a disclaimer warning people they will be reported for going off topic in the thread he made "Competitive League of Legends" speaks clearly to the point I was making. I don't really feel like digging through old topics to give you multiple examples of threads being derailed in the name of fun or emotions->name calling instead of debate/discussion.

Well I was just asking for general examples, like political discussions. And I see a video game discussion as just naturally lending itself to derailments about other video games. Even with stricter rules on that kind of thing (and since it's in a Lounge subforum, I imagine it would fall under the "Safe Zone" caregory).

Basically, for that kind of thing, I just think thread creators and contributors should be more proactive with requesting that derails get moved to new threads if the discussion merits it, or preexisting ones dedicated to general discussions of that specific one.

Otherwise you can just say something like, "Hey, guys, can we get back on topic?" I don't imagine anybody around here is a big enough dick to just tell the person to **** off.

I don't think stricter modding on that front is necessary, as greater non-mod member oversight would solve the problem, and I don't think that's something to ask that would be unrealistic, as it wouldn't mean members policing themselves, but rather other members just being more proactive with maintaining the integrity of threads they're already invested in.

Edit: As to drama, I would tentatively agree that mods step in more actively when it comes to derailing, but unless people get used to reporting posts (which I don't see happening, as it's just not something that I think occurs to most members) then I don't think a rule change would really help, since they can only intervene when they know about it.

I'm not sure if this has been stated already, but I'd like to highlight the importance of reporting posts you find offensive. I think I can speak for the whole mod team by saying we don't read every single post or conversation that goes on.

You make a lot of points that I agree with, Plankton; a nice summary of the atmosphere we enjoy on MB.

Just the bolded sentence I'm inclined to disagree with; the poll isn't trying to control anything - it's just trying to collect opinions, For instance, poll option 3A is for allowing short/nonsense posting anywhere on the site, but as I write, only two people have voted for it. Poll option 3B is for discouraging short/nonsense posts outside the Lounge and has four votes at the moment.

Anyone who likes the fun, freewheeling "noisy" MB can vote for 3A, which is a vote against more control and will help demonstrate how popular that option is.

I'll try to be more proactive about that, but it's just not something that ever occurs to me.

The report post happens so infrequently that ppl might not know where it is located.: \

Maybe not the poll itself, or at least certain options, but considering the impetus of this whole story arc in the first place, I definitely think that that motivation is what's behind the general idea of the poll.

Bottom left of a post, right under the user's post count. The red triangle with the exclamation point.

And what will be done with that data? Ultimately, it will be used to steer the forum in a different direction, which by my logic, is a way to control things. Whether it has any real impact is anyone's guess.

HaHa thank you ! Total news to me. I'm off to scour MB for an offensive post I can use it on ...

Edit: I understand your caution, Plankton, but in the end it's only an indication of public opinion - it might be used to bolster/undermine a suggestion, but that's all. If enough people choose the status quo options, the results will become an argument for leaving things alone, so it won't necessarily "steer the forum in a different direction".

that's what that is! I thought it meant my flash player crashed. :(


edit: waiting on your :imwithstupid: emjoi so I can practice report you.

I voted for this but I agree with Jans' take on emoticon/short response usage. I don't have a problem with someone acknowledging someone else's post with a simple "lol" or "good luck" or ROFL emoticon. I don't think those are nonsense.

However, I don't want to see a bunch of memes/gifs/emoticons, being responded to with more memes/gifs/emoticons.

No. There will always be unusual circumstances that will call for judgment regarding context so it's not a black/white issue of context or not.

The question is what it is. The example is that; an example.

If you recognize that context and judgement will always play a role, then it seems like your proposals don't have much of a purpose.

A poorly chosen and loaded example then.

As I understood it, tore made his first poll which was accused of being loaded and very biased, so he, Freebase and Veganelica got together to write a more inclusive and fair one. If this is not that, then what is it? Has tore given up on his "New dawn for Music Banter" idea? And if so, is this just a suggestion box idea? I don't understand: to me, this was the first poll reworded and improved, basically tore's proposal 2.0? Am I wrong?
It was when we had to vote for a treaty that, essentially, took all our govt's autonomy away and allowed all major decisions for any European Union state to be taken by basically the powers in Europe, mostly Germany. After almost 100 years of freedom and independence, we signed it all away. But the first referendum was defeated by a big margin. Instructed by their European overlords that this would not do (though we were feted in many parts of Europe for having the guts to say NO!) they ran it again a few years later, loaded it with scaremongering and doomsday scenarios, and basically phrased it as much as "Do you want Ireland to take her place in the European community or would you rather she remained isolated?" Who's gonna vote no to that?

Yeah, I really don't understand where this has gone/is going now. :confused:
Drama does not equal fun nor the other way around. People know when to stop and you can't have everything serious all the time. Many of my threads have been derailed, it's just how it is. Unless the topic is ultra-serious, in which case off-topic posts should definitely be discouraged. We're heading back to Military School again, are we?
I woudl think the amount of posts considered offensive would be very small. Members (not spammers) are seldom actually offensive in my experience.
Batty plans for the movie rights! :laughing:
That happened in someone's journal, basically a battle of the GIFs. I asked it be stopped, and it was. It's not rocket science. If you stay silent then you're only contributing to the problem. Say your piece and be heard, that's how adults do it. Can't see a problem with that.

Oh, may I also ask is tore promoting drug use among the mods as policy? ;)

7A. For rule enforcement, moderators should use a joint

I think your activity here should drop if it gets out of hand. I don't think it'll get out of hand. Wait until you're actually uncomfortable with the rules before you leave. If these new rules get implemented, we might not even see a difference in things. Of course, new mods could be implemented and we could all be posting in a Nazi fascist message board come summer. I'll just wait to find out. I'll still be posting d*ck jokes where I can in the meantime.

Quite possibly the best opinion I've seen on the matter.

I too think this whole thing is being blown out of proportion. It takes the term "making a mountain out of a molehill" to a realistic degree. I'm all for discussion on these matters but Tore seems hellbent on creating some sort of constitution to not only his liking, but the liking of 6-7 members who don't feel comfortable around here anymore, compared to the 50 or so that love our atmosphere.

The last poll showed that the majority, by a large difference, don't want anything to change. I keep seeing "this is just for opinion" being thrown around. I don't think that's true. I feel like this is continuing because the majority of us don't want to get on board with this.

I see it like this.

Tore: You want this donut?
Vast Majority: No.

T: Don't worry. I'm just asking who wants the donut and who doesn't. It's just for opinion.
VM: Okay. We don't want the donut dude.

T: Have you seen the donut? It's got a lot of cool things that will make you REALLY like it. Here I'll show you...
V: We don't want the donut. We like what we are eating already.

T: I know. You're entitled to your opinion. If you really don't want the donut, you don't have to have it. It has sprinkles and powered sugar though. I feel it's the best option for your breakfast.
VM: WE DON'T LIKE DONUTS.

T: Right, but you see, some people over there like and are eating donuts. So, let's talk about the donut some more.
VM: FFFFFFFFFRRRRUMMSAARRRRRGGHGHAHGARRRRRRA

We've discussed this before, but perhaps you forget.

I believe what I wrote last time, or even the last two times, is that I don't think it should be all judgment and context. When a moderater is confronted with a user who has broken some rule in some common way, there should be some policy, guideline or precedent as to what the appropriate punishment should be. This makes the job easier. Dealing with common rule breaking shouldn't feel like solving some big dilemma. The unusual situations are what should call for that and this moderator will experience those too.

When there's no policy or guideline telling a mod how to deal with a certain situation, it makes it easier to not deal with it.

You had better!



Sorry for robbing your line, but this I believe now applies to you. Great description of what appears to be going on.
Remember the late great Mister Spock...
http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/40413068.jpg

(And yes, I'm aware of the irony of posting memes in a thread whose OP seems to dislike their use.)

All I know is, no matter what happens, I won't stop swearing, making bad jokes, and friendly name calling in threads that allow for it. That's part of the fun. However, if that becomes frowned upon, well...i'll take the infractions.

tl;dr, I agree with you, Exo.

Neither will I. My main focus in this whole thing is making sure that mods like Janz and Goof aren't replaced with new mods who suck balls. Even if the current mod team stays and new mods are introduced who suck balls, this will also be a failure.

As for infractions? Sucks to your infractions. I'm also just getting annoyed this whole thing is receiving so much attention after so many of us stopped wanting to talk about it. The conversation is only being seriously discussed by a few people but is being wheeled out as if it is the Poll/Discussion of the century.

You can keep going Tore. The people who are having the discussions can keep going. I'm just saying that it seems like the sail is losing a lot of wind and nobody seems to notice on the side of Tore.

Don't believe me? Hell, look at the votes. Look at my votes. I side with Tore on a lot of issues. It's just that this whole thing is just too much. There was never a real issue to begin with and these huge polls are just breathing fire on a match trying to turn it into a torch. It's never been a torch. It never will be.

anyone who reports a post is a bitch imo

Sorry. I didn't mean to say I've gotten infractions. Just saying that if I ever do for acting the way I do, I'll gladly take em. Can't say I'll learn anything if I do get them though.

That's what I meant too. "Sucks to your infractions" was a reference to infractions in general.

When I said drama/"having fun", I was speaking on two different things. Just like meme/gif/emoticon is three different things. :D

And like when you said "ki, you're an *******" but what you really mean is "ki, i love you, you're cool". Right? RIGHT?!

Thanks for noticing that my views are not really that extreme. I think I am relatively moderate in what I want from a forum. I have noticed that my suggestion to use the infractions system has lost wind. That was apparent from the old poll.

The poll, by the way, isn't just me. The first poll was called for by Roxy, I believe. This more detailed poll was initially suggested by Freebase in a post that criticized the first poll.

I'm just trying to get it right.

I completely agree, which is exactly why those posts need to be reported.

So any post that is jokingly offensive to another member even when the other members know it's a joke should be reported?

What do you think?

I'm hoping that's a "no" but with how things are going in these threads, the answer can be anything

If anyone's interested, here's what I voted :

1A. The rules should be applied equally to all members (ex. rules apply equally to mods and users)

To ensure fairness, rules should apply equally to all. For example, if someone breaks a rule, whether they are a mod, member or newbie shouldn't factor into punishment. If someone breaks a rule, they should be punished for what they did and not for who they are.


2A. Rules should apply equally to all forums

Whether you use a three strike rule or infractions, these are basically systems that give you some leeway or warning before consequences get serious, so I think that could give enough leeway that a safe zone is not required. On a more strict board, I might be for, but I can't see MB getting too strict for me - at least not with the current climate.


3B. Outside safe zones, mod policy should discourage short, nonsense posts

I think infractions should be consistently used to discourage short, nonsense posts.


5C. Details of rule enforcement can be subject to public scrutiny

Another way to ensure fairness.


6A. For punishment, there should be a general policy to use temporary infractions

Full on infractions policy looks so sweet on paper. I would love to see it tried out on MB in a full scale experiment or implementation. It automates the most difficult things about a moderators job (like banning users and keeping tabs on their post/punishment history) and I think it would be much more effective at modifying behaviour on the large scale than what we're currently doing.


7B. For rule enforcement, moderators should use their personal accounts

I like transparency and that's hard to preserve if moderators use an anonymous mod account to punish users. To ensure transparency then, people would have to keep record of what they do when they're on that account. Mods would also have to log in and out of this account and their personal account.

It just sounds like something that is not transparent, could be abused and would become fiddly/tedious to mods.

There are some arguments for as well, but not enough to make implementation seem like a good idea to me.


8B. A new moderation policy should NOT have a trial run first (implemented immediately)

When I answered this, I was thinking about my own proposal to use infractions. I am not really opposed to a trial period as such, but I think the idea's good enough to implement straight away. I think a trial period would have to be rather long to give a good, representative idea of what forum life under a new policy really would be like.


9A. The mod team should be bolstered with additional mods.

I think there are too few mods at the moment.

Whether the current mod team should be retained or not, I don't really have a strong opinion about, so I left both options C and D out.

Come on man.