Trollheart

Tore,
I have to admit, your single-mindedness and finger pointing is now getting to the point of victimisation. Are you just going to ignore my reply that I was not the only one in that conversation, was replying to a theory put forward (to test whether the person actually thought that or not) and yet am the only one you posted that snippy reply to?? Furthermore:
Did you even read my post? It said "This should NOT be taken as a threat". You have seen three, maybe four people, all established members, advise that if this system went through they would be forced to either leave or, in the case of those who maintain journals, lock themselves in their journal cave. Yet you still choose to tell me I'm making a threat. I jsut told you it is not a threat, why can't you acknowledge that, and the depth of feeling there is against this in many quarters?
I'm very much against people not being able to have a lighthearted approach to threads outside the Lounge. For instance, my "Metal Month III is coming" thread. Your new system would forbid the likes of Batty calling me a girl, or telling me to **** off, or someone else saying I know **** all about metal? Using those words? You would want EVERYTHING taken seriously 100% of the time? Cos that is what your system is proposing, at its heart. Have your fun in the Lounge, but be serious outside it? No thanks dad. I'd prefer, much prefer to be able to, and have people able to, take the piss out of me in any thread they feel they wish to, unless it is VERY serious, like maybe an RIP or someone discussing their mental state or something. There's a time and place for fun and levity, and that's always.

So no, fencing off the Lounge as the only place you can kick back and let your hair down (metaphorically in my case) after working hard in the main forum does not appeal to me, and does not seem like very much of a compromise. I am insulted that you imply that we don't know when to turn it off and act seriously: someone only has to say come on guys knock it off this has gone too far, and 99 people out of 100 will. We're not stupid.
If what I've said up to now is not being taken seriously by you, or seen to be, then I don't know what to say. I haven't made fun of your thread or your proposal, but I have been very clear that I am one hundred percent against it and do not believe it is needed. How many members have left because of "bad feeling"? How can you quantify, or even qualify this? It seems to me this is a classic case of a problem that does not need fixing. How would I fix it? I wouldn't. It's fine. Even when I had spats with Sansa I jsut waited for it to be sorted, put her on Ignore and eventually was glad to see she had taken enough rope to hang herself. Once someone is on Ignore you don't have to worry about them, unless they're quoted. It worked well for me. YorkeDaddy on the other hand was man enough to accept my PM and we worked it out like friends, which we now are. Your new system would have had us both banned and he probably would never have come back. Not only would we then have missed his excellent music but his sharp humour, so it would have done more harm than good.
And I was the only one doing this of course, as I said above. Look Tore, if I had run that conversation on my own, trying to draw people in and nobody bit, then yes, you would have cause to call me out. But I was responding to a question, and really the only reason you picked me out as far as I can see was that you were getting irked that attention was being taken away from your main topic, even if it was only a few posts.
Yeah, but you give everyone who wants the job a chance. You don't just pick the people who voted for you, or who you went to school with. Could be a case of Clique City ahoy!
So you would come in, get us all thinking the way you think we should be thinking, then leave us to fend for ourselves? You know, I kind of thought that. Also, you didn't answer my more important question: if this gets shot down, if the vote goes against you, or the poll, will you let it rest or will you continue to bring it up every chance you have?

Is it even possible you have taken into account the views of the, as it were, NO campaign, or do you see us all as standing in the way of your system because we're all just a bunch of naysayers who don't know what's good for them, and you'll run this thing and get it through whether we like it or not? Cause there's a word for people like that, you know.

It'll be interesting to see how this poll goes... and more to the point, what happens after it. Also, I agree that the title of the poll is very unbalanced, sort of like "Do you favour fair governance?"

__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

Soulflower

After being viciously attacked here numerous of times when the mods stood by and watched and did nothing, I think I have a right to feel frustrated with that.

I would like to see all new moderators.


For the record, you show a lot of hostility yourself whenever you express your opinions and no one agrees with you.

I think we all can take a look at ourselves and how we can improve the forum but a lot of you act like you do NOTHING at all.

Janszoon

So no recognition from you then, just personal attacks. Not very productive.

__________________
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die

last.fm

RoxyRollah

Come on now this is just getting crazy. Jen, Jansz is one of the best mods we have and a really nice person.
Whats to say if we get new mods ,and when one of your threads goes askew the same thing wont happen?
At least Janszy has your back.Better the devil you know.

Also you keep pointing out their flaws and how much they suck, its kinda like ****ting where you eat.Just throwing it out there.

__________________

Aux-In

The #1 reason that I'm even here was because I wanted to find a less restrictive environment than some other forums. From what I've read in this thread and others, the problem seems to have stemmed from a few prolific members causing issues because they've gotten too comfortable. I'm not sure how the modding is currently handled (maybe it is handled this way, I don't know), but I'd like to say a few words. To me, an easy solution would be to send the person in question a private message, stating something along the lines of:

"The mod team has met and discussed (whatever the issue is), and we wanted to let you know that it is inappropriate. We consider you a valuable member, but you have to stop doing x, y, and z. For any future actions revolving this issue, please see our rules page [linked here]."

It should be in a PM, too, because just stating "you need to cool it" in the process of a thread discussion doesn't carry the same weight (too indirect). The fact that more than one mod is on board with sending a PM shows that it has been discussed among, well, more than one mod. This helps to make things less personal as it's a group decision. It's something light and functions as a verbal warning, and no system modification/programming is even necessary. If the person refuses to stop what he/she is doing, then form there, you can infraction away and/or follow more punitive measures. Largely, I don't think people change their behavior too much, but you can at least try it that way.

__________________
Reviews l YouTube Playlist: Another Dimension

"All over a bowl of bitter beans."

Freebase Dali

In my experience, most people that get infractions don't feel like they are deserved. I'd be surprised if any of those "other members" told you their infraction was totally justified without trying to save face.

I just checked your infraction and the comment it's tied to directly violates a written rule. And since you support Tore's proposition outlined in the original post of this thread, I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't agree with the infraction enthusiastically.

Whatever issues you and the particular moderator have are irrelevant of the validity of the infraction. Had someone else given you an infraction, it wouldn't become more valid.

Please provide specific examples that are not in the SYG thread so that we can investigate further.

Yes you do need to show examples. If you see a problem, please provide evidence of the problem so that we can address them. We are not going to act based on hearsay.

Again, examples please. I'm not aware of any events that have occurred on regular boards/threads not designed for going all out that show mods unjustly attacking individuals inside the scope of rules and context. I would be interested to see such examples, because whether it was due to my own absence or otherwise, it would be news to me.

I don't disagree that there should be more new moderators when and where appropriate. It's just that we are in a state of unknown regarding older current mods and their intentions, and have not begun discussing a course of action as of yet. It's a process and I'm sure it will happen if and when it's necessary.

I'm unsure whether you're trying to alienate your own perspective or not, but you're not helping yourself by saying that mods should consider the many before the few, which relates to how few people have spoken in agreement for some desperate need for change.

It's VERY clique in here. But I usually see that in two different manifestations: 1 being music taste in general, which is probably to be expected in a music forum. 2 being member-relationship manifestation, which usually means allegiance to certain members they consider friends. But I'm not sure how far clique behavior works when it comes to leadership if everyone is under the same umbrella. I would see more validity in that argument if some people were treated differently than others, and in a way they are, but I tend to see it more as certain "types" of members being treated differently than others, which I talked about when referencing longstanding members versus newbs in terms of chances given. But certainly the possibility of favoritism can exist, however, the mod team is comprised of not just a single person, and we have to all agree on things, which takes debate. I think the only member we all like and would probably never infract is .bob, but that's because he's not the kind of guy to ever do anything to deserve it.

That's nice and all, but I'm not sure what the suggestion is. Infract anyone who makes you and whoever PMs you agreeing with your points intimidated? Are you to be our barometer for how we moderate, or would it be more wise to gauge the response of the community as a whole, rather than taking the perspective of several vocal members and all the ones you're speaking for?

__________________

Freebase Dali

We already do that.
The person on the receiving end inevitably doesn't think what they did was wrong and immediately assumes that we didn't send the same message to the person they were in a spat with, further enforcing their assumption that we just have it out for them.

__________________

RoxyRollah

my infract was because I was an ******* to YD and asked for it. How bout dat?

__________________

Freebase Dali

Seems like a breath of fresh air to me.

__________________

Carpe Mortem

Carpe for modship 2015

__________________