Key

So now you don't want people who are friends to have friendly banter in the forum? I don't like that idea at all. Everyone would be like robots if we weren't allowed to have a little back and forths with the people we like here.

To your second point, I'm also going to have to disagree. I'm not going to proofread and read over and over again every single time I post. I don't think i've actually been on a forum that stood by that either, so if you have proof that this type of forum exists, i'd love to see it. I find the casual posting style to be one of the better qualities of this site. The only time I personally care about what my post looks like is when it's in my journal, other than that, I hardly ever worry about what my post says or looks like.

Overall, what your saying here is if we don't talk to each other in threads that relate to the topic, we shouldn't even talk at all. Bravo on yet another terrible idea.

The Batlord

I don't know why. You were a blast when you started cutting loose. You've got an inane Lounge poster inside of you. You just need to let him out.

__________________

Guybrush

It's not so much friendly banter I have a problem with. If it is friendly banter which is relevant to the topic, that's fine. It's just that some people treat forum posts like SMSes or chat messages. An SMS or a chat message can still have on-topic content with value to the discussion or community (and then it's fine), but sometimes they don't (ex. just "lol" or just an emoticon) and they're the ones that should be discouraged, I think.

For a quick example of how I think bad posting could be improved, see this post.

For the time being, he's chained up in my inner Fritzl dungeon.

__________________
Something Completely Different

Trollheart

This is the best idea yet. A warning with some weight behind it and the obvious implication that it's not just the opinion of one person/one person being singled out by one mod.
Like Roxy (and if you talk to Urban he will confirm this) I accepted the warning I got for insulting SF. It was at the time a bad decision and to be fair to Urban, he explained its necessity very well. I didn't take any offence and I accepted it with good grace. But then, I'm such a nice guy it probably makes the rest of you sick.

If a warning/infraction/ban is deserved, there's no real reason why anyone should whine about it, especially if they've been able to see it coming. There is, admittedly, nothing worse than getting that PM and once you read it you can no longer access the site (or when you go to the site you get a message saying you've been banned, can't remember which but they're both annoying and a little terrifying) but it does hammer the point home that you crossed the line.

I just bet that's a true story!
Exactly. The reason so many of us are against this is precisely because we don't get involved in drama, or if we do we know how to get out of it, even (and I'm talking mega-extreme measures here obviously) if it involves a public apology and climbdown. We can do this ourselves. We're adults, which is why this whole carrot-and-stick-minus-carrot idea is so offensive to me.
He is going against the spirit of the board, yes, I'll grant you.
Also, @tore, if there a reason why the poll is NOT anonymous? That smacks of a rather dark intent to me, even if that's not the case. How many polls have ever been made here that gave names of members out? Why did you feel you had to do that? What's the thinking behind that decision may I ask?

Some people had proposed me (whether seriously or not I don't know, though Vanilla certainly was) as a mod, and I had and will continue to turn it down, as I know I could not give the job the amount of time and energy it would require. If you're going to do a job do it 100%, and I could not guarantee that. So I'd rather not be a mod than be a bad one. I honestly don't know how these guys and girls do it. It's surely not an easy job, nor one replete with gratitude.

You see, that there is the whole problem. This doesn't feel like someone who cares about us trying to make the place better (I'm sorry tore but it doesn't, not to me), more like someone running a cold and clinical experiment, and I feel like a lab rat. With glasses.
This again. Why does it always have to be relevant to the topic, tore? I created a thread specifically with no topic, and it's chaos but fun. Yes it's in the Lounge but again, to go back to my "Metal Month III" thread, which is in the main form (Metal), I wouldn't care if people instead of giving me lists of albums started talking about how hard it is to catch a bus, if the conversation naturally and organically grows into that, as long as it returns to the topic eventually. That's what conversations are; you don't just stick to one topic, you end up being pulled or taking the conversation in new directions. Remember Billy Connolly? There's nothing wrong with that as far as I can see, once it does eventually settle down.
.
So Jansz would be in your sights for an infraction then??

__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

RoxyRollah

Tore:

Its not that I don't trust you, I worded that poorly. I don't trust parts of this plan.And your push push push approach made me change my mind about it even more,because I start thinking well hes proposed this before and it was shot down once,why is that etc.
For me you came off to strong and then ya lost me. And thats not personal .

it feels like you are saying you can't police yourself. Which Im more then capable if doing.But as far as using another outlet to communicate with my people from here,I cant realistically text everyone everytime something is hilarious. You feel me, and I dont want to get infracted everytime I

So Im sorry if I offened you personally but I dont see that helping in the lounge.
But if you can clean up the indie boatds so Im not talking to myself or spammers all day Id spend more time there.

__________________

Neapolitan

There are two threads now, so somewhere in either you said you won't want to be a mod in the present condition. So you do want to be a mod? What it seems like is that you want the other mods to do the dirty work for you and then hop on board as a head mod and rule MB using a junta and your personally engineered rules. And why did this come off the heels of UH? leaving? "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."

More like a "social engineer."

The key word is "chat" I don't want those places be considered as troll havens. Kinda the way SYG went from a legit. thread expressing how you felt about other members to a troll haven till it was placed in the "memory hole."

__________________

Trollheart

I would just like to make the perhaps unpopular point that in fact, the idea of treating everyone the same is in itself something of a fallacy. A "one size fits all" policy does not work. Think of the context. Look at MB as a, well, community I guess. Some of us are here for the long haul. We write, create and post in threads, talk to friends, make new ones, help newbies out, search for songs on behalf of people who will never post again, maintain journals and in general try to contribute to the overall wellbeing of the community. I would class those sort of posters (and of course I include myself in them) as Working Posters.

Then you have those who come here rarely, have a look around, say hi and dash off, and may not be seen for some time. While here they may contribute, and may contribute well, and be missed when away, or they may add little to the community. These I would call Casual Posters.

And finally, you have the (excuse the disrespect) lowest level of community society, those who come here to spam, cause trouble, troll and make fun of people, get into arguments, stamp their feet, shout at the mods and so on. They are the equivalent of people who hang out on street corners getting high and becoming involved in petty crime. They are the Lazy Posters.

OK so far? Any problems with those descriptions? There may of course be other variants but I think that covers most people here. Of course there are the Mods, who are mostly a separate entity, but can fall under the first two categories too, but never in my experience the third.

So, let's say a Working Poster pops a one-line post in a thread. So does a Lazy Poster. Both get infracted. But Mister Lazy Poster is probably just upping his or her post count so they can post links, and will then scoot off to some other community. He or she offers nothing to MB. Mr. Working Poster, on the other hand, is known for writing considered arguments, making good or at least funny and interesting threads, is well known as being someone you can talk to and perhaps (or not) maintains a journal. He or she is a valued member and the fact that he or she posted a one-line/smiley reply does not mean in any way that he or she will not later post something far more significant. He or she certainly contributes more to the community than Mister Lazy Poster.

So, should both be punished the same for the same infraction, given what we know of the two?

Answers on a postcard please...

What? Postcard? It's a small piece of stiff paper with a picture on the front and .... you know what? Just email your answers in ok?

__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

Guybrush

Janszoon actually answered this question in the poll thread. As he wrote, the reason is simply that if the poll was anonymous, you could rig it with sock puppets. For example I or you could make fake accounts for the purposes of upping either the Yes or the No vote.


If the point of a thread is that it has no topic and anything can be discussed in it, then I guess posts in that thread can't be off-topic.

Having threads with loosely defined topics in the lounge is a great way to create threads where one could have more relaxed discussions.

Of course. Were I a mod under the suggested policy, I'd infract myself if I thought I deserved it. Or I would hope that Jans or another mod would.

Who watches the watchmen? The watchmen, of course.


I do police myself. I just do it according to my own internal morals / code of conduct rather than outside pressures. For example, I generally try to follow the rules because I think the forums would be a better place if everyone did, not because I worry about the consequences if I don't.


Thanks Roxy and no worries

edit :

I don't want to be a mod the way the site is run now (it's a big part of why I stepped down in the first place), but I could come on as a moderator to help enforce a new policy along the lines I suggested - one that ensures equal treatment of members and consistent rule enforcement. The reason for that is that this is something that I want for MB and so I would like to help make it happen. As has been previously mentioned, I view modship as means to an end - as a way to fix a problem. If I'm not gonna get an opportunity to fix that problem, then there's just no real reason for me to be a mod. I view modship as a job, not a privilege.

This came off the heels of UH leaving because I think Urban in part tired of the anarchic culture here and that he's only the last in a longer line of mods leaving more or less because of this, a line which also includes Mojo, Pedestrian and myself. I could be wrong. Either way, it made me think it was relevant again.

__________________
Something Completely Different

Trollheart

Yes I saw that in the poll thread. It actually makes sense that way, so I will withdraw my question.
That just avoids my point. I'm saying that just because a thread is labelled, let's say, "John Zorn is great", does not mean someone at some point might start talking about, say, Merzbow, and then someone else might reference my dislike of him, leading to a discussion about what a girl I am, and then from that someone might say they wondered why people have a problem with sexuality identification, till someone says "let's get back to Zorn", and we do. What then is lost through that tangential conversation? Assuming nobody insults anyone or does anything to hurt another member, all you've had is a digression from the thread, and eventually going back to it. But you would infract everyone who brought it off-topic? That could be everyone talking in it, and so what's left of the thread but tumbleweed? Even if it's not everyone, you're going to lose a lot of people from what was a lively (if somewhat seemingly directionless) conversation. So how is that good? Keeping the thread on topic at all costs is the most important thing? But it isn't, not always. People like to digress, and rigidity is seldom welcome.
So that means the Lounge is the only place we're allowed have fun? We have to be serious in every other thread outside of that? Oh wait: I asked that before, but you have yet to confirm this.
Yeah, sorta proves my point. Why should Jansz get infracted when it's obvious he does this sort of thing all the time and is not a spammer nor trying to derail any discussion? Are his years here and all his many many contributions to be wiped out by one smiley?
Sometimes the watchmen are not needed. NSA anyone?
That's just great, but I don't want you policing me. As I've pointed out, people (mature people) here know when enough is enough and are adult enough to call a halt to whatever shenanigans they have been carrying on. They don't need a point system to tell them to stop.


The only example in recent times I can think of was when Grtwhtgvity was asked to stop insulting people, did not, and was banned for a week. Instant justice, within the current system. Worked fine. How is that not enough?

__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

Guybrush

You need to understand what I think should be punished. It is rule breaking that I think should be punished. If a post breaks a rule, I think that demands some moderator attention. Currently we have a rule against short nonsense posts (and the like) and these tend to be off-topic. Hence, asking oneself whether or not a post is on topic is a way to identify nonsense posts, but it's not the only question one should ask.

If your thread got significantly derailed without rules being broken, then I'd probably move the derailed part of the discussion to another thread and tidy up your John Zorn thread a bit. If you asked me to, I would get right to it.

If your thread got derailed with a flame war erupting, then I would infract those who broke rules and probably delete the posts.

If your thread got filled with nonsense posts - and we had a rule against those - I would give the offenders warnings or infractions and possibly move the nonsense posts to a thread in the lounge called nonsense depository or something similar. They could continue their nonsense there. We might already have a thread suitable for that purpose.

You can have fun and be funny, but rule breaking would have some consequence.

His contributions wouldn't be wiped out due to one smiley. He might just get some infractions. Perhaps he only did it once and then the infractions he got were not enough to really matter. However, if he did it a lot, he might get tempbanned for a little while. As he should be, the sly minx, for hypothetically disrupting our deep, serious discussion with his annoyingly cheerful emoticons.

__________________
Something Completely Different