|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
View Poll Results: Which statements do you agree the most with? (public poll) | |||
1A. The rules should be applied equally to all members (ex. rules apply equally to mods and users) | 15 | 60.00% | |
1B. The rules should NOT be applied equally to all members (ex. mods more lenient with regualrs) | 8 | 32.00% | |
2A. Rules should apply equally to all forums | 7 | 28.00% | |
2B. Rules should NOT apply equally to all forums (ex. "Safe Zones" less strict) | 18 | 72.00% | |
3A. Outside safe zones, mod policy should allow for short, nonsense posts | 10 | 40.00% | |
3B. Outside safe zones, mod policy should discourage short, nonsense posts | 13 | 52.00% | |
3C. Outside safe zones, mod policy should prohibit short, nonsense posts | 2 | 8.00% | |
4A. General mod policy should be to react to every instance where a rule is broken | 10 | 40.00% | |
4B. General mod policy should allow for mods NOT to react to an instance where a rule is broken | 15 | 60.00% | |
5A. Details of rule enforcement is ultimately between a mod and a user | 7 | 28.00% | |
5B. Details of rule enforcement can ulimately be subject to other mods scrutiny | 4 | 16.00% | |
5C. Details of rule enforcement can be subject to public scrutiny | 16 | 64.00% | |
6A. For punishment, there should be a general policy to use temporary infractions | 5 | 20.00% | |
6B. For punishment, there should be a general policy to use warnings, infractions / bans | 16 | 64.00% | |
6C. There should be no general policy for how punishment is carried out | 7 | 28.00% | |
7A. For rule enforcement, moderators should use a joint, anonymous account | 4 | 16.00% | |
7B. For rule enforcement, moderators should use their personal accounts | 21 | 84.00% | |
8A. A new moderation policy should have a trial run first (ex. 1 - 2 months) | 18 | 72.00% | |
8B. A new moderation policy should NOT have a trial run first (implemented immediately) | 5 | 20.00% | |
9A. The mod team should be bolstered with additional mods. | 13 | 52.00% | |
9B. The mod team should NOT be bolstered with additional mods. | 6 | 24.00% | |
9C. The current mod team should be retained. | 17 | 68.00% | |
9D. Some or all of the current moderators should be replaced. | 6 | 24.00% | |
10. Some of my concerns are not listed in the individual items, but I will voice them in a reply. | 5 | 20.00% | |
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
06-10-2015, 12:40 AM | #93 (permalink) | |
Zum Henker Defätist!!
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beating GNR at DDR and keying Axl's new car
Posts: 48,199
|
This site needs strippers. Let's have a stripper poll.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
06-10-2015, 03:04 AM | #95 (permalink) | |
carpe musicam
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Les Barricades Mystérieuses
Posts: 7,710
|
I haven't voted yet till I think this over, but there are only a few items on the poll that I think are worth it. The need for more mods e.g., that would help regardless of if there are rule changes.
I think it can be very relative what is considered banter what is unwanted chatter, because a conversation can so easily branch off the main theme, does that mean ion every case it is off-topic and subject to warnings/infractions. I think the boundaries to what constitutes off topic conversation, nonsense posts and trolling should be discuss first rather than that should rules be changed (which seems to some to be just change for the sake of change). There are no proof that the present rules that members agreed to when they first signed up are insufficient, when they are not fully exercised. The atmosphere as of present seems to be site seems quite laxed. The only way to know there needs to be rule changed if the present rules are enforced full tilt and the despite even that the forum is still in chaos. Otherwise the present rules are not really the issue.
__________________
Quote:
"it counts in our hearts" ?ºº? “I have nothing to offer anybody, except my own confusion.” Jack Kerouac. “If one listens to the wrong kind of music, he will become the wrong kind of person.” Aristotle. "If you tried to give Rock and Roll another name, you might call it 'Chuck Berry'." John Lennon "I look for ambiguity when I'm writing because life is ambiguous." Keith Richards |
|
06-10-2015, 06:11 AM | #96 (permalink) | |
Born to be mild
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: 404 Not Found
Posts: 26,994
|
Quote:
So here's the problem I have with it. Nah, just kidding hon: it was perfect and should really be the final word on this, though of course it won't be. Let's not get ahead of ourselves: we should have a poll, to see if we need a poll, to have a poll to see if we need more polls. And what have you against Poland anyway? Now there's something we can all enjoy! Time for another useless wall of text, but I feel this needs to be said, especially in the light of what Roxy has pointed out. I think maybe if we compare MB to a country we might get our best metaphor. At the moment, say 80% of the people are happy. They work, they play, they contribute. Some fight, there is some prejudice, there is some intolerance. This will always be the case; you will never eliminate this sort of behaviour and so we will never have a Utopia. No government will ever change things that benefit a minority (unless they're rich and powerful) and alienate the majority of voters. The thing is, I never saw this "constitutional crisis" that's being bandied about now. MB is not perfect, by any means, but who would expect it to be? To my mind it was run more or less by a benevolent junta, who took care of all the little things we didn't have to know about or bother about, and made this a good place to be. Now suddenly it's to be a democracy. Why? What's wrong with the current system? Apart from a few isolated incidents here and there, can anyone (including tore) point to a string of occurrences that proves a pattern of behaviour has been in play? I've seen people fight, get angry, make up, pout, sulk, threaten to leave, accuse everyone who wasn't of the same mind as them about something, but that sort of thing happens all the time, and will continue to do so no matter what. Guess what though? The place has not fallen apart. I find much of this new poll unnecessary. Do we need new mods? Who cares? If the mod team feel they need more members they will recruit them, as they always have done. When Goofle was made a mod did we have polls and endless debate? No. The guys knew he was the man for the job and he got it. Nobody would begrudge him the position. But now we have to be asked if more mods are needed? Why has that anything to do with us? We don't see or know what goes on behind the scenes in their crazed, debauched sessions in the Mod Cave. Maybe they're fine as they are, maybe they need help. Why do they need us to ratify that? Why is it important that we all have our say? You can apply that logic to pretty much all of the poll. Who sets, or at least implements the infractions? The mods do. Do we not trust them to do their jobs to the best of their ability? And anyway, it's not a job is it? They don't get paid. So whatever way they want to run this forum, the way they have been running the forum, should be okay. I'm totally unclear why there needs to be change, particularly of the magnitude tore is/was suggesting? Tore and others are worried about (among other things) new members not sticking around because they don't like the atmosphere here. Well I'll tell you one thing: if they read these threads they're likely to shake their heads and say "These guys can't even agree among themselves how to run this place! How can I enjoy a place like that?" To the outside viewer, the newbie or those recently joined and still to decide if they want to stay, we're looking like a bunch of bloody amateurs who can't even decide on what colour the walls should be, rather than a fairly happy bunch of people who have been living in the same house for years and years.
__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018 |
|
06-10-2015, 06:53 AM | #97 (permalink) |
Juicious Maximus III
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scabb Island
Posts: 6,525
|
On phone, so will be brief, but I think a community discussing stuff like mod policy and forum culture can be a sign of health. If there's an unhealthy aspect to it, it's in the responses; how people discuss it.
__________________
Something Completely Different |
06-10-2015, 08:02 AM | #98 (permalink) | ||
Oracle
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Closer then you think.....
Posts: 4,365
|
@TH I got a new computer, and tablet. I did my reply via tablet.I spent a few minutes thinking about my response as well, contrary to some beliefs I'm really not that much of a bitch..
I wanted to be accurately heard as well as understood, when change is forged as an act of at attrition rather than it coming from deep within the consciousness and hearts of the people, its disingenuous to its core, however pure the initial motives. I wanted that heard and understood. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and it would be sad to see the spontaneity , the heartfeltness, the rawness,the good the bad and the ugly all ripped out of this place because a noob or 12 got butt hurt and judged us without reading the context.
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
06-10-2015, 08:47 AM | #99 (permalink) | |
Juicious Maximus III
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scabb Island
Posts: 6,525
|
^I too like the spontaneity and fun of MB and I feel that there are some strawman arguments and misapprehensions that have yet to clear up, despite all the discussion. Like rule enforcement - if it was more consistently done, it wouldn't target spontaneity and fun. It would target rule breaking.
If the community wants the freedom to break certain rules, that's a legit opinion. I think the solution then could be to change the rules so that they are rules that can be consistently excercised without killing the freedom that the community wants to protect. You know, make the rules more lax if needed, but enforce them. It's better than having rules for show or just follow them up in some cases and not others without it being predictable to members. To summarize, a lot of these suggestions can be implemented in a way that preserves all the current freedoms and forum culture. It would just tidy up the system a bit. (I do want a stricter environment, but I know opinion is against me and I just wanna point out it doesn't have to be all or nothing) Quote:
__________________
Something Completely Different |
|
06-10-2015, 11:49 AM | #100 (permalink) | |
Account Disabled
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,235
|
Quote:
srs question though... what about the civil war? the abolition of slavery despite the overwhelming opposition to such a change from the white members of the slave-based southern society? and the north's reneging on the initial agreement laid out that states would have the right to succeed from the union, in order to prevent the prospect of federal tyranny? or the later civil rights movements/advances, when it became necessary for big brother to march in with the national guard and force the predominant white racist populace to tolerate black students going to their schools and ****? |
|
|