How Should MB Be Moderated?
 

Hello musicbanterers and banterins :)

• This is a multiple choice poll that makes several statements. Please vote for those statements that you agree with.

• The poll is the result of a discussion that started in these threads : http://www.musicbanter.com/announcem...forcement.html (policy discussion) & http://www.musicbanter.com/announcem...forcement.html (poll discussion)

• The poll will be open for two weeks.

PS! We humbly ask that you leave a post in this thread explaining your votes. Also, if any option is unclear, please ask about it before you vote.



Poll options

Also, the poll options have been shorted down because of a 100 characters rule. I give you the intended poll options below :

Equality

• 1A. The rules should be applied equally to all members (ex. no favoritism, rules apply equally to mods and users)
• 1B. The rules should NOT be applied equally to all members (ex. mods are generally more lenient with long time members and mods than others)
  

Safe zones

• 2A. Rules should apply equally to all forums
• 2B. Rules should NOT apply equally to all forums (ex. The Lounge forum less strict or other designated "safe zones")
  

Short, nonsense posts

• 3A. Outside safe zones, mod policy should allow for short, nonsense posts (ex. one-word posts are okay)
• 3B. Outside safe zones, mod policy should discourage short, nonsense posts (ex. you can get away with a few, but not many)
• 3C. Outside safe zones, mod policy should prohibit short, nonsense posts (ex. one-word posts are not allowed)
  

Mods reaction policy

• 4A. General mod policy should be to react to every instance where a rule is broken (ex. the mods react the first time and every other time a user breaks a rule)
• 4B. General mod policy should allow for mods NOT to react to an instance where a rule is broken (ex. allows for mods to first react to rule breaking when member does it repeatedly)
  

Mods transparency policy

• 5A. Details of rule enforcement is ultimately between a mod and a user (ex. Mod-user PMs can remain secret)
• 5B. Details of rule enforcement can ulimately be subject to other mods scrutiny (ex. Mod-user PMs are visible to other mods or can be made available)
• 5C. Details of rule enforcement can be subject to public scrutiny (Mod-user PMs can be made available to all)
  

Mods punishment policy

• 6A. For punishment, there should be a general policy to use temporary infractions (enough infractions result in a ban)
• 6B. For punishment, there should be a general policy to use warnings, infractions / temp bans and permabans
• 6C. There should be no general policy for how punishment is carried out
  

Mods anonymity policy

• 7A. For rule enforcement, moderators should use a joint, anonymous account
• 7B. For rule enforcement, moderators should use their personal accounts
  

Trial run

• 8A. A new moderation policy should have a trial run first (ex. 1 - 2 months)
• 8B. A new moderation policy should NOT have a trial run first (implemented immediately)
  

Mod team

• 9A. The mod team should be bolstered with additional mods.
• 9B. The mod team should NOT be bolstered with additional mods.
• 9C. The current mod team should be retained.
• 9D. Some or all of the current moderators should be replaced.
  

Other

• 10. Some of my concerns are not listed in the individual items, but I will voice them in a reply.

I see the loaded phrasing has continued on into this new poll. It would have been nice if you had tried to be neutral in the way you presented the options.

I have tried to be neutral. Which option(s) do you find to be loaded?

Also, the various options here were discussed in the old poll thread. I wish you would've given your constructive feedback there before the poll was posted.

Dude. Too long.

1B is very loaded.

Yes, discussed via walls of text between the handful of people who had time to wade through it all. Apologies for not having as much free time as you during what you know was my first week at a new job.

Ugh, it has a spelling error in it.

I think it is kinda loaded both ways. I imagine many will think that "the rules should NOT be applied equally to all members" initially sounds disagreeable, but that the example "mods more lenient with regulars" sounds agreeable.

No, it's the example I'm talking about. It shouldn't be about being "more lenient with regulars" it should be about taking context into account with rules enforcent versus an emphasis on consistency regardless of context.

So, is there no option for "I don't want anything to change" or do I have to choose something?

Yeah I'm not voting whatsoever the atmosphere is amazing how it is right now, and I refuse to take part in some sort of rule change plus I don't want to read all that.

Come on, Jansz. The members were demanding a poll be posted, tore can't please everyone at once. It's not his fault that not everyone with an opinion wasn't a part of the discussion, just as it's not your fault you were at a new job and not able to spend free time discussing the poll. At least cut him some slack on that point.

There are options in the poll that basically describe the status quo.

I'm not going to read through all the poll options just to find the one that applies to my disapproval. You should've just added a "i'm not included / keep things the way they are" option for the people who don't want things to change. So, i'll just refrain from voting.

I voted in the original poll, have not changed my mind so all these extra subdivisions mean nothing to me. MB is fine as it is, no need for change. End, for me, of subject. So I'm not voting here, but just letting you know why.

No, I shouldn't. Last time, I was told it shouldn't be a simple yes / no question. Now you're telling me that there should be a simple option, but only only one for those who want to keep things exactly as they are? I don't think so.

It would be stupid for various reasons which I won't bother get into at this point. It's clear you haven't thought your suggestion through.

If you don't want to vote, that's fine.

Tore you should have made a poll option specifically for someone with my very important point of view, even though the only contributions I've made to the discussion revolve around my not wanting to participate in the discussion.

Great. I'm being mocked now. I see the maturity level of this discussion has gone down significantly.

On what point? He was complaining to me that I didn't respond to the walls of text on his schedule so I responded to him.

K then the people who don't want any change just won't vote most likely, don't see how making this more complicated will be making it easier so do what you want.

I'd just like to point out that because he posted last, at this point, when you look at the thread it says "How should MB be moderated? By Machine." :laughing:

Now it says Trollheart.


Oh wait...

Here we go back to normal. Just no one leave anymore comments.

I think tore has done a great job with this poll. It' s a rare opportunity for us to get a clear idea of public opinion on a lot of issues that periodically have turned up in MB discussion threads.

It may look complicated at a glance, but it took me about 2 mins to vote. I would strongly recommend other members to make that slight effort too. The poll results could become a useful resource for mods and regulars alike, to either promote or resist change.

As tore says, there are options to show your approval of the status quo as well as suggestions for change, so I say; let your opinion be heard. The more people who vote, the more representative the poll becomes - and remember what they say; if you don't bother to vote, you can't complain about how things are run!

^thats under the impression that the mods will approve/deny anything regardless of poll results. Almost all the mods have expressed their disapproval so knowing that, what is the point?

I have a serious problem with option 8, which operates under the assumption that changes WILL be made.

I voted for every other option though. Not much to explain

Brother, some people don't want change you know , rewording it doesn't make their opinions different just means they still feel the same way they did a week ago.

Yeah, Lisna, I'm kind of reminded of our govt's desperate attempts to get us to ratify the Lisbon treaty: they had to ask us twice (what, you didn't hear us clearly enough say NO the first time?) and we eventually voted as they wanted us to. I don't agree with the need for any changes, as I've said, and therefore, for me, voting here is just a pointless exercise. I have looked through all the points, and few if any make any sense to me, or would as far as I can see, enrich my life or the running of the forum. Considering the idea has been defeated on a more or less 2-1 basis on both current polls, I honestly don't see why we need a third.

But vote all you want, I can't stop you. I just don't see this one reflecting any different an outcome than the other two have.

Oh, and now I'm running MB, until someone else posts. ;)

Not entirely sure what you are saying, Ki. What have mods expressed their disapproval of ?

My assumption is that the poll provides a statistical base of public opinion which can help anyone, in any future discussion about several different aspects of modding policy. Isn't that sufficient point in itself?

If option X has 10 votes, option Y has 100 votes, it's immediately clear which option is more popular. Whether or not option Y can be implemented is really a seperate issue, but that shouldn't discourage people from voting.

^theyve expressed disapproval of changing anything regarding the rules etc. You can see most of them voted No on the previous poll.

I'm not opposed to making changes if that's what people want.

Are we reading this poll different ways, Roxy and Trollheart? To me, it's just trying to give everyone a chance to show what they'd like. If you don't want any changes you can skim through the options and just pick out the ones that'll leave things as they are.

( Never heard about that Lisbon Treaty referéndum, which sounds both sad and bizarre, but I don't think that's what's going on here. I recommend you put in your "No Change" votes so that the poll results reflect what people actually want.)

Honestly, I have not been here much lately because of personal crap and so have not had the time or patience to read through the original thread. I'm abstaining from voting because I don't yet understand what's going on here.

But what about those that don't? Would they just have to deal with it? If any of this ends up approved, my activity here will drop immensely.

Yes, they voted no on tore's original infraction package, but this poll is about various other ítems too.

no your not reading the wrong poll love, I'm just saying some folks aren't into it. Some are. And those not into change only have buttons in the initial poll and this sorta reads like f you guys your opinions only half matter, which was the problem with the original poll and it looks like sore loosing.Because it was 20-10 last I looked.

Every category has an option that represents how things currently are and alternatives. Wording might be loaded but it still fits.

I don't see a problem with this. Either you want respected members to be given some leeway for their past contributions(or whatever else) or you don't. Some of you are getting incredibly nitpicky over some really dumb ish.

I'm not really sure what you're saying here. If the majority of the forum wants X, are you saying the forum shouldn't consider X? I think it's reasonable to consider changes if the majority want them, though based on the previous poll, it looks like majority don't.

To clear up any confusion, the previous poll was a yes / no poll regarding my suggestion. This is not about that anymore. This is something else.

All you basically have to do is vote for whatever statements you agree with.

Reading up on the old discussion may be useful if you want to find some arguments on the things that I suggested and I really think people need to know what the infractions system does before they don't vote for a general policy to use it. It effectively automates record keeping, bans and helps ensure transparency. It's a sweet thang.

Yeah, the options are fine and it took me all of thirty seconds to vote.

1\2 minute man.

The issue is that that wasn't really the question in the first place so for someone with my position that issue, which I've made clear from very early on, it's being presented with a proposal they disagree with versus a strawman of their actual position. Kind of problematic.