Jump to content
Honey Monster

Community Discussion - Moderation

Recommended Posts

And we have further examples of bad moderation by @Frank Castle and @Erin Brockovich and perhaps the rest of them while at it as they may have signed off on it. 

Lets run through the rules shall we:

Quote

When creating a thread

1: Thread titles should be a brief description of the thread topic. Moderation has the right to alter thread titles that do not follow this rule.
2: Topics should contain the subject you want to discuss backed by facts to support that discussion subject.
3: Whether a thread has sufficiently set a basis for respectful discussion on the thread topic will be at the discretion of the moderators.
4: This is not a debate forum. We have one of those. If your "discussion" toes the line of a debate it will be moved.
5: This is not a spam forum. We have one of those. If your "discussion" toes the line of a spam it will be moved.
6: Opening posts should be long enough to develop a positive discussion.

1: Title was appropriate, summing up the contents nicely. 
2: In immigration thread linked to the article with the information being discussed. 
3: I took some pieces of the article and started the discussion off.
4: This one applies to the Trump Day one most. There indeed is no debate there, it is a listing of events after all, but it doesn't have to be. A subject merely needs to be provided for discussion.
5: Not spam. If linking to an article and talking about it is spam then everything is. Oddly I've done this article linking many times and only now are the mods trying to stop me... wonder why.
6: My opening posts in both cases were in depth.

Conclusion: In the Trump thread I mentioned Trump Derangement Syndrome, what those mad at Trump often suffer from. In the immigration thread I ripped apart the lefty policy of deeming everything racist. They belong to those groups. They're mad that the mean ol' Roz is easily making them look like the joke they are. They are moderating, a verbal warning yes, but with a threat of actual warnings if continued to try to make the Roz stop in his posting of threads that show their politics for what they are. Insane disgusting, garbage. 

@Alex I get you're a lefty progressive type too, except when you go off the reservation anyway, but this is blatantly transparent. Tell your mods to man up (crap, negative gender based statement) and face me in debate if they're so triggered (of course I know, you know, everybody knows that the Roz would then easily destroy them) and not to try these pathetic attempts while hiding behind moderation. Oh and as seen above, your mods clearly have no understanding of the rules as I previously said. They only provide more evidence of this fact.

Edited by Rozalia
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Rozalia said:

And we have further examples of bad moderation by @Frank Castle and @Erin Brockovich and perhaps the rest of them while at it as they may have signed off on it. 

Lets run through the rules shall we:

1: Title was appropriate, summing up the contents nicely. 
2: In immigration thread linked to the article with the information being discussed. 
3: I took some pieces of the article and started the discussion off.
4: This one applies to the Trump Day one most. There indeed is no debate there, it is a listing of events after all, but it doesn't have to be. A subject merely needs to be provided for discussion.
5: Not spam. If linking to an article and talking about it is spam then everything is. Oddly I've done this article linking many times and only now are the mods trying to stop me... wonder why.
6: My opening posts in both cases were in depth.

Conclusion: In the Trump thread I mentioned Trump Derangement Syndrome, what those mad at Trump often suffer from. In the immigration thread I ripped apart the lefty policy of deeming everything racist. They belong to those groups. They're mad that the mean ol' Roz is easily making them look like the joke they are. They are moderating, a verbal warning yes, but with a threat of actual warnings if continued to try to make the Roz stop in his posting of threads that show their politics for what they are. Insane disgusting, garbage. 

@Alex I get you're a lefty progressive type too, except when you go off the reservation anyway, but this is blatantly transparent. Tell your mods to man up (crap, negative gender based statement) and face me in debate if they're so triggered (of course I know, you know, everybody knows that the Roz would then easily destroy them) and not to try these pathetic attempts while hiding behind moderation. Oh and as seen above, your mods clearly have no understanding of the rules as I previously said. They only provide more evidence of this fact.

This had nothing to do with your topics. 

I stated before that moderation will be heavier in those forums to route out spam and posts that are not created in that effort to provide a substantial base of discussion or debate. 

I don't care about the topics you want to discuss - but they need to hold substance and actually create a discussion or have a working debate. We have done this in the past and it created a strong community where even you were posting good stuff that had positive response and discussion. 

I asked you to reword your OP and you refused because of your opinion on it. We must remain consistent and provide a positive environment for the community. Allowing posts like that in those forums would be the same as allowing OOC spam in alliance affairs forums. 

Feel free to reintroduce your topics in the future and follow those guidelines for a fruitful and constructive debate or discussion. 

 

Thank you for your feedback. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex should just merge Discussion and Debate into a single forum. A debate can also be a discussion and a discussion can easily turn into a debate. Distinguishing between the two and going so far as to lock threads is pointless.

 

Also why lock the thread rather than move it to its suitable area if its in the wrong area. Did the forum update break thread moving or something.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

Alex should just merge Discussion and Debate into a single forum. A debate can also be a discussion and a discussion can easily turn into a debate. Distinguishing between the two and going so far as to lock threads is pointless.

 

Also why lock the thread rather than move it to its suitable area if its in the wrong area. Did the forum update break thread moving or something.

To spam? The only place it would fit. 

To have consistency we have to enforce the guidelines of those forms like we did in the past. I am for merging those tho, would already more sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Frank Castle said:

To spam? The only place it would fit. 

This isn't the first time recently mods have opted to lock a thread rather than move it, it was a legitimate question. I don't think I've seen mods move threads in recent history. 

Threads being locked should be a last resort, not a first option. I disagree with it being considered "spam" but regardless, yes you should really move it to spam then rather than lock it. Unless it breaks an actual rule, I don't see why a thread supposedly in the wrong section, shouldn't be moved to the correct section.

Seems like mods need proper procedures for enforcing rules on top of new rules. 

Trying to stay on the topic of moderation rather than getting into specifics of various moderator mess ups since that is just a distraction.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

This isn't the first time recently mods have opted to lock a thread rather than move it, it was a legitimate question. I don't think I've seen mods move threads in recent history. 

Threads being locked should be a last resort, not a first option. I disagree with it being considered "spam" but regardless, yes you should really move it to spam then rather than lock it. Unless it breaks an actual rule, I don't see why a thread supposedly in the wrong section, shouldn't be moved to the correct section.

Seems like mods need proper procedures for enforcing rules on top of new rules. 

Trying to stay on the topic of moderation rather than getting into specifics of various moderator mess ups since that is just a distraction.

Guidelines in the debate and discussion forums are not new, they were posted by me a year ago. 

Threads have always been locked in those forums when actual consistent moderation was present. If it's better to move it to spam to keep those forums clean, so be it, that's easy. 

When it comes to IC forums - my belief is locking is last resort. Those are IC and the posts of a few can ruin it for the many who actually want to engage IC. That's why we have those global verbal warnings for those threads which are primarily in the IC sections of this community. I know recently mods have been locking threads but that is being worked on. 

For now, any posts that don't meet standards of the debate/discussion forums as well as orbis central and alliance affairs posts that are considered spam will be moved to the spam forum. I'll pass this along to the moderation team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frank Castle said:

This had nothing to do with your topics. 

I stated before that moderation will be heavier in those forums to route out spam and posts that are not created in that effort to provide a substantial base of discussion or debate. 

I don't care about the topics you want to discuss - but they need to hold substance and actually create a discussion or have a working debate. We have done this in the past and it created a strong community where even you were posting good stuff that had positive response and discussion. 

I asked you to reword your OP and you refused because of your opinion on it. We must remain consistent and provide a positive environment for the community. Allowing posts like that in those forums would be the same as allowing OOC spam in alliance affairs forums. 

Feel free to reintroduce your topics in the future and follow those guidelines for a fruitful and constructive debate or discussion. 

 

Thank you for your feedback. 

And how exactly am I supposed to do to meet your standard of "not spam" (Linking to the Guardian and discussing an article of theirs is spam now? What isn't spam then?)? Huh? Go on, lets hear it. I linked the article that is to be discussed along with it's subject matter. I provided my take. Left it for people to respond to. So come on, what should I have done then in those two threads?

Edited by Rozalia
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Dr Rush said:

ITT: -snip-

I'd argue otherwise. I'm sort of worried about mods not being consistent when classifying threads as spam or not spam. Take this thread and this thread into consideration. The Christmas thread has a link to an article and calls The Guardian and CNN fake news. The immigration thread expands another thread which was IMO, poorly created because of its either-or nature and actually mentions stats from the article in the OP. The vague wording in the thread ("This also does not follow the standard guidelines to a debate/discussion as there is no substance to discuss or debate on. Please update your OP to provide actual substance for discussion or this thread will be locked.") really doesn't address which point. I believe the mods stating which point was broken by posts (not just Roz's, but all) would improve the overall state of the forum over time. Kaizen is a strong force. 

44 minutes ago, Frank Castle said:

Guidelines in the debate and discussion forums are not new, they were posted by me a year ago. 

Threads have always been locked in those forums when actual consistent moderation was present. If it's better to move it to spam to keep those forums clean, so be it, that's easy. 

In the Discussions Guidelines thread, Four clearly states that posts will be moved. When did that change? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WISD0MTREE said:

I'd argue otherwise. I'm sort of worried about mods not being consistent when classifying threads as spam or not spam. Take this thread and this thread into consideration. The Christmas thread has a link to an article and calls The Guardian and CNN fake news. The immigration thread expands another thread which was IMO, poorly created because of its either-or nature and actually mentions stats from the article in the OP. The vague wording in the thread ("This also does not follow the standard guidelines to a debate/discussion as there is no substance to discuss or debate on. Please update your OP to provide actual substance for discussion or this thread will be locked.") really doesn't address which point. I believe the mods stating which point was broken by posts (not just Roz's, but all) would improve the overall state of the forum over time. Kaizen is a strong force. 

In the Discussions Guidelines thread, Four clearly states that posts will be moved. When did that change? 

Well it changed when y'all asked us to stop spam and "shit posts" but now y'all want them moved. ? So we will just go back to original settings of moving them. 

We will throw a comment like "this doesn't fit the guidelines of this forum. Link guidelines here. Check these out for future posts. We are moving this to (whatever forum it should belong in) in this case spam. 

 

We aren't trying to work against y'all. We are trying to give everyone what they want in a fair way so just give us some wiggle room to work out the kinks. We will get there together. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2018 at 3:38 AM, Frank Castle said:

We will throw a comment like "this doesn't fit the guidelines of this forum. Link guidelines here. Check these out for future posts. We are moving this to (whatever forum it should belong in) in this case spam. 

Wouldn't it be more beneficial to cite which rule was broken in order to educate the forum at large, thus improving the overall quality of posts here? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the like on Wisdomtree's post by a mod. Great. You can start now. Where did my two threads break the rules, go. I'm going to predict, like all the last times, you can't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2018 at 1:30 PM, Rozalia said:

I see the like on Wisdomtree's post by a mod. Great. You can start now. Where did my two threads break the rules, go. I'm going to predict, like all the last times, you can't. 

These mods seem to be quiet - maybe they are working what they said they were working on. Maybe. I'm personally in favor of a police state. 

 

#maga 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.