Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 8:08:12 GMT -5
Greetings.. I doubt the moderation will be exactly the same. With the ability to say " Take it to the parkinglot, boys" and have that actually mean something and be enforceable without having to ban anyone from the forum, it might get exercised. In that case, why not create a 'pit' where the two people in disagreement fight it out, no holds barred, no interventions.. the peanut gallery can post their observation in another thread.. let's see the disagreements explored without distractions and interventions.. Be well.. In RT land, "the pit" was where anyone could be involved. "The Dueling Ground" was just one on one. It's funny though, the latter was more civil because it was a liberated vs newbie relationship. So your pit proposition sounds more like a dueling ground. How 'bout The Cage (a la WWF Cage Matches). Actually I don't like the idea.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 8:10:02 GMT -5
So the moderated section will be exactly the same as what we have now. That includes mocking, in all it's forms as long as it doesn't trip the moderation wires. The unmoderated area will be whatever happens as long as it is within the proboards guidelines. Peter are you enforcing that last part? That's like real bullying, and stalking and ad-blocking and such. I haven't heard anything from Peter about the moderated area excluding certain members from the start, for example Reefs and Enigma. In fact, neither of them have ever actually fully tripped the moderating wires, so they'll be fine in the moderated area, probably. This begs some questions. It seems like folks who want a moderated area because they think R&E et al are superbaddies are really wanting tighter moderation on mocking. Otherwise what we're getting is just a new loosely moderated area where there is no-holds-barred (within Proboards guidelines). I can see this area becoming a place for folks to speak their mind, complete with epithets, about those they percieve as treating them unfairly elsewhere. More like a venting zone. It's possible the superbaddies will be the object of such venting to a great degree. I doubt the moderation will be exactly the same. With the ability to say "Take it to the parkinglot, boys" and have that actually mean something and be enforceable without having to ban anyone from the forum, it might get exercised. Yes it seems like what folks want is increased moderation in the moderated area. Someone should let Peter know this though. To me, discerning when to utter "Take it to the parkinglot boys" would be difficult and arbitrary.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 26, 2013 8:17:14 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. In that case, why not create a 'pit' where the two people in disagreement fight it out, no holds barred, no interventions.. the peanut gallery can post their observation in another thread.. let's see the disagreements explored without distractions and interventions.. Be well.. In RT land, "the pit" was where anyone could be involved. "The Dueling Ground" was just one on one. It's funny though, the latter was more civil because it was a liberated vs newbie relationship. So your pit proposition sounds more like a dueling ground. How 'bout The Cage (a la WWF Cage Matches). Actually I don't like the idea. Why not? it makes sense, an 'either put up or shut up' situation.. let's take the warring parties and have them arrive at a mutual understanding, even if it is to 'agree to disagree'.. no posting privileges until a mutual agreement is arrived at, or until a moderator opens the 'cage'.. maybe this forum could move beyond the endless bickering.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jun 26, 2013 8:19:17 GMT -5
As I understand it, from Peter, the only change here is a new area that is less moderated. A venting zone. Could be ugly. Actually I doubt it will be used much. Hmmmm ... I don't think that this is what topo' and Peter have in mind to be honest with you, otherwise, why make the change? The first time Enireefs goes all third-person snarky on someone is where you will see the change. Yes, this change would make room for the mod to be able to tell the snarkers to take it to the snarking zone without having to pull the trigger on a ban. It creates room for a grey area between black and white.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jun 26, 2013 8:25:54 GMT -5
Greetings.. I doubt the moderation will be exactly the same. With the ability to say " Take it to the parkinglot, boys" and have that actually mean something and be enforceable without having to ban anyone from the forum, it might get exercised. In that case, why not create a 'pit' where the two people in disagreement fight it out, no holds barred, no interventions.. the peanut gallery can post their observation in another thread.. let's see the disagreements explored without distractions and interventions.. Be well.. I think that would still need to happen in an unmoderated way to vent completely. Easier on the mod if there was a section for that. Instead of having it mixed in with regular discussion.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jun 26, 2013 8:31:09 GMT -5
I doubt the moderation will be exactly the same. With the ability to say "Take it to the parkinglot, boys" and have that actually mean something and be enforceable without having to ban anyone from the forum, it might get exercised. Yes it seems like what folks want is increased moderation in the moderated area. Someone should let Peter know this though. To me, discerning when to utter "Take it to the parkinglot boys" would be difficult and arbitrary. You mean deciding between light grey, staying in the white, versus grey? The light grey being classified either way doesn't get kicked from the forum. This change allows the dark grey no longer need to be banned. There is a place for extended latitude. There are people crying for more moderation and people crying for less moderation, this just gives them both what they want.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 8:36:17 GMT -5
Hmmmm ... I don't think that this is what topo' and Peter have in mind to be honest with you, otherwise, why make the change? The first time Enireefs goes all third-person snarky on someone is where you will see the change. Yes, this change would make room for the mod to be able to tell the snarkers to take it to the snarking zone without having to pull the trigger on a ban. It creates room for a grey area between black and white. Okay, just clarifying for myself... a snark violation* sends the perp to the parking lot. They can't return to the saloon. Non-perp patrons can drift in and out of the saloon, interacting in both areas as long as they are within guidelines. A perp who's been exiled who dares tread in the saloon again gets the mega-boot from the forum all together, temp then perm. *snark violation = tightened moderation change
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jun 26, 2013 8:42:10 GMT -5
Yes, this change would make room for the mod to be able to tell the snarkers to take it to the snarking zone without having to pull the trigger on a ban. It creates room for a grey area between black and white. Okay, just clarifying for myself... a snark violation* sends the perp to the parking lot. They can't return to the saloon. Non-perp patrons can drift in and out of the saloon, interacting in both areas as long as they are within guidelines. A perp who's been exiled who dares tread in the saloon again gets the mega-boot from the forum all together, temp then perm. *snark violation = tightened moderation change There's nothing stopping the snarkers from participating in the "snark free zone", but if they keep snarking in it instead of snarking in the snarking zone... Peter is going to have to explain how he sees that working.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 8:44:37 GMT -5
Greetings.. In RT land, "the pit" was where anyone could be involved. "The Dueling Ground" was just one on one. It's funny though, the latter was more civil because it was a liberated vs newbie relationship. So your pit proposition sounds more like a dueling ground. How 'bout The Cage (a la WWF Cage Matches). Actually I don't like the idea. Why not? it makes sense, an 'either put up or shut up' situation.. let's take the warring parties and have them arrive at a mutual understanding, even if it is to 'agree to disagree'.. no posting privileges until a mutual agreement is arrived at, or until a moderator opens the 'cage'.. maybe this forum could move beyond the endless bickering.. Be well.. I don't feel strongly about the idea. It seems to me that two may come together in such an area but never get any resolution. Boobytrapped from the start. Maybe within the snark zone have a sub area for just one on one, see how it goes. Not sure about the mechanics of it, though. I suppose if some ultrasnarky butted in and made it a threesome, there could be a request to ban that one, as they are violating the one-on-one rule. So that would require the moderator to visit the unmoderated section. This probably wouldn't happen too often though.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 26, 2013 9:02:07 GMT -5
Just to throw in a question here: This forum has about 2,500 threads. Who decides what thread belongs into the adult area and what thread into the kids area?
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jun 26, 2013 9:04:19 GMT -5
Greetings.. Why not? it makes sense, an 'either put up or shut up' situation.. let's take the warring parties and have them arrive at a mutual understanding, even if it is to 'agree to disagree'.. no posting privileges until a mutual agreement is arrived at, or until a moderator opens the 'cage'.. maybe this forum could move beyond the endless bickering.. Be well.. I don't feel strongly about the idea. It seems to me that two may come together in such an area but never get any resolution. Boobytrapped from the start. Maybe within the snark zone have a sub area for just one on one, see how it goes. Not sure about the mechanics of it, though. I suppose if some ultrasnarky butted in and made it a threesome, there could be a request to ban that one, as they are violating the one-on-one rule. So that would require the moderator to visit the unmoderated section. This probably wouldn't happen too often though. The point of the unmoderated zone is that it be unmoderated apart from spam, porn, racism, hate, I.e.proboard requirements. The personal whining and crying about how mean someone is or how someone is not following rules would fall on the Mod's def ears. The only reason for the mod to step in is if there would be liability for not stepping in with respect to proboards' hosting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 9:05:41 GMT -5
Just to throw in a question here: This forum has about 2,500 threads. Who decides what thread belongs into the adult area and what thread into the kids area? It seems like there might be paralell universes going on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 9:10:14 GMT -5
I don't feel strongly about the idea. It seems to me that two may come together in such an area but never get any resolution. Boobytrapped from the start. Maybe within the snark zone have a sub area for just one on one, see how it goes. Not sure about the mechanics of it, though. I suppose if some ultrasnarky butted in and made it a threesome, there could be a request to ban that one, as they are violating the one-on-one rule. So that would require the moderator to visit the unmoderated section. This probably wouldn't happen too often though. The point of the unmoderated zone is that it be unmoderated apart from spam, porn, racism, hate, I.e.proboard requirements. The personal whining and crying about how mean someone is or how someone is not following rules would fall on the Mod's def ears. The only reason for the mod to step in is if there would be liability for not stepping in with respect to proboards' hosting. Tzu is talking about a different idea though. He wants the functionality to have a thread where only two members have posting rights. I don't know if this is a technical possibility. But it could be possible with moderation. It makes sense to me that in the new proposed structure Tzu's mano y mano area would be a subgrouping within the unmoderated area, though it would require moderation if there is no proboards technical set-up possible.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jun 26, 2013 9:11:21 GMT -5
Just to throw in a question here: This forum has about 2,500 threads. Who decides what thread belongs into the adult area and what thread into the kids area? That is why I suggested it would be easier to turn this section into adults and let the new area be the kids area. But if it's the other way around, Peter is going to have to do some extra work in clarifying the boundary as people contribute and enforcing the boundary going forward. Applying the distinction retroactively would be a waste of time.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jun 26, 2013 9:20:31 GMT -5
The point of the unmoderated zone is that it be unmoderated apart from spam, porn, racism, hate, I.e.proboard requirements. The personal whining and crying about how mean someone is or how someone is not following rules would fall on the Mod's def ears. The only reason for the mod to step in is if there would be liability for not stepping in with respect to proboards' hosting. Tzu is talking about a different idea though. He wants the functionality to have a thread where only two members have posting rights. I don't know if this is a technical possibility. But it could be possible with moderation. It makes sense to me that in the new proposed structure Tzu's mano y mano area would be a subgrouping within the unmoderated area, though it would require moderation if there is no proboards technical set-up possible. Yes it is possible, but would require the mod to enforce it or have Shawn give him the ability to create groups with permissions. The boards are capable of that arrangement, though. Spectators grouping and cage-match participant grouping. I suspect the mod doesn't really want to be involved in those situations though and will let anarchy and self-organization be the rule of law in the unmoderated forum if it's created.
|
|