Results 26 to 50 of 57
Thread: Warnings
-
07-26-2004, 06:30 AM #26The Elder One
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- EU
- Posts
- 1,670
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this topic overdiscussed?
There were suggestions regarding this is issue in the past and and present...
I agree to the fact that changes have to be made, but I think they remain to the latitude of the moderators and perhaps iNet staff.
As you might have seen, Dennis already started a thread and maybe that will be the best place to take our suggestions and feedback.Lorand R. Minyo
Co-Founder @ Neveli
-
07-26-2004, 06:43 AM #27Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Location
- Eaglehawk, Victoria,Australia
- Posts
- 5,014
Originally posted by Lorand M
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this topic overdiscussed?
There were suggestions regarding this is issue in the past and and present...
I agree to the fact that changes have to be made, but I think they remain to the latitude of the moderators and perhaps iNet staff.
As you might have seen, Dennis already started a thread and maybe that will be the best place to take our suggestions and feedback.
Docwww.doctorhill.com.au
Need help? just ask The Doctor
House calls a specialty
If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy ?
-
07-26-2004, 06:56 AM #28The Elder One
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- EU
- Posts
- 1,670
Doc, I think that's exactly what happened, otherwise I wouldn't seen any reason for SWR to open a thread about changes. Ergo, they really did look closer
Lorand R. Minyo
Co-Founder @ Neveli
-
07-26-2004, 07:18 AM #29Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Location
- Eaglehawk, Victoria,Australia
- Posts
- 5,014
Originally posted by Lorand M
Doc, I think that's exactly what happened, otherwise I wouldn't seen any reason for SWR to open a thread about changes. Ergo, they really did look closer
Docwww.doctorhill.com.au
Need help? just ask The Doctor
House calls a specialty
If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy ?
-
07-26-2004, 07:22 AM #30The Elder One
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Location
- EU
- Posts
- 1,670
Yes, but as you might have noticed, it says it will be "populated" with the other "WHT changes threads"
Lorand R. Minyo
Co-Founder @ Neveli
-
08-14-2004, 10:47 PM #31Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Posts
- 351
show which mod has warned you
Hello,
I would like to know if it is possible to implement a system where when a moderator gives you warning points, he must enter a reason/explination, and his nick is there so we can see who it was.
I have the feeling that some mods are too quick to give warning points and generally have a bad effect on the community.
thanks
-
08-14-2004, 11:33 PM #32rogue element
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Location
- Northwest Colorado
- Posts
- 4,636
Eric J. Bowman, principal
Bison Systems Corporation coming soon: a new sig!
I'm just a poor, unfrozen caveman Webmaster. Your new 'standards' frighten, and confuse me...
-
08-14-2004, 11:57 PM #33Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Posts
- 351
In my stupidiity, I was unable to find this thread so I had made my own. BigBison set me on the right track.
I also think this is necessary. We should get to see who warned us and for what reason (i.e. an explination). What would be a good reason NOT to do it? Why would you not want the user to know reason of warning/ban and who did it? I think it is only fair.
It is not always easy for the admins to recognize patterns among a large number of bannings/warnings.
The reason I have found this to be crucial is that quite often, some members that view themselves as some sort of self appointed police enter threads and try to enforce rules instead of merely contacting a moderator. This results in unneccessary flamwars, thread closing, and warnings/bans.
iNET or whoever runs this forum should be happy to disclose this information. This is a community, it is not really owned by anyone. Since most of the mods come from the community, the posts/contributions come from the community, at least some degree of freedom of information should be practiced. The idea that if you dont like it leave it is ridiculous. You try to contribute/change something that you have invested time in, you find mostly valuable, and something worth improving.
I dont think accountability is ever a bad thing. Do you?
-
08-15-2004, 12:07 AM #34Away
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Posts
- 5,278
Originally posted by cord
I dont think accountability is ever a bad thing. Do you?
-
08-15-2004, 12:17 AM #35Disabled
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Posts
- 1,769
cord,
Feedback and concern is always a good thing. However, if you read this entire thread, you will see that it's been discussed pretty extensively already. How the system works. Why the system works. Etc.
-
08-15-2004, 12:26 AM #36Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Posts
- 351
I did read through the whole thread Gen-T
I think the explination is faulty. First off, just because you say it works or people say it works doesnt mean it does work. It may be the case that the system works almost all of the time, but if the system is more open, there is less of a likelihood of failure, furthermore, the system will become somewhat self-healing. Openness in this area follows the same philosophies that are the foundation in some open-source communities (such as the gpl, etc...) whereby the community can find problems quicker, and then can solve it.
To be honest, if it were me, I would not even need discussion to implement this since it seems like a no brainer to me. What is bad about it Gen-T?
-
08-15-2004, 12:36 AM #37Disabled
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Posts
- 1,769
As I said, the information is there. Many people have spoken about it. That doesn't mean that you will like it, or agree with it. No matter what rule/system is in place, it will not be perfect, nor will everybody like it.
-
08-15-2004, 01:30 AM #38Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Posts
- 351
I didnt say it would be perfect. I just wanted to make my opinion known, and argue for adding this feature. I think it will make wht better, not perfect.
So, if at some point, the people that make these decisions come accross my posts, they will hopefully see that there arent any downsides to the approach that I am advertising.
-
08-15-2004, 02:04 AM #39Disabled
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Posts
- 1,769
Originally posted by cord
....there arent any downsides to the approach that I am advertising.
Your feedback is important and everybody appreciates it I'm sure. However, there is no such thing as an approach or system that doesn't have any downsides, so keep that in mind. That's all I'm saying.
Peace.Last edited by Gen-T; 08-15-2004 at 02:15 AM.
-
08-15-2004, 02:27 AM #40
One thing this prevents is "this mod sucks" threads. When we had just a few mods and we sent a warning to someone, some would start a mod bashing thread. Some of them got quite ugly before they were tossed (although some are also still visible). . Now that we have many more, I can see a big surge of threads where little Johnny or little Janey didn't like the warning they received from a particular mod if they were identified in the warning.
Anyone having a problem with the warning now, can contact the helpdesk (and many do), if they don't understand why they received a warning. Admin will investigate to be sure it was warranted, if it was "borderline", we may remove the warning.
-
08-15-2004, 03:33 AM #41Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Posts
- 351
I understand your concern anon-e-mouse. And Gen-T, the things mentioned in this thread are not suffecient downside (IMO).
So the problem you mention (x mod sucks) seems like something that can happen. But, just as there are many rules governing the use of the forums that do not allow for certain flaming, insulting, and bad behaviour, I think enforcement of the anti-mod-bashing rules can be easy.
I dont see what is different between being wronged (as percieved by the alleged victim) by a host vs. a moderator. If people want to know about others' experiences with other hosts, I dont see why experiences with mods should not be shared. Just like how threads digressing and making baseless accusations/lies are locked/deleted with regards to hosts, the same should apply to mods.
So, what can happen if a mod gives warning/ban:
1. user agrees and says nothing
2. user feels it is unfair
a. user does nothing
b. user makes a thread with some discussion/conversation possibly after contacting the mod/admins off the board.
c. the user starts to flame the mod for no reason
How is that different from what happends to hosts?
Now, if I were a mod, I would not want disclusore for the following reasons:
1. I am unsure/know I have not made the right decisions.
2. I fear that my decision may be relayed to others
3. as a result of #2, I may loose business (since many mods seems to be hosters as well)
The last benefit is that there will be an equalization over time where mods will react to similar situations in a more even-handed/predictable way. This way, people will be treated more equally than they are today.
As I said, it is the same set of principles used in many of the software applications that you should be familiar with. Need I mention that it has been met with a great deal of success?
-
08-15-2004, 04:01 AM #42Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 876
Cord, as we've said, allowing users to post a thread concerning warning will do no good. We will not, as policy, discuss warnings or bans with anyone but the member. Thus a thread would be a one sided discussion, never allowing the moderation team to respond to unbased claims of unfairness as would be posted.
-
08-15-2004, 04:07 AM #43Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Posts
- 351
Well, it seems your mind is set (at least for now).
Suffice it to say I think it will be a valuable (and neceesary) service where one can balance the needs of the user/community with the rights of the moderators. Maybe some other time though.
At least an explination would be nice (to be included with warnings) even though the name may not be there. Unless, I am mistaken, explination is not included with current notifications unless pursued through the ticket system.
-
08-15-2004, 04:11 AM #44
If you still have your email, take a look further down at the comments section
-
08-15-2004, 04:16 AM #45Disabled
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Posts
- 1,769
Originally posted by cord
Now, if I were a mod, I would not want disclusore for the following reasons:
1. I am unsure/know I have not made the right decisions.
2. I fear that my decision may be relayed to others
3. as a result of #2, I may loose business (since many mods seems to be hosters as well)
Originally posted by cord
This way, people will be treated more equally than they are today.
Originally posted by cord
As I said, it is the same set of principles used in many of the software applications that you should be familiar with. Need I mention that it has been met with a great deal of success?
Maybe we are going about this all wrong. Perhaps we should just ask you, Cord, what exactly has happened to you here at WHT that makes you feel things are bad, or that people are treated unfairly? Let's just get right down to the nitty gritty. Please tell us, or give specific examples, of what makes you feel the mods are doing anything less than a great job? Then maybe everybody can learn from it and improve.
-
08-15-2004, 04:25 AM #46Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Location
- Sofia
- Posts
- 1,354
Re: show which mod has warned you
Originally posted by cord
I would like to know if it is possible to implement a system where when a moderator gives you warning points, he must enter a reason/explination, and his nick is there so we can see who it was.
I have the feeling that some mods are too quick to give warning points and generally have a bad effect on the community.
Thank you,
Plamen
-
08-15-2004, 04:38 AM #47rogue element
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Location
- Northwest Colorado
- Posts
- 4,636
I don't like that idea so much, Plamen. It reminds me of driving through a state which posts the amount of the fine vs. mph in excess of the speed limit. Drivers ask themselves, "How fast can I afford to go?" I think that table you suggest would be a good idea if limited to the mods, unless such a thing already exists? But I agree with Gen-T: cord, please post a link or something?
Eric J. Bowman, principal
Bison Systems Corporation coming soon: a new sig!
I'm just a poor, unfrozen caveman Webmaster. Your new 'standards' frighten, and confuse me...
-
08-15-2004, 04:38 AM #48Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Sep 2002
- Posts
- 876
Cord, except for rare cases a reason is included with a warning. This reason however can vary from a copy and paste of the rule broken or a few sentances the moderator has written to explain the situation further.
Imago, the thing is we often modify the number of points and length for each individual situation from their defaults.
-
08-15-2004, 05:23 AM #49Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Posts
- 351
Big Bison: a link to what?
Daveman: I understand that such a think may be changing, but providing some range (e.g. advertising own company 2-4 points for 5 days or whatever) and guidelines will allow people to get a better feeling for the community, its rules, its people, and it wil alow users who recieve warnings feel that they have been treated fairly. It should probably even reduce your work in explanations to the warned/banned user.
I keep wanted to stop resopding in this thread, but it seems I am not so good at keeping that promise,
-
08-15-2004, 05:41 AM #50rogue element
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Location
- Northwest Colorado
- Posts
- 4,636
Originally posted by cord
Big Bison: a link to what?
Originally posted by Gen-T
Maybe we are going about this all wrong. Perhaps we should just ask you, Cord, what exactly has happened to you here at WHT that makes you feel things are bad, or that people are treated unfairly? Let's just get right down to the nitty gritty. Please tell us, or give specific examples, of what makes you feel the mods are doing anything less than a great job? Then maybe everybody can learn from it and improve.Last edited by BigBison; 08-15-2004 at 05:44 AM.
Eric J. Bowman, principal
Bison Systems Corporation coming soon: a new sig!
I'm just a poor, unfrozen caveman Webmaster. Your new 'standards' frighten, and confuse me...