@Cygan: Ah, didn't see that. I meant "how we're going to define what constitutes being a dick", but I feel that's going to take up a ton of discussion, since dickery is multifaceted.
Eddie's guidelines are a good start though.
edited 21st Dec '11 5:52:43 AM by Icarael
"Stealing is a crime and drugs is a crime too BUT if you steal drugs the two crimes cancel out and it’s like basically doing a good."Yeah, anyway, let's see.
This isn't exactly the best list of rules, but it's certainly something to work from, at least.
2. Don't harass other users, please. If someone's being a dumbass, tell them so, but don't make a huge fuss over it.
3. Keep in mind that others have had different experiences than you, so try not to be callous.
4. Fucking spell properly.
5. Be understanding. That is, don't be racist or sexist or homophobic or anything like that. Hiding behind pretty words won't help.
6. Regarding NSFW stuff: It's fine to have it here, sometimes, but make it available in a way that people looking over your shoulder won't immediately notice it.
And, of course, the all-important rule:
Moderators may exercise discretion at any time. Just because you're not technically breaking a rule, doesn't mean we won't ban you for being an idiot anyway.
I don't expect these exact rules to get in, but I dunno. They cover most of the behaviours I'd class as "dickish", though, so there's that, at least.
Just in case anyone feels they want to look at the rules :V
edited 21st Dec '11 6:21:23 AM by CyganAngel
There are too many toasters in my chimney!The problem with OTC is that it really, in my opinion, needs a lot more moderator attention than it can currently get. This is compounded by the fact that many of the current posters will never report anyone else's misbehavior (unless they're doing it for argument advantage, anyway). In addition, fights there blow up very quickly.
So we either add moderators just for OTC or we change OTC.
The problem with adding moderators for it and fundamentally watching the place like it's a fight-prone schoolyard is — that's no fun at all. I know I don't want that job. I doubt any of the rest of the moderators want that job. I'm not sure that it's important to what the site is about to host debates like we currently do, certainly not if it involves more work to do it properly.
A brighter future for a darker age.It's a bit over the top, and takes off the supposed community focus that we're aiming for.
That, and the loss of a userbase and blah blah blah
I don't completely disagree with the notion, mind you, but it feels like just nuking something for the sake of nuking it rather than trying to fix it. Especially when most fix attempts are either shut down early or just never take off.
"My life is my own" | If you want to contact me privately, please ask first on the forum.I'd definitely support some rules reform. Not to say we should adopt a whole new ruleset as-is, but even so, as-is, Cygan's are much clearer than the ones we have, more explicitly condemn the worst problem behaviours and offer more leeway for judgement calls. Considerably shorter, too.
On OTC... see, I tried moderating that board more closely at one point. It got actually pretty stressful and took up more of my time than I can now afford to spend, honestly, and even then I think I was considerably more lenient than I should have been because the problem attitudes were just that pervasive. I mean, we're not talking about a few problem posters here, there are issues with the whole culture of the board that need working on. Some tropers are making an effort, and I appreciate that, but on the whole the threads that most need attention are the least fun ones to monitor. Frankly, the cutlist makes for pleasanter reading.
Cutting the non-wiki boards has been proposed before (pretty sure AOD advocated it a couple years back, even), but I would hope we wouldn't have to resort to anything quite that drastic. YF is currently less bad than OTC, for instance, and the media boards are hardly stellar.
edited 21st Dec '11 6:41:38 AM by BobbyG
Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The StaffI maintain that banning topics is not the way to go. In fact, I'd say that the moment we went "No complaining" instead of trying to address the problems within the userbase, whether with bans or just reasoning, was the moment the problems in OTC started to appear.
"My life is my own" | If you want to contact me privately, please ask first on the forum.Yeah, I wouldn't say subsume the rule list whole (like, I'm fairly sure that some of the mods would take issue to me telling people they're being dumbasses, even if they are being so), but, at least in my opinion, it's clearer than the ruleset you currently have, it's easier to follow, it gives the mods more leeway without being seen as ignoring the rules or having a get out of jail free card themselves, and it covers more topics. Plus, it's a lot shorter, which makes it much easier to read, meaning people are more likely to read it through.
There are too many toasters in my chimney!Yeah, I think we can safely say there are some topics which need to be banned (rape apologism and such), and the rest is mostly just poor debate conduct.
Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The StaffI feel like I'm playing Devil's Advocate here, but eh, whatever.
I feel we should be able to discuss such topics freely and without fearing a ban hammer on our asses. But we also should discuss those topics with moderation looking from the sides so things don't go awry.
I know, I know. One of the biggest arguments that has been thrown around from moderation is that "it's a big forum, we can't do nothing if you don't report it"
Here's where I make a plight, then: You guys have watchlists. I know I'm asking much of you if I ask you to watch everything, so then I won't ask you that. What I will ask you is to organize in a less informal fashion. If you don't want the "Moderation per subforum" thing, then it's fine. You don't have to do that. But going in with such an informal formation as we have now, where moderators just need to see shit going on and if they don't, it turns out they are not aware is...well, pretty bad.
We're in a situation where Eddie himself did not know about the latest OTC escapades. And I don't think this situation would have even started if moderation was organized.
"My life is my own" | If you want to contact me privately, please ask first on the forum.Well, hold up. We can agree that there's a difference between discussing, say, rape and related laws/current affairs, and claiming that rape victims "brought it on themselves" or "deserved it", surely? Only the latter is a problem, I would think.
What's more concerning is that we don't seem to be able to hold the former without it derailing into the latter. But hey, that's what banhammers are for.
Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The StaffWhat's more concerning is that we don't seem to be able to hold the former without it derailing into the latter. But hey, that's what banhammers are for.
Yeah, I don't think that discussing, say, new legislation that relates to rape is bad, and discussion on that should be allowed, but something along the lines of saying that a rape victim brought it on themselves is deserving of getting in trouble.
I think that's another point I should have brought up. A thump, while it's an official thing, it doesn't feel like you're getting in trouble because it happens so often and most of the time, by the time it's thumped, the post has served its' purpose. I feel like they're being overused a bit, while other forms of punishment, like forum bans, aren't being used enough.
There are too many toasters in my chimney!^^ That's something we can perhaps look into. I know thumps get used a lot.
Could we perhaps incorporate into the thump message a more explicit don't-do-that-or-you'll-get-banned warning? Would that help?
^ Sooo close! (drop the first h
)
Something like that would help, yes.
Also, if a person is having multiple posts in a thread thumped, it may be simpler to just forum-ban the person rather than littering a thread with multiple THUMPED messages.
And if a thread needs several thumps, then maybe it would be better to like, yell at the thread first? Or maybe lock it.
I just know that it's kind of ridiculous when I go into a thread and see like, twenty thumped posts, and some posts responding to them are left alone so I'm getting half of a conversation without the other half, and the people with ten thumps are still posting in the thread.
There are too many toasters in my chimney!

Well, personal and economic freedom are differet aspects of liberal v. conservative.
/derail.
I think OTC would do better with another, more dedicated watcher/moderator (like the TRS/IP guys), and we've been trying to work on self-moderation, to mixed results.
I am now known as Flyboy.