On mini-modding and how to improve ATT

A spin-off from this thread, so this one could be more focused on how the queries should be handled in general. To summarize, I've suggested to update the Edit War / FAQ or draft a Administrivia.Ask The Tropers Guidelines / Administrivia.How To Respond To Problems / Administrivia.Minimodding, and asked for a report button in the Wishlist.

Leaving technical side aside for unforseeable future, some general guidelines are something that can (and a few said should) be considered about the behavior in ATT. To start with, ATT has a hidden under a button short list of "Ask the Tropers is for and Ask the Tropers is not for", but not how the procedures go. Then, there's nothing for now really preventing queries from slipping into thread-mode besides others starting to complain about it.

At the very least, if the welcome paragraph in ATT was revised, what else should tropers keep in mind before asking?

By guidelines I mean a page like this:

Edited by Amonimus on Nov 4th 2021 at 4:54:30 PM

I like it.

I'm not sure we need an exact "here's how to format reports" thing, mostly because a lot of reports are sort of off-the-cuff acts of desperation, and if they're pre-meditated they're usually pretty long and detailed. I guess I just don't want to force people to write their reports according to an exact template. But if it's just more of a guideline of what the reports should ideally look and read like, that might be a little easier.

Maybe it isn't necessary, maybe it is (it being brought up repeatedly last month says to me perhaps it is), but I think something close to TLP Guidelines would make queries on average a bit cleaner.

To be clear, I agree with the idea that the queries should be kept concise and that the titles should be detailed. I'm mostly just against the idea of a full template model.

Well for the ban evader part, that one is easy. Let me propose something:

• If you suspect ban evaders, report to ATT immediately. It's generally ill-advised to summon the suspects to ATT or any discussions until a ruling is made.
• Do not send personal messages to suspected ban evaders accusing them of sock-puppetry. Wait until the moderation team does a check to see if their IP addresses, behavior, and/or editing patterns closely overlap with previously-banned users.
• Be sure to include the suspect's editing history and their presumed original account's history in the report if possible. These will help in investigations by creating less work for the mods to handle.
• If ban evasion is confirmed, visit the Ban Evader Reversion Thread to discuss and revert their edits if necessary.
• If ban evasion is not confirmed or is inconclusive, then it is ok to summon the users to ATT or discussions to try and settle an editing dispute.
• In the event of a flame-out, contact the moderation team immediately.
• No popcorning or gravedancing. Ban evader reports are NOT peanut galleries.

Edited by DivineFlame100 on Nov 5th 2021 at 5:08:33 AM

~War Jay 77

~Amonimus

Just in case you missed my above post, I've outlined a proposed concept for the ban evader report rules.

(I hope I got the ping system right.)

Yeah I saw it, I read the threads I make. Notably, I've thought paging spawns a PM? This one didn't.

In case if you'll ask if I would append those to the OP, the OP is a proof of concept. If we agree to draft a non-strict guidelines page and describe how to respond to other problems, it will go to the future sandbox.

I saw it too, I was just waiting to see if anyone else wanted to pitch in...

I think putting this thread out in the open in ATT would help garner more feedback.

Been reading this thread, so I decided to make an ATT post promoting it as seen here.

While this may fall under technical issues, something that would be worth adding might be steps on how to link to troper profiles, edit histories, and individual edits as needed. In the last case I know there's different ways to link to an edit in the immediate history vs when looking at the full edit history.

Edited by sgamer82 on Nov 5th 2021 at 3:41:04 AM

Added. Thanks.

One thing I can think of to stop popcorning is allowing the creator of an att thread to lock it once the issue is resolved (and mods to unlock it of course, along with suspending users who lock their atts maliciously or otherwise problematically)

That helps, though a lot of popcorning issues happen during the waiting period, when people are just seeing the post and might decide to bump it, but choose to do so in unhelpful ways, which generates discussion of the wrong kind.

This is one of those cultural issues we need to deal with, less so to do with the technical side of things and more just something we need to get people to quit doing.

Mini-modding is harder to catch because you can slip into it just by trying to point out the facts or be helpful. It often crosses into popcorn territory, but isn't always the case. Just informing someone they'll get banned for something is often considered mini-modding, even if that statement is completely accurate.

Edited by WarJay77 on Nov 5th 2021 at 11:26:40 AM

Technical options are also going to be limited by the fact that implementing them is up to the admins, and that is not generally a fast process. Standardizing the process on the troper side like we're discussing here is probably the best way to alleviate that until the technical options become feasible.

On a side note, should any such guide include a specific definition on what "popcorning" and "mini-modding" are, for clarity's sake if nothing else?

We already have a popcorn posting definition on TV Tropes Glossary that we can use here. Mini-modding might be there too.

Popcorning is defined in the TV Tropes Glossary. Mini-modding could get defined there as well.

Ok, here's my take on a proposed Edit War report rules:

• If you spot an Edit War playing out, report to ATT immediately to let the moderation team be aware of the situation. Be sure to include links to the page's edit history, the editors involved, and each step of the Edit War for clarity.
• What constitutes as an Edit War? Note that the below points are just a general overview and can apply to any situation, not just to adding or removing entries. The bolded text is the instigation threshold.
  • Add (Troper A) > Remove (Troper B) > Add (Troper A)
  • Add (Troper A) > Remove (Troper B) > Add (Troper C) > Remove (Troper B) - Note that Troper A can be excluded in this case since their only "contribution" is just adding the initial entry. If you don't see Troper A participate at all, they can be left alone.
• What doesn't constitute as an Edit War?
  • Add (Troper A) > Remove (Troper B) > Add (Troper C) > Remove (Troper D) > Add (Troper E) - Unless sock-puppeting or meat-puppeting is involved, multiple editors getting into a dispute over one entry is generally considered not an Edit War and would be best left to discussion to resolve this.
  • Cases where the same entry gets altered with improvements or multiple editors add their own version of the entry without borrowing from the previous one. It depends on nuance, but if you're unsure, you can always leave a question to see if it qualifies.
  • Adding context to commented-out Zero-Context Examples.
• Send notifiers to the parties involved to let them be aware of the situation and ask them to join ATT to explain themselves if need be.
• Do NOT post reports simply demanding for the parties involved to be banned. This is considered "mini-modding" and is frowned upon in discussions. Ban decisions are entirely up for the moderation team to decide.
• If either party becomes hostile and/or refuses to co-operate, contact the moderation team immediately.
• No popcorning. Editing disputes are serious business. If you don't have anything constructive to add to the discussion, then don't participate. Anything that maliciously disrupts the discussion violates the cardinal rule of TV Tropes: "Don't be a dick."

Edited by DivineFlame100 on Nov 6th 2021 at 3:22:41 AM

Here's my take on an entry about image violations:

• There are many things that ATT is. One of the things it is not is a discussion place for images. If you need to make a post about an image that you think violates our policies in some way, take it to Image Pickin, not ATT.
  • Sometimes, you can't make a post in Image Pickin' due to all of the slots being filled.^note In Image Pickin', a maximum of 60 threads can be held at one time. After that, you can't make any new ones until one of the threads closes. If this happens to you, don't panic and use ATT as a way to circumvent this. Slots open up very quickly, so just be patient and you'll be able to make a post there.
• In certain scenarios (such as a troper repeatedly changing images without permission or an edit war over an image), it's appropriate to take a situation involving an image to ATT instead of Image Pickin'. In these scenarios, it's because what's happening to an image would still be taken to ATT if it were happening to a trope entry. Keep this in mind when you want to write an ATT post about an image.

IP does have a general thread, so directing people there might be relevant.

I think there's enough suggestions to compile something: Sandbox.Reporting Trouble (WIP).

Is there anything wrong? I did re-read the sandbox a few times, but with writing so much text in one sitting, I could have spaced out somewhere.

Well, there are several grammar issues, which is why I sent you a grammar notifier.

I really shouldn't have posted a page I'm still working on. Irony aside, I've checked everything I could, attached it to GHWEH and will reread it again later.

Edited by Amonimus on Nov 6th 2021 at 6:03:43 PM

Alright, now that the grammar issues are fixed, the page is looking good.