Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Cheese]

This is a better way to do it, though not the best. Moderators should be picked for their ability to moderate, not their popularity or post count. They should be level-headed, intelligent, thoughtful, impartial, empathetic and active. That's pretty much all that matters.

That's what I said. When did I say anything about elections?

[Rose]

While I have nothing constructive to add to this conversation (other than election campaigning) I will be following this.

[RedKing]

I like this idea of quasi-mods, wherein they're basically just people that get the Reports, and are basically just able to step in and PM offenders and say, "Look, dude...seriously...."

I think the vast, VAST majority of people here will respond positively to something like that. They'd basically be that friend that takes you aside when you're drunk and making a fool of yourself and tells you so. The bulk of people here don't need mutes and bans to modify their behavior if they're getting a bit out of hand.

Now if you have someone who's ignoring those gentle suggestions, that's when it could get elevated up to Toady and ThreeToe for action to be taken. That way, people feel more comfortable (hopefully) reporting piddly stuff, and it gets dealt with at a lower level so it doesn't take time away from the devs.


EDIT: Noticed that I used the word "basically" entirely too much. My bad.

[Truean]

Please point out exactly which 1/3 you think is gibberish:

Money is always an implied motivator when it's costing you. Or, do you enjoy getting bills in the mail you have to pay? Furthermore the internet consists largely of porn and crap. Finally, we have a huge problem in the US, our infrastructure is crumbling and this includes the net (wires, the electric grid etc). Also server space is not cheap; again try footing the bill for some.

Forget about toady's motivation for a second, he pays for this/creates this and thus he has the right to decide how it is or isn't. That's exactly what he's doing:

As you pointed out, this is what toady said:

...if you guys continue to ignore my attempts to keep this place in some kind of working order, I'm going to have to shut them down.

But here is what was argued:

If toady does not want to (1) pay for server space to (2) house random gibberish, which (3) gives his site an image he doesn't want, why should he?

I of course added the bold numbers. 1 and 3 are not explicit in toady's post. That leaves the 1  (out of 3) points left - that the forums house random gibberish. While the 1st and 3rd points are valid if toady says that, I wouldn't assume them. A lot of people house servers without either of these considerations. I played on a NWN server called Arelith that lost the owner of the server a LOT of money. The guy cared, but ate the cost anyways because he thought it was fun and other people thought it was fun.

...

People willfully loosing money is the exception, not the rule by an absolutely overwhelming margin. You know this or should. This is especially true here because this is Toady's livelihood: his job. It's lovely that you once found a NWN server that one guy paid for, good for you. That is not the case here and completely and utterly inapplicable in this instance. While altruism might exist, in the real world where people need jobs to live, this is Toady's. This pays his rent, food, etc.

Sever/ site hosting space is an expense for Toady. The more he spends on that, the less money he makes to support himself with. Recently, donations have been good, but a while back, they were so low people were seriously worried he could not support himself and might have to get another job. If that happens, no DF, or severely reduced DF....

Toady's signature says Toad is a natural resource, preserve yours today. It then links to a donation button.... It is about money, because that's what he needs to live and produce DF.

I can say nothing more on the money issue than it is entirely reasonable to assume point 1 as this is overwhelmingly the norm and Toady doesn't have spare cash to throw around. That and of course, it is his right to regulate his forms because he pays for them. What on earth would make you think this doesn't matter? It does to the overwhelming majority of people out there....

Then of course let's not forget, I don't have to prove ALL of my points, any one of them standing alone is sufficient. At the end of the day, whatever Toady decides rules, as be it should.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Giant images and one-word posts have a way of irritating a large segment of the people here and are on the road to the total degeneracy that lead to the creation of the different boards in the first place.  If something made you happy/sad today, you should talk about that.  I've said this before, in these threads, and if you guys continue to ignore my attempts to keep this place in some kind of working order, I'm going to have to shut them down

Tell me he doesn't sound frustrated by this. Tell me you can't read between the lines and see it. Tell me him threatening to close down things means he's happy. Just because toady doesn't expressly state things doesn't mean they aren't there. Maybe he doesn't state the money and image points directly because he's got some class.

You talked about my assumptions: you're pointing to one guy who paid to host a NWN server and implying because of that one guy's existence that Toady might also be altruistic or not care about money. Yes, you are; that is what your words add up to.

It is far more unreasonable to assume Toady doesn't care about costs he must pay and his image than to assume he doesn't.

Why on earth would you think otherwise?

Yes, I make assumptions, because Toady and I don't have time for a rousing conversation on topic. Actually I'd like that, but not in the cards. Until then:

a.) Reasonable assumptions > unlikely ones.
b.) Toady fed up with certain things = problem
c.) Moderators = possible solution to problem.
d.) Our right to speak does not mean Toady has to provide us a form to speak. That he is willing to is nice of him. His terms on provision of that form apply.

[Retro]

Was just pointed out to me that I said "the Tarn brothers" instead of "the Adams brothers" like four times. Embarassing. Fixed now.

[G-Flex]

Was just pointed out to me that I said "the Tarn brothers" instead of "the Adams brothers" like four times. Embarassing. Fixed now.

Isn't it "Super Tarn Bros" officially?

[Frajic]

I like this idea of quasi-mods, wherein they're basically just people that get the Reports, and are basically just able to step in and PM offenders and say, "Look, dude...seriously...."

I think the vast, VAST majority of people here will respond positively to something like that. They'd basically be that friend that takes you aside when you're drunk and making a fool of yourself and tells you so. The bulk of people here don't need mutes and bans to modify their behavior if they're getting a bit out of hand.

Now if you have someone who's ignoring those gentle suggestions, that's when it could get elevated up to Toady and ThreeToe for action to be taken. That way, people feel more comfortable (hopefully) reporting piddly stuff, and it gets dealt with at a lower level so it doesn't take time away from the devs.

Well then; if this works, then this solves all the problems. Silliness/bad posting gets under control(to a certain degree), forum keeps its good mood, everyone's happy.

[Truean]

Was just pointed out to me that I said "the Tarn brothers" instead of "the Adams brothers" like four times. Embarassing. Fixed now.

It's cool Retro, you have enough credit here that you've more than deserved a pass on something like this .

Undergrotto alone was such a credit to DF in my view that you rock.

[lordnincompoop]

I like this idea of quasi-mods, wherein they're basically just people that get the Reports, and are basically just able to step in and PM offenders and say, "Look, dude...seriously...."

I think the vast, VAST majority of people here will respond positively to something like that. They'd basically be that friend that takes you aside when you're drunk and making a fool of yourself and tells you so. The bulk of people here don't need mutes and bans to modify their behavior if they're getting a bit out of hand.

Now if you have someone who's ignoring those gentle suggestions, that's when it could get elevated up to Toady and ThreeToe for action to be taken. That way, people feel more comfortable (hopefully) reporting piddly stuff, and it gets dealt with at a lower level so it doesn't take time away from the devs.

Well then; if this works, then this solves all the problems. Silliness/bad posting gets under control(to a certain degree), forum keeps its good mood, everyone's happy.

Unfortunately, this does not always work. Mods, in my opinion, need something at least resembling a stick to wave at people. I'd like them to have some mute/lock/whatever powers, if at all possible.

[Retro]

Lock powers and access to reports would be a must, in my eyes. Warnings don't require special powers, of course, just some sort of authority. Mutes... undecided. Bans and deletions should be left up to the Adams.

[nordak]

Mods should have the power lock threads and move them if necessary.  They should be able to mute Offensive offenders.

[Eugenitor]

Goddamn, I haven't seen this much collective suicide since Heaven's Gate.

If this new mod regime actually happens I'll be sitting in back. With popcorn.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Mods shouldn't have the ability to mute or ban, just to bring the user in question's posts to the Adams brothers. I think that they should be able to lock threads, but that their locks will only last a day before the OP can reverse them if no action is taken on the part of Toady or ThreeToe. I see no problem with allowing Mods access to reports.

[Truean]

Moderators in my view are a logistical/judicial issue. The following present as issues:

[This of course bypasses for now the entire question of if we should have mods]

1.) Scope of Power.
2.) Constraint of Power
3.) Guidance of Power
4.) Scope of review/appeal
5.) Crime and Punishment
6.) Commendations and Encouragement

1.) Scope of Power: Simply, what area of the forms should a mod have any jurisdiction over at all. Should one just focus on a problem area or limited area. Should it be the entire forms. Perhaps it should be divided up by a percentage of the reports? Perhaps the mod might merely review reported threads/posts to weed out the obviously frivolous ones, thus saving Toady time.

2.) What are Mods, NOT allowed to do? What should they check with Toady before doing? What abilities can they earn if any.

3.) Guidance of Power. Should everything be according to strict rules followed strictly or should everything be an ad hoc, according to the circumstances thing. The first is quicker, the later may be more fair (except perhaps disparities in dealing with people).

4.) If a Mod disagrees with you, what should your recourse be? This is especially important if the mod can act against you or negatively impact your standing in some way.

5.) Crime and Punishment: Should this be left entirely to Toady? If not, what should the mod be able to do and under what circumstances. What are the aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Repeat offenders? Etc. Keep in mind that these must be things we can live with because we shall live under them.

6.) Commendations and Encouragement: Should a Mod be able to give an article a preferred status for great content or a poster marks for great conduct? If punishment is the stick then this is the carrot. Perhaps this could be used to sticky threads or create a sub area of excellent threads?

Just thoughts thrown around.

P.S. I do not want this responsibility as I have enough crap on my plate as it is.

[Frajic]

Hrm, I still think this one is the best idea. No fuss about unfair mods, and people get to know they're not acting properly. People on here are well-behaved enough to take the warning seriously.