Print

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

[sonerohi]

The maturity level I would prefer would be like, school cafeteria level of mature. You're with your friends, and you've got side entertainment and stuff, but the group is going to meander along a theme and follow some basic social etiquette about talking order and hogging the mic, even if it isn't point-counterpoint-formal debate stuff. You can drop a cuss word here and there for emphasis, but you can't throw out a full swearing sentence because the people further down the table can hear you and a teacher is monitoring the room. The teacher isn't like, Mr. Strict gym teacher either, more like the ex-hippy poli-sci teacher that will lecture you and give you a detention, but has that twinkle in their eye that lets you know that you just got bumped up in their book for fighting the Man.

[Jay]

Sure there was. In Toadys business model, the forums have few moderators. notably, two. You said this structure wouldn't surfice as the forums grew in popularity.

...What?
I'd love to know where you're getting your idea of a "business model" from.
These forums really don't have much of anything to do with the "business" of Bay 12 Games, if donation-driven software development can really even be called business, unless you count the forum donation drives, which still have nothing to do with the "business model".
It has never been written in that only the two of them moderate anything.
In fact, we do have two other moderators, though one has been inactive and both only have jurisdiction in one subforum apiece.

If Toady wants to appoint new moderators, it'll happen.  There really isn't anything stating that he won't do so, as far as I've ever seen.
I'd love to be proven wrong, but I really don't see how you keep referencing this "business model" that doesn't even actually exist.

[Max White]

...What?
I'd love to know where you're getting your idea of a "business model" from.
These forums really don't have much of anything to do with the "business" of Bay 12 Games, if donation-driven software development can really even be called business, unless you count the forum donation drives, which still have nothing to do with the "business model".
It has never been written in that only the two of them moderate anything.
In fact, we do have two other moderators, though one has been inactive and both only have jurisdiction in one subforum apiece.

If Toady wants to appoint new moderators, it'll happen.  There really isn't anything stating that he won't do so, as far as I've ever seen.
I'd love to be proven wrong, but I really don't see how you keep referencing this "business model" that doesn't even actually exist.

I get the feeling this is going into a derail. A business model is about more then marketing, or finance, or any other business function. It is the collective of all business rules, reguarding everything the business does. That includes how Toady and ThreeToe manage there forums.

And ok, bay12 being a business is debatable, but that dosn't mean they can't have a business model. Charitys get to have one too, as do most orgenisations.

[Jay]

I get the feeling this is going into a derail. A business model is about more then marketing, or finance, or any other business function. It is the collective of all business rules, reguarding everything the business does. That includes how Toady and ThreeToe manage there forums.

And ok, bay12 being a business is debatable, but that dosn't mean they can't have a business model. Charitys get to have one too, as do most orgenisations.

I love how you try to prove your own use of "business model" instead of actually answering my pseudo-question-statement-thing.
Where was it ever stated in any definitiveness that there were to be only the two of them moderating the forums?
Nowhere, that's where.

As I said, if he feels that appointing moderators is a positive change, it'll happen.  There's nothing stating the contrary anywhere.  And as I noted, there are two existing counter-examples to your point in the first place.
Once again, if you can find actual evidence of any such statement/whatever, I'd love to be proven wrong.
I would not, however, love for you to tell me I'm wrong as you're doing.  You've got no clout in that department.  If it were Toady saying so, sure.  However, as random guy #22093, you're going to need something official, not some idea you're pulling out of your ass.

[alway]

As shown by a thread about atheism and religion which lasted something like 400 pages before being locked, we aren't exactly prone to flame wars here. There is definitely a lean towards silliness as opposed to srs bisniz, which is a part of it. Compared to most places, I would say we are fairly mature here, if a bit laid back. And I, for one, enjoy the more laid back and relaxed atmosphere of the forum; it makes it feel more like we come here to hang out.

The happy and sad threads should stay more or less in their current form IMO; places for odd little discussions which don't really belong anywhere else while still serving the purpose of getting to know each other a bit more. Between the two, they make up a full quarter of the GD's post count; unless you want to argue the entire things are spam, you have to admit they are indeed serving a purpose for which people continue returning to them. There should be a bit more regulation though when it comes to happy and sad thread level offtopic-ness spreading to other threads though, since it does disrupt more serious discussions at times.

[Max White]

I love how you try to prove your own use of "business model" instead of actually answering my pseudo-question-statement-thing.
Where was it ever stated in any definitiveness that there were to be only the two of them moderating the forums?
Nowhere, that's where.

As I said, if he feels that appointing moderators is a positive change, it'll happen.  There's nothing stating the contrary anywhere.  And as I noted, there are two existing counter-examples to your point in the first place.
Once again, if you can find actual evidence of any such statement/whatever, I'd love to be proven wrong.
I would not, however, love for you to tell me I'm wrong as you're doing.  You've got no clout in that department.  If it were Toady saying so, sure.  However, as random guy #22093, you're going to need something official, not some idea you're pulling out of your ass.

Why do you think the existance of two more mods changes anything? I said your were argusing Toadys model, not mine. He said they had enough, you said they needed more. That's the business model I said you were disbuting.

Do you honestly think that throwing statistics at me makes you right? Especialy ones with little relevance? One is only in a specific forum, not this forum, so he dosn't count. The other hasn't been seen for ages, so he dosn't count.

Yes, if Toady thinks they need more mods, he will get more. If toady thinks, not if jay thinks. That's how the model works. Toady and ThreeToe set the business rules, and can change them on a whim, but right now, your debating there policy that goes along the lines of "It doesn't take very long to moderate the forums.  If people are having trouble because the discussions they start are being derailed by spam, then they should report that and we'll take care of it."

[Vector]

... Would you two mind not arguing about this here?  It seems that it's a bit of a derail, since the consensus right now appears to be "use the gosh-darned report button and exercise a little judgment."

We don't really need to argue about the use of the word "business model," do we?

[Max White]

... Would you two mind not arguing about this here?  It seems that it's a bit of a derail, since the consensus right now appears to be "use the gosh-darned report button and exercise a little judgment."

We don't really need to argue about the use of the word "business model," do we?

I get the feeling this is going into a derail.

I know, and I called it. But sometimes when people are yelling at you becuase they don't understand what you said, you need to explain it to them.

[mnjiman]

It doesn't take very long to moderate the forums.  If people are having trouble because the discussions they start are being derailed by spam, then they should report that and we'll take care of it.  That certainly rises to the level of using the report button.  That's what it is for.  I don't mind some silliness, but spam and image posts lead to porn, etc. as they did with VN and as they have on occasion in the happy/sad threads, so it's good when the outright goofy no-content spam is kept to a minimum to stop that kind of problem, which will have to be dealt with.  Nobody is going to like every thread on the forum and when you have enough people around, you aren't going to like everybody.  I don't think general discussion has become the new various nonsense, and I hardly ever get reports from forum games.

There seems to be a sentiment that we are deleting more categories of posts lately.  I'm not sure if that's the case, because the ones we remember getting rid of (discussing it amongst ourselves just now) were pretty atrocious/trolls/spam/etc., but we'll try to be mindful of this since it has come up a few times in the thread.

Too bad the issue occurring is that sometimes filth does stay on the forums a lot longer then some would want it too. Not to say you Toady dont do a thorough job and are active, but its hard to argue that more OPs would not releive an unneeded amount of work load on you as well as make the forums a cleaner place. I think people would rather have you program then mod the forums all the time

[nenjin]

There needs to be more discussion in this thread about how awesome Other Games is, and less of the other stuff.

Because it may be the best Other Gaming Forum I've ever read. I don't read news to see what's coming out, I check to see what's popped up in OG.

[Chaoswizkid]

Okay, with the rate that things are being posted, I really hope I'll have enough time to say what I think before things go crazy. I also apologize in advance for not reading the full thread, so if someone already covered the contents of my post, see the aforementioned apology. I promise I'll read it all after I post this.

I've got some definite personal opinions about this, but I don't think I have enough time to type it all out. Hell, I could probably write paragraphs and paragraphs about how I feel about these forums, that I feel it's a wonderful community, and that it's one of the few places I just want to visit to see what's happening with everybody and not just the game itself. I won't go there unless I have to because by the time I ever get to post, there'll be 15 new replies I'll have to read through.

I have a proposition.

It seems one of the major back-and-forths here is whether or not to have third party mods. True, ToadyOne and ThreeToe need more help. Things happen and they don't need to slave over us being silly, or watch like mothers over children who are riled up and calling names, worried that something will give and noses will break. They don't need the stress, and we sure as hell don't need to give it to them.

But we do. And we will, simply because we're human, and we are given at times to be egocentric. If we considered at our every action, "Will this adversely affect ToadyOne and ThreeToe?", this would make everything far simpler, but I doubt that any one of us can say, with an exact certainty, that they have done this. There will be times when someone just wants to make a silly remark, or add in their two cents on a topic that was spawned in discussion but relatively away from the original post's intent. There will be times when we simply don't think, or don't consider.

There will be times when we get on one another's nerves. Some of us will hate eachother, and I'm sure some of us already have a deep-seated dislike of some of our others. That's the price of having a community.

Communities seek to have moderators. Having moderators breaks up the community, as has already been stated. Having moderators requires a rigid structure, or else people feel bullied. Again, this has been stated.

What I haven't seen stated is another possibility. Moderators that do not have any actual power. What I mean is, these are the watchdogs of the community, selected by some means, whether by their peers or by the Word of Toady, that scope out trouble. Trouble is things that definitely violate the already-established rules that no one seems to be complaining about, because they are relatively lax. Trouble is also a sense that things are getting out of hand. The catch is that there doesn't need to be a set of rigid rules for this. People can more or less tell when things are getting a bit too personal. This is when these 'moderators' show up, and do something like:

This is my mod voice. I am giving [x-user] a warning for the following behavior:
Antagonizing [y-user].
I apologize for my interruptance, but I felt I was obligated to give this warning as a member of my station. Please, keep things calm, but do carry on.

People will know that this person was appointed specifically to do that function, and they should respect that. They should understand that they don't need to cause problems for the caretakers of the community.

So what happens when things continue to get out of hand?

X-user, you have already been given a warning. I regret to inform you that your continued behavior has prompted me to report your actions to ToadyOne and ThreeToe. I hope that amends can be made in the meantime, and I hope that you are forgiven for your actions and are not as prone to this sort of behavior as a continued member of this community.

Essentially, the appointed mods work as the report button now, but they filter out things. They serve as a buffer. Warning: You are approaching the line we have drawn. Please ensure that you do not cross it. Warning: You have crossed the line, and you face judgement.

Obviously the plan is to never get to that second warning. Users will have time to back off, and if the parties who were subject to the warning given feel that it wasn't the tone intended, they can appeal the moderator through PM. Heck, even the warning can be given in PM if it needs be.

These moderators will be selected for their personal sense of when they should break out their mod voice. If they are overzealous, or let their personal problems get in the way, then it will be reflected. The community may complain, but ultimately the word gets up to the top. If ToadyOne and ThreeToe keep getting reports from one of the mods that tons of users they've seen are doing bad, and when they investigate and it seems it's not as much cause for concern, well, they no longer need to be a moderator, because they aren't very good at it.

This helps to avoid a rigit code of conduct and allows itself to be self-moderating. The only hurdle to get over is just who is right for the job, which, as I said, the wrong people for the job will weed themselves out.

That's my proposition as a middle-ground for this sort of thing. It relieves some frustration at the top, gives some community members a sense that justice is occuring on the forums, others that they are actually serving the community to establish that justice, and it keeps those who fear total structure, at the least, content.


The other issue that seems to be popping up is that the "Lower Forums" are a horrible representation of the community. If that turns out to be the bigger problem, I guess I'll have to go into my personal spiel on that that I tried to avoid.

However, if people feel that my idea is a good one, would it be nice to create a new thread about it, where discussion on it specifically can be carried out? Of course, if there isn't much support, then it isn't worth it. Just my shot in the dark at trying to 'fix' the situation.

FAKE-EDIT: I see ToadyOne has posted, which really takes away a lot of the argument for my post. I'll post it anyway, just to see if anyone likes the idea.

[LordNagash]

I have to say, this whole discussion makes me feel like not posting at all. Just...all of it, gives me the impression that in reality none of us like each other in the slightest. I mean, is any of this even needed? If Toady is going to make changes to the forum, he'll be the active party, not us.

Being melodramatic about it doesn't really help the discussion, and everyone is already aware that the final decision on all this rests with Toady. That doesn't mean we can't discuss the issue and make suggestions.

The weird thing here is that we seem to have a lot of people chipping in and saying "I think we shouldn't change things because I haven't personally been offended," when perhaps we should be asking "how can we alter the forums to make them more welcoming to the community at large, rather than only ourselves."

I've been offended by a number of things I've read here.  This is why I think I'd make a terrible moderator--I'm good at arguing and being fair-minded as long as I don't have power, but I'm just not chill enough to restrain myself when it comes to "things that make me irritated."

Meh.  So what I'm saying, really, is that I think there's some things we can agree to--that we should be, in general, able to discuss what we like as long as we keep calm about it--but as-is, something about what we're doing right now is bugging people.  There's got to be a middle ground.

Vector really hits the nail on the head here. A lot of the posts I am seeing basically say 'Well what is happening doesn't offend me personally, so that means it should be perfectly fine!' Of course it doesn't offend or irritate you, you're the one doing it. That has no relation to how someone who is coming here for the first time is going to view it, and that's a major thing you should be considering on a forum considering posts are archived for all eternity.

As an example of this sort of thing, I'll use the #bay12games IRC channel. I've never seen an IRC channel so detached from a forum it should be related to in terms of regular member overlap, and the reason that I've frequently heard is that a lot of people think the bay12 forums are really awful. Reasons i've heard are that they are full of especially awful memes, a lot of really creepy attitudes towards Toady (bordering on stalking/worship occasionally) and that DF fans can be really rabid in their defense against any sort of attack (real or imaginary) against the game or its creator. I'm talking about the forums as a whole here, too. Not just the Finally... section. And I really don't think this is a good thing for the community in the long run. On a personal level I've stopped reading the dwarf mode forums because I got sick of reading 'magma solves everything', 'lol kill all the elves because they are hippies' and 'CARP LOL' in basically every thread, no matter what the original post was, and I'm not even new. If I was I imagine it would be even more off putting.

I'm not saying everyone who says something silly should be cast into the abyss, but I also don't think enforcing some kind of behavioral standards is going to tear the fabric of reality apart and cast everyone into the cold abyss of a dystopian future. Nearly every other forum on the internet does it (especially if that forum is connected to an official entity like a website), so I don't really see where all the doom and gloom predictions are coming from.

[FuzzyZergling]

I love the memes and off-topic-ness, I feel it gives the forums a feeling of friendlyness and companionship, and is one of the reasons I joined.

[sonerohi]

The reasons that you like the community are also reasons people are being driven away. I suppose a simpler solution would be that, since it looks like the majority of GD is for silly shenanigans, make a more serious subforum for people like me that find the hijinks off-putting. You can have your kawaii, desu, and tohou, and I my leather armchairs, aged cigars, and brandy.

[Retro]

Well, it appears Toady's made his call. I'll leave this thread open for an hour or so in case anyone else wants to toss their opinion onto the pile then it's lock time.