There have been a few times where I've seen the full might of the moderators fall on someone and I couldn't figure out why.
perhaps it was because the offending post was deleted or edited before I ever read it. But sometimes it feels a little random. That being said, I haven't really changed what I would or would not say on the forum. Though I have done a better job of resisting Fist of Death.
I'm not so much worried about the Line.. I think for the most part the line is pretty clear.
Although Don't Mess with Texas seems to be a new by word on the forum :)
So have at it! How do you feel about the changes?
I'll just stick my two cents into the quiet discussion. I got slapped by the banhammer's softie baby brother the banruler. I know WHY I got slapped by the banruler (or at least I suspect what got me put in the group of banee's). I will henceforth avoid such behaviors so as to avoid banruler passing me off to tough guy big bro. That doesn't mean I'm going to say nothing or tip-toe on eggshells. That means I'm going to embrace the new regime and find just as many ways as possible to party in Moscow, jump on the beds in Milan, run on the grass fields in Kansas, race through the sand on dunebuggies in the Sahara, claim I've been to Hell and back (It gets HOT in the Caymans)_and just have as much FUN as possible, all while looking exceptionally stylish in my $5000 suits and making a huge profit running my LOLcat Criminal Empire in the wacky fun world we call the Jum Botcher Biards. And I reserve teh right to keep any typos I make while on a soapbox tangent and mangle words almost beyond recognition and expect at least two comments on just how badly I messed up Jim Butcher Boards. Just because we can't spill blood doesn't mean we can't have fun.
*steps off soapbox and leaps up wall to mouth of volcano, snags rope ladder and flies away in a helecopter to wherever I decide to stop in the world*
Simple fact is, we will never be able to police everything. There aren't enough of us to be the Debate Procedural Fact Police in every occassion. So we focus on the worst case behavior, and address issues as people bring them to us. Rudeness, disrespectful and offensive behaviour, etc.
Sometimes, a body just plain doesn't like how another body argues. Sometimes we just don't like the cut of their jib. "Alpha Fox 6, Do NOT engage! Repeat, do NOT engage!" If somebody's being rude, disrespectful, report them. But if someone just gets on your nerves because you feel their approach to a debate is improper, then don't try to win a pissing contest with a skunk. Now, if that skunk follows you all around the damn place and is clearly acting like Max Cady in Cape Fear, jumping on everything you say... then you could have an issue to bring us.
Also , going back to the non-specific comments. I've seen cases where multiple threads have equal "heat values", but only one gets slapped down. And since it's not specifically clear on why that one was selected to get slapped down, it tends to make one wonder if it the choice had as much to do with the posters involved as it did with the actual posts. This (I hope) is simply a by-product of not knowing exactly why one thread is being moderated and not the other(s), but as it stands it leaves a lot to interpretation.For this particular instance, it could possibly be that one thread was reported while others were not. There are so many quick moving threads in the spoilers section, that it's likely very difficult to keep track of what's being said and done where. Which is why the mods say to report any problems. They likely won't know about it until it's reported.
For this particular instance, it could possibly be that one thread was reported while others were not.
Oh, I understand all this quite well. I don't expect there to be a stick to punish each and every offender.
I am rather pointing out that there are no more carrots than there were before. :)
Considering I was one of the more ill tempered posters back in the TT days, I'm getting a little dizzy and think I'll take a drink.
Remember kids friends don't let friends mod drunk.
For this particular instance, it could possibly be that one thread was reported while others were not. There are so many quick moving threads in the spoilers section, that it's likely very difficult to keep track of what's being said and done where. Which is why the mods say to report any problems. They likely won't know about it until it's reported.
And even more to the point, there are a lot of things going on behind the scenes that simply don't get seen. Mods try to take the long view, and that includes trying to keep up on posters' behavior over time and through multiple sets of stimuli. We ain't perfect. Also, when we see someone who damn well should know better, especially after having gotten a number of friendly reminders or introductory warnings, both public and private, we do tend to get a mite tetchy. Downright rude, even. Or when one mod's tried a non-nuclear public statement and gotten flamingly ignored, the others will pile on.
Combine all the above with, for example, a bunch of off-stage arguing against a request to tone things down, and you've gotten someone who needs to have their attention thoroughly gotten. Does that attention-getting venture over the line itself sometimes? Yup. Consider it similar to "Dammit, son, what the HELL is WRONG with you? You KNOW better."
In short, one poster may see what seems to be a bolt from the blue or a merciless piling-on. Just try to keep in mind that more times than you might think, it's simply the tip of the iceberg, the straw that broke the camel's back.
Sometimes, this stuff's enough to drive me to quit drinkin'. :D
This makes sense too. But "tip of the iceberg" or not, it's still wrong IMO. "One law for the ruled, another for the ruler" isn't going to work if you expect the members not to grumble and eventually disperse.And there is the whole "lead by example" thing. My understanding of the policies/rules is that there isn't any justification for violating the rules.
This makes sense too. But "tip of the iceberg" or not, it's still wrong IMO. "One law for the ruled, another for the ruler" isn't going to work if you expect the members not to grumble and eventually disperse.
One of the reasons for the public warnings is we're trying to make sure everyone understands the new standards of decorum. Say Mickey PM's me because I'm being a big too vulgar, asks me to please not use my peers so familiar... I might ammend my behavior but others will keep doing it until they each get their own PM on the issue. That's a lot of PM's. But if Mickey comes over and roasts my ass, Prisc kicks dirt on it, Ashton makes me eat it, then everybody gets that calling someone ais a big old No Go.(click to show/hide)
It seems to me that if a thread is locked in the latter case, with a fairly severe warning as the last post in it, it doesn't leave any immediately obvious way to say "Message received" and/or apologise if one has crossed a line in error.
PMs suffice. In fact, in the case of a thread that's gotten so toxic that it needs to be shut down, PMs are BETTER than open-forum apologies/acknowledgements; allowing anyone to reply at that point, when emotions are highest, is tantamount to playing with fire when everyone is covered in gasoline. Best to remove the temptation.
That's as may be. Why, then, do the rules keep getting violated when mods ask pretty please with sugar on top over and over and over again? I don't like coming down harshly on an offender. I've never liked it. It would be easier and probably more efficient just to ban the offender; the extra effort to get through to the person seems like such a waste when most offenders just wind themselves up more over the affront of being called to task for their actions. In short, the rules' enforcers following their own enforced rules to the letter rarely works. It would be simpler all around just to ban the offenders outright instead of trying extreme ways to get through to them.
Wouldn't it? Shouldn't we just follow the rules rigidly and never go above and beyond to try to supply that cosmic cold-water-in-the-face in order to persuade a person to do the right thing?
That's as may be. Why, then, do the rules keep getting violated when mods ask pretty please with sugar on top over and over and over again? I don't like coming down harshly on an offender. I've never liked it. It would be easier and probably more efficient just to ban the offender; the extra effort to get through to the person seems like such a waste when most offenders just wind themselves up more over the affront of being called to task for their actions.
The example I call to refute this is myself. Ask any of the regular posters from when I joined, I was one of the nastiest SOB's around. A good chewing out from when I stepped over the line once too often, a good knock over the head for smarting off, and I shaped up (I like to think) into the sort of guy that loves to be around and people like having around. If I'd been banned outright when I stepped over, it wouldn't have happened, I'd have stayed a beligerant smartass. I understand that I'm the exception, but (again, I like to think) it's the exception that proves the rule.
There's nothing wrong with the cold-water-in-the-face. I mean, if someone slips up a few times over the course of thousands of posts, there's nothing wrong with a polite slap on the wrist. But if it goes to the point where an admin/mod feels the only way to get through to the offending person is by "stooping to their level", I think a ban (even a temporary one) is in order.
I like the debates, but I don't want to see them dissolve into petty bickering any more than the next person. But, at the same time, I don't want to read constant exasperated "I'm so sick of you people" posts by admins. It boils down to either the offending poster(s) that are annoying said admin(s) need to be banned, or said admin(s) are over reacting. If the former is correct then ban the offending poster(s) and let the forum be happier for it. If it's the latter, then perhaps said admin(s) require some cold-water-in-the-face as well.
In all honesty, there has been a few times in which I actually considered hitting the "report to moderator" button on admin posts to point out these things. But frankly, I thought it might cause more problems than it solved. Not because I doubted the validity of my claim, but because the temperament of the post left me expecting a response of "don't like how things are done, leave".
You're assuming that a major chewing-out of one person who's stepped WAY over the line is going to equate to your getting pissed on if you pose a reasonable, private question to the mod.
Plus, and I repeat, you still don't have anywhere nearly all the information. I've SEEN massive chewings-out. They're a sort of compliment - they mean that the person getting chewed out at least seems to have the POSSIBILITY of straightening up and flying right, becoming a contributing member of the forum. WJM is a perfect example. He was (sorry, WJM, but I think you'll agree) pretty damn dickish. He got a thorough chewing-out and now he's a member in fine standing here - because, as he said, he didn't just negligently get booted but was actually ADDRESSED, actually given more than just "You screwed up" to show him how and how BADLY he had stepped over the line.
This goes hand in hand with how you don't "want to read constant exasperated 'I'm so sick of you people' posts by admins" honestly misses the point. Yeah, the mods could just boot people. Do you really think they'll learn? Especially when they're repeat offenders who have more than once entirely missed the point about HOW they're offensive? If a punishment is to have any effectiveness, it must be strong enough to catch and HOLD the attention of the person receiving it. They have to know in absolutely NO uncertain terms WHAT they did, WHY it's wrong and WHY it's not fit for polite society. And when there's a whole freakin' flood of people doing that, are you honestly surprised that there are "I'm so sick of you people" mod posts?
And finally, aren't you exaggerating a lot with the "constant" description? Happened a handful of times, and anyone who honestly claims that those times were quiet and peaceful and NOT exasperating as hell needs to see a surgeon to fix that rectocranial inversion. :D
And if you can't figure out whether your posts were or weren't in line with the rules, chances are they weren't - you don't have to be a mind-reader, just a reader. And yes, it IS up to you to analyze your OWN actions.
I acknowledge the fact that it's possible for someone to read a problem with one of my posts even if I can't imagine what the problem was. I can proof read a post 1,000 times but since we're communicating solely through text, it's not going to guarantee that someone wont find an issue with it. If i do something wrong, I personally have no problem accepting the consequences, but it's only right that I be told what I did wrong. Honestly, I don't know if I've annoyed any mode/admins or not. I've never been contacted directly about anything, but a few debates i was involved in have been generally stepped on. So do I assume I was right and continue on as I was, or do I try to completely change the way I normally explain myself to be on the safe side?
Prejudice. Literally. You're assuming that a major chewing-out of one person who's stepped WAY over the line is going to equate to your getting pissed on if you pose a reasonable, private question to the mod.
I'd still like to see specific examples instead of broad brushstrokes.
Shecky, this is the crux of the problem, and one that I think the mods are having a hard time understanding. Yes, we think that. I can certainly say I think that. Because the "on-air" modding in the threads tends more towards the heavy handed. (Obvious disclaimer, this is only what I've seen, and I'm sure it's not every moderated thread on here.) It tends towards the snarky. It tends towards the yelling. Is there something wrong with that? Not necessarily, no. Some people aren't going to get it unless you apply the clue by four upside the head. And then get a tank to make sure they got it.
There's nothing wrong with "Ok, this person was banned because <insert reason>". But there's a big jump between that and "Wow you guys are ignorant children. Stfu or i'll ban you... on second thought, I'll just ban you now!". That kind of thing is unnecessary and promotes the same kind of issues that the administration is trying to prevent. And it just plain looks bad.
I think we're all having growing pains, and we all need to be understanding of each other on both sides. Because in the end, we're all here because we like the board, the books, and Jim, right? So there's a way to work through this, IMO.
No, I really do not like the changes. Maybe because I was painted with the ban hammer brush and feel that no matter what I say it will be looked at more closely than it would have before.
I know how Harry felt with the Doom over him and Morgan looking over his shoulder every second.
David
I don't even have the manpower to stalk Mila Jovovich properly, much less any particular forum member.
<smacks PG>
The forum has gone through a lot of changes lately, like a teenager or caterpillar. Our goal is to stem the tide of unpleasantness that was choking the forum, making tempers flare and making the forum environment toxic. We're requiring that folks communicate with a certain level of civility and courtesy, and we're cracking down a lot harder on the kinds of crass, deliberately goading behavior and subject matter that seemed to be the root of the problem.
It's become clear that a number of you are uncomfortable with the actions of some of the moderators, but are afraid to speak up. That's not good. We want to make this forum a place where you can enjoy yourself again, not where you're living in fear of the Wrath of Mod.
If you have any suggestions on how better to accomplish this, or if you feel paranoid to bring up any topic at all for fear it'll be labeled TT, LET US KNOW. We thrive on your feedback. Share your thoughts here, or PM the mods if you'd rather your words be kept private. Snide remarks about the mods and admins without specific grievances will not be taken well. Constructive criticism, however, is welcomed, even if we end up disagreeing with it. We want folks to take an active interest in making this forum a better place. When folks whisper behind our backs, we can't exactly do anything to anything to remedy the problem they're whispering about, can we?
So have at it! How do you feel about the changes?
The only thing I've noticed is a slight increase in some threads being relocated to boards that seem odd. Once in a while, I've seen a thread locked, was completely unable to determine why it was locked by reading the thread, and there was no explanation given. This may be uncharitable, but frankly I chalked it up to new middle managers flexing their muscles to prove they have them. I don't mean to be insulting really, it's just what happens anytime you get a new 'boss'. They get the job, make a bunch of changes, and after awhile everything settles down as the shiny wears off.
So if we have complaints on your modding, PG, we send them to onlyelise? ;D
If the general response is "This is the way it works, deal with it" and/or "It's ok for mods/admins because their forum experience is more stressful, deal with it". Then what is the point of asking for member feedback?
I understand all too well the work involved. I've seen and dealt with junk in other online communities that make the rudest post I've read here look like a pleasant conversation over tea (including stuff in TT). But I've never seen a forum/community where it was acceptable for the administration to break the same rules they were trying to enforce, regardless of how stressful or burdensome their task becomes.
There's nothing wrong with "Ok, this person was banned because <insert reason>". But there's a big jump between that and "Wow you guys are ignorant children. Stfu or i'll ban you... on second thought, I'll just ban you now!". That kind of thing is unnecessary and promotes the same kind of issues that the administration is trying to prevent. And it just plain looks bad.
The only thing I've noticed is a slight increase in some threads being relocated to boards that seem odd. Once in a while, I've seen a thread locked, was completely unable to determine why it was locked by reading the thread, and there was no explanation given. This may be uncharitable, but frankly I chalked it up to new middle managers flexing their muscles to prove they have them. I don't mean to be insulting really, it's just what happens anytime you get a new 'boss'. They get the job, make a bunch of changes, and after awhile everything settles down as the shiny wears off.
I have noticed almost zero difference.
But I never was the type to go looking for things to get in fights over, and once I identified the drama-seekers and attention hos in the "old" forums, I was quite capable of avoiding them. I still continue to wistfully long for an "ignore" feature, but I soldier on womanfully.
The only thing I've noticed is a slight increase in some threads being relocated to boards that seem odd. Once in a while, I've seen a thread locked, was completely unable to determine why it was locked by reading the thread, and there was no explanation given. This may be uncharitable, but frankly I chalked it up to new middle managers flexing their muscles to prove they have them. I don't mean to be insulting really, it's just what happens anytime you get a new 'boss'. They get the job, make a bunch of changes, and after awhile everything settles down as the shiny wears off.
So aside from a slight increase in middle manager syndrome, and that merits nothing more on my part than a smile and a shake of the head, nothing's changed. All to the good, as far as I'm concerned.
Actually, we Bartenders can only lock or modify threads in the Bar. Not in "Mac's" or any of the other sections like "Spoilers" and the like. Outside that http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/board,1.0.html , it's The Bigg'ns.
Btw, are we allowed to name names on this forum? For example, could I have actually mentioned people's names in the above paragraph instead of saying "a mod" and "the posters"? I'm only asking because another forum that's pretty much free swinging is rather strict about no unwanted attention, and I sort of do it out of reflex now...didn't even realize it until I looked back at what I had written. :P
This is something I would like answered...
I stand corrected.
Even so, I remain infallible and mad with power. At least in the Bar. Well, a little bit anyway.
You are, it's true. But since your avatar is from the best, weirdest Angel ever, we forgive you.
I'll try to make a note of the next quietly-and-inexplicably locked thread I find. I know the ones in the Bar expire; I even explained the process once (sorta). This wasn't that. I've only noticed it twice that I remember. Like I said, for the most part, the changes have been invisible to me which is exactly what they should be for any poster who gets the whole 'behave as you would if your grandmother was in the room' thing.
I'm trying to be very polite, so I'll refrain from calling you an idiot
!"£%!$^!$^%!^!$£^
I have found myself being on the forum more since the changes came about.
This place reminds me of a huge family. Siblings (us members) playing with each other nicely, then getting into spats with each other. The kids pushing the limits with the parents (mods and admins). The parents trying to keep the peace and make a happy home for everyone as well as disciplining the kids. Then you have the crazy uncles........ ;D
Thanks again to those in charge, who make this place work!
Apparently, people like their Shecky like they like their coffee: COVERED IN BEES.
I agree! The only thing that's really bothered me lately is that mom seems to be REALLY stressed out and the least little "HE BREATHED ON ME!" heard from the back seat gets us all pulled over to the side of the road for whippin's!
I imagine it will all smooth out eventually.
Actually the big thing is that Jim himself wants this to be a pleasant venue. Relaxed and friendly, where misfits can feel comfortable and mellow and nobody has to fumble for their blood pressure pills. The Be Nice Rule starts not with Iago, but with The Man Himself.
Accorded Neutral Territory, just like this bar Jim writes about.
bitter sniping
Bitter sniping, bad.
Butter sniping, awesome with croissants. Pew pew!
What have I got in my pockets?
Jam or nothing! :D
Nasty, sticksye hobbitses
Jam or nothing! :D
Thinking about toe jam myself... But I do lurves the cheese!
Just a quick question. When a thread is deleted, do our post counts reflect the deletion? As in will my post count be decreased when a thread I've posted heavily on is deleted?
Fred and I aren't clear on what sort of algorithm is used to count posts, but so far, I haven't seen any change. The post counts seem to have been unaffected by the initial massive purge, so I'm guessing it'll hold true for subsequent ones. No guarantees, of course.
Or perhaps some boards got outright deleted (like word association used to) and some got compressed and archived?
I mean, to be honest, if everything that seemed to have gotten deleted really got deleted, I shouldn't have even over 10,000 posts left, because I've never been a big poster on the books discussion side. 2/3rds of my stuff has always been in Mac's in some way shape or form.
Not a "Political Correctness" issue so much as a "Jim don't want to hear you guys arguing about this when you're sitting on his couch drinking his beer." The new policy applies to both Left and Right, and everything in the middle. As for the Be Nice Or Go policy, that's not about sensitivey cuddlesomeness, it's just abiding by our host's standards of behaviour. Manners, basically.
You weren't here for the Epic Pissing Matches that spawned in TT. We've got people on the Left, Right, Middle, as well as some people who are Extreme Left on a couple issues, but also Extreme Right on others. Even I, paragon of genteel and respectful conversation, from time to time, once in a great while, would upon rare occassion. say things that might be considered sarcastic, unpleasant, even snarky. We had some good discussions, good points, thought provocationey things. And for every one of those conversations, there'd by 6 where things just kept going south of nasty. Then the "debates" would spill over into unrelated threads about the books, kitty cats or cheese. This happened more and more.
We still have the Advice Corner, where people can to get help and support, (as opposed to just bitch).I’m very glad that was left in there, but sometimes you really do need to let it out and have someone get you through it. I guess I’m just too idealistic about humans’ capability of interacting peacefully. Wow. When did I become an optimist?
I understand the political angle, but what about ethical issues? I don't think there are "factions" only people with opinions, like "I don't like Changes' ending" or "I think"(click to show/hide)
WARNING, CHANGES SPOILERS
We try to keep Dresdenverse discussions strongly grounded in the Dresdenverse and leave real-world ethics at arm's reach. It's the difference between "I think" and "I think(click to show/hide)."(click to show/hide)
"Politics" has a tendancy to gather all the other Touchy Topics I've mentioned under it's skirts, so we tend to use the term in generic fashion.Ah, all right. I understand it now.
Some people do.
I think what it should boil down to in basic terms, is that some people with opinions cannot and should not have them challenged on a forum where the fallout will not be tolerated.
You can't "Just avoid" the jerks in a forum like this, they come to you, and why should the guests who do behave in a civil and pleasant manner be forced to put up with those who simply refuse to?
How about the Future newcomers, and the imaginary ones? :P We have to rip on someone surely... :'(
How about the Future newcomers, and the imaginary ones? :P We have to rip on someone surely... :'(
Vat? U say mai langwich is incomprehensible 2 u? Fhmmmff...
^^Perhaps something is being lost in translation...^^
???
I realize that, MSD, but I wanted to keep this from spinning up into a gripefest regarding her.
I understand. Sorry if I'm touchy today.
That's ok. I shall now poke you.
Poke.
;)
Damn straight.
Carry on.