click tracking
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

Banning is so last century. When a person is banned it gives them license to feel indignant and wronged. Instead of banning just flip the "moderation required" flag so that all their posts must be moderated before they can be seen. That will cool a person off really quick! It also lets them know that they are getting close to the red line. If you find they continue to post garbage that won't pass the smell test then you can issue a ban.

 

17 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

 

Excellent idea!

 

NOOOOO!!!! 

Unless you want your Mods flooded with posts! :angry:

Besides- who decides whats stinky and what isnt?

You?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, rene said:

NOOOOO!!!! 

Unless you want your Mods flooded with posts! :angry:

Besides- who decides whats stinky and what isnt?

You?

 

I can see your point re: the overworked mods. As for the stink test, if the mods were considering a ban then they already smell something. I figure flipping the moderation flag (for 5-10 posts, whatever is appropriate) gives the offender a chance to make peace without feeling like a door got slammed in his face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rene said:

NOOOOO!!!! 

Unless you want your Mods flooded with posts! :angry:

Besides- who decides whats stinky and what isnt?

You?

 

True, it could really make for a lot of moderation work. And I don't like the idea of moderators or myself deciding stinkiness of behavior...the goal is to be only determining whether someone: infringed on another person's safety, spammed, or did something illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jason said:

 

I can see your point re: the overworked mods. As for the stink test, if the mods were considering a ban then they already smell something. I figure flipping the moderation flag (for 5-10 posts, whatever is appropriate) gives the offender a chance to make peace without feeling like a door got slammed in his face.

 

We're talking about 2 different things.

 

 If someone repeatedly says Jason's a silly goose and needs to wash his head - that's one thing,  and doesn't call for moderation.

 

If someone says even once Jason doesn't deserve to breathe and I know where he lives then that person is gone. No warning needed. 

 

JMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

 

True, it could really make for a lot of moderation work. And I don't like the idea of moderators or myself deciding stinkiness of behavior...the goal is to be only determining whether someone: infringed on another person's safety, spammed, or did something illegal.

Right.

Welcome to the not-Bums.

:)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I see your point. I'm thinking more along the lines of spamming or trolling.

 

 

Edited by Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obvious trash is easy to take out. 

Faster than a straw dog. ^_^

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With trolling...it's annoying, but should it moderated out?

I don't see it as something that interferes with anyone's safety. But maybe just like spam, it ruins the quality of a forum, and should be modded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

With trolling...it's annoying, but should it moderated out?

I don't see it as something that interferes with anyone's safety. But maybe just like spam, it ruins the quality of a forum, and should be modded?

It might be the difference between minor trolling and major trolling will be clear.

Ignore button for minor trolling.

Major trolling could  be treated like spam.

Edited by rene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The operating principle of a forum is to promote communication. Reserve the right to suspend or ban. Permit odious speech unless it's truly intolerable, as in an abusive pattern.

 

It's not possible to specify tightly what is transgression, beforehand. 

The moderation is just a thing to be judged over time by the individual participants, the general response by admin should be presumed to be, 1 suck it up, 2 cut it out , or 3 please leave,.. in that order. ( And the person asked to leave may be either the defendant or plaintiff)

Imo

Edited by Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Joe said:

The operating principle of a forum is to promote communication. Reserve the right to suspend or ban. Permit odious speech unless it's truly intolerable, as in an abusive pattern.

 

It's not possible to specify tightly what is transgression, beforehand. 

The moderation is just a thing to be judged over time by the individual participants, the general response by admin should be presumed to be, 1 suck it up, 2 cut it out , or 3 please leave,.. in that order. ( And the person asked to leave may be either the defendant or plaintiff)

Imo

Sounds about right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, rene said:

Sounds about right.

Thanks, I read several long discussions on this subject, everybody has their own idea where to draw the line. 

If you go totally free speech you cant deal with obvious and ugly harassment on the part of the participants. 

Or ,the other extreme ,harassment is done by the admin. Like at X ,IMo, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The site is up at www.originaldao.com, although totally in its early stages, with a lot of work that needs to be done.

 

I want to listen to all suggestions people have for how they want their forum to be. The way I'm setting it up right now isn't necessarily how it needs to stay.

Edited by Aetherous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Aetherous said:

The site is up at www.originaldao.com, although totally in its early stages, with a lot of work that needs to be done.

 

I want to listen to all suggestions people have for how they want their forum to be. The way I'm setting it up right now isn't necessarily how it needs to stay.

 

Congrats! Getting it set up is half the job. Now it just needs people and content. The shape can change over time.

 

Good job!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Joe said:

The operating principle of a forum is to promote communication. Reserve the right to suspend or ban. Permit odious speech unless it's truly intolerable, as in an abusive pattern.

 

It's not possible to specify tightly what is transgression, beforehand. 

The moderation is just a thing to be judged over time by the individual participants, the general response by admin should be presumed to be, 1 suck it up, 2 cut it out , or 3 please leave,.. in that order. ( And the person asked to leave may be either the defendant or plaintiff)

Imo

 

My philosophy on moderating/admin:

 

Applying such ideas to members are equally important for staff... some get worked up or rankled by comments.

 

I give the benefit of the case as long as possible but have less tolerance for trolling and spamming as they just are there for the wrong motivations or are just mis-placed.

 

You would likely do best to do as a single staff over moderation, particularly at first to establish the tone of expectation.   I'm not sure there is reason for staff in general except folks need a break.   At bums, I almost went to a 3 Admin setup where any of the three had equal power to do and effect the rules/expectation... we were rather close to that idea by the time we were broken up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I can understand your reasoning in creating a new site along the line of the Dao Bums sans Sean I do feel that it may prove a difficult endeavour.

 

Political and religious debate are guaranteed to bring out the worse in even the most saintly of individuals, it certainly did in me, so you are almost certain to follow the path of the original site. As site owner you will need to watch yourself very closely for signs of going the way of Sean and thereby alienating a large section of the community. I would most certainly deem myself unfit to take on such a role. PatrickJB made a start which was over almost as soon as it began and perhaps he got out at just the right time.

 

I wish you well and can but hope that you do not soon find yourself wondering why you ever bothered starting the thing up. I do not think that I will be joining you for I was beginning to grow weary of locking horns with those whose views I detested and had no hope of changing - the frustration of it all being just too much. So for now I think I shall linger here and work on my own cultivation without worrying what others think and do. It will be a sort of wallowing in rational self interest. I do however wish you well in your quest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Chang said:

Whilst I can understand your reasoning in creating a new site along the line of the Dao Bums sans Sean I do feel that it may prove a difficult endeavour.

 

Political and religious debate are guaranteed to bring out the worse in even the most saintly of individuals, it certainly did in me, so you are almost certain to follow the path of the original site. As site owner you will need to watch yourself very closely for signs of going the way of Sean and thereby alienating a large section of the community. I would most certainly deem myself unfit to take on such a role. PatrickJB made a start which was over almost as soon as it began and perhaps he got out at just the right time.

 

I wish you well and can but hope that you do not soon find yourself wondering why you ever bothered starting the thing up. I do not think that I will be joining you for I was beginning to grow weary of locking horns with those whose views I detested and had no hope of changing - the frustration of it all being just too much. So for now I think I shall linger here and work on my own cultivation without worrying what others think and do. It will be a sort of wallowing in rational self interest. I do however wish you well in your quest.

Chuang and Buddha and Ghandi and the Dalai Llama , dont have a problem with politics,

maybe wallowing is bad , and bringing self control and rationality to conversations with others is the best way to cultivate ones own way. 

JMO 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Joe said:

Chuang and Buddha and Ghandi and the Dalai Llama , dont have a problem with politics,

maybe wallowing is bad , and bringing self control and rationality to conversations with others is the best way to cultivate ones own way. 

JMO 

 

Unfortunately the bringing of self control and rationality to conversations with others does tend to be the difficult bit and oft times they are the first thing to go west, hence the problems on the old site. Whilst Chuang, Buddha,  Ghandi and the Dalai Llama did not have a problem with this, experience shows that the majority do not fare so well.

 

This is only my take on things and I do wish Aetherous well in his project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Chang said:

Political and religious debate are guaranteed to bring out the worse in even the most saintly of individuals, it certainly did in me

 

The political etc section requires that members request to join...what's contained in it isn't viewable without access (potentially, I could even hide the forum itself to everyone except those who request to join).

If someone doesn't want to see or use it anymore, they can just request to be removed, and the site will go back to being only spiritual, martial arts, texts, health, etc discussion. There's going to be no leaking of the controversial topics section into the main forum, and if something controversial is posted in the main area, it'll be moved out of it.

 

Religious debates do get heated, too, though! They will stay in their appropriate sections. No escaping disagreement when it comes to a spiritual discussion forum, I suppose.

I hope you'll want to use it eventually, Chang, but understand if not.

 

19 minutes ago, Chang said:

As site owner you will need to watch yourself very closely for signs of going the way of Sean and thereby alienating a large section of the community.

 

I'm a natural at "placing the mission first" and foregoing personal interests in favor of a greater good... with the vision and purpose of the site being what it is, I hope that it will prevent such a thing from ever happening.


Really just wanted to recreate the good thing we had at TDB, without what happened with Sean, without unclear moderation sometimes being personal, and where everyone can be happy with the content (some not seeing political discussions, some having them).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Chang said:

 

Unfortunately the bringing of self control and rationality to conversations with others does tend to be the difficult bit and oft times they are the first thing to go west, hence the problems on the old site. Whilst Chuang, Buddha,  Ghandi and the Dalai Llama did not have a problem with this, experience shows that the majority do not fare so well.

 

This is only my take on things and I do wish Aetherous well in his project.

:)  Ok man , up to you , but things often being what you make of them ..... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Chang said:

Whilst I can understand your reasoning in creating a new site along the line of the Dao Bums sans Sean I do feel that it may prove a difficult endeavour.

 

Political and religious debate are guaranteed to bring out the worse in even the most saintly of individuals, it certainly did in me, so you are almost certain to follow the path of the original site. As site owner you will need to watch yourself very closely for signs of going the way of Sean and thereby alienating a large section of the community. I would most certainly deem myself unfit to take on such a role. PatrickJB made a start which was over almost as soon as it began and perhaps he got out at just the right time.

 

I wish you well and can but hope that you do not soon find yourself wondering why you ever bothered starting the thing up.

 

Wise words.  Having done moderation, I can say it will be challenging especially with political topics.  Most people that participate only in political discussions are not exactly Buddhas or Gandhis.  The minimal or no moderation may sound good at the start, but it will not be practical if the forum becomes popular with regular visitors and guests.  There are going to be all types of characters pushing all types of boundaries and making the staff work hard depending on how busy the site is.  There can be bitterness at times with members taking different sides and finding fault with the staff no matter what they do (even if they don't do).   I do not agree with minimum or no moderation and neither do I agree with excessive moderation by going through every single post like some sites do.  Being prepared will be good.  Initially one admin may be enough and even a good thing as david pointed out.  Later, if you can have one or two in staff who have done moderation or admin work in other forums before, it may be helpful.  Like every other work prior experience can be helpful at times in dealing with conflicts.  Right candidates can also learn quickly.

 

There should be a balance in moderation in order to create  a forum where spiritual conversions can thrive in harmony and independence.  For those who keep crossing the line warnings and few temporary suspensions with increasing time periods should be considered before banning.

 

Good luck with the new site.  I will check it out soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the political section of the new forum fails (we'll have to see how it goes), then I hope that the political section will just be closed down and that the spiritual part will go on and survive. I will probably not participate in the political section anyway, as I no longer like heated debates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Zwerver said:

If the political section of the new forum fails (we'll have to see how it goes), then I hope that the political section will just be closed down and that the spiritual part will go on and survive. I will probably not participate in the political section anyway, as I no longer like heated debates.

If anything ! survives it's going to be politics. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...