Rules

Summary:

Discussion of strength, enforcement, changes etc. Wall of text. Well thoughts. It's a discussion, just discuss already.

Rules

3WMElliott 15 Nov 2010 03:04

Right, this board is here for a reason, let's use it. We need to be on the same page here when talking about the forum rules, so let's discuss, let's see what we think about them, what we need to do to enforce them etc.

This set of rules is not all-inclusive, nor is it hard and fast.

How hard and fast are we going to allow? How quick are we going to clamp down on offenses? We seem to let things run and get out of hand before someone steps in to call and end to it, rather than nip it in the bud. Should discussions be left to see how they develop and whether anything can be brought back?

1. Stay on topic

This site is about the "2012 Doomsday" hoax, and related issues. It is not about the New World Order, the Illuminati, UFOs, alternate physics, or time-travel, except as these may pertain to the "2012 Doomsday" hoax. The forums are not "open" where any subject is welcome, they are provided in order to answer questions people may have regarding the pages, to request clarification, etc.

On the whole, I think we're good with this, especially if the original poster is not a member and/or is posing a question about a recent news item or claim and so on. The issue is resolved quickly and the thread sinks down the board list.

But we know there are times when a large paragraph comes in that assumes something absurd for example, takes an outright falsehood as gospel truth, and any number of us will respond and pick it apart word by word, and sometimes we have different 'debunking' approaches to the same post, so we bring up different responses which in turn bring more responses from the the original poster, and here we go the cycle starts and you can bet we'll be straying out of bounds at some point… but where do we draw the line to stop?

Not all topics are welcome, even in the "Off Topic" forum. The site is not intended to serve as a platform for the discussion of any and every conspiracy theory under the sun. It is specific to the "2012 doomsday" hoax. If you came here to rabble-rouse for your pet conspiracy theory, expect your posts to be summarily deleted. Look, if you want a wide-open free-for-all debate, go post on Usenet.

While I get the message there, maybe there should be a soap box. A heavily moderated, one step off line and your soap box never existed soap box. It still has to be related to 2012, sure, but if it is not presented and responded to in a manner fitting the rules, then it's gone and it's not going to happen again.

Having a place for the strange claims to get an airing on the premise that said claim will be responded to with heavy criticism, the rules for needing to support claims, answer direct questions etc will be enforced for both sides, and one wrong move will result in a closed thread. A proper debate forum perhaps. Here are the conditions you agree to, here are the things we require to see from you, if you do not follow them, no debate.

2. Listen to your hosts

If a moderator or admin tells you that a particular subject line is off topic, or that you are going a bit over the top in your posts, consider that a warning. There may not be a second one.

All too often there is a second one. And a third one. And then we go off topic some more, someone gets louder, hell starts to see the light through the cracks in the walls and then one of us decides "Yup, that's it, bye bye thread."

At what point are we going to enforce this? Too often we read the warning, we quote the warning, and we keep going after the warning.

3. Keep it clean

This site is visited by people of all ages. There have been posts in this forum by children as young as 11, and I have been told that the forums are read by children as young as 8 or 9. Keep this in mind as you write your next forum post.

Where's the line? I know some bad mouthed 10 year olds… How should they be softened? Are we going to draw attention to the ******* $&£?%@! or switch them for flipping harmless ones?

4. Keep it respectful

Argue against the issues, not against the people. Some people have complained in the past that they were attacked for asking a question. Keep in mind that some of the visitors here have been traumatized by the 2012 doomsday rumors. Don't victimize them a second time.

Are the likes of sarcastic responses covered in here, or are we talking about calling people morons? Again, where's the line? Is hinting that someone is part of a group taking things too far? Is making a joke that a post sounds like something some other vocal proponent would say taking things too far? How are we clamping down on it? Edited posts?

5. This is not a democracy

This site is run by private individuals for a specific purpose. If you are told to stop doing something here, then stop doing it. Attempting to appeal the decisions of the moderators or admins will most likely not work. They were picked because they demonstrated a level-headedness that was desirable. If you feel a 'rule' is being inconsistently applied, tough. See the top of this page about how the mods/admins are expected to use their best judgement. We expect them to make decisions, and not double-check every time they have to say something to you.

We make decisions, that's fine. On the whole most of us also contribute to posts with our own inputs, and if we're all posting, we're inside whatever is going on, wherever a thread is going, we may even be taking it off topic, but we still roll with it until we deem something to have gone astray, often too late. When are we going to call a decision?

We've got to let threads develop in some way, certainly, we can't shoot on sight. We just need to know where the boundaries are and stay in between them, and then how we're going to deal with them.

As far as I'm concerned, most things should stay up for others to read in their entirety. But do we then need to differentiate a 'dead' thread from the others? Do we need to highlight where someone stepped out of line by editing posts and drawing attention to it? Should that happen in the middle of a live thread? Should we be disemvoweling or borking posts until those posts are brought back on topic or the posters give in and stop posting?

I think we've got to nail it down, we need to know when things are going sour and indeed when we are pointing them in that direction - or do we? This is a discussion, let's see what you think.

Re: Rules

Astrogeek 15 Nov 2010 03:53

Hi 3WMElliott;

I'm basically flying by the seat of my pants here, so I hope the rest of you are not looking for immediate decisions from me.

I'm going to go off and think about this for a little while. I'd appreciate hearing from others on this topic as well.

---

Full Frontal Nerdity

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Re: Rules

UndeadxNurse 15 Nov 2010 21:43

I agree with all of the points that Elliott has touched upon.

I, personally, think that some of the issue is that certain parties attempt to lighten the mood a bit with a little bit of humor, however when this happens, someone else pretty much just hijacks the entire thread by targeting that specific piece that was posted. We've seen this all too often in the older threads.

Keep it respectful

Respect is given where respect is due, much like credit, I, personally refuse to pay respect to someone who is appallingly disrespectful, we've seen the likes of these types as well. I have shown how far I will go in terms of disrespect, if someone is an idiot, I'll call them an idiot, but I always maintain the courtesy of responding to their posts, if I can of course. Respect has many different lines, if someone is intentionally trying to scare someone, that's quite disrespectful, in my eyes, especially if the target is someone who has a history of high-anxiety, there's no respect in that, if there were, then there would also be respect in shooting someone in the chest, but there isn't.
However, I want to point out, right now that there is a difference between calling someone an idiot, and insulting them over, and over, and over through vulgar language and stooping to the level of using the words such as "retard" or, "moron".
As a Wiki, everyone should be entitled to freedom of speech, but within reason.

This is not a democracy

This needs to be heavily enforced.

Listen to your hosts

Where do I begin?
I just recently returned from a trip, when I left everything seemed to be fine, but when I returned it was complete and utter mayhem in the threads. None of the threads had been locked or, enforced by a moderator until I returned.
With that being said, it's difficult to listen to your hosts, when the hosts say nothing at all. And as I said in the thread that I locked, I had only been home for 25+ minutes and I was already disgusted by what I saw in that particular thread. Not one moderator put their foot down, I had to do that myself.

Keep it clean

I agree that posts can be made without the use of vulgar language, however it's difficult to find a substitute for the word "bullshit", as I've explicitly used over time and those uses have not been edited or, removed, so I'm assuming that "bullshit" is acceptable, as it's the universal word for… well, bullshit, of course, but I do agree that much of the words that I've seen in the past need to be either removed or, edited.

As a whole, I'm not too impressed by the mods, and if they are confused, as I was in the beginning, then they should take the same route that I took which was contacting Astro to get a feel of my limits, once I had gotten a feel of my limits, I started doing what Astro put me in the position to do.

The rules need to be enforced, and the mods need to step up, as much as I enjoy helping Astro and the others with this site, I refuse to waste my life's time as a moderator, when none of the other moderators (save a few) have really done anything. In case no one has noticed, I travel quite often, so I can't be here all the time.

I firmly believe that goons such as Pandora, Ghost, Ivan, etc. should swiftly be removed once their theories have been examined and debunked. Once debunked, the thread should either be locked or, the discussion ended with the exceptions of comments on the matter. For example, the discussion with Pandora, Ghost and Ivan didn't have to last as long as it did. Their theories were examined and debunked, but the discussion was still dragged out until it finally became unnecessary text and drama.

---

Wie Sie säen, so sollst du ernten.

Re: Rules

3WMElliott 15 Nov 2010 23:33

The rules need to be enforced, and the mods need to step up, as much as I enjoy helping Astro and the others with this site, I refuse to waste my life's time as a moderator, when none of the other moderators (save a few) have really done anything.

If you look at the most active posters, besides Moo and the newer members a lot of us are mods, and a lot of us respond in our own ways to what we find within a comment. We're posters first, mods second.

You can pick up any out of hand thread you'd like and find that despite knowing full well that a thread will go the way of the dinosaurs, despite making mentions of it being off topic or disrespectful or whatever, it won't end until someone who isn't really active in it steps in - while in the thread, you want to stay in the thread, you want to see where it goes rather than cut it off.

Where does an active thread become an overgrown mess? On whose watch? Because despite many people able to make that decision, the first move is to keep it going, wherever it's going.

Re: Rules

Astrogeek 16 Nov 2010 04:27

When I started the site, I had the naive idea that I could host a forum and have an honest and open discussion regarding the issues. I suppose I was thinking mostly of people who came to the site to ask questions, and receive answers.

At this point I'm overwhelmed with the forum, and I would just as soon turn the thing off rather than spend a lot of time on it. This is becoming a crucial issue, because between now and mid January I have a very large project at work, and I don't need the distraction of misbehavior on the forums.

However, I don't want to close the avenue of people asking questions, and receiving answers.

I know I can't have everything, and I also know that I kind of 'drafted' a lot of people into the mod/admin role without asking first. So if anyone wants to step aside from those roles that's understandable.

So, I'm looking for suggestions, I guess. Should we turn off the forums? Should we make them available only to registered wikidot users? Should we create a separate 'Ask A Question' page for people to ask questions anonymously? I'm seriously open to anything you have to offer.

On a related note, since you two are the only ones who have responded here… what should I do about ghost? I'm of a mind to ban him permanently, but that could just be my anger talking.

---

Full Frontal Nerdity

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Re: Rules

3WMElliott 16 Nov 2010 19:13

Ghost/spaceghost6666/MrGhostblood is in a discussion with some YouTubers about this event. In a nutshell it was "2012hoax is a joke, they banned me, they wouldn't accept my ideas", to which the reponse from me and others was "actually, you were acting out line, we can understand why they don't appear to like you."

However, he has posted comments like these (which are likely out of order with regards to post time, but you should see the gist of it. Emphasis my own):

Do you have any idea how long ive been going on about this? The people in 2012hoax hate me. If you throw one joke at them, they act like your lying about the whole thing. Im a person with an enormous sense of humor. It dosn't mix well when im trying to consistently debate. During long debates, I start feeling really anxious. To break that tension, i'll make a joke. But that dosn't mean that im not serious most of the time.

You know, I just realized that I need to be more careful with the things I say in public forums. There are actually people out there that become severly depressed and some even suicidal over this 2012 thing. To me that seems absurd to get that out of whack because of a theory, but im starting to hear more and more of people actually taking this thing so serious, that it changes thier entire way of life. I dont want to be responsible for that.

I mean, even though some of things I say are clearly just part of my imagination, some people take it very serious. Do I think its possible that we are from an alien race? Yes, I do. Do I think it's within the realm of possiblity that another planet is out there? Sure, I mean, we dont know everything about the universe. Do I think that a renagade planet is hurling towards our solar system and will arrive in 2012? No. I just didnt think anyone was taking me serious, but apparently people do.

If I found out that I was responsible for someone taking thier life over this, no matter how absurd I think that would be, I would be devastated. I was reading through some of the posts on 2012hoax and there are people that are actually, genuinely frightened. Now, when I go out with my scope, my mind wanders and I do see things that are very strange. But, awesome is more the word for it. I mean, the universe dosnt need any help being interesting, it does that on it's own.

Biken called me a moron many times before I called him a moron. Nurse wasnt being too bad, but she called me spacefraud and it ticked me off a little. But since I was acting like a jackass at times, I immediatly apologized to her. I also immediately apologized to juju, even though he really didnt deserve an apology for being rude. However, Ive decide if they let me back on, I will be respectful and wont rant anymore. Stick to the topic and answer questions to the best of my ability.

I'll see how it goes there, if I can get a statement or apology or something from him I will, as far as I'm concerned he can come right back, just as long as we don't have another 400 post behemoth on our hands.

Edit

3WMElliott: Hate is far too strong a word but there has to come a time when enough is enough, especially when we're lead on a whistle-stop tour of all manner of crazy without being shown any supporting evidence or even ignoring well established science.

You yourself have admitted that it can get too far and that this nonsense leads people to fear for their lives, and so we have to take the stance of demanding evidence from each and every claim - what you supplied did not stand up on its own.

MrGhostblood: Yes, well, I feel genuinly bad about doing that and I have ceased. Like I said, im not going to have fun at the expense of someone's life. From now on, im going to 2012 websites and do my best to set people's mind's at ease. I thought what I was doing was harmless, because I trully didnt think anyone took me serious at all. Which im sure educated people didnt, but im afraid my rantings will cause someone to become depressed or even suicidal. It isnt worth it.

Regarding the forums as a whole, no, there is no need to delete them in the slightest. It's not like we have 20 ghosts or Ivans springing topics up left, right and center, we have one at any one time whom we respond to and arguably respond to too much.

The problem isn't with letting the rabble in, it's just how we deal with them, or rather how quickly we deal with them - if you want nice clean boards we need to act quicker.

It shouldn't need to be registered only either, unless there is a behind the scenes reason for it being an easier option.

Last edited on 16 Nov 2010 19:17 by 3WMElliott Show more

Re: Rules

Astrogeek 16 Nov 2010 19:36

based on the above comments from him on YouTube, I'm ok with letting him post again.

I do think we mods/admins need to take a step back and make sure we're not hijacking, or enabling the hijacking, of the threads ourselves, and yes, there are 'regular' posters who I'm about ready to kick to the curb.

---

Full Frontal Nerdity

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Re: Rules

Alene Y 16 Nov 2010 19:21

Sorry for not responding to this earlier. My computer has been unavailable to me off and on while my son is putting in a new floor. As I mentioned on another thread, I did mark ghost as an abusive user after he insulted you, nurse. I didn't find anything else that I could do about him. I'm not nearly as computer savvy as most of our other adminstrators and moderators and haven't found how to block a person or lock a thread.

We started out with the idea that we wouldn't be like the crackpot sites, blocking people who disagree with us. I am not sure where we should draw the line in the sand. Some of our members have seemed content to continue beating a dead horse indefinitely and, to be honest, some have insulted the person they were debating, so it goes both ways. I have watched these threads and, since our members were still participating, haven't known whether to interfere. If you will let me know how to lock a thread and/or ban a troll, I'll be happy to do it when I think it's getting out of hand and pointless to continue.
I think we should keep our forum open so those who need help or reassurance can get it. I haven't been inclined to get into the arguments, and we have several members who seem to enjoy them, but there have been several that probably should have been shut down.
I have been uncertain about whether I should do it without a consensus. If you and the other admins and moderators think any one of us should do it based on our own opinion of when a thread is getting out of hand, I'm willing to go with that.

Re: Rules

UndeadxNurse 16 Nov 2010 20:36

Agreeing with Elliott once again.

The creation of this website was a noble thing to do, it isn't often that someone will go out of their way to help people that they don't even know, and as we all know, Astro is paying for this site out of his own pocket only to have some visitors trample on his noble cause, when I had first begun reading the 2012hoax forums, I was somewhat surprised, and even in disbelief that there were physicists, astrophysicists, astronomers and others of the like were actually joining to help as well, it was that small gesture of gratitude and a helping hand that really made me re-think the way that I perceived our species entirely, at that point in time, I had it stuck in the back of my mind that we humans are nothing short of savages, but you people have proven me wrong.

If you don't mind, Astro, I would like to introduce everyone to a specific Moderator rule from another forum that I go to (Anime forum), taken straight from their site:

1) Moderators are to use their best judgment, admins are not here to babysit the Moderators, nor are we here to hold their hand. We trust that the Moderators decisions are what's best for the prolonged existence of our lovely forum. As a Moderator, you have the ability to lock, delete, and move threads as you see fit and you are not the only Moderator, but you are a team of Moderators, if one Moderator makes a mistake, we trust in the other Moderators to quickly, and respectfully correct that mistake and as Moderators, all of you know what to look for [e.g. if a thread has gotten out of hand, flaming, disrespect, fighting, inappropriate material].

Pandora is a perfect example of when a thread has gone too far, as is Ivan Gorelik.

I believe that Ghost should be removed if he acts like a fool again, I will not tolerate someone who is intentionally trying to scare someone or, keep an argument going with foolish replies.
Much like Moo, Ghost has the ability to help people realize that conspiracy theorists are completely nuts, but sadly much more like Moo, Ghost has the uncanny ability to cross the line, rather than lend a helping reply.

When it comes to the forums, Astro, I personally, would love to see the forums remain open for the public, because it is helping people, but like the old saying goes, no good deed goes unpunished. With each person that we help, we will likely have an equal amount of people who will only cause trouble.
I will say this, Astro.. This is your forum, this is your idea, this is your project, this is your baby. What you choose to do rests solely on your shoulders and I trust that your decision will be the right decision for the forum, we can only pass around ideas, you will always have the final say of the matter.

When I received a notice, stating that I was made a Moderator of 2012hoax, I was completely estatic(sp?), but in the midst of my moment of excitement, it dawned on me that this would be a lot of responsibility as a Moderator, and I chose to accept that responsibility, so I'm not going anywhere as a Mod.

Personally, the forum as it stands is OK, I don't think the forum needs to change, I just think that the people within the forum need to change. There are times that I'm gone for a week, two weeks, sometimes up to a month at a time, but when I'm here, I'm going to do my best as a Mod, and I hope to see the same effort from all of the others. No one has to put their lives on hold, nor does anyone have to make drastic changes, even if you just have a few minutes of spare time, that's a few minutes that you could use Moderating, instead of staring blankly at the homepage of Google.

I am not sure where we should draw the line in the sand.

The line in the sand should be drawn at the point where the poster has forfeited his own thread and insists on arguing, rather than discussing, all of us have seen an example of this where posters stray from the topic, only to call each other names like children.

I did mark ghost as an abusive user after he insulted you, nurse.

I would have banned him, but I couldn't find the ban-hammer.

and yes, there are 'regular' posters who I'm about ready to kick to the curb.

I know that Moo is likely to be one of them, but as of late, he seems to have calmed down quite a bit, save a few posts.

---

Wie Sie säen, so sollst du ernten.

Re: Rules

Astrogeek 16 Nov 2010 21:28

I know that Moo is likely to be one of them, but as of late, he seems to have calmed down quite a bit, save a few posts.

Yes, he has calmed down quite a bit. I gave him a fairly blunt warning recently. It contained the words "If you wish to continue to post here…"

That's part of the joy/pain of running a team, or a family, or a website. Some people need to be smacked with a clue-by-four before they realize you're talking to them. And sometimes its nice to have a bulldog around.

---

Full Frontal Nerdity

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Re: Rules

Astrogeek 16 Nov 2010 21:22

Right, this board is here for a reason, let's use it. We need to be on the same page here when talking about the forum rules, so let's discuss, let's see what we think about them, what we need to do to enforce them etc.

This set of rules is not all-inclusive, nor is it hard and fast.

How hard and fast are we going to allow? How quick are we going to clamp down on offenses? We seem to let things run and get out of hand before someone steps in to call and end to it, rather than nip it in the bud. Should discussions be left to see how they develop and whether anything can be brought back?

This clause is meant to give admins/mods some leeway. Based on recent activity, I'd rather err on the side of being too strict rather than being too open.

1. Stay on topic

This site is about the "2012 Doomsday" hoax, and related issues. It is not about the New World Order, the Illuminati, UFOs, alternate physics, or time-travel, except as these may pertain to the "2012 Doomsday" hoax. The forums are not "open" where any subject is welcome, they are provided in order to answer questions people may have regarding the pages, to request clarification, etc.

On the whole, I think we're good with this, especially if the original poster is not a member and/or is posing a question about a recent news item or claim and so on. The issue is resolved quickly and the thread sinks down the board list.

But we know there are times when a large paragraph comes in that assumes something absurd for example, takes an outright falsehood as gospel truth, and any number of us will respond and pick it apart word by word, and sometimes we have different 'debunking' approaches to the same post, so we bring up different responses which in turn bring more responses from the the original poster, and here we go the cycle starts and you can bet we'll be straying out of bounds at some point… but where do we draw the line to stop?

I don't know that I can give an answer to this question. I'd prefer that if someone starts ranting about (pick one: UFOs, President Obama, President Bush, the Illuminati, etc) we just say "That's not on-topic here" and shut it down, rather than rebut it. Of course the danger is that it leaves the subject open to accusations that we can't refute their pet issue. So, perhaps a one-two punch: Refute it briefly, and then declare it 'off topic'.

Not all topics are welcome, even in the "Off Topic" forum. The site is not intended to serve as a platform for the discussion of any and every conspiracy theory under the sun. It is specific to the "2012 doomsday" hoax. If you came here to rabble-rouse for your pet conspiracy theory, expect your posts to be summarily deleted. Look, if you want a wide-open free-for-all debate, go post on Usenet.

While I get the message there, maybe there should be a soap box. A heavily moderated, one step off line and your soap box never existed soap box. It still has to be related to 2012, sure, but if it is not presented and responded to in a manner fitting the rules, then it's gone and it's not going to happen again.

Having a place for the strange claims to get an airing on the premise that said claim will be responded to with heavy criticism, the rules for needing to support claims, answer direct questions etc will be enforced for both sides, and one wrong move will result in a closed thread. A proper debate forum perhaps. Here are the conditions you agree to, here are the things we require to see from you, if you do not follow them, no debate.

There are ways that this could be accomplished, but it would require interaction from the mods to enforce the rules. I'm thinking this would have to be set up in advance on a case by case basis, with a mod volunteering to act as a mod, instead of a debater.

If a moderator or admin tells you that a particular subject line is off topic, or that you are going a bit over the top in your posts, consider that a warning. There may not be a second one.

All too often there is a second one. And a third one. And then we go off topic some more, someone gets louder, hell starts to see the light through the cracks in the walls and then one of us decides "Yup, that's it, bye bye thread."

At what point are we going to enforce this? Too often we read the warning, we quote the warning, and we keep going after the warning.

I agree. I think that I've let the forum get out of control. I think we need to clamp down on the behavior.

3. Keep it clean

This site is visited by people of all ages. There have been posts in this forum by children as young as 11, and I have been told that the forums are read by children as young as 8 or 9. Keep this in mind as you write your next forum post.

Where's the line? I know some bad mouthed 10 year olds… How should they be softened? Are we going to draw attention to the *** $&£?%@! or switch them for flipping harmless ones?

I would prefer 'Disney Clean' but that's not realistic. How about 'Classroom Clean'? For example, I'm uncomfortable with even 'Bullshit' as UndeadxNurse brings up in the other reply. I just don't have time to go through and find every instance and 'bleep' it.

4. Keep it respectful

Argue against the issues, not against the people. Some people have complained in the past that they were attacked for asking a question. Keep in mind that some of the visitors here have been traumatized by the 2012 doomsday rumors. Don't victimize them a second time.

Are the likes of sarcastic responses covered in here, or are we talking about calling people morons? Again, where's the line? Is hinting that someone is part of a group taking things too far? Is making a joke that a post sounds like something some other vocal proponent would say taking things too far? How are we clamping down on it? Edited posts?

I don't know. It's kind of a judgement call to be made: Is there one person going for the name-calling consistently? Was the other party drawn in by it? Who gets a warning, who gets edited, who gets banned, which threads get removed vs locked? What happens to the post is also a judgement call. I've set a precedent I guess by heavily editing Raymond Mardyk's posts, so that's obviously an option. Posts that are pure hate (and we've had some of those) I'm fine with deleting. I guess what I'm saying is that any option is available, and it's going to have to be a judgement call on the mod/admin part. I'm not going to ask someone to take on this responsibility and then nit-pick them, so there won't be any second-guessing from me.

5. This is not a democracy

This site is run by private individuals for a specific purpose. If you are told to stop doing something here, then stop doing it. Attempting to appeal the decisions of the moderators or admins will most likely not work. They were picked because they demonstrated a level-headedness that was desirable. If you feel a 'rule' is being inconsistently applied, tough. See the top of this page about how the mods/admins are expected to use their best judgement. We expect them to make decisions, and not double-check every time they have to say something to you.

We make decisions, that's fine. On the whole most of us also contribute to posts with our own inputs, and if we're all posting, we're inside whatever is going on, wherever a thread is going, we may even be taking it off topic, but we still roll with it until we deem something to have gone astray, often too late. When are we going to call a decision?

In the 'heat of battle' it may be up to another admin/mod to step in.

We've got to let threads develop in some way, certainly, we can't shoot on sight. We just need to know where the boundaries are and stay in between them, and then how we're going to deal with them.

And that, of course is the problem. We're dealing with people, some of whom (not mentioning any names here) will test and test and test to see what the boundaries are. No doubt there will be whiners who complain that their rights are being violated, or that the 'rules' are inconsistent. Inconsistent rules are going to be a problem, because I can't possibly think of a rule to cover every situation.

As far as I'm concerned, most things should stay up for others to read in their entirety. But do we then need to differentiate a 'dead' thread from the others? Do we need to highlight where someone stepped out of line by editing posts and drawing attention to it? Should that happen in the middle of a live thread? Should we be disemvoweling or borking posts until those posts are brought back on topic or the posters give in and stop posting?

I'm all for some gentle and not-so-gentle and some blunt reminders. As far as I'm concerned, since all the mods are unpaid and "volunteers" (only quoted because I 'drafted' some), whatever works for you in the short term, or keeps you from having to baby-sit the forum. Locked threads can be unlocked. The 'Deleted' threads are moved to the 'Deleted' forum (which is hidden from everybody except mods and above).

I think we've got to nail it down, we need to know when things are going sour and indeed when we are pointing them in that direction - or do we? This is a discussion, let's see what you think.

I think we can't nail it down 100%. But I also think it's worthwhile to try to nail it down somewhat.

---

Full Frontal Nerdity

"Do you ever think about things you do think about?" - Henry Drummond to Matthew Harrison Brady in Inherit the Wind

Re: Rules

3WMElliott 17 Nov 2010 21:18

Refute it briefly, and then declare it 'off topic'.

We need more of that then. More "look, it's been refuted, if you've got nothing else then this is the end of the thread."