Discussion for new forum policies

Agreed. The thumbs should be used as a tool for the mods to see posts that are upsetting people without having to scour the forums.

The thumbs should be used as a tool for the mods to see posts that are upsetting people without having to scour the forums.

Thats an awesome idea!  if a post gets say 6 or more negative votes, the Moderator should be notified by the system, so he can see what is going on. Good idea!!!

Alot of times we cant see all the new threads and posts, but this will help a great deal.

I think it’s up to the community to decide how tolerant they are of minor/moderate trolling.

I disagree on this. You got to be in the place of the ‘victim’ who gets trolled. It should never be up to a mob to decide if somebody should be the subject of cyber bully or crass commentary. This site is not a democracy, and nobody should be a put in a position of being attacked personally with no recourse. The other obvious issue is not everyone will see the attack because they may not read the thread so no votes will come fast enough to hide the post. Imagine a new “noob” type player who registers and somebody cuts him down in a game with a personal attack on his play and nobody sees it and this new player never comes back because somebody else thought it would be cool to be mean to him. We can’t allow that ever.

Folding is where the post is mostly hidden but anybody can unfold it to see what was in there.

I don’t see a need for this. Why even hide a post if you can view it? How can the software differentiate between a post that is folded or hidden?

Hidden posts would only be viewable by moderators.

This should be the only function of the arrow up and down thing. If a post gets a cumulative 6 negative hits, the post notifies Moderators so they can take action. Its just an alternate from of “report to Moderator”.

People just don’t like #2, I wish there were a way to do suggested edits.

So they would rather lose the entire post? What if this post was in a game, where poster said something crass…we just ruin the game because edits are not allowed?
Sometimes the language is terrible in these games but usually it is just a sentence or word. An edit of this type should be allowed again with explanation.

** It should be noted, that certain sections of the forum, are much more likely to produce flame fests than others.

For example, when was the last time you read a flame fest in the “play boardgames” section?  Almost never, and player disputes are resolved by krieghund/players-themselves/or community.  Mods as a last resort - but I don’t think that’s ever happend.

Like the removal of the politial section, perhaps eliminating the WWII history section wouldn’t hurt. Any incredible WWII news, would just end up in the General Discussion section anyways.

Next ** I’m going to motion that option #2, NEVER be allowed, unless requested by the original poster/user.

There is no reason to edit anyones material - ever. If someone posts offensive (or otherwise) material, Simply MOVE it to the quarantine, if community voting hasn’t already hidden it.

That said,  IF/WHEN something is moved, THAT is the time to strike, and make largely public, to the mods, user, and administration, that the thread clearly violated the rules, intention of the site, and was an obscenity/concern for the public.

Too often I’ve seen posts/threads by myself, or others, that are just removed.  With no ensuing discussion.

You all have permission to call me an idiot, but how the hell are people supposed to learn whats appropriate/inappropriate behaviour, if there’s never a discussion between several parties and themselves as to what the issue is?  This process needs to be addressed.

Another concern is the -matter of opinion- factor.

A user posts something grey, which a mod in their opinion might think is off key…  but that the community and the original user don’t give a damn about.  Does it need to be moderated?

Perhaps the AUTHORITY to act, should be directly proportional, to the vote/value of the post or thread?

Of course, a community culture of “psst ok guys, stop the flame fest, I’m voting this gong show down” will have to develop, but I think it will naturally.

So they would rather lose the entire post? What if this post was in a game, where poster said something crass…we just ruin the game because edits are not allowed?
Sometimes the language is terrible in these games but usually it is just a sentence or word. An edit of this type should be allowed again with explanation.

Thinking outside the box.

Instead of arbitrarily editing a users post, Perhaps the moderator could “request” publically, that the user edit his own post.  Said user would likely fulfil the request. (or if he didn’t face the consequences of arbitration anyways).  At least they would learn the lesson subtly.

And in areas where users don’t have edit permissions, like the games section.  I have yet to see anyone care about language, because nobody reviews the game threads, except the gamers playing mostly.

Moderators DO monitor game threads and alot of people who are not involved in the game do hit “report to moderator”

This is due to horrible crass language of which i personally have had to edit.The request was made by others not even in the thread, but i guess followed the game and didn’t want that language  I wont repeat the sentence here, but it was edited out so the game can continue. You can’t simply quarantine game posts because it destroys the continuity of the game being played.

IN other threads, they may post a good idea, but flamed the other poster with You Fking CT you suck my **** in that same post.

Well their is a clear line that is easily crossed in that post and moderators have edited posts to remove that sentence or something like it many times. It could have been moved but for some part of it that offered something to the discussion. That is why it was edited because only part of it was not allowed. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS AGAINST ANYBODY EITHER DIRECT OR BY ROUSE OF A POST THAT ATTEMPTS TO RIDICULE ANY OTHER POSTER BY OTHER MEANS.

I think it’s up to the community to decide how tolerant they are of minor/moderate trolling.

I disagree on this. You got to be in the place of the ‘victim’ who gets trolled. It should never be up to a mob to decide if somebody should be the subject of cyber bully or crass commentary. This site is not a democracy, and nobody should be a put in a position of being attacked personally with no recourse. The other obvious issue is not everyone will see the attack because they may not read the thread so no votes will come fast enough to hide the post. Imagine a new “noob” type player who registers and somebody cuts him down in a game with a personal attack on his play and nobody sees it and this new player never comes back because somebody else thought it would be cool to be mean to him. We can’t allow that ever.

I’m going to remain totally open, honest, and fair here, and hope that this discussion retains it’s ability to continue being adult.

There is a twisted Irony with the disagreement suggested, and we need to address the elephant in the room openly, and with succint thought.

You got to be in the place of the ‘victim’ who gets trolled

This site is not a democracy

nobody should be a put in a position of being attacked personally with no recourse

The reason we’re gathered here today, having this discussion, is because enough people put themselves in the place of the ‘victim’ who got trolled, that had no means of recourse, and spoke up about it.

The irony being, users harassed by moderators, who had no recourse…
(And no I’m not going to get into specifics about me).

I like to use examples, thus here is the clearest one:

Let’s talk about a recent member, who is NO LONGER WITH US.

-He wasn’t popular,
-He made long posts,
-He was tireless and could be annoying.

But he was one of us…
He never swore, cursed, name called, or broke any rules, as far as I can tell.

His only crime, was to have a disagreement, with not one, but two moderators, who trolled him and harassed him constatnly; And then banned him when his reactions/spam went too far. Nobody leant the kid an ear. And hence he was ejected from our community.

This link…
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=24768.30

Which we can no longer see, serves as the pinnacle of the example. The link is to a game that was made for “Mantlefan” and “Jennifer” to sort out their differences, all the while prodded and harassed by other users and moderators. (Probably including me, I do recall offering to play in his place). In terms of it’s social value, it’s rather disgusting.

Many of you saw it, and no one here can deny what they saw happen. Which is why we should ask, where was Mantlefan’s recourse? Incase you didn’t already know there wasn’t any…

There is/was no ability, for the common user to A. Disagree, B. Request to be left alone C. Expect anything more than belitting and frustrating moderation, for trying to express thier opinion.

And from these rules, as far as I can tell, 20 days from today, when my soft ban ends, and so does IL’s, there’s still no method of recourse for the common user, and no qaurter from the sentiment that input from the average user isn’t welcome in the “not a democracy”.

To make a short story shorter, there is a bit of history at AA.org of people being bullied, isolated, and harassed, by people they couldn’t speak out against.

As stupid as it is, that’s what all this fuss over the last month has been about.

Which is why I fundamentally support community based moderation, and an end to “not a democracy”.

YES - I do get this is 1 man’s site (Djensen), but it seems clear to me, that he’s put the effort into this place, for all of us, and it wasn’t done just so he could tell us what to do, and laugh as he bans us one at a time.

It was done, so that we could play axis and allies and have fun. How do we best do that, and empower people, or the community, to keep the streets clean here so to speak? Whilst closing the door to potential power trolling?

The problem with all of that of course was because the trolling was done by the banned user, not unlike his ban at HGD he could not control his behavior. He would enter every conceivable thread running off gibberish about that problem, dragging her into his post and insulting her at every opportunity after being told 100 times to knock it off.

I guess you didn’t read his posts ever.

Moderators were not trolling him, but taking action because he was violating the rules.

Funny thing is you were against him, but i guess if he serves an invalid point, use him.

where was Mantlefan’s recourse?

Was to take 100 warnings but he didn’t either here or at HGD, and he found the result and caused his final result.

he never swore, cursed, named called, or broke any rules, as far as I can tell.

Must be some form of joke right?  He broke every rule in nearly every post. The man could not help himself. It was like a rabbit animal with sickness. Most every post contained bringing in that “she is a lair and cheats” mantra. He fit it in almost every post every day and night. It hijacked threads, and so many people complained it was ridiculous.

Obviously you don’t understand alot of the goings on, you just view the final result and don’t know the back story.

Well obviously the rules we get from you and Yanny ( before) are all we got to go on.

Also, we are posters like anybody else. When somebody continuously performs a cyber bully both in off colored posts and PM’s, it is not a chance to blame the victim, but to enforce the already established rules against the perpetrator of this affair. Never be wishy washy about enforcement. Once you go down that road, that emboldens the perpetrators to see how they can push the rules around since they are never punished.

Again, all you need is too tweak what Yanny wrote and make it clear it’s for all the forums.

Also, make it clear to Moderators what the new rules are and how to enforce them as you wish.

It is not a democracy, you own the site and the site is not owned by the community. At a basic level you got to be in charge and make rules as you see fit, and nobody who moderates should be blamed for doing what you ask us.

You don’t get it, trolling is not the same as flaming. What you’re describing is a flame not a troll.

I and talking about personal attacks against a person.

Saying “anyone who builds a factory in X is an idiot” is nothing to be worried about.

It crossed the line when somebody says Mantf for Fu**ing noob you suck for building that factory.

NOBODY SHOULD PERSONALLY BE ANY PART OF A FLAME OR TROLL.

1. A Flame is usually against a person.
2. A Troll is a poster who consistently posts very loud, hurtful sentiments just to see how it may effect others. They are like a fire starter who like to see people try to put out the fire and watch people suffer. They usually suffer with self esteem issues as they try to draw attention to themselves because early in life they never got support from others.

I would rather just see people exchanging ideas here. Their is no need to cut people down for any reason. That alone drives people away from this site much greater than anything else that was ever done.

nobody who moderates should be blamed for doing what you ask us.

I agree IL, entirely.

But at the same time…

Moderators need be held tightly accountable for when they go too far.

For Example Craig A. Yope’s name being removed from the MIA thread; Is an item that has led to the circumstances you and I have found ourselves in together.

As part of your statement:

NOBODY SHOULD PERSONALLY BE ANY PART OF A FLAME OR TROLL.

From the Yope example, so too should it be, that noone is personally targetted by a moderator.

And nobody should be personally targeted by a moderator.

Yes right unless they commit a flame, troll, hijack, or other violation of the rules. When they violate the rules repeatedly, they will be targeted repeatedly for each infraction.

It is not the case if a poster violates rules more than once, the other times we should ignore that poster so that he does not feel “targeted” for continually violating the rules.

It’s like a serial killer and the police prosecute him for the first killing, ignoring the other 10 murders so as not to get “personally targeted by Police”