Self Moderation

[xane]

Originally posted by Shocko
That's why Cama and Embattle are good choices. The latter is boring, and already considered to be a "spoil-sport"... The former is too sensible to care what others think about him

Awww, Shocko, such kind words.

/me hurries to hide little black book labelled "Barryworld Bastards" under the cat litter.

 

[FatBusinessman]

Originally posted by (Shovel)
Disturbingly, when I was 5 years old I went to school on Red Nose Day dressed as He-Man...

Ok, disturbing mental image there...

 

[~Lazarus~]

Originally posted by throdgrain
Id nominate Lazurus, after all, there is surely an arguement for a general forum moderator to be disliked, and that puts him in the frame straight away

Gee. Thanks for thinking of me m8. pity your spelling is crap.

tbh - moderating isnt all its cracked up to be. Already do it and its pretty pants most of the time.

When you are closing threads, a simple note in the thread before closure explaining WHY would stop all of the flame wars and silly rumours of why the thread was closed.

 

[Testin da Cable]

once again TdC changes his mind

as I mentioned in the sticky, the potential mods here don't have to have the same general qualities as they should (I feel) in the 'new gamers' forum...but I would like them to be visible, and colourful forum people.
For various reasons I'd nominate Will, Shovel Summo and Xtro if they feel like it. And me though workies is going to cut off my access to the forums during the day

 

[mank!]

Nah, not Xtro

Sheff Wed will be in Div2 with us next season, and I don't want to get banned when we thrash em

 

[(Shovel)]

Had a few thoughts about the "powers" that any future community moderators might have.

I can't help feeling that allowing these new mods to ban users would be a potentially very bad idea. I guess it would be up to the individual mod whether they used such a power, but I would prefer to see a situation where banning users was something that had to be discussed - however briefly - between as many mods as possible. It isn't something that a community on the edge can afford to get wrong.
I could see that a situation might arise when a mod might have to "suspend" someone for a few hours while an issue got sorted out, but to administer permanent bans should really be a more informed decision, probably taken by the admins rather than the mods.

As much as community mods would get elevated by status, it is surely in the best interests of everyone to keep them as close to "normality" as can be?

Also, on a similar note. Regardess of whether community mods are going to be able to ban or not, should there be an accepted/standardised process for suspensions/bans. With these new T&C rules such actions are going to happen more often and people should know where they stand with it.

I mean, if (as I suggest above) a user might be suspended for a few hours, maybe there should be a set course of action for how many. Both for users so that they know where they stand, and for admins so that they have guidlines to act consistantly.

I'm a little bit unfocused in this post, sorry. What do other's think?

 

[danger]

banning will be up to ted and ted alone surely?

 

[Xtro]

Thanks for the kinds word TDC

As if I'd ban anyone who slagged SWFC, I moan about 'em enough myself

Having moderated about 3 tribes forums, a couple of MOHAA forums, and 10 or so others I can safely say NO THANKS to being nominated . The joy of text communication can't properly convey the utter despondency of moderating....!

Ta anyway!

*runs off screaming*

 

[xane]

Originally posted by (Shovel)
I'm a little bit unfocused in this post, sorry. What do other's think?

What you're trying to say is that there should be a division between closing/deleting threads/posts and banning users ?

 

[danger]

Originally posted by xane


What you're trying to say is that there should be a division between closing/deleting threads/posts and banning users ?

ahh that makes sense... I assumed that wouldn't be upto the mods anyway?

 

[Testin da Cable]

I would like to leave the actual judgement of banning where it is now. One could communicate to the 'higher powers' exactly what has come to pass, and one's recommendation for a ban, if necessary.

As to Shovel's idea for being able to have users suspended for a certain time...I like it. I'd propose a 'slidable' value though, say 30mins to ooh...say 4 hours or so.
People have to sleep sometime, and the longer timeframe gives you ample time to chat with another person/supermod about it. *thinks back to the forum-caretaker idea*

 

[Scooba Da Bass]

Originally posted by DBs
I would like to be a moderator.

Reasons:

1) I am kind
2) I am nice
3) I listen
4) I am unbiased
5) I am kind
6) I am fair
7) I am nice
8) I have da powah
9) I have been here since the beginning.
10) I think I could cut down the shit in this forum by 99%

Thank ya

I'll vote for DBs if he promises to come to the next BarryBeer in London

 

[(Shovel)]

Originally posted by xane


What you're trying to say is that there should be a division between closing/deleting threads/posts and banning users ?

Yes

and

As to Shovel's idea for being able to have users suspended for a certain time...I like it. I'd propose a 'slidable' value though, say 30mins to ooh...say 4 hours or so.
People have to sleep sometime, and the longer timeframe gives you ample time to chat with another person/supermod about it.

Yes.

God I love it when people get me right like that.

Also, I assume that banning would be a Ted/Admin responsibility - but it's possible that it might not work like that, hense I raised the point.

 

[xane]

Something like:

0.5 - 1.0 hrs = spam, norty links, too many Bob pictures
1.0 - 2.0 hrs = excessive "glenning", extreme personal insults
2.0 - 3.0 hrs = genital mounted beam weaponry pictures
3.0 - 4.0 hrs = goatse, anti-semitic conspiracy and assorted male exhibitionist images
4.0 hrs + = pimping your clan in General forum

( http://www.clangreen.co.uk/ )

 

[leggy]

I'll do it.

I promise to ban everyone and delete threads.

/edit

Gah someone already has my job :/

 

[~Lazarus~]

from experience, the banning could be assigned to individual mods in 2 scenarios

a "3 strikes your out" mentality

or

You outta here.

3 strikes
When an individual users has had 3 warnings

Your outta here.
a user completely ignores posting rules (i.e. goatse) and should be removed from the posting pool as often as possible.

There are other "punishments" such as loss of postcount, reset forum title etc.

 

[danger]

I vote we let Wij dish out the err... "punishment." yes... punishment... that's right! :uhoh:

 

[Summo]

Originally posted by (Shovel)
Indeed, I'd question what he did to get called "Boring" in repeated posts. He gets the the point and doesn't waste time on flame wars and the like, I can't see how that is anything but positive for a mod.

I'd strongly disgree with that. No offence to him, but Embattle is far to easily drawn into flamewars and vendettas. I don't vote for him as moderator.

TdC would get my vote, as would Will. Nobody else.

 

[Wij]

Originally posted by danger
I vote we let Wij dish out the err... "punishment." yes... punishment... that's right! :uhoh:

I'm keeping well out of this but if someone wants to sub-contract my services at a later date we could arrange an hourly rate.

 

[Testin da Cable]

or a 'by the gallon' rate perhaps

 

[Will]

I'll just add that I'd be happy to moderate here.

 

[Scooba Da Bass]

TdC and Will would edit all references to Windows and replace them with references to Torvold, Penguins and Command Line Interfaces, IMAGINE THE INSANITY!

(Yes I think they would make pretty good mods)

 

[(Shovel)]

Actually, I hadn't clicked that the whole Xav thing came out of his column... argh, I don't know now.

My main experience of EmBattle is in the hardware forums where we don't get flame wars. As much.

 

[~Lazarus~]

Originally posted by Will.
I'll just add that I'd be happy to moderate here.

/me joins Summo's Will for Mod campaign

 

[danger]

Originally posted by ~Lazarus~



/me joins Summo's Will for Mod campaign

nono he's far too left wing, not nearly facist enough!

 

[Testin da Cable]

case ${post} in
[nice][iffy][instaban])
if [ -n "${ban.pl}" ]; then
${killuser}
fi
esac


or something

 

[danger]

Originally posted by Testin da Cable
case ${post} in
[nice][iffy][instaban])
if [ -n "${ban.pl}" ]; then
${killuser}
fi
esac


or something

*Stabs TdC .... oh and i almost forgot!!!

take that aswell...

 

[doh_boy]

I'd vote for will/summo/camazane

also I can't believe the 'vote cama' picture hasn't appeared yet.

 

[charl8tan]

I think the systems being suggested are quite good as it is pretty much what we have had to use when adminning servers etc.
Although we could ban people it was only until 6am the following day at max. unless we supplied suitable evidence etc to our liason.
I think a similar system would work quite well on the forums.
As for the whole anon thing, yes and no, can't be arsed to state reasons as at the end of the day it's not going to be up to us anyway, though I will say an anon system could work with the mod still taking responsibility for his bans etc. Simply put several mod accounts called Moderator 1, Moderator 2 etc. TTD, BF etc would know who's which mod # and then if they are taking the pish they can still be spanked by them without recieving shite from people on the forums....

 

[Xtro]

I'd like to add that I think Will would make an excellent mod.