Off Topic Posts

[TheEschaton]

That seems like a rather constricting paradigm, HN. Specific issues are subsets of broader themes, if we have to make a thread for a broader theme every time we wanted to discuss one, we'd be having the same conversation in like 3 or 4 threads.

-TheE-

[HarmNone]

Sorry, TheE. If we don't exercise some control, and make some effort to keep threads on topic, those who would like to discuss the topic at hand have a real problem trying to sift through the detritus to get to the real meat of the topic. Therefore, please try to keep topics somewhere near their original intent.

[Parkbandit]

I will start a thread for each of the offtopic posts in this thread. The titles will be:

Borat
Hugging
Hardons
Illegal Wars
terrorism
Homeless
Memory
Ammendments
Piss poor moderating.


Have I missed any? See how stupid your position is Harmnone?

[HarmNone]

Start whatever topics you like, Parkbandit. Just stay on them.

[Parkbandit]

Sorry, TheE. If we don't exercise some control, and make some effort to keep threads on topic, those who would like to discuss the topic at hand have a real problem trying to sift through the detritus to get to the real meat of the topic. Therefore, please try to keep topics somewhere near their original intent.


No one is looking back on these forums to do a research paper Harmnone. Every single topic does not have to be perfectly on topic. If this was a library and you wanted to impose your dewy decimal system on it.. then maybe.

It's a conversation on the internet. It's not a final exam. Conversations will stray from the original topic .. and is that really such a huge problem? You need to use better judgement on what is blatently off topic and what is casually off topic.

[Parkbandit]

Start whatever topics you like, Parkbandit. Just stay on them.

Really? Like the topic titled "For TheE" that you deleted and haven't sent me a PM about regarding why it was? You mean start topics you agree with.. but if it's something that you don't like, you will just delete at your pleasure?

Great administering.

[HarmNone]

There. Now we aren't dragging another topic off into the hinterlands.

Lots of our topics go "casually" off topic. A few off topic posts are not a problem, most of the time. However, in serious topics that may be of interest to some people, tangents can present a problem. It's not all about what you (or I) want, or what you or I think is okay.

There's another little problem that is creating distress for other posters. That problem involves those who wish to turn threads into a battle between the few. That, while enjoyable for those who participate in the baiting, is not enjoyable for many of our posters and readers.

TOS precludes off topic posts; however, we don't make a big deal about it until it becomes a big deal. When you start a board war about something completely unrelated to the topic being discussed, I'll probably step in and put an end to it.

[HarmNone]

The topic you started for TheE was started with something that had already been deleted, Parkbandit. Be creative. Come up with something new. If you want a fight, look somewhere else. I'm not interested.

[Parkbandit]

How the fuck is it a 'big deal' when a conversation goes from draft to homeless? How the fuck is that such a big deal in your life?? I don't get it.

Next time I am having a conversation with someone.. and we're talking about football and all of a sudden, out of the blue, they mention baseball and we start talking about that.. I'm going to stop them dead in their tracks and say "WOAH! We were talking about football.. let's get back on that topic"

Sounds stupid right? sounds exactly what you have been doing lately. Powertrip much?

[Back]

Thats it! I’m cancelling my subscription!@ Oh, wait...

[Parkbandit]

The topic you started for TheE was started with something that had already been deleted, Parkbandit. Be creative. Come up with something new. If you want a fight, look somewhere else. I'm not interested.


Oh.. so now, I can only start new threads that you approve of? I posted a pic of Rush Limbaugh with a dart board over his face.

Why again did you delete the thread? Because YOU don't like Rush? You don't like Darts?

You are pathetic and use this board to get the power and authority you obviously lack in your real life. I pity you... much like I did Klaive.

[Gan]

I also have an issue with over-moderation of 'topic-ness' of threads.

It is a normal function of conversation for the topic to broaden and sometimes evolve. And lately I have had issues with posts removed for being off topic and yet also seeing moderators make posts afterwards with no contribution to the thread whatsoever.

I think that there is an undue amount of over-consideration given for this concept of forcing the readers to read (skim) through posts (conversation) that has diverged from the original topic.

Give us readers some credit in our ability to have an attention span longer than a few moments. We are educated enough to learn to skim posts for the key words relating to the subject we wish to follow and discuss.

Now if the divergence in off-topicness grows to become the primary theme of argument then the decision can be made to create a new thread rather than let it continue where the original topic evolved.

This off-topic'ness needs to chill out.

[Drew]

I think the mods are a little too busy here, but then again, they aren't my boards, I don't set the policy. HarmNone obviously cares about the boards but sometimes she's just very zealous about enforcing the rules as they are laid out. I don't prefer the rules about "off topic" because I prefer the discussion to be more natural and less stunted (that's the whole reason I come to these boards, the "stay on topic" moderation on the officials is irksome) but we currently do have a rule saying we should stay "on topic" for whatever reason.

[Xaerve]

The reason I've left these boards several times is because of over-moderation. I enjoy talking to the people on here and generally having a good time. But posts are altered and deleted WAY too much. Its blatant censorship, quite often.

Thats not to say HN is a bad person, but I really don't ever see her budging on her stances. She kinda just does what she wants.

What I find more bothersome is the fact that she becomes so enthralled in several threads where she has no business discussing the material. She doesn't even play Gemstone, am I right?

As the above posters have mentioned, just let threads play out... its not the end of the world. If a conversation is going on and its not just random spamming or trolling, then whats the deal? Needless censorship.

[Jolena]

What I find more bothersome is the fact that she becomes so enthralled in several threads where she has no business discussing the material. She doesn't even play Gemstone, am I right?

Dumbest comment ever.

[Goretawn]

I think we are getting off topic. Let's tighten it up.

[Xaerve]

Dumbest comment ever.

No, its actually not. She weighs in on several threads related to specific situations that have occurred in gemstone and takes a side, quite often. I'm not going to cite sources, but thanks for the unnecessarily rude remark.

[Skirmisher]

No, its actually not. She weighs in on several threads related to specific situations that have occurred in gemstone and takes a side, quite often. I'm not going to cite sources, but thanks for the unnecessarily rude remark.

I have barely logged into GS at over the last couple years.

Don't expect to have me not chime in on GS topics.

[CrystalTears]

The problem is that it's no one's right to tell someone else what they can or can't have an opinion on something. Just because someone doesn't currently play Gemstone doesn't mean they still don't hold opinions for things that occur in the game, as for the most part, the game is the same. Leave that out of the equation for this current problem as it's not relevant.

[Jolena]

:yeahthat:

[Xaerve]

I agree CT. My only point was that she often does the exact thing that she is removing other posts for doing. I guess I wasn't clear. Best to just drop it, you're right.

[CrystalTears]

Well if your point is that admins and mods make off topic posts which are left behind, and then suddenly everyone else's off topic posts are deleted/moved, then that's a valid point to bring up.

I'm guilty of that myself, but then, I'm of the opinion that threads going on slight tangents are okay so it doesn't occur to me to enforce it. I really only focus on posts that either troll and have no bearing on the post or are in direct violation of a forum rule. I don't like deleting posts as it is.

[Fallen]

I'm guilty of that myself, but then, I'm of the opinion that threads going on slight tangents are okay so it doesn't occur to me to enforce it. I really only focus on posts that either troll and have no bearing on the post or are in direct violation of a forum rule. I don't like deleting posts as it is. >>

I dont think anyone would argue for the removal of posts which build upon a topic to a certain extent as to expound upon related issues. It is the moderators call to determine when exactly that off-topic line has been crossed. Each will likely rule differently.

[SpunGirl]

THE MODERATORS OF THE PC ARE THE ANTI-CHRIST(S) AND MUST BE STOPPED.

-K

[Skirmisher]

There is off topic and then there is OFF TOPIC!!!!

Come now, when people get into a sniping match or the like and are asked and then told to cut it out or things will be deleted then please don't bitch when they are in fact deleted. More innocuous off topic posts may well be left as the whole issue isn't made into another ego/flame fest.

Some people at times have difficulty distancing themselves from a topic and allowing them to discuss it without quickly bcoming ground to a halting painful trench warfare of insulting and totally irrelevant point and counter point flames.

[CrystalTears]

Some people at times have difficulty distancing themselves from a topic and allowing them to discuss it without quickly bcoming ground to a halting painful trench warfare of insulting and totally irrelevant point and counter point flames.
Which is why the politics folder was created. :D

[Skirmisher]

The joy.

[HarmNone]

The politics forum was created so that people could discuss politics without those discussions infecting other threads that were not politically related. In other words, to curtail off topic posting. It was not created so that some people could take constant pot-shots at other people whose beliefs don't sit well with them.

Skirmisher's earlier post (#25 in this thread) stated perfectly my feelings on this subject.

[Parkbandit]

You should use your feelings less and your head more when deciding when to moderate and when not to moderate. Your butcher job today and last week was unnecessary and more of a distraction than the homeless discussion in the armed forces thread.

[Xaerve]

The politics forum was created so that people could discuss politics without those discussions infecting other threads that were not politically related. In other words, to curtail off topic posting. It was not created so that some people could take constant pot-shots at other people whose beliefs don't sit well with them.

Skirmisher's earlier post (#25 in this thread) stated perfectly my feelings on this subject.

You're not directly addressing the issue at hand though. PB has made direct statements against your actions and you're not attempting to justify them. Did you really delete his thread because it wasn't 'creative' enough?, etc.

[Skirmisher]

You should use your feelings less and your head more when deciding when to moderate and when not to moderate. Your butcher job today and last week was unnecessary and more of a distraction than the homeless discussion in the armed forces thread.

PB, you don't see any irony when you and some others so very often use your feelings rather than your head when OMGPOSTINGTHINGSLIKETHISTOSHOWYOURCONTEMPTFOROTHER S, or when you are just plain flat out calling people names?

[HarmNone]

I don't justify myself because of comments made by Parkbandit, Xaerve. He knows perfectly well why that thread was deleted. It started with something that had already been deleted, and was posted to harass another member of these boards. My comment on being created was not to be taken literally. ;)

There is a section of TOS that precludes harassing another poster from thread to thread, which is exactly what Parkbandit was doing. Now, I could have awarded points. I did not. That decision is subject to change. FYI, I shall quote the section in question:

Hostile Posts

"Any member or group of members who persistently incite or provoke hostility towards other members are in violation of forum policy and subject to a violation increase of at least 1 and at most 15. This includes harassment, establishing a pattern of antagonism from thread to thread, and thread derailments of an insulting nature."

[CrystalTears]

Granted, Skirm has a point where the insults and such is unnecessary and should be dealt with. However the way the threads have been dealt with lately, which had nothing to do with insults and just a veering slightly off course in thread, I can see why they would be upset about it.

[Parkbandit]

PB, you don't see any irony when you and some others so very often use your feelings rather than your head when OMGPOSTINGTHINGSLIKETHISTOSHOWYOURCONTEMPTFOROTHER S, or when you are just plain flat out calling people names?


I'm not the administrator of the boards. THAT is a huge difference. I'm not held to such a standard, retard. :P

I'm just asking her to do her job consistently and to stop squelching conversations between people when it goes slightly off topic.

[Skirmisher]

I'm not the administrator of the boards. THAT is a huge difference. I'm not held to such a standard, retard. :P

I'm just asking her to do her job consistently and to stop squelching conversations between people when it goes slightly off topic.

So you want people to be better than you?

[Parkbandit]

I don't justify myself because of comments made by Parkbandit, Xaerve. He knows perfectly well why that thread was deleted. It started with something that had already been deleted, and was posted to harass another member of these boards. My comment on being created was not to be taken literally. ;)

There is a section of TOS that precludes harassing another poster from thread to thread, which is exactly what Parkbandit was doing. Now, I could have awarded points. I did not. That decision is subject to change. FYI, I shall quote the section in question:

Hostile Posts

"Any member or group of members who persistently incite or provoke hostility towards other members are in violation of forum policy and subject to a violation increase of at least 1 and at most 15. This includes harassment, establishing a pattern of antagonism from thread to thread, and thread derailments of an insulting nature."

Feel free to assign points Harmnone, my viewpoint of your over moderation will not change. You were wrong last week in your overzealousness (If this isn't a word, it should be) and you are wrong today. There was no reason for you to butt into that conversation and hack the shit out of the topic and you know it.

Be consistant in your moderation.

[Parkbandit]

So you want people to be better than you?

I simply want the administrator of this message board to do her job without going overboard. I don't think I'm asking for alot here.

[Back]

I simply want the administrator of this message board to do her job without going overboard. I don't think I'm asking for alot here.

POOR LITTLE PB JUST WANTS SOME HUGS! FREE PB!! DONT LET THE MAN KEEP YOU DOWN!!

YELL IT COMRADE!

[Parkbandit]

Finally.. someone understands me.

I knew I could count on you Backlash.

[Latrinsorm]

There's a balance to be struck between the following two points:
1) As Sean said, threads that evolve can leave people behind.
2) As Ganalon said, people are capable of remembering things for extended periods of time.

To come down with a battleaxe whenever the topic shifts implies that point 2 is false; I imagine this is where the disgust with such behavior comes from. Acting as if we (the posting population) are particularly idiotic children is not endearing behavior.

To suggest that re-orientation posts are the results of flamefests is a pretty transparent hustle. If protracted flaming is bad, it is bad regardless of whether or not it is on-topic.

Nobody wants free-for-all insults or free-for-all discussion. A post that is a response to an earlier post is ok. Just relax.

[Nieninque]

There's a balance to be struck between the following two points:
1) As Sean said, threads that evolve can leave people behind.

That would be true for a verbal discussion, but message boards have a "quote" feature and each post is saved as part of the discussion for people to come back to.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Nieninque
That would be true for a verbal discussion, but message boards have a "quote" feature and each post is saved as part of the discussion for people to come back to.

Thats true but it doesn't really work that way. If I goto Today's Posts and see a thread about Snapple and I think to myself hey i have something to add to this conversation/thread and then I open it read through it and by the time I get to the end the threads about Pepsi and I have nothing to add about Pepsi I'm more or less excluded from the conversation or have to attempt to reroute the conversation back to where it started. Refocusing the thread shouldn't be something a poster has to do it's something the moderators of that forum should do.

[Nieninque]

Thats true but it doesn't really work that way. If I goto Today's Posts and see a thread about Snapple and I think to myself hey i have something to add to this conversation/thread and then I open it read through it and by the time I get to the end the threads about Pepsi and I have nothing to add about Pepsi I'm more or less excluded from the conversation or have to attempt to reroute the conversation back to where it started. Refocusing the thread shouldn't be something a poster has to do it's something the moderators of that forum should do.

I guess, I tend to reply as I'm going through though. I dont really care if people have moved on a bit. I do sometimes get to the end and see that my point has already been made by someone else though. Such is life.

[Gan]

Thats true but it doesn't really work that way. If I goto Today's Posts and see a thread about Snapple and I think to myself hey i have something to add to this conversation/thread and then I open it read through it and by the time I get to the end the threads about Pepsi and I have nothing to add about Pepsi I'm more or less excluded from the conversation or have to attempt to reroute the conversation back to where it started. Refocusing the thread shouldn't be something a poster has to do it's something the moderators of that forum should do.

A lot depends on how active that thread was in relation to its latest post and when it was started. Sometimes I'm not able to view the boards during the day, and when I get home, a thread that was started in the morning may have been so popular that there are 3 pages of posts from inception to the time I view it, and I'm faced with the fact that the topic/conversation has evolved to into something totally different.

Because I wish to contribute, I'll quote the last relevant post, and add my input. If for some reason someone's already covered what I wanted to say then I can just reiterate/concur or STFU.

I dont think threads should be forced to remain in stasis on a single homogenic topic unless the topic being discussed doesnt merit any evolvement in discussion. So many factors are relevant to the survivability of a thread, and attempting to maintain purity of the topic for the benefit of those who are unfortunate enough not to review the boards during the day or with the capability of multitasking their thought process to follow multiple lines of conversation, is unrealistic.

Interestingly enough, the primary regulator of off-topic posts has been Harmnone, even above and beyond what would normally should be the responsibility of the actual first-line moderators of the actual threads. And now we even see some moderators concurring through actual posts, or through their silence, that the PC is experiencing a rash of over-moderation.

So as recourse what is left to do? Continue to post and deal with it (because its not a Democracy here) in hopes of the trend reversing itself. Or go post somewhere else.

Perhaps its time to check out that link that Bob was kind enough to contribute. Its always good to have options. Thanks Bob.

[Artha]

Am I the only one who reads multiple page posts from last to first?


And now we even see some moderators concurring through actual posts, or through their silence
Silence can mean lots of things, and moderators are super complex.

[StrayRogue]

I have no problem with threads evolving. However when they "devolve" to typical snipes from the likes of PB et al. I see a need to edit, cull or move them.

Obviously PB doesn't see a difference between constructive posting, and needless whining, flaming, whoring and +1 posting.

[Gan]

Am I the only one who reads multiple page posts from last to first?
I do too. Much like reading a magazine from back to front.



Silence can mean lots of things, and moderators are super complex.

MoDeRaToRs are HoOmAn tOo!

[CrystalTears]

I have no problem with threads evolving. However when they "devolve" to typical snipes from the likes of PB et al. I see a need to edit, cull or move them.

Obviously PB doesn't see a difference between constructive posting, and needless whining, flaming, whoring and +1 posting.
I agree with you that the sniping, name calling and insults need to be dealt with, as it can really get out of hand. However what they're debating now isn't what happened recently, it was just regular off topic posts that stemmed off one of the posts and were removed.

[Miss X]

Interestingly enough, the primary regulator of off-topic posts has been Harmnone, even above and beyond what would normally should be the responsibility of the actual first-line moderators of the actual threads. And now we even see some moderators concurring through actual posts, or through their silence, that the PC is experiencing a rash of over-moderation.



I'm one of the politics moderators and also a super mod, while I might not worry personally about all of the off topic posts (in general I believe in letting discussions flow), HarmNone, as the Administrator, is there to step in when needed. I don't have an issue with her going over my head and editing posts that I leave, because she's the boss and I'm not.

[Sean]

Sure it does, assuming we're talking about the same thing. TheE posted a situational analogy about a homeless individual to backup his point and it turned into "people choose to be homeless" "your stupid" "no your stupid" type sniping and lost track of the original thread intent which was a new draft proposal. Most of these posts remain in the thread (w/HN's warnings). If I want to discuss the pro/cons of reinstating the draft I shouldn't have to wade through the tangent thread topic about whose fault it is people are homeless.

That being said I do feel that it's up to the individual mods for each folder or a supermod to best determine when that point in a conversation occurs that a thread needs to be corrects. And without trying to attack anyone there are a fair share of mods asleep at the wheel or who have no responsibilities because they have almost non existant folder duties. I think it's the Admin's responsibilities to keep after those mods rather than correcting threads themselves. I'd support an action to remove folder mods, give all mods supermod abilities, and then remove the mods who do nothing and replace them with new mods who are actually interested in doing the job rather than just reading the CCH.

[CrystalTears]

Like I said, taking away the insults isn't what bothers me, and probably not the others. It was taking it ALL away.

[Gan]

I'm one of the politics moderators and also a super mod, while I might not worry personally about all of the off topic posts (in general I believe in letting discussions flow), HarmNone, as the Administrator, is there to step in when needed. I don't have an issue with her going over my head and editing posts that I leave, because she's the boss and I'm not.

While I understand your perspective, I wouldnt be as casual about it. To me it bespeaks of micromanagement or the impression that person with the higher authority thinks so little of your ability that he/she steps in and does the job themself. That leads me to ask, why do we have so many moderators if the only one actively moderating is HN? Or is it that the inactive moderators represent an opinion that differs from HN, as represented through the fact that there is more 'stepping in' by HN than by the other moderators?

:thinking:

[Miss X]

While I understand your perspective, I wouldnt be as casual about it. To me it bespeaks of micromanagement or the impression that person with the higher authority thinks so little of your ability that he/she steps in and does the job themself. That leads me to ask, why do we have so many moderators if the only one actively moderating is HN? Or is it that the inactive moderators represent an opinion that differs from HN, as represented through the fact that there is more 'stepping in' by HN than by the other moderators?

:thinking:

What I'm trying to say is... HarmNone is in charge. If I decide to leave a semi off topic post, that's my judgment as a moderator. If HN decides to over rule that and remove it, that's her prerogative as the administrator.

It's like with my job, if I decide to use Iodaflex on a wound and the Charge Nurse decides Promogran is better, I defer to his expertise and experience as well as authority, and use Promogran.

[Parkbandit]

I have no problem with threads evolving. However when they "devolve" to typical snipes from the likes of PB et al. I see a need to edit, cull or move them.

Obviously PB doesn't see a difference between constructive posting, and needless whining, flaming, whoring and +1 posting.

Seriously hypocrite.. you should stop there before you look even dumber.

[Gan]

It's like with my job, if I decide to use Iodaflex on a wound and the Charge Nurse decides Promogran is better, I defer to his expertise and experience as well as authority, and use Promogran.

In keeping with the analagy, and because I understand the nursing perspective, does this mean that your charge nurse is always 100% correct in their judgement of treatment over your own clinical judgement and practice?

As a patient I would be more at ease with a nursing supervisory staff that was comfortable enough with the competence of their staff nurses to let them carry out treatment and orders with the latitude to use their own clinical judgement than be treated by a staff that was having their supervisor dictate how every order was to be carried out.

As a poster on these boards, and one who participates in lively discussions and diverging threads (and off topic posts and the slinging of slurs), it makes me wonder why when a front line thread moderator lets something stand as written only to be later quashed by a moderator with a higher authority. And it really makes me wonder why it doesnt make you wonder when it happens with greater frequency.

[Sean of the Thread]

Like I said, taking away the insults isn't what bothers me, and probably not the others. It was taking it ALL away.


Agreed.

[Parkbandit]

What I'm trying to say is... HarmNone is in charge. If I decide to leave a semi off topic post, that's my judgment as a moderator. If HN decides to over rule that and remove it, that's her prerogative as the administrator.

It's like with my job, if I decide to use Iodaflex on a wound and the Charge Nurse decides Promogran is better, I defer to his expertise and experience as well as authority, and use Promogran.

You should teach her how to moderate then imo. I don't think anyone believes you are taking this far too seriously and doing it with no regard to being consistant.

[Sean of the Thread]

Miss X is a super mod! Not quite as super as Ilvane.. but super none the less!

[Miss X]

In keeping with the analagy, and because I understand the nursing perspective, does this mean that your charge nurse is always 100% correct in their judgement of treatment over your own clinical judgement and practice?

As a patient I would be more at ease with a nursing supervisory staff that was comfortable enough with the competence of their staff nurses to let them carry out treatment and orders with the latitude to use their own clinical judgment than be treated by a staff that was having their supervisor dictate how every order was to be carried out.

As a poster on these boards, and one who participates in lively discussions and diverging threads (and off topic posts and the slinging of slurs), it makes me wonder why when a front line thread moderator lets something stand as written only to be later quashed by a moderator with a higher authority. And it really makes me wonder why it doesn't make you wonder when it happens with greater frequency.

There's little point in wondering, if you are already aware wondering will not facilitate change. HN and Kranar can quash our (the rest of the moderating team) decisions because they're in charge. While I might not always agree or be happy about it, that's how things are. There has to be someone to take overall accountability. As it stands, I'm comfortable enough with HN to discuss any issues I have and she is quite willing to listen to any issues we bring up. I can assure you of that.

[Gan]

There's little point in wondering, if you are already aware wondering will not facilitate change. HN and Kranar can quash our (the rest of the moderating team) decisions because they're in charge. While I might not always agree or be happy about it, that's how things are. There has to be someone to take overall accountability. As it stands, I'm comfortable enough with HN to discuss any issues I have and she is quite willing to listen to any issues we bring up. I can assure you of that.

Then I can honestly say they chose wisely in making you a moderator for these boards.

And I can honestly say that now I'm glad I'm not a moderator here on the PC, because I'm not satisfied with the conditions under which I would be asked to volunteer my efforts.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<Perhaps its time to check out that link that Bob was kind enough to contribute. Its always good to have options. Thanks Bob.>>

Heh.

I actually could make a copycat PC in a couple minutes if people wanted one.

[Parkbandit]

<<Perhaps its time to check out that link that Bob was kind enough to contribute. Its always good to have options. Thanks Bob.>>

Heh.

I actually could make a copycat PC in a couple minutes if people wanted one.


While I disapprove of the way HN choses when and where to moderate.. I'm pretty sure your boards would be far worst.

No thanks.

[Snapp]

I'm one of the politics moderators and also a super mod, while I might not worry personally about all of the off topic posts (in general I believe in letting discussions flow), HarmNone, as the Administrator, is there to step in when needed. I don't have an issue with her going over my head and editing posts that I leave, because she's the boss and I'm not.

:yeahthat: (minus the supermod part)

Oh, and Bob please spare us on making another copycat PC. :weird:

[Bobmuhthol]

<<While I disapprove of the way HN choses when and where to moderate.. I'm pretty sure your boards would be far worst.>>

Yeah, I'd have to spend all my time editing posts because of shitty diction.

[Jazuela]

You should use your feelings less and your head more when deciding when to moderate and when not to moderate. Your butcher job today and last week was unnecessary and more of a distraction than the homeless discussion in the armed forces thread.

I am against the homeless in the armed forces.

That is all.

[Artha]

If they have a barracks, are they still homeless?

[Jazuela]

It depends on the type of barracks. Are they wood, or canvas? Is there plumbing or do they have to carry water from a well or a lake and boil it? I think these things are much more important than some silly arguement about fantasy game unofficial board moderators. I insist we not only change the topic, but stick with the off-topic as an off-topic, especially since this thread is entitled "Off-Topic Posts" which means we are doing our duty by the spirit and letter of TOS by sticking to the topic; which is, afterall, off-topic.

Off-topically,
Jaz

[HarmNone]

Like I said, taking away the insults isn't what bothers me, and probably not the others. It was taking it ALL away.

ALL wasn't taken away. The off-topic posts that were there before I asked that the thread return to topic are still there. Those few that followed my request were removed, exactly as I said they would be.

Those who wanted to discuss homelessness were welcomed to make a topic in which to discuss it. I figured the person who started the thread wanted to talk about the release of documents pertaining to the Holocaust. I still figure that.

[Ilvane]

I'm not sure what the big deal is about staying on topic. It just keeps things cohesive, and lets people talk about a certain subject, without veering off course incredibly into something totally different.

Why not want to have a thread about say for example "terrorism" be about that and not about whether or not Backlash is a hippie and hippies are the cause of the downfall of civilization?(Pure made up nonsense, of course, but it's for effect.)

Rather than argue and get all snippy, why not try and see the positive here?

Angela

[Sean of the Thread]

You shouldn't make assumptions (pretend to know all about our posters and posts) It's just funny to see the MAJORITY come out of the woodwork and agree now.. I doubt you're squirming in your chair with sanctimonious delight anymore.

You volunteered for a job.. do it right or find someone that will.




For fuck sakes the thought of you squirming in your chair made me ill.

[CrystalTears]

That being said I do feel that it's up to the individual mods for each folder or a supermod to best determine when that point in a conversation occurs that a thread needs to be corrects. And without trying to attack anyone there are a fair share of mods asleep at the wheel or who have no responsibilities because they have almost non existant folder duties. I think it's the Admin's responsibilities to keep after those mods rather than correcting threads themselves. I'd support an action to remove folder mods, give all mods supermod abilities, and then remove the mods who do nothing and replace them with new mods who are actually interested in doing the job rather than just reading the CCH.
:yeahthat:

[Ilvane]

I have nothing against getting more ability to edit posts, though I doubt many of you would enjoy if we were all able to do this at will.

Quite honestly, in my opinion, I think it's a good idea to have things stay on topic.

Angela

[Sean of the Thread]

I have nothing against getting more ability to edit posts, though I doubt many of you would enjoy if we were all able to do this at will.

Quite honestly, in my opinion, I think it's a good idea to have things stay on topic.

Angela

Finally a real mod with some advice.

[Parkbandit]

I have nothing against getting more ability to edit posts, though I doubt many of you would enjoy if we were all able to do this at will.

Quite honestly, in my opinion, I think it's a good idea to have things stay on topic.

Angela

While we never, ever agree on any political threads.. I've never once had an issue with you using your position to impose your will on any threads. I would trust you with any new 'powers' that would be granted to you and would hope you wouldn't use them the same way someone else has.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Ilvane
I have nothing against getting more ability to edit posts, though I doubt many of you would enjoy if we were all able to do this at will.

Quite honestly, in my opinion, I think it's a good idea to have things stay on topic.

Angela

I don't think this will happen. You were already a major thread mod (before you had yourself removed) and rarely edited/removed posts why would that change if you got the ability to edit posts in a major folder again?

Anyway I think all mods have the same abilities would also push them to be more inline with each other in terms of how they interpret the ToS.

[HarmNone]

I'll put it this way: I know Kranar has been to the boards, and I'm sure he's read your comments, including the poll in another thread.

TOS was written by Kranar to implement a system by which he wishes the boards to operate. If he feels that the system needs changing, he'll change it. If he feels I need to do things differently, I have all the faith in the world that he'll tell me so. He's never let me down in the past, and I don't expect him to do so now. If he feels I have interpreted TOS wrongly, he WILL tell me.

He's said countless times that there will never be consistency with regard to moderation on these boards. Personally, I wish there could be more, but I understand that it's probably not going to be possible. All of us don't think alike and, ultimately, Kranar is the one who will tell us if we're out of line with his vision for the boards.

If, indeed, I hear from Kranar that I have made an error, I'll be very happy to apologize to him, and all of you, and to change my way of thinking to better fit his vision. If he determines that TOS needs to be changed in some way, I'm quite sure he'll make the necessary changes and inform us of those changes.

[CrystalTears]

And this is what I don't get about a second admin. If you feel you have to run everything by Kranar, then you're just a super mod with some profile altering abilities. I just feel that you personally don't see anything wrong in how things are run, and I'd be okay if you just said that. Leaning on Kranar as an excuse to not adjust to what people would like to see is just disheartening to me.

[Sean of the Thread]

It's not the TOS thats the problem it's the lack of common sense. The only thing consistent has been your lack of consistency whilst moderating.

[Skirmisher]

I personally don't see anything wrong with how things are run.

[Gan]

I personally don't see anything wrong with how things are run.

That does not suprise me at all.

[Ilvane]

Let me clarify exactly where I stand, Sean..mainly because I think you misunderstood me a little.

I don't mind if a topic goes a bit off, just a little. When it goes far off and into a new topic, then it needs to either make a new thread, or stop.

It's really about making the boards more organized and cohesive.

Does that make sense?

Angela

[DeV]

Leaning on Kranar as an excuse to not adjust to what people would like to see is just disheartening to me.If I were Kranar I'd appreciate being informed of and okaying any major changes proposed for the boards. But that's just me.

[CrystalTears]

We're not talking about rehaul of how the boards are run. No one's saying to redo the TOS. No one's saying to not mod. Just saying that deciding that maybe there can be a little more consistancy in how things are modded doesn't need to go through a second party, does it?

[HarmNone]

And this is what I don't get about a second admin. If you feel you have to run everything by Kranar, then you're just a super mod with some profile altering abilities. I just feel that you personally don't see anything wrong in how things are run, and I'd be okay if you just said that. Leaning on Kranar as an excuse to not adjust to what people would like to see is just disheartening to me.


I don't see anything wrong in how things are run. That's a given, since I'm the one who deals with the posts, threads and forums, for the most part. There. I just said that.

Now, Kranar is the owner of the boards and the one who wrote TOS. These boards are his vision, not mine. As I see it, it would be highly disrespectful of Kranar, and the time and effort that he has put into these boards over the years, for me to simply ignore his wishes. I do what I think is right, but if Kranar wants it otherwise, and tells me he wants it otherwise, it will be otherwise. I give him that respect. If he wishes to adjust to what people would like to see on his boards, he will do so. I will not usurp his authority there. I will simply uphold what I believe TOS, as it currently stands, indicates he wants.

[Skirmisher]

That does not suprise me at all.

Gan, your opinions stopped surprising me long ago also.

[HarmNone]

If I were Kranar I'd appreciate being informed of and okaying any major changes proposed for the boards. But that's just me.


That's why I don't make major changes, DeV. It's not my place, as I see it.

[CrystalTears]

For the hundredth time, there is no request for a major overhaul of the boards.

But in any case, it's been decided. Nothing is going to change despite how several people feel. Great. That's all I wanted to know.

[HarmNone]

Okay then. Nothing is going to change despite how several people feel. Great. That's all I wanted to know.

I don't think we know that, CT. Kranar may decide to change things based on the poll that was taken. We'll have to wait and see.

[TheEschaton]

I think we have different ideas of what's going "off topic". Me bringing up an analogy of homelessness to support my ideas of the draft, and then having my critics try and shoot down the analogy, in support of THEIR idea of the draft, doesn't strike me as going off topic. It's simple logic: You shoot down the analogy, then the premise it was based on is wrong, or the analogy isn't good enough.

-TheE-

[Sean of the Thread]

WTF there is no need for an overhaul.. quite simply the masses have requested that HN be more consistent overall. It shouldn't take a court decision for HN to see the results and act accordingly.

[Gan]

Gan, your opinions stopped surprising me long ago also.

At least there's a level playing field of agreement then.

[Gan]

I think we have different ideas of what's going "off topic". Me bringing up an analogy of homelessness to support my ideas of the draft, and then having my critics try and shoot down the analogy, in support of THEIR idea of the draft, doesn't strike me as going off topic. It's simple logic: You shoot down the analogy, then the premise it was based on is wrong, or the analogy isn't good enough.

-TheE-

Ding Ding Ding

We have a winner. The frequency of having those refuting side arguments being declared as off topic has increased, somewhat drastically of late. Although if you go back and look, the trend is almost cyclic. For me personally it has been experienced from both HN and Skirm.

The whole premise of this uprising was to illustrate the unnecessarily over-moderation of posts with regards to side arguments that were still related to the original topic in addition to some evidence of selective moderation that could be (and is from my perspective) construed as favoritism.

From this point, it simply remains to be seen what Kranar's opinion will be. And if any changes in moderation behavior result from it.

Either way, we as generic posters, are powerless beyond the expression of our opinion, when that opinion is allowed to be expressed freely.

[Skirmisher]

We have a winner. The frequency of having those refuting side arguments being declared as off topic has increased, somewhat drastically of late. Although if you go back and look, the trend is almost cyclic. For me personally it has been experienced from both HN and Skirm.
.

That's because i'm out to get you Gan.

You've seen through my ploy damn you.

[Ilvane]

Off topic, off topic! :-P

Angela

[StrayRogue]

I'd be happy for all folders on the boards to be moderated to the same level as each other. This isn't going to happen though as some moderators just don't give a shit, aren't very professional, or are just never here. One person cannot read every post. Thats why they are divided between XXX amount of mods.

Saying that, I have no problem with problem posters (those known for generally going off topic, or starting flame wars) be "over-moderated".

[Gan]

That's because i'm out to get you Gan.

You've seen through my ploy damn you.

Thats not my impression at all. I just think you suck at moderating a bbs as well as sucking even worse at any form of customer service.

Thats all. Nothing personal.

[Sean of the Thread]

Saying that, I have no problem with problem posters (those known for generally going off topic, or starting flame wars) be "over-moderated".

Hello kettle.

[StrayRogue]

Huh? I think you'll find that a whole load of my posts have been moderated in my time here.

I seldom whine about it though, dickhead.