How much fun is "too much" for these forums?

[Beerdude26]

I completely concur, Darkside

 

[99.vikram]

An Appeal to the Mods (please read)

I'd like to tell you all the story of how I joined here. I found this site six months after HL2 released because I wanted to try out some tweaks to the game. And I would have forgotten about this site right then if I hadn't come across one of these "spammy" threads, and I forget the people involved in it but I think AL was there. This was one of the first forums that actually kept me coming back, albeit as a lurker. Of course, two years later I finally joined when I had a lot of free time on my hands, and I remember being excited at becoming part of a close knit group because HL fans are rare in this part of the world.

I didn't join this forum for the deep meaningful debate about religion or war. That's just a bonus. I joined to talk about the little things, topics which make the message boards look lively every day. And then these topics started disappearing little by little. I remember lurking threads that were 20-30 pages long (and they were never closed). Are any of the new threads that long? (Not incl. the spam zones like Image Dump and such) Almost all the new threads get locked by the 6th or 7th page. But if there are really more interesting topics out there, we'll find them ourselves. After each thread has been derailed or rendered defunct, it will sink slowly and let new topics rise to the surface. But closing threads because they might become spamfests leaves us with a lack of interesting threads to post in, till we are left checking the politics section 4 times an hour (yes, I really do that :O). WE NEED THE FILLER.

And please, please don't infraction us for posting memes - they will die of their own accord. Thx.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Oh look. The yearly thread about how the mods are too strict, the forums are going to hell. They're just not as good as they where when <insert old forum member's name> was still around.
Evil, nasty moderators.

Of course, the majority of locked threads, infractions comes from posts that other people have reported. Ones that other people have found to be offensive. Or unnecessary spam. But hey, don't let that get in the way of your righteous rant against the oppressive system. Fight the power! Stick it to the man!

Or, you know, just use your ****ing common sense and don't post things that you think might be OTT, or offensive.

Funny how everyone knows how to run things so much better.

This is how we, the people that run the site like it. We're generally pretty hands-off in the Lounge area, certainly more than we used to be. We don't want or need a spam forum. If you feel unable to control those urges, seek professional assistance.

Remember kids - there's no such thing as free speech on a privately-run site.

Spam supposedly :|

It was spam. It was a genuine post from someone requesting technical assistance. Was your post helpful? Was it on-topic? Or was it a puerile and stupid attempt at humour?

 

[Raziaar]

Double posting... Banned.

 

[Beerdude26]

Remember kids - there's no such thing as free speech on a privately-run site.

But I do wonder what would happen to this privately-run site if there are no more free-thinking individuals on it.

 

[99.vikram]

In b4 'posting here is a privilege not a right', 'go somewhere else if you don't like it' etc.

Wiser words were never said. :upstare:

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

I'd say it was pretty obvious what would happen. It's not really relevant, though. Many times, people have requested a spam forum. It's been denied each time because we don't want one. People who can't live without one aren't necessarily the kind of people we want on the forums.

 

[Asknoone]

Oh look. The yearly thread about how the mods are too strict, the forums are going to hell. They're just not as good as they where when <insert old forum member's name> was still around.
Evil, nasty moderators.

Of course, the majority of locked threads, infractions comes from posts that other people have reported. Ones that other people have found to be offensive. Or unnecessary spam. But hey, don't let that get in the way of your righteous rant against the oppressive system. Fight the power! Stick it to the man!

Or, you know, just use your ****ing common sense and don't post things that you think might be OTT, or offensive.

Funny how everyone knows how to run things so much better.

This is how we, the people that run the site like it. We're generally pretty hands-off in the Lounge area, certainly more than we used to be. We don't want or need a spam forum. If you feel unable to control those urges, seek professional assistance.

Remember kids - there's no such thing as free speech on a privately-run site.



It was spam. It was a genuine post from someone requesting technical assistance. Was your post helpful? Was it on-topic? Or was it a puerile and stupid attempt at humour?

This.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Wiser words were never said. :upstare:

Except, if you note, I didn't say either of those things. Also, don't paraphrase me and put words in my mouth. Thanks.

 

[k3ithrm]

i agree with pi mu rho.. but did the thread really have to be deleted? i wouldn't mind if it was just locked.

 

[Asknoone]

Incidentally, I haven't a clue what the “Avatar” thread is.

 

[Raziaar]

Incidentally, I haven't a clue what the ?Avatar? thread is.

Because it was deleted.

To be fair, I don't know what the avatar thread is either.

Because it was deleted.

Unless I somehow posted in it, in which case I probably knew.

 

[kriztov]

Wiser words were never said. :upstare:

What about the Manamanah song? Those words were pretty wise. They touched me in a way that no other song has *Tear*

ANWYAYS

But I do wonder what would happen to this privately-run site if there are no more free-thinking individuals on it.

Orchestrating a mass exodus is out of the question, it cannot happen becuase people dont listen to one another.

Still, my suggestion of a spam board wasnt really to entail the idea of a board devoted to spam, more of a board where people can let off steam. So that they can continue to make intelligent posts in other threads.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Except it would just be a forum where people would post spam and other assorted shite. Constantly.

 

[kriztov]

So? You can set the forum to prune the board every 12 hours, keep post count off. Then the threads in there wont last any longer than a few hours anyway. It just depends on how you set it up.

 

[Asknoone]

It's not happening - end of story.

 

[Darkside55]

Nobody's asking for a spam forum--well, perhaps two or three people have said it in this thread, but that's not what anyone's asking for.

Neither is the point of this thread to villify the moderators, so you can cut that canned sarcasm out.

Nor are we even discussing the posts that're reported by actual members. We're talking about threads that members are enjoying, that no one has a problem with--but they get closed.

It was spam. It was a genuine post from someone requesting technical assistance. Was your post helpful? Was it on-topic? Or was it a puerile and stupid attempt at humour?

Heavens, an attempt at humor. INFRACTION. He even went on to help the guy; really, is that how we want to be? So strict that even a toe out of line results in punishment?

Really, the point of moderators and staff is to regulate and facilitate, not to come down hard on someone because he made a joke.

Also, one thing I really hate is that damned, "this is how we want it, if you don't like it too bad" attitude. This site wouldn't be ANYTHING without its members. Yeah, it's true, it's a private site, it can be run any way the operators see fit, but wouldn't you rather work with your members? That's the point of having a site for discussion, that's the point of being staff and having the power to actually DO SOMETHING for the people who use and enjoy the site. To say, "this is how we do things" and cut it, that strikes me as being rather pureile.

 

[Pulse]

emember kids - there's no such thing as free speech on a privately-run site.

In after, etc.

It was spam. It was a genuine post from someone requesting technical assistance. Was your post helpful? Was it on-topic? Or was it a puerile and stupid attempt at humour?

I went on to help him alleviate his problem. Scroll down next time if it doesn't interfere with your hectic schedule too much.

 

[Raziaar]

This site wouldn't be ANYTHING without its members.

This is very true. We make this site what it is. And we're all damned proud of it or ashamed, as the case may be.

 

[Cormeh]

Members populate the forums. The site itself could run without any of us.

 

[kriztov]

Plus, we're not the only ones on the internet. There will be more members with or without us.

 

[Raziaar]

Plus, we're not the only ones on the internet. There will be more members with or without us.

Arguably, no other members will be as great for these forums as many of us are.

 

[repiV]

Noone would ever find it acceptable for a party host to interfere in everyone's conversations and tell them what to do, just because the party is in their home.
In the same vein, I don't see how it being a private site excuses moderators telling people what to do for no apparent reason.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Nobody's asking for a spam forum--well, perhaps two or three people have said it in this thread, but that's not what anyone's asking for.

Apart from the people asking for one...

Neither is the point of this thread to villify the moderators, so you can cut that canned sarcasm out.

Apart from the people vilifying the moderators...

Nor are we even discussing the posts that're reported by actual members. We're talking about threads that members are enjoying, that no one has a problem with--but they get closed.

So we only get to discuss things within your narrow parameters?
Some threads get closed. A small number. As of now, I can see numerous multi-page active topics in the Lounge, and one deleted one (which is still on the first page).

Heavens, an attempt at humor. INFRACTION. He even went on to help the guy; really, is that how we want to be? So strict that even a toe out of line results in punishment?

Sorry? I thought we weren't discussing these?

Really, the point of moderators and staff is to regulate and facilitate, not to come down hard on someone because he made a joke.

Good job you're here to remind us, or I fear we may have forgotten totally. It's more than likely that the post in question was reported by one of the happy bunch in this thread.
The whole point of the Lounge is to keep the off-topic stuff in one place. We'd rather not have it spreading out across the whole forum.

Also, one thing I really hate is that damned, "this is how we want it, if you don't like it too bad" attitude. This site wouldn't be ANYTHING without its members. Yeah, it's true, it's a private site, it can be run any way the operators see fit, but wouldn't you rather work with your members? That's the point of having a site for discussion, that's the point of being staff and having the power to actually DO SOMETHING for the people who use and enjoy the site. To say, "this is how we do things" and cut it, that strikes me as being rather pureile.

Such is life, I'm afraid. This isn't a democracy. Also, given the actual ratio of deleted to active threads in the Lounge, you were never really onto a winning argument anyway. As I've said previously, the moderators are pretty hands-off in the Lounge. You're going to have to accept, however, that some threads nudge the boundaries and get closed/deleted. There's certainly no way on earth we're going to allow all threads to continue regardless because, hey, it's the Lounge.

 

[kriztov]

Arguably, no other members will be as great for these forums as many of us are.

Yes, but it is easy to be forgotten. Like it or not, no footprint is permanent, especially on the internet.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Noone would ever find it acceptable for a party host to interfere in everyone's conversations and tell them what to do, just because the party is in their home.
In the same vein, I don't see how it being a private site excuses moderators telling people what to do for no apparent reason.

Because it's a website and forum, not a party. Do you often attend parties that require you to agree to a list of rules before you can enter. Do you often attend parties that have specific topical areas of conversation with people specifically tasked to look over those sections? Your analogy doesn't work.
Also, we don't "tell people what to do for no apparent reason".

 

[Asknoone]

This is a pretty damn lenient, fair and well moderated forum. We're not going to change what we've been doing because some people feel the need to lower the bar; it's there, and it's staying, whether you like it or not. That's a decision that we, as the staff body, have made. And if you don't like it, then it really is too bad.

 

[Raziaar]

It is too lenient. There have been countless times I probably should have gotten an infraction, but remain infraction-less.

Don't use this as a reason to give me an infraction though, because stupid infractions don't count.

 

[repiV]

Because it's a website and forum, not a party. Do you often attend parties that require you to agree to a list of rules before you can enter. Do you often attend parties that have specific topical areas of conversation with people specifically tasked to look over those sections? Your analogy doesn't work.

It works because your point is that the people in charge have the right to do what they want, so long as it's not a democracy.
The same logic applies to parties, or pretty much any other situation where a group is brought together for one purpose or another. But noone would stand for being micro-managed to the degree found on the internet in a real life situation. And the people doing the micro-managing wouldn't be popular for very long.

Also, we don't "tell people what to do for no apparent reason".

I don't see why there's ever a reason to close threads. An open thread does nobody any harm - if the thread doesn't deserve to stick around, then noone will post in it and it will disappear. If it's a popular thread then obviously it deserves to be open otherwise noone would be posting in it. If you don't want to read it, noone's forcing you to either.
Closing a popular thread is just telling people how to behave because you think you know what's best for them, and apparently they don't.

 

[99.vikram]

Here's one post of mine you might have missed, Pi (can I call you that?)

An Appeal to the Mods (please read)

I found this site six months after HL2 released because I wanted to try out some tweaks to the game. And I would have forgotten about this site right then if I hadn't come across one of these "spammy" threads, and I forget the people involved in it but I think AL was there. This was one of the first forums that actually kept me coming back, albeit as a lurker. Of course, two years later I finally joined when I had a lot of free time on my hands, and I remember being excited at becoming part of a close knit group because HL fans are rare in this part of the world.

I didn't join this forum for the deep meaningful debate about religion or war. That's just a bonus. I joined to talk about the little things, topics which make the message boards look lively every day. And then these topics started disappearing little by little. I remember lurking threads that were 20-30 pages long (and they were never closed). Are any of the new threads that long? (Not incl. the spam zones like Image Dump and such) Almost all the new threads get locked by the 6th or 7th page. But if there are really more interesting topics out there, we'll find them ourselves. After each thread has been derailed or rendered defunct, it will sink slowly and let new topics rise to the surface. But closing threads because they might become spamfests leaves us with a lack of interesting threads to post in, till we are left checking the politics section 4 times an hour (yes, I really do that ). WE NEED THE FILLER.

And please, please don't infraction us for posting memes - they will die of their own accord.

I hope you can put down the sarcasm baton for just a minute to read through this.

 

[Solaris]

On the whole I like how this forum is generated. Good job

What I would love though is tougher moderation in politics.

For example, a recent thread of mine was immediately met with spam and stupid comments and the thread was closed. No constructive discussion could take place becuase of these people. If people are going to wreck a thread like that they should get heavy infractions, perhaps they did, who knows.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

I don't see why there's ever a reason to close threads. An open thread does nobody any harm - if the thread doesn't deserve to stick around, then noone will post in it and it will disappear. If it's a popular thread then obviously it deserves to be open otherwise noone would be posting in it.
Closing a popular thread is just telling people how to behave because you think you know what's best for them, and apparently they don't.

Just because you don't see a reason, doesn't mean there isn't one.

Threads get closed generally because they breach the rules. Popularity doesn't trump that.
You apparently have no liking for rules or authority. Which is fine - those are your opinions which you are entitled to. It's worth jack shit when it comes to running a forum, however.

 

[Pesmerga]

I fully condone / support CP.

What?!?!




Me too :ssh:

I don't see a problem with the Lounge atm. I've pushed the envelope as far as rules go several times, and have received only mild warnings. I think the staff is pretty softcore.

 

[Asknoone]

What I would love though is tougher moderation in politics.

I think moderating a Political board is no easy task. You might argue that there should be no moderation; after all what is politics without some mud-throwing and cursing, right? That is probably the whole basis of having a Political based board, so we can regulate those kinds of discussions and let them take their own course. We really only step in when people start threatening to run each other down with double-decker bus's. But then there's the example you mentioned, and threads being de-railed by a bastion of stupidity with wheels...which happens outside of Politics a fair chunk of the time.

See how tricky this moderating business is? You can churn out your "omg dese forumz are like anti-fun" threads, and think somehow you could obviously do it oh so much better, but really, you probably couldn't.

 

[Darkside55]

Apart from the people asking for one...

Apart from the people vilifying the moderators...

The spam forum isn't a popular idea anyway; like I said, two people.

And I didn't intend that people villify the moderators, but with some of the issues brought up I think you can see that it's not entirely without basis. But that's really beyond the point of the thread.

So we only get to discuss things within your narrow parameters?

Absolutely not. In fact that's exactly what I'm against.

Good job you're here to remind us, or I fear we may have forgotten totally. It's more than likely that the post in question was reported by one of the happy bunch in this thread.
The whole point of the Lounge is to keep the off-topic stuff in one place. We'd rather not have it spreading out across the whole forum.

Such is life, I'm afraid. This isn't a democracy. Also, given the actual ratio of deleted to active threads in the Lounge, you were never really onto a winning argument anyway. As I've said previously, the moderators are pretty hands-off in the Lounge. You're going to have to accept, however, that some threads nudge the boundaries and get closed/deleted. There's certainly no way on earth we're going to allow all threads to continue regardless because, hey, it's the Lounge.

The thread that really brought this all up was contained in one place, it wasn't reported--I check the reports first thing, all the time, in the staff forum. Even though I can't do anything about reported posts, they're the FIRST thing I check when I log onto the site, just to make note of the members' complaints and see if there's something I can do. So it wasn't reported. It was closed because it had been defined as spam.

And really, what you said in that second paragraph, "some threads nudge the boundaries," what I've been calling for this whole time is to define the boundaries. What's acceptable? What isn't? WHY isn't it? That's what I want us to look at. That's what I want us to come to a compromise on. How was that thread pushing the boundaries? Why is someone's joke thread not accepted? Why is someone's post infractioned? None of it's clearly defined.

See how tricky this moderating business is? You can churn out your ?omg dese forumz are like anti-fun? threads, and think somehow you could obviously do it oh so much better, but really, you probably couldn't.

I can't say for politics, but it's not as hard as you make it sound either bro. Having had experience the past ten years moderating a forum with a couple hundred members myself, it really isn't. Things generally tend to balance themselves out, and we have a grand community here. Like I said, the Lounge could probably moderate itself.

 

[repiV]

Just because you don't see a reason, doesn't mean there isn't one.

Threads get closed generally because they breach the rules. Popularity doesn't trump that.
You apparently have no liking for rules or authority. Which is fine - those are your opinions which you are entitled to. It's worth jack shit when it comes to running a forum, however.

You're right, because rules cease being useful and start being oppressive the moment they start being justified by themselves - "because that's what the rules say". The Founding Fathers of the USA are revered historical figures precisely because they sought to create a society with rights instead of rules.
I was staff of a large IRC network for five years, and I was in charge of the user support operation for two of those. I know that being "hands-off" is by far the most effective approach from extensive personal experience. It also builds trust and respect.
I'm not just criticising from nowhere.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

The thread that really brought this all up was contained in one place, it wasn't reported--I check the reports first thing, all the time, in the staff forum. Even though I can't do anything about reported posts, they're the FIRST thing I check when I log onto the site, just to make note of the members' complaints and see if there's something I can do. So it wasn't reported. It was closed because it had been defined as spam.

And really, what you said in that second paragraph, "some threads nudge the boundaries," what I've been calling for this whole time is to define the boundaries. What's acceptable? What isn't? WHY isn't it? That's what I want us to look at. That's what I want us to come to a compromise on. How was that thread pushing the boundaries? Why is someone's joke thread not accepted? Why is someone's post infractioned? None of it's clearly defined.

That's because you can't define the boundaries. You absolutely can not legislate for every single possible case. Hence the need for moderators, that can make the grey area decisions.

I can't say for politics, but it's not as hard as you make it sound either bro. Having had experience the past ten years moderating a forum with a couple hundred members myself, it really isn't. Things generally tend to balance themselves out, and we have a grand community here. Like I said, the Lounge could probably moderate itself.

No, it really couldn't.

You're right, because rules cease being useful and start being oppressive the moment they start being justified by themselves - "because that's what the rules say". The Founding Fathers of the USA are revered historical figures precisely because they sought to create a society with rights instead of rules.
I was staff of a large IRC network for five years, and I was in charge of the user support operation for two of those. I know that being "hands-off" is by far the most effective approach from extensive personal experience. It also builds trust and respect.
I'm not just criticising from nowhere.

And my experience doesn't come from nowhere either. I know that being "hands-off" is generally a recipe for disaster. So it comes down to a difference of opinion, nothing more.

 

[Darkside55]

But it does regulate itself, most of the time. At least in the sense that threads people don't like will fall by the wayside and get pruned, threads that've outlived their usefulness.

And if you can't completely draw a line for the boundaries, they could at least be defined better than they are. If moderators have to make gray area decisions, what was the decision behind getting rid of the avatar thread? Seriously, what made it spam?

 

[Asknoone]

You can't define boundaries; we let the moderators use their discretion. Glenn (Chief Editor), locked the Avatar thread. It's his call on what is spam and what isn't. You can't expect clear definition.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

That's not self-regulation, that's threads dying through lack of interest. Threads that contained objectionable or offensive content would likely get more popular, not less.

Glenn deleted the thread - you'd have to ask him about his reasoning.