When u bump a thread in CC...

[Arch0wl]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

Do you mind explaining how it could be better?

yes. I will give one example because I could write about 2000 words on what needs to be changed with FFR rules so to avoid overspending time I will just go with a sample

FFR rules do not distinguish by intent. at all. they are intent-blind. all sustainable/sensible legal systems factor intent into decisions.

note here I said "FFR rules", not "FFR mods". the rules should be written so that mods do not have to make this interpretative call. they should be unambiguous.

[Untimely Friction]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

problem here is post quality is ust really poor, what did you want to discuss exactly? This is literally ust a salty callout for not getting your way on not your website, kinda nonsense lol.

Edit: @ Arch you're writing 4000 words (Across a lot of bad threads) to ustify why you wont write 2000 words worth of suggestions, when if you stopped ustifying and ust did the thing STUFF MIGHT GET DONE WOAHHHHH, it's like you're wasting a massive ammount of time pointing out that you dont like things instead of suggesting the fixes, 10/10

[Arch0wl]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

* this has nothing to do with my website, I have no idea where you got that from

* I'm responding to two threads with similar but different content, not "a lot"

* suggestion of fixes has problem I just mentioned. I don't want to rewrite rules if they're open to like, one thing. that's 5 hours I could have spent doing something.

[MixMasterLar]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

So wait, I think you're talking about alot more rule changes then you did in previously attempts to do so.

Posting rules really do not need to be updated, as they can easily be ignored until the circumstance that the rule smooths out actually occurs (Examples: bumping old threads when traffic is high; double posting when so many people are trying to respond; off topic post in a otherwise very serious thread; quoting giant walls of text just to write "QFT" under it, etc). It'll be nice to do for professionalism's sake, but not really needed.

Now the issue of mods taking rules more serious then they probably deserve with our all time low low traffic? I'm down to having that conversation although I kind of feel like nothing too sinister really happens around here.

[Hakulyte]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

Prepare for it to get locked even if it has the potential for discussion.

No but srsly whoevers modding this shit needs a harsh introduction

Your thread is pointless if you don't provide more in-depth explanation about what you mean.

you don't need a master's in mathematics or philosophy to write professional papers in mathematics or philosophy

nonetheless, good luck otherwise.

if I suggest rules, here is what will happen:

1. admins look at list
2. admins discuss list
3. admins adopt like 5-10% of things
4. admins go back to business as usual

being an admin for a day makes the whole package need to be accepted at once

while they could certainly reverse the rule changes I made as admin too, this:

1. makes them change something actively instead of rejecting something passively
2. behavioral econ / social psych shows they are less likely to do this unless the rule is just obviously bad, so the only changes they do make will be the substantial ones

That's kind of how things were back in 2008, staff changed, things evolved, the site is moving in a different direction.

If I was you, I would use this as an opportunity to contribute and see if anything positive can be done about it.

yes. I will give one example because I could write about 2000 words on what needs to be changed with FFR rules so to avoid overspending time I will just go with a sample

FFR rules do not distinguish by intent. at all. they are intent-blind. all sustainable/sensible legal systems factor intent into decisions.

note here I said "FFR rules", not "FFR mods". the rules should be written so that mods do not have to make this interpretative call. they should be unambiguous.

I agree with you once again, but the way you've been posting lately has been in direct contradiction with what you're currently preaching for in this example. You're unlikely to get admin status if you don't follow your own logic on how things should be.

Are you interested to care enough to provide more information about how you think things should work? I know it sounds silly, but if you're hoping for a change about something, you really have to sit down and write up an essay if you want to get feedback and things implemented. We can't fix problems if we don't know what's wrong in the first place.

I believe it's worth the time if you really care.

[Untimely Friction]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

Now the issue of mods taking rules more serious then they probably deserve with our all time low low traffic? I'm down to having that conversation although I kind of feel like nothing too sinister really happens around here.

I'd say recent(Edit: Recent as in last week or two) thread quality from some people (I couldnt list names I've ust noticed what feels like tgb leaking) has been pretty troll and been meant to push mods buttons, which in turn kinda prompts a like response.

[MixMasterLar]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

what feels like tgb leaking

It does get lonely in the bin sometimes.

On a serious note I don't see that big of an issue with the baiters or the biters if that's what it really boils down to. Some old users having a goof because the site is mostly contained to the same lot of us 24/7 and mods just kind of doing mod stuff by stopping old users having a goof.

But again I have not really been around here so that's assuming I understand all this correctly.

[Arch0wl]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

I do care

do I care enough to override the other shit I care about to do this, without any idea of how my efforts will go

no I do not, other shit beasts

sorry FFR

I love you but you're like a cousin I talk to every 3 years

I'll give you a ride to the airport but only if I know you're actually waking up for your flight

etc

[Hakulyte]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

It does get lonely in the bin sometimes.

On a serious note I don't see that big of an issue with the baiters or the biters if that's what it really boils down to. Some old users having a goof because the site is mostly contained to the same lot of us 24/7 and mods just kind of doing mod stuff by stopping old users having a goof.

But again I have not really been around here so that's assuming I understand all this correctly.

I see a problem with baiters actually.

Normally, when you bait, it's for a reason.

If you're purely baiting for baiting, you should technically get in trouble with mods.
If there's an hidden message behind your baiting, you should try to be clear about it or you're doing it wrong.

I support drama over technicalities, but I don't support drama over users or staff.

If you want to attack, you need to attack the argument, not the person.

tl;dr: Baiting "is" a problem.

I do care

I do not

Well, I got my answer.

That sucks because I know you have the potential to do great things when you put your mind into it.

I guess that's it for this thread.

Thanks for trying. \o

[MixMasterLar]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

I see a problem with baiters actually.

Normally, when you bait, it's for a reason.

If you're purely baiting for baiting, you should technically get in trouble with mods.
If there's an hidden message behind your baiting, you should try to be clear about it or you're doing it wrong.

I support drama over technicalities, but I don't support drama over users or staff.

If you want to attack, you need to attack the argument, not the person.

Just glancing at the first page, it seems that the only one really going after the mods personally (Or as personally as you can get while referring to them as mods) is Top, and I mean he's making his case pretty clear.

Still the way the bolded quote is worded makes me wonder if there's a subtext I am missing, like if there really have been personal attacks that go further then "The way the site is managed does not sit well with me". Would you link me some choice examples of posters crossing the line from light site trolling to potential harmful?

[devonin]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

FFR rules do not distinguish by intent. at all. they are intent-blind. all sustainable/sensible legal systems factor intent into decisions.

The two main problems with having intent be a strong enough factor to make the difference between an edit or not and a delete or not are:

1/ It's real easy to just claim passive intent after the fact to avoid getting in trouble

2/ If you do something that would generally be against the rules, but your intent was something justifiable (They knew I was joking, I was just making a point, I only stole that bread because my family is starving) you know it, the mod knows it, but the new user coming in after the fact seeing it goes 'oh this just must be how it is'

A lot of what seems like being completely intent-blind is also about curating the appearance of the community to outsiders who don't know which people are buds who just like to smack talk, and which people are assholes being allowed to be assholes.

[Hakulyte]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

This is why content and intents are both important.

You can't have one without the other.

[MixMasterLar]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

A lot of what seems like being completely intent-blind is also about curating the appearance of the community to outsiders who don't know which people are buds who just like to smack talk, and which people are assholes being allowed to be assholes.

To follow up on this line of thought, I guess that was one of the big reasons why the OG TGB was a popular hangout and a very good addition to the forums, as the rules where more relaxed and people could smack talk all day long in there---getting rid of the need to feel tempted to break the rules.



....Well, for that and to troll people who stumbled in.

[devonin]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

This is something I have to consider a lot now that I own my own retail business that fosters a great deal of community and has large group events.

On the one hand, if two buddies are the only people in the store, and they are playing Magic and one says to the other "Man that card is so retarded, it just rapes me!" my inclination is to enforce the rules of behavior of my store where that kind of language is not acceptable.

If I allow intent and the particulars of that individual situation to influence how I react (Say, I go 'well it's just them here, his buddy laughed and they obviously don't mean any actual insult or offense to anybody') and let it slide, if I later -do- tell them they can't act that way when they do it in front of other people, they are pretty justified in protesting because they did it before and I didn't say anything.

To go a step further, if I -keep- letting it slide because I know they are just joking and don't mean anything malicious by it, when they DO do it in front of other customers who -do- get upset or uncomfortable or offended by it, and I don't do anything, they are not able to tell the difference between "He's letting it slide because he knows those two, and thinks they don't mean any harm by it" and "He thinks this is perfectly okay, and this is the kind of place this is" and they are pretty likely to leave and not come back.

To follow up on this line of thought, I guess that was one of the big reasons why the OG TGB was a popular hangout and a very good addition to the forums, as the rules where more relaxed and people could smack talk all day long in there---getting rid of the need to feel tempted to break the rules..

I know when the standing ruleset for TGB was one I wrote, a bunch of rules -were- relaxed in TGB that the current rules seem to not relax (inasmuch as V's rules are actual rules) and there's really no reason I can think of that they shouldn't still be relaxed. It's a closed forum.

[Arch0wl]

Re: When u bump a thread in CC...

1/ It's real easy to just claim passive intent after the fact to avoid getting in trouble

2/ If you do something that would generally be against the rules, but your intent was something justifiable (They knew I was joking, I was just making a point, I only stole that bread because my family is starving) you know it, the mod knows it, but the new user coming in after the fact seeing it goes 'oh this just must be how it is'

#1 seems like it would be an issue but it's not.

you'd think it would be, because this is a textual forum so it's more ambiguous.

in actuality, in a workplace setting I've found I can stretch the limits of speech codes far more due to the varying tones I can put on messages. (don't feel bad; this was a customer service job that had me lying every 30 seconds or less as an occupational requirement.) and in cases like these you can deny a conversation ever happened -- at least here you have a record of it.

I was able to get people to obey an intent rule on a pretty controversial reddit forum, so it can be done.

#2 is a possibility but if they internalize that into breaking a rule just business-as-usual and enforce the rule in their case.