When bad threads rear their ugly head.

[devonin]

As happens in any forum anywhere on the internet, there will always be times when people start a thread in a place they shouldn't, or start a meaningless thread that adds nothing to -any- forum.

The standards of thread-making in CT are higher than elsewhere on the site, and so the number of threads that are outright pointless and irrelevant will be higher.

However, along with the higher standards of thread-making, there are also higher standards of posting. You aren't supposed to post in this forum unless you have something to contribute, something useful to add to the discussion at hand.

With that said, I've noticed all over this website a propensity, when someone posts an irellevant thread, to rush to get an equally meaningless, often flamey or trolly post "In before lock"

This is (to me anyway) just as bad as the poorly thought out thread in which you are posting. It inflates postcount with crap, it increases the number of totally useless posts clogging up the forum, the subforum, and the search parameters, and it just encourages return flaming, and generally just creates more annoying work for the moderators.

I move that in the exact same way that users who post in CT repeatedly without contributing or otherwise following the rules of the forum are warned and eventually punished, the people who jump on the IBL bandwagon and give attention to stupid pointless threads by adding in stupid pointless responses suffer the same fate.

[slipstrike0159]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

I honestly dont agree that they should receive the same level of punishment, but warnings and such should be put in place.

You know... now that i think about it, on the smashboards forum you have to be invited to their 'critical thinking' area and can only post there if you have special permissions. I think this is a great idea because outsiders can still read the discussions in here but to be able to contribute they have to prove that they are capable of making effective contributions to the thread. This would drastically reduce 'wrong section' threads and thoughtless posts from people who cant contribute.

How we would go about this beats me... maybe in a little while i will ask one of the mods at smashboards and find out.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

Even the smartest of people make mistakes and I don't think that moderaters should be able to invite us to critical thinking especially since some posts don't reflect how a person thinks overall. FFR is also a Dance Dance Revolution based program and I don't think that it's formal enough to have such restraints.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

With that said, I've noticed all over this website a propensity, when someone posts an irellevant thread, to rush to get an equally meaningless, often flamey or trolly post "In before lock"

This infuriates me to no end, and I make a note of it every time I see it. It's been banned on FFR before, too.

and generally just creates more annoying work for the moderators.

Reason #1 to not do this. An unhappy Guido is a banhappy Guido.

I move that in the exact same way that users who post in CT repeatedly without contributing or otherwise following the rules of the forum are warned and eventually punished, the people who jump on the IBL bandwagon and give attention to stupid pointless threads by adding in stupid pointless responses suffer the same fate.

You'll note that I banned six out of the nine people who posted in that thread.

@slipstrike: I can't count how many people made their starts on FFR in the CT forum (myself included); I wouldn't want to do something like that.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[slipstrike0159]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

Well then again in that forum i think there are more than one moderator for the CT place to handle specifically certain parts and thus creating less work for one individual. Also, i failed to mention that its not necessarily a basis of 'being invited' necessarily, its more like you send in a little essay or something showing your skills to effectively discuss points in a topic and explain why you would be productive to the threads having been accepted in. If whoever is reading this little application thing deems you would contribute by posting in here then they give you access.

I also think there is a way the made it so the person with the permission has temporary access until proven worthy to have permanent access, to weed out the people that would join and then immediately start spamming.

Dont forget to keep in mind that other members are allowed to read posts in the CT thread, they are just not able to post in it.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

I still don't like the system because it's too complicated for people to easily get accepted. People'll just lurk and not post, and then when a thread comes along where they have something really important to post, they'll have to wait a while to compose an essay, write it, submit it, have it evaluated, and then gain access. By that time, it could be off-topic.

Temporary access wouldn't be terrible, but I'm still fine with having the occasional bad post come around. Typically, someone'll make a stupid post and be on their way. We ignore them and life goes on. If one of those people posts in a similar manner again, they get a PM from me (or anyone else) telling them that they need to mend their ways. I'm fine with sending the rare PM as they come and day-or-two-banning the stupid FFR regulars who don't read the stickies.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[slipstrike0159]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

Eh... Its just a thought for all the people that desperately despise the amount of spamming and other dumb posts. Just to quickly clear something up though, it would only be like a couple paragraph essay so its nothing huge. I honestly think it would make things a lot more organized so indepth conversations can go on without threat of attracting the wrong type of publicity from other members. However, i can see how keeping it so everyone could post would be an advantage because it brings in fresh ideas from new people.

So, i dunno, its just a thought for when it gets too out of control.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

Well... another way to think about this is the way life is. Why would a cop want to kill a criminal? Wouldn't he want the money and joy of performing his duty to lock up a criminal? I think that a moderater would be lazy if there was just some test or way for people to be accepted in CT sections. Not that a moderater would get any cash rewards for banning spammers, but they have to be called moderaters for a reason you know.

[archbishopjabber]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

IN BEFORE LOCK!

Just kidding. I think you should lower anyone who attempts this blatant postwhoring's post count. The whole point is they want to raise the number of posts they have, so if you knock it down by 100 or 200 it would deter people from trying to raise it in that fashion.

[devonin]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

Um...I think you'll find that virtually every moderater of every forum (Well...except the crazy power-hungry ones who [imo] shouldn't be mods at all) would be -ecstatic- if the forum developed to a point where they were only ever needed to deal with the odd legitimate accidently misplaced post, and never had to deal with asshats, spammers, trollers and flamers.

I think the problem is actually worse than a lot of us think. I really do think sometimes, that it isn't that people -won't- properly crtically argue and discuss. I think what they do that makes us shake our heads and curse the education system -is- what they think critical thinking is.

I think we need to move copies of the grammar lesson sticky into CT, I think the 'logical fallacy and you' thread ought to be cleaned up and stickied, I think some stickies about how to properly form an arguement, how to provide evidence etc should be made.

I mean...yes, the people who are the biggest problem are the last people who will read and follow a sticky, but at least if the resources are there, the ones who -want- to be doing the right thing, but are screwed over by the fact that nobody is taught how to do this stuff anymore, will have that chance.

EDIT: Archbishopjabber sniped in with a -brilliant- idea. I mean, getting caught using secret arrows can get your level ranks 0'd out, excessive postwhoring should get your postcount nuked. I'm about 90% positive that VBZ style stuff has the ability for admin/mod types to directly access that info, and it would be a great way to punish the people who are obviously trying to inflate postcount.

[jamuko]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

That's an interesting idea, but is postcount really the only reason people post those things? I get the feeling it's not always about that, but also wanting to show off in a way by "calling it" before the lock happens... or that they just don't understand the standard of post that is required here. Or they get the impression that a thread might as well be a TGB one if it had no worth to begin with.

For people who post for those reasons, lowering postcount probably wouldn't be too much of a deterrent.


Edit:

Well... another way to think about this is the way life is. Why would a cop want to kill a criminal? Wouldn't he want the money and joy of performing his duty to lock up a criminal? I think that a moderater would be lazy if there was just some test or way for people to be accepted in CT sections. Not that a moderater would get any cash rewards for banning spammers, but they have to be called moderaters for a reason you know.

Sorry, but I hate this kind of reasoning. This is what makes people think it's okay to leave a mess and not clean up after themselves in a public place, because "that's what janitors are for". Just because someone is there to keep things in order doesn't mean that people are free to be irresponsible for their actions.

[slipstrike0159]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

Aside from that, it wouldnt make moderators lazy purely because if they used such a method they would have to go through many essays and grant access to those people. If anything it would be more work which is why more people would be assigned to sort through some of the peoples requests.
Besides, why do you want the moderators to be constantly doing something anyway? Its not like its a job... Why waste their free time with so many menial tasks?

[tsugomaru]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

Unfortunately for CT, this will not be possible. As long as it's kept open to everybody, people will post. I cannot possibly understand why some people would post a "wwhoze bettr, narto or ichigo?" in the CT forums, but it happens.

If we lock this forums, what about those who don't have a high post count? As mentioned, people lurk these forums and post only when they really, really want to say something.

I think our current approach to bad CTers is great and should be continued. A warning on the first offense, a ban on the next. I definitely got scared away from CT for a while when I received my first warning. But that's just my experience, some people will still be dumb or stubborn enough to continue posting spam in CT, but that's what that ban is for.

~Tsugomaru

[devonin]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

Makes me wish for a seperate "Report" button that, in CT goes directly to some log that any mod who wants to be a CT mod can freely access.

I feel bad using the report function for things that aren't explicitly spam, flames, or blatant trolling, because what is an unacceptable thread here can still follow all general forum rules, but still want locking/deleting, but at the same time, I feel bad sending a PM to Guido or Jewpin etc because I know they'll come across the thread eventually anyway.

[jewpinthethird]

Re: When bad threads rear their ugly head.

I understand what you are getting at, but CT is a forum that doesn't get that much traffic compared to some other forums on the site and in that sense, it is easy to moderate.

However, this thread smells a lot like some smart guy's way of opening a discussion that ultimately leads to someone getting modded.

I'm just throwing that out there. And I agree, I think CT needs another mod, kind of like how Squeek was mod of Media when it started growing.