The Round Table (Rational Pagans Forum)

Science & The Supernatural: A Discussion of the World Around us - Based on Science with an Interest in the Supernatural ...
It is currently 04 Aug 2020, 18:09

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Forum rules


Please note: Discussion here should be relatively civil. Attack the post, not the poster. Thanks!



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: 25 Apr 2010, 19:38 
Offline
Grand High Lord Admiral of Hell
User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2007, 13:14
Posts: 5726
Location: Buffalo, NY
:director: Derail moved from Forum Administration Philosophies ...

_________________
If you can't stand the heat, don't tickle the dragon ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Apr 2010, 01:48 
Offline
The Power to Scry
User avatar

Joined: 05 Dec 2009, 05:45
Posts: 803
Location: My house
Hex wrote:
:director: Derail moved from Forum Administration Philosophies ...


It wasn't a derail as we were discussing Ipetrich's ability to moderate but wise decision, although why this belongs in a forum about ethics is beyond me but there you go. We decided given the general standard or lack of it of forum moderation, that lying hypocrites (see previous examples of moderation on various boards), who pretend they are wonderful and are incapable of admitting they are only human and can make mistakes - given the general uselessness and sheer lack of any discernible standards - were perfect mod material. And that the best way to improve forums and boards in general would be to make mods culpable for being bad at the job instead of completely immune from warnings or criticism. Or just fire most of them and get some people in who aren't worthless, and just there abusing their position and making piss poor decisions because they are given no incentive nor reason nor admonition to do any better. Get away from the clique of friends/close ranks model of moderation and make them subject to if not independent, some sort of impartial complaints procedure, instead of just using such areas as an excuse to justify why you are always right no matter what and no matter how badly you fuck up or overreact or are just damn incompetent. Totally on topic In My Opinion but meh. In other words businesses in the real world say for example are independently moderated by standards agencies and if worse comes to worse the law. Forums have no such process and so they attract those most easily corrupted by power (albeit completely insubstantial) to them. I say we, but no one has challenged this assertion so I presume its not a bad idea on paper. I tell you one thing though most people are perfectly happy with being judged by a bunch of clowns who live in tweesville, pleasant town, and have no idea what the real world is like. Who find it perfectly reasonable to permanently ban people for showing any sign of independent though or criticism of the system, or for making jokes that they don't get for the simple reason that they don't get them, or worse they think you are serious and therefore insane. I am not The Messiah I am a very naughty boy. I think the idea that you can expect unpaid amateurs to have the same standards as paid professionals, given that there is no culpability is woefully flawed, I think most people if they are honest would see why. Who died and made you king?

_________________
May the road rise up
To meet you
May the wind be always
At your back
May the sun shine warm
upon your face
May the rain fall soft
upon your field,
And until we meet again.
May God hold you in the palm of his hand.


"I apologise... For nothing!"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Apr 2010, 02:37 
Offline
Guardian of the East

Joined: 22 Dec 2008, 02:47
Posts: 589
The Dagda wrote:
Hex wrote:
:director: Derail moved from Forum Administration Philosophies ...


It wasn't a derail as we were discussing Ipetrich's ability to moderate but wise decision, although why this belongs in a forum about ethics is beyond me but there you go.

I think that it's an interesting ethical issue. Also, I'm not a moderator anywhere - I don't consider myself very competent at moderating.

Quote:
We decided given the general standard or lack of it of forum moderation, that lying hypocrites (see previous examples of moderation on various boards), ...

Like what, specifically? No whining and complaining and moaning and groaning about what dweebs mods supposedly are, I want *details* of *specific* incidents.

Quote:
And that the best way to improve forums and boards in general would be to make mods culpable for being bad at the job instead of completely immune from warnings or criticism.

How do you think that that would work without turning into the mess that TR has become?

Quote:
Or just fire most of them and get some people in who aren't worthless, and just there abusing their position and making piss poor decisions because they are given no incentive nor reason nor admonition to do any better.

Why not address more broadly the question of what mods ought to do?

Quote:
I tell you one thing though most people are perfectly happy with being judged by a bunch of clowns who live in tweesville, pleasant town, and have no idea what the real world is like. Who find it perfectly reasonable to permanently ban people for showing any sign of independent though or criticism of the system, or for making jokes that they don't get for the simple reason that they don't get them, or worse they think you are serious and therefore insane.

What signs of independent thought? What criticisms of what systems? What jokes?

Can you describe any cases of that other than yours?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Apr 2010, 02:43 
Offline
The Power to Scry
User avatar

Joined: 05 Dec 2009, 05:45
Posts: 803
Location: My house
lpetrich wrote:
The Dagda wrote:
Hex wrote:
:director: Derail moved from Forum Administration Philosophies ...


It wasn't a derail as we were discussing Ipetrich's ability to moderate but wise decision, although why this belongs in a forum about ethics is beyond me but there you go.

I think that it's an interesting ethical issue. Also, I'm not a moderator anywhere - I don't consider myself very competent at moderating.


The interweb is devoutly thankful for you realising that, most moderators don't.

Quote:
Quote:
We decided given the general standard or lack of it of forum moderation, that lying hypocrites (see previous examples of moderation on various boards), ...

Like what, specifically? No whining and complaining and moaning and groaning about what dweebs mods supposedly are, I want *details* of *specific* incidents.

Quote:
And that the best way to improve forums and boards in general would be to make mods culpable for being bad at the job instead of completely immune from warnings or criticism.

How do you think that that would work without turning into the mess that TR has become?

Quote:
Or just fire most of them and get some people in who aren't worthless, and just there abusing their position and making piss poor decisions because they are given no incentive nor reason nor admonition to do any better.

Why not address more broadly the question of what mods ought to do?



Already have, resign and let people who are more able to moderate do the job or instigate a procedure system that actually allows them to be culpable for mistakes and or pay them, so they have more reason to care about what they do. My idea was to accept donations to the site and use this as a means to pay the moderators, that way if they are shit they will lose out for being shit, instead of waving at the crowds from their ivory towers. Actually you need only have Admins paid or super moderators or global mods + or whatever they call themselves, as long as there is a level at which professionalism is expected, that would be fine. The owners of forums (profit making or otherwise) are in no position to be impartial and generally do not want to get involved in disputes anyway.

Employees are subject to the law generally, unpaid volunteers can do whatever they like in their own clubs or religions.

Quote:
Quote:
I tell you one thing though most people are perfectly happy with being judged by a bunch of clowns who live in tweesville, pleasant town, and have no idea what the real world is like. Who find it perfectly reasonable to permanently ban people for showing any sign of independent though or criticism of the system, or for making jokes that they don't get for the simple reason that they don't get them, or worse they think you are serious and therefore insane.


What signs of independent thought? What criticisms of what systems? What jokes?

Can you describe any cases of that other than yours?


Yes if you want me to post details of humourless idiots overreacting then I will gather as many examples as I can remember, I fail to see what that is going to establish, if you have been on the interweb for any length of time then you will have accrued many such examples.

I saw someone get perma banned for complaining that asking if someone was Jewish was racist but asking if someone was Islamic was ok, and not subject to the same standard. I saw someone get banned for making jokes about another user who were both mutually enjoying the whole conversation. I know personally a guy who got banned for not conveying himself in a manner that was easy to understand, permanently. They wanted him to change the way he thought, and communicated, as if somehow they could or a person could just rewire the way they think or they even had the power to suggest it (fucking hell are you from planet retard or just the past?!) I saw someone banned for saying shit twice and then self censoring his own swearing after that, because it bypassed the swear filter, apparently. Although the irony of such a situation was lost on the moderators, as I then got banned for complaining about the sheer stupidity of the situation, and I wasn't rude either, pointed as always maybe. C.r.a.p is not a swear word anyway? For Gods sake where do you live the 1950s? Forums are inordinately cliquey and mods often see themselves as the thought police, deciding with no input from anything but their own ideology what makes standards, and then blatantly subjecting people to double standards or heavy handed ones on a whim and without expecting to be challenged for it. Is it really appropriate to ban people because you personally don't like them, and can't answer criticism? Or because you find someone hard to understand?

EDIT: I saw someone banned for saying shit twice not shit, I can't seem to edit it.

How long have you got and how many examples do you want, I have dozens, and it happens a lot more than it should, and not just to me. Why do you think I am bothered? If it was just me then it would clearly be a different matter?

EDIT shit not shit.

Ok c.r.a.p not s.h.i.t. And btw outside of the US shit is a far worse swear word than c.r.ap, which isn't even derogatory or rude so why idiots insist on believing it is a horrible word that deserves banning is beyond me. Obviously some people think the world revolves around their country or that everyone should be subject to puritanical values that haven't existed ever, even in Amish communities.

As a side issue why have a swear filter and also ban people for being caught by it or self censoring swearing the %$££$£* clowns? Surely it makes more sense to either treat people like grown ups and let them self censor. Or better still on forums with a mature user base just not do anything at all, because people are perfectly capable of deciding when or when it is not appropriate to swear, or have a swear filter and only warn if they by pass it by saying c.r.a.p or bollocks, or wanker, or plimhole, or cunt. Warning someone for typing physically, that's a load of %$£" is ridiculous. Banning them for complaining about such stupidity is even worse.

BTW not directed at this forum which I know doesn't really use the swear filter except as a joke.

_________________
May the road rise up
To meet you
May the wind be always
At your back
May the sun shine warm
upon your face
May the rain fall soft
upon your field,
And until we meet again.
May God hold you in the palm of his hand.


"I apologise... For nothing!"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Apr 2010, 20:29 
Offline
Grand High Lord Admiral of Hell
User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2007, 13:14
Posts: 5726
Location: Buffalo, NY
Well ... I saw it as becoming a topic built a bit more on a set of personal attacks rather than on the merits of the arguments as a whole, and hence, slipped it off over here to it's own thread. Please note that it was a judgement of topic rather tone, and hence it's still here in the cafe.

I am rather interested to see where you guys go with this discussion, BTW. :wave:


Oh ... and yeah, the filter here was somewhat set-up to make sure that people weren't seeing the place as being so amazingly uptight. Swearing for a reason and in context is just fine, as long as it's in the right place here. And it's not just swears. Check out e a r t h q u a k e ... :cheeky:

_________________
If you can't stand the heat, don't tickle the dragon ...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group