Open Discussion of Board Rules and Policy

[Starwind51]

I'm sorry, but wikipedia is not an official resource for quality information in that it is user created.

Wikireality:     
 
Reality as defined by the masses (usually in a large collective of internet junkies); refering to the source of all truth, wikipedia, a medium where random facts are collected and corrected by others who are just as uneducated as the rest.

"I reject your reality and substitute wikireality, as defined by wikipedia"

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wikireality

I was going to pos nod out one of your neg nods, but I think you should be very proud of them, so I pos nod you in spirit.

[Bentleys Dad]

Thanks Starwind, but personally I couldn't give a s___ if I get neg nodded or not. and obviously looking at it now, it seems that not many agree with me, and those that do, voice their opinion OPENLY, as is their right.

[kempsternyc]

I've always taken the rules to be a way to insure that a level of civility is maintained.

I once belonged to a political community on AOL that was based on being Senators in a Simulation game that used message boards. We had a monitor that would hide posts that got out of hand.

During my time there ( I basically ran the official part of the game as Senate Clerk for a year) I began a practice of responding to a post by calling them every name in the book and telling them to do things to themselves that are anatomically impossible. and then I would cancel the post.

It made me feel better and preserved my good name.

To me moderating is an artform in, well, moderation. At what point to you pull a post etc? And for those who've had a post pulled, it can feel arbitrary. Which, in a way, makes sense. Because it is based on an open ended set of guidelines.

So do the rules need to be changed? Probably not. Because, no matter what, there will be moments when things get heated and a bit out of control. And there will be those that feel their rights were violated. It's the nature of the beast.

The one thing I would hate to see is a forum such as this with no rules. At that point it becomes chaotic and not worth being a part of.

[essen]

The one thing I would hate to see is a forum such as this with no rules. At that point it becomes chaotic and not worth being a part of.

I don't think anyone's said there shouldn't be any rules. I wouldn't have a problem with things like obvious trolling and generally illegal activities being against the rules. It bugs me when people who are obviously flame-baiting get off scot-free while the people who get openly pissed off at them get suspended. And, if arguments are getting too heated and people are starting to insult each other rather than debate, I have no problem with a moderator coming in and telling people to cool it, and if they don't cool it the thread could be locked. I do have a problem with people getting suspended without any sort of open warning to calm down, especially people who have been here for a long time and have proven themselves to not be trolls. Suspending a longtime regular who has made valuable contributions to this forum just for calling someone an asshole seems like an unnecessary slap in the face. The post should've just been deleted, if anything.

As for name-calling, I try to avoid that myself since I don't think it strengthens an argument, but if people want to do it I can handle myself in these situations.

[kempsternyc]

I don't think anyone's said there shouldn't be any rules. .

The implication from the other site is that it's virtue is in that there are no rules.

Please understand that I'm not arguing one point or the other here. I've been involved in the past heavily in a message board world and know the results of chaos. I thought I had made it clear that I understand both sides.

BTW, after posting this, I read further in the link that Jennifer posted from the other site. Ummm...okay.

But that really doesn't matter. In the end, we go were we go to find a home we are comfortable with.

Let me tell everyone of a journey I took because of this site.

My partner and I run 3-4 time a week. Usually it is down to Astoria Park from 30th Ave and Steinway. However, I read a post with pics regarding the Steinway mansion. And so I changed our route one day and, with camera, ran down to that area. And had a blast. Tucked into this very industrial area was a piece of Astoria history. We took pics and marveled at the atmosphere of this part of Astoria. And it all happened because of this site.

So yes, I am a bit pro Merm. Because he put together something that directly gave me a bit of happiness.

That's how I feel and that's that.

[essen]

Please understand that I'm not arguing one point or the other here. I've been involved in the past heavily in a message board world and know the results of chaos. I thought I had made it clear that I understand both sides.

No need to be defensive. I also come from a world of message board experience, for better or for worse.

[kempsternyc]

I've been involved in the past heavily in a message board world and know the results of chaos. I thought I had made it clear that I understand both sides.

I just want to clarify something here. Chaos can result just as easily from a heavy handed moderator as it can from a poster who has lost his/her mind. It's all about finding a balance that works for the vast majority.

[kempsternyc]

No need to be defensive. I also come from a world of message board experience, for better or for worse.

I'm really not trying to...I just wanted to explain myself more fully.

[JavaJay73]

Wow...8 negative nods so far.  I guess you can't say what you want.  I guess we live in a world where only one persons views are acceptable.  I am sure to get negative nodded again  :)

[mcdirk]

Sorry that folks are getting negative nodded - I hope folks are not dissuaded from participating in the conversation.  I think most of the comments have been helpful, even if we do not all agree on all topics.  I hope folks will continue to weigh in on suggestions and whether they like the rules as is, or would like to see some changes.  I think the poll at the top of the thread is giving us a good sense of opinion.

[paratactical]

Things that I think we might want to talk about in terms of helping out with revamping the rules (if we do so at all).

1. Make sure that people can see somewhere (maybe when they view their own profiles) if they are considered to have already been warned about violating board rules, or what their length of suspension was at last time and what it will be next time.

2. Make a list of suspensions (ie 2 warnings, 24 hrs, 3 days, etc) and put that in the rules with the caveat that severe violations may warrant more severe punishment, but be especially careful in using this.

3. Find a way to allow suspended users to express their suspension. I'm not sure how to do this. Can suspended members still send private messages?

Are there any other issues that might be good to address?

[Bentleys Dad]

Things that I think we might want to talk about in terms of helping out with revamping the rules (if we do so at all).

1. Make sure that people can see somewhere (maybe when they view their own profiles) if they are considered to have already been warned about violating board rules, or what their length of suspension was at last time and what it will be next time.

2. Make a list of suspensions (ie 2 warnings, 24 hrs, 3 days, etc) and put that in the rules with the caveat that severe violations may warrant more severe punishment, but be especially careful in using this.

3. Find a way to allow suspended users to express their suspension. I'm not sure how to do this. Can suspended members still send private messages?

Are there any other issues that might be good to address?

You know that first idea of your is something that was used on a chat forum I used to go to about ten years ago, and I'm surprised that it hasn't been instituted here.

Unfortunately suspended users cannot post a reply to a thread nor can they send private messages. But someone else suggested that they be able to make a topic that can be seen but not replied to, which is something that I have seen on other forums as well.

[paratactical]

I think it might be a good idea to allow suspended people to send personal messages. They can contact people on the site without being forced to give out otherwise hidden information (their emails if they chose not to share); they can still contact board moderators; plus, anyone who doesn't want PM from someone can block them.

[Starwind51]

I think the pos/neg nod feature should be removed, and not replaced with anything. 

I think a person should only be banned for:
 
Cyber-bullying - spreading gossip, untrue, or irrelevent information about a person or rallying or suggesting others to react to a person in a hostile manner
Threatening or stating the intent to do real-world harm to a person
Continued PM'ing of a person who requests that you don't
Posting a business anouncement in the guise of a normal post or spamming

Banning for any length of time should be for real offenses, things that would be a crime in the real world. 

[Pulled pork]

Thank you for the opportunity to join in and make comments on the rules.

Quote
- Act appropriately: We do not permit comments that we deem abusive, baiting, defamatory, insulting, harassing, inflammatory, hateful, obscene, inappropriately rude or personal, retaliatory, threatening, invasive of privacy or violative of any law.

I think this rule covers much and make some obsolete.  In particular the two rules about name calling and ad hominem / personal attacks.  The rules should be reduced and simplified as much as possible. 


Since these rules are created by people, enforced by Mods and not computers, there will always be personal interpretation when mods judge a ruling.  If the rules are simple and clear then all understand them. Any final ruling comes from the mod's personal influence. That can always be addressed or fought on an individual basis. 

I would rather see no rules concerning appropriate behavior because it will ultimately restrict discussion and flow of ideas.  The mods can always lock to thread or step in with a comment.  But since that will not happen, we should consider minimal rules and hope that the mods in charge will be fair and consider the meanings behind peoples actions. Flaming and provoking OR responding rudely both have meaning and deserve consideration. 

We all want an open forum to discuss anything and of course any social civilized group will have some structure in place.  But clearly things have gotten out of hand.  The fix could be a few things:

Those in charge need to delegate more and bring on more mod's to relieve stress from mod burn out.

Perhaps Astorians has passed critical mass and there is more going on than one or a few can handle.  Maybe if more were involved then things might not have gone out of hand (not meant as an insult to anyone).

Realize that all things eventually find balance and things will take care of themselves.  (A reason for less rules.)

Astorians might consider going in more of a community board direction that embraces "goings on" in Astoria and excluding "debate and discussion" topics since this is where most of the troubles come from (under the current rules and vision of the founder). 


I think that under current conditions the last suggestion might work best for this board.  That said, Astorians has been a boon to the community in terms or bring people together (new friends, dating, marriage) and opening up what Astoria has to offer to many people who before joining new very little about the treasures available to us here.  THis is a big bump in the road so lets hope we resolve this in a positive fashion and things improve because of it.