Ideas / Suggestions - New System of Warning / Banning -

ClaireBear · #31 09-02-2004, 09:14 AM

:

A blog is like an online journal - most are full of crud and are only read by about 5 people once every quarter.

I side with Peter here, you got random stuff to say, keep it away from here.

Em... the entire SPAM thread.. the old one did fine... being what it was... random off topicness... so it definitely "kept it away from here" in a nice packet in off topic labelled SPAM!!!!

Hobo · #32 09-02-2004, 09:51 AM

No. Just No. You want to chat about shoes and stuff, go to a chat room. This forums rules ban spam. No good will come of it except for clogging up the post database and raising peoples post counts without them making a good contribution to the forums.

Though I'll admit, it would be nice to rate spam on how bad it is ala the points system, but that could be a pain to keep track of.

Statikk HDM · #33 09-02-2004, 11:17 AM

I think the post thing is a little dumb when flaming is seen as more offensive than porn. I've had warnings before(cursing once, forget what the other one was. It sure as hell wasn't for short posts!). Would those count against me? And seriously, why is everyone getting their codpieces in a tangle over this? If you ask me this is a rather benign and trouble-free area.
On a side note, warnings are a little pussy. Tell it openly in the thread or don't do it at all. PMing sucks. Also, this is one of the most warn-happy forums ever and while it does make the trains run on time it feels a little stiff and formal.
So said by Statikk HDM, the man who only skims the threads.

***Nate*** · #34 09-02-2004, 01:53 PM

:

Sorry Nate but as the creator of the ORIGINAL (now sadly defunct) spam thread...

Adders definition is indeed correct... I intended it as a place for people to post random thoughts, ideas and feelings... without feeling like they'll get whupped by warnings....

I have no problem with random thoughts in general but I think the example Adder gave

:

"I'm so bored and I think you're all fat".

was a bit extreme and would count as spam even in the spam thread.

:

It's designed for people who feel they MUST post, but have nothing to say.

If they have nothing to say, then they shouldn't say anything quite frankly.

Mac the Janitor · #35 09-02-2004, 04:19 PM

:

I found the post for you, or at least, I think it is the post you are referring to:

Alcar...

No, that's not the post I was referring to. It was pretty long, and like the 2nd post in a topic in the FS&H about a new system I'd like. I'll go try and find it.

EDIT: Here it is. Copy and paste baby.

Hmm...well, I have to agree with you to a certain extent. I know I may be pummeled and sworn at for saying this, but I really believe OWF is a bit too strict on classifying spam. I mean, I believe that in order to have a strong, tightly knit community, we should just let threads go in the direction that they go. Of course, we should obviously crack down on the blatant spam, such as posts like "oh ya lol" or "w3rd up", but I think that the careful watch on if a post is ever so slightly off the initial topic shouldn't be carried through so strictly. Let the conversation flow; that's what conversations do. I mean, I have seen many a forum that are a tenth as strict as this that get along better than we do.

So all in all, I believe that we should get a new system of "cleaning" the forums. I would like to see here what they do at The Aquabats message board; don't give out warnings and such, as that may be trivial with different members. Instead, if a thread has done its purpose and can go nowhere else, lock it. For example, if there is a thread asking "What systems will the next game be on?", then members would answer the question, and once it has been answered, the thread has no further purpose and should be locked. Or if someone creates a thread on a subject which already has a thread for discussion, it will simply be locked. There would be no more of these horrible, heated arguments about the rules and such. It may not sound very effective simply typed up, but trust me; it works.

Ok, you are free to throw your stones and insults at me now.

Havoc · #36 09-02-2004, 06:27 PM

:

And we have told everyone time and time again, that we do not want, nor need such threads that are pointless. If you have something to post that urgent, create a blog, so that we can choose to ignore it.

Alcar...

Dude you can choose to ignore "spam" posts too, what kinda bullshit is that? You can ignore the link someone posts to a blog, but you can't ignore a "spam" message? Do you know how stupid that sounds?

Notice how I put quoteation marks around spam, becouse in your eye's spam is everything that has nothing to do with the topic it is posted in. Yet, what you concider spam, I concider (in a lot of cases, so I noticed) just a normal everyday post, maybe it has nothing to do with the topic, but wtf? Who care's! Its just 1 louzy post!

Statikk HDM · #37 09-03-2004, 11:26 AM

Havoc, I've noticed that the people who decry harshing on people because of post counts or "pulling rank" are the first ones to decry spam. Why? Because it ups your irrelevant little post count and puts another little star under you name. Big friggin' deal. As long as people reward people based on posts counts and not content and give undue attention to spam and little stars under the names things will never change around. Here is my "revolutionary" idea and it has nothing to do with the Aquabats or being an even bigger ass about spam: Do away with post counts and stars.

Majic · #38 09-03-2004, 11:48 AM

I think those are fine. The fact of the matter is, any number of things could be responsible for spam. New members, young members, post counts, stars/titles, the spam thread, lax moderating. Most likely a combination. No individual step is going to ever bring it anywhere close to a screeching stop. What will lower the effect is to stop talking about the problem, and come to accept it to an extent.

Adder · #39 09-03-2004, 12:44 PM

Havoc, you can't say "it's 1 lousy post"

Simply because that gives everyone the right to post 1 lousy post in every thread, thus crating endless SPAM

oddguy · #40 09-03-2004, 12:54 PM

I have an idea. You know how on each post there are quote buttons and such. Well, maybe there should be a "report spam" button on each post. That way, if it is offensive someone will click the button and Alcar or Abe Babe will be notified. If nobody clicks the button, then it isn't bothering anybody. And maybe depending on how many people click the "report spam" button, spammers will recieve more or less "offense points."

-oddguy

Mac the Janitor · #41 09-03-2004, 01:41 PM

:

I have an idea. You know how on each post there are quote buttons and such. Well, maybe there should be a "report spam" button on each post. That way, if it is offensive someone will click the button and Alcar or Abe Babe will be notified. If nobody clicks the button, then it isn't bothering anybody. And maybe depending on how many people click the "report spam" button, spammers will recieve more or less "offense points."

-oddguy

There already is -

Havoc · #42 09-03-2004, 03:37 PM

:

Havoc, you can't say "it's 1 lousy post"

Simply because that gives everyone the right to post 1 lousy post in every thread, thus crating endless SPAM

Do I realy have to explain everything into detail here? Damn...

When I say "its just one stupid post" I mean it in a way that it just happands every once in a while.
Let me tell an example.
If a topic is about 30 posts long, then someone posts something completely inrelevant to the topic to let know he's going on vacation or whatever. Then another 30 topics later he posts another one to tell he's back.
Personaly, I don't see any problems with going of topic for small bits, 3 maybe fours posts. The real spamming starts when ppl start using the forum as an instant messenger.

Example 2: is this spam?

:

The topic is well on the way, then this happands.

Persone 1: Yes, I agree. Though my ant in Florida does the exact opposite, she does this and that.

Persone 2: Yea but your ant is just freaky. She should do it like we said.

Persone 1: My ant aint freaky, she just has a diffrent way of doing things.

Persone 3: Yes she is :P. She's just as freaky as you! J/k

Persone 4: Yup, persone 1 and his freaky ant. LOL. Anyway, to get back on topic...

Is this, or is this not conciderd spam? And don't lie becouse ppl have been banned for stuff like this, which is complete nonsence. Its just a little fun inbetween, by persone 1, 2 and 3 who just are realy good friends and like to pull a joke on one another from time to time. Anything wrong with that? No...

Though ofcourse, when it happands to much, or a conversation carries on to long, then it can be conciderd spam. But even then, we have moderators to send it back on track.

Something like: Yea guys, realy nice about the ant and all but can you please get back on topic?

That serves two puposes. 1. You end the spam. 2. You don't get the endless flame wars about the warning passed out. 3. You keep the respect of your members tords the mods becouse the mods treat the 'spam' with normal behavior instead of pretending to be a policeman.

Take my own forum for example, I have rule's set up. I have a warning system which thank god I never have to use exept once. My forum is nice, cozy and fun without strictness. And spamming happands a lot, just ask TBM or T-nex, but most of it is just for fun. And when things do get out of hand, the topic does get closed, and the persone is spoken to.
The point im trying to make is that to avoid spam, you have to allow it to a certain hight. Simple as that. Cuz right now, its starting to look like its mods VS members, and if 1 thing is deadly to a good forum, its having a reputation for having flame wars between moderators and members.

Ok, I end my statement :P. Hope yall learned from it

Don't forget to take note's

***Alcar*** · #43 09-03-2004, 05:04 PM

People are comparing the Oddworld Forums to other forums. While this is fine, you have to take into account a whole range of differing factors. What works on one forum, will not work on another.

Anyway, have we actually got any suggestions / comments on the proposed new system?

Alcar...

Havoc · #44 09-03-2004, 05:13 PM

Yes... GET RID OF IT!

(sorry, im just saying out flat what everyone has been screaming for weeks now...)

oddguy · #45 09-03-2004, 05:20 PM

:

There already is -

Hmmmm, I'm on the industrial theme, and that button seems to have been omitted.

-oddguy

***Alcar*** · #46 09-03-2004, 05:54 PM

:

Yes... GET RID OF IT!

(sorry, im just saying out flat what everyone has been screaming for weeks now...)

Havoc, you want the system which hasn't even been instated, to be gone? That doesn't make sense.

Oddguy, the button is not present on the Industrial Style. It has been replaced by the words "Report". However, my email address, and I'd assume Abe Babe's, might not be working, as the server is having domain-email issues.

Alcar...

***Cloverfield*** · #47 09-04-2004, 05:24 PM

I get the impression that some of you think we are definately going to impliment this new system. But we are not. We are simply taking feedback and suggestions. And if we did impliment it, the points schedule would be reviewed to reflect this forum. I pulled some example warnings out of my head, I didn't even check what I had on my other forum.

To be honest, what I would like to see is a good half way. A forum has to have some kind of rules, otherwise people will just do anything they want including spamming and flaming. But I'd also like to see people having fun and not having to worry about whether their post is going to be called up as spam. This is why we want your input. We're not just going an implimenting a system that you guys hate. But the way I'm reading this, there's a lot of you saying you just want us to allow spam, and that really isn't going to work.

The only thing I'm getting from this is that there seems to be a push for the spam forum. I'm hesitant on the idea because of what I previously said. But I would like to hear some feedback on this. Specifically, if such a forum were put into existance, it would mean that Off-topic Discussion would become more heavily moderated as a result [due to the fact that you would then have a place for such posts]. So would this bother you, and would you still post in the main Off-topic forum if there was a spam sub forum with no post count? And also, while such a forum would allow for spam and random discussion, some rules would still apply such as flaming and posting of stuff that is real spam [smilies, random letters, etc].

Abe Babe...

Majic · #48 09-04-2004, 05:34 PM

Actually, this point system would be much more user/mod friendly, so not all offenses are represented on the same plain. But instead of having a mandatory ban, let's say at 10 or 15 points, the staff (or maybe 5+ staff members at least?) quickly exchange some words in the EL, about what to do. If the offenses are just several harmless posts stacked on top of each other, further action could be put off to 20 points. If it's two or 3 seriously racist comments, a 1 week ban could be place. Or if it's just a couple of annoying spam posts, it could only be a 3 day ban.

It would be difficult having each moderator input, but I don't think it would be too bad to just have whoever can discuss at the time come up with a solution. Given a 24 hour period after the designated point amount is reached, most of the staff (who are all common posters, anyways) can give their input. Then simply, Alcar or Abe Babe can wiegh all of the gathered opinion and put it to use.

Or something.

***Cloverfield*** · #49 09-04-2004, 05:40 PM

You know Majic, I really like that suggestion. While still being a warning system, it also takes into consideration the person's specific offenses/situation. It's not a straight out you're warned, you're banned kind of thing. We could also incorporate warning removals as well which would allow a member to have their warnings removed [or part of them] if they have been good members.

Abe Babe...

Hobo · #50 09-04-2004, 11:09 PM

:

Actually, this point system would be much more user/mod friendly, so not all offenses are represented on the same plain. But instead of having a mandatory ban, let's say at 10 or 15 points, the staff (or maybe 5+ staff members at least?) quickly exchange some words in the EL, about what to do. If the offenses are just several harmless posts stacked on top of each other, further action could be put off to 20 points. If it's two or 3 seriously racist comments, a 1 week ban could be place. Or if it's just a couple of annoying spam posts, it could only be a 3 day ban.

It would be difficult having each moderator input, but I don't think it would be too bad to just have whoever can discuss at the time come up with a solution. Given a 24 hour period after the designated point amount is reached, most of the staff (who are all common posters, anyways) can give their input. Then simply, Alcar or Abe Babe can wiegh all of the gathered opinion and put it to use.

Or something.

I like it, but then that'd mean alot more work for you mods, and we know how overworked you are already

I do like the idea that the punishment fits the means of getting the punisment though. *hugs magic*

Statikk HDM · #51 09-07-2004, 11:26 AM

Racist? Dematory? Who cares if it offensive, a person should have a right to speak! The only offenses that brother me are intimidation and threatening. Mods are supposed to moderate not censor.

Majic · #52 09-07-2004, 03:00 PM

There's a place for everything. This forum caters to a varied group; pretty much every demographic you can think of. I'm sure the majority of the forum doesn't want to see insults and racist comments being flung back and forth. Freedom of speech is dandy and all, bu not when used irresponsibly. Anywhere in the world you can go to a crowded street corner and shout obscenities until you're hoarse. But the chances are, people aren't going to like it, and you're going to be taken down to the nearest precinct.

Jacob · #53 09-07-2004, 03:20 PM

If somebody uses the term -

"I'm gonna tar 'n' feather your nigger ass until you look like the Chicken your dad f*cks!"

at a person who is black and has a father into Beastiality, then fine, give them a warning. However, if someone uses it at a person who is merely a coloured, then i don't see the problem...*Sniggers*

My point is the above. If somebody doesn't use it offensively but more tongue-in-cheek, like i constantly do, i don't see why anybody should have a hissy fit like a six year old girl having an epileptic fit in the bath.

***Cloverfield*** · #54 09-07-2004, 04:31 PM

I think Jacob sums it up best ... you have to take the term into context. I think most people here can differentiate between humor and a comment made to intentionally hurt someone. So as long as we can keep that judgement, then it should be fine. As I said eariler, I don't want people to feel they can't say things on there.

The only exception would probably be when welcoming a newbie ... as they mightn't understand the joke. So I think we should be at least make an effort to be friendly to people in such cases.

Abe Babe...

Jacob · #55 09-08-2004, 04:45 AM

Just been thinking, we could have certain forumers assigned as a kind of "Case handler" when it comes to the younger people, as the younger people might not be able to put their points across as fluidly as some other members and so they would be given a choice to have somebody speak for them, like a forum Lawyer for somebody for instance.

This Lawyer would get all the facts beforehand and then either discuss the issue privately [in the Mods forum] or publically in a specified thread where only the defendants, prosecution and Mods can speak in.

The Lawyers picked will obviously be random, but they have to put all their effort into the case and defend their client no matter what prejudices they have against them.

So...forum Lawyers to defend the people who want them - opinions?

oddguy · #56 09-08-2004, 02:04 PM

That is such a cool idea, Jacob. Sounds more like fun, rather than a method of process though. Also, it might take up a lot of time, especially if there are multiple cases pending.

-oddguy

The Gungrave · #57 09-09-2004, 04:29 AM

The Babe has a point, this is one of only 2 forums I use and the number of tiems jokes and sarcasm have backfired on people amazes me. You neve know how they're going to take it.....i'll go then shall i

Hobo · #58 09-09-2004, 06:03 AM

:

Just been thinking, we could have certain forumers assigned as a kind of "Case handler" when it comes to the younger people, as the younger people might not be able to put their points across as fluidly as some other members and so they would be given a choice to have somebody speak for them, like a forum Lawyer for somebody for instance.

This Lawyer would get all the facts beforehand and then either discuss the issue privately [in the Mods forum] or publically in a specified thread where only the defendants, prosecution and Mods can speak in.

The Lawyers picked will obviously be random, but they have to put all their effort into the case and defend their client no matter what prejudices they have against them.

So...forum Lawyers to defend the people who want them - opinions?

I thought of that aggggges ago. But then I forgot it. But now I remembered. Too late.

Um..

Great Idea Jacob, just don't put Codek incharge of newbie herding.

Jacob · #59 09-09-2004, 06:26 AM

'and the number of tiems jokes and sarcasm have backfired on people amazes me.'

How many times has someone neared banning on this forum?

I don't really think there has been any recently. And if so, very few. Some could probably be open and shut cases, where the Lawyer merely argues a set length of time for the banning.

And if Codek didn't want to be a Lawyer, he doesn't have to be. But if he was and he got assigned to a newbie and screwed the newbie over, that newbie has a chance to take him to the amazing OWF courts where someone will analyse such evidence and attempt to aid the newbie but also to screw Codek with a seven inch wide spanner - without any lubrication.

Majic · #60 09-09-2004, 08:00 AM

But... that just seems a bit tedious and pointless. If the person just slipped up a few times, then they get a short banning period. Simple as that. If they blatantly break the rules, knowingly, they get a longer banning sentence. Trying to argue a 3 day ban is like taking a traffic ticket to the supreme court. More trouble than it's worth.