Author Topic: The Rules  (Read 9523 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sigmaleph

  • Ungodlike
  • Administrator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3418
    • sigmaleph on tumblr
Re: The Rules
« Reply #15 on: August 08, 2013, 08:11:16 pm »
Something to that effect is what I have in mind, yes, but "unresolvable" is difficult to specify, which is why I hesitate to make a definitive rule about it. For now, it shall be a case-by-case matter (as is thread locking in general).
Σא

Offline m52nickerson

  • Polish Viking
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1386
  • Gender: Male
  • Winning by flying omoplata!
Re: The Rules
« Reply #16 on: August 08, 2013, 09:30:29 pm »
I was tempted.

Do it!  If for no other reason you could use Picard memes when someone is breaking the rule.

Such as...

It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. ~Macbeth

Offline Lithp

  • Official FSTDT Spokesman
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1339
Re: The Rules
« Reply #17 on: August 09, 2013, 05:40:57 am »
That possibility amuses me & I'm not even a fan of Star Trek.

Quote
b) This was already a part of the rules, effectively. The original don't be a dick rule was ambiguous enough that nearly anything someone disliked could be construed as an offence.

I guess that is kind of true. I don't know, it's been a while.

Quote
c) On that note: if you can't trust the moderators to behave reasonably, the text of the rules is no safeguard. An admin can choose to entirely disregard the rules as written at any point anyway, and you can't really appeal to the Supreme Court on the matter.

Well, yeah.

It's not so much that I expect you guys to willfully abuse anything, I just ideologically oppose certain rules. This is mainly when I think that the problems outweigh the benefits, & I don't see the need to go there in the first place. I also think that less is usually more.

Quote
As for fairness in enforcement, yes, it's a concern. All I can say is, if you think the rules are being inconsistently applied yell in my general direction and try to provide examples.

I guess that really is all that can be done.

Quote
And finally, I believe the alternative is worse. There's simply far too many ways to be an asshole to even begin to cover them in the rules, and if I did the resulting document would be a thousand pages long and nobody would read it. Refusing to act because one asshole in particular wasn't covered, or treating different situations the same way because it's in the text of the rules and we didn't factor in relevant context, will be worse.

As long as people get fair warning, I guess I don't really see it as an issue.

Quote
At the same time, we also need to clarify that trolling can be worthy of a ban in itself without consideration for further rules.

This is one of those things I'm ideologically opposed to. If a troll is disruptive enough to ban, it's very unlikely that they aren't breaking any rules. Even with as few rules as Not-FSTDT has. I think "troll" works best as a descriptive label, kind of like "asshat" or "douchebag." It's just not the same as "don't spam" or "don't post porn," or even as "don't necropost" or "don't backseat mod," which can all be more-or-less clearly demonstrated.

Quote
That, and having someone else to rage at can be a decent way to distract people from internal drama.

I'd call that a form of drama. I think that, if it is aimed at the board in general, it pretty much falls under "don't backseat mod." My problem is mostly with the designation/labeling. "Chewtoys" never really went anywhere, you bring up the example of Atheism Exposed, we just stopped referring to them as such. And I think that, in doing so, we kept our smarmy attitudes, but lost some of our mob mentality.

Speaking of "don't backseat mod," I was wondering where that leaves the whole "you are a bad member & you should not be here" type statements?

Quote
The year period seemed superfluous. If I recall correctly, the only person ever to make it to 'year' without getting permabanned for some other reason was Skyfire, and he didn't bother to come back after his time was up. Since the week/month/perma pattern is intended to be a basic guideline to base the duration of bans on, it should be based on what has actually worked in the past. So far, year has been functionally identical to perma, so I scrapped it.

The possibility for bans longer than a month remains, if we think it might help.

Makes sense.

Offline Sigmaleph

  • Ungodlike
  • Administrator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3418
    • sigmaleph on tumblr
Re: The Rules
« Reply #18 on: August 09, 2013, 01:10:31 pm »
Quote
At the same time, we also need to clarify that trolling can be worthy of a ban in itself without consideration for further rules.

This is one of those things I'm ideologically opposed to. If a troll is disruptive enough to ban, it's very unlikely that they aren't breaking any rules. Even with as few rules as Not-FSTDT has. I think "troll" works best as a descriptive label, kind of like "asshat" or "douchebag." It's just not the same as "don't spam" or "don't post porn," or even as "don't necropost" or "don't backseat mod," which can all be more-or-less clearly demonstrated.

Most of the time, yes, a troll is usually breaking some other rule. But I've seen a fair number of them that try to find their way around them and then complain that they didn't break any rules.

The argument could be made that this is redundant, since rules-lawyering is why I created the primary rule. The counter-argument could be made that it's worth specifying it as a matter of policy.

I'm arguing with myself here. Further opinions on the subject are welcome.

Quote
Quote
That, and having someone else to rage at can be a decent way to distract people from internal drama.

I'd call that a form of drama. I think that, if it is aimed at the board in general, it pretty much falls under "don't backseat mod." My problem is mostly with the designation/labeling. "Chewtoys" never really went anywhere, you bring up the example of Atheism Exposed, we just stopped referring to them as such. And I think that, in doing so, we kept our smarmy attitudes, but lost some of our mob mentality.

I see. Do you propose the rule be removed, or restructured in such a way that it doesn't result in designated targets?


Quote
Speaking of "don't backseat mod," I was wondering where that leaves the whole "you are a bad member & you should not be here" type statements?

Frowned upon, but not directly in violation of a rule, depending on context. Could easily fall under Don't be a Dick, but not backseat moderation (Unless you specifically phrase it to imply "you should be removed" rather than "you should quit"). Does that make sense?
Σא

Offline RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 7374
  • Gender: Male
  • The Mad Dog of Shimano
    • My Twitter
Re: The Rules
« Reply #19 on: August 09, 2013, 01:37:55 pm »
If nothin else, the last bit makes sense to me.  One's telling another member to bugger off which, while its bad form, isn't as...severe as what is, essentially, ordering the mod staff around.
Quote from: Mikasa Ackerman
If I win, I live.  If I lose, I die.  Unless I fight, I cannot win.

Offline Lithp

  • Official FSTDT Spokesman
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1339
Re: The Rules
« Reply #20 on: August 09, 2013, 08:34:56 pm »
Quote
I'm arguing with myself here. Further opinions on the subject are welcome.

I think that most people who get banned, most of the time, will claim that they haven't done anything, regardless of their intention. Doesn't necessarily mean there's truth to their claim. That's just been my experience, I'm not sure what others would say.

Quote
I see. Do you propose the rule be removed, or restructured in such a way that it doesn't result in designated targets?

Both would make sense to me. I'd think that restructuring it would be redundant, with Don't Backseat Mod, but eh.

Quote
Frowned upon, but not directly in violation of a rule, depending on context. Could easily fall under Don't be a Dick, but not backseat moderation (Unless you specifically phrase it to imply "you should be removed" rather than "you should quit"). Does that make sense?

Yes, it does, thanks. And, after some back-&-forth, I'd have to say that I agree with it.

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Rules
« Reply #21 on: August 10, 2013, 02:08:23 pm »
Can we bring back exalts/fuck yeahs? I would add the caveat, though, that there NOT be a button for negs/fuck noes....that keeps grudges and cowardly secret flaming from happening like last time. As to chew toys, they should be "vetted" as to whether they are true trolls...like in a fun kangaroo court thread where the mods and admin act as tribunal. Once the chew toy is vetted as a genuine stubborn true believer, and not a troll, they should be given an honorific badge; they would be the only members to have a fuck no button enabled on their avatar tile. ;D
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline Death.

  • Neonate
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Rules
« Reply #22 on: August 10, 2013, 03:12:01 pm »
LOL @ the Skyfire clause, just LOL

What happened to the little .... anyway?

Has he been married off and now has ten kids and three sister wives ?

Did he ever get his canon ( sic ) of Transformers fandon fiction published ( oh, Sandman lolled for weeks, months over that, as did I ) ?

Is he still bothering people over at deviantart?

Offline ironbite

  • Overlord of all that is good in Iacon City
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 9761
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Rules
« Reply #23 on: August 10, 2013, 04:39:28 pm »
As far as I know, he's bothering me over at the Allspark.  They revoked his Politics and Religion privileges though but now he's using the Pokemon Thread to inform us of Anime going ons.

Ironbite-still hasn't figured out...nobody cares.

Offline Sigmaleph

  • Ungodlike
  • Administrator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3418
    • sigmaleph on tumblr
Re: The Rules
« Reply #24 on: August 10, 2013, 04:43:45 pm »
Oh, hey, Death is back.

Skyfire got a year-long ban a while back (for violating the eponymous rule repeatedly, IIRC) and never bothered to come back after it expired. His activities elsewhere can be documented by other users (see for instance Ironbite above.)


@mellenORL: I am extremely wary of bringing the karma system back, given how it turned out the last two times. Looking into it, it might be possible to disable the "smite" button, but there's no way of enabling it only for specific users.


Finally: I'm leaning towards striking the chewtoy rule as redundant. Anyone that is strongly attached to it may speak now in its favour
Σא

Offline Sleepy

  • Fuck Yes Sunshine In a Bag
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4568
  • Gender: Female
  • Danger zone
    • Toki Matters
Re: The Rules
« Reply #25 on: August 10, 2013, 05:23:48 pm »
I think it's a bad idea to bring back the karma system after everything that happened with it. Even lacking the "fuck no" button, it still leads to people comparing numbers and holding grudges over those. It doesn't contribute anything positive.
Guys, this is getting creepy. Can we talk about cannibalism instead?

If a clown eats salmon on Tuesday, how much does a triangle weigh on Jupiter? Ask Mr. Wiggins for 10% off of your next dry cleaning bill. -Hades

QueenofHearts

  • Guest
Re: The Rules
« Reply #26 on: August 10, 2013, 05:36:28 pm »
I think it's a bad idea to bring back the karma system after everything that happened with it. Even lacking the "fuck no" button, it still leads to people comparing numbers and holding grudges over those. It doesn't contribute anything positive.

pretty much this, I think the DRAMA system is best left in the past.

Online dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3855
Re: The Rules
« Reply #27 on: August 10, 2013, 10:09:37 pm »
I think it's a bad idea to bring back the karma system after everything that happened with it. Even lacking the "fuck no" button, it still leads to people comparing numbers and holding grudges over those. It doesn't contribute anything positive.

The only way I could see it coming back is if a) who gave exalts/smites to a post is public (at least public to all members) and b) you actually have to give some sort of reason for the exalt/smite, which is also shown publicly with said exalt/smite.

Even with that, it would probably just lead to way too much drama.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."

Quote
Be weird, cause normal is boring.

Offline Lithp

  • Official FSTDT Spokesman
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1339
Re: The Rules
« Reply #28 on: August 10, 2013, 11:02:52 pm »
I would like to believe that we are mature enough to handle the system, but that's what I said last time. Maybe it's best to just not go there.

Offline Art Vandelay

  • Greatest Person to Ever Grace this Shitty Forum
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8904
  • Gender: Male
  • Check Your Privilege
Re: The Rules
« Reply #29 on: August 10, 2013, 11:50:07 pm »
Yeah, the exalt/smite system is a cute system in theory. However, it's always ruined by a few shitheads who just have to use it to create drama. Nothing good can come of bringing it back.