Poll: Should there be less forum moderation? Please Vote.

[Garrett]

Thank you for repeating Dag.  Now everyone can completely understand.

[mewa]

I think allowing the poll to run a bit longer would be within reason. A lot of people don't check the forums every three days. Maybe give it a full week. More number can't hurt can they.

As for what I wish to accomplish; First, a more concrete understanding of where the users lie on this topic. Having a few people reiterate their views throughout many threads doesn't form good policy. Second, It's not as simple as "follow the rules or gtfo". The rules are enforced when at will and stretched when needed. This is corrosive to any community.

[DrRickDaglessMD]

Thank you for repeating Dag.  Now everyone can completely understand.

My post was aimed at mewa who presents himself as someone with developed reading comprehension skills. And anyway, there was only one word in there which you might not know (provided you've finished secondary school) and that's iconoclastic - no better term exists for mewa and bix's attitudes on the forums lately: http://www.answers.com/iconoclastic .

@mewa - A week sounds good to me. But if the vote goes against you, don't start endless more threads saying '49% of the community think knack should be put to death, which is a very significant number' as you've already made it clear that you would take Bix's figures of 19/9 as a concrete yes, irrespective of how many or who stood against you.

Also, last time we addressed each other directly, you in no uncertain terms told me that you understood that this was a private organisation, which was open to the public (as opposed to a public organisation, which is run democratically). So why is it so hard to understand that those who make the rules in an organisation like this can bend and break them as they see fit? Having said that, I think we'd all like to believe in an objective fairness to things, so I think you'd do a lot better in stimulating this discussion with your dissenters if you could show a body of evidence to back up your claims, perhaps some proof that this community has been corroded by over-moderation. This way, the (currently 28) people who disagree with you won't have to see you as coLa describes - as 'whining little girls'.

- Dag

[Bix]

Senor RickDagless,

Good thing I know the meaning of the word 'iconoclastic'. Welcome to 12th grade AP art history. Anyways, I don't think that is the idea.

"One who attacks and seeks to overthrow traditional or popular ideas or institutions"

Hmmm, trying to think of the correct words so I do not hurt anyone's feelings. I like the current moderation from Jitpspoe and y00tz, although I think some of the other moderation needs reform or relaxation. I agree with the ideas and institutions. There are just certain members of our moderation team I do not agree with.

[coLa]

Second, It's not as simple as "follow the rules or gtfo". The rules are enforced when at will and stretched when needed. 

Surely it is. If you followed the rules, do you honestly believe the past 8ish threads would have been created? There would be no need for strict enforcement and everyone would be happy.

I have one question for you. Have you ever been given the power to moderate a forum of AT LEAST 400 members, where the majority of the members are early teens?

[jitspoe]

The forums are a place to have somewhat structured discussions and share information, feedback, and other data that will stick around for a long time.  If you want a place to spout uninformed opinions, use IRC.  I currently have about 100 unread threads I'm trying to catch up on.  If you think there should be less moderation, I challenge you to read every single word of every post on the entire forum, then get back to me.  If you have an issue with the way a thread was handled or what somebody said in a thread, use the report to moderator link.  If what you're typing doesn't contribute anything of value to the discussion, don't post it (or don't be surprised if it gets deleted or results in getting the thread locked for getting way out of hand).

Not trying to be a tight-arse, but I don't want to have to wade through 20 pages of nonsense in each thread to get to stuff that actually pertains to anything of importance to the game.  Of course, there's an entire section of the forums for off-topic conversations that is loosely moderated.

[mewa]

This will be a long one, and that's relative to my normally winded talk. There's a lot of ground to cover, so be prepared.

Surely it is. If you followed the rules, do you honestly believe the past 8ish threads would have been created? There would be no need for strict enforcement and everyone would be happy.

I have one question for you. Have you ever been given the power to moderate a forum of AT LEAST 400 members, where the majority of the members are early teens?

1.) The point of my statement was to show that it's not always about the poster not following rules, but rather the administrator bending rules and choosing when and where to enforce rules. I'm sure you wouldn't be real happy if you got pulled over immediately arrested, put in jail, and never given a reason. It'd be even worse if when you asked why, you were muzzled and called a whiner. I'll make a real example of this later in the post, so stay tuned. Also, please show me these "8ish threads". I think you're starting to combine Bix and I into the same person (a mewix?). Although we've had similar views lately, we are quite different people.

2.)No.

what i have been saying since the beginning is that you never gave anyone a chance to come forward and explain why it is they created a second, third, forth, etc... account. instead of letting people know you were going on a search you just started banning people. imo this is wrong. you should have at least given them a chance to explain what they were thinking or what they were trying to accomplish by making another account.

Oh, this is cute. You must really believe what you say.... But, god bless you, you try cola.

http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=9890.msg100965#msg100965 (i couldn't use the "quote" feature, locked thread. nor do i know how to write out the quote in html. can someone throw out the date format as a sidebar?)

But if the vote goes against you, don't start endless more threads saying '49% of the community think knack should be put to death, which is a very significant number' as you've already made it clear that you would take Bix's figures of 19/9 as a concrete yes, irrespective of how many or who stood against you.

Give me a break, literally. First off, if you simply took the time to read the first post of this thread/poll, you'd realize that the whole point of this thread is to attempt to give some legitimacy to Bix's "informal" count. Everyone should realize that simply counting the opinions within a forum thread isn't a very accurate sample, although it can be a good first step.

2nd, I have yet to create or imply one thread/post that directly against Knack. I am showing my nobbiness here, but until this series of threads I had no idea that Knack was responsible for the large majority of moderating. Even if I did know that, I couldn't assume that he was the one in a specific instance, or doing a certain type of administration(repeated locking of threads). Further, I generally wouldn't go after one specific admin for the simple fact that they all should be working together and following the same basic guidelines, indistinct from eachother.

Lastly, please don't make wild accusations or lump me into some stereotype of previous DP posters. I realize that generally there is younger base for this game and that they might not be so inclined to act ethical or consistent. Until, I show you some evidence that I will ignore the results and just carry on babbling for my own sake. I don't make unfounded, snide remarks to belittle you. Please reciprocate this attitude. I like to think I'm a pretty reasonable person, and very willing to admit when I'm wrong. Without any reason to think otherwise, you've made the assumption that I'm not.

So why is it so hard to understand that those who make the rules in an organisation like this can bend and break them as they see fit?

Are you serious? This kind of statement idealogical goosestepping. Why make rules at all if they don't have to realize them?

Having said that, I think we'd all like to believe in an objective fairness to things, so I think you'd do a lot better in stimulating this discussion with your dissenters if you could show a body of evidence to back up your claims, perhaps some proof that this community has been corroded by over-moderation.

Now, here's the real substance of this post. I originally tried to post this once, shortly after my ban. Something queefed up and it timed out which resulted in me losing the text in the "create new post" form (here is a post in a different thread referring to the original post, which I'm attempting to rewrite within this post, before I realized it was deleted. http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=15802.msg154239#msg154239). I procrastinated for a few days after that, during which Bix was making his post's along the same general topic. I decided that it was not necessary to post my thread since Bix was doing the same topic in a more obtuse manner, and I honestly started to feel some sympathy for Knack. Not saying that he's some wuss who can't handle excrement, but after enough threads directed towards your incompetence of the work you volunteer to do, I'm sure it doesn't sit well within a person. Despite what it seems many of you assume about me, I'm not a vindictive, heartless person just looking to lampoon anyone who decides to drop a foot in my path. But since Dagless and others have been mentioning a lack of real trigger for these post's, and it has been eating at me also that I am carrying on with all this ruckus and haven't shown the foundation for it, here it is in as close to the original verbatim as possible (just to clarify this is two rewritten post's, one within another. The first was posted for all of 6 hours and then removed by moderators for unknown reasons. The second was a post I wrote to find out why the first post was removed, while also attempting to rewrite the original as best as I could remember. The second post failed because of an identical attachment, proving the existance of the original post):

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"A few days ago I made a thread about L!nk's usage of a stolen GT login on their public servers (http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=15785.0). I was promptly banned for this thread's "personal attacks on server admins", or lack of evidence, even though this is highly contradictory since the essence of the thread was that L!nk wasn't actually an admin. I saw Knacks posting about my ban soon after it was made and for whatever reason was able to make a reply post, which stuck for many hours into the early morning, the next day I noticed it was removed. It stated:

--------------------------------------
"My apologies Knack, I hadn't read the rules regarding posting about server admins. I wish you would have just asked me for the proof or simply warned me of the rules, instead of jumping towards a ban. Anyways, here is the condump with L!nk specifically saying that no GT authority gave him the login, along with his justification for using it. I realize this is an editable file and therefore loses much of its credibility as evidence, but if you can scrutinize this file you'll find that I have not once so much as opened it, let alone change it's content.
This thread is less about L!nks abuse of a GT login, than the hypocrisy of his thread about another GT admin (supposed) seemingly banning without reason, and then him going onto the servers and using a stolen login to assert his own unwarranted will (which is quite annoying when he repeatedly changes maps, mid-map.
I would also like an explanation of why you insist that I have proof and not "flame" the server admins, when L!nk was not once asked for the same thing or repremanded in a virtually identical thread (http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=15692.0). I hope this has nothing to do with the thread I made criticize the overuse of administrative powers in this forum"

*attached "Link.txt"
--------------------------------------

Why remove a perfectly legitimate post? Did it seem easier to just remove the post than to have to respond and justify your rash use of authority? I am aware of the need for a strong set of rules, but I can't grasp the need to always jump to the assumption of punishment. Some honest mistakes (my failing to thoroughly read the entire set of rules) can't be rectified quite quickly and painlessly when the lines of communication are actually used. I am also incredibly curious as to why L!nk wasn't asked to provide any evidence to support his thread, let alone the swift hand of injustice I faced. Was this just "gut reaction" or "different strokes for different folks". Either way, I do not feel like I'm out of line asking for some reply to this.

This whole incident has left me sick with the abuse of power in the forums. I don't think it's always intentional or malicious, but it is wrong. The ability to erase any post is eerily reminiscent of Stalin behavior where he is able to continually change history to his fitting, just by the removal of documents and/or the person. By deleting my post, which seemingly contradicts your ruling, you ended the option of you being wrong. I, still to this day, have no solid proof of writing this post (although if there is any master log, there should be a mention of it in there).

Although I don't know you, I trust that you are not so hungry for DP power that you would delete any derogatory post made about you just to preserve your name. But, the way this incident has been handled is really pathetic and makes for a reluctant place to express a real opinion or idea. I hope you can see the need for more accountability, if the players trust is important to you."

*attached "Link.txt" (now renamed "Linkdumps.txt", due to "an identical file already on the server". This is why I believe I timed out and hence lost this whole posting.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


I hope you were all able to stay away from the ADD dragons long enough to actually read through all of that. Like I mentioned originally, it's a lot for one post, but all fairly important information. Although I can be fond of debates and academic discussions, this wasn't an ideal Saturday night for me, but I thought it was overdue and all too relevant to this past week or two's conversations.

I'm going to end by reiterating the requests I had made in some of the original post's on this subject. A lot has been said in the past weeks, much of it has been convoluted or "conversational eddy's", so I just want to resubmit my original goals. Hopefully you all can see some logic in having rules like these to encourage purposeful and honest writing in these forums.


1.) Less strict administration. If a person(s) is "flaming" or going off topic or any number of violations, consider giving the individual warnings that would lead into a temporary ban. It's not necessary to obliterate the discussion others were enjoying productively because a few cannot behave.

2.) Some degree of accountability and transparency. When a person is banned or a topic is locked, the administrators write a personal message or post, respectively, explaining the rational behind their logic. To the moderators credit, this is done sometimes, but too many times it isn't. It doesn't seem like to much to give the people who care about a topic one sentence to explain why they can't discuss it any further.   

3.) Less administration in general. The community can more or less handle itself. Sure they're are plenty of preteens who might run around abusing one another (and plenty of us adults who will do the same thing, slightly veiled), and these who constantly bully and resort to insults should have a be allowed to be reprimanded. I am not trying to advocate anarchy here. But let's look at this realistically, you administrators have mention how many countless hours are spent examining every word in every post (I believe this is quotable, but if not it's the gist of a statement). Is this really necessary? There are so many, countless, postings that have ceased for no apparent reason except fear of what might have evolved. This is a silly way to control people and the peons smell your fear and overcompensation. A lack of respect quickly follows. For the numerous other post's which have ended because of one or two insulting type comments, I say this, "You try and remove every possible material" that could be used as a weapon and we'll end up using our penises as shanks."


Please don't reply nitpicking some irrelevant wording I used, but if you truly disagree with a concept of mine, I'll be happy to discuss it.



“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”     - Twain


Thank You,

mewa.rules


P.S. - Sorry Jitspoe, I'm posting this without reading your post. I've been writing for awhile and am plain done with the forums for the night.

[coLa]

Quote from: coLa link=topic=9890.msg100965#msg100965 date=

what i have been saying since the beginning is that you never gave anyone a chance to come forward and explain why it is they created a second, third, forth, etc... account. instead of letting people know you were going on a search you just started banning people. imo this is wrong. you should have at least given them a chance to explain what they were thinking or what they were trying to accomplish by making another account.
Oh, this is cute. You must really believe what you say.... But, god bless you, you try cola.
http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=9890.msg100965#msg100965 (i couldn't use the "quote" feature, locked thread. nor do i know how to write out the quote in html. can someone throw out the date format as a sidebar?)

And how is that whining like a "little papas girl"? Looks like you're the only one trying here. God bless yourself.

There's no sense in even keeping this discussion alive. Jitspoe doesn't seem like he's about to change his mod staff. It's pretty much done.

I'm sure you wouldn't be real happy if you got pulled over immediately arrested, put in jail, and never given a reason. It'd be even worse if when you asked why, you were muzzled and called a whiner.

I wouldn't ask why because I obey the law and don't have to worry about police harassment.

Also, please show me these "8ish threads". I think you're starting to combine Bix and I into the same person (a mewix?). Although we've had similar views lately, we are quite different people.

I did combine both into that number since they were about the same subject.

I'm not gonna read the rest. It's way too much, too late.

Final statement: Pointless thread.

[DrRickDaglessMD]

I don't make unfounded, snide remarks to belittle you. Please reciprocate this attitude. I like to think I'm a pretty reasonable person, and very willing to admit when I'm wrong. Without any reason to think otherwise, you've made the assumption that I'm not.

To which I reply:

Give me a break, literally. First off, if you simply took the time to read the first post of this thread/poll

Don't insult my intelligence, of course I read the thread - I'm just not going to take everything you say at face value.

You see, this thread indicates to me that your strategy in this debate is to lay down some supposedly unimpeachable legitimate facts (i.e. statistics, which we all know can be used to say anything) as the bandying about of "19:9" has shown. These 'facts' would give you an apparent legitimacy (that which '19:9' could not give due to its informal nature) in your cries for revolution, and any action or argument to the contrary would be then deemed by you as being dictatorial, irrational, fascist, etc...

The reason I take exception to this, is that it is essentially a no-lose gambit if you were of a mind to pursue it even if you lost the poll. You could be fairly confident of - if not a win - then a substantial voter support, just by making this poll. The fact that the language you used, which has been commented on by others in this thread, is loaded towards the 'yes' option only confirms this. So if you win, you get your legitimate and democratic support, if you lose, you can still say X% of people are being marginalised by the current administration, why should we divide our community in half, etc... and STILL argue for change using the poll statistics for a basis. This kind of politicking just clouds the issue, so I made my prior posts in this thread to call you out on it to attempt to mitigate that strategy.

I must concede that I have lumped you and Bix in together in this entire arduous discussion, mainly due to the similarities in your tone and apparent goals. If this is wrong of me, then all I can do is apologise and from this point on be careful to differentiate between you.

Are you serious? This kind of statement idealogical goosestepping. Why make rules at all if they don't have to realize them?

I made the point all the way back in the 'lock the whole discussion' thread that your idealistic views are out of place here. Rarely are idealistic views actually IN context with the situation they are held in. In reality I am very concerned with issues of civil liberty and creeping oppression, but as far as this community is concerned, I believe it is run by mature and rational adults whom I trust to use their discretion implicitly. I'm not indoctrinated or institutionalised into accepting the 'par for the course', I simply believe that the moderators are competant and can do the job I rely on them to do, whether they follow the letter OR the spirit of the law - or not. This isn't the UN, there is no ethical oversight committee, just a group of people who dedicate their time to using their discretion to maintain this community.

Anyway, The rest of your post surprised me a bit and I think you put your point across well. While there is no evidence of that post, I'm inclined to believe you intended to make it or one like it.

As you can imagine, I don't support points 1) and 3), but 2) is rational and makes sense - I think the mods can do whatever they want (as I said before), but having some more transparency will at least placate some recipients of bans or thread lockings, which can only be a good thing.

- Dag

[iced]

Yes.

Keep up the good work jitspoe and y00tz

i vote yes...or knack shud be stripped of his power

EMPEACH!!!!

[Spook]

You ruin your credibility when you misspell words like that

[Cameron]

Bix, or Mewa, or anyone else who thinks specifically that KnacK does alot of (bad or whatever) Moderation, read.

http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=15892.new#new

[Bix]

I just read it, and i agree with erad.

[RoBbIe]

-1000 to this post i am tired of spammed threads about knack. He is good at what he does. of course he will lock threads that are unprogressive or is racist in anyway. Its his job on the forums to moderate that stuff its called moderator for a reason he can lock it if its unnecessary.

[MyeRs]

Robbie, This thread isn't "Should Knack not be a moderator"
It's simply saying that the forum should have less moderation and more expression. Of course people will still get banned for inapropriote things. Just people feel it's a little to strict, and would like a bit less severe moderation. An example could be Cameron's post, Eradicator didn't say anything bad, just was surprised that someone got banned for writing: Get a life. and Eradicator's post got deleted.

[RoBbIe]

K i understand. i think personally this forums are perfect as is. I have been to a lot of forums like the xbox live forums and they are so annoying. so this forums should stay the same for the sake of everyone's sanity. Do you really wanna come onto forums to see new post just saying random things and seeing someone make fun of someone for race. i think we should stay the same
     -Peace-

Edit-Although i do think mods should be less i don't know what to call it but they play favorites people they like they wont ban them.new members and people they don't like will be banned in seconds. considering when i first came to forums i was banned because in random section i posted i like pie?? wtf is that for now if dt did it or if terrorist did it everything would be fine and maybe post deleted and dt, terrorist that was nothing against you guys just thinking of some popular people around here

[mewa]

28 to 30, in favor of the way it is, seems to be the final tally. Although no argument can be made for an immediate need for change, since the majority was in favor of status quo, I still believe it is telling of the current situation. Don't get too happy Dagless, I'm not refuting the results, just saying that it takes more than half of the communities support for a comfortable margin, whichever way you want to view that.

I won't be around to lock the voting at it's proper ending time of 6pm, so I'll leave it to the mod's to end it then if they feel it's necessary. Otherwise, I'll lock it within the next 24-36hrs. I think we touched on some incredibly important issues, regardless of how you voted. Thank you all for participating.

Thank You,
mewa.rules