UEMB Moderation Policy Q&A

[Mix]

This is not how I envisioned this going...

 

Let's try to get back on topic, you guys made some very reasonable points...

 

 

[Hornshire]

In general, We don't really care what rules you end up deciding to enforce. Everyone has different sensibilities as to what constitutes offense/harassment and what is just someone being a pussy who can't take a joke or legitimate criticism or a dissenting opinion. It would be nice, though, if there was more of an emphasis put on the tools at individual users' disposal, such as the ignore feature, and moving on after reporting.

 

What We do care about is transparency and fairness.

 

We largely agree with what Sandstone has said thus far. The rules that get set in place need to be clear, both in visibility and meaning. "Engage in civil discourse" and "Do not damage overall board health", while fantastic goals, are terrible policies. Prohibited actions and conduct should be well-defined, as should potential consequences. There will always be grey areas, of course, but any action regarding such should have an explanation readily available. 

[Raptorpat]

Without identifying what the goal of the moderation policy is in relation to the board this is an academic exercise at best.

The goal is to create minimum standards and moderation protocol to enforce those minimum standards, while at the same time preserving the open atmosphere JMC wanted this place to have. Generally speaking.

 

As everyone was already discussing the issue, there was no sense in not creating a single thread for discussion, questions, and input.

[Ginguy]

The goal is to create minimum standards and moderation protocol to enforce those minimum standards, while at the same time preserving the open atmosphere JMC wanted this place to have. Generally speaking.

 

As everyone was already discussing the issue, there was no sense in not creating a single thread for discussion, questions, and input.

 

  The point I was trying to make is that the protocol and standards will depend on the outcome desired. If you want to create an environment with the purpose of attracting and retaining new members, that is going to be a much different standard than simply not getting KN indicted.

 

  As it stands now, this is a glorified FB group which costs KN a couple grand/year. If everyone is fine with that, then there is probably not much needed in terms of codifying a Terms of Use or Moderation protocols. If an individual really decides to shit himself and everyone else simply remove their ability to post in that folder/altogether and problem solved. Considering that everyone here by and large is familiar with each other, there isn't much of a need for more than a time out policy if someone really decides to be a jackass or violate Miller for whatever reason. If the objective is to create an atmosphere where new users would feel welcome and not simply leave after a few hours/days, then the Terms and Protocols will have to be more defined. I would consider something like this* to be a good starting point, though perhaps a bit lighter on the punishment side for certain offenses. Personally I think there needs to be an emphasis on improving civility and removing the vitriol, but I've long ago accepted that I'm in the distinct minority in that regard.

 

 

* taken from the Hannity forums

Abusive Posting:

 

Personal attacks, wishing death on innocents, racism, antisemitism, and trolling are all prohibited and can result in a ban.

 

Altering Quotations:

 

The quotation feature of these forums are a tool, and not a toy to misrepresent what other users have said. Do not alter the wording or make it appear as though another guest had said something which they did not. This purposeful disrespect and misrepresentation, this fraud, is a form of abuse and will not be allowed. It may result in a ban.

 

Antisemitism/racism:

 

This creates a hostile environment contrary to the purposes of civil discourse and a welcoming forum environment. It is an instaban offense and will not be tolerated on the Forums.

 

Ban Bypass:

 

A user who has been banned, is banned. They do not just lose the username, the welcome is gone by any other name as well. A ban bypass is an instaban. Banned users may not post anywhere but on the Moderator Forum and only for specific purposes.

 

Banned User Procedure:

 

A user who has been banned may create a temporary account to apologize, to appeal the decision or to clarify why he committed the act for consideration by the moderators, and specifically the Forum Moderator who called the ban. Generally speaking, once a Forum Moderator has taken action, He/She has "the ball" and will be handling related matters. The temp account can ONLY be used to post in the mod board and ONLY on topic of their ban.

 

Call Out Threads:

 

This is a form of abuse and we don't allow intentional abuse of honored guests. Starting a topic for the purposes of picking a fight with another guest is not allowed. These forums are for civil discussions, not brawling around the forums and flaming other guests. This can result in actions such as deleting the topic, locking the topic, and banning.

 

Changing Screen Names:

 

This is generally disallowed. There are exceptions, for example in cases of confused identity or inadvertent disclosure of personal information during the creation of the account. The reasons for this are the problems inherent with our honored guests needing to remember a list of "AKA" and the abuse that comes with Multiple Screen Names such as puppeteering (posting in agreement with yourself) and playing both sides of a debate to make yourself look good.

 

Flooding:

 

Flooding is a form of spamming, it's the practice of bumping other topics out of view in favor of changing the board to either increase your own visibility or decrease the visibility of another guest or topic. It can be cross-posting identical topics in different Forums or multiple posts in any one forum with identical or nearly identical content. It may result in actions from topics being deleted to the account responsible banned.

 

Hateful posting:

 

No lynch mobs. Do not use the forums to spread hate, Antisemitism/racism, suggest that innocents should die or that an innocent deserved to die, or otherwise fill our welcoming forums with hatred and malice. This makes our forums unattractive to our honored guests and will not be tolerated.

 

Impersonations:

 

Copying a guest's avatar, and/ or closely approximating their screen name for the purposes of being mistaken for them or mocking them as you destroy their reputation falls clearly into the realm of abuse of honored guests, and that amount of malice and aforethought rises to the level of an instaban..

 

Instaban:

 

This is a no-questions-asked, no-quarter-given ban. It's an offense so blatant, so egregious, and so obvious that any regular member who has been a member for long can spot it coming a mile away. An example is a profanity bypass with the F-bomb. It's a ban where a warning is simply not an option which will be considered.

 

Multiple Screen Names:

 

Honored guests are allowed to have one account apiece. Multiple accounts are typically abused for puppeteering (posting as another user to bolster your own argument with a straw man ally), or for holding an account in reserve to commit a ban bypass, or for playing "good cop bad cop" style of debating and seemingly "ganging up" on other posters. This is not allowed and such accounts are forfeit.

 

Obscenity:

 

Posting pictures of obscene gestures, linking to obscene web sites, posting obscene or graphic descriptions of a decidedly adult nature, and violating the standards of decent behavior found in the Sean Hannity show falls under obscenity. In short, if the FCC could fine Sean Hannity for it, then you could be banned for it.

 

 

 

[CAC]

No, too many rules there, but heading in the right direction.

[Sawdamizer]

This thread.... was moderated.

[Ginguy]

No, too many rules there, but heading in the right direction.

 

  I simply put it there as a starting point/example. The discussion over what constitutes racism alone would be pointless and irritating in the extreme as certain parties would doubtless attempt to use it as a dog whistle for "he/she disagreed with me and hurt my feels  " type vendettas. The main take away from posting that is to provide an example where a Terms of Use/Rules was written to be welcoming and encouraging to new posters.

[1pooh4u]

Not sure we need moderation guidance from the Hannity forums -_'

It's too many rules anyway

[HardcoreHunter]

I think birthday threads should be exempt from being a shoutout.

[Rogue_Alphonse]

I think birthday threads should be exempt from being a shoutout.

 

Second.

[Naraku4656]

Happy Birthday Werecat

[CAC]

I think birthday threads should be exempt from being a shoutout.

 

I'm honestly fine with shoutouts in general as long as there in good fun. It's pretty easy to tell which ones need locked and which don't.

[HardcoreHunter]

I'm honestly fine with shoutouts in general as long as there in good fun. It's pretty easy to tell which ones need locked and which don't.

 

I feel the same, but then you get people being full on assholes with what rules are written out. I swear some people on this site would sue a fan company after getting their dick chopped off because it didn't have a warning not to put their dick in it.

[Rogue_Alphonse]

Happy Birthday @werecat

 

Fixed.

 

Also, the shoutouts are like Hardcore(lol) said. they're pretty straight forward and kinda the least of the concerns.

[scoobdog]

  The point I was trying to make is that the protocol and standards will depend on the outcome desired. If you want to create an environment with the purpose of attracting and retaining new members, that is going to be a much different standard than simply not getting KN indicted.

 

  As it stands now, this is a glorified FB group which costs KN a couple grand/year. If everyone is fine with that, then there is probably not much needed in terms of codifying a Terms of Use or Moderation protocols. If an individual really decides to shit himself and everyone else simply remove their ability to post in that folder/altogether and problem solved. Considering that everyone here by and large is familiar with each other, there isn't much of a need for more than a time out policy if someone really decides to be a jackass or violate Miller for whatever reason. If the objective is to create an atmosphere where new users would feel welcome and not simply leave after a few hours/days, then the Terms and Protocols will have to be more defined. I would consider something like this* to be a good starting point, though perhaps a bit lighter on the punishment side for certain offenses. Personally I think there needs to be an emphasis on improving civility and removing the vitriol, but I've long ago accepted that I'm in the distinct minority in that regard.

 

 

* taken from the Hannity forums

Abusive Posting:

 

Personal attacks, wishing death on innocents, racism, antisemitism, and trolling are all prohibited and can result in a ban.

 

Altering Quotations:

 

The quotation feature of these forums are a tool, and not a toy to misrepresent what other users have said. Do not alter the wording or make it appear as though another guest had said something which they did not. This purposeful disrespect and misrepresentation, this fraud, is a form of abuse and will not be allowed. It may result in a ban.

 

Antisemitism/racism:

 

This creates a hostile environment contrary to the purposes of civil discourse and a welcoming forum environment. It is an instaban offense and will not be tolerated on the Forums.

 

Ban Bypass:

 

A user who has been banned, is banned. They do not just lose the username, the welcome is gone by any other name as well. A ban bypass is an instaban. Banned users may not post anywhere but on the Moderator Forum and only for specific purposes.

 

Banned User Procedure:

 

A user who has been banned may create a temporary account to apologize, to appeal the decision or to clarify why he committed the act for consideration by the moderators, and specifically the Forum Moderator who called the ban. Generally speaking, once a Forum Moderator has taken action, He/She has "the ball" and will be handling related matters. The temp account can ONLY be used to post in the mod board and ONLY on topic of their ban.

 

Call Out Threads:

 

This is a form of abuse and we don't allow intentional abuse of honored guests. Starting a topic for the purposes of picking a fight with another guest is not allowed. These forums are for civil discussions, not brawling around the forums and flaming other guests. This can result in actions such as deleting the topic, locking the topic, and banning.

 

Changing Screen Names:

 

This is generally disallowed. There are exceptions, for example in cases of confused identity or inadvertent disclosure of personal information during the creation of the account. The reasons for this are the problems inherent with our honored guests needing to remember a list of "AKA" and the abuse that comes with Multiple Screen Names such as puppeteering (posting in agreement with yourself) and playing both sides of a debate to make yourself look good.

 

Flooding:

 

Flooding is a form of spamming, it's the practice of bumping other topics out of view in favor of changing the board to either increase your own visibility or decrease the visibility of another guest or topic. It can be cross-posting identical topics in different Forums or multiple posts in any one forum with identical or nearly identical content. It may result in actions from topics being deleted to the account responsible banned.

 

Hateful posting:

 

No lynch mobs. Do not use the forums to spread hate, Antisemitism/racism, suggest that innocents should die or that an innocent deserved to die, or otherwise fill our welcoming forums with hatred and malice. This makes our forums unattractive to our honored guests and will not be tolerated.

 

Impersonations:

 

Copying a guest's avatar, and/ or closely approximating their screen name for the purposes of being mistaken for them or mocking them as you destroy their reputation falls clearly into the realm of abuse of honored guests, and that amount of malice and aforethought rises to the level of an instaban..

 

Instaban:

 

This is a no-questions-asked, no-quarter-given ban. It's an offense so blatant, so egregious, and so obvious that any regular member who has been a member for long can spot it coming a mile away. An example is a profanity bypass with the F-bomb. It's a ban where a warning is simply not an option which will be considered.

 

Multiple Screen Names:

 

Honored guests are allowed to have one account apiece. Multiple accounts are typically abused for puppeteering (posting as another user to bolster your own argument with a straw man ally), or for holding an account in reserve to commit a ban bypass, or for playing "good cop bad cop" style of debating and seemingly "ganging up" on other posters. This is not allowed and such accounts are forfeit.

 

Obscenity:

 

Posting pictures of obscene gestures, linking to obscene web sites, posting obscene or graphic descriptions of a decidedly adult nature, and violating the standards of decent behavior found in the Sean Hannity show falls under obscenity. In short, if the FCC could fine Sean Hannity for it, then you could be banned for it.

 

 

 

I guess I have to be a good boy here...

 

I think this is a terrible starting point mostly because it, counterintuitively, still breeds arrogance.  For an in internet troll, rules aren't made to be broken as much as bent to serve a purpose.  The more rules you add, the more an enterprising troll can use those same rules to provide cover for his activities with relatively little risk of retaliation.  The old boards had some of the strictest moderation anywhere when they were first up and we still managed to have a Y7.  Having more rules and stricter behavioral parameters looks great on paper, but it does little more than make the mods job more difficult, slows down the process, and leads to lots of borderline abuse still getting through.

 

More rules do not make this place less any less inhospitable if that's your goal.

[André Toulon]

I think there is a lot to say for the placement of DF. 

 

Remove reports from DF, and remove DF from the top listing.........If you put it all the way at the bottom, only those of us who like farts will bother to go there.....With it right under Rants (or since it's a subfolder, I guess under FFA) that makes it too appealing for people to walk out of FFA and come to DF, even though the disclaimers are there.

 

If a denizen of DF comes, and messes up one of FFA's hundreds of "no, you" threads, just do what you did to this thread, chop it off and DF it to spare the feefees.

[rpgamer]

Dunno if it's a rank privilege or something else, but from my end, DF doesn't even show up anywhere.

[mthor]

Dunno if it's a rank privilege or something else, but from my end, DF doesn't even show up anywhere.

 

Yes, it is rank related; unfortunately I'm not sure how many posts are require before you can access it.

 

This question came up not to long ago.  Does anybody remember what the answer was?

[Codename: Jackass]

They should raise the post threshold incrementally every few months to keep the rifraff out.

[Ginguy]

It's 1500 posts to see DF

[wacky1980]

It's 1500 posts to see DF

i can see it today and i crossed 900 overnight.

[Misaka]

It's 1500 posts to see DF

 

It was changed recently

I'll have to find the new requirement

[mthor]

i can see it today and i crossed 900 overnight.

 

Yeah, but you're speshul. 

[The1gairon]

No up or down-voting.

[CAC]

Yes up and down voting.

[André Toulon]

No up or down-voting.

 

Lulz

[The1gairon]

Yes up and down voting.

 

Vote up or down if you want up or down-voting.  :P

[Codename: Jackass]

I can hear the cries of "downvote trolling" already.

Did we learn nothing from the nightmare that was NoDeBB?

[The1gairon]

I can hear the cries of "downvote trolling" already.

Did we learn nothing from the nightmare that was NoDeBB?

 

Oh I am the opposite. That's why I sad NO up to down-voting. It's what made me leave the previous forum before it got shut down.

[SwimModSponges]

I want to be able to downvote again, that was fun.

[wacky1980]

Yeah, but you're speshul. 

i was about to say something about how i've seen posters in df with only a couple hundred posts. i'm speshul, so it didn't make sense for a minute. then i figured it out.  -_'

[CAC]

I want to be able to downvote again, that was fun.

 

indeed it was, but I doubt it will happen here.

[Misaka]

Oh I am the opposite. That's why I sad NO up to down-voting. It's what made me leave the previous forum before it got shut down.

 

if anything it could be a moderation type system

otherwise it would be a rank level only type deal Centurion or Paragon to avoid trolling and abuse

 

also to make it a better situation it would be a once a day deal 

complete way to counter the trolling but staff would be voided

[Ginguy]

Down votes in Dumpster Fire only.

[K_N]

No downvoting will ever be added.

 

Final say.

[The1gairon]

I wouldn't call rescinding your member priviledges because of trolls trying to get rid of you fun. 

[mthor]

i was about to say something about how i've seen posters in df with only a couple hundred posts. i'm speshul, so it didn't make sense for a minute. then i figured it out.  -_'

 

It's a strange gateway to pass through - I've been posting in there all along, even before I hit any magic number. Maybe it's because the old rants was pretty much a dumpster fire, and I'm the only one left who'll admit that that's where I'm from. (you should have invoked your rants time and they'd have let you in from the beginning.).

[Mewn]

Mix[/member] Why was I summoned here? >_>

 

If these rules actually do go into action then good.

Otherwise meh.

I've given up for the most part in caring anymore. 

[wacky1980]

It's a strange gateway to pass through - I've been posting in there all along, even before I hit any magic number. Maybe it's because the old rants was pretty much a dumpster fire, and I'm the only one left who'll admit that that's where I'm from. (you should have invoked your rants time and they'd have let you in from the beginning.).

well shit. i've never been scared to admit my rants roots. it was always the only place worth investing any energy. i guess senpai finally noticed me?

[1pooh4u]

Down votes in Dumpster Fire only.

Down votes for you only :catlol

[Ginguy]

Down votes for you only :catlol

 

I agree.

 

You heard the people, I and I alone shall wield the power of the downvote.  ohno  ::: :brownbottle:

[naraku360]

I agree.

 

You heard the people, I and I alone shall wield the power of the downvote.  ohno  ::: :brownbottle:

You, and you alone, shall have the ability to get downvoted.

[1pooh4u]

I agree.

 

You heard the people, I and I alone shall wield the power of the downvote.  ohno  ::: :brownbottle:

Oh, I'm sorry, I mean you're the only one to receive downvotes from others, not the ability to give them.

I might be dumb but I ain't crazy  ::]::

[1pooh4u]

You, and you alone, shall have the ability to get downvoted.

That's what I meant  :catlol

[Still Me]

i don't care what the rules are but don't take away my fucking use of fuck k?

[Raptorpat]

Ok

[Mix]

i don't care what the rules are but don't take away my fucking use of *cooks* k?

 

*cooks* you, lady  :robotmad

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Misaka]

*cooks* you, lady  :robotmad

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait there is a filter now?

[Still Me]

Wait there is a filter now?

 

oh fuck no... mix is being a doof

[Mix]

Like I said before, being forced to have only one of those two choices is when murder is totally appropriate.