| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Proposed rule change
I would like to propose a rule change. If an admin is involved in posting in a thread they are not allowed to use their admin powers to delete posts, issue warnings or lock threads. This would help stop the situations where an admin who loses an argument can abuse their powers to remove the posts they personally disagree with.
|
|
... 138 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
Quote: If a mod is going to just delete things then wtf is the point of anyone ever posting? Some idiot is going to think they know better and PRESTO your post is gone. I understand mods doing that type of stuff with files, might not agree with it sometimes but understand, but just deleting posts??
As I suggested to gropeaz at the time, all a mod has to do is ask people keep it on topic NOT post some sarcastic crap because they know it'll get a reaction (the very definition of trolling)
Offtopicness (sic) in a thread like that, as you've said hardly mattered as most of it was. Or do you guys pay by the word? If not, and it wasn't "Today I went to Zoo!" or something really off topic like that, it should just be left. Who knows, the hardware dev might see it if he picks it up again and decide RLE would be an interesting thing to explore. It sure as crap wasn't hurting anyone.
Moderator decides. |
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
shame the whole shebang crashes down when the moderator chooses to be a dick really. |
| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Quote: Moderator decides.
As I said you cannot logically fall back to using "moderator decides" when the moderator has a biased involvement in the thread and is therefore no longer able to perform the role of moderator.
Which is why I proposed the rule change, it would help to improve debate in threads by clarifying that when moderators post like everyone else they are subject to the same rules as everyone else in that thread.
|
| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3057 |
Quote: I think you're wrong for the following reasons:
The thread was very much still alive.
The topic of using RLE spans for 3D acceleration are relevant to the developer, it is why I made the post.
Even if the original poster stopped posting the topic of the thread still remains and might be useful to someone else in the future. To delete posts that are on topic and useful is incorrect moderation.
Because the posts were deleted and the topic locked the original poster was not even given a chance to comment on the useful nature of the posts. The first post in that thread by Stingray was in 2004, the last post was in 2010. Judging by the length of time the poster was still posting in the thread you cannot logically claim the poster "stoppoed posting in it". You have to concede that it was perfectly possible Stongray could have seen our on topic posts and come back with more posts regarding an RLE addition to his project.
The mod's post was not useful, it was off topic. The moderator is no longer performing the role of moderator when they make off topic posts in a thread. Ergo they are no longer a moderator per se.
As such there is no logical sense for Groepaz's objections.
You cannot logically fall back to using "it's on moderator to decide" when the moderator has a biased involvement in the thread and is therefore no longer able to perform the role of moderator.
And you are coming up with new arguments which are dragging your own thread to total mess.
First of all. I'm not going to delete anything, nor closing this. I'm chosing ignoring it. But of course I will post one last post here. Which is this one.
so..
The thread was dead for almost year.. it wasn't alive.
This post appeared after almost a year
Quote:"I followed this thread waiting to see the birth of a new hw but it looks like too much time has passed since last Stingray's post... It sounded very promising, I really hope this thing still being under development.
... any news about this lil beauty?"
I would have expected Stingray to reply. That would be on-topic.
Your JCB's and STE'86 posts weren't useful for me. I have read the whole thread for the first time when it reappeared. And your posts later after the thread was closed and mentioned in moderators forum. I found posts by C64 coders very useful. Your post's vere somehow releated but not useful.
If Stingray returns back, he can start new thread easily.
The mod's post shouldn't have been there. He should have deleted your posts if he thought they were offtopic. That what mods are doing and should do (if they feel it is right thing to do).
As far as people vs. groepaz in that thread is concerned. My independent point of view is, that Groepaz deserves the blame for getting into silly argument with you.
But it seems it is really easy to get into silly argument with you guys. Live long and prosper. EOT for me.
|
| |
STE'86
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 274 |
it only looks silly when you havent got a better argument than "because i say so" |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
Quote:
As far as people vs. groepaz in that thread is concerned. My independent point of view is, that Groepaz deserves the blame for getting into silly argument with you.
But it seems it is really easy to get into silly argument with you guys. Live long and prosper. EOT for me.
well said. and as for the rest, i wont get into such argument with some people anymore. promised.
and now for shits and giggles, look at some of the past "omg the evil nazi mods" threads and see how its always the same 5 people whining. thats totally moderation proven wrong!
|
| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Quoting CreaMDAnd you are coming up with new arguments which are dragging your own thread to total mess.
Actually no, I didn't want to or start discussing particular people or posts. I specifically kept the original post neutral. I am only responding to your points specifically about those particular posts and mods.
I also note that nobody has come up with a good argument against the proposed rule change. Which is the real topic of this thread.
Quoting CreaMD
The thread was dead for almost year.. it wasn't alive.
I would have expected Stingray to reply. That would be on-topic.
Given the very short amount of time between new on topic posts about RLE 3D and the eventual lock and delete I put it to you that the original poster was not given enough time to actually check and respond to the thread. So you cannot logically say if the thread was alive or not.
Also the fact is the deleted posts only came after it was pointed out the mod made off topic posts and then apparently got angry and went into a huff. You have to concede this is not good moderation.
Quoting CreaMDYour JCB's and STE'86 posts weren't useful for me. I have read the whole thread for the first time when it reappeared. And your posts later after the thread was closed and mentioned in moderators forum. I found posts by C64 coders very useful. Your post's vere somehow releated but not useful.
Other posters found them to be useful and on topic. I would also point out that because the thread was locked and the posts deleted I was not able to comment or clarify further.
Quote:If Stingray returns back, he can start new thread easily.
It would be more useful and the better choice if Stingray could read our posts and contribute to the same thread he started. Instead of having to create a new thread on the same subject.
Prompted by Stingray's project I started my own retro themed 3D accelerator for the C64. Do you mind if I start a thread about it?
Quote:The mod's post shouldn't have been there.
...
My independent point of view is, that Groepaz deserves the blame for getting into silly argument with you.
So I take it moderators should be reminded that they should not do this in the future?
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
Quote:So I take it moderators should be reminded that they should not do this in the future?
indeed, no doubt.
however users should also be reminded that moderators are just like you, are not machines and might like some silly bickering every now and then. (and just for the records: it works most of the time, except for these annual case when a silly argument explodes into a flood of void)
|
| |
Martin Piper
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 722 |
Groepaz. It isn't the silly bickering so much, as you say mods are not machines they are people as well.
It is the silly bickering then deleting on topic useful posts and locking the thread. That just looks plain bad.
I think you should restore the posts and unlock the thread to give those of us who were discussing on topic a chance to continue the discussion. At least it will show that you can admit you're wrong and clean up your own mess. This would demonstrate good qualities that people expect from good moderation. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
Quote:It is the silly bickering then deleting on topic useful posts and locking the thread. That just looks plain bad.
agreed - i think i said that before.
Quote:At least it will show that you can admit you're wrong and clean up your own mess. This would demonstrate good qualities that people expect from good moderation.
if anyone from the moderation team felt like the case would be handled wrong, you can be sure he would speak it out and act accordingly. however, in this case i am with creamd.
i'd like to give your initial idea another thought though - eventhough i think it is unrealistic in practise for several reasons so making it mandatory is likely not going to happen - it is probably a good idea to "keep in mind" anyhow. i totally understand and support the idea behind it - the entire thing would have likely turned out differently if another moderator had stepped in. (atleast we'd get some evil communist images instead... or something =P)
i'd also like to think it a step further - what about if some user gets into an argument or otherwise disagrees with a moderator or rule, then he can not complain about it because he is personally involved - he must find another user, who is not involved, who does that? (yes, another unrealistic idea that wont work in practise. it rocks in theory though :=P)
because, you know, it isnt like that we dont want or dont listen to feedback of whatever kind - especially if it involves the rules we impose or the moderation in general.
it is more like, that very often (most of the times infact) the kind of feedback that comes from users who are directly involved is not very useful. eg it is obvious that someone who just got into an argument and then some of his posts were deleted most likely feels that this wasnt the right thing to do. we know that already :) what is a whole lot more interesting in such cases is feedback from those who are not directly involved (and preferably not big buddie with someone involved either) - because that'd really be the only way to get a half neutral view from a user perspective.
and in fact, although this kind of feedback is rare (unfortunately), it is almost always useful and leads to an improvement of some sort. eg i am just right now working on making some particular rule more elaborate, because some (even totally new) user noticed us about something that leaves too much room for interpretation and needs a small addition to avoid some silly arguments :)
on the other hand, opening a thread and posting silly nazi references is, even if you are right and were treatened wrong, completely counterproductive and will always lead into the respective actions, even if you are right and were treatened wrong. if that is your feedback, then you really shouldnt complain about what emerges from it either =P
another thing learned from this thread though: for those who like nitpicking on words, "moderators" should probably rename themselves to "co-sysops". it'd be more fitting in any case.
|
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 15 - Next |
