Log inRegister an accountBrowse CSDbHelp & documentationFacts & StatisticsThe forumsAvailable RSS-feeds on CSDbSupport CSDb Commodore 64 Scene Database
You are not logged in - nap
CSDb User Forums


Forums > CSDb Feedback > Evaluating the moderation of CSDb
2007-09-25 09:11
Laxity

Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 459
Evaluating the moderation of CSDb

I think it's time to evaluate how the moderation of CSDb is going. Good/bad?.. Anyone?

Something just struct my eye. I just saw the "moderation rules" thread (started by Oswald) being closed for no obvious reason (Ok, Steppe said - "close thread?" or something). I disagree in such an approach to moderation. The moderator should not close a thread unless it's going really bad, and warnings have been issued; furthermore I think moderators who personally participate in a discussion should be rendered powerless over moderating that particular discussion. Furthermore, when closing a thread, I think a reason for doing so should be given..

Oh, and this is not supposed to be another "bitching" topic. I'd like to call and everybody interested to state their thoughts. Good AND bad. Not just bad, please!..
 
... 150 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
 
2007-10-02 08:00
Stainless Steel

Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 966
Quoting groepaz
because i am an elitist fascist bastard gestapo moderator.


We knew it all along.

2007-10-02 11:36
Laxity

Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 459
Ok, I'm sitting here doing some nitpicking, and I thought:

Wouldn't it be nice if the moderator sign under the moderators nicks weren't visible, unless you guys are actually moderating. It's rather distracting and I've been confused more than once if you were talking as moderators or individuals. Might seem like a stupid thing, but I bet it will give the impression that users and mods aren't so far apart, and there'd be no doubts as to when you speak as yourselves and when you don't.

Is that a bad idea?.. Just thinking out loud!..
2007-10-02 11:54
chatGPZ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114
mmmmh, somehow that sounds as if you are implying that users are too stupid to think for themselves =P

and it won't make me a less elitist fascist moderator bastard either =P
2007-10-02 13:15
wreg
Account closed

Registered: Mar 2004
Posts: 679
i like 'laxitys' idea, i already though about that when starting to post in threads like these :-)
cause sometimes my opinion differs from the one the mod-team has ;-)
2007-10-02 15:31
CreaMD

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 3034
Quote: i like 'laxitys' idea, i already though about that when starting to post in threads like these :-)
cause sometimes my opinion differs from the one the mod-team has ;-)


I also don't think it is necessary to have " moderator sign "directly under the nickname. It was added only lately and I didn't notice anyone from mods asking for this.
2007-10-02 16:33
chatGPZ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11114
actually i asked for it, i'm used to that from pretty much any other forum (both phpBB and BurningBoard do it) :=)
2007-10-02 20:40
MagerValp

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1055
I, for one, welcome our new moderating overloards. This place really is a lot nicer now.
2007-10-02 21:19
Laxity

Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 459
Quote: mmmmh, somehow that sounds as if you are implying that users are too stupid to think for themselves =P

and it won't make me a less elitist fascist moderator bastard either =P


Maybe I'm getting old or something (which is probably true), but did I really imply that users are stupid?..
2007-10-02 21:29
Burglar

Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1031
Quote:
what people seem to forget is that this is a hobby for everyone here, even the moderators. Posting an explanation after deleting a post/oneliner/comment will cost them a whole lot more time. and that would suck for them.

well, the point is that most of us don't see a reason to delete posts most of the time. I know that moderators have been very eager to delete posts lately, which means they are the cause themselves to explanations.

having moderators think of an explanation will hopefully make the trigger-happy-mod think twice and possibly not delete the post.

it might be good to know how many posts the moderators delete on a daily basis. I bet it a averages < 0.25 (deleting multiple wdr-spam posts count as 3)

also, not only the mods are contributing to csdb in their spare time, we all do that.

PS: Oswald, for the love of God, you still don't understand that my crappy coder remark was a joke? I was telling a newbie that he shouldn't worry about his coding skills as one of the best coders on c64 ever was able to optimize his code. I only tried to explain that in a humorous way.
2007-10-02 21:31
Burglar

Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 1031
Quote: I, for one, welcome our new moderating overloards. This place really is a lot nicer now.

I have to say, I also really respect the time and effort the mods are putting into csdb. If only they tried to work a bit more with us than against us.
We're all arguing for the same goal. A good, accurate and fun c64 scene database. (don't forget the fucking fun!)
Previous - 1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 - Next
RefreshSubscribe to this thread:

You need to be logged in to post in the forum.

Search the forum:
Search   for   in  
All times are CET.
Search CSDb
Advanced
Users Online
Remdy/Dentifrice
hedning/G★P
Guests online: 109
Top Demos
1 Next Level  (9.8)
2 Mojo  (9.7)
3 Coma Light 13  (9.7)
4 Edge of Disgrace  (9.6)
5 Comaland 100%  (9.6)
6 No Bounds  (9.6)
7 Uncensored  (9.6)
8 Wonderland XIV  (9.6)
9 Memento Mori  (9.6)
10 Bromance  (9.5)
Top onefile Demos
1 It's More Fun to Com..  (9.7)
2 Party Elk 2  (9.7)
3 Cubic Dream  (9.6)
4 Copper Booze  (9.5)
5 TRSAC, Gabber & Pebe..  (9.5)
6 Rainbow Connection  (9.5)
7 Wafer Demo  (9.5)
8 Dawnfall V1.1  (9.5)
9 Quadrants  (9.5)
10 Daah, Those Acid Pil..  (9.5)
Top Groups
1 Oxyron  (9.3)
2 Nostalgia  (9.3)
3 Booze Design  (9.3)
4 Censor Design  (9.3)
5 Crest  (9.3)
Top Logo Graphicians
1 Sander  (10)
2 Facet  (9.7)
3 Mermaid  (9.4)
4 Pal  (9.4)
5 Shine  (9.3)

Home - Disclaimer
Copyright © No Name 2001-2024
Page generated in: 0.047 sec.