What's this rating thing?
- Thread starter Chris Martin
- Start date
Lord Abaddon
Sr Member
It is very simple when you don't look at it like something from the X-Files.
Two different things:
1) Policy. No changes to policy.
2) Tool for enforcing current policy. It was said they were looking at such a tool.
Simple.
Err, no.
It was said earlier that ban/warning monitoring was done rather laboriously through threads in the staff forum.
By implementing a new tool, the procedures associated with this activity, permissions, etc would be changed. Thus a change in policy as the old methodologies and policies (USE ONLY IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, per Wampa) would no longer be the same.
Hence, policy change.
It was said earlier that ban/warning monitoring was done rather laboriously through threads in the staff forum.
By implementing a new tool, the procedures associated with this activity, permissions, etc would be changed. Thus a change in policy as the old methodologies and policies (USE ONLY IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, per Wampa) would no longer be the same.
Hence, policy change.
Gman666
Well-Known Member
Was this not a tool that each member could use to personally monitor their status in regards to warnings? Apparently I missed the confession from the staff that this was some "new" type of banning. What I got from the staff was this was just a way for members to track their activity. How would this lead to stricter "policing "of the boards and the elimination of rights by "Big Brother"? I thought it was fine, a tool just like the post counter. Just a way of a member to keep track of things, a memberÂ’s information would constantly be available to them. Is this a wrong assumption?
Greg
Greg
Lord Abaddon
Sr Member
Err, no.
Policies and procedures are two very different things. Policy usually will affect procedure, but procedure does not necessarily affect policy.
Flynn,
I think you're overcomplicating. I know this cold from when we set the forum up and I was the one who changed the defaults. Matt wasn't very knowledgable about the software at the time (hell, none of us were.) so that may be why his post sounds a little weird to you, who does know the software (probably better than any of us.).
In short, (and again) the panel was/has been active, but the warn portion was not used (hence the reason that when it was toggled "on" for all to see, no one had any warnings). It was activated soley to allow non-root group mods to do an emergency ban if needed.
Of course, if they had decided to use the warn portion of it, who cares HOW they keep track of warnings? Shouldn't they keep track of them?
I dunno, to me, this really IS "nothing to see." Sure, there are a few guys that seem to want to use this as their "spear of the day" to lob at the current staff and act as if this is "scary" and all that BS just to try to sew the seeds of mistrust for the staff (and then say "see, people don't trust you." on top of it.), but at this point I think they're gonna do that regardless. :unsure
Tom
Gman666
Well-Known Member
I know that, it still did not answer my question. How would this tracking take away a member's rights? The only thing turned on was the member monitor feature right? What does this feature have to do with instant one-button bans? The original question was what it this new display under our avatars, and from what I understand from the staff's posts is that it was just a way for a member to monitor their own warnings log. Is this incorrect? This thread has moved away from the original question to the way members are banned and the staff changing procedures. Back to my question, the only purpose of the temporary feature toggled on was for members to monitor their own log right? Thanks for the answers.
Thanks,
Greg
exoray
Master Member
The reason I take offense, to me (joe average) the in your face *WARNING* level was akin to the Scarlet Letter, I understand it's only in view to the user and admin staff, but do I really need it in my face...
An honest upfront explanation, rather then the side stepped answers, would go a long way towards trust, it's not given but earned...
I don't know that any current or former staff members have mentioned it in just this way, so I'll chunk in my four half-pennies:
When we originally talked about this "warning tracking" tool, I thought it would be most useful for keeping track of the "everyday" warnings that went on, not just the spammers and porn posters and things.
What happens in the staff forum is that you warn a couple of members for fighting or whatever. They cool off. Then a week or so later, one of them baits the other one in another thread, so you have another warning. And the cycle continues. Now, all of this is tracked in the staff forum, but each warning has it's own thread (usually) and then also gets a small posting in a stuck thread at the top that is sort of a "catch-all" warning thread, if that makes sense, so we can track the warnings. The theory was that we'd eventually see a pattern of behavior and lay down more than a warning, if necessary. The problem was that all of these warnings got lost in the shuffle, and you'd soon forget how many times you've had to pull a member off of another member.
This tool is just a way of more efficiently keeping track of those kinds of warnings, in my mind.
Tom (moogybaby), LA, and a few others in this thread know what it's like to keep dogging the staff about someone continuously baiting them in this thread and that thread and having to remind us of how long this has been going on, how many times the other member has already been officially warned (nevermind being warned in private), etc. Well, this is the kind of tool that would make things much simpler for the staff to keep track of that. That's all there is to it. Nothing sinister. Just something to make that part of the record keeping much more efficient.
And the temp ban/auto-ban button was always there, that's nothing new. Rob et al. have already talked about that. This tool doesn't make that part any easier, mechanically. It's always been a pretty simple and quick process to ban people.
W.
When we originally talked about this "warning tracking" tool, I thought it would be most useful for keeping track of the "everyday" warnings that went on, not just the spammers and porn posters and things.
What happens in the staff forum is that you warn a couple of members for fighting or whatever. They cool off. Then a week or so later, one of them baits the other one in another thread, so you have another warning. And the cycle continues. Now, all of this is tracked in the staff forum, but each warning has it's own thread (usually) and then also gets a small posting in a stuck thread at the top that is sort of a "catch-all" warning thread, if that makes sense, so we can track the warnings. The theory was that we'd eventually see a pattern of behavior and lay down more than a warning, if necessary. The problem was that all of these warnings got lost in the shuffle, and you'd soon forget how many times you've had to pull a member off of another member.
This tool is just a way of more efficiently keeping track of those kinds of warnings, in my mind.
Tom (moogybaby), LA, and a few others in this thread know what it's like to keep dogging the staff about someone continuously baiting them in this thread and that thread and having to remind us of how long this has been going on, how many times the other member has already been officially warned (nevermind being warned in private), etc. Well, this is the kind of tool that would make things much simpler for the staff to keep track of that. That's all there is to it. Nothing sinister. Just something to make that part of the record keeping much more efficient.
And the temp ban/auto-ban button was always there, that's nothing new. Rob et al. have already talked about that. This tool doesn't make that part any easier, mechanically. It's always been a pretty simple and quick process to ban people.
W.
Yes, although I wouldn't put it in such Orwellian terms.
What is it exactly that you think moderators do? Just hang out and talk about flowers and incense, hoping that the forum runs smoothly all by its lonesome and that the people who are pissing all over the forums and the other members will wake up of their own volition and realize that what they are doing is inappropriate and start send love-o-grams via PM to everyone?
W.
What is it exactly that you think moderators do? Just hang out and talk about flowers and incense, hoping that the forum runs smoothly all by its lonesome and that the people who are pissing all over the forums and the other members will wake up of their own volition and realize that what they are doing is inappropriate and start send love-o-grams via PM to everyone?
W.
Similar threads
