Rule Enforcement Discussion

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Would you be interested in a Rule system like the one discussed in this thread?

Poll ended at Sat Feb 02, 2013 1:44 am

Yes
4
57%
No
3
43%
 
Total votes : 7

Rule Enforcement Discussion

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Jan 17, 2013 5:47 am

Note from kentington:
I would like input from the community and if you could add any of your reasoning, that is welcome. Do not let this become a place to troll or flame each other. Try to keep it together for at least this thread.







MOST IMPORTANT POSTS ITT,
the rest can suck it.

Haggis_McMutton wrote:
notyou2 wrote:The problem is that the rules and bans are very subjective. Many others break the same rules and are not punished, but others appear to be picked on. Exasperating the situation is the policy of silence.

Double posting? Come on.

Necro posting? wow. Why?

These are very minor infractions.

The powers that be, be they one or two individuals, are a board of several administration people, have apparently decided to say nothing of the alleged infractions, so no one learns the application of the rules. Imagine from the players eyes, a player disappears for no apparent reason, and then returns after a certain amount of time. Translate that to real life. For example, all the village knows the police have detained someone but no one knows why or for how long. Then one day they reappear.

The admin needs to institute an announcement policy on these infractions. Much like the police give statements on arrests and cases. The courts announce sentences, etc.


+1

Also, the existence of these infractions seems to be part of the old tactic of making trivial common things "illegal" but very rarely prosecuting them so that no one gives a shit cause it seems like it doesn't matter. Of course it does matter cause the powers that be now have an excuse to selectively prosecute whomever they don't like for these minor offences that virtually everyone is guilty of.

Mods, why not tell us what the ban was for ? Please explain the reasoning. If scotty requested you not to tell us then say that.
Honestly this is the second worrisome sign regarding the new moderation for me (first was the ham-fisted handling of the joke rape threads situation).
Rds, you seem like a decent guy. Please, for Hank's sake, don't go the Twilldo route of moderation.


[/MOST IMPORTANT POSTS ITT]


What's the point of having rules when the reasons for enforcement remain ambiguous? How does that effectively serve the goals of CC's enforcement policy?
(hint: it doesn't).

If you want CC'ers to not do X, then punishments for X, Y, or Z should be publicly announced; otherwise, we have no idea which rules are actually being enforced--nor would we know how many times a somewhat unenforced rule is now being enforced. That information matters, but it's unfortunately being withheld.

(Furthermore, responding with "all the rules are enforced! lololol!" is total BS because they simply aren't for several reasons which have been previously mentioned for the past 3 three years).
Last edited by kentington on Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:47 am, edited 3 times in total.
Reason: Added Poll.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Jan 17, 2013 5:56 am

kentington wrote:
notyou2 wrote:I am not a fan of the system, no matter who is banned. I will say the forum has not been inundated with a multitude of stupid threads.


Out of curiosity, what would you have done for breakers of the rules?


Great question. Here's a few answers which are reasonable and have worked in the past:

(1) Ignore them.
(2) Ignore the complaints of the extremely small yet highly sensitive and inflammatory group.
(3) Let the community handle it.


Obviously, this need not apply to all cases, but all infractions do not need to be enforced--nor should all infractions be silently piled onto one's 'case file', which is later used to ban that CC'er whenever some arbitrarily determined tipping point is passed. (Recall how user A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. Rule enforcement seems to be random here, which is the worst way to enforce rules).

The mods aren't necessary for most bans. We should institute People's Courts. That would be fun!--but at the very least, it would allow us to experiment with new avenues of rule enforcement which are more just, thus satisfying to the community. After the People's Court decides, the mod obediently fulfills the Court Orders.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby Gillipig on Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:10 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
kentington wrote:
notyou2 wrote:I am not a fan of the system, no matter who is banned. I will say the forum has not been inundated with a multitude of stupid threads.


Out of curiosity, what would you have done for breakers of the rules?


Great question. Here's a few answers which are reasonable and have worked in the past:

(1) Ignore them.
(2) Ignore the complaints of the extremely small yet highly sensitive and inflammatory group.
(3) Anarchy! Woot woot!!!


Obviously, this need not apply to all cases, but all infractions do not need to be enforced--nor should all infractions be silently piled onto one's 'case file', which is later used to ban that CC'er whenever some arbitrarily determined tipping point is passed. (Recall how user A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. Rule enforcement seems to be random here, which is the worst way to enforce rules).

The mods aren't necessary for most bans. We should institute People's Courts. That would be fun!--but at the very least, it would allow us to experiment with new avenues of rule enforcement which are more just, thus satisfying to the community. After the People's Court decides, the mod obediently fulfills the Court Orders.

Fixed one of your alternatives.
AoG for President of the World!!
I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!
User avatar
Lieutenant Gillipig
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:24 pm
Medals: 38
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (3)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:46 am

Gillipig wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
kentington wrote:
notyou2 wrote:I am not a fan of the system, no matter who is banned. I will say the forum has not been inundated with a multitude of stupid threads.


Out of curiosity, what would you have done for breakers of the rules?


Great question. Here's a few answers which are reasonable and have worked in the past:

(1) Ignore them.
(2) Ignore the complaints of the extremely small yet highly sensitive and inflammatory group.
(3) Anarchy! Woot woot!!!


Obviously, this need not apply to all cases, but all infractions do not need to be enforced--nor should all infractions be silently piled onto one's 'case file', which is later used to ban that CC'er whenever some arbitrarily determined tipping point is passed. (Recall how user A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. Rule enforcement seems to be random here, which is the worst way to enforce rules).

The mods aren't necessary for most bans. We should institute People's Courts. That would be fun!--but at the very least, it would allow us to experiment with new avenues of rule enforcement which are more just, thus satisfying to the community. After the People's Court decides, the mod obediently fulfills the Court Orders.

Fixed one of your alternatives.


How is local governance considered anarchy?

What do you think anarchy entails?
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby Gillipig on Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:54 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Gillipig wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
kentington wrote:
notyou2 wrote:I am not a fan of the system, no matter who is banned. I will say the forum has not been inundated with a multitude of stupid threads.


Out of curiosity, what would you have done for breakers of the rules?


Great question. Here's a few answers which are reasonable and have worked in the past:

(1) Ignore them.
(2) Ignore the complaints of the extremely small yet highly sensitive and inflammatory group.
(3) Anarchy! Woot woot!!!


Obviously, this need not apply to all cases, but all infractions do not need to be enforced--nor should all infractions be silently piled onto one's 'case file', which is later used to ban that CC'er whenever some arbitrarily determined tipping point is passed. (Recall how user A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. Rule enforcement seems to be random here, which is the worst way to enforce rules).

The mods aren't necessary for most bans. We should institute People's Courts. That would be fun!--but at the very least, it would allow us to experiment with new avenues of rule enforcement which are more just, thus satisfying to the community. After the People's Court decides, the mod obediently fulfills the Court Orders.

Fixed one of your alternatives.


How is local governance considered anarchy?

What do you think anarchy entails?
The good shit!


In phatscotty's absence:



Image
AoG for President of the World!!
I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!
User avatar
Lieutenant Gillipig
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:24 pm
Medals: 38
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (3)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Jan 17, 2013 8:10 am

Gillipig wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Gillipig wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
kentington wrote:
notyou2 wrote:I am not a fan of the system, no matter who is banned. I will say the forum has not been inundated with a multitude of stupid threads.


Out of curiosity, what would you have done for breakers of the rules?


Great question. Here's a few answers which are reasonable and have worked in the past:

(1) Ignore them.
(2) Ignore the complaints of the extremely small yet highly sensitive and inflammatory group.
(3) Anarchy! Woot woot!!!


Obviously, this need not apply to all cases, but all infractions do not need to be enforced--nor should all infractions be silently piled onto one's 'case file', which is later used to ban that CC'er whenever some arbitrarily determined tipping point is passed. (Recall how user A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. Rule enforcement seems to be random here, which is the worst way to enforce rules).

The mods aren't necessary for most bans. We should institute People's Courts. That would be fun!--but at the very least, it would allow us to experiment with new avenues of rule enforcement which are more just, thus satisfying to the community. After the People's Court decides, the mod obediently fulfills the Court Orders.

Fixed one of your alternatives.


How is local governance considered anarchy?

What do you think anarchy entails?
The good shit!


In phatscotty's absence:



Image


<pats Gillipig on the head>

Run along, Gilli. Go have fun with the kids!

:D
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby Gillipig on Thu Jan 17, 2013 8:14 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Gillipig wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Gillipig wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
kentington wrote:Out of curiosity, what would you have done for breakers of the rules?


Great question. Here's a few answers which are reasonable and have worked in the past:

(1) Ignore them.
(2) Ignore the complaints of the extremely small yet highly sensitive and inflammatory group.
(3) Anarchy! Woot woot!!!


Obviously, this need not apply to all cases, but all infractions do not need to be enforced--nor should all infractions be silently piled onto one's 'case file', which is later used to ban that CC'er whenever some arbitrarily determined tipping point is passed. (Recall how user A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. Rule enforcement seems to be random here, which is the worst way to enforce rules).

The mods aren't necessary for most bans. We should institute People's Courts. That would be fun!--but at the very least, it would allow us to experiment with new avenues of rule enforcement which are more just, thus satisfying to the community. After the People's Court decides, the mod obediently fulfills the Court Orders.

Fixed one of your alternatives.


How is local governance considered anarchy?

What do you think anarchy entails?
The good shit!


In phatscotty's absence:



Image


<pats Gillipig on the head>

Run along, Gilli. Go have fun with the kids!

:D

Wow, never thought you'd trust me with your kids. You must really have grown fond of me :)
AoG for President of the World!!
I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!
User avatar
Lieutenant Gillipig
 
Posts: 3583
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:24 pm
Medals: 38
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (6) Tournament Contribution (3)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby kentington on Thu Jan 17, 2013 8:46 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
kentington wrote:
notyou2 wrote:I am not a fan of the system, no matter who is banned. I will say the forum has not been inundated with a multitude of stupid threads.


Out of curiosity, what would you have done for breakers of the rules?


Great question. Here's a few answers which are reasonable and have worked in the past:

(1) Ignore them.
(2) Ignore the complaints of the extremely small yet highly sensitive and inflammatory group.
(3) Let the community handle it.


Obviously, this need not apply to all cases, but all infractions do not need to be enforced--nor should all infractions be silently piled onto one's 'case file', which is later used to ban that CC'er whenever some arbitrarily determined tipping point is passed. (Recall how user A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. Rule enforcement seems to be random here, which is the worst way to enforce rules).

The mods aren't necessary for most bans. We should institute People's Courts. That would be fun!--but at the very least, it would allow us to experiment with new avenues of rule enforcement which are more just, thus satisfying to the community. After the People's Court decides, the mod obediently fulfills the Court Orders.


I understand where you are coming from with this and I can agree with it somewhat.
Here are the things that I see as issues that would need to be dealt with by mods, without the people:
Spam - taking up a whole page with new posts from yourself, especially not adding anything, should get a warning -public- and continued behavior should result in an escalating ban.
Porn - no first time warning. I think members know this is unacceptable and I would make sure it was added to the user guidelines. -public notice and immediate ban-
Marketing - it is the sites prerogative to enforce this and does not require consistency or the people, do so at your own risk. -possible immediate ban, made public-
Blatant Flaming - with a public specific definition -public warning, second time public ban-
(There are some people who may not get defense from the "people" and this should be enforced. If you can't communicate on here without resorting to "you stupid idiot, f u and your mom, where were u born the smrt farm?" Then it should be in the hands of the mod.


These are just off the top of my head. This is not what are in the guidelines, do not think you can use this post as any change in rules. This was a post to get some ideas across. While I would love to get something solid together and propose it, there is no guarantee that it will work.
Bruceswar » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 pm wrote:We all had tons of men..
User avatar
Sergeant kentington
 
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:50 pm
Medals: 9
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
General Contribution (4)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:21 am

kentington wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
kentington wrote:
notyou2 wrote:I am not a fan of the system, no matter who is banned. I will say the forum has not been inundated with a multitude of stupid threads.


Out of curiosity, what would you have done for breakers of the rules?


Great question. Here's a few answers which are reasonable and have worked in the past:

(1) Ignore them.
(2) Ignore the complaints of the extremely small yet highly sensitive and inflammatory group.
(3) Let the community handle it.


Obviously, this need not apply to all cases, but all infractions do not need to be enforced--nor should all infractions be silently piled onto one's 'case file', which is later used to ban that CC'er whenever some arbitrarily determined tipping point is passed. (Recall how user A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. Rule enforcement seems to be random here, which is the worst way to enforce rules).

The mods aren't necessary for most bans. We should institute People's Courts. That would be fun!--but at the very least, it would allow us to experiment with new avenues of rule enforcement which are more just, thus satisfying to the community. After the People's Court decides, the mod obediently fulfills the Court Orders.


I understand where you are coming from with this and I can agree with it somewhat.
Here are the things that I see as issues that would need to be dealt with by mods, without the people:
Spam - taking up a whole page with new posts from yourself, especially not adding anything, should get a warning -public- and continued behavior should result in an escalating ban.
Porn - no first time warning. I think members know this is unacceptable and I would make sure it was added to the user guidelines. -public notice and immediate ban-
Marketing - it is the sites prerogative to enforce this and does not require consistency or the people, do so at your own risk. -possible immediate ban, made public-
Blatant Flaming - with a public specific definition -public warning, second time public ban-
(There are some people who may not get defense from the "people" and this should be enforced. If you can't communicate on here without resorting to "you stupid idiot, f u and your mom, where were u born the smrt farm?" Then it should be in the hands of the mod.


These are just off the top of my head. This is not what are in the guidelines, do not think you can use this post as any change in rules. This was a post to get some ideas across. While I would love to get something solid together and propose it, there is no guarantee that it will work.


I'd resort to tug-o-war on the Blatant Flaming, but the others seem fine. The People's Court idea is a tangent; my primary concerns are the following:

(1) Adverse rewards to the highly sensitive complainers in the form of bans against their 'worst enemies'.
---i.e. People who continually throw a fit about minor attacks and perceived sleights seem to be rewarded with their cries for a ban against whoever they dislike. It's a crap system which should be stopped, and stopping this requires removing the mods' monopoly on the decision rights for such bans. In other words, the highly sensitive would have to take their case to their general public instead of a few, very partial mods.


(2) Random Rule Enforcement
---i.e. User A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. A first warning is typically used to cover the current infraction (baiting) as well as later infractions of different kinds (necrobump, spam), thus failing to clarify exactly what the boundaries are for infraction Y--since no warning was given for Y.


(3) Opaque Rule Enforcement
---- Obviously, the rules are clearly written yet remain ambiguous because circumstances can vary. Because of this ambiguity, the community requires feedback from the enforcers in the form of publicly announcing why user A was banned. Upon receiving this information, the users can make more discretionary posts, thus becoming more law-abiding users. Without public announcements, then the users have a less certain idea as to where the mods 'draw the line in the sand' in regard to the more ambiguous rules and their gray areas.

(For more details, especially about opaque rule enforcement, see Haggis' and notyou2's posts here.

If the goal of the mods is to create a more just system as well as more law-abiding community, then they should enact the above three policies.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby kentington on Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:29 pm

Ok, so the tug-o-war begins. Glad we can agree on the face value of the others. They are a lot less subjective and less prone to emotion.


BigBallinStalin wrote:I'd resort to tug-o-war on the Blatant Flaming, but the others seem fine. The People's Court idea is a tangent; my primary concerns are the following:

(1) Adverse rewards to the highly sensitive complainers in the form of bans against their 'worst enemies'.
---i.e. People who continually throw a fit about minor attacks and perceived sleights seem to be rewarded with their cries for a ban against whoever they dislike. It's a crap system which should be stopped, and stopping this requires removing the mods' monopoly on the decision rights for such bans. In other words, the highly sensitive would have to take their case to their general public instead of a few, very partial mods.


Starting with number 1. At first glance this seems like a great idea. The community is the customer and to some extent should have a say in the way the community feels/is run. So, to narrow this down there are two issues that readily show up. If you have an idea with how to deal with them or you agree with my solution for part of it then great.

Situation 1. Not everyone is a premium member, therefore not everyone is a customer to CC. Should they be allowed to vote as well?
My thought is no, but then this seems like a good way to piss people off.

Situation 2. CC value. We each have a value in CC and this includes quality/quantity of posts ratio.
Premium Member A- S10,000 (10k Saxi Bucks) A skinny guy with a mustache and a dinosaur outfit.
Premium Member B- S100 (100 Saxi Bucks) A very cute, sugary, sword toting guy.

Premium Member A flames PMB : "Ha, suck it you didn't even make it on the popularity contest. Step up your game loser. ::Big L:: I would kill myself if I was you." (I don't really want to make it worse.)
PMB takes his case to the people. Well, the people have valued PMA at S10k and PMB at S100, do we really want to lose that guy with a creepy smile over this?

So, now the judges have switched places, but the community has decided that certain members with a lot of credit can get away with more than those who don't have as much value. An argument for that is : You are paying customers so what is the problem? Well, we also have to protect our little guys who aren't as cool or good looking. Do mods ever step in and how would that work? We would still be somewhat subjective. (It is a subjective situation. Not bias, but certain words and phrases bother certain people differently.)




BigBallinStalin wrote:(2) Random Rule Enforcement
---i.e. User A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. A first warning is typically used to cover the current infraction (baiting) as well as later infractions of different kinds (necrobump, spam), thus failing to clarify exactly what the boundaries are for infraction Y--since no warning was given for Y.


Agreed.
At the very least. Let us say they have gotten a warning in every subject and they have become a troll, then we can :
a) Bring it to the people
b) Give a final warning and let the member know that the next infraction for x,y, or z will result in a ban

BigBallinStalin wrote:(3) Opaque Rule Enforcement
---- Obviously, the rules are clearly written yet remain ambiguous because circumstances can vary. Because of this ambiguity, the community requires feedback from the enforcers in the form of publicly announcing why user A was banned. Upon receiving this information, the users can make more discretionary posts, thus becoming more law-abiding users. Without public announcements, then the users have a less certain idea as to where the mods 'draw the line in the sand' in regard to the more ambiguous rules and their gray areas.


I agree. The offenses were public and the sentence should be as well.
What about stuff that goes on in a pm? Do you agree that it should be handled by a Mod and if a ban is warranted, then the mods make the call and just make public that the ban was for pm's and the type of infraction without details?

BigBallinStalin wrote:(For more details, especially about opaque rule enforcement, see Haggis' and notyou2's posts here.


I agree with what they have said.

BigBallinStalin wrote:If the goal of the mods is to create a more just system as well as more law-abiding community, then they should enact the above three policies.


This is the ultimate goal for me. I didn't become a mod for premium. Look at my games. I didn't become a mod so people would love me, that obviously wouldn't work. I didn't become a mod for the power, as when I first joined powers were very limited and I had to watch a lot of stuff and ask permission before doing things. (Which makes sense, to prevent rogue mods(that white hair stripe isn't cool anymore))
I just want the community to flow and as I said in the other thread I am a background poster. I prefer to just do stuff and maybe have a few people notice, but not a lot of people. That is how I am in real life. I work with machines and fix them and I don't want to deal with all of the people just a few.

Long post I know and TMI, but I think it was all pretty much on topic and if we actually agree on things I will present it to the people who make the ultimate calls on this site.
Bruceswar » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 pm wrote:We all had tons of men..
User avatar
Sergeant kentington
 
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:50 pm
Medals: 9
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
General Contribution (4)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby DoomYoshi on Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:49 pm

tl;dr Free PHATTIE!
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class DoomYoshi
Community Coordinator
Community Coordinator
 
Posts: 5307
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Termina Field
Medals: 73
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (2) General Achievement (8) Clan Achievement (16)
Tournament Contribution (6) General Contribution (5)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby thegreekdog on Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:55 pm

kentington wrote: I didn't become a mod for premium.


Ooohhh... burn on BBS!
Image
User avatar
Sergeant thegreekdog
 
Posts: 6571
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia
Medals: 38
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (3) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (1)
General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (2) General Contribution (2)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby kentington on Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:56 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:tl;dr Free PHATTIE!



Docked S100 Saxi bucks of status. Read Doom Yoshi, Read!
Bruceswar » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 pm wrote:We all had tons of men..
User avatar
Sergeant kentington
 
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:50 pm
Medals: 9
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
General Contribution (4)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby BigBallinStalin on Thu Jan 17, 2013 5:04 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
kentington wrote: I didn't become a mod for premium.


Ooohhh... burn on BBS!


They may fan the flames of false rumors, but I strive to avoid the fancy flights of frolicking gossipers.

May their fantastic flubber-fueled flambeaux fizzle out.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby kentington on Thu Jan 17, 2013 5:10 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
kentington wrote: I didn't become a mod for premium.


Ooohhh... burn on BBS!


Unintentional. However, his NSW (Net Saxi Worth) has not dropped.
Bruceswar » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 pm wrote:We all had tons of men..
User avatar
Sergeant kentington
 
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:50 pm
Medals: 9
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
General Contribution (4)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby CBlake on Thu Jan 17, 2013 5:28 pm

Can we extend Scotty's Suspension?
dcowboys055 wrote:The alaska PD pwned you brian.
User avatar
Captain CBlake
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Where the wild things are
Medals: 20
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (1)
Tournament Contribution (4)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby jonesthecurl on Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:55 pm

CBlake wrote:Can we extend S-c-o-t-t-y-'-s S-u-s-p-e-n-s-i-o-n?


Fixed.
And remember what the poet said – “in booty there is loot, and in loot booty.” Or sump’n like that.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class jonesthecurl
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:42 am
Location: disused action figure warehouse
Medals: 23
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (1) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Bot Achievement (4) Ratings Achievement (3)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby nietzsche on Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:05 pm

kentington wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:(For more details, especially about opaque rule enforcement, see Haggis' and notyou2's posts here.


I agree with what they have said.


This is very important.


We have kentington agreeing, it would be nice to hear MeDeFe's and rds' opinion on this.
Image
User avatar
Colonel nietzsche
 
Posts: 2947
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 1:29 am
Location: Fantasy Cooperstown
Medals: 41
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (3) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Contribution (1)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Jan 18, 2013 4:17 am

kentington wrote:Ok, so the tug-o-war begins. Glad we can agree on the face value of the others. They are a lot less subjective and less prone to emotion.


BigBallinStalin wrote:I'd resort to tug-o-war on the Blatant Flaming, but the others seem fine. The People's Court idea is a tangent; my primary concerns are the following:

(1) Adverse rewards to the highly sensitive complainers in the form of bans against their 'worst enemies'.
---i.e. People who continually throw a fit about minor attacks and perceived sleights seem to be rewarded with their cries for a ban against whoever they dislike. It's a crap system which should be stopped, and stopping this requires removing the mods' monopoly on the decision rights for such bans. In other words, the highly sensitive would have to take their case to their general public instead of a few, very partial mods.


Starting with number 1. At first glance this seems like a great idea. The community is the customer and to some extent should have a say in the way the community feels/is run. So, to narrow this down there are two issues that readily show up. If you have an idea with how to deal with them or you agree with my solution for part of it then great.

Situation 1. Not everyone is a premium member, therefore not everyone is a customer to CC. Should they be allowed to vote as well?
My thought is no, but then this seems like a good way to piss people off.

Situation 2. CC value. We each have a value in CC and this includes quality/quantity of posts ratio.
Premium Member A- S10,000 (10k Saxi Bucks) A skinny guy with a mustache and a dinosaur outfit.
Premium Member B- S100 (100 Saxi Bucks) A very cute, sugary, sword toting guy.

Premium Member A flames PMB : "Ha, suck it you didn't even make it on the popularity contest. Step up your game loser. ::Big L:: I would kill myself if I was you." (I don't really want to make it worse.)
PMB takes his case to the people. Well, the people have valued PMA at S10k and PMB at S100, do we really want to lose that guy with a creepy smile over this?

So, now the judges have switched places, but the community has decided that certain members with a lot of credit can get away with more than those who don't have as much value. An argument for that is : You are paying customers so what is the problem? Well, we also have to protect our little guys who aren't as cool or good looking. Do mods ever step in and how would that work? We would still be somewhat subjective. (It is a subjective situation. Not bias, but certain words and phrases bother certain people differently.)


Note: these suggestions are best suited only for the Off Topics forum.

Situation 1: The Status of Non-Citizens
Non-premiums are allowed to participate in the votes; however, there should be some time limit for 'newcomers' (multis), and after some time there can be a vote--if anyone really cares enough for the multi/newcomer.

Seniority
It would seem to make sense that seniority should hold more sway--since people who've been REGULARS on this particular forum would have more local knowledge on the circumstances of time and place here. So, casuals who post as infrequently as JJM (a.k.a Jim) get 1 vote, quasi-casuals/quasi-regulars get 2 votes, and regulars (sax, me, Sym, etc.) get 3 votes. The difference in votes reflects How Awesome the Regulars Are, or more seriously reflects the relevance of their knowledge about OT and its inhabitants. Before Casuals are allowed a vote, they would probably have to be voted in.

This prevents 'outsiders' from blindly rushing in and heavily distorting our democratic process.

And the values (# in votes) may have to vary, so those are just illustrative.

Situation 2: Value-Based Post Count
Not a fan of this idea. I'd recommend using the Seniority thing, or something like it.

Think of the People's Courts as areas of deliberation--which ideally occurred in Aristotle's time with the Polis Council. There would be discussion, then a vote.


kentington wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:(2) Random Rule Enforcement
---i.e. User A is warned for infraction X, but later banned for infraction Y, which is irritating because the user isn't informed (warned) about committing infraction Y. A first warning is typically used to cover the current infraction (baiting) as well as later infractions of different kinds (necrobump, spam), thus failing to clarify exactly what the boundaries are for infraction Y--since no warning was given for Y.


Agreed.
At the very least. Let us say they have gotten a warning in every subject and they have become a troll, then we can :
a) Bring it to the people
b) Give a final warning and let the member know that the next infraction for x,y, or z will result in a ban


Image


kentington wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:(3) Opaque Rule Enforcement
---- Obviously, the rules are clearly written yet remain ambiguous because circumstances can vary. Because of this ambiguity, the community requires feedback from the enforcers in the form of publicly announcing why user A was banned. Upon receiving this information, the users can make more discretionary posts, thus becoming more law-abiding users. Without public announcements, then the users have a less certain idea as to where the mods 'draw the line in the sand' in regard to the more ambiguous rules and their gray areas.


I agree. The offenses were public and the sentence should be as well.
What about stuff that goes on in a pm? Do you agree that it should be handled by a Mod and if a ban is warranted, then the mods make the call and just make public that the ban was for pm's and the type of infraction without details?


With PMs, the details do not have to be copy-paste quality, but at least mention (a) the infraction and (b) offer the reasoning (10-50 words).

To be clear, there is this spectrum of details. If the mod simply says, "Yeah, he was banned for PMs, which were gross" then this denies others the opportunity to understand what exactly is permissible via PM. What's the optimal disclosure of detail? I'm not sure, and I'm not opposed to actual quotes, but maybe this is something the community can decide.

kentington wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:(For more details, especially about opaque rule enforcement, see Haggis' and notyou2's posts here.


I agree with what they have said.


Image

kentington wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:If the goal of the mods is to create a more just system as well as more law-abiding community, then they should enact the above three policies.


This is the ultimate goal for me. I didn't become a mod for premium. Look at my games. I didn't become a mod so people would love me, that obviously wouldn't work. I didn't become a mod for the power, as when I first joined powers were very limited and I had to watch a lot of stuff and ask permission before doing things. (Which makes sense, to prevent rogue mods(that white hair stripe isn't cool anymore))
I just want the community to flow and as I said in the other thread I am a background poster. I prefer to just do stuff and maybe have a few people notice, but not a lot of people. That is how I am in real life. I work with machines and fix them and I don't want to deal with all of the people just a few.

Long post I know and TMI, but I think it was all pretty much on topic and if we actually agree on things I will present it to the people who make the ultimate calls on this site.


Thanks for posting!



Image
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby kentington on Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:00 am

You had me at Bill Murray.

I have a really bad headache right now. I had a fever last night, so I have to say pending more review.

I can't see an issue with what was posted so far. I agree this is for Off Topics only. If anyone behaves improperly in General Discussions and even more so Suggestions, then they will be dealt with by the mods per the regular forum guidelines. This would take a lot of time to set up for multiple forums and you would have to keep track of too many things. It is less appropriate to go OT in those other forums.

Would we just start a thread for a new infraction and then have the members put Vote: guilty/not guilty?

I will post more thoughts later after my head calms down.
Bruceswar » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 pm wrote:We all had tons of men..
User avatar
Sergeant kentington
 
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:50 pm
Medals: 9
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
General Contribution (4)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:35 am

kentington wrote:You had me at Bill Murray.

I have a really bad headache right now. I had a fever last night, so I have to say pending more review.

I can't see an issue with what was posted so far. I agree this is for Off Topics only. If anyone behaves improperly in General Discussions and even more so Suggestions, then they will be dealt with by the mods per the regular forum guidelines. This would take a lot of time to set up for multiple forums and you would have to keep track of too many things. It is less appropriate to go OT in those other forums.

Would we just start a thread for a new infraction and then have the members put Vote: guilty/not guilty?

I will post more thoughts later after my head calms down.


I'm not sure, but we have many avenues for experimentation.

We could hold a trial by jury, we could have the lawyers chosen from earlier, or we could have a "free for all" where anyone posts their position.

There would have to be an agreement on whether or not the prosecutor is correctly following the law, if the chosen punishment is optimal, and finally if the defendant is actually guilty. (Compared to the current system of mods getting together and making partial decisions behind closed doors, this approach is more just, reasonable, less costly for mods, and etc.).

We'll just have to get our feet wet and learn from our mistakes, but we can't have success or improvement without trial and error.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby patches70 on Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:24 pm

You have a lot of ideas for how to run something that isn't even your, BBS. You seem to have ignored that fact. Maybe you should consult with the actual owners of the site?

I mean, it's all good if you want to whip the mobs into a frenzy. That can be a lot of fun in many ways. But in the end, for all your supposedly good intentions, you'll merely destroy that which you are trying to change.

Just sayin' is all.

I especially like your clever manipulations at attempting to give yourself more influence because you've determined to separate people into groups and then arbitrarily deciding which group is above other groups.
Hilarity, I must say.

Carry on with your revolution.
Corporal patches70
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:44 pm
Medals: 2
Standard Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1)

Re: FREEEE Phatscotty!!

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Jan 18, 2013 7:42 pm

patches70 wrote:You have a lot of ideas for how to run something that isn't even your, BBS. You seem to have ignored that fact. Maybe you should consult with the actual owners of the site?

I mean, it's all good if you want to whip the mobs into a frenzy. That can be a lot of fun in many ways. But in the end, for all your supposedly good intentions, you'll merely destroy that which you are trying to change.

Just sayin' is all.

I especially like your clever manipulations at attempting to give yourself more influence because you've determined to separate people into groups and then arbitrarily deciding which group is above other groups.
Hilarity, I must say.

Carry on with your revolution.


Oh, sorry for suggesting implementations and encouraging discussion which would lead to the increase of autonomy for all regular and causal posters in the OT forum. Your nonsensical claim about a Stalinist-2dimes-Haggis Triumvirate Fascist Dastardly Dictatorship would definitely arise through a more a democratic system which I can't dominate. Makes sense(?). But please, go ahead and do nothing constructive in order to make this forum better.

If I had a monopoly on who could post ITT, then maybe your points would stand, but I don't, so why don't you take that strawman outside?
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: Rule Enforcement Discussion

Postby kentington on Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:46 am

I split this from the Free Scotty thread. It was enough of its own topic. I added a poll, so please vote. I will be posting the result of the poll and only running it for one week. I will probably add other polls ITT as questions arise.
Bruceswar » Tue Aug 28, 2012 8:59 pm wrote:We all had tons of men..
User avatar
Sergeant kentington
 
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:50 pm
Medals: 9
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
General Contribution (4)

Re: Rule Enforcement Discussion

Postby nietzsche on Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:55 am

Yes.

It would be of great help.

If you guys (mods) have to put your thoughts clearly in a statement, you would be less prone to ban someone for something irrelevant. Being public you will have to expect certain responses from the community, which it would mean that the community would have some level of power on the decisions, so the community could be ruling itself to some degree.
Image
User avatar
Colonel nietzsche
 
Posts: 2947
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 1:29 am
Location: Fantasy Cooperstown
Medals: 41
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (3) Polymorphic Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (4) Teammate Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (3) General Contribution (1)

Next

Return to Bieberville

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DoomYoshi, GoranZ, greenmachine!

Login