PERMABANS (though you did not know it!)

[squishyg]

Thanks for agreeing to remove "aggressive" before homophobia. The only other thing I see is maybe including sexism in the the description of bigotry. The clarification may be helpful given the general misunderstanding that cc is a boys club.

This is just nitpicking, but the capitalization of bigotry is inconsistent. It seems to be it should be lowercase in most instances.

[AndyDufresne]

Fixed a few things.


--Andy

[JoshyBoy]

Well done Andy!

Thank goodness. This topic looks like it might be nearing an end!

you for one at least learned something, Jboy... you should hope it continues, so your knowledge
of the world outside of your dorm room may continue ... again, great resolution... and
yes, even Jboy helped it reach it's resolution...-0

Your 100% right owen!

And you've been very kind to me buddy... thanks

[Suzy1]

Andy, I am certain that this was not an easy task for you. By taking affirmative action and actually coming up with a solution, you bring respect to yourself as a Mod and to the Foundry. Thanks for a job well done. I do hope your friend isn't in serious danger and makes a speedy recovery.

[owenshooter]

you bring respect to yourself as a Mod and to the Foundry.

what does this have to do with the foundry? i believe it was the GD regs that pushed this ahead and made at least one admin realize it was a serious issue.... what does the foundry have to do with this? is someone going to come put a stamp on this? jeez...

anyway, the new guidelines have already been used by lance in the C&A forum, and to great effect. the debate over whether or not the ruling was fair or just was limited to one person that had not yet read the new guidelines, but that had been involved. after he was pointed to them, he agreed the ruling was fair. it helps when people know that after the warning, the hammer will fall. good job andy... oh, and good job foundry...-0

[jbrettlip]

And good job also to live chat and to ESPN.com.

[Suzy1]

I stand corrected. The Mods and the people in the Forum! Last I looked, it's all the same people. My bad!

[AndyDufresne]

Hey, MrBenn did help out too. He's a Cartography Assistant. I hope that more of you come visit the Foundry now.


--Andy

[jbrettlip]

Hey, MrBenn did help out too. He's a Cartography Assistant. I hope that more of you come visit the Foundry now.


--Andy

I would if the map threads didn't take so long to load on my crappy computer.

[whitestazn88]

Hey, MrBenn did help out too. He's a Cartography Assistant. I hope that more of you come visit the Foundry now.


--Andy

I would if the map threads didn't take so long to load on my crappy computer.

go to the library

[neanderpaul14]

Does this mean I can't make fun of North Dakota any more???

[Suzy1]

Andy I apologize for using the wrong word and saying Foundry not Forum. My posts are mostly in the Foundry and said the wrong thing. What I said to you was sincere though. You and the others did a great job.

[MrBenn]

is someone going to come put a stamp on this?

Onwards and Upwards!

[owenshooter]

is someone going to come put a stamp on this?

Onwards and Upwards!

YES!!!!

[The Fuzzy Pengui]

Get back to your cellar Benn, and let me quench things in mine!

Seriously, though...I love the new guidelines that have been worked out. Great job to everybody that participated. I wish I could have more, but finals and work got in the way

[jiminski]

heh, the last couple of pages have been like the cigarette after good sex.

[pimpdave]

So are we still allowed to call each other names and stuff in the private sub forums?

I don't want to bandy about racist words or anything, I just want to know how this is going to work.

I think we should be allowed to have completely unregulated free speech in the sub forums. Or rather, the free speech in the sub forums should be regulated only by the leaders of those sub forums.


Night Strike, for example, shouldn't be able to come in and lock every thread he feels like, citing the policies to fit his incredibly spurious interpretation, playing such obvious favorites that his behaviour would be comical if it didn't carry real consequences for the aggrieved.

Instead, it should be dealt with in house by the people of the sub forum. Sorry if that's already been addressed, but it doesn't look like it has.

[jiminski]

So are we still allowed to call each other names and stuff in the private sub forums?

I don't want to bandy about racist words or anything, I just want to know how this is going to work.

I think we should be allowed to have completely unregulated free speech in the sub forums. Or rather, the free speech in the sub forums should be regulated only by the leaders of those sub forums.


Night Strike, for example, shouldn't be able to come in and lock every thread he feels like, citing the policies to fit his incredibly loose interpretation, playing such obvious favorites that his behaviour would be comical if it wasn't so sad.

Instead, it should be dealt with in house by the people of the sub forum. Sorry if that's already been addressed, but it doesn't look like it has.

I think that locking and interrupting the natural flow of threads is a completely separate but very important subject.
To be fair, if someone is using the extreme cases of bigotry which i hope this rule now solely applies to, then i have no problem with words being edited.. i think, though that is a good debate too.

What you touch upon applies to the broader carte-blanche moderation rights which mods have. We are in a situation where someone can start a thread and a couple of abusive trolls can get the thread locked at the discretion of the mod.

It used to be that their had to be repeated misdemeanour including thread violation from the starter of the thread. Otherwise there were not the grounds for the thread lock.


Anyway, this is a separate subject and one which i feel needs discussion too.

[pimpdave]

What about running jokes being purposefully misinterpreted as flaming?

For example, everyone in Off Topics knows that I regularly reveal one member's identity to be Cobra Commander, in the hopes that his diabolical plans for world domination can somehow be stopped (even though they can't). This is a running joke and is truly done in friendly jest, er, I mean, it's serious because of the threat he poses to the world.

There seems to be a new one brewing too, I've been revealing one user to be the President of the AARP, lately, and he has in turn exposed me as an undercover member of the French Foreign Legion (little does he know that I've already surrendered and am no longer actively planting socialist thoughts in American's minds through fries).

But these are all light hearted jokes with people I know reasonably well through the board. I wouldn't do this with someone who isn't completely acclimated to the culture of this place.

I mean, serious business. This is very serious and I mean every expose I write.



So please, moderators, take a big, heavy grain of salt with your actions. There are some mods that seem to get it, who get the difference between real flames (insults), and the kind of joking friends do. I mean, not joking. Completely serious.

[barterer2002]

Andy I want to say that in the past I've been someone disgusted with the lack of Admin presence in threads such as this one. I've found that traditionally the site Admin has ignored most of the community postings.

I have to retract anything I might have said about you personally (not sure if I said anything but if I did I retract it). The manner and method you've stepped up in here has kept the discussion on track, pulled out the essential points in an organized manner and developed a great new set of guidelines. I have been pleasantly surprised at this turn of events and look forward to the future as you stretch out of the foundry into your new role. If your reign continues in this manner it will be a great time in CC.

Thank you for a job well done.
-B

[jiminski]

What about running jokes being purposefully misinterpreted as flaming?

For example, everyone in Off Topics knows that I regularly reveal one member's identity to be Cobra Commander, in the hopes that his diabolical plans for world domination can somehow be stopped (even though they can't). This is a running joke and is truly done in friendly jest, er, I mean, it's serious because of the threat he poses to the world.

There seems to be a new one brewing too, I've been revealing one user to be the President of the AARP, lately, and he has in turn exposed me as an undercover member of the French Foreign Legion (little does he know that I've already surrendered and am no longer actively planting socialist thoughts in American's minds through fries).

But these are all light hearted jokes with people I know reasonably well through the board. I wouldn't do this with someone who isn't completely acclimated to the culture of this place.

I mean, serious business. This is very serious and I mean every expose I write.



So please, moderators, take a big, heavy grain of salt with your actions. There are some mods that seem to get it, who get the difference between real flames (insults), and the kind of joking friends do. I mean, not joking. Completely serious.

make another thread mate, I am sure many people are very keen that this ruling on Bigotry be taken on board so that this seeming partnership between user, Mod and admin is for the betterment of the site and not the ripping-out of the heart of fun through more tools of petty censorship.

And if you are serious about your lack of seriousness then please make the prevailing tone of the initial post serious enough for it to be taken seriously.

[pimpdave]

And if you are serious about your lack of seriousness then please make the prevailing tone of the initial post serious enough for it to be taken seriously.

I'm super serial.

Wait. Now I'm confused.


So are we still allowed to have innocuous fun, or what? That's what I'm asking. If people get too passionate about the rules (i.e. their own power) and forget their passion for the site (i.e. happy fun time), it can lead to (and has) stifling creativity and community building activities.

See, I know that it's hard to say "yes, you can tease and joke with one another in a friendly way" because then some stupid teenager is going to have a conniption at some point and go off the deep end with insults and flagrant bigotry.

It's just a complicated mess, and we have to trust the judgment of the mods, I guess. The problem is, I don't trust the judgment of certain mods and have reason to believe that some individuals play favorites.

So here it is, perhaps the real solution is to put a proviso in the guidelines... Make an effort to settle it between ourselves, privately, when we cross a line or accidentally offend someone. Before there are bans and warnings levied, people, at least make an effort to settle things, or ask if the offending party was genuinely trying to start something.

[Night Strike]

If you have a problem with an action of a moderator, you can always take it to Optimus Prime or AndyDufresne. It's part of their jobs. But you'll have to do it via PM, not by raising a fuss in the forums.

[jiminski]

If you have a problem with an action of a moderator, you can always take it to Optimus Prime or AndyDufresne. It's part of their jobs. But you'll have to do it via PM, not by raising a fuss in the forums.

I know what you mean Night, but he is making a valid general point. I too am concerned about the general, organic flow of threads, it's easier to just not invest any time in them so you are not frustrated.

I think Dave just needs to make his point better and to take out the personalities. If he does that he will be taken seriously and it could be the valid basis of worthwhile discussion in order to safeguard vibrant and fun threads.

However i don't think that his point, though potentially valid, is really relevant to the extreme bigotry we are talking about here. It could be though, if he makes some general parallels?
(i did add a clause much like the one proffered by Pimp, regarding placing emphasis upon the recipient and offence taken.)

[Woodruff]

What about running jokes being purposefully misinterpreted as flaming?

I do believe this is a very valid point. However, I'm not sure it's applicable to this particular topic (being bigotry), so long as the pseudo-flaming isn't related to bigotry.