Dimensions Forums  
Home Register Premium Membership Health Issues Market Place Big Fashion

Go Back   Dimensions Forums > Discussion > Board Business



Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-14-2016, 11:30 AM   #51
ScreamingChicken
One of 50,298
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,549
ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tad View Post
One thing that I've wondered about, if some people treat the infractions system as something of a game (how far can I go before getting infracted? Can I lure someone else into an infraction? How much does constantly complaining about the moderation effect any of the above?), would it work better with less sober and well judged rules, and to simply acknowledge that penalties are part of the game and make them more pervasive? Penalize such things as tautologies, taunting, or repetitive tit-for-tat posting?
Those of us that know how to behave would probably not have an issue with it. However, there is going to be some posters who will howl bloody murder about it because the other person made them do it.
ScreamingChicken is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 01:37 PM   #52
loopytheone
Administrator
 
loopytheone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Robinhoodland
Posts: 3,557
loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xyantha Reborn View Post
*referring back to original post*

I really appreciate the amount of thought and work that has gone into this and also understand the amount of work this will take.

I ike the idea of removing bad posts, but other members also have to be accountable for not escalating...and using the quote function to bypass the rules.

So if Xy posts something that is clearly a violation, others should not be quoting and responding her. That means that the moderator not only has to remove the offending post, they have to edit dozens of subsequent posts and do a thread correction.

I don't know how to deal with that, but maybe have sub infractions for those who can't leave well enough alone...?
If a post is moderated/deleted then any posts quoting it afterwards will be edited to remove the quote/reply to the deleted post, if that is what you are asking?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HereticFA View Post
Since so many immediately hit you with personal attacks instead of addressing your question, I'll respond.

Based on these that rule, any discussion of fat acceptance would be "outlawed" if the rule is followed as written. The philosophy is known as the tyranny of the majority. A minority viewpoint is outlawed.
I don't understand? I don't see where we have said any topic or opinions are outlawed? I'm honestly confused.
loopytheone is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 01:46 PM   #53
ScreamingChicken
One of 50,298
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,549
ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loopytheone View Post
I don't understand? I don't see where we have said any topic or opinions are outlawed? I'm honestly confused.
A precedent for topics that are off limits has been set here.

Obama's birth place was explicitly stated in the rules of Hyde Park as off limits for discussion because it was "universally accepted". "Universally accepted" can be a very slippery slope. It's that type of logic that has some of us concerned that certain topics are going to be off limits for discussion because it goes against the moderator's (or whatever power that be) beliefs.
ScreamingChicken is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 01:54 PM   #54
Tad
mostly harmless
 
Tad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,609
Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

If I could suggest (as a contributor to the discussion, not as a mod saying ‘this is how it is’):

- Saying that you don’t believe in human caused climate change is OK (we’ll believe that this is your opinion if you tell us so)

- Citing evidence that refutes the case of human caused climate change is OK (people may not agree with it, but it won’t hurt anyone to read some contrary evidence)

- Saying “There is no evidence of climate change” or “No credible scientists believe humans cause climate change” or “that climate change is just the latest story that socialists made up to scare themselves around the campfire” would not be OK. (When pretty much every country in the world has signed up to a treaty confirming that they believe that human caused climate change is happening, all of those claims are patently false, and could only be viewed as baiting).

- Linking to an article that that makes claims similar to the previous point would also not be OK (linking an opinion piece doesn’t absolve you of responsibility for the content)

The point being that there have been too many cases of people claiming that white is black, and these have had all the appearance of baiting the other side.

To use some more examples:

- It would be OK to say that you don't think Trump favors Russia

- It would be OK to cite evidence that he doesn't favor Russia

- It would not be OK to say that he never has done business with Russians, or that he never encouraged Russian hackers to disclose contents of Hillary Clinton's private email server from her time as Secretary of State. (those are both widely covered matters of record)

ETA: ETA: And to make sure I cover some items from the other side of the spectrum:

- Saying that you think Hillary Clinton is essentially honest is fine (again, an opinion)
- Linking to an analysis of fact checking results is also OK (it doesn’t prove that she is honest, but it is evidence related to the case)
- Saying that the Clinton Foundation has a squeaky clean record with no doubts of propriety raised about it is not OK (there is quite a bit of coverage of some of the issues that at the very least look questionable)

Or
- Saying that you think every member of NATO is valuable is an opinion, and is OK.
- Linking to an analysis discussing what it would cost the United States to ensure its security if it were not for NATO is also fine (assuming the article contains mostly facts)
- Saying that every country in NATO has supported the treaty is not (even a cursory review of information would let you know that many/most member states don’t hit the official targets for percent of GDP spent on defense)

=====================

How does that sound, and how do you turn that into a clearer rule?
__________________
Criticism is so often nothing more than the eye garrulously denouncing the shape of the peephole that gives access to hidden treasure.
-Djuna Barnes, writer and artist
Tad is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 04:32 PM   #55
Big Beautiful Dreamer
ridiculously contented
 
Big Beautiful Dreamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Down heah
Posts: 3,968
Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!Big Beautiful Dreamer keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreamingChicken View Post
A precedent for topics that are off limits has been set here.

Obama's birth place was explicitly stated in the rules of Hyde Park as off limits for discussion because it was "universally accepted". "Universally accepted" can be a very slippery slope. It's that type of logic that has some of us concerned that certain topics are going to be off limits for discussion because it goes against the moderator's (or whatever power that be) beliefs.
If I may... The way I remember it is that a discussion of Obama's citizenship and birth certificate flourished for months after November 2008, and, after much consultation with other mods and with Conrad, I posted that there would be more more discussion allowed of whether Obama was U.S.-born. The one and only reason is that the discussion had deteriorated to "is not," "is too" and had remained there for quite some time. And if I remember correctly, I didn't say it was "universally accepted" but only that his citizenship and place of birth were no longer open to discussion. Eight years is a long time; however, I remember that tussle pretty clearly.
Big Beautiful Dreamer is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 10:03 PM   #56
HereticFA
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 761
HereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions community
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loopytheone View Post
I don't understand? I don't see where we have said any topic or opinions are outlawed? I'm honestly confused.
In post #1 of this thread that you posted, "Draft Rules", "in Board Practice this means", second bullet:
"Faking data or quotes or establishing fake correlations is outlawed. (emphasis added, HereticFA)
For example: Some things are universally acknowledged – like 197 countries set up the United Nations Secretariat to combat Climate Change. Even if you don’t believe in it, accept it that most of the world sees this as a fact."

Unfortunately one person's supporting data is another's faked data these days. It's the process of discussion and debate by which errata can be identified and targeted as being in error.
HereticFA is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 10:08 PM   #57
DELIMAN092262
 
DELIMAN092262's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 10,876
DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loopytheone View Post
Climate change was being used as an example of not falsifying data.
Exactly, how will the Mods define “falsifying data” that will be outlawed? For example, during the case of Michael Brown there was an often repeated phrase of “hands up; don't shoot!”

Based on witness statements to the grand-jury and forensic evidence from the scene; it was determined that Brown did not have his hands up nor was he trying to surrender.

So does that mean the Mods will “outlaw” such a statement as “hands up; don't shoot” since it was based on false data?

IMHO that would be a mistake.
DELIMAN092262 is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 10:12 PM   #58
HereticFA
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 761
HereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions community
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by agouderia View Post
What it boils down to is this ..
"members also have to be accountable for not escalating..."

Make that "members and mods" and I'd agree. But that's supposed to be addressed already by some new approach. (Like mods not posting/participating in a thread?)
HereticFA is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 10:23 PM   #59
Dromond
Old school
 
Dromond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: In the past.
Posts: 7,365
Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

I'm fine with it if mods participate. Mods are people with opinions, too.
__________________
I hate Illinois Nazis.
Dromond is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 10:27 PM   #60
Dromond
Old school
 
Dromond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: In the past.
Posts: 7,365
Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.Dromond has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DELIMAN092262 View Post
Exactly, how will the Mods define “falsifying data” that will be outlawed? For example, during the case of Michael Brown there was an often repeated phrase of “hands up; don't shoot!”

Based on witness statements to the grand-jury and forensic evidence from the scene; it was determined that Brown did not have his hands up nor was he trying to surrender.

So does that mean the Mods will “outlaw” such a statement as “hands up; don't shoot” since it was based on false data?

IMHO that would be a mistake.
This is a fine example of false equivalency masquerading as counterpoint. You're comparing apples to durian here, thank you very much.

And yes, I did take you off ignore. For the new era of brotherhood or whatever.
__________________
I hate Illinois Nazis.
Dromond is offline  
Old 12-14-2016, 10:33 PM   #61
tonynyc
Slow Dance Aficionado
 
tonynyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: East Coast
Posts: 9,640
tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.tonynyc has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Seems like Battle pay would be in order.... With all of these proposed rules and flag infraction system seems to me that

1. May need more than 1 Mod
2. A jury of NPB peers

More fun to follow.....careful what you are wishing for....
__________________
Doughboy gets ripped :D

[SIGPIC]http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/image.php?u=841&type=sigpic&dateline=1258169105[/SIGPIC]
tonynyc is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 01:23 AM   #62
loopytheone
Administrator
 
loopytheone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Robinhoodland
Posts: 3,557
loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HereticFA View Post
In post #1 of this thread that you posted, "Draft Rules", "in Board Practice this means", second bullet:
"Faking data or quotes or establishing fake correlations is outlawed. (emphasis added, HereticFA)
For example: Some things are universally acknowledged – like 197 countries set up the United Nations Secretariat to combat Climate Change. Even if you don’t believe in it, accept it that most of the world sees this as a fact."

Unfortunately one person's supporting data is another's faked data these days. It's the process of discussion and debate by which errata can be identified and targeted as being in error.
I understand what you mean now, thank you for explaining. But we mean more in the sense that Tad explained earlier; saying "No scientists believe in climate change" is a lie. Saying "I don't believe in climate change because x" is an opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DELIMAN092262 View Post
Exactly, how will the Mods define “falsifying data” that will be outlawed? For example, during the case of Michael Brown there was an often repeated phrase of “hands up; don't shoot!”

Based on witness statements to the grand-jury and forensic evidence from the scene; it was determined that Brown did not have his hands up nor was he trying to surrender.

So does that mean the Mods will “outlaw” such a statement as “hands up; don't shoot” since it was based on false data?

IMHO that would be a mistake.
Well no, if something is widely reported and genuinely believed by several people then we aren't going to punish people for that information later being revealed to be false. There is a difference between intentionally lying and accidentally being incorrect about something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dromond View Post
I'm fine with it if mods participate. Mods are people with opinions, too.
This. We have discussed this at length on the mod board and come to the consensus that there is no reason why BBD (who I assume you all mean when you say 'mods' as the rest of us never set foot in Hyde Park) can't participate too. Nobody tries to tell Tad and Agouderia that they can't participate in the BHM board or write stories for the library, and nobody has suggested that I should never post on the forums ever just because I am the admin/general mod at the moment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonynyc View Post
Seems like Battle pay would be in order.... With all of these proposed rules and flag infraction system seems to me that

1. May need more than 1 Mod
2. A jury of NPB peers

More fun to follow.....careful what you are wishing for....
I'm not sure if we made this clear in the original post or not, so apologies if we didn't. But after a post is taken for moderation, it requires the consensus of 3 mods on what to do, so decisions are made as a team/consensus rather than by individual moderators.
loopytheone is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 03:22 AM   #63
agouderia
Library Girl
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,181
agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!agouderia keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DELIMAN092262 View Post
Exactly, how will the Mods define “falsifying data” that will be outlawed? For example, during the case of Michael Brown there was an often repeated phrase of “hands up; don't shoot!”

Based on witness statements to the grand-jury and forensic evidence from the scene; it was determined that Brown did not have his hands up nor was he trying to surrender
Since when are diverging eye-witness accounts data???

Tad has done a really good job above in listing several good, transferable examples of the difference between opinion and facts. Appeal to everybody posting - read that post, understand it and apply it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by HereticFA View Post

Like mods not posting/participating in a thread?
When new rules are discussed here that we as mods are supposed to apply, weighing in on that should be a given.

As Loopy pointed out though, we will broaden the base of NPB moderating by having any action to be taken decided on by a team of three. That will introduce the element of a outsider referee.
agouderia is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 07:26 AM   #64
ScreamingChicken
One of 50,298
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,549
ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Since nobody wants to say it aloud, then allow me to....

You need to just outright ban at least three people right off the bat. We are all adults here and we know who have turned this place in to a swamp. Do I actually have to spell it out for everyone about whom I am referring to?

The moderator of HP was an epic fail and why is that? Not willing to enforce the rules! Simple, clear rules! No backbone but way too worried about an appearance. And way too much of an eagerness to engage in arguments to ever being an impartial moderator. But because no one else wants to touch a NPB and because they are just nice people, nobody wants to admit that the moderation has been a problem. People will say it's fine but they are the same people who are the patients being allowed to run the asylum. They just want their status quo minus Deliman and Bio.

These new rule proposals are getting so convoluted that you are going to make an even bigger headache for everyone involved. More so than HP ever was if that was even possible. Too complicated to follow, a pain in the ass to enforce, and accomplishes what exactly? Nothing! Because we will back to where we were in mere months.

Same posters, same moderator with the same level of participation, and a labyrinth of rules that will quickly go by the wayside. Congratulations, you have improved NOTHING. Nada. Not one bit.

Y'all have fun with this new, not so new experiment. Clearly, history hasn't taught any one a damn thing.
ScreamingChicken is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 07:32 AM   #65
Leishycat
Dark and scarry
 
Leishycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 4,578
Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!Leishycat keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreamingChicken View Post
You need to just outright ban at least three people right off the bat. We are all adults here and we know who have turned this place in to a swamp. Do I actually have to spell it out for everyone about whom I am referring to?
I'm actually not sure who the third is...
__________________
In the future, the world was dark and scarry.
Leishycat is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 08:16 AM   #66
DELIMAN092262
 
DELIMAN092262's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 10,876
DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!DELIMAN092262 has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreamingChicken View Post
You need to just outright ban at least three people right off the bat. We are all adults here and we know who have turned this place in to a swamp. Do I actually have to spell it out for everyone about whom I am referring to?
I am not sure to which individuals you are making reference to? Are they people that can't function under the rules and get cited again and again for rules violations? Or, are they people that stand up for their individual beliefs despite those that disagree with them?
DELIMAN092262 is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 09:03 AM   #67
LeoGibson
Slangin'
 
LeoGibson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,372
LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.LeoGibson has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

On one point I'll agree with you SC. It wasn't that the moderation was bad or uneven. BBD actually went out of her way to try and make it even on the infractions but therein is where the actual unevenness began. Look, if all the culprits that can't obey a set of clear rules are on the same side politically, so be it Bounce them. End of story. Enough with things getting convoluted and harder than they need be. Make one clearly defined set of rules for acceptable behavior and political discourse. Then, because soccer is horrible in my opinion, I'll go with baseball. Three strikes and you're out. First you're warned, then timeout, if that didn't straighten them out then buh-bye. Thanks for playing. We're all supposedly adults here. Act like it and if you can't then you leave. By choice or by force. It makes me no difference either way. Also, if it seems that the bulk of the problem children are from one side or the other, tough titty. No more bending over backwards so as to seem fair. It's up to the individual poster as to how they're treated, regardless of political affiliation.
LeoGibson is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 09:13 AM   #68
HereticFA
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 761
HereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions community
Default

Regarding the mods participating in the discussion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by loopytheone View Post
This. We have discussed this at length on the mod board and come to the consensus that there is no reason why BBD (who I assume you all mean when you say 'mods' as the rest of us never set foot in Hyde Park) can't participate too. Nobody tries to tell Tad and Agouderia that they can't participate in the BHM board or write stories for the library, and nobody has suggested that I should never post on the forums ever just because I am the admin/general mod at the moment.
Then we have a major problem right at the outset.

Unlike all the other boards, the NPB is always going to have a core basis of conflict, We're basically pitting two debate teams against each other, but the debate moderators are from only one of the teams. At any point during the debate one of potentially several of the debaters on one side will arise from their panel, go to the podium and levy penalties against the opposing team.
HereticFA is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 09:20 AM   #69
ScreamingChicken
One of 50,298
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,549
ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hereticfa View Post
regarding the mods participating in the discussion:

Then we have a major problem right at the outset.

Unlike all the other boards, the npb is always going to have a core basis of conflict, we're basically pitting two debate teams against each other, but the debate moderators are from only one of the teams. At any point during the debate one of potentially several of the debaters on one side will arise from their panel, go to the podium and levy penalties against the opposing team.
Yes! This right here!
ScreamingChicken is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 09:23 AM   #70
HereticFA
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 761
HereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions communityHereticFA is a pillar of the Dimensions community
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by agouderia View Post
Since when are diverging eye-witness accounts data???
Ever since "observation" was the first step in the scientific method. Afterwards it becomes an issue of validation of those observations to determine the outliers to be questioned.

In the case of eye-witnesses, it may turn out the witness had a poor sightline, was distracted, or changed their account after talking with someone else they trust that was also there. (Or due to many other possible reasons.)
HereticFA is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 10:59 AM   #71
ScreamingChicken
One of 50,298
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,549
ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DELIMAN092262 View Post
I am not sure to which individuals you are making reference to? Are they people that can't function under the rules and get cited again and again for rules violations? Or, are they people that stand up for their individual beliefs despite those that disagree with them?
You've stayed within the rules. I've never seen your resort to a personal attack either. Your opinions may not be popular but oh well. You're not one of the posters I had in mind who should be voted off the island.
ScreamingChicken is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 11:11 AM   #72
loopytheone
Administrator
 
loopytheone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Robinhoodland
Posts: 3,557
loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.loopytheone has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreamingChicken View Post
Since nobody wants to say it aloud, then allow me to....

You need to just outright ban at least three people right off the bat. We are all adults here and we know who have turned this place in to a swamp. Do I actually have to spell it out for everyone about whom I am referring to?

The moderator of HP was an epic fail and why is that? Not willing to enforce the rules! Simple, clear rules! No backbone but way too worried about an appearance. And way too much of an eagerness to engage in arguments to ever being an impartial moderator. But because no one else wants to touch a NPB and because they are just nice people, nobody wants to admit that the moderation has been a problem. People will say it's fine but they are the same people who are the patients being allowed to run the asylum. They just want their status quo minus Deliman and Bio.

These new rule proposals are getting so convoluted that you are going to make an even bigger headache for everyone involved. More so than HP ever was if that was even possible. Too complicated to follow, a pain in the ass to enforce, and accomplishes what exactly? Nothing! Because we will back to where we were in mere months.

Same posters, same moderator with the same level of participation, and a labyrinth of rules that will quickly go by the wayside. Congratulations, you have improved NOTHING. Nada. Not one bit.

Y'all have fun with this new, not so new experiment. Clearly, history hasn't taught any one a damn thing.
Look, you made it quite clear before that you didn't want a new political board at all but we decided to go with what the majority of active users on here asked for a going to give it a go. Maybe it will work, maybe it wont. But we feel it is worth trying if nothing else.

Incidentally, I don't see how the rules are convoluted at all. If you are referring to the discussion going on in this thread then that is just it, discussion. Not everybody's suggestion on everything is going to be implemented. But the minds and thoughts of everybody involved are worth hearing and worth listening to so that we can come to a conclusion that works for as many people as possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeoGibson View Post
On one point I'll agree with you SC. It wasn't that the moderation was bad or uneven. BBD actually went out of her way to try and make it even on the infractions but therein is where the actual unevenness began. Look, if all the culprits that can't obey a set of clear rules are on the same side politically, so be it Bounce them. End of story. Enough with things getting convoluted and harder than they need be. Make one clearly defined set of rules for acceptable behavior and political discourse. Then, because soccer is horrible in my opinion, I'll go with baseball. Three strikes and you're out. First you're warned, then timeout, if that didn't straighten them out then buh-bye. Thanks for playing. We're all supposedly adults here. Act like it and if you can't then you leave. By choice or by force. It makes me no difference either way. Also, if it seems that the bulk of the problem children are from one side or the other, tough titty. No more bending over backwards so as to seem fair. It's up to the individual poster as to how they're treated, regardless of political affiliation.
This is what we are trying to go for in terms of fairness, which is why we think having multiple mods making the decisions together will make things fairer. And also stop some of the constant pressure/stress that was on BBD trying to run Hyde Park on her own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HereticFA View Post
Regarding the mods participating in the discussion:

Then we have a major problem right at the outset.

Unlike all the other boards, the NPB is always going to have a core basis of conflict, We're basically pitting two debate teams against each other, but the debate moderators are from only one of the teams. At any point during the debate one of potentially several of the debaters on one side will arise from their panel, go to the podium and levy penalties against the opposing team.
This is what we disagree on. Tad is much better at explaining this than I am so I'm hoping he will chip in to help. But that thinking, that 'us against them' thinking is what caused Hyde Park to rot from the inside out in the first place. Dims is an international board and should be available to discuss all politics, not just american politics, but the regulars in Hyde Park drove every body else and all other discussions away. And even in american politics, a debate is not a fight or an argument. It is not about point scoring or 'teams' or anything like that. You are supposed to be adults capable of discussing issues/topics and not just point scoring with each other.
loopytheone is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 11:48 AM   #73
ScreamingChicken
One of 50,298
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,549
ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loopytheone View Post
Look, you made it quite clear before that you didn't want a new political board at all but we decided to go with what the majority of active users on here asked for a going to give it a go. Maybe it will work, maybe it wont. But we feel it is worth trying if nothing else.

Incidentally, I don't see how the rules are convoluted at all. If you are referring to the discussion going on in this thread then that is just it, discussion. Not everybody's suggestion on everything is going to be implemented. But the minds and thoughts of everybody involved are worth hearing and worth listening to so that we can come to a conclusion that works for as many people as possible.
Actually, this what I said...

I answered "yes" but only with numerous reservations.

1) Clear, straightforward rules. The less cumbersome , the better. Rules that don't suggest that the powers that be have a slant would be great. For example, the rule forbidding discussion of Obama's citizenship was a huge blunder IMO. And no hidden rules that only the moderator knows about. If the moderator can't point to the publically stated rules and clearly cite why someone was infracted or put on timeout, them that's a problem.

2) The moderator stays out of the conversation. They are simply the referee and not a participant.

3) Don't be afraid to timeout posters. We have some personalities here, who rather unfortunately, are only interested in fighting. Not to discuss or debate but to just fight and act like jackasses. That's a huge problem that nobody wants to admit to . It's time to state the obvious and do something about it.

4) With all due respect, the new board needs a new moderator. Thank you for everything BBD, but after the ditzygirl timeout fiasco, more than a few of us lost confidence. Either draft a mod who has very little if any time spent in HP or perhaps reach out to another poster who has time here but without nearly the baggage of the more notorious ones. With the provision that they do not participate in the discussion. (I can't stress that enough.)


Which if you look at others' input, I am not the only one thinking along these lines either.
ScreamingChicken is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 12:37 PM   #74
Tad
mostly harmless
 
Tad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,609
Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

One thing we did not mention was that the intent of the ‘three moderator review’ process was to help deal with the issue of a moderator being involved in a discussion. We’ve talked about some behind the scenes coordination to make sure that if one of us is in a discussion, the others generally aren’t*, so that we can at least keep a couple of people out at any given time.
The challenge is when two mods want to have a political discussion, making sure that there are enough neutral parties available if anything happens in that thread may be a challenge.

I do understand that some people would prefer that moderators for the NPB be referees, monitoring what is going on without being involved. Personally I am quite opposed to that viewpoint for a number of reasons.

First of all, fairly often an escalating issue can be dealt with by an in-thread post. I’ll always prefer that to taking moderator action.

Secondly, (and to re-iterate that I’m speaking as one moderator here, not necessarily for the whole crew), I’m not much interested in moderating a board that I can’t take part in. To be honest I simply avoided HP a lot of the time, because I didn’t have the time to take on the amount of stuff in there which I thought was calling out for a retort. But under this new system I’m going to have to read at least parts of the NPB, and doing that without occasionally getting involved just isn’t on, for me.

Third, there are politics that I do want to talk about – which mostly aren’t American domestic politics, at least not directly, but the US being such a big player in the world it is hard not to touch on those issues sometimes. I value reading Agouderia’s viewpoint on a lot of issues facing the world and I wouldn’t want to silence that. I’m dying to get some other viewpoints on what is going on in the Philippines under its current president, would like to get a European view on ‘wither Turkey’ (what with the threat to open the immigrant floodgates if the EU doesn’t make certain concessions that Erdogan wants), and there is some stuff I’ve been reading on different cultural modes of dealing with certain issues that I’d like to have a discussion on in the context of a lot of the very nationalist/populist politics that has been breaking out in many places lately. All just by way of example.

But most importantly, I fundamentally don’t agree with the referee model. There are a subset of discussions that will tend to be highly partisan, with quite predictable ‘sides’ to the discussion, but certainly not all discussions need be that way, nor do I think that we should expect and accept that as the default mode of discussion on the proposed board, as that tends to be the least interesting and informative approach to any given issue.

Maybe it is a Canadian thing, but I have quite strong belief that on most issues, most people tend to fairly moderate positions when not whipped into more extreme and entrenched positions by ‘us versus them’ rhetoric. Given that the political board is not meant to be open to all comers, but is meant to be for the use of the Dimensions community, and we all have to get along on all of the other boards, I don’t think encouraging ‘us versus them’ approaches is healthy for the broader site.

Now, I grant you that the whole ‘neutral referee versus community member moderator’ might be one of those polarizing issues which could descend into us versus them …..
__________________
Criticism is so often nothing more than the eye garrulously denouncing the shape of the peephole that gives access to hidden treasure.
-Djuna Barnes, writer and artist
Tad is offline  
Old 12-15-2016, 01:14 PM   #75
ScreamingChicken
One of 50,298
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,549
ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!ScreamingChicken keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Dimensions may be international but when you have a site that is geared to fat people and their admirers, it makes sense that it will be dominated by the country with the fattest population. So it makes sense for American politics to dominant the conversation. "It is what it is" as the cliché goes. And the reality is America has been deeply divided since the late 1990's. We are partisan as hell. This didn't just magically occur in the last year. And if you look closely at the posters of HP, you had a handful of diehard conservatives, lots of liberals, along with a few moderates and some libertarians in the mix as well.

Unless there is a plan to bar every IP address from the US, it makes sense to have the rules and moderating style fit the needs of the people debating (read: Americans). Otherwise, it's a set up for failure.
ScreamingChicken is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Non Sequitur Fuzzy The Lounge 112 05-14-2010 05:44 PM
FA/FFA Forum Rules (PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING) James FA/FFA forum 27 06-13-2009 06:13 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright Dimensions Magazine. All rights reserved worldwide.