Forum Community Architecture

[Vindiction7]

Maybe I ought to get there for some good old fashioned K+B. As you might imagine I've gotten the boot from a bunch of forums with all the anti-capitalist bashing.

Sorry if this is a rather newbish question, but what exactly is K+B? 

[Tshern]

Kick+Ban. An old IRC saying. Probably not the original source of the saying, but that's where I learned it some ten years back.

[Callix]

Save your energy. GitP is between servers, and the forums are down.

LogicNinja's been banned there since before I got into D&D. But it still has the Guide to Being Batman.

While I agree G-Fu should not be the sole reason for mods having another think about whether to edit/remove/ban, I think that if the person has high G-Fu, then the odds that they know what they're doing is higher. PI himself has been a bit harsh to honestly naive posters before (though they really should've read his guidelines), but the fact that he is usually right, helps maintain order, and makes significant contributions, reflected in his G-Fu, means that he should have some leniency for when he makes the occasional bad judgement call. On the other hand, a poster who does nothing but flame newbies indiscriminately might well find themselves modded, or banned if they make a habit of it, and that's how it should be.

[OneWinged4ngel]

Save your energy. GitP is between servers, and the forums are down.

LogicNinja's been banned there since before I got into D&D. But it still has the Guide to Being Batman.

While I agree G-Fu should not be the sole reason for mods having another think about whether to edit/remove/ban, I think that if the person has high G-Fu, then the odds that they know what they're doing is higher. PI himself has been a bit harsh to honestly naive posters before (though they really should've read his guidelines), but the fact that he is usually right, helps maintain order, and makes significant contributions, reflected in his G-Fu, means that he should have some leniency for when he makes the occasional bad judgement call. On the other hand, a poster who does nothing but flame newbies indiscriminately might well find themselves modded, or banned if they make a habit of it, and that's how it should be.

Precisely.

By the way, another thing that needs to be noted:
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting

[Meg]

So my philosophy is to have broad, general mission statement type ideas and then let the specifics fall into place under those.

What I like about this list, though intended to be humorous, is that it gets at the intention and motivation of posters and I feel that is much more important.

It has always been a huge pet peeve of mine to discipline people based on 1 interaction or post.  First of all, even the best of us get drunk and post vitrol at 4 am.  Second, I think it is much more damaging to post ongoing crap that technically falls within the "rules". 

When the rules are specific it also means people argue minor, meaningless points and that drives me crazy.  In my 7 years experience as a professional forum moderator, I heard SO many times shit like "Well, I didn't say "YOU are an asshole, I said "People who say what you said are an asshole, so technically I wasn't flaming HIM."

Calling someone an asshole isn't the part that should be against the rules.  It's how they use it.  I could tell someone to eat shit and die and based on my motivation, it may be ok.  But I could also just say "whatever" and be completely disruptive.

I don't anticipate banning folks, and I will always give warnings first (unless it's an obvious troll or spam account), but I just want everyone to know upfront that there are no specifics and I'm looking at overall and motivation, not specifics. 

I want healthy, intelligent debates.  That means folks may be a bit rough and call names.  I'm ok with that.  If it crosses a line and someone actually takes offense, that's why I've set up the Duel of Wits.  Get it out and get over it. 

In general I don't want arguments or pettiness dragging down a real conversation and will moderate based on that.

[yellerSumner]

No offense, but I think that list is too damn long.
I skimmed all the way down to "Diplomat" (yeah, that's the second one) before I got bored and scrolled down to the end of the post.

"No Douchebaggery" Is short, sweet, and to the point. 

If we need to get more detailed than that, I bet we could probably cover it in half a dozen specific types of douchebaggery that we aren't cool with.  Three dozen (I think I counted 36) gets old and makes it look like you're trying too hard to be cute.


(I'm tired and grumpy, so my post may be colored by that.)

[Vindiction7]

No offense, but I think that list is too damn long.
I skimmed all the way down to "Diplomat" (yeah, that's the second one) before I got bored and scrolled down to the end of the post.

"No Douchebaggery" Is short, sweet, and to the point. 

If we need to get more detailed than that, I bet we could probably cover it in half a dozen specific types of douchebaggery that we aren't cool with.  Three dozen (I think I counted 36) gets old and makes it look like you're trying too hard to be cute.


(I'm tired and grumpy, so my post may be colored by that.)

Methinks so.  Read the post right above yours by Meg.  It looks like they're saying that there will be a few general rules of what "no douchebaggery" means, and that those general rules can be broken down into more specific archetypes in order to deal with specific cases without being quite as arbitrary or biased as many mods are.

[Skara Brae]

I'd suggest stickying/adding to a rules thread a List of Logical Fallacies. Argument from Ignorance, Argument from Fallacy (The Fallacy Fallacy) and Appeal to Ridicule are a few I've seen from time to time, as well as the Straw Man.

Thirded.  (Then again, people in North American culture in general lack critical thinking skills.  Linking to a webpage isn't going to fix that overnight, but it's better than doing nothing...)

a few things that you might expect to be in there aren't.  "Jerk," for example, is not.  It's okay for someone to be rather acerbic in their arguments

I want healthy, intelligent debates.  That means folks may be a bit rough and call names.

Directed you both: why?  I was under the impression that people who have solid arguments don't generally resort to such tactics as namecalling or being jerky because, well, their arguments are so good they don't have to.  I'd also be concerned about a high howler tolerance policy inadvertently driving off new members and making the forums seem more cliquey.  (If that's what you want, fine.  Just be clear about what kinds of people you want on your forums/who your target audience is.)

[OneWinged4ngel]

I'd suggest stickying/adding to a rules thread a List of Logical Fallacies. Argument from Ignorance, Argument from Fallacy (The Fallacy Fallacy) and Appeal to Ridicule are a few I've seen from time to time, as well as the Straw Man.

Thirded.  (Then again, people in North American culture in general lack critical thinking skills.  Linking to a webpage isn't going to fix that overnight, but it's better than doing nothing...)

a few things that you might expect to be in there aren't.  "Jerk," for example, is not.  It's okay for someone to be rather acerbic in their arguments

I want healthy, intelligent debates.  That means folks may be a bit rough and call names.

Directed you both: why?  I was under the impression that people who have solid arguments don't generally resort to such tactics as namecalling or being jerky because, well, their arguments are so good they don't have to.  I'd also be concerned about a high howler tolerance policy inadvertently driving off new members and making the forums seem more cliquey.  (If that's what you want, fine.  Just be clear about what kinds of people you want on your forums/who your target audience is.)

I think we mentioned this, but we're aware that a Con of high howler tolerance is that it can drive off innocent newbies, and we'd like some ideas to try to counteract that while still maintaining a high howler tolerance.

[Kai]

Would having someone's register date available under their post count help the self-professed howlers to know when someone is a 'newbie' and may need some leniency? I don't know if it's possible to do on this forum, but I've seen it on other forums.

The register date is available in posters' profiles, but people might not make that effort to check.

[AfterCrescent]

Would having someone's register date available under their post count help the self-professed howlers to know when someone is a 'newbie' and may need some leniency? I don't know if it's possible to do on this forum, but I've seen it on other forums.

The register date is available in posters' profiles, but people might not make that effort to check.

I always thought the post count helped point out newbies, but that might help.

[Kai]

Post count doesn't equal time spent on the boards though...I have about 2 weeks on you, but you have about 900 posts on me. 

[AfterCrescent]

Very good point.

Registration date may be helpful, then. I think when I was helping sdk search for a dice roller mod that I saw one that could do that... *scratches head*

[OneWinged4ngel]

Would having someone's register date available under their post count help the self-professed howlers to know when someone is a 'newbie' and may need some leniency? I don't know if it's possible to do on this forum, but I've seen it on other forums.

The register date is available in posters' profiles, but people might not make that effort to check.

Sounds like a start to me!  Maybe encourage the community to support people who have joined within the first X days, and have an announcement line at the bottom of the boards (or somewhere) saying "Please welcome our newest members:  X, Y, and Z!" (as I've seen some other forums do, but no one actually ever welcomes them) during set number of days.  And say something in the board guidelines/rules about it.

[PhoenixInferno]

Would having someone's register date available under their post count help the self-professed howlers to know when someone is a 'newbie' and may need some leniency? I don't know if it's possible to do on this forum, but I've seen it on other forums.

The register date is available in posters' profiles, but people might not make that effort to check.

Sounds like a start to me!  Maybe encourage the community to support people who have joined within the first X days, and have an announcement line at the bottom of the boards (or somewhere) saying "Please welcome our newest members:  X, Y, and Z!" (as I've seen some other forums do, but no one actually ever welcomes them) during set number of days.  And say something in the board guidelines/rules about it.

The newest member that joined the forum is already available at the bottom of the main forum, FYI.

[yellerSumner]

Okay, what exactly do we mean by "support" anyway?

Have we really had anyone jump on a new member that wasn't asking for it? *cough214iqcough*

Are we talking all the board over or speaking in regards to the heavy CO population and new members who might not know much about min/maxing?

[OneWinged4ngel]

Would having someone's register date available under their post count help the self-professed howlers to know when someone is a 'newbie' and may need some leniency? I don't know if it's possible to do on this forum, but I've seen it on other forums.

The register date is available in posters' profiles, but people might not make that effort to check.

Sounds like a start to me!  Maybe encourage the community to support people who have joined within the first X days, and have an announcement line at the bottom of the boards (or somewhere) saying "Please welcome our newest members:  X, Y, and Z!" (as I've seen some other forums do, but no one actually ever welcomes them) during set number of days.  And say something in the board guidelines/rules about it.

The newest member that joined the forum is already available at the bottom of the main forum, FYI.

I know; I was suggesting that it should apply to more than one person, be applied over a period of X days, and be seen all over the forums.  Which is notably not how it is now.

[Nox_Noctis]

Would having someone's register date available under their post count help the self-professed howlers to know when someone is a 'newbie' and may need some leniency? I don't know if it's possible to do on this forum, but I've seen it on other forums.

The register date is available in posters' profiles, but people might not make that effort to check.

Personally, I dislike emphasis on registration dates since I have seen forums where people turn it into an elitist measurement. For instance, "You weren't even around when [X] happened, how would you know?," and the like can come up and people start referring to one another as veterans, etc., which, while perhaps true in some respects, seems to actually be counter-productive as far as helping the new people since they can find it intimidating, or even somewhat insulting when they aren't treated equally because of their new status.

Personally, I think we should treat everyone the same, new or old. Help them out, point them in the right direction, don't be a dick (or a douche bag). But at the same time, don't give them so much leeway when they screw up that it disrupts the rest of the community. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few after all.

[Omen of Peace]

I guess I come from a different place than many people here.

- I actually like GitP and disagree with your assessment : IMO the main problem is that too many different topics get collated in the Gaming forum. It covers half a dozen equivalent BG forums. (You mentioned Gameology so I assume you are talking about Gaming.) It does lower the average level of cluefulness, but I've seen quite a few interesting threads over there, on a wide range of topics. There are some flamewars too, but anyone can elect not to care and go on their merry way.

LogicNinja was actually banned several times (aliases...) - I've lost count of how many. He has a lot of to contribute but it's true that his howling is above the threshold there.

I don't know what reproaches you have against Roland. I always thought he was doing a good job but I'm probably not aware of everything.

- Now how does that apply to this forum ? Like I said, I actually prefer little howling. I recognize that having some is a necessity, but not feeding the trolls (and other "bad" flamewarriors) always seems like the best solution to me - even if it's sometimes hard to refrain from posting (I plead guilty on the count of occasional thoughtless flame-feeding).

In short I don't see a correlation between the level of howling and the level of the debates.

[OneWinged4ngel]

I don't know what reproaches you have against Roland. I always thought he was doing a good job but I'm probably not aware of everything.

  You ever speak with him face to face?  Guy's an anti-intellectualist.  He actually doesn't like smart people.  If you act too smart, he will ban you.  Proof:  Try to find anywhere I broke their code of conduct.  I also could just show you the private correspondence, but that would be unethical.

- Now how does that apply to this forum ? Like I said, I actually prefer little howling. I recognize that having some is a necessity, but not feeding the trolls (and other "bad" flamewarriors) always seems like the best solution to me - even if it's sometimes hard to refrain from posting (I plead guilty on the count of occasional thoughtless flame-feeding).

  I have yet to see any high level "academic" forum on any subject that did not have public troll burnings, be they extraordinarily vicious or "more polite about it" (in fact, about half of them would expressly encourage it in the Code of Conduct).  It's why I'm extremely dubious about the Duel of Wits idea.  It leaves the troll's statements unopposed in the public view, unless I'm misunderstanding how that system works.  I also don't see how that "back and forth ONCE" idea is consistent with threads the giant Faelrynith thread or Meg's own Gamer Zero bashing.  It seems hypocritical to me.

In short I don't see a correlation between the level of howling and the level of the debates.

Then I'd love to see these "intelligent debates" you found on GitP, because I certainly couldn't find them.  By contrast, I can go over to the Gaming Den, which has even LESS boards than GitP and even more content crammed into a small space... and the debates tend to be quite worth reading.

On the Gaming Den, half the threads are interesting.  On GitP, I could search for several hours and come up with maybe one little buried gem, and when I did, it was because it was a decent POST, not because there was a decent DISCUSSION about the post afterwards.  Heck, half the time the OP was getting flamed or baited by some Picador (Lots of them on GitP) or was already banned.