Consistency

Inverse Tiger · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2008 12:58 pm

extremejon09 wrote:

http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=14525

WTF?

Can we get some modmin consistency around here? Mod: "Stop trolling" Admin: "No it's not trolling it's fine", discussion continues normally, then randomly from who knows where POSTS VAULTED... um OK?

Also, so is this a ruling that nothing negative may be said in a thread about a thing ever? Because I'd love to live in a world in which nothing negative could legitimately be said about anything, and if I've been mistaken this whole time and I actually do live in that world, that'd be really peachy keen!

Capt. Ido Nos · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2008 2:21 pm

We are, or at least trying to be, they've slowed up the last few days, to get ourselves all on the Same Page. The Page Talks are still in progress. I guess though, thems aside, that it would be nice for if there was a modmin disagreement that they'd bring it up in the mod boards instead of making it public. (hint hint)

Beyond the Grave · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2008 2:22 pm

That was I who moved the posts. I left Susan's original post in there and some of the discussion that followed. I moved the posts because if you read the posts about Susan's "trolling," they were trolling themselves.

I don't mind seeing someone have a different opinion, in fact I encourage it.

Inverse Tiger · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2008 2:26 pm

Ah OK. Well, some legit posts got swept up in the cleanup operation then.

Acekirby · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2008 5:50 pm

Except, you know, half of the moderator staff disagrees with ramrod but who cares what they think amirite??

Capt. Ido Nos wrote:

I guess though, thems aside, that it would be nice for if there was a modmin disagreement that they'd bring it up in the mod boards instead of making it public. (hint hint)

Um except that Inverse was the one that brought this up

Lunar Jesty · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2008 5:54 pm

Inverse Tiger wrote:

Also, so is this a ruling that nothing negative may be said in a thread about a thing ever? Because I'd love to live in a world in which nothing negative could legitimately be said about anything, and if I've been mistaken this whole time and I actually do live in that world, that'd be really peachy keen!

I really did not mean to cause that much drama. I bet if I said, "no one cares" no one would have thought twice, but I guess the combination of the green name and the hot-button word "trolling" set everyone off. Here's how I defended myself in the mod forum:

Tell ya what. Go into the baseball thread, say that you think the game is utterly pointless and a waste of time to play and watch. How is that not trolling? It's not a matter if you like it or not. He may not be fishing for a negative response, but it's fairly obvious that he will get one. You can argue about things about something in a thread and that would be fine, especially if you point out exactly what you don't like about it. But if you hate everything about a subject, when you see the thread you should just ignore it.

Trolling isn't in the rules, so I didn't mean my post to even be an order: just a piece of advice along the lines of "no one cares and you are not going to get a positive response."

Inverse Tiger · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2008 6:30 pm

Yeah, you have a point about that. I would just rather not have an admin say one thing and then a mod randomly and without comment do the opposite thing. It makes it hard to know what really flies around here.

Capt. Ido Nos wrote:

I guess though, thems aside, that it would be nice for if there was a modmin disagreement that they'd bring it up in the mod boards instead of making it public. (hint hint)

Gimme mod board access and I'll do that from now on!

Anyway, guess that's all there is to see here, unless someone wants to prove me wrong? [EDIT: about there being nothing more to see here, not "prove my point wrong" like I'm some kind of stuck up jerk]

ramrod · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2008 6:56 pm

Inverse Tiger wrote:

Capt. Ido Nos wrote:

I guess though, thems aside, that it would be nice for if there was a modmin disagreement that they'd bring it up in the mod boards instead of making it public. (hint hint)

Gimme mod board access and I'll do that from now on!

Hey, if you or any of the other formers mods that I like wants back in, just say the word.

Ju Ju Master · **Joined:** Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:01 am **Posts:** 6245

As Capt said, we're in the process of creating some consistency. We've been talking about each rule in depth and making sure every modmin agrees and will mod in the same fashion so that things like this don't come up, or are quickly resolved when they do.

In addition, we've been debating quite a bit about the specific instance you bring up. We're trying to come to a consensus on this as well.

We are in in the process of creating a more fair, consistent leadership. It takes time, though, so you'll have to be patient. I for one am getting a bit tired of explaining this every time something like this comes up. We are working. You're not being ignored. Just bear with us while we try to sort things out.

Like I said in a thread similar to this one, if you have any specific complaints like this, please, please bring it up with an admin privately. Threads like this cause nothing but problems, and there's no reason to bring what should be a private matter into a public thread.

Capt. Ido Nos · **Posted:** Sat Jul 12, 2008 10:20 pm

*waves hands in non-threatening manner*

I wasn't meaning to come off as harsh or snide to Inverse, I was trying to leave that hint-hint for the other modmins ^^;; Sorry about the confusion...

But yes, everything everyone's said.

Acekirby · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 1:36 am

Inverse Tiger wrote:

Also, so is this a ruling that nothing negative may be said in a thread about a thing ever? Because I'd love to live in a world in which nothing negative could legitimately be said about anything, and if I've been mistaken this whole time and I actually do live in that world, that'd be really peachy keen!

I have no idea why but posts like this really tick me off.

As explained, what was said was not simply a "differing opinion". Those are welcome. The manner in which it was stated was the issue here.

Jesty's post is exactly how I feel about it as well.

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 2:26 am

Acekirby wrote:

Inverse Tiger wrote:

Also, so is this a ruling that nothing negative may be said in a thread about a thing ever? Because I'd love to live in a world in which nothing negative could legitimately be said about anything, and if I've been mistaken this whole time and I actually do live in that world, that'd be really peachy keen!

I have no idea why but posts like this really tick me off.

As explained, what was said was not simply a "differing opinion". Those are welcome. The manner in which it was stated was the issue here.

Jesty's post is exactly how I feel about it as well.

So then... If he had said "I dislike <blank Due to the following Faults" and then proceeded to list every single thing he hated about whatever the subject is, is more preferable than saying "<blank> Sucks." ?

The Noid · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 2:28 am

I thought Jesty was saying that those situations would be of equal trolling.

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 2:29 am

The Noid wrote:

I thought Jesty was saying that those situations would be of equal trolling.

Theres no clear definition of what trolling is and what trolling is not. Essentially, if you just say "I hate Chocolate" in a Chocolate thread, you're trolling now a days. And personally, I find that offensive.

Inverse Tiger · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 2:32 am

Ace: My statement you quoted had an unnecessary amount of sarcasm, I'll admit that. Really, even tho I dislike people who feel personally insulted by criticism of something they like, even in a thread dedicated to that thing, I can see how it might be in a forum's best interest to tell people not to do that. It's not my ideal, but I can live. The real problem was that the discussion was allowed to continue with admin blessing, it seemed to have turned civil, and then there was a moderator action that swept out some of those civil posts, including one of mine. This made me very confused early in the morning. Not that my post was the word of God or something, but we like to pretend we're not wasting our time by posting on a forum, and having legit posts deleted for confusing reasons reminds us of the terrible truth.

Ju Ju Master wrote:

We are in in the process of creating a more fair, consistent leadership. It takes time, though, so you'll have to be patient. I for one am getting a bit tired of explaining this every time something like this comes up. We are working. You're not being ignored. Just bear with us while we try to sort things out.

I think you're making it more complicated than it really is. There are too many cooks in the kitchen to hammer out some kind of wordy policy of mutual action like I was trying to do when I was a mod. Pick an admin, either ramrod or StrongRad, ask them how it'll be, do what they say, don't contradict them. The end.

Ju Ju wrote:

Like I said in a thread similar to this one, if you have any specific complaints like this, please, please bring it up with an admin privately. Threads like this cause nothing but problems, and there's no reason to bring what should be a private matter into a public thread.

A lock wouldn't hurt my feelings

ramrod wrote:

Hey, if you or any of the other formers mods that I like wants back in, just say the word.

That'd just increase the crowd in the kitchen.

lahimatoa · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 2:48 am

Quote:

I think you're making it more complicated than it really is. There are too many cooks in the kitchen to hammer out some kind of wordy policy of mutual action like I was trying to do when I was a mod. Pick an admin, either ramrod or StrongRad, ask them how it'll be, do what they say, don't contradict them. The end.

Most of the people who reacted to this idea with "OMG DICTATORZ WERE GUNNA DIE!!!" seem to be gone or far less active than they used to be.

I vote yes for order and consistency.

Acekirby · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 2:56 am

Inverse Tiger wrote:

I think you're making it more complicated than it really is. There are too many cooks in the kitchen to hammer out some kind of wordy policy of mutual action like I was trying to do when I was a mod. Pick an admin, either ramrod or StrongRad, ask them how it'll be, do what they say, don't contradict them. The end.

I highly disagree. What would be the point of the rest of us moderators? To enforce the whims of one person? I think a policy of cooperation would be highly preferable to having one person decide the rules.

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest wrote:

Acekirby wrote:

As explained, what was said was not simply a "differing opinion". Those are welcome. The manner in which it was stated was the issue here.

Jesty's post is exactly how I feel about it as well.

So then... If he had said "I dislike <blank Due to the following Faults" and then proceeded to list every single thing he hated about whatever the subject is, is more preferable than saying "<blank> Sucks." ?

Probably.

Ju Ju Master · **Joined:** Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:01 am **Posts:** 6245

Acekirby wrote:

Inverse Tiger wrote:

I think you're making it more complicated than it really is. There are too many cooks in the kitchen to hammer out some kind of wordy policy of mutual action like I was trying to do when I was a mod. Pick an admin, either ramrod or StrongRad, ask them how it'll be, do what they say, don't contradict them. The end.

I highly disagree. What would be the point of the rest of us moderators? To enforce the whims of one person? I think a policy of cooperation would be highly preferable to having one person decide the rules.

I agree with Ace. How is having only one person happy with the rules better than having all of the modmins happy with them? If we can tweak the rules so that we all agree on them - completely - then not only do we have consistent leadership, we have rules that are well-thought out and fair, and we have leaders who want to enforce the rules because they believe in them. Sure, an admin unquestionably deciding the rules is faster and more efficient at this moment, but what we're doing will create a better end result.

Choc-o-Lardiac Arrest · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 4:27 am

all it will create is more Bureaucracy.

To tell you the truth, it'd make more sense to get rid of some rules than to tweak and enforce more and new ones.

Ju Ju Master · **Joined:** Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:01 am **Posts:** 6245

Actually, a lot of what we're doing is dropping old rules (well, parts of old rules, we haven't dropped a whole rule yet).

Inverse Tiger · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 1:39 pm

Oh wow, SOMEONE was PMSing yesterday. (Hint: somehow, defying all physical possibility, it was me)

Sorry for this thread guys!

...

:'(

Ninti · **Joined:** Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:35 pm **Posts:** 3094

It's okay, I still love you.

Inverse Tiger · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 3:36 pm

Happy time is now!

ed 'lim' smilde · **Posted:** Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:41 pm

Once again, Inverse has stated the truth.

Ju Ju Master · **Joined:** Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:01 am **Posts:** 6245

Inverse Tiger wrote:

Oh wow, SOMEONE was PMSing yesterday. (Hint: somehow, defying all physical possibility, it was me)

Sorry for this thread guys!

...

:'(

No worries. And you're not the only one, I reacted pretty much the same way in the mod forum

So, I'm gonna give this one a lock.

Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Consistency

Who is online