New Members

[scottish-guy]

OMFG - I come back from work and this is still going on to any extent?

Now the dust has at least partially settled, it's clear our esteemed moderators either have no moderation policies to follow or if they have such policies then they don't all interpret them the same way.

Whilst a447 and Christian are both reasonable, Head Judge Len makes it up as he goes along and when caught out doing so, he cannot take any criticism at all and lashes out like a petulant child - which is a bit of a handicap when your "job" relies on you being seen as even-handed and reasonable.

Hopefully they can now all agree amongst themselves that the libelous content posted about Newalaan should have been deleted/moved immediately it was spotted. Even though Newalaan and I do not see eye to eye (understatement), I still do not like to see that sort of shit thrown around.

Instead of that happening it was still there when I originally responded to this thread (if it hadn't still been there, I wouldn't have known what SameBB had said, would I?)

[Moses]

scottish-guy ​this thread is about new ideas how to manage newcomers or to control users who violate rules, please keep on rail

[newalaan2]

Just workable ideas.......please.

Put this thread BACK to the main forum and keep it 'live' there, pinned even, a place where some with workable ideas might see it. If you want members to see it and reply it needs to be where most log straight into. Previous owners were sticklers for every single thread being in exactly where they thought it should be, .e.g a general discussion about the forum should be immediately moved to 'forum feedback' when in actual fact the topic was relevant enough to remain on the main page until discussion ebbs away... perhaps then 'park it' in one of sub-forums.

As for banter and wildly off topic shit, I liked it best when all that litter was moved to the flaming forum, 'jinks' was pretty good at splitting threads and moving the way off-topic stuff, inane banter and 'in-jokes' between 3-4 forum regulars to the flaming forum, and that included some that I was active in and happy to see tidied out of the main forum, because that is where previous contributors come to read and then decide if worth contributing to a thread or starting a new one. Not everyone has hours in the day to wade through tons of litter to get to some interesting/relevant content and try to get some traction/momentum.

There was a comment from Arsenal recently which he declared the forum was as busy as ever...yes but with what exactly? just inane nonsense, in-jokes, banter, utter rubbish and irrelevant off topic crap. Six regulars blathering back and fore with multiple nonsensical posts is NOT a busy forum, a busy forum is one where a WIDE RANGE of posters in numbers come and contribute. The occasional comment, and moving a thread off topic to a similar or relevant side topic is fine and natural, but not the cliquy drivel which has littered this forum for months.

Why don't some of you ask those you know who sit on the sidelines only reading not contributing, or previous contributors who don't bother why they don't contribute? The answer will be because it's simply not worth the effort to post or start a thread and have it derailed into a mish mash of one-liners...and it needs to be said 90% of these one-liners are not funny, not in the slightest bit amusing. Banter back and fore, for EVERYONE else not part of the clique it's just downright fucking boring, and a useless waste of time clicking on.

When moses partly took over I was hopeful, when he took over completely and we were rid of surfcrest who RUINED the whole point and basis of SGT's reason-to-be, it's different-from-the-crowd edgyness in favour of a bland, integrated 'community' simply aping gaybutton and gaythailand, I was more hopeful it might get back to that edgy, interesting, information-central smiles set up which spike and neal (for the first half of his ownership) continued with successfully. I realise now the full value of jinks who put in the hours to keep the forum problem free as moderator.

I don't personally think moderators should/need to bee seen or heard except in extreme situations where a post which is problematic for the forum or owner needs to be addressed. Then a short explanation on the post and why it's been moved/deleted is all it needs. Quoting forum rules to the long serving members here is a total waste of space, for crying out loud....who gives a fuck about 'rules' made up when the forum was conceived? we all know what is acceptable and what is not. My red line is anything deemed to cause problems for the forum/owner or a threat so outrageous it needs to be taken seriously. Not the waffle and blatherings from nonentities like samebb, it's all yakkety-yak....jibber-jabber, witterings of toothless cretins who have decided they are 'somebody' and bark away with their gummy gobs. That stuff just needs to be parked out of the main forum.

Banning? For what purpose? Surfcrest was deluded into thinking he was banning and warning real people, they were in fact merely 'handles'....meaningless nom de plumes, for which the banned individual only need set up a 'another' to continue. I've had about 8 different handles over on gaybutton as on occasion when truths have been told, the handle was banned, more out of vindictive sulkiness than anything else. What? challenge gaybutton? begone!

MY IDEA.
Resurrect the FLAMING FORUM again and sweep all the garbage littering the main forum into there! Sorry, was rambling on only to realise at the end the new 'members control' thing was the real topic. So let any new members post as they wish and be subject to same as everyone else, and when they post garbage Mickp-style sweep the lot into the flaming forum. Keep the MAIN forum litter-free and many will return.

Also this stops sensitive creatures from sending multiple PMs to complain about this argument and that comment, when all they need do to avoid....is avoid clicking on to the Flaming Forum. Neal told me that these petty complaints 10 times a day was the start of his losing patience with the board. What started out as an ego massaging centre of attention 'toy' soon became one long headache.

[Moses]

MY IDEA.
Resurrect the FLAMING FORUM again and sweep all the garbage littering the main forum into there! Sorry, was rambling on only to realise at the end the new 'members control' thing was the real topic. So let any new members post as they wish and be subject to same as everyone else, and when they post garbage Mickp-style sweep the lot into the flaming forum. Keep the MAIN forum litter-free and many will return.

have you seen Holding Room sub-forum?

[francois]

I didn't ask for opinions Francois. I asked for workable ideas regarding preventing new members writing filth. I'd still like some of you have any.

Arsenal, this is what you wrote:

All opinions are, of course welcome but I am especially interested in those members who have either been here a long time, post regularly or both.

I have been here a long time and I did give you my opinion. I leave it there.

[newalaan2]

have you seen Holding Room sub-forum?

Yes I have. 'Holding' means there for a period of time before being put elsewhere [that's my understanding of surfrests intention behind it?]. Flaming Forum was a permanent area where threads and posts deposited (or indeed started )there, remained there. So you could resurrect and find thread/posts easily. It also encourages to keep momentum on the thread going as you know where it is and where it will be when you come back to find it. Also from the name its quite clear what is going to be going on in there, so anyone who doesn't care for in-fighting, arguing and off topic litter/rubbish can see and avoid.

[colmx]

I find it incredulous that the "rules" do not allow the removal of posts that threaten physical violence or ill will upon a person.

Surely they should be modified to stop this kind of threat. There is a level of decorum and respect that these forums should have and its not difficult to see when someone has stepped over the line

We all know that BBB is a nutcase, but a harmless one at that. On the other hand other members have shown themselves as being quite volatile.... and nobody knows if they are really a Chihuahua or a Rottweiler

On another forum I use the moderators use a rule "what would you do if someone said that about your grandmother/father" when deciding whether to moderate

So:
=>Your granny is a pig pink fat wrinkly elephant = Probably true and just banter, therefore allowed

=>Your Grandfather is a bald haggis eating maniac from Scotland = probably true and just banter, therefore allowed
=> I hate your granny, she's a stupid c*nt = possibly true and just banter, therefore allowed, but poster may be asked to tone down their language

On the other hand:
=>If I ever see your granny I will punch her, unless someone puts her in a shallow grave first = this kind of comment is inappropriate and offensive and should be removed

=>Your grandfather was a leader in the scouts and he was probably interfering with all the younger scouts = this kind of comment is inappropriate and offensive and should be removed

=>Your grandmother is a fucking retard = this kind of comment is socially unacceptable and offensive and should be removed

You remove the content of the offending post, but leave a moderator comment to not ruin the flow of the thread.
The offender gets a yellow card or infraction - which lasts 7-30 days. If they offend again during the yellow card period they get a red card and a 30 day ban.

On their return from the 30 day ban, they may have 2 more infractions (yellow/Red) before being permanently banned

Its not rocket science... in fact the forum software probably has this built in already?

[scottish-guy]

That is exactly what I mean about "having policies" - but apparently that is not the kind of "idea" which is welcome.

It's one thing having "rules" but you must also have a policy (which is clear and agreed upon by all the moderators), on how to enforce those rules and on the sanctions which apply when these rules are deemed to have been broken.

The problem at the moment seems to be that, with an apparent lack of any policy, the moderators are each interpreting the rules in a different way, confused about how many it takes to reach a decision, and totally clueless about what to do once they eventually agree that 'something must be done'.

The reason it (largely) worked with jinks ("no capital J please") was that he was not trying to moderate by committee as seems to be happening now - he just called it as he found it.

There is nothing inherently wrong in having 2,3, or even 4 mods - but only if there is a policy for them to follow and be consistent upon.

So my "idea" is that the 3 of them get together, decide what constitutes a 'punishable' offence - as Colmx has outlined above, decide on the disciplinary pathway, stick to it, and apply it to new and old members alike - with new members under active moderation for their first 2 weeks

[Moses]

Yes I have. 'Holding' means there for a period of time before being put elsewhere [that's my understanding of surfrests intention behind it?]. Flaming Forum was a permanent area where threads and posts deposited (or indeed started )there, remained there. So you could resurrect and find thread/posts easily. It also encourages to keep momentum on the thread going as you know where it is and where it will be when you come back to find it. Also from the name its quite clear what is going to be going on in there, so anyone who doesn't care for in-fighting, arguing and off topic litter/rubbish can see and avoid.

No. It is sub-forum what is invisible for searchengines and to visitors without login. Moving to there is permanent. May be I will change name soon to "Trash can" or to "Serpentarium".

[Moses]

You cannot run the Board by committee

I can. And I do it over 15 years on another forums. Wait a little bit. We are working about policies "on the go".