User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 5:43:32 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wait, I thought he had a good point there. Based on what I've read, if I'm reading it right, this idea sounds a lot like our judicial system. If a cop kept arresting people for yelling wolverines as they drove by, and the charges kept getting thrown out, and arrestees got a 6 month to a year free membership for their trouble, maybe arrests would decrease? Since you put it that way you both might be onto something . |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 7:03:55 PM EDT
[#2]
Seems so restrained as to be nearly useless. I like the idea in general, but your terms significantly weaken the premise.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 7:32:21 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems so restrained as to be nearly useless. I like the idea in general, but your terms significantly weaken the premise. Totes agree |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 8:11:09 PM EDT
[#4]
I love that people are trying to find ways to find common ground, and I think there could be something here, but as much as it could solve many problems, I also think it has the potential to blow up in everyone's faces. This is partially Devil's Advocate, but it is also a lot of how I see it playing out.
In reading a lot of the recent threads, I see two big issues here: 1)transparency in the system; 2)lack of agreement about the meaning, interpretation and enforcement of the COC. Ben's proposal solves the first problem of transparency in many ways, but I think the second issue of disagreement over the COC would overwhelm the good-intentions and turn this proposed forum into a shit show. Transparency over the process of how warnings and bans are handled are inconsequential when there is such huge disagreement over what the COC is (or should be) and how it is (or should be) interpreted and enforced. A big question is that with a site this big, can everyone find a happy place within the current (or future) COC? If not, transparency is kind of meaningless. Some want the raucous "Wild West"; some want civil discussion of conservative issues; some want the "hey buddy...fuck you buddy...hahaha" threads; some want to catch up on the news; some want to ask questions of the forum for serious topics. Then there are the shit-posters, the shit-stirrers, the contrarians, the trolls, the plants, etc. Then there are many who blur the lines. This is where it gets tough, especially when a poster gets to be popular, but very clearly crosses the lines. One group cries foul if the poster is warned or banned; another group cries foul if the poster is allowed to continue on. I don't see how one COC can make all of those groups happy, unless people just accept that the site is not going to be exactly what each of us wants to see. Maybe we all need to grow some thick skin in more ways than just one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 8:12:05 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems so restrained as to be nearly useless. I like the idea in general, but your terms significantly weaken the premise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 8:12:15 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Totes agree |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 8:18:17 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I love that people are trying to find ways to find common ground, and I think there could be something here, but as much as it could solve many problems, I also think it has the potential to blow up in everyone's faces. This is partially Devil's Advocate, but it is also a lot of how I see it playing out. In reading a lot of the recent threads, I see two big issues here: 1)transparency in the system; 2)lack of agreement about the meaning, interpretation and enforcement of the COC. Ben's proposal solves the first problem of transparency in many ways, but I think the second issue of disagreement over the COC would overwhelm the good-intentions and turn this proposed forum into a shit show. Transparency over the process of how warnings and bans are handled are inconsequential when there is such huge disagreement over what the COC is (or should be) and how it is (or should be) interpreted and enforced. A big question is that with a site this big, can everyone find a happy place within the current (or future) COC? If not, transparency is kind of meaningless. Some want the raucous "Wild West"; some want civil discussion of conservative issues; some want the "hey buddy...fuck you buddy...hahaha" threads; some want to catch up on the news; some want to ask questions of the forum for serious topics. Then there are the shit-posters, the shit-stirrers, the contrarians, the trolls, the plants, etc. Then there are many who blur the lines. This is where it gets tough, especially when a poster gets to be popular, but very clearly crosses the lines. One group cries foul if the poster is warned or banned; another group cries foul if the poster is allowed to continue on. I don't see how one COC can make all of those groups happy, unless people just accept that the site is not going to be exactly what each of us wants to see. Maybe we all need to grow some thick skin in more ways than just one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 8:22:40 PM EDT
[#8]
Ben, I admire what you’re doing. I love the site, and quite possibly some of the staff here for various reasons (some latent Thursday homo) and am not a fan of both the division that’s happening and again the lack of a dedicated staff member that does what NorCal used to do.
That being said, it is Friday night… |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 8:37:44 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ben, I admire what you're doing. I love the site, and quite possibly some of the staff here for various reasons (some latent Thursday homo) and am not a fan of both the division that's happening and again the lack of a dedicated staff member that does what NorCal used to do. That being said, it is Friday night |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 8:58:34 PM EDT
[#10]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 9:00:37 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 9:03:39 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is restrained. I did that to keep as much BS out as possible. It cannot be the pit. If it has pit rules then the entire point of asking staff and mods why about something will get lost. It should never be a place to insult. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Totes agree Maybe its just me. But this is all I can think of in that statement.  That Man Insults Me |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 9:09:29 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe its just me. But this is all I can think of in that statement.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqUK45SPA1U |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 9:41:09 PM EDT
[#14]
I'm not sure I grasp the concept of staff or mods being "unavailable." If they're unavailable to explain the reasoning behind their actions, shouldn't they also be considered to have resigned their position? Similarly, if the member is "unavailable" shouldn't that be considered as as best a "no contest" plea, if not a guilty plea?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 9:45:18 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not sure I grasp the concept of staff or mods being "unavailable." If they're unavailable to explain the reasoning behind their actions, shouldn't they also be considered to have resigned their position? Similarly, if the member is "unavailable" shouldn't that be considered as as best a "no contest" plea, if not a guilty plea? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 9:46:24 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not sure I grasp the concept of staff or mods being "unavailable." If they're unavailable to explain the reasoning behind their actions, shouldn't they also be considered to have resigned their position? Similarly, if the member is "unavailable" shouldn't that be considered as as best a "no contest" plea, if not a guilty plea? I think that’s one of the biggest gripes here. You’ll see edits with a COC number, sometimes with the mod name, sometimes not. When there isn’t a detailed explanation in the edit, even with the mod putting their name there, it makes it look like an emotional decision. Emotions have no place in moderation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 9:48:11 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The potential for creative insults is high. Freedom to speak your mind, or "insult" can be defined. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 9:49:11 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Freedom to speak your mind, or "insult" can be defined. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 10:25:36 PM EDT
[#19]
Phone lines are still open. Come say what you think on this.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 10:37:24 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I agree with your last point. I think the forum can be used by admin to see problems with the COC. for instance if they see repeatedly the same COC being questioned several times then they can start to rewrite or clarify the COC so as too lessen confusion or maybe correct a mistake. I don't think the Coc gets fixed quickly anytime soon. But the furm could be seen as a data collection place for them. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I love that people are trying to find ways to find common ground, and I think there could be something here, but as much as it could solve many problems, I also think it has the potential to blow up in everyone's faces. This is partially Devil's Advocate, but it is also a lot of how I see it playing out. In reading a lot of the recent threads, I see two big issues here: 1)transparency in the system; 2)lack of agreement about the meaning, interpretation and enforcement of the COC. Ben's proposal solves the first problem of transparency in many ways, but I think the second issue of disagreement over the COC would overwhelm the good-intentions and turn this proposed forum into a shit show. Transparency over the process of how warnings and bans are handled are inconsequential when there is such huge disagreement over what the COC is (or should be) and how it is (or should be) interpreted and enforced. A big question is that with a site this big, can everyone find a happy place within the current (or future) COC? If not, transparency is kind of meaningless. Some want the raucous "Wild West"; some want civil discussion of conservative issues; some want the "hey buddy...fuck you buddy...hahaha" threads; some want to catch up on the news; some want to ask questions of the forum for serious topics. Then there are the shit-posters, the shit-stirrers, the contrarians, the trolls, the plants, etc. Then there are many who blur the lines. This is where it gets tough, especially when a poster gets to be popular, but very clearly crosses the lines. One group cries foul if the poster is warned or banned; another group cries foul if the poster is allowed to continue on. I don't see how one COC can make all of those groups happy, unless people just accept that the site is not going to be exactly what each of us wants to see. Maybe we all need to grow some thick skin in more ways than just one. Because it will most likely be such a small group, you cannot tell if they are a good representation of the overall membership, or are they a loud minority just shouting their same points over and over again. I could be wrong, but I don't think this will provide much useful data about the overall membership at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 10:40:02 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think it will be useful data at all. I will most likely be a very small group of posters, making a lot of noise. Because it will most likely be such a small group, you cannot tell if they are a good representation of the overall membership, or are they a loud minority just shouting their same points over and over again. I could be wrong, but I don't think this will provide much useful data about the overall membership at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 10:56:46 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well given I bet warnings, locks and bans are fewer than what we think that could be true. Though I will point to the members satisfaction thread and poll that just saying its a small group could be over looking something. Usually the complaint threads get a small group of affected members all riled up and very vocal, but is that really reflective of the overall membership? It could be, but you can't know from these threads. I think that is what your proposed forum would end up being: a small group of affected members being very vocal, but not giving an indication of whether that reflects their small minority, or the overall membership. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 11:01:47 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think there are a lot of people who have a vision of what the site should be that doesn't match what a lot of others think it should be. This mismatch is what I see as the huge problem, not tranparency. Usually the complaint threads get a small group of affected members all riled up and very vocal, but is that really reflective of the overall membership? It could be, but you can't know from these threads. I think that is what your proposed forum would end up being: a small group of affected members being very vocal, but not giving an indication of whether that reflects their small minority, or the overall membership. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 11:06:27 PM EDT
[#24]
Thanks for starting this, and keeping it alive Ben.
It’s a worthwhile effort. Hopefully that effort is reciprocal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 11:07:49 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks for starting this, and keeping it alive Ben. It's a worthwhile effort. Hopefully that effort is reciprocal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 11:19:52 PM EDT
[#26]
Ben,
First off all, thanks for what you’re doing here. I think the vast majority of us enjoy this site, value it as more than just an internet home and don’t like seeing the dissension that’s developed recently. So, thank you for the efforts! It’s also great to see mods and staff in this thread actively engaging and listening. There’s a lot of good suggestions in this thread already, that I’m sure you’re already incorporating into your proposals. But, there’s one thing that keeps bugging me. In my personal life I do a fair bit of industrial labor relations stuff. It can be a tough environment at times, to say the least. One where both parties question the others motives, skeptically look at proposals and may not always operate in good faith. But, when you can get past that there’s almost always some common ground. In our case here, that common ground is a love of the site and all that it provides for a generally conservative, pro-2A community. The challenge is having a productive enough conversation to find that ground in the midst of a dispute. Sometimes, that takes the engagement of an arbitrator. In theory an independent, impartial party, to help the parties find the answer. I don’t know who, or what, could play that role in your proposed grievance form - or if it’d even be something that would be entertained - but, with at tense as some of the recent discussions have been it may be necessary. Maybe the act of having the discussion open to the public eye will be enough of a disinfectant to do the job on its own. I’m sure I offered more questions than answers here, but wanted to pass along my thoughts as well. PM if there’s anything I can do to help out. BTW, I’ve been following the hubris thread from day one, and it’s really great to see this one is still alive. Thanks again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 11:28:07 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ben, First off all, thanks for what you're doing here. I think the vast majority of us enjoy this site, value it as more than just an internet home and don't like seeing the dissension that's developed recently. So, thank you for the efforts! It's also great to see mods and staff in this thread actively engaging and listening. There's a lot of good suggestions in this thread already, that I'm sure you're already incorporating into your proposals. But, there's one thing that keeps bugging me. In my personal life I do a fair bit of industrial labor relations stuff. It can be a tough environment at times, to say the least. One where both parties question the others motives, skeptically look at proposals and may not always operate in good faith. But, when you can get past that there's almost always some common ground. In our case here, that common ground is a love of the site and all that it provides for a generally conservative, pro-2A community. The challenge is having a productive enough conversation to find that ground in the midst of a dispute. Sometimes, that takes the engagement of an arbitrator. In theory an independent, impartial party, to help the parties find the answer. I don't know who, or what, could play that role in your proposed grievance form - or if it'd even be something that would be entertained - but, with at tense as some of the recent discussions have been it may be necessary. Maybe the act of having the discussion open to the public eye will be enough of a disinfectant to do the job on its own. I'm sure I offered more questions than answers here, but wanted to pass along my thoughts as well. PM if there's anything I can do to help out. BTW, I've been following the hubris thread from day one, and it's really great to see this one is still alive. Thanks again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 11:57:32 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ... However I need to have the other side present if this is to go any where.... The membership is huge, and there is a wide range of expectations of what this site should be. It is not so much as one side or the other, as it is different groups pushing for their own vision of what this place should be. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2021 11:58:52 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the problem is that there is no "other side". The membership is huge, and there is a wide range of expectations of what this site should be. It is not so much as one side or the other, as it is different groups pushing for their own vision of what this place should be. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 12:12:11 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There are no mods and staff? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I think the problem is that there is no "other side". The membership is huge, and there is a wide range of expectations of what this site should be. It is not so much as one side or the other, as it is different groups pushing for their own vision of what this place should be. I am guessing that there are also similar divisions among the mods/staff that we may not see. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 12:14:54 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My point is that there are so many different ideas of what this site should be in the membership that 'members' vs. 'mods/staff' doesn't work here. I am guessing that there are also similar divisions among the mods/staff that we may not see. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 12:35:07 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well yes. What the forum is for is for everyone. So big or small factions really don't matter. I think it would be like the pit (used to be) with dogpiles by those who are impassioned enough to post, while most members won't be bothered to address the issue. That is not a reflection of the membership, only those who are inclined to participate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 12:41:25 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I just think that a forum to debate bans/warnings would devolve into the small factions (or shit-posters) showing up in numbers to argue their point, while those unaffected would not bother. This does not give a good indication of how the membership feels, only the portion who feel strongly enough to respond. I think it would be like the pit (used to be) with dogpiles by those who are impassioned enough to post, while most members won't be bothered to address the issue. That is not a reflection of the membership, only those who are inclined to participate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 1:40:31 AM EDT
[#34]
Thank you for your efforts, @m35ben. I sent you an email through the site but I guess you never received them. An email or two was also sent to @Goatboy but it appears as though he never received anything either. I'll have to look into that later.
My thoughts are: The ability for thread starters to lock their own threads would be an improvement. IF a thread goes sideways and a mod isn’t online, the thread starter could stop the troublemaker pretty fast. However, allowing a thread starter to ban certain people from the thread would lead to personal vendettas. This option has irony written all over it. OTOH, unless the thread starter could lock troublemakers out of the thread, then having the ability to unlock the thread would be useless. Having the lock only ability might be a first step to see how it goes, but shitting on threads would probably become more common. ---------- Regarding a grievance forum: (Not sure this is a good idea, but….) If it’s open to all members, it would immediately turn into a constant shit-fest on mods and staff. This forum would need to be open for members to VIEW, but not post. The only poster allowed would be the locked or banned member and the mod that took the action. The ability to see the infraction of the member and the reasoning behind the moderator’s action IS the oversight. When I say members, I mean paying members, not guests. (See below) Also, no cross posting – copy/pasting from grievance to GD. ---------- If we all benefit from the site, then we all need to have skin in the game. This would help cut down on troll accounts, dual accounts, etc and help with member vetting. The site is free to read, as it is now, (except for member only areas) but if you want to post, you must have a paid account. ---------- To help cut down on GD problems, site staff needs to find 3 or 4 trusted members to help moderate GD. GD shouldn’t be a free for all. Those advocating for a wild west forum have plenty of other websites to choose from. Having a reasonable COC does not mean it can’t be enjoyable. ---------- Again, everything above is YMMV and all that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 1:49:10 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thank you for your efforts, @m35ben. I sent you an email through the site but I guess you never received them. An email or two was also sent to @Goatboy but it appears as though he never received anything either. I'll have to look into that later. My thoughts are: The ability for thread starters to lock their own threads would be an improvement. IF a thread goes sideways and a mod isn't online, the thread starter could stop the troublemaker pretty fast. However, allowing a thread starter to ban certain people from the thread would lead to personal vendettas. This option has irony written all over it. OTOH, unless the thread starter could lock troublemakers out of the thread, then having the ability to unlock the thread would be useless. Having the lock only ability might be a first step to see how it goes, but shitting on threads would probably become more common. ---------- Regarding a grievance forum: (Not sure this is a good idea, but.) If it's open to all members, it would immediately turn into a constant shit-fest on mods and staff. This forum would need to be open for members to VIEW, but not post. The only poster allowed would be the locked or banned member and the mod that took the action. The ability to see the infraction of the member and the reasoning behind the moderator's action IS the oversight. When I say members, I mean paying members, not guests. (See below) Also, no cross posting copy/pasting from grievance to GD. ---------- If we all benefit from the site, then we all need to have skin in the game. This would help cut down on troll accounts, dual accounts, etc and help with member vetting. The site is free to read, as it is now, (except for member only areas) but if you want to post, you must have a paid account. ---------- To help cut down on GD problems, site staff needs to find 3 or 4 trusted members to help moderate GD. GD shouldn't be a free for all. Those advocating for a wild west forum have plenty of other websites to choose from. Having a reasonable COC does not mean it can't be enjoyable. ---------- Again, everything above is YMMV and all that. The thread locking is being discussed in the hubris thread in team. I think the rules can be tight enough to help minimize crap slinging. The forum is not just for locked or banned members. Those that see something they are confused about or perhaps disagree on should be able to start a thread and ask. That is a key part in preventing more problems that come from frustration. Thank you for taking the time to give your thoughts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 1:59:22 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would like to see mods and staff and admin be more active in here. I haven't started on round two of this. A third party would be interesting but for now I see it as unneeded. I'm at the table and I bet others would sit here too. However I need to have the other side present if this is to go any where. Thank you for offering to help. I will need some in the future. This is some of the problem with mods not participating as members it encourages an us and them way of thinking, when staff only interact to hand out punishment they will be thought of as overseers ,this is a problem staff, also if they don't participate I question that they really don't like it here and is a sign that maybe they shouldn't be a mod or staff of the place they don't like |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 2:07:04 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah I messaged you that I did not get the email. The thread locking is being discussed in the hubris thread in team. I think the rules can be tight enough to help minimize crap slinging. The forum is not just for locked or banned members. Those that see something they are confused about or perhaps disagree on should be able to start a thread and ask. That is a key part in preventing more problems that come from frustration. Thank you for taking the time to give your thoughts. Message(s) received, thank you. I'll look in Team. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 2:07:36 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is some of the problem with mods not participating as members it encourages an us and them way of thinking, when staff only interact to hand out punishment they will be thought of as overseers ,this is a problem staff, also if they don't participate I question that they really don't like it here and is a sign that maybe they shouldn't be a mod or staff of the place they don't like |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 2:11:08 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Message(s) received, thank you. I'll look in Team. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 2:11:56 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is some of the problem with mods not participating as members it encourages an us and them way of thinking, when staff only interact to hand out punishment they will be thought of as overseers ,this is a problem staff, also if they don't participate I question that they really don't like it here and is a sign that maybe they shouldn't be a mod or staff of the place they don't like Or that they don't want to participate in a mod bashing thread questioning their judgement. If there is no other reason for the forum other than questioning their judgement, what good can come from it? (Assuming said forum is open to all members instead of the offender and mod) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 2:15:05 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Or that they don't want to participate in a mod bashing thread questioning their judgement. If there is no other reason for the forum other than questioning their judgement, what good can come from it? (Assuming said forum is open to all members instead of the offender and mod) Many other threads besides mod bashing threads, and the forum Ben is suggesting is not a mod bashing thread |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 2:15:41 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't mind talking about the user lock and ban function. I just don't want to talk about it in this thread. I'm going to have to go back through this thread and organize everyone's comments and thought so we can hash them out next. Understood. Didn't mean to alter the discussion. Will direct my thoughts to Team. Thanks again for your ideas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 2:23:12 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Many other threads besides mod bashing threads, and the forum Ben is suggesting is not a mod bashing thread |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 2:24:24 AM EDT
[#44]
I'm out for now. I'll catch up in the morning.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 2:26:20 AM EDT
[#45]
You're wasting your time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 4:41:16 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Or that they don't want to participate in a mod bashing thread questioning their judgement. If there is no other reason for the forum other than questioning their judgement, what good can come from it? (Assuming said forum is open to all members instead of the offender and mod) Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This is some of the problem with mods not participating as members it encourages an us and them way of thinking, when staff only interact to hand out punishment they will be thought of as overseers ,this is a problem staff, also if they don't participate I question that they really don't like it here and is a sign that maybe they shouldn't be a mod or staff of the place they don't like Or that they don't want to participate in a mod bashing thread questioning their judgement. If there is no other reason for the forum other than questioning their judgement, what good can come from it? (Assuming said forum is open to all members instead of the offender and mod) The main benefit of this forum that I can see is that it could provide a publicly viewable method to ensure that everyone, site-wide, is on the same page, regarding the CoC. Membership, Mods and Staff would all be operating from the same set of examples. Over the years, Staff have repeatedly said that they keep the CoC a bit loose, so as to allow a judgement call on posts that are maybe a bit iffy, so as to not completely kill discussion as the CoC would, if it were strictly enforced. As they have rightly stated, it is impossible to list all the minutia in the CoC while also accounting for the context of the post. Realistically, one could say that the CoC is the equivalent of law code and that however a "case" is finally adjudicated and quick summary of why in relation to the CoC, could be considered case law. This would help Staff maintain flexibility in the CoC, while also providing a bit of clarity and consistency to the everyone at all levels and not having to think of every possible CoC violation. Further, I don't think it would be technically infeasible for a message to be sent to all the Staff and Mods with the final decision and reasoning. It would basically be a quick policy and directive update from Staff to Mods and Staff to Staff. The common thread that has nearly always been in these, well threads, is the seemingly inconsistent moderation at times. As it currently stands, you can have contradictory or different explanations of the CoC by Staff or threads with both Staff and Mods posting and participation while another Staff or Mod will come in and start moderating and issuing warnings. Which naturally leads to the question of why didn't the other Staff and Mods do the same? I've seen a Mod edit and issue a warning for post that TBS, the guy in charge of running GD, responded to without editing or moderating, which frankly makes no sense to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 5:00:32 AM EDT
[#47]
We all seem to be getting hung up on mods and staff. The bigger issue is what the website represents and stands for.
Here's what the owners of this website need to decide (maybe they already have). Is this a website dedicated to furthering the 2nd or is it a website to appease Amazon, GoDaddy, Brownells ect to make the owners money? There's nothing wrong with them wanting to make money. But if that is their ultimate goal a lot of us don't belong here. It seems this website is becoming the ole boys club. I get it they have to work within a hostile environment. But they have never explained to us that is the issue. There are ways to avoid the Amazon issue. What is being done to rid the website of those issues. Maybe they are doing something. I hope they are but up until now we have seen no tangible actions or results. What attracted me to this site way back was its unapologetic support of the 2nd. I'm no gun nut. I don't own 100 guns or have my garage stacked with half a million rounds of ammo on palettes. But I do believe every citizen of this country has a God (or whatever you heathens want to believe, joke lighten up) given right to own and carry firearms when and wherever they want to. I just wonder if this website is about that anymore. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 6:06:29 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The main benefit of this forum that I can see is that it could provide a publicly viewable method to ensure that everyone, site-wide, is on the same page, regarding the CoC. Membership, Mods and Staff would all be operating from the same set of examples. Over the years, Staff have repeatedly said that they keep the CoC a bit loose, so as to allow a judgement call on posts that are maybe a bit iffy, so as to not completely kill discussion as the CoC would, if it were strictly enforced. As they have rightly stated, it is impossible to list all the minutia in the CoC while also accounting for the context of the post. Realistically, one could say that the CoC is the equivalent of law code and that however a "case" is finally adjudicated and quick summary of why in relation to the CoC, could be considered case law. This would help Staff maintain flexibility in the CoC, while also providing a bit of clarity and consistency to the everyone at all levels and not having to think of every possible CoC violation. Further, I don't think it would be technically infeasible for a message to be sent to all the Staff and Mods with the final decision and reasoning. It would basically be a quick policy and directive update from Staff to Mods and Staff to Staff. The common thread that has nearly always been in these, well threads, is the seemingly inconsistent moderation at times. As it currently stands, you can have contradictory or different explanations of the CoC by Staff or threads with both Staff and Mods posting and participation while another Staff or Mod will come in and start moderating and issuing warnings. Which naturally leads to the question of why didn't the other Staff and Mods do the same? I've seen a Mod edit and issue a warning for post that TBS, the guy in charge of running GD, responded to without editing or moderating, which frankly makes no sense to me. As you mentioned, and I think we can all agree, the COC in GD is somewhat loose, as you said, to allow for a wider amount of expression on an array of subjects. I think most of us have an idea when we enter that grey area. It seems, from what I am gathering, there are members that feel the grey area is shrinking and strikes are being called outside the zone they have been accustomed to. And, that many older members seem to be scrutinized a bit more than a newer member. I think we’re both talking about transparency, or at least some form of it. My position is that if such an open forum were to exist, it would quickly become abused, regardless of rules. Again, this idea is in its infancy and most likely won’t take root since, like it or not, we are guests on their website, they make the rules, period. We all have the choice to remain or search for another destination. At the end of the day, most of us have chosen to remain. The content here is vast and it’s all user generated, which is refreshing. When the info is user generated, there is no implied bias, it’s simply one users opinion based on experience, I think we on appreciate the average mans opinion vs a conglomerate directing you to their product for revenue. Alas, I’m getting off into the weeds... This thread proves what we’ve known all along... the members here are some of the most thoughtful and caring of any site I’ve ever visited. For that reason alone, I’ll stick around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 6:16:43 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This thread proves what we’ve known all along... the members here are some of the most thoughtful and caring of any site I’ve ever visited. For that reason alone, I’ll stick around. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2021 6:19:38 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote History We’re all broken, my friend, but not all injuries can be seen from the outside. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File