#95348 - 2002-11-11 12:16 AM
Re: RFC: Acceptable moderator behavior
|
Howard Bullock
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-09-15
Posts: 5809
Loc: Harrisburg, PA USA
|
Well I have edited posts to make them more readable by inserting code tags as well formatting code and shortening LONG lines. I see nothing wrong with that because most people that make those formatting mistakes do not understand how to edit a post - even when told how to do it.
[ 02. December 2002, 00:38: Message edited by: Howard Bullock ]
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#95352 - 2002-12-02 02:41 AM
Re: RFC: Acceptable moderator behavior
|
MCA
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-04-28
Posts: 5152
Loc: Netherlands, EU
|
Dear,
Our not limitive input:
- not all forums have the same type of members. Starters forum contains mostly the first
reaction from the new ones without looking at the 'rules' of it.
How many people creates a poll without the goal to have one.
In our opinion and we aren't alone in that it can be necessary to extend f.e. title or to
insert code-blockstructure.
Titles to reflect more the actual question.
Code-structures to make inserted code more readable. Script code will return.
Truncate longlines to keep a topic more readable.
In most situations intervention is based on the active part a moderator want play.
We never receive negative reactions from them. Only now we read that someone
would be really pissed.
The topic "INFO: Moderator's message to new forum users" which was creating by Howard
and me is also very clear about what can happen with a topic on the starters forum
and during the RFC phase it wasn't a big problem. - any experience member knows the 'general' rules of the board. There must be also
a very very good reason for a moderator to move a topic to another forum.
In the past we agree with the restrictions for udf forum and we agree also
that this board such have a lot of freedom.
f.e.
when we put a topic on beta forum we have our reasons for that. To put it on
general forum wasn't the goal. Such moves by moderators can lead to a situa-
tion members stop using this board. Once we were confrontating with those kind of
moderators. Impact for that board: to put something nice on the internet is inte-
resting enough for them why spend our leisure time there. - Howard Bullock, we subscribe completly your reaction. To make it more readable cost
time and it mostly isn't a very instructive duty, but the benefits for all readers
can return a feeling of statisfaction. - sealeopard, we agree with you that the contents of topic shouldn't changed by
moderators. Moderators can add a reaction to the topic for that purposal. - we should keep a little bit of freedom on this board. Just this kind of freedom
makes this board great. Sometimes this board gets a chatroom function for
some of you. Is that a problem. - we shouldn't move old topics to new created forums.
greetings.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#95354 - 2002-12-02 03:56 AM
Re: RFC: Acceptable moderator behavior
|
MCA
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-04-28
Posts: 5152
Loc: Netherlands, EU
|
Dear Les,
We aren't talking about renaming, but about extending it. It isn't
the same.
You can experience it as "stupid", but it aren't our though.
Again we get a hard discussion "what a member should and shouldn't do". A discus-
sion we don't like at all. Freedom is a great good for this board.
To extend guidelines with a kind of rules without any moment of RFC isn't the
right way. Rules must supported by most of the community.
So we turn away from the statement "dredge up old threads".
So it doesn't harm us when some guys and most of those are experience members to
use this board as a chatroom.
So it isn't a problem for us that each morator plays a part he likes. Active or
wait for the interesting things to blow.
Les, your idea By so doing, it sends the message that everyone can
do likewise we doesn't understand. Most of the members and mostly
junior ones doesn't read in an arranged way old topics. Mostly the last
10 days topics get attention.
What is the problem f.e. that some find a very old topic, but the solu-
tion doesn't work. We prefer that he add his reaction to it and not that
he should open (of course he could open) a new reaction. Such order
can makes him afraid. Such order can reduce the right feedback. Such
order skips already available information about his problem.
greetings.
btw: when this board becomes an over regulated place to be we must rethink
which part we want to play in the future.
A nice example of unwanted changes is that the most important topic of UDF
forum "Guidelines for the UDF-section" (F12-4) isn't there anymore. Simple
a move can have big impact to other topics too.
So members must have the trust that after a period position of topics keep un-
changed.
So such moves makes it not easy to ask Henri to implement all kind
of direct links on his mainpages.
So people doesn't take knowledge of existing rules. Not everyone is searching
for a possible available document on another forum.
btw: a possible way of preventing borrowing Ruud's ear is by preparing as expe-
rience members a reaction which contains hardly any information Ruud needs for
useful feedback. Simple one or two words doesn't meet the tests.
One of such examples is when we return a complete reaction on his documentation
as one topic entry.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#95355 - 2002-12-02 04:07 AM
Re: RFC: Acceptable moderator behavior
|
MCA
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-04-28
Posts: 5152
Loc: Netherlands, EU
|
Dear,
So we find the guidelines back. New URL is here (F14-142).
It requires the need to select Show all topics to find them back.
Please read also the comments in topic here which has to
deal with the freedom of this board.
greetings.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#95357 - 2002-12-02 06:17 AM
Re: RFC: Acceptable moderator behavior
|
MCA
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-04-28
Posts: 5152
Loc: Netherlands, EU
|
Dear Les,
It is not personal, but extending the rules with in our opinion unwanted elements
we don't like at all. In some things we will always very clear and we aren't using
misty words to express that.
Our opinion about restricting forums was published in other topics. Above we point
to one of those reactions.
About "chatroom" we wrote So it doesn't harm us when some guys and most of those are
experience members to use this board as a chatroom.. Which is in our opinion
nothing negative. We read them also with fun.
About I think you are probably the only person to keep an extensive list of URLs to
old threads and so perhaps the only one inconvenienced by their move. At least you
are the only one to complain. As volunteered we are trying to keep our site
which has also a direct link with this site up to date and we don't like at all
that kind of unwanted error message appears when users/members are visiting it.
It aren't only links from us but also from other members.
The new topic F12-250 looks more to be a UDF instead of a replacement of previous guide-
lines topic.
About You are a valued member here and it is not my intention to drive you away..
First thanks Les, but we are really thinking about a dramatic reducing of our
contributions to this board.
greetings.
btw: once again, it isn't personal to anyone.
[ 02. December 2002, 06:33: Message edited by: MCA ]
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#95358 - 2002-12-02 02:29 PM
Re: RFC: Acceptable moderator behavior
|
Radimus
Moderator
Registered: 2000-01-06
Posts: 5187
Loc: Tampa, FL
|
BTW...
The the non-UDF posts in the UDF forum, were moved into the General forum, at the request of others... Specifically to assist in some of the scripting of some apps that other members were working on.
Likewise, were some UDFs renamed to conform to the 'standard' formatting.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#95359 - 2002-12-02 03:08 PM
Re: RFC: Acceptable moderator behavior
|
MCA
KiX Supporter
Registered: 2000-04-28
Posts: 5152
Loc: Netherlands, EU
|
Dear Radimus,
We have a simular problem in the past, but we create a work-around for it.
How, simple include a list of topic-numbers which should be excluded during
processing.
The strange thing is that there are possible to automate MOVE operations.
See f.e. topic F1-5154, which contains the header info This topic has been
moved to COM scripting.
Other examples are F1-5773 and F1-5774
greetings.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Arend_, Allen, Jochen, Radimus, Glenn Barnas, ShaneEP, Ruud van Velsen, Mart
|
0 registered
and 696 anonymous users online.
|
|
|
![[Wink]](images/icons/wink.gif){kind=icon}
![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon}
