I thought the point of the Flameboard...

[Bajaratt]

Mistra wins with the best graphic ever.

 

[Mistra]

/bow

 

[Tyrath]

GREATEST gif ever. I'm stealing it!

 

[Alyada]

The problem isn't her, it's you. There are a dozen or so mods, a majority of them know enough to keep a low profile when they are moderating and assert it in a partial way, but several feel they need to clean things to THEIR liking and assert their authority when they disagree. You disagree, you edit or lock. I called you out in a previous thread as the shitty mod you are and what did you do? You trolled, PC+1 the entire thread and locked it AFTER you said you wouldn't shit on it. I guess your word is that worthless.

I was just having some fun with Lanien.

Seriously, get over the power trip, do what you're expected to do and nothing more. Don't jump into the thread and suggest you're going to lock it. Leave them be unless they clearly violate the rules, are from a bot or some troll wanting to spam the board. That was the only reason mods were ever given the authority to moderate the flameboard and you should have enough common sense to know that's all you should moderate.

That's what I do, Lavi. I haven't locked anything in the FB. The rules were unclear and unfocused before the FB was back. Most of us had no clue what to do in certain situations, we did what we thought was best. I worked hard & fought for the FB being reinstated. Now that there is clarity, I haven't touched a thread yet. I ban 6-7 bots a day & remove their stupid posts. I take a look at every thread inside the flameboard, even though I wouldn't do crap to any of them. I make sure the more popular boards (Lounge, Reality Sinks In) are clear of spam/flames and then I call it a day. Occasionally, I'll pop in my 2 cents on a thread I find interesting. What more do you want?

I know Reeve isn't exactly around much nor does he know all the past history, but you do. Take into account that has been the way the board functioned in the past for years without problems and when the problems arose, the solution wasn't gestapo like moderation, it was minor fixes. Stop the editing, stop the locking and leave shit be.

I was just doing what I was told--what I saw Sculli do. I don't do it anymore. I'll edit links/pictures that aren't appropriate for the boards. If people have an offensive sig, or a moving sig, I give them the option to remove it themselves rather than me just editing it out of nowhere.

People asked for the OLD flameboard back, not some half wit edited, watered down BS you call flaming.

I cannot help what people post.

And for the love of fucking god, remove the damn edit function. Only fucking pussies need an edit funtion on the flameboard.

Eh, it's been brought up to Reeve before. I'll bring it up again. None of us can change the code or anything like that.

 

[Sharpe]

Alyada is a good mod, it's that bloody Blabj we need to be careful of. That boys got a massive ego :nyam: :wink:

 

[Lanien]

I was just having some fun with Lanien.

And it felt nice too O.O

 

[Winklewil]

To wrestle my thread back to the topic I originally began with:

Though, if you have any constructive criticism for us, don't relay it in a post on a thread in the FB. I ask you PM any of the mods or Reeve for changes you want to see.

As for equality with thread treatment: If you see that one thread has been handled the way another should have been, please report it or send a PM with thread link to someone and it will be taken care of.

I understand where you're coming from, here, and I know it would certainly be easier on you. I genuinely don't intend to whip up mob mentality against you, but in the end ... grievances against board practices in general are best aired in public ... on the board itself.

The kind of thing that RoM and Trippy are going back and forth over are the sort of thing that would likely be better done in private. Serious concerns with the way things are being run, however, have a lot more weight behind them when others are given room to agree ... or less weight, when people come to disagree.

I truly apologize for causing you so much headache, but I wanted my point to come across, and publicly. In the future, I personally will try to talk it in private, first.

Still, the deed's done, and to my original end:




I have still yet to see a green name address the following issues, no matter how often I try to steer them back to it:


1) Going over and over and over the motivations for locking Rufus's thread, and why you felt it was the "right" thing to do ... you still basically admit it was done not out of the breaking of any rule, but because you didn't like it. No guidelines were broken, none that you woudn't have to interpretively stretch to encompass a whole lot more than that thread alone.

2) Bearing that reality in mind, I really want this question to be answered, once and for all: is the highest rule, here, that a moderator will lock anything he/she wants to? Is there restrictions on your power, guidelines that you're supposed to be following ... or is the only true guideline whether or not you personally want something gone?

If so, fine. Just spell it out, in black and white, here:

http://www.qcdn.org/showthread.php?t=34848


It wouldn't have to be complicated. "We reserve the right to do whatever the crap we want." Plenty of boards work that way, and make no bones about it. If that's the way it is, just spell it out.


Otherwise, don't even maintain the PRETENTION that there are a set of boundaries that have to be crossed before moderator intervention occurs. Don't even prop up the illusion of an easy-to-understand set of rules that, once obeyed, should protect you from forced silence.


Be honest, and call it what it is, so those that are in utter contrast against that sort of philosophy can give the place up for what it is, stop causing so much trouble and in-fighting ... and just move on. Anything else is stringing people along, prolonging the mistaken idea that there's going to be any sort of censorless environment (like the Flameboard) around for them.


In short, I really only beg for one thing: consistency. If there's no rule broken, then no matter how distasteful, stupid, or downright rotten you feel a certain thread is ... you've got to let it be free to stand. Hell, if you've noticed something about it that's the primary REASON for you wanting to lock it, but isn't technically a rule, just ADD THE RULE! Don't like flames in which the flamee has absolutely no chance to defend him/herself?

Fine. Insert the new line: "Attacks cannot be lobbed at those incapable of defending themselves." The only thing is, once you add the rule, make it consistent, and enforce it for good.

If you don't want to bother with any of that, just change everything to one rule: "The moderators will just lock anything they feel to be 'inappropriate,' which is a completely subjective decision."



Any of these solutions will work, but they share one thing in common: they've been spelled out clearly. If you're not going to take the third option (absolute moderator power), for consistency's sake, you're going to have to:

A) Add a new rule to apply to Rufus's locked thread to explain the moderator action, and begin enforcing it regularly.

B) At the very least, concede the fact that it was locked as a result of no specific rule being broken.

 

[Winklewil]

Alyada is a good mod...

The best, actually. ^_^

That's what I do, Lavi. I haven't locked anything in the FB. The rules were unclear and unfocused before the FB was back. Most of us had no clue what to do in certain situations, we did what we thought was best. I worked hard & fought for the FB being reinstated. Now that there is clarity, I haven't touched a thread yet. I ban 6-7 bots a day & remove their stupid posts. I take a look at every thread inside the flameboard, even though I wouldn't do crap to any of them. I make sure the more popular boards (Lounge, Reality Sinks In) are clear of spam/flames and then I call it a day. Occasionally, I'll pop in my 2 cents on a thread I find interesting. What more do you want?

I appreciate what you've done, and what you do. I get the notion that you don't often hear that, but I think you've got the right idea in terms of how to go about your duties.

 

[Eleibfrid]

1) Going over and over and over the motivations for locking Rufus's thread, and why you felt it was the "right" thing to do ... you still basically admit it was done not out of the breaking of any rule, but because you didn't like it. No guidelines were broken, none that you woudn't have to interpretively stretch to encompass a whole lot more than that thread alone.

In hindsight, it wasn't right to lock it. I apologize for that mistake.

2) Bearing that reality in mind, I really want this question to be answered, once and for all: is the highest rule, here, that a moderator will lock anything he/she wants to? Is there restrictions on your power, guidelines that you're supposed to be following ... or is the only true guideline whether or not you personally want something gone?

If so, fine. Just spell it out, in black and white, here:

http://www.qcdn.org/showthread.php?t=34848

That is not the highest rule, though we mostly rely on judgement. I made a wrong judgement, even though it did not go against the guidelines.

Otherwise, don't even maintain the PRETENTION that there are a set of boundaries that have to be crossed before moderator intervention occurs. Don't even prop up the illusion of an easy-to-understand set of rules that, once obeyed, should protect you from forced silence.


Be honest, and call it what it is, so those that are in utter contrast against that sort of philosophy can give the place up for dead, stop causing so much trouble and in-fighting ... and just move on. Anything else is stringing people along, prolonging the mistaken idea that there's going to be any sort of censorless environment (like the Flameboard) around for them.

Completely understood.

In short, I really only beg for one thing: consistency. If there's no rule broken, then no matter how distasteful, stupid, or downright rotten you feel a certain thread is ... you've got to let it be free to stand. Hell, if you've noticed something about it that's the primary REASON for you wanting to lock it, but isn't technically a rule, just ADD THE RULE! Don't like flames in which the flamee has absolutely no chance to defend him/herself?

Fine. Insert the new line: "Attacks cannot be lobbed at those incapable of defending themselves." The only thing is, once you add the rule, make it consistent, and enforce it for good.

If you don't want to bother with any of that, just change everything to one rule: "The moderators will just lock anything they feel to be 'inappropriate,' which is a completely subjective decision."

Also completely understood, that guideline will be added (the unable to defend one, not the lock anything).

Any of these solutions will work, but they share one thing in common: they've been spelled out clearly. If you're not going to take the third option (absolute moderator power), for consistency's sake, you're going to have to:

A) Add a new rule to apply to Rufus's locked thread to explain the moderator action, and begin enforcing it regularly.

B) At the very least, concede the fact that it was locked as a result of no specific rule being broken.

A. Done
B. It was, and I apologize.

 

[Alyada]

1) Going over and over and over the motivations for locking Rufus's thread, and why you felt it was the "right" thing to do ... you still basically admit it was done not out of the breaking of any rule, but because you didn't like it. No guidelines were broken, none that you woudn't have to interpretively stretch to encompass a whole lot more than that thread alone.

Like I said a couple of pages back, I didn't lock it. I'd already taken a look at it & already made a promise to myself not to lock anything but spam/bot topics on the FB. Personally, I saw it pretty useless.. but I just left it as is.

2) Bearing that reality in mind, I really want this question to be answered, once and for all: is the highest rule, here, that a moderator will lock anything he/she wants to? Is there restrictions on your power, guidelines that you're supposed to be following ... or is the only true guideline whether or not you personally want something gone?

No, not really. Though, there isn't really a standard set of rules aside from if we have some thoughts on a major issue to contact Reeve.

 

[Winklewil]

A. Done
B. It was, and I apologize.

Wow...I really wasn't expecting a reply beyond a cursory brush-off, let alone concessions ... which is sort of why I made it so long. Um ... I'm impressed.


Sorry to be such an obsessive arsehole about it all. I never intend to, but it's kind of a pet issue of mine, and once I work myself up, it's difficult to stop until I either see failure or success. ^^;



Thank you.

Like I said a couple of pages back, I didn't lock it.

Well, I was actually talking to Eleibfrid, there ... and even then, I wasn't really trying to attack him, but trying to elicit some further explanation for his decision in locking the thread. As for you, I had little but grudging praise.

 

[Alyada]

The best, actually. ^_^

Thanks for that, really brightened up a super crappy day.

I have still yet to see a green name address the following issues

You didn't specify. ; ; Ask & ye shall recieve.

 

[meeze]

No, he came out all guns firing on a flame.

The FB was never ingame related only.

The rules ask we keep it in-game related.

Dumbasses (the other guy, not pere, forgot his name) was at least FF related.

Who gives a shit if Windaria can't respond, I woulda LOL'd, but i think the kid who posted it is a bigger tool then Peregrine and that says a lot.

There are tons of threads about people who don't post here, there are tons of threads in the FB that aren't flames, but the subject matter dictates where the thread goes.

Had he chosen a different area, it would have been contrued as a flame and locked. While peregrines thread only got moved. That thread was going to be locked regardlesss where he put it because of the movement by Windaria's douche rags to make her a martyr.

Matter of fact, even this thread breaks the "rule", wonder if it gets moved now to qcdn feedback and support.

 

[RaidrX]

http://qcdn.org/showthread.php?t=36767

NOT about FFXI In-game and its 2 pages and going strong, where the mofo LOCK TRAIN!