|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
posted April 10, 2010 05:57 AM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 06:09, 10 Apr 2010.
|
I think it is my time to do a little cleaning. This thread is not the place to debate other things not related to Feedback. Take your discussions on unrelated topics elsewhere please.
Now to cover some things that have bred like rabbits since I was away for a weekend. Jolly, sorry but you are one to talk about other taking a few words and making a mountain out of a molehill. In several of our discussions, you have taken things I've said, twisted them (for whatever reason)..and totally misunderstood what I was trying to say. Before you complain about your neighbors yard, clean your own.
Everybody needs to slow down and actually think before they post. People not agreeing with YOUR belief (or lack thereof, or whatever you want to call it (ie don't want a semantics war here)) is not insulting you. I would give examples, but again that might start a discussion and this is NOT the place for it.
____________
Message received.
|
|
bixie
Promising
Legendary Hero
my common sense is tingling!
|
|
posted April 10, 2010 08:43 AM |
|
|
petty, I thought I had some pretty good responses there...
Oh well. if it's gone, it's gone.
____________
Love, Laugh, Learn, Live.
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted April 10, 2010 08:48 AM |
|
|
I agree, Bixie, just not really the place for the discussion that was going on. Feel free to take the discussion to another thread.
____________
Message received.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted April 10, 2010 11:21 AM |
|
|
When, in the osm, the mods decide something is unrelated and therefore delete, I wonder, would it not be a better practice to create a seperate topic from where the talk should be in the opinion of the moderator?
Or is it too much hassle to create in stead of delete?
(Please notice, this is a feedback, as I suggest a different practice in the relevant forum).
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 10, 2010 11:27 AM |
|
|
This is the feedback thread for the OSM, isn't it?
I could say, a lot of things in response to this latest deletions and that the way how this thread is run is a mirror of the way the OSM is run.
I could say, that I've never seen the mods reacting anything else as defensive or aggressive (or not at all) to anything that is said or suggested here.
I could say, that, while it is true that generally spoken the police isn't at fault for people committing crimes, the job of the police is to get the perps; the job of the police is not to sit back and complain about the state of society, and the job of the police is neither to punish the whole society for the fact that there are perps.
I could say, that if the OSM was a youth club in a deprived area, your way to run it would be to have a piece of paper with a couple of rules nailed in the backroom, then sit back and watch, how the 13-year-olds start to smoke now and then, your comments being a quiet "careful" once a while, until the first ones started to bring in the alcohol and the dope; then, after some really heavy partying, when you'd find tons of empty bottles and the place a shambles of stubs and ash, next evening you'd make s sweep, earning massive protests from those who accidentally have been caught with stuff; then, after a short time, everything would start again, only now you may find a syringe as well, and and now you just close the place.
I could say, that moderating a place like the OSM may involve the necessity to invest some time into it initially, because it may be important to establish the way you want this place to work, whioh would involve a lot of attention to detail at first, telling people that you won't have a certain way of discussing, arguing, snip-quoting, indirect-insulting, off-topicking and so on and so forth; it may even involve establishing different and special rules like how many quotes a single post is alllowed to contain and how long a single quote can be.
I could say, that it's always a bad thing when the cops are brawling with the worst perps they are to enforce the law upon; I'm sure, Mytical is pretty biassed against me, and I'd say that angelito is probably biassed against Elodin, even though both may see that differently. angelito is arguing a lot with Elodin, and from a more objective point of view, and strictly spoken, for me some of his posts has been very provocative in nature; Mytical has done a lot of arguing with me; as a consequence it would seem a pretty bad idea that angelito mods Elodin's posts and Mytical mine, and even if they cross-mod, chances are that too much arguing BEFORE the establishment of a firm moderation style isn't the best thing to do.
I could say, that if someone remarks "In the night, there isn't much of a difference between black and dark blue", and someone answers by quoting that remark and saying: "Except for those who ARE either black or dark blue", you may think and say that this wasn't the direction and meaning you had in mind when saying your piece in the first place, but that's not the fault of the guy who answered because he cannot read your mind; just because someone has something in mind when posting something, it doesn't mean that other people may have something else in mind. More so, it doesn't mean, that others may be wrong when pointing out other directions this may lead to.
I could say, that it is a difference, however, when you suddenly read: "Since it was said that black and dark blue are the same thing...", written by someone whom you don't actually want to discuss with.
I probably could say a lot more but the only thing I will actually say, is asking a question, yet again.
If these last two points I could have made were identical, like you say, Mytical, which means, if I had been treating your posts indeed the same way like I claim Elodin treated mine, why would that be a point against generally doing something against it?
In other words: if a person you, someone with a lot of law enforcement power - and maybe some others as well -, would consider to be one of the worst bullies in town, would come to you and ask you to start acting against some bullying that is going on against him, why would it be important that he was a bully? Either bullying is okay or it's not. If it IS okay, say so: "There is currently no law against bullying and we do not intend to make one. Full stop." If there IS a law or there is none, but you'd like to have one, what does it matter WHO comes calling to the law?
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted April 10, 2010 11:30 AM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 11:38, 10 Apr 2010.
|
There is a reason we generally do not do this. One, if a thread adds to the over all benefit of the forum (and is interesting) the creator of that thread tends to get a qp. As Mods can not get qp's, it is best if somebody else creates the thread. Note that creating a thread does not guarantee a qp.
Two, we don't really seek to pigenhole a discussion (unless left with no other avenue). Despite some people's opinion of us, we don't want to be standing over everybody with whips in our hands, standing on their necks and saying "Do this my way or ELSE."
We take to heart the saying "With power comes responsibility." we are just everyday posters..we don't get paid or anything to do this, that happen to have the authority to keep the peace.
So we clean up the messes, and let everybody go about their business. If they want to continue it in another thread that one of them creates..so be it.
Jolly, I would address your so called "I could say" list, but that would be pointless. Have a good day. Except to say this. I have never had a personal problem with you, despite the failure to communicate. Why you have a personal problem with me, seems to be the failure to communicate. From here on, I will let another mod address you. Do not have a worry about that. Though if you directly address me, rest assured, I will answer. As futile as it may be.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted April 10, 2010 08:54 PM |
|
|
Maybe a general guide on posting in the OSM would be useful?
Especially, I'd like, the suggestions from the people who're not satisfied and the people who seem to go in long debates with eachother that often turn into 'you said this' 'you said that' (i.e. personal and not very much talking about the subject, at least parts of it).
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted April 10, 2010 09:34 PM |
|
Edited by Vlaad at 21:40, 10 Apr 2010.
|
Quote:
Maybe a general guide on posting in the OSM would be useful?
There are two guides actually, one is called the Code of Conduct and the other is more OSM-specific. In addition, it's always a good idea to try to read up on the subject: I asked everybody not to comment about the documentary unless they had seen it, but you had to, didn't you? And you argued the posting limit should be removed? 
____________
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 02:49 PM |
|
|
In: http://heroescommunity.com/viewthread.php3?TID=32825&pagenumber=2
Angelito wrote:
Quote:
I don't see any problems currently either, but you (all) should try to not quote and re-quoute and re...., so the posts become too long.
Is that the problem of quoting in your opinion? I'd like to suggest, you at least give a valid alternative. The idea of quoting, in my opinion, is that you can make clear what exactly you're replying to. How should one do that without quoting?
I honestly don't get the problem of quoting, and in my opinion that's not what ruins a given thread. I think it's the lack of focus of the substance (topic) of the thread in stead of people using direct one to one communication about irrelevant details that should be fixed over hcm and then edited into the thread when a common agreement has been reached.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 03:12 PM |
|
|
I may be able to help here.
I've tried to start a thread like that some time ago:
http://heroescommunity.com/viewthread.php3?TID=30427&pagenumber=1
It was a relgion-spinoff, and as such it was clear it would be controversial.
Conditions were:
1) No quotes
2) No classifications (meaning, I didn't want people telling themselves that this or that statement would make them atheist, fundamentals or whatever else).
One reason, not to allow quotes, is, if someone answers a post, the content of the post somewhat has to be summarized: "You said, that this and that was so and so."
The necessity to repeat what was written in one's own words helps understand posts better and clarifies for OP, whether the answering person did understand the post as it was meant.
Also, I thought it might help keeping posts shorter, but I seem to remember that I was dead wrong with that.
Still, as long as it lasted, the thread wasn't that bad for such a controversial isssue.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 03:26 PM |
|
|
I understand your reasoning as: Using your own words to describe what others said in stead of quoting and replying would limit the risk of confusion upon a misunderstanding.
I however would imagine doing that, assuming a misunderstanding have been made, would just bring even more confusion, because it's not clear what had been confused.
My example would be in the thread of religion that was closed were Elodin claimed I stated something.
Then he quoted it and told how he understood it.
He understood it differently than how I understood it and what my intentions with it was.
Had he not quoted it, I'd have had no idea were the confusion rose and I'd have been tempted to think he'd be making it up, because I could not reckognize what he wrote as something I had written.
In reality, I believe it was a misunderstanding of the word absolute.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 03:31 PM |
|
|
I said this to you yesterday, Ohforfsake, but I'm just going to say it here as well.
If you are able to make a post without any quotes and people know exactly what you're referring to, then you've made a good post and it's written well. I think if you can start with not quoting, then your writing will be improved because people will be able to better understand what you're talking about and you own't need to refer to quotes for that.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 04:56 PM |
|
|
@Ohffs
Reactionary posting: Your posted thoughts and ideas have an external genesis; they are framed only as reactions to the thoughts and ideas of others.
For instance. Let's say you are asked a difficult philosophical question. Like: What is the meaning of life?
You have two general ways in which you can address this question.
Way #1: Sit down and think about the question and come up with an answer on your own.
Way #2: Wait around for someone else to answer the question and then merely agree or disagree with them - i.e., form your opinion as a reaction to someone else's.
While there is a value in approach #2, and indeed it is a necessary part of dialogue, it is a more passive approach to self-analysis. It is also a less efficient route towards a complete understanding of your own mind. Approach #2 is certainly an excellent way to hone your beliefs and opinions, and comparison of your stated beliefs with the stated beliefs of other essentially anonymous people is, in fact, necessary, as I've stated elsewhere. But it's far better, in my opinion, to get a sense of your beliefs by thinking for yourself rather than letting other people do your thinking for you and then just reacting to what they say.
Moreover, reactionary posting tends to lead to more arguments and also tends to exclude other people from the conversation. When you post your opinions as mere reactions to what someone else writes, you tend to create one-on-one, exclusive conversations. You will also find that your conversations become very repetitive and stagnant (if only because you're only interacting with one person at a time). When you post opinions that result from self-analysis, on the other hand, you will tend to include more people in the conversation, which is better for the quality of the conversation, of course, but it is also a much more efficient way to bounce your opinions off of a larger collective group.
This is not to say that you shouldn't react to what other people say. If everyone just posted their opinions and didn't respond to anyone else, the conversations would not be conversations! Ideally there should be a good mix of reactionary and pro-actionary (?) posting. When you quote someone else's post line by line and reply to each quoted line individually, you're just being reactionary. If you eliminate your quotes, you will find yourself thinking much more critically about what other people write - if only because you'll be required to rephrase what they said so that they know what you're talking about in your response to them.
Quoting is just lazy and ineffective. Like anything else, it should be used sparingly.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted April 15, 2010 06:08 PM |
|
|
Maybe my post wasn't read to well?
I didn't say you should prevent yourself from quoting, but from quoting AND re-quoting AND re-re-quoting etc...in ONE post.
This is what makes a post completely unreadable.
Of course I understand that without quotes, it will be difficult for many participants to make clear to which posts their posts are adressed to, especially if you come back after 1 day and the thread is 2 pages longer than before.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted April 19, 2010 08:49 PM |
|
|
You even continue your quote war here in the feedback thread. Seems you are doing hard in learning.
And I said it not only once, I (and the other mods) will take a deeper look into those OSM threads than before, and if we see a tendency which seems to ruin a thread, we will step in.
You can call it "bad modship", I call it "good modship", because i have to see what is good for ALL members, while you're just looking for yourself.
And as others already suggested. I won't ask for permission to step into a thread and try to bring it back on track. It is importat for all participants to see when a thread has a bad tendency. And multiple quotes ARE a bad tendency.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 19, 2010 09:49 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 21:50, 19 Apr 2010.
|
The moderator's role is not just to discipline. It's also to moderate.
Have you ever watched a real (live) debate? There's always a moderator, and his job is to keep people on track, on topic, and make the debate generally interesting for not just the participants, but also the audience.
I see the role of a moderator in an online forum to be no different. Point of fact is that excessive quoting encourages rambling, repetition, topic abandonment and circular arguments. It also actively disengages the audience (which is to say, the rest of us who might actually want to read the thread without participating). Therefore, I see no problem with Angelito or any moderator taking steps to keep a thread on-topic and interesting for everyone.
Maybe his approach was too blunt or sarcastic for your liking, but... well, his heart's in the right place as far as I'm concerned.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted April 21, 2010 11:29 AM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 11:58, 21 Apr 2010.
|
Sorry Oforf we don't have to convince you to change your style. You have to convince US your style should be accepted, and let me explain why.
Say a person has lived somewhere that there was never a rule about killing (say somewhere out in a rainforest, or such) and then come to say New York City. Should he then be exempt from that law until it is explained WHY he shouldn't do so? Absolutely not.
So, while you do not HAVE to change your posting style, you have to accept the consequences of not doing so. Which can include penalties and silencing. We have had past experiences with Quoting wars issues. As for Angelito, he saw a problem and addressed it. Because A) Just sending an HCM to you alone would not solve the issue if somebody else comes along and starts doing it. B) Making it known that it is unacceptable to everybody cuts down on confusion later.. and C) ITS HIS JOB. I've posted in several threads myself in an attempt to curtail possible problems.
In short..we don't have to convince you to change. We have given you the why, and the possible consequences. It is up to you to decide if those consequences are worth it or not. Angelito was not wrong, as it was for others not just you. It was a warning for the future as well.
Edit : As I said in one of my HCM's to Ohforf..Quoting itself is not bad, but excessive IS. Which is what the complaint Angelito made was about.
____________
Message received.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted April 21, 2010 06:25 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Whatever go ahead.
Nope 
Even if Ohforfsake will dislike my spamming here again, I will clean the feedback thread very soon.
The feedback thread is not for arguing pages and pages about the same issue and bringing the quote wars from one forum to another.
The issue was brought up by ohforsake, if he would have read the CoC properly, he would have noticed earlier why his way of posting isn't the right choice.
There is no need for others to argue about the CoC here. This is what you can do in the Tribunal forum.
And finally: A mod never SPAMS a thread if he moderates a CoC breaking action (massive quoting!) What is next? I hand out a penalty or a +qp and get named a SPAMMER too?
I will HCM newcomers about a wrong behaviour. I will HCM longtime members when breaking a NEW rule of the CoC, but I will NOT HCM a member if he breaks a long time rule. But of course I will NOT hand out a penalty immediately, but will give a warning first. And this warning should be public so all others know about what went wrong.
And a warning isn't spam.....
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
veco
Legendary Hero
who am I?
|
|
posted April 21, 2010 08:19 PM |
|
|
I'd like to file a simple complaint,
The moderators in the OSM are being far too nice and hesistant in taking action. I do not know the reasons for it but in my opinion it should stop - it reflects on the quality of their job and the board as a whole. The users here won't cut the modding squad any slack yet the mods allow them to get on top of their heads and hamper their duties.
The prime example for this is this very thread which hosts pointless discussions and even picture spam. It has very little to do with any actual feedback and is a disgrace.
If I may, I'd like to sugget a final warning/penalty to all participants (myself included), thank you for your attention.
____________
none of my business.
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted April 21, 2010 11:04 PM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 23:06, 21 Apr 2010.
|
Here is a general guideline (remember it is subjective for the most part). If it becomes an 'eyesore' it is excessive. It depends on the size of the quotes however. One really really long quote is too much, or 4-5 small ones can be. It is IMPOSSIBLE to make a hard and fast rule, but COMMON SENSE should be a GOOD PLACE to start.
Edit : And yes Oforf your post was excessive.
____________
Message received.
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
