|
| Thread: Different editing politic for modding threads |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted November 18, 2014 08:17 PM |
|
|
Valeriy said:
Flagging threads to be exempt from editing restrictions - interesting idea, would require extra coding but this is a bit easier. Maybe this could be done using the thread rating system - perhaps we could add a new rating (maybe "project") that only moderators can assign. Threads with that rating can only be re-rated by moderators and their first post can have unlimited edits by the author.
One old post edit per week - should really be old 1 thread edit per week as it may be hard to get all the changes right in a single editing operation. Specifically, it could be unlimited edits of the first post of one old thread per week. Before another old thread can be edited by this user, one week would need to pass since the last edit of the first old thread. This is probably not too hard to code and gives a balance of functionality and protection. Sure, a user can nuke one thread, but they won't be able to go on a thread nuking rampage.
these two are the best solutions.
Valeriy said:
Automatically sending the original content of the post to a moderator (ex: via HCM) when an old thread is edited - interesting idea, not too difficult. But this will have to occur on every single old post edit, even same post & same person. Question is - how many of these would a moderator receive per day? I'm asking this as a question. If not too many this would be a workable solution.
this one would be overloading the mods, i think. it would get old, really fast, for everyone involved. it's barely a step up from what we already have.
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted November 18, 2014 09:23 PM |
|
|
Valeriy said:
a user can nuke one thread, but they won't be able to go on a thread nuking rampage
I know that sometimes great contributers have reacted to something said in this pages and took the wrong way but do you really believe that if a guy like Slava or OxFea decides to nuke us down a policy rule will at least delay him? International laws maybe.
P.S. I agree with Fred. The first two proposts quoted are workable while the third one can easly became a worst solution then the original problem with moderators submerged by solicitations and reacting on the heat of the moment without paying much attention to what is being asked and by whom or maybe quitting a now extremely ungratefull role.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted November 18, 2014 09:31 PM |
|
|
Quote:
One old post edit per week - should really be old 1 thread edit per week as it may be hard to get all the changes right in a single editing operation. Specifically, it could be unlimited edits of the first post of one old thread per week. Before another old thread can be edited by this user, one week would need to pass since the last edit of the first old thread. This is probably not too hard to code and gives a balance of functionality and protection. Sure, a user can nuke one thread, but they won't be able to go on a thread nuking rampage.
I think Orzie put it quite well, this would be completely pointless since the problem is mod makers making various changes to their threads instantly and repeatedly.
Once moderation approval for user edit is here, nobody will be able to nuke anything anyway, there's really no downside to it, except you say it is hard to code, so that's another dead end.
Yet, I think on long-term, this should be the way to go. I mean clicking a few buttons of approval shouldn't be a problem for mods and let's not exaggerate the traffic in here, it's not like they are going to receive 50 HCM's per day about this, how often does a 1 year old thread will need to be edited people? 5 times a week? 5 times a day? 10 times a day?
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted November 18, 2014 09:51 PM |
|
|
How difficult would it be to make a forum that's hidden for all but the mods and admin, where edited posts are copied to, right before the post is actually submitted after editing? The hidden forum would then host the original post and in case of maltreatment of the post, the mods can restore it from the hidden forum.
It would only require another (but for us, hidden) subforum, where older and edited threads appear. Moderators would only have to review them every now and then to see how the original one looks (the one that's visible for us all) and if it's looking good, they can remove the copy in the hidden forum.
Or perhaps even give those posts in the hidden forum an expiration timer (a week? a month?), after which they vanish automatically. After all, if someone goes on a rampage, how much time is really needed to notice that and restore it?
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted November 18, 2014 10:00 PM |
|
|
artu said:
how often does a 1 year old thread will need to be edited people? 5 times a week? 5 times a day? 10 times a day?
How often do you edit "Heroes Renovated"?
Most of the mod threads? Never. Succession Wars? Hota? Conquistador? 60 mods? Frequently.
How often to you think TDS thread needs to be edit? Yet, I've found some bugs after all this years. The most important one will remain as it is cause noone would dare to try to solve it.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted November 18, 2014 10:04 PM |
|
|
|
Frequently but not at a level that the moderators wont be able to handle it and turn unresponsive. The moderators are passive now, because they can not edit what they don't follow closely and participate in, they are clueless about the details of how the page should be edited according to the thread user. Once the editing part is done by the user, they wont have a problem clicking a few approval buttons.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted November 18, 2014 10:15 PM |
|
|
So why make it simple when it can be utterly complicate?
Let's go the complicate way. I have a head ache reading the proposals.
As I said in wog forum, is pointless asking anything, but is not my forum so thanks for attention and go on. When I have 2 minutes to edit a link, I will need 5 to hcm a moderator, wait until when for approval, then thank you sir for the honor you make me for letting me update my mods links. May I give a donut?
Well, no. I keep the donut. And my energy.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted November 18, 2014 10:56 PM |
|
|
Maurice said:
How difficult would it be to make a forum that's hidden for all but the mods and admin
I think the moderator forum is already only accessible for mods and admins?
About several edits in a row.. I imagine perhaps there could be a delay.. so in stead of having to consider many small edits during a day, how the qp post looked the first time it was edited that given day may be all that is needed to be saved.
Perhaps HCM notification won't be necessary as long as the original content is saved in some form (like the separate forum mentioned above) before the first edit of the given day, so if some posts suddenly go blank, mods would eventually be alerted and can restore?
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted November 18, 2014 11:18 PM |
|
Edited by Maurice at 23:18, 18 Nov 2014.
|
OhforfSake said:
I think the moderator forum is already only accessible for mods and admins?
I think it is, but I am not sure if they want to "contaminate" it with copies of edited posts . Suppose someone edits a master post 5 times in a row, then I expect 5 copies are made.
Personally, I think it's something that is probably easy to implement. All that's needed is a new subforum (or, if the mods don't mind, it could even be in their own subforum ) and some code to automatically copy the master post before it's replaced with the edited version, plus some further code to delete those copies automatically again after a set period to avoid clutter.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted November 18, 2014 11:28 PM |
|
|
That's why I mentioned the "how the qp post looked the first time it was edited".
To be more clear, I imagine something like this:
Old thread in WoG forum is edited. When this happens, how it looked before it was edited is stored somewhere. This post won't change, despite further edits that same day.
I think it could hinder clutter of several almost identical threads being stored. The time period may need to be more than a day.. or maybe it need to be validated (confirmed that the edit is good, so to say).
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 12:10 AM |
|
|
OhforfSake said:
I think it could hinder clutter of several almost identical threads being stored. The time period may need to be more than a day.. or maybe it need to be validated (confirmed that the edit is good, so to say).
And that's why I suggested a new, but hidden forum  . That forum only needs to be accessed by the mods if they wish to restore something, so ten copies of (nearly) the same topic shouldn't matter in most regular cases since no one will usually access that forum. And with an automatic deletion after an amount of time (days, weeks, whatever), the clutter should be cleaned up automatically on a regular basis anyway.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 12:56 AM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 00:58, 19 Nov 2014.
|
Valeriy said:
Automatically sending the original content of the post to a moderator (ex: via HCM) when an old thread is edited - interesting idea, not too difficult. But this will have to occur on every single old post edit, even same post & same person. Question is - how many of these would a moderator receive per day? I'm asking this as a question. If not too many this would be a workable solution.
Surely this could be set to only occur with certain frequency, like at most once per post per day. This way if a user edits a single post several times in short succession, the moderator only gets the original post (the version before the first edit).
I think a combination of solutions is likely in order. Like, make old post editing only possible in a few pertinent forums AND apply a solution like the above to give protection. Or institute the thread rating idea AND apply a solution like the above to give protection. This will reduce the load to moderators from lots of posts flooding in box.
Another possibility: instead of sending a copy of the edited post to a moderator via HCM, can it be set to be posted in a designated thread/forum in the MSHQ? (EDIT: I see this was already suggested.)
____________
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
|
|
Valeriy
Mage of the Land
Naughty, Naughty Valeriy
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 02:20 AM |
|
|
Is editing of the first post of an old thread sufficient? Or are there many cases where authors would need to edit subsequent old posts within the thread?
____________
You can wait for others to do it, but if they don't know how, you'll wait forever.
Be an example of what you want to see on HC and in the world.
http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 02:25 AM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 11:57, 19 Nov 2014.
|
Solution from Stevie.
Create a new "Modder" rank. Set the rank to give full editing options to owner's posts. Give the rank to old and proven modders that actually need it to bypass the one year editing rule. Problem solved.
What you achieve:
- You give the modders their much needed edit options without restrictions to a 3rd party's approval or other default rules;
- You limit the area of users in need of such a feature, so the chances of someone destroying their own work is practically 0;
- Modder rank/icons/image frame would promote a modder and his work by giving him credit and good advertisement.
I think this is the best solution. I concur with Orzie, Sal and the others that there should be no such restrictions for modders. I also understand Valeriy and the need for a rule that prevents someone from destructively editing their own posts. Since a general compromise is far from ideal, we have to consider selecting a certain group that has the utmost need for unrestricted privileges. And if my understanding is correct, then the only ones in need of such privileges are the modders. There is no need to select entire boards/sections to exempt from the one year rule when there is a much smaller and convenient group that can be singled out. You can also limit their access to only a few subforums if the need ever arises or if you so desire.
This should be easy to implement and yield the best results. Consider it. 
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 02:41 AM |
|
|
Valeriy said:
Is editing of the first post of an old thread sufficient? Or are there many cases where authors would need to edit subsequent old posts within the thread?
I have never personally been asked to edit any post other than an opening post.
____________
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
|
|
orzie
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 04:16 AM |
|
Edited by orzie at 04:16, 19 Nov 2014.
|
Stevie cuts it. Many forums like No Mutants Allowed support modder ranks, and they even support ranks like Master Modder, etc.
Problem: people may misunderstand the Modder rank being on the same level as Moderator, Admin and Ubi Dev.
Solution: the Modder rank is implemented as an alternative post count marker. I.e. Legendary Hero is changed to Modding Hero regardless of the yellow stars. The Yellow stars accumulate just like they were.
The Modding Hero status must be a nomination like QP, I.e. requiring a moderator approval, and a list of modders should be created somewhere.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 05:26 AM |
|
|
I don't see how this solve their fear of destruction. Xarfax was a very decorated and quality poster, nobody cares if Ghost deletes 10 of 100 of his posts (in fact, yes I guess they will dance).
What now, a graphical competition for modder icons?
|
|
Orzie
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 05:56 AM |
|
|
Top post editing is allowed almost everywhere. I don't see a problem. If anyone was to delete his own post, he would be subsequently banned - easy just like a piece of cake.
Yet, a solution with the "modding hero" title seems to be the best for me.
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 09:08 AM |
|
|
Orzie said:
Top post editing is allowed almost everywhere. I don't see a problem. If anyone was to delete his own post, he would be subsequently banned - easy just like a piece of cake.
Yet, a solution with the "modding hero" title seems to be the best for me.
The whole problem is that the top post is usually the one with all the information that needs to be preserved. Sure, you can ban the user after the fact, but then the information is already lost. Stevie's suggested solution also doesn't solve this fact.
The core of the issue is preserving the information, not the banning of whoever is destroying the information. While that's necessary, it's not the center of the problem.
|
|
orzie
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 09:31 AM |
|
Edited by orzie at 09:38, 19 Nov 2014.
|
Damn, you defend from barely believable things. There are no hysterics making mods for years.
I can't imagine Fred or Sal deleting their topics just because they are 'leaving'. We all understand that the info from our threads is required by other people, and we are responsible for this.
Okay, even if we count preserving the thread, the moderators can receive a message that the thread #4926827 has just been updated. The thread source codes may be stored somewhere manually as txt files, just like the avatars are.
|
|
|
|
