|
| Thread: Different editing politic for modding threads |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
posted November 19, 2014 10:42 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?
It should be sufficient BUT the actual policy has made posters to work around and now there are important links and actualizations on the middle pages as well. If a different policy is implemented people will adapt and move ALL the important stuff to the main page.
But that would be both a solution and a problem because then an hypotetical berserker would only need to mess the first page, destroying the juice and leaving us with the residues.
All my life I've pro-choice (abortion, drugs, etc...) so I admit I may be a little biased with finding solutions for this rule but I feel you are looking to the wrong side of the equation.
This politic may have prevented one or two episodes in years but at the same time has extensively contributed to make the site more chaotic on a daily base.
If you said to me OxFea wanted to leave us and delete all his contributions I would worry but if a super hacker wants to create a mess he can find a way, for most of the other guys (including myself) I susbscribe what Salamandre said about Ghost.
I think more valuable content gets lost everyday in this spaghetti of threads that the one that is preserved. And more complex security meassures tend to agravate this.
|
|
Orzie
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 11:01 AM |
|
Edited by Orzie at 11:02, 19 Nov 2014.
|
|
Another case is Bersy who is actually able to hack the forum here and there and have fun with new avatar every day, but he doesn't do that because he is a man with high morality. We are all grown up enough to deserve the given trust.
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 11:17 AM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 11:50, 19 Nov 2014.
|
|
The risk of an user with Modder rank going berserk wouldn't be any higher than the risk of a Moderator going berserk. Even more, between the two, a Moderator would have the power to destroy more than only his own posts. Does that mean we should restrict Moderators to not be able to edit posts or delete threads? Because someone might do this or that? I don't see a valid reason for mistrust in long time dedicated modders while there are users handling bigger privileges and being subjected to the same "risks".
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 11:53 AM |
|
|
Stevie said:
The risk of an user with Modder rank going berserk wouldn't be any higher than the risk of a Moderator going berserk.
Agreed, if it is transparent (meaning I never have to worry about it after I won the Modder rank of my own threads) this seams to me the better solution presented.
Of course, it implies a bit of trust in people who have done major contributes to gameplay (wich leaves people that have made their major contributions on other areas somehow subranked) but I think that's only fair.
Yet, this does nothing about the other problem I've been complaining. With all this dynamic we have a tremendous confusion in the modder's subforuns and that would require some work of indexation.
Since this is compatible with my current ambitions about this site (organize my information so I can learn the modding tricks I still miss) I offer myself as volunteer to help with the reindexing of the pages in new subforuns in WoG and Beyond.
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 12:05 PM |
|
Edited by Maurice at 12:08, 19 Nov 2014.
|
orzie said:
Damn, you defend from barely believable things. There are no hysterics making mods for years.
I'm not defending it, I'm only pointing out Valeriy has put the current restrictions in place because Xarfax went berserk and destroyed (his) content, which is now lost forever. Valeriy has asked for constructive thinking to achieve the same (avoid a member going berserk, nuking quality) while also providing flexibility and ease of use for people who need to edit masterposts often, like modders.
The solutions provided by some people only focus on the flexibility, while ignoring the gap that Valeriy wants to keep closed. I will rightfully admit that what Stevie says is true: a moderator currently has that power too, and a lot moreso than that since they can also edit other people's posts. That's a risk, but ultimately one that he is willing to accept, otherwise he probably wouldn't have let it be as is for all this time.
The specific reason Valeriy wants to keep that gap closed is because he wants to preserve the content that has been posted in the past, to protect it from a disgruntled member. You may call it paranoid, but the fact that a member, who was in relatively high esteem, went on such a destructive roll is undeniable. And even if we can all agree that the odds on such an event happening again are extremely small, it's very apparent that Valeriy is not willing to take that risk anymore. So if you say that I'm defending it, please address Valeriy instead, as I'm only reiterating what he wants. Don't shoot the messenger  .
As it stands, that's a given we have to work with, when we are trying to come up with a solution. I still think the solution I provided serves all needs and is relatively easy to implement.
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 01:24 PM |
|
|
Maurice said:
The specific reason Valeriy wants to keep that gap closed is because he wants to preserve the content that has been posted in the past... You may call it paranoid...Valeriy is not willing to take that risk anymore.
I'm not calling him PARANOID. The fact that dealing with so many different wills and PoV can drive someone out of his mind is something I accept as a fact.(Do you want quotes? from the same respected members someone gave as example yesterday? Or is JimV enouch?)
I was once almost banned because I entered a discussion with a creationist. Please, call STUPID IGNORANT to someone who pretends to know the planet Earth is about 5000 years old and the species came out of Noah's arc has they are is not an insult is the candid expression of a fact. Did I felt injusticed that day, yes. As I felted the time I recieve an advise cause I called a lyer to someone in the religious thread, when he spoked about his sentiments while seing his mother dying slowly in his arms - now I think of the "Other Side of the Monitor" as monkeys in jails, their funny to observe but I don't want to get caught in the middle.
Yet, I never before tought about nuking the site (I don't feel is everybody's fault if the Code of Conduct can help to protect criminal or ignorant opinions) but now that I tought about how to do it I wouldn't try to delete my best posts; I would instead open thread after thread with interesting titles like "How to create your own creatures", "How to add a new Town", "How to create your first script" and then add close to nothing to the contents. I bet I could open about one hundred of this threads before being discovered and I wouldn't need to be a coder to make this mess.
So, it's not paranoid I call this policy, is ineffective. We have daily problems trying to work around it but if someone with a litle imagination gets mad and wants harm the forum it will find some way around.
P.S. Just to clarify a possible misunderstanding: I'm NOT thinking about nuking the site, I tought about HOW TO do it.
I'm even glad with the development of my openning post, I was expecting to be ignored.
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 02:17 PM |
|
Edited by Maurice at 14:18, 19 Nov 2014.
|
I must admit I am surprised at the vehemence of some of the replies to my posts, when all I did was try to reiterate what Valeriy wants, while also providing a solution that fulfills the various needs. Suddenly it's an issue when the forum admin wants to preserve the content by somehow safeguarding it? Even if my suggestion provides not only a preservation means but at the same time also freedom for anyone to edit any post?
I am confused; is the criticism aimed at the safeguard to preserve the information, or is it aimed at not having full editability rights?
Either way, to make it explicitely clear, this is what I envision as a solution, that should make everyone happy:
- A hidden forum is made, accessible only to the admin and the moderators;
- The editing restrictions as they are currently in place are completely removed, so editing once again is free to everyone;
- Whenever someone edits a post that's over a year old, a script kicks in as soon as the "Submit" button is pressed;
- The script first copies the original text of the edited post to a new post in the hidden forum, with relevant title and message header (possibly with a link?) referring the original location;
- The edited post is then submitted as the new version;
- Multiple edits are possible in short succession, each one resulting in a new post in the hidden forum (so a history of edits can be retrieved, if needed);
- Posts in the hidden forum are automatically deleted, once they reach a certain age (to be determined, could be a week, a month, whatever);
This way, everyone is happy. All normal users are able to edit all of their posts. If someone goes berserk, the information is preserved, so Valeriy is happy. Only when someone goes berserk, do the moderators need to access the hidden forum to perform a restore action, so they have no extra workload whatsoever (cleanup happens automatically, so the forum isn't overloaded either), making them happy too.
Furthermore, this whole concept seems easy to implement, as far as I can see. What's against it?
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 02:29 PM |
|
|
Sounds like a workable solution, Maurice.
____________
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 02:37 PM |
|
|
|
Storm-Giant
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
On the Other Side!
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 03:26 PM |
|
|
That's a very nice suggestion to deal with both problems at once 
____________
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 03:29 PM |
|
|
I like this propost too, even if I think Stevie one's translate the mature actitude. Now, let us see how it works.
P.S. And I keep my offer if someone wants to work the organization problem.
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 03:31 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 15:33, 19 Nov 2014.
|
Maurice said:
Furthermore, this whole concept seems easy to implement, as far as I can see. What's against it?
How do you know it's easy to implement? It doesn't look like that at all. Plus, the amount of entries that get saved would be absolutely ridiculous. For each edit, no matter how insignificant, another entry gets saved. You know how many times I edited the post with my proposition? About 10 times, for small additions and grammar. Imagine that extrapolated to the entire forum, with posts of thousands of letters. The amount of information stored would never be able to motivate the feature. How many times do you think the mods will actually need to swim through the ocean of edits to restore a post? Once in a decade? And who's gonna pay the bill for the secondary hidden forum?
All this just for an edit option that the majority of posters won't ever use? Quite hilarious and terribly inefficient. The only ones that need to edit beyond one year are those whose projects are continually updated. The rest don't need anything more than to ask a moderator to put a new link or change a word here and there.
|
|
LizardWarrior
Honorable
Legendary Hero
the reckoning is at hand
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 03:39 PM |
|
|
|
Copying QP awarded post into a different thread is the easiest method IMO. No line of code required.
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 03:44 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 15:46, 19 Nov 2014.
|
|
But it begs for QP awarding. And it needs regular updates done by Mods, which they won't be happy with. And it doesn't solve the problem of modders wanting to easy edit without restrictions.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 03:49 PM |
|
|
I'm not sure how difficult it'd be to e.g. direct to new thread in another forum when a qp is awarded to an opening post in the WoG forum, or to update that same thread whenever an edit is made. I think a major concern is how much extra space it'll take, but I'm not sure it'll be much compared to the whole community.
After all, isn't this only for opening posts in a specific forum once they get qp's? While there has been a lot of contribution over the years, doubling this amount seem to me to be rather negligible compared to the whole of the community. Then it's "only" matter of saving eventual edits in a sensible and smart way, so they're easy to overlook, but do not take up much more space than the original content..
Of course that wouldn't apply if e.g. an entire post is completely changed, but I think that'd be the very rare incidents anyway and can therefore be ignored.
Stevie said:
Plus, the amount of entries that get saved would be absolutely ridiculous. For each edit, no matter how insignificant, another entry gets saved. You know how many times I edited the post with my proposition? About 10 times, for small additions and grammar. Imagine that extrapolated to the entire forum, with posts of thousands of letters.
Well I too do not think every edit should be saved, but rather only the original important post, but there are two things I'd like to note.
1) I think it only applies to qp given posts.. and maybe only to certain forums or even certain posters, and only to opening posts, so it shouldn't be extrapolated to the entire forum.
2) It's possible to save all 10 edit entries without having 10 almost identical copies, it's more a matter of storing the change in an easy to overview way, than saving the new submitted post every single time.
But I'm not sure why that would be needed, but I may be overlooking something.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 03:55 PM |
|
Edited by Maurice at 15:59, 19 Nov 2014.
|
Stevie said:
How do you know it's easy to implement? It doesn't look like that at all.
"As far as I can see" for me means "based on my limited knowledge of how forums work in general". After all, it's only a copy script based on a requirement with a slight bit of automated editing (title, header with link). I already made a reservation by stating "as far as I can see". Why do you harp on it explicitely? The only one who can say in reality whether it's easy or not is Valeriy.
Quote:
Plus, the amount of entries that get saved would be absolutely ridiculous. For each edit, no matter how insignificant, another entry gets saved.
You obviously missed something, so I will put it in boldface and underlined:
Quote:
Either way, to make it explicitely clear, this is what I envision as a solution, that should make everyone happy:
- A hidden forum is made, accessible only to the admin and the moderators;
- The editing restrictions as they are currently in place are completely removed, so editing once again is free to everyone;
- Whenever someone edits a post that's over a year old, a script kicks in as soon as the "Submit" button is pressed;
- The script first copies the original text of the edited post to a new post in the hidden forum, with relevant title and message header (possibly with a link?) referring the original location;
- The edited post is then submitted as the new version;
- Multiple edits are possible in short succession, each one resulting in a new post in the hidden forum (so a history of edits can be retrieved, if needed);
- Posts in the hidden forum are automatically deleted, once they reach a certain age (to be determined, could be a week, a month, whatever);
How often do posts - that are older than a year - get edited, relative to the number of new posts that appear on the forum every day? Especially since they get deleted automatically again after they meet their expiration timer.
As for the value and reason to implement it, the only one who can decide that is Valeriy, who has said that he wants a failsafe. I seriously don't understand why I am being questioned about something that Valery desires. Take it up with him, if you don't like it, not with me. Thanks.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 04:04 PM |
|
|
orzie said:
I can't imagine Fred
haha, Fred decided one day that people didn't thank him enough then deleted his links, pics and some of his posts, before leaving-for a while-. So I would say Fred is the perfect candidate for Xarfax succession.
I am not criticizing the thing. My opinion is that people should be allowed to do whatever they want with their posts, edit or delete. It is by adding restrictions and not handling the requests that such of those attitudes can be triggered. Is easy to prohibit.
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 04:15 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 16:16, 19 Nov 2014.
|
@Maurice
You still create a huge database that will be 99% useless, regardless if it only stores only 1 year old posts edits. Work and money going down the drain for a fail safe plan that you will most likely not use.
Anyway, Valeriy's gonna have the last word.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 04:15 PM |
|
|
Regarding a timer for posts in the hidden forum as suggested above:
I think that it's important to note that at least one copy should be preserved at all time, which one can be determined by several ways such as:
1) The post which got the QP.
2) The most recent edit after a specific amount of time has passed.
3) The most recent moderator approved edit.
However I think in stead of a timer, it may be a nicer solution that all edits are compressed within a single post in a way that make every edit of said post easy to overview and saves as much storage space as possible, while still saving the important content.
Then said post could be edited to remove non necessary information as more edits occur, e.g. if a thread has a lot of links and the poster edits these links, because they did no longer work, then this information may not be important and can be removed once a moderator sees this.
Then again, it may be sacrificing too much effort for what I think is elegance, and the original suggestion may be a better solution in that regard. Especially since there may be some coding limitations to HC that prevents this. E.g. I've seen on other boards they've spoiler tags, and I could imagine a similar style could work well to hide edited out passages that are still saved with a date for when this particular part was removed. If such code cannot be supported on HC I think my suggestion is useless.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2014 04:22 PM |
|
|
LizardWarrior said:
Copying QP awarded post into a different thread is the easiest method IMO. No line of code required.
I was joking when I made my last comment in the Trainer thread but not all posts with mods recieve a QP.
And I certainly would get mad if the hability to edit their mods is granted to others but not to me, cause my mod is considered of lower quality. Wouldn't you?
As a matter of fact this would be kind of THE ONE THING to get me mad to the point of going BERSERKER.
|
| |
|
|
