K'Ehleyr8 July 2011 at 10:11pmPosts: 8422 (0 today)Status: offline
I think we should come up with some guidelines for the forum here - I sent some suggestions to Rachael - why don't you all add your suggestions
here's my email to Rachael:
I was wondering, any chance we could have a "suggestion box" for ways to improve the forum, like and "edit function" also to preview a post before we post and to post pictures instead of the links.
Also guidelines for common courtesy at the forum
I'm no prude, but I hate swearing - so in the guidelines - no swearing, no personal attacks on posters or Peter Gabriel
Maybe one or two warnings then a temporary ban (like getting grounded) from posting here - say 2 weeks or a month - but if someone is banned they should know why and have a chance to plead their case
Please add your suggestons
DeFacto8 July 2011 at 10:29pmPosts: 476 (0 today)Status: offline
I think swearing should be allowed. Most people here do it. It's not fair to ban one thing because of one person's preference, you know?
On another forum I go to, there's a swearing filter. It's much better than banning swearing altogether. Just go to your settings, check a little box, and all swear words are replaced with harmless ones(that could be amusing, if the forum collaborated to make them so)
My other problems with the vulagrity-banning are: Someone might not know about the ban and get banned themselves because of it. Also: Mr. Gabriel swears. It would seem hypocritical to the newbie to not allow the freedom of speech.
I support the preview and edit function, along with image coding. Maybe the forum could be advanced overall to also allow italics, bolding, strike-outs and underlining as well?
Personal insults, well, that's mandatory. But there'll need to be an established line of what counts because there are those in the world who are soft when it comes to themselves and/or Mr. Gabriel. If there isn't guidelines established of what counts and what doesn't, this could easily be abused for the littlest things.
Also, we should have a karma system. Just for the fun of it.
. . . I find myself feeling like we're wanting to turn this into a Proboards forum. Huh. Would that be able to be integrated into the website like the current one is?
Maybe there should be moderators that are put on the forum to keep track of things instead of having to e-mail people off the forum all the time? Just a thought.
Soul Reader8 July 2011 at 10:36pmPosts: 3479 (0 today)Status: offline
I agree with you De Facto.
K'Ehleyr8 July 2011 at 10:38pmPosts: 8422 (0 today)Status: offline
No, I didn't say someone should be banned for swearing, just that it would be part of the rules - no foul language -
DeFacto8 July 2011 at 10:43pmPosts: 476 (0 today)Status: offline
And if you break the rules, what happens? Banning.
So that was my line of logic.
But a swearing filter would pay off MUCH better in the long run.
And it could be fun. Like, "Oh humdrum!".
We could be completely silly and geeky with it.
K'Ehleyr8 July 2011 at 10:46pmPosts: 8422 (0 today)Status: offline
People get banned here, without warning, no idea how long they are banned and they are not told why they are banned
case in point rraven
DeFacto8 July 2011 at 10:51pmPosts: 476 (0 today)Status: offline
Okay. And I didn't know that because I joined a month ago.
I said nothing against being told why you have been banned.
That's just another reason why there should be moderators- people that would know exactly why and be able to tell people, including the banned, as such.
Soul Reader8 July 2011 at 11:06pmPosts: 3479 (0 today)Status: offline
DeFacto, people get banned for a reason, please believe that. No one goes around and with a wave of a wand "Poof, your banned".
K'Ehleyr8 July 2011 at 11:11pmPosts: 8422 (0 today)Status: offline
"I said nothing against being told why you have been banned" huh?
rraven was banned and her pals were convinced I got her banned - the person who got helped get her banned, collected all her nasty comments about Peter and other posters and sent them off to the webmaster.
When rraven came back this person sent her a pm explaining that she was the one responisble but in the end it was rraven's own words that got her banned
I think a person should know why they are banned - then they can defend themselves
a few months ago a member here was convince I was two different posters me and someone called Golden Heart - he told everybody in pm's wrote detailed posts proving I was GH - GH was a lovely lady from Berlin, you might notice she's not here anymore
I was banned - because this person said I was also GH - I emailed Tina - said I wasn't GH, can't they prove that I am from Canada and she is from Berlin
Tina un-banned me
I asked this certain person how I could post items at almost the exact same time as GH was posting, he said I was running between two computers -
So if someone really dislikes you, they can tell all sorts of lies - and the webmaster tends to ban first, but if you send an email, and really, sometimes you don't have a clue why the bannage
So at least if you get banned, the webmaster should let you know why - let you defend yourself - they should have short time outs, but maybe a three strike thingy
something like that
and I think we'd all love to have an edit function
mooniest8 July 2011 at 11:15pmPosts: 1531 (0 today)Status: offline
Okay, so is there a place where interviews are being held?
I would like to apply for the job !
I'll be the best moderator in the world, I promise
or do I have to go on some political campaign?
DeFacto8 July 2011 at 11:16pmPosts: 476 (0 today)Status: offline
@Darcy: Thank gods.
@Ez: I see. So it's a matter of poor management all around.
Thank you for telling me. I had no idea.
K'Ehleyr8 July 2011 at 11:18pmPosts: 8422 (0 today)Status: offline
I nominate Moonstorm, we should have a newbie and and oldbie - for a fair and honest moderator I elect Jared C
we should have like a 5 person panel - and of course I would exclude myself, and anyone else who like picking on people, ahem, should exclude themselves too
T-Dogg is a good guy, never gets in fights - and resident moon goodess would be perfect and fair people
DeFacto8 July 2011 at 11:21pmPosts: 476 (0 today)Status: offline
@Moonstorm: Depends on what the administrator decides. Usually it's just a matter of requisites like being on often, being unbiased, able to solve problems quickly and as quietly as possible, stuff like that.
But I don't know if it would work like that here. I've never been to a forum before where you didn't see the admin on a daily basis among the forum-goers, and already had mods and assistant mods from the beginning to keep the peace. So it's all a bit new.
K'Ehleyr8 July 2011 at 11:22pmPosts: 8422 (0 today)Status: offline
Moon Goddess Arlene I meant to say (edit function needed)
I'd used an edit function to change this statement, didn't quite come out right
"and of course I would exclude myself, and anyone else who like picking on people, ahem, should exclude themselves too"
I meant people who take totally innocent remarks and blow them up into a big fight - there, they should exclude themselves - someone who is fair to both sides, that's what we need
okay here's a list:
DeFacto and Moonstorm
Jared C T-Dogg - to cover the male pov
mooniest8 July 2011 at 11:24pmPosts: 1531 (0 today)Status: offline
words of wisdom; careful what you wish for.
mooniest8 July 2011 at 11:26pmPosts: 1531 (0 today)Status: offline
DeFacto too young
sorry Defacto, but you are.
DeFacto8 July 2011 at 11:29pmPosts: 476 (0 today)Status: offline
Well, obviously, I wouldn't be a mod. Too new, unable to be unbiased for the most part. (I'm a teenager, as much as I try not to act like it. Still shines through sometimes)
If we were able to get a "Report" button with a handy-dandy form to fill out with a click on the button, I'd be able to help out that way like any good forum-goer.
Rev_Bob8 July 2011 at 11:51pmPosts: 7 (0 today)Status: offline
I never said you were "running between two computers".
Rev Bob8 July 2011 at 11:52pmPosts: 2229 (0 today)Status: offline
Neither did I.
mooniest8 July 2011 at 11:58pmPosts: 1531 (0 today)Status: offline