|
I've never been one to openly blame TL's staff for how they run the show, but lately the users/forums have been almost unbearable for me.
I've been debating whether or not to ask something like this for a while and I guess the thread that finally pushed me past the breaking point was: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=85127
I've been here a long time and I realize there are ' phases ' and ' stupid threads ' that pop up every now and then but personally, I can't find an explanation for the past 3 months or so and how people get by with stupid shit. There's a handful of users that I am dumbfounded by how they have over 3000 posts and cannot believe they haven't been banned for stupidity yet. I won't name names since that's not my biggest complaint, but to try and illustrate my point I've also contemplated asking TL admins on MSN to just ban my account so I don't have to look at stupid shit anymore. There's quality so I still come here every day I'm on the computer [ multiple times ] but there's starting to be so much shit that its ALMOST worth it to just prevent myself from coming to see 1 speck of quality.
So the only logical theory that I've come up with is that there aren't enough/good moderators. Again I won't name names but one of the mods I have no earthly idea how the fuck he ever got blue. It's like, TL has a tradition of picking out great minds to be leaders so its like duck duck duck fugly goose <---- wtf?
So is it just me? Do I just need to take a break? I finally got the hint when I started getting worked up over shit people post on TL which never really happened before. I would literally say to myself ' how dumb can you be '
Disclaimer: I know shit is busy. This isn't the greatest time to ask, probably won't get addressed fully etc but I figured might as well do it now. I also realize TL gets this kinda question/thread often but I really like this site and I think the amount of dumb activity over the past couple months has warranted something like this. Its like the purge never really happened.....
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Blue =/= Moderator; I assume you mean red?
That thread you linked is really shit; and it did get closed. But theres nothing more in that thread other than giving a warning - which was given. We could probably use a little harsher moderation though now that i think about it ...
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Don't worry yo my new years resolution is to become Chill.
|
Sorry, I use mod interchangeably since there have been some blue names who are mods in the past. I know mods are red ;x.
I guess its just me complaining. Like I said I would rather not use names....but man....there are some annoying [subjective I know] and relatively useless [ contribute once a blue moon and have thousands of unbelievably dumb posts ] users that I would have expected to be banned.
I have faith in you guys though. Thanks for reading.
|
this is all chill's fault lolololol
---- I used to feel the same way as the OP a couple months ago, and complained all the time about shitty posters/threads
now I dont even care. Its kinda sad
|
I used to give a shit about posting but when it all goes unpunished and good post(er)s are just torn down by idiots, who gives a fuck
|
thedeadhaji
39473 Posts
On January 01 2009 11:43 H wrote: I used to give a shit about posting but when it all goes unpunished and good post(er)s are just torn down by idiots, who gives a fuck
I honestly feel the same way.
|
|
Suggestions:
1) Perhaps moderators shouldn't ban each other to begin with? That would help tremendously.
Examples:
Chill was just Temp banned for 90 days by Kennigit.
That account was created on 2005-01-28 05:00:00 and had 8502 posts.
Reason: I wanted to outdo your other birthday presents. Happy Birthday, love from everyone who you banned or who's thread you closed
Hot_Bid was just banned by SonuvBob.
That account was created on 2003-10-09 00:31:23 and had 17043 posts.
Reason: STOP SPOILING ME ON MSN JERK
2) Purge the SC2 forum? Thanks for purging the Strategy forum (once Chill came back, btw), but the SC2 forum's case is even more urgent. Among other things, the no mbs rule isn't enforced, and it should extend to automine and other incendiary topics, and also to single comments instead of just threads. Nothing good ever came out of these discussions anyway, only flame and sheer zealotry.
3) May I suggest that 2-days bans are ineffective? Why would anybody care unless they're compulsive thread spammers? Make it 30 days minimum, and permanent ban after 2-3 offenses, or if trying to work around the temp ban with a new account. That should limit the need for multiple bans if anything.
4) Make reading guidelines mandatory before new users can post anything? Right now they're easy to miss, even if you open a specific forum (they're only one of many featured threads), and outright invisible if you don't (just click on the sidebar). That would limit the number of bad threads as well.
and finally:
5) Indeed warn/ban users that just denigrate others and never contribute, even if they have 3000+ posts, are korean, or are St-Peter sitting at the right of Jesus Christ in Heaven? There's indeed a hell lot of them in every forum and they stiffle conversation on everything that matters and discourage others from posting, but they pass under the radar somehow.
Thank you moderators for your work. But we ungrateful users indeed expect more.
|
|
On January 01 2009 12:28 onepost wrote: 1) Perhaps moderators shouldn't ban each other to begin with? That would help tremendously.
On January 01 2009 11:43 H wrote: torn down by idiots
|
suggestion:
1) give me the power to ban
|
On January 01 2009 12:51 thedeadhaji wrote: 2) the sc2 forum is so bad that most mods dont even read it. That's why it's so bad - because the quality is so trash that pple don't want to read it to begin with, and hence the trash doesnt get thrown out Kennigit does read it. He even makes threads.
3) i respectfully disagree is all. There used to be only 1 and 2 week bans, and they were difficult to use because we couldn't easily slap someone on the wrist without knocking them unconscious, per se. That's exactly the point that I'm trying to make. But you can disagree with that; I'm quite the radical type.
4) how would you go about implementing such a thing? The same as for terms of service on most websites, upon creation of a new user account. Write in big bad bold something like: "Read the guidelines carefully before you post anything. Infringers may be banned without warning." Sound scary enough.
5) I think we just may need more mods I totally agree.
|
On January 01 2009 12:51 thedeadhaji wrote: 1) no comment
|
On January 01 2009 09:13 Ack1027 wrote:I've never been one to openly blame TL's staff for how they run the show, but lately the users/forums have been almost unbearable for me. I've been debating whether or not to ask something like this for a while and I guess the thread that finally pushed me past the breaking point was: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=85129I've been here a long time and I realize there are ' phases ' and ' stupid threads ' that pop up every now and then but personally, I can't find an explanation for the past 3 months or so and how people get by with stupid shit. There's a handful of users that I am dumbfounded by how they have over 3000 posts and cannot believe they haven't been banned for stupidity yet. I won't name names since that's not my biggest complaint, but to try and illustrate my point I've also contemplated asking TL admins on MSN to just ban my account so I don't have to look at stupid shit anymore. There's quality so I still come here every day I'm on the computer [ multiple times ] but there's starting to be so much shit that its ALMOST worth it to just prevent myself from coming to see 1 speck of quality. So the only logical theory that I've come up with is that there aren't enough/good moderators. Again I won't name names but one of the mods I have no earthly idea how the fuck he ever got blue. It's like, TL has a tradition of picking out great minds to be leaders so its like duck duck duck fugly goose <---- wtf? So is it just me? Do I just need to take a break? I finally got the hint when I started getting worked up over shit people post on TL which never really happened before. I would literally say to myself ' how dumb can you be ' Disclaimer: I know shit is busy. This isn't the greatest time to ask, probably won't get addressed fully etc but I figured might as well do it now. I also realize TL gets this kinda question/thread often but I really like this site and I think the amount of dumb activity over the past couple months has warranted something like this. Its like the purge never really happened.....
|
thedeadhaji
39473 Posts
wtf was that quote for...
|
Yea, I've noticed that the post quality has gone down a lot too. There are a lot of people that don't think before they post. Compared to before, the standard for posting has fallen a lot. I think the solution, like mentioned before, is more moderators. The current mods are too few and have real lives to deal with and can't read every thread. To make up for that, we need to add some mods to keep the strict policies that TL advocates.
edit: posts like the one 2 posts above me add no content to the thread whatsoever, but it's hard to moderate that much without reading every thread.
|
Osaka26959 Posts
ok, lemme get back to you on this tomorrow.
|
On January 01 2009 13:50 thedeadhaji wrote: wtf was that quote for...
Notice that I had changed the link.
Seriously, WTF are you doing clicking on a thread which says Warning: Adult Link anyway Ack1027 and then bitching about it?
|
On January 01 2009 15:07 Wolverine wrote:Notice that I had changed the link. Seriously, WTF are you doing clicking on a thread which says Warning: Adult Link anyway Ack1027 and then bitching about it?
You still added nothing to the thread.
FrozenArb does mod the SC2 forum but he is a softy.
I agree with the OP, I've been lurking quite a while and only started posting in June/July(?) and one thing I've noticed is that the quality of feedback and threads has decreased significantly from my lurking days. Good advice is constantly shut down by random noobs in the strategy forum and there are countless people who do nothing but insult and act like idiots. I have seen so many people quote a thorough post and then say something like "ur a retard" and I find it really offensive.
Admittedly I haven't always been the best poster but I do make an effort to remain politically correct and keep some class instead of flaming for nothing.
|
CA10824 Posts
well, looks like i'm the newest blue staff member so i guess you're talking about me...
|
On January 01 2009 15:07 Wolverine wrote:Notice that I had changed the link. Seriously, WTF are you doing clicking on a thread which says Warning: Adult Link anyway Ack1027 and then bitching about it?
................god damnit.
but yeah... i read the sc2 forum when i first came here. but now i just read some opening posts and skip the comments. it reminds me of youtube, where the videos are just plagued by hundreds of shitty comments. frozenarbiter needs to be more of a hardass :p
edit: and like 50% of general threads start out well, good op w/ nice info, then it turns into a shitstorm of personal insults and dumb arguments.
|
On January 01 2009 15:07 Wolverine wrote: Seriously, WTF are you doing clicking on a thread which says Warning: Adult Link anyway Ack1027 and then bitching about it?
This is the most ignorant, juvenile justification for a shitty thread I've seen in a while. Actually, I guess it's been about an hour since I read gearitup's explanation for his mama joke thread.
|
On January 01 2009 12:51 thedeadhaji wrote:5) I think we just may need more mods Pick me, pick me !
Seriously, why not have another purge? I think the last one helped a bit. Speaking of which, if any of you think my posting is sub-par, let me know and I will ignore you and post goatse endeavour to improve my posting. I'll probably edit in more stuff later.
|
honestly, the part that really kills me is that when it comes to features, TL has improved so much its scary. We never used to have youtube vods (and often not a stream), no final edits, no TL:A or any of that.
It used to be the forums that kept people at TL and now its just the features
|
Osaka26959 Posts
On January 01 2009 16:39 fusionsdf wrote: honestly, the part that really kills me is that when it comes to features, TL has improved so much its scary. We never used to have youtube vods (and often not a stream), no final edits, no TL:A or any of that.
It used to be the forums that kept people at TL and now its just the features
And now no one even says thank you
|
I've had a few to drink [ happy new years everybody btw ] but I appreciate all the replies in this thread.
Don't worry LosingID you weren't the blue name I was talking about. You contribute a lot and its good to see you on staff ^^ I heard you live in GA now? We should hang out sometime.
I guess people will always feel my sentiment about the posting the past few months, but really I feel like a lot of the posts I read nowadays are unbearable...... It's kinda like.....why do I bother even thinking before I post if people can get away with posting a question that was answered one page or even one post before them....I respect this place and the people who run it enough to think before I post.
I was kinda paranoid tbh that people wouldn't respond and I thought I would just be shooting blanks but to be completely honest it was refreshing to hear from people like haji and zulu who used to be staff and were demoted/removed yet their posts are thousands of times better than the people I was referring to in my OP. Sc2 is coming soon and there's gonna be a huge influx of new users and I don't really want TL to become complacent because this is a really nice place to discuss higher level sc among other things.....
On January 01 2009 14:07 Manifesto7 wrote: ok, lemme get back to you on this tomorrow.
It was really nice being part of TL when you and Beyonder were active. Things around here were run a lot more solidly and I appreciated that very much. That's not to say I don't appreciate things now.....its just that under your administration I feel like there was more emphasis on poster quality. I look forward to your reply.
I know there's a men in red [ MiR ] forum and all that.......but if I could be so bold to suggest maybe you start looking harder/or for more moderators to lighten the load so TL can continue to improve that would be awesome.
|
I've always thought TL was pretty good about staying on top of bad threads and useless spam. What kind of service are you used to?
|
its not about service
its not like we're trying to be whiny and say TL isnt good enough. Its almost 2AM and I'm going to be watching starcraft and posting on TL for at least a couple more hours. I really like the way TL has developed.
This is more railing on bad posts than anything. I know a lot of veterans dont visit general and certainly don't visit starcraft 2 (although I personally dont think that forum is 'bad' because of a lack of moderation, it has to do with a lack of topics to discuss and just overall a lack of good posts/posters.
I know the 'veterans' aren't perfect, but at least theoretically they should be decent posters. And when they start avoiding entire subforums out of frustration its a bad sign. Maybe its just that TL has so many people now and a lot of big names inactive/semi-active that its lost its close knit feeling. The main point is that bad posts feed bad posts.
|
thedeadhaji
39473 Posts
the biggest factor that makes many of us cringe and cry out for help regarding the current state of the boards, is because we know how it used to be and are appalled at how it is now.
|
On January 01 2009 16:50 Manifesto7 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2009 16:39 fusionsdf wrote: honestly, the part that really kills me is that when it comes to features, TL has improved so much its scary. We never used to have youtube vods (and often not a stream), no final edits, no TL:A or any of that.
It used to be the forums that kept people at TL and now its just the features And now no one even says thank you I did, but since you didn't notice: Thank you again.
Seriously, I care much less about features than the climate; what's the point of features if you don't even want to read, let alone post? It's so bad, you can't say anything without being called a troll/ignorant/idiot/faggot/etc. We need better moderation or TL will just become another slashdot. I'll gladly help if I must.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
ALL THE GOOD SHIT IS ON BLOGS
|
On January 01 2009 19:24 thedeadhaji wrote: the biggest factor that makes many of us cringe and cry out for help regarding the current state of the boards, is because we know how it used to be and are appalled at how it is now.
i only came here like 9 months ago, i think, and back then it was really awesome. but a lot of it has really declined (general forum turning into 95% shitstorm)
|
I think the general section's relative decline can be blamed on blogs.
The blogs section is, to most veterans at least, a no-holds-barred general, essentially. You can post about anything, unless it is just completely retarded, and moderation is much more lax. Basically blogs is run not by moderation but by popularity, since blogs come and go so quickly that crap blogs will quickly find themselves with <4 replies on the second page of blogs, and essentially, without mod intervention, the blog closed itself.
Now you would think that the no-holds-barred mentality of blogs would lead to the betterment of general, not the degradation of it, but it obviously hasn't, and I think I know why. People, before making a thread, have to decide where it goes. SMART people, thinking the thread may be controversial in some way, will default to blogs. But SMART people, generally, don't make crap threads, so wherever their threads go, they will most likely not be crap. Their decision is also made easier by the fact that blogs has essentially become its own sub-community, and everybody seems to know/like each other. However, DUMB people are not burdened with a well thought out decision as to where their thread's home should be, so they post wherever and whenever they feel like, clicking post amid a flurry of 'shooping da whoops' and 'a chargin their lazers'. This being said, they often post in general.
I believe there is only one solution: (This is only partially a joke, btw)
1. Send a 6-pack of redbull to chill.
2. Make it so that he can only surf the general and sc2 forums until he acrues 100 bans.
3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 when necessary.
|
we just need better posters. There's lots of new registrations and most of them are shitty users. For example i havent seen cow post in a while t.t.
|
The funny thing I notice is that even though there's a shit ton of aforementioned shitty posts/users none of them have posted here.
Edit:
No, I take that back....Posts like Wolverine's:
On January 01 2009 15:07 Wolverine wrote:Notice that I had changed the link. Seriously, WTF are you doing clicking on a thread which says Warning: Adult Link anyway Ack1027 and then bitching about it? make me wonder how he's still around. I mean, really? His logic is that I shouldn't click topics like the one I linked? Ok dude....let's not delete a pile of shit and just let it stink the rest of the forums. I don't fucking understand how people with logic like this are allowed to post on TL. I miss times when Rekrul or Mensrea would just ban posters like that on the spot. One incredibly dumb mistake and poof you're gone. Its like, SURE WOLVERINE please advise me on how I should navigate through the forums. Clearly your -200 post count and whatever forum-lurking time is greater than my time spent here.
On January 02 2009 09:43 Night[Mare wrote: we just need better posters. There's lots of new registrations and most of them are shitty users. For example i havent seen cow post in a while t.t.
My complaint was more about the existing user base. I can name a few people who, from my understanding of TL rules and policy in the past, should have been banned long ago. These people have thousands, even 10k+ posts. This isn't the main issue....but it bothers me either A) that I don't understand TL policy/have no grasp on what is accepted or B) I'm just wrong and these people are actually fine....they are the ' vets ' now that new users model posting behavior after.
Whatever it is, either A or B [ unknowingly maybe even C or D ] it kinda frightens me to think I've been here several years and I don't know what's going on.
Anyway the existing user base was my main issue, since new registrations are bound to happen since the sc community has its ups and downs. My offer at solving this problem was more/better mods?
|
Braavos36362 Posts
I agree we need more moderators. A lot of our old guard are growing up and have more pressing time constraints. Also, many of our mods are actively involved in the expanding TL features, so they have less time to simply browse and moderate.
The problem isn't identifying this, we know this. The problem is finding competent moderators. TL has been built through a process of trust where reasonable, competent moderators were promoted. The judgment of admins doing the promoting has been very deliberate, conservative, and for the most part, uncannily accurate. We haven't promoted a moderator that's been a mistake (yet, knocks on wood). Since we have a policy of "Mod for life" we have to be very selective in our choices, and it's difficult finding someone who is both active and has good enough judgment.
Finally, I think a user-initiative toward better posting is required. Veterans need to band together and try to clean up the forums by example. Moderators banning and warning simply isn't enough, you need your peers to act a certain way and then the new posters will follow. Authority telling you that you need to change doesn't promote good behavior in the same way. Top-down progress will happen at a glacial pace, but it'll happen if enough people try.
|
On January 02 2009 05:36 Nitrogen wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2009 19:24 thedeadhaji wrote: the biggest factor that makes many of us cringe and cry out for help regarding the current state of the boards, is because we know how it used to be and are appalled at how it is now. i only came here like 9 months ago, i think, and back then it was really awesome. but a lot of it has really declined (general forum turning into 95% shitstorm) Yeah I really never really read past the first page of a general forum. Usually by the time one of those threads gets to like page 10 its either just massive flame spamming or Inc owning some forum newb.
Would especially like some more moderation of LR threads, so many bm noobs spam those threads. I hate to see someone get to their 1000th post just spamming "Wtf is all this nonsense about Reach, I think it is pretty gay."
@HB: Micronesia for a mod?
Sudden rash of spam threads TT. Wtf is happening...
|
Calgary25938 Posts
once im back from vacation ill set these fools straight again
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On January 02 2009 10:32 Hot_Bid wrote: I agree we need more moderators. A lot of our old guard are growing up and have more pressing time constraints. Also, many of our mods are actively involved in the expanding TL features, so they have less time to simply browse and moderate.
The problem isn't identifying this, we know this. The problem is finding competent moderators. TL has been built through a process of trust where reasonable, competent moderators were promoted. The judgment of admins doing the promoting has been very deliberate, conservative, and for the most part, uncannily accurate. We haven't promoted a moderator that's been a mistake (yet, knocks on wood). Since we have a policy of "Mod for life" we have to be very selective in our choices, and it's difficult finding someone who is both active and has good enough judgment.
Finally, I think a user-initiative toward better posting is required. Veterans need to band together and try to clean up the forums by example. Moderators banning and warning simply isn't enough, you need your peers to act a certain way and then the new posters will follow. Authority telling you that you need to change doesn't promote good behavior in the same way. Top-down progress will happen at a glacial pace, but it'll happen if enough people try.
Does that mean we have to start making effort again?
|
thedeadhaji
39473 Posts
|
I think we should have another purge. At least for me, it made me really rethink my posting, and I didnt press the post button for a whole bunch of would-be crappy posts. As for the problem about not enough mods, maybe you could create some sort of pseudo-mod, who has some limited mod powers, perhaps the ability to move threads and give warnings, and is supervised by the mods proper. It seems that it has the potential to lessen your workload and give you a decent idea of how a person reacts to being granted some power. Downside is that it could backfire, and the mods will have to spend more time monitering their behavior than time is saved.
Or, you could try doing what the XKCD boards do. I once read that there is a wordfilter in place that prevents a post from being exactly the same as another post. Since I don't read the XKCD boards, I have no idea how well it works, but its an interesting idea.
Overall though, I think that Hot_Bid is right; forum quality has to come from the users, not the mods. I'll keep trying to post well, but I don't know if I'm the kind of person to lead any kind of user iniative.
Edit: I just realized that the eternal problem with all internet forums, that of post quality can be summed up by the fact that mods have a stick, but no carrot. The only thing we can really do is give mods bigger sticks. Forums with post feedback (voting a post up or down, like slashdot, digg, reddit, etc) have a carrot, but no stick. Forums need both.
Also, a couple of ideas occured to me. First, you could block all posts that don't have a space somewhere in them. This ought to prevent one-word posts, or at least provide a warning to the user to stop and think about his/her post. Secondly, perhaps you could block quoting without adding anything extra. Sometimes its funny, but usually pretty stupid.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On January 02 2009 12:05 thedeadhaji wrote: wanna be a mod HT?
So I can join the halls of Active Forum Vets who Retire After Gaining Mod Status?
|
United States24342 Posts
My suggestion is to assign multiple people (2-4) to each forum to be in charge of them... and maybe have one of those people in charge of the group.
Chill tried to single-handedly fix strategy. He was doing a very good job, but it honestly looked like too much work for one person. He can't be on tl 24/7, but if he and a couple of other guys (maybe from other time zones) all kept a close eye on the strategy forum specifically, there would be much less opportunity for bad posters to propagate in there.
Rather than only give this responsibility to people on a 'for life' basis it would, in my opinion, be better to give it to a wave of people for an interim period of say a few weeks/months. Suppose there were suddenly 3 people assigned to strategy, broodwar, general, blogs, etc... A couple of the current tl leaders (current red/black) could make it their initiative to keep an eye on what all the new staff are doing. I think it would be worth putting a little bit of effort into working with a somewhat large amount of new staff if it ultimately created a very viable and adaptable system.
As for staff assignments, I think one current staff member could be put in charge of picking some people they think would be reliable/willing for each section. For example, Chill could recruit a couple of people to help him with strategy, and could lead that small team.
This is all just brainstorming and I'm sure could be adapted to tl's needs.
|
I agree mostly with CDR and Micro's suggestions. Additional people even with lesser power is what we seem to need.
I respectfully disagree with Hot_Bid's sentiment that a user-initiative toward better posting is required. For me its like, sure there were people I looked up to and people I modeled my posts after but I think bad posters will almost certainly remain bad.
I don't think any of the posters who need to be banned, read a good poster and say ' oh hey i want to be like him ' and on the reverse I think anyone who says ' oh hey I WANT to post well ' was someone who was already going to post well to begin with [ granted it would be over time ]
Or maybe I misunderstood, but that's my response to it. The only other way I could even think of a ' user-initiative ' is having a bunch of good users agree to not reply/post to bad posters/bad poster's threads. I think that's ineffective and will just cause forum split in unity. Don't get me wrong, over the past 3 months there's been a steadily growing mental list in my head of people I just skip over. I literally see their username and just leave the thread. That's how bad it is.
On another note I'm still really glad the mods now who posted here like chill, kennigit, hot bid, all realize this problem and are trying to brainstorm some kind of solution. Still waiting on Mani's response though.
|
Braavos36362 Posts
On January 02 2009 13:51 Ack1027 wrote: I agree mostly with CDR and Micro's suggestions. Additional people even with lesser power is what we seem to need.
I respectfully disagree with Hot_Bid's sentiment that a user-initiative toward better posting is required. For me its like, sure there were people I looked up to and people I modeled my posts after but I think bad posters will almost certainly remain bad.
I don't think any of the posters who need to be banned, read a good poster and say ' oh hey i want to be like him ' and on the reverse I think anyone who says ' oh hey I WANT to post well ' was someone who was already going to post well to begin with [ granted it would be over time ]
Or maybe I misunderstood, but that's my response to it. The only other way I could even think of a ' user-initiative ' is having a bunch of good users agree to not reply/post to bad posters/bad poster's threads. I think that's ineffective and will just cause forum split in unity. Don't get me wrong, over the past 3 months there's been a steadily growing mental list in my head of people I just skip over. I literally see their username and just leave the thread. That's how bad it is. I am saying that more moderation can weed out more bad posters and prevent bad posts, but more moderation cannot create good posts. We need a ground level change among the vets and frequent posters to achieve an overall rise in posting quality. Simply banning all the idiots doesn't change the overall blah-ness of General or the apathy among veterans.
I disagree with you that posters cannot impact each others' behavior. I think if there's a thread and a lot of people are posting thoughtfully and intelligently, it does impact how everyone else will post. It's not necessarily simply looking at someones posts and consciously thinking "oh I want to be like him", that's ridiculous. It's a subconscious, atmospheric thing, if a lot of people care and posts well, you can't help but care and post well.
Also, bad posters certainly do not remain bad. A vast majority of the current vets, and heck even the current staff, were immature kids when they joined this site. The community grows, people mature, and many bad posters slowly are won over. Sure there are a lot that will never change, but leave that to the mods; there are plenty that have changed.
I just don't see how you can expect an overall increase in forum quality without a user-based awareness and initiative. Increased moderation cannot solve everything, especially when this forum is growing and only will get bigger. The nostalgic TL you remember is easy to maintain when the number of users is smaller and the staff projects less frequent. It's a trade-off. Thus, we need our vets to help us out a bit. Don't just post memes and one liners. Show others what good posting is, try to help and guide new posters instead of making fun or attacking them. This sort of behavior will certainly help create better posters.
On another note I'm still really glad the mods now who posted here like chill, kennigit, hot bid, all realize this problem and are trying to brainstorm some kind of solution. Still waiting on Mani's response though. Again, it's not like one thread or one solution can fix this problem. It's a huge issue that we will struggle with for a long time; we've always wanted to improve post quality. Recently, we've been very busy with many projects. We are in the process of finding new mods. However, in order for such a change to be effective, we definitely need large, community wide cooperation to get this done, not just more Mods telling people what to do and what not to do. There is no way our forum gets better without our veterans help. If they continue to post the way they have been, no amount of Moderation will accomplish the goals we want.
|
Mods do have a bigger capability of setting an example however, if mods just ban and warn, well its not such a good job.
|
Braavos36362 Posts
A lot of the suggestions made are not possible given the current access structure of TL.net. Maybe down the road when semi-Moderator status is implemented, but for now and the near future, we can only make Moderators with the full range of powers. It would be very useful to be able to give half mod powers for a temporary time, or limit someone's moderation ability to a certain forum, but right now that's not possible.
An idea that was proposed in MiR is to have a queue of user-alerted moderation actions, kind of like reporting when a thread should be closed or when a specific post needs moderation. The ability to add stuff to this "bulletin board" that the Mods read can be given to veteran or high quality posters to allow us to cover more ground.
|
On January 02 2009 15:49 Hot_Bid wrote:
An idea that was proposed in MiR is to have a queue of user-alerted moderation actions, kind of like reporting when a thread should be closed or when a specific post needs moderation. The ability to add stuff to this "bulletin board" that the Mods read can be given to veteran or high quality posters to allow us to cover more ground.
This is what I was looking for. I can remember several times where I was 100% sure a mod would close a thread and sure enough it was closed. But the thing that pisses me off more is that a thread which should've been closed fairly quickly [ but mods were busy or none were on at the time ] survives and so a good poster saves it. So everything that was posted before the good user stays, and readers of the thread see that as acceptable...To me that's pretty dumb.
By bad posters I meant posters who are almost certainly deemed ban-worthy. I apologize if I didn't make this clear. There's pyramid schemes, spam posters, etc that are ban-worthy and then there are people who only make threads in blogs who are ban-worthy, even further there's people who blatantly break TL's commandments. Those people break commandments get warned/banned and continue to habitually break them. So for these mentioned posters, shouldn't perma-bans be auto?
I understand your point that posters improve. I'm not saying a bad poster can never improve. I'm just saying the vast majority of people who post with the logic of those I listed above are going to stay that way. I'll admit, I was a pretty shitty poster too when I started. I think almost everyone is. I've seen all sorts of posters. Posters who are great since day 1, some who improve with time, some who are selfish and use features or leech off others etc.... My complaint here is not ' Oh woe is TL ' stimey style or anything. Its just I think there are definitely vets and threads that are left alone the past few months and they have the same mentality as spam posters and blog shitters.
To me it sounds like having a police force or snitching vets is where this discussion is leading to....I don't know if anyone actually wants to do that. I know I sure as hell don't, which is why I've refrained [ with much effort I might add ] from saying any of the relatively long time posters' names.
Anyway thanks for the response. I just wanted to make clear I'm not ' wishing for the days of old ' I'm frustrated at how some terrible posters are allowed to stay. There are bad posters who improve, and then imho there are bad poster who've stayed a LONG time and haven't improved a bit or significantly, or even much at all. I think they should be looked at.
|
Melbourne5338 Posts
On January 02 2009 12:34 HonestTea wrote:So I can join the halls of Active Forum Vets who Retire After Gaining Mod Status?
You get a nice retirement package.
|
|
|
no i wouldnt
+ Show Spoiler +okay maybe but they dont deserve to live ?!?!??!
plus i'd also ban all the crappy people
|
i think i can guess who you'd ban first tuna :p
|
Fuck Tuna i'd ban that kid if I could >:o
|
I'd be careful with implementing a semi-mod position. I think it has the potential to improve moderation overall, however you have to ask yourself two things. First is hotbid's point about whether heavier moderation is necessarily the solution. Second, is the possibility of petty bannings and power struggles which frankly I see on a lot of forums (but not this one) which really have the potential to kill forums.
I don't know if the problem is more of low quality posts or low quality topics. If the topics are dumb its not easy to get good intelligent replies in them from anybody. Perhaps the blog section killed general and that is the problem, though its not trivially obvious.
+ Show Spoiler +It seems to me like blogs in general are less of an interactive topic (not necessarily because there are less replies or discussion, but the OP generally is written in such a way that it is self contained and doesn't require responses to be worthwhile to read). For example, I have confined my blog to a single thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=80710I'm not necessarily saying we should change it though (I like the current blog section).
|
United States24342 Posts
On January 02 2009 18:14 fight_or_flight wrote:I'd be careful with implementing a semi-mod position. I think it has the potential to improve moderation overall, however you have to ask yourself two things. First is hotbid's point about whether heavier moderation is necessarily the solution. Second, is the possibility of petty bannings and power struggles which frankly I see on a lot of forums (but not this one) which really have the potential to kill forums. I don't know if the problem is more of low quality posts or low quality topics. If the topics are dumb its not easy to get good intelligent replies in them from anybody. Perhaps the blog section killed general and that is the problem, though its not trivially obvious. + Show Spoiler +It seems to me like blogs in general are less of an interactive topic (not necessarily because there are less replies or discussion, but the OP generally is written in such a way that it is self contained and doesn't require responses to be worthwhile to read). For example, I have confined my blog to a single thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=80710I'm not necessarily saying we should change it though (I like the current blog section). I agree we don't want to overemphasize power and create tension/struggles etc. However, I think more manpower is needed to maintain a clear level of consistency which is something tl sometimes lacks. I don't think 'semi-mod' positions specifically would create problems. I also feel an ideal solution would be a user driven initiative to slowly morph the community into more like what we want it to be. However, it is indeed idealistic, and will require some help from moderation to see any significant change.
|
I can moderate general forum. I don't pay to much attention to the other sections, except sports around UFC time.
|
Epitome of the shitty general forum: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=85186
This is a great example of how the many shitstorms in the general forum get started, that thread is about 1/3 people blatantly saying "Microsoft sux" or "Apple sux," 1/3 people telling the first third to stop trolling, and 1/3 flamewars about trolling.
On January 01 2009 11:43 H wrote: I used to give a shit about posting but when it all goes unpunished and good post(er)s are just torn down by idiots, who gives a fuck This is so true. Sometimes they are torn down by other good posters/forum vets too though. I think a big problem we have is that once you have >1000 posts under your belt it becomes exponentially harder for you to get banned.
Oh? Kennigit is cracking down even as a post this, great.
|
thedeadhaji
39473 Posts
I honestly might not be banned even if I posted chibiporn.
That's a scary thought.
|
gene for mod imo though i mostly just read general so thats pretty much a joke.
|
On January 03 2009 02:23 TeCh)PsylO wrote: I can moderate general forum. I don't pay to much attention to the other sections, except sports around UFC time.
Psylo has my seal of approval.
|
On January 01 2009 16:01 Wolverine wrote: fools and their money...
In Susie's thread about helping her friend via autograph auction: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=84965
How is this kid not banned yet...? First a dumbass post there and one earlier in this thread.
I don't understand how bans work at all apparently. I've been linking to this thread whenever I see a shitty OP or post, while also trying to provide suggestions on how to improve said post/thread. If this is a bother then let me know and I'll stop.
But seriously, it boggles my mind. How is there not a ban yet for wolverine....
|
Im sure im not the only one who just loves people who call others "kid".
It just makes you sound so manly.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
He was warned but yeah it looks like he is on his way out. Keep in mind that warnings aren't public.
On January 03 2009 10:18 Cloud wrote: Im sure im not the only one who just loves people who call others "kid".
It just makes you sound so manly. lol you would love Media vent :p
|
thedeadhaji
39473 Posts
kennigit hangs in media vent? :O:O:O
|
On January 03 2009 10:04 Ack1027 wrote:In Susie's thread about helping her friend via autograph auction: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=84965How is this kid not banned yet...? First a dumbass post there and one earlier in this thread. I don't understand how bans work at all apparently. I've been linking to this thread whenever I see a shitty OP or post, while also trying to provide suggestions on how to improve said post/thread. If this is a bother then let me know and I'll stop. But seriously, it boggles my mind. How is there not a ban yet for wolverine....
Come on, just admit that you created this thread because you want to be a mod, judging from the irrational amount of concern you seem to have regarding this and the amount of effort you're putting into your posts in this thread. And that you're taking my posts personally because I responded to your OP negatively.
As for my post in Susie's thread, I'm a fan of lots of bands etc. as well but I wouldn't spend money buying signed t-shirts or whatever. Some people do, fine whatever but what do you have against someone who doesn't think it's a good idea, freedom of opinion and what have you. Just the other day a recording of John Lennon drunk sold for US$30,000. If you think there's something wrong with someone saying that's a foolish thing to spend money on that then well go for it but there's a lot of charities out there that certainly could've used that money more. The guy lost some money in an investment and that's tough and I can certainly sympathize, there's a lot of threads like that here (see http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=85248) but that doesn't mean I should change my view and think people wasting their money on autographs is a wise thing.
|
its more about showing susie a little more respect as she's trying to help someone.
also, its about the fact that any signed shirt like that would sell for much more than its being offered. so no, that's not incredibly foolish of anyone.
|
I don't want to be a fucking mod. I've been here for years. You don't have reading comprehension.
You are a moron btw, if you read over what you said in your second paragraph you'll see why you should let people use their money on what they want. If someone has money they deem expendable then let them use it. Who are you to put a price on something that is sentimental to a person.
You also think reading neil strauss' the game is enlightening to the female mind. Good thing saying this to someone who just broke up with a girl he's dated long-term. THE GAME BLOWS YOUR MIND.
On January 03 2009 04:46 Wolverine wrote:
You can easily get this book off Torrents, it's called The Game by Neil Strauss if you read if it doesn't exactly immediately help you with your situation but at least you'll understand why your Brad Pitt friend gets to fuck the girl. The fact that he already gets a shit load of pussy is all the more reason he'd get to fuck your girl, not a reason why he shouldn't (as you were saying).
Done talking with you. Its clear you're on the lower end of the poster quality spectrum.
|
On January 03 2009 12:06 Wolverine wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 10:04 Ack1027 wrote:On January 01 2009 16:01 Wolverine wrote: fools and their money... In Susie's thread about helping her friend via autograph auction: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=84965How is this kid not banned yet...? First a dumbass post there and one earlier in this thread. I don't understand how bans work at all apparently. I've been linking to this thread whenever I see a shitty OP or post, while also trying to provide suggestions on how to improve said post/thread. If this is a bother then let me know and I'll stop. But seriously, it boggles my mind. How is there not a ban yet for wolverine.... Come on, just admit that you created this thread because you want to be a mod, judging from the irrational amount of concern you seem to have regarding this and the amount of effort you're putting into your posts in this thread. And that you're taking my posts personally because I responded to your OP negatively. As for my post in Susie's thread, I'm a fan of lots of bands etc. as well but I wouldn't spend money buying signed t-shirts or whatever. Some people do, fine whatever but what do you have against someone who doesn't think it's a good idea, freedom of opinion and what have you. Just the other day a recording of John Lennon drunk sold for US$30,000. If you think there's something wrong with someone saying that's a foolish thing to spend money on that then well go for it but there's a lot of charities out there that certainly could've used that money more. The guy lost some money in an investment and that's tough and I can certainly sympathize, there's a lot of threads like that here (see http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=85248) but that doesn't mean I should change my view and think people wasting their money on autographs is a wise thing.
Please settle scores elsewhere? Thread derailing is another bannable offense.
|
On January 03 2009 12:11 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 12:06 Wolverine wrote:On January 03 2009 10:04 Ack1027 wrote:On January 01 2009 16:01 Wolverine wrote: fools and their money... In Susie's thread about helping her friend via autograph auction: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=84965How is this kid not banned yet...? First a dumbass post there and one earlier in this thread. I don't understand how bans work at all apparently. I've been linking to this thread whenever I see a shitty OP or post, while also trying to provide suggestions on how to improve said post/thread. If this is a bother then let me know and I'll stop. But seriously, it boggles my mind. How is there not a ban yet for wolverine.... Come on, just admit that you created this thread because you want to be a mod, judging from the irrational amount of concern you seem to have regarding this and the amount of effort you're putting into your posts in this thread. And that you're taking my posts personally because I responded to your OP negatively. As for my post in Susie's thread, I'm a fan of lots of bands etc. as well but I wouldn't spend money buying signed t-shirts or whatever. Some people do, fine whatever but what do you have against someone who doesn't think it's a good idea, freedom of opinion and what have you. Just the other day a recording of John Lennon drunk sold for US$30,000. If you think there's something wrong with someone saying that's a foolish thing to spend money on that then well go for it but there's a lot of charities out there that certainly could've used that money more. The guy lost some money in an investment and that's tough and I can certainly sympathize, there's a lot of threads like that here (see http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=85248) but that doesn't mean I should change my view and think people wasting their money on autographs is a wise thing. Please settle scores elsewhere? Thread derailing is another bannable offense.
i was happy not posting anymore in this thread and just sitting back and reading the rest of it, it was when ack brought me up again that i responded
|
On January 03 2009 12:11 Ack1027 wrote:I don't want to be a fucking mod. I've been here for years. You don't have reading comprehension. You are a moron btw, if you read over what you said in your second paragraph you'll see why you should let people use their money on what they want. If someone has money they deem expendable then let them use it. Who are you to put a price on something that is sentimental to a person. You also think reading neil strauss' the game is enlightening to the female mind. Good thing saying this to someone who just broke up with a girl he's dated long-term. THE GAME BLOWS YOUR MIND. Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 04:46 Wolverine wrote:
You can easily get this book off Torrents, it's called The Game by Neil Strauss if you read if it doesn't exactly immediately help you with your situation but at least you'll understand why your Brad Pitt friend gets to fuck the girl. The fact that he already gets a shit load of pussy is all the more reason he'd get to fuck your girl, not a reason why he shouldn't (as you were saying). Done talking with you. Its clear you're on the lower end of the poster quality spectrum.
wow, a bit of attitude there, take a step back and look at your own post then ask yourself whether this is the kind of negative, angsty attitude you want posters on TL to have
|
Hey guys, there's this PM function that allows the two of you to shout insults at each other without polluting threads. Thank you for using it.
|
Starting/continuing a flame war in a thread that many mods are likely to be reading is a bad idea, Wolverine.
Just some friendly advice from your neighborhood walrus.
|
On January 03 2009 12:16 Wolverine wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 12:11 Ack1027 wrote:I don't want to be a fucking mod. I've been here for years. You don't have reading comprehension. You are a moron btw, if you read over what you said in your second paragraph you'll see why you should let people use their money on what they want. If someone has money they deem expendable then let them use it. Who are you to put a price on something that is sentimental to a person. You also think reading neil strauss' the game is enlightening to the female mind. Good thing saying this to someone who just broke up with a girl he's dated long-term. THE GAME BLOWS YOUR MIND. On January 03 2009 04:46 Wolverine wrote:
You can easily get this book off Torrents, it's called The Game by Neil Strauss if you read if it doesn't exactly immediately help you with your situation but at least you'll understand why your Brad Pitt friend gets to fuck the girl. The fact that he already gets a shit load of pussy is all the more reason he'd get to fuck your girl, not a reason why he shouldn't (as you were saying). Done talking with you. Its clear you're on the lower end of the poster quality spectrum. wow, a bit of attitude there, take a step back and look at your own post then ask yourself whether this is the kind of negative, angsty attitude you want posters on TL to have It doesn't matter how right you think you are Wolverine, you are still going to get banned if you continue to aggravate the veteran posters. Seriously, just check the date that Ack joined. He has been here for more than 10 times longer than you.
If you haven't learned yet, when a forum newb fights a forum vet the newb always loses and you, sir, are about to be that loser.
I don't even know why I'm trying to warn you away from this, I doubt you will ever contribute anything to TL.net. I guess I just feel a little bit of compassion for new posters about to run face first into a ban hammer.
Edit: @Haji: Lol I should really just delete the first line so theres a blank space there. XD, I just tried it and it works.
|
thedeadhaji
39473 Posts
On January 03 2009 12:16 Wolverine wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 12:11 Ack1027 wrote:I don't want to be a fucking mod. I've been here for years. You don't have reading comprehension. You are a moron btw, if you read over what you said in your second paragraph you'll see why you should let people use their money on what they want. If someone has money they deem expendable then let them use it. Who are you to put a price on something that is sentimental to a person. You also think reading neil strauss' the game is enlightening to the female mind. Good thing saying this to someone who just broke up with a girl he's dated long-term. THE GAME BLOWS YOUR MIND. On January 03 2009 04:46 Wolverine wrote:
You can easily get this book off Torrents, it's called The Game by Neil Strauss if you read if it doesn't exactly immediately help you with your situation but at least you'll understand why your Brad Pitt friend gets to fuck the girl. The fact that he already gets a shit load of pussy is all the more reason he'd get to fuck your girl, not a reason why he shouldn't (as you were saying). Done talking with you. Its clear you're on the lower end of the poster quality spectrum. wow, a bit of attitude there, take a step back and look at your own post then ask yourself whether this is the kind of negative, angsty attitude you want posters on TL to have
I am the epitome of angry angsty posting on TL.
edit: lol fontong your sig 2nd line
|
I disagree with most of what is in the OP. I think that TL is probably about right in how strict it is right now. Overly strict restrictions give the feeling that you can't actually say your opinions or thoughts because you might "stand out" and get banned. Especially annoying are threats where people who are not mods call out for someone's banning.
I think that closing the threads that clearly cross the stupidity line is punishment enough for that kind of offense and banning should be reserved for more serious problems. Otherwise, we all just will be forced to stand in line and fear the thought police. Not fun.
There were a few calls to ban me initially when I started representing the conservative viewpoint in the election thread. I "stood out". I am grateful that moderators are more careful than the general TL public might be in who they choose to ban.
+ Show Spoiler +MYM.Testie : I'm amazed Savio isn't banned yet.
alphafuzard : why would you ban someone for their political views? seems like a polite post if nothing else
maybe im missing some history : /
Savio: No there is no history. This has mostly been a pretty well mannered discussion. Most of the people who disagree with me are also putting a lot of thought into their responses and not flaming. Neither side has really paid any attention to the random flamer.
I know that most people on this blog have different political views than me and thats ok. This is one of the better political discussions I have had over the internet.
Clutch3 : First of all Savio, kudos to you for fighting steep odds and for continuing to make good points. Many people in your position would have given in or have been banned for flying off the handle long ago.
|
On January 03 2009 12:16 Wolverine wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 12:11 Ack1027 wrote:I don't want to be a fucking mod. I've been here for years. You don't have reading comprehension. You are a moron btw, if you read over what you said in your second paragraph you'll see why you should let people use their money on what they want. If someone has money they deem expendable then let them use it. Who are you to put a price on something that is sentimental to a person. You also think reading neil strauss' the game is enlightening to the female mind. Good thing saying this to someone who just broke up with a girl he's dated long-term. THE GAME BLOWS YOUR MIND. On January 03 2009 04:46 Wolverine wrote:
You can easily get this book off Torrents, it's called The Game by Neil Strauss if you read if it doesn't exactly immediately help you with your situation but at least you'll understand why your Brad Pitt friend gets to fuck the girl. The fact that he already gets a shit load of pussy is all the more reason he'd get to fuck your girl, not a reason why he shouldn't (as you were saying). Done talking with you. Its clear you're on the lower end of the poster quality spectrum. wow, a bit of attitude there, take a step back and look at your own post then ask yourself whether this is the kind of negative, angsty attitude you want posters on TL to have
err i actually agree with this post
no reason to pull out some attitude.
|
It's 7:00 AM and I haven't slept yet, this will probably be my last post on TL before I hit the hay. I read every single post in this thread and feel obligated to reply
I agree that the quality of the forum has declined, but I don't think it's entirely due to the new posters. I think some new posters get banned too quickly because of their minor offenses, to the point that we are really shooting ourselves in the foot. I think the reason why the quality is so bad these days is actually due to the increase in veterans. I actually always felt this way, but it was not really a problem before because there weren't too many veterans back in the old days. Of all the commandment rules, I think the one that people (mods and veterans) abide mostly royally to is the "Respect forum veteran" rule, to me, this is unfair. I'll follow the rules of not pointing fingers in this thread, but I'd like to say, some of the people with 5K+ posts should have been banned a long time ago, but since they have so many posts now, they are much harder to get rid of (don't worry Haji, it's your bday today, you won't get banned ). Even if you skim through this thread, all the bad posts are indeed made by people who are more known on this board.
I, for example, have started to be more careless in my posts in recent times, and I have also occasionally insulted newer members (okay, some deserve it, and some really deserve it) just because I know I can get away with it (hey, if anything, I can always point to the commandment right?), but I know I am not the worst one, and there are people far worse than me.
I don't know how coherent this is anymore, so I'll sum it up by saying, I think the most pressing issue is the increase in veterans who aren't great posters to begin with, and how we should deal with them.
|
On January 03 2009 12:23 Fontong wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 12:16 Wolverine wrote:On January 03 2009 12:11 Ack1027 wrote:I don't want to be a fucking mod. I've been here for years. You don't have reading comprehension. You are a moron btw, if you read over what you said in your second paragraph you'll see why you should let people use their money on what they want. If someone has money they deem expendable then let them use it. Who are you to put a price on something that is sentimental to a person. You also think reading neil strauss' the game is enlightening to the female mind. Good thing saying this to someone who just broke up with a girl he's dated long-term. THE GAME BLOWS YOUR MIND. On January 03 2009 04:46 Wolverine wrote:
You can easily get this book off Torrents, it's called The Game by Neil Strauss if you read if it doesn't exactly immediately help you with your situation but at least you'll understand why your Brad Pitt friend gets to fuck the girl. The fact that he already gets a shit load of pussy is all the more reason he'd get to fuck your girl, not a reason why he shouldn't (as you were saying). Done talking with you. Its clear you're on the lower end of the poster quality spectrum. wow, a bit of attitude there, take a step back and look at your own post then ask yourself whether this is the kind of negative, angsty attitude you want posters on TL to have It doesn't matter how right you think you are Wolverine, you are still going to get banned if you continue to aggravate the veteran posters. Seriously, just check the date that Ack joined. He has been here for more than 10 times longer than you. So?If you haven't learned yet, when a forum newb fights a forum vet the newb always loses and you, sir, are about to be that loser. I think this should changeI doubt you will ever contribute anything to TL.net. This just doesn't make senseI guess I just feel a little bit of compassion for new posters about to run face first into a ban hammer. That's nice of you
Sorry I'm quoting you, but you just happened to be on this page
This is exactly what I am talking about, and why I think the quality is declining. I am not saying who is right and who is wrong between wolverine and ack, I'm simply pointing out the flaws in your lines (which I think is a very good representation of a typical forum veteran).
Comments inline.
|
On January 01 2009 11:43 H wrote: I used to give a shit about posting but when it all goes unpunished and good post(er)s are just torn down by idiots, who gives a fuck I''ve never seen a post of yours longer than 1 or 2 lines not resounding some already-mentioned inane comment.
|
Belgium8305 Posts
I'm honestly not seeing much of a decline in overall posting quality, there will always be plenty of examples of bad posting because this is simply the Internet. Everybody else seems to agree though, so maybe I've just gotten callous. Regardless, I'll post my thoughts on TL moderation here, seeing as how I have a PhD in Posting. You could argue that my diploma is just a napkin with a couple of ketchup stains, but I could argue that I will ban you forever and ever.
I have noticed throughout the years that posting quality is pretty much cyclical in nature. It started off low (everybody should check out some random '03 threads, it was pretty terrible by today's standards), then gradually improved as TL started maturing and from then on we always just implemented some sort of Purge whenever we felt it was sinking again. This means we're constantly flopping back and forth between shitty and great posting. Although I think it has worked out very well for us (I don't think anyone with at least half a brain would disagree that we are the best forum in this community, bar none), this is not an optimal solution.
In my opinion, strictness isn't the issue here. We throw people out pretty fast for being blatant idiots and the Mod Team as a whole is pretty well on top of things, in terms of swiftly taking out the completely unacceptable threads and posters. I think there's mostly two other issues at play:
- Posts which are shitty, but not outright banworthy. For example, pretty much any post relating any aspect of life to SC (siege your firebat in her mineral line XDDD), and 99% of posts containing memes. These posts diminish the value of any thread they're posted in, without anybody really being punished for it. The solution here is probably more use of Warnings, not only privately (to the offending user) but also publicly (in the thread itself), so that more awareness about what constitutes acceptable posting is generated.
- Backseat modding. This is an important problem, and it occurs mostly (though not solely) because of veteran posters. It's what happens when people see a thread or post they deem unacceptable and start berating or trolling the culprit. This type of behavior instantly ruins a thread, even though it might have had potential.
To combat this, I see two solutions.
First off, a change of attitude. We (by which I mean YOU) need to be more constructive towards offending posters. It's simply the difference between saying "here is what you should have done" and saying "LOL. NOOB. GET OUT." People will be more inclined to better their posts when they're being helped, rather than mocked. Of course, this doesn't apply to people who are being malicious. Those people don't have a soul, are therefore not human and should be treated the same way one treats a tumor.
Secondly, as other people have already suggested, some sort of system for people to report bad posts/threads to a Mod. To keep it functional, we'd probably need to restrict it to the veterans, but I still think it'd be a good idea because not only does it alert the Mod Team to stuff we might be missing, it also provides an outlet for people who might otherwise start flaming the offending poster, thereby being detrimental to the thread and the forums as a whole. But of course, this is easy for me to say as I don't have to do any of the coding and the staff is already very busy as it is. I don't expect this feature to make it (at least not any time soon), and I think my first solution is much, much more important.
Well, this turned out a little longer than I had intended it to. I promise I won't write as many serious words ever again. Poo poo kaka balltastic.
|
On January 03 2009 23:46 vGl-CoW wrote: First off, a change of attitude. We (by which I mean YOU) need to be more constructive towards offending posters. It's simply the difference between saying "here is what you should have done" and saying "LOL. NOOB. GET OUT." People will be more inclined to better their posts when they're being helped, rather than mocked. Of course, this doesn't apply to people who are being malicious. Those people don't have a soul, are therefore not human and should be treated the same way one treats a tumor.
I myself have a honoris causa PhD degree in dealing with that kind of people. Even here I tried to be constructive, to no avail. There's always people that will cling to the "ur a fscking troll" line even if you engage them constructively. Or there's the pedant type that calls everyone "ignorant" (a strategy forum pandemic) and refuse to dialogue intelligently if you ask them, because "you're not worth my time" (but they have plenty of time to BM you; go figure). You need negative reinforcement with those people, a mix of fear and pain that forms the limit of their sensibility spectrum.
Secondly, as other people have already suggested, some sort of system for people to report bad posts/threads to a Mod. To keep it functional, we'd probably need to restrict it to the veterans, but I still think it'd be a good idea because not only does it alert the Mod Team to stuff we might be missing, it also provides an outlet for people who might otherwise start flaming the offending poster, thereby being detrimental to the thread and the forums as a whole. But of course, this is easy for me to say as I don't have to do any of the coding and the staff is already very busy as it is. I don't expect this feature to make it (at least not any time soon), and I think my first solution is much, much more important.
I differ regarding that "limit to the veterans" attitude, which is part of the problem we're currently trying to address; a very significant proportion of offenders ARE veterans. Civility does not come with the number of posts you have.
How about a comment flagging system, like for most news outlets? Just put another link on the top bar that says: "Report abuse". It would be very effective, and if individual posters repeatedly abuse it, you ban them instead. It's a simple, tried-and-true method of reducing the moderators' burden, while it wouldn't require recruiting new mods, hence putting to rest this dispute over who should be promoted. Also, it should be quite easy to implement, less than a day of coding perhaps?
|
Belgium8305 Posts
On January 04 2009 00:45 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 23:46 vGl-CoW wrote: First off, a change of attitude. We (by which I mean YOU) need to be more constructive towards offending posters. It's simply the difference between saying "here is what you should have done" and saying "LOL. NOOB. GET OUT." People will be more inclined to better their posts when they're being helped, rather than mocked. Of course, this doesn't apply to people who are being malicious. Those people don't have a soul, are therefore not human and should be treated the same way one treats a tumor.
I myself have a honoris causa PhD degree in dealing with that kind of people. Even here I tried to be constructive, to no avail. There's always people that will cling to the "ur a fscking troll" line even if you engage them constructively. Or there's the pedant type that calls everyone "ignorant" (a strategy forum pandemic) and refuse to dialogue intelligently if you ask them, because "you're not worth my time" (but they have plenty of time to BM you; go figure). You need negative reinforcement with those people, a mix of fear and pain that forms the limit of their sensibility spectrum. I am using negative reinforcement (because when all else fails, it's the only thing a Mod is capable of). If I see people clinging to a negative, "fuck you newbie"-attitude, the ban hammer will be swung. It's a nice tool to get one's point across.
Show nested quote +Secondly, as other people have already suggested, some sort of system for people to report bad posts/threads to a Mod. To keep it functional, we'd probably need to restrict it to the veterans, but I still think it'd be a good idea because not only does it alert the Mod Team to stuff we might be missing, it also provides an outlet for people who might otherwise start flaming the offending poster, thereby being detrimental to the thread and the forums as a whole. But of course, this is easy for me to say as I don't have to do any of the coding and the staff is already very busy as it is. I don't expect this feature to make it (at least not any time soon), and I think my first solution is much, much more important.
I differ regarding that "limit to the veterans" attitude, which is part of the problem we're currently trying to address; a very significant proportion of offenders ARE veterans. Civility does not come with the number of posts you have. How about a comment flagging system, like for most news outlets? Just put another link on the top bar that says: "Report abuse". It would be very effective, and if individual posters repeatedly abuse it, you ban them instead. It's a simple, tried-and-true method of reducing the moderators' burden, while it wouldn't require recruiting new mods, hence putting to rest this dispute over who should be promoted. Also, it should be quite easy to implement, less than a day of coding perhaps? I suggested restricting it to veterans out of several considerations. If we'd allow anyone to use this sort of system, we'd probably be drowned in reports, which would be counterproductive. Also, I would nuance your statement - civility does not necessarily come with the number of posts you have. A high post count doesn't guarantee quality posting, but usually acts as an indicator for it. If someone survives long enough to have a few thousand posts over a reasonable span of time, more often than not it means that person is at the very least a decent poster. It seems logical that the reports this person makes will more often be in line with the decisions a Mod would make, and therefore will be more useful to us. I really have no idea how long it would take to implement a feature like this so I won't comment on that, I just know our coders already are very busy bees.
|
On January 04 2009 01:13 vGl-CoW wrote: I suggested restricting it to veterans out of several considerations. If we'd allow anyone to use this sort of system, we'd probably be drowned in reports, which would be counterproductive.
I assure you it works well everywhere I've seen it implemented. Besides: =>You can put a big fat warning on this feature: "Abusing the abuse report feature can get you banned." Scary enough. =>If it is indeed abused, ban the offenders. Although that makes another bannable offense, I suspect that it will overlap with the kind of posters you want to ban anyway. Makes sense?
Also, I would nuance your statement - civility does not necessarily come with the number of posts you have. A high post count doesn't guarantee quality posting, but usually acts as an indicator for it. If someone survives long enough to have a few thousand posts over a reasonable span of time, more often than not it means that person is at the very least a decent poster. It seems logical that the reports this person makes will more often be in line with the decisions a Mod would make, and therefore will be more useful to us.
I respectfully disagree. Look at sites like Slashdot, for example, where a lot of veterans that spit acid on everything that breathes have insanely positive karmas.
I really have no idea how long it would take to implement a feature like this so I won't comment on that, I just know our coders already are very busy bees.
I'm a software developer (even though web and database stuff aren't my cup of coffee). The logic would be quite simple: an additional flag for each post, an additional link on the post bar, a thread for mods that shows the flagged posts (like the automated ban thread; that should be just a single tweak to a request I think) and a bit more code perhaps, like disabling the report abuse link if the post is already flagged, or recording who flagged the post (just another field and a couple more lines here and there).
If I were to estimate how long I would take to implement this on a codebase I'm familiar with, I would say one day. Perhaps two if you want to add statistics by user (how many posts were flagged for a given user, percentage, a sorted list of worst offenders). It's so simple yet so useful that I would also make this kind of stuff a high priority.
|
United States24342 Posts
On January 03 2009 23:46 vGl-CoW wrote: First off, a change of attitude. We (by which I mean YOU) need to be more constructive towards offending posters. It's simply the difference between saying "here is what you should have done" and saying "LOL. NOOB. GET OUT." People will be more inclined to better their posts when they're being helped, rather than mocked. I agree. I think this is a bigger problem than most people give it credit for.
Everybody has to walk on eggshells on tl, never do anything that could be even remotely construed as dumb, and avoid contributing to a topic unless they are 100% sure that they are an authority on that topic, lest they get harassed and labeled as one of the dumb ignorant noobs (especially true for new members). This always happens on the internet to some extent, of course, but I think TL could definitely be better about it than we currently are.
|
On January 03 2009 23:46 vGl-CoW wrote: First off, a change of attitude. We (by which I mean YOU) need to be more constructive towards offending posters. It's simply the difference between saying "here is what you should have done" and saying "LOL. NOOB. GET OUT." The problem is the massive are of negativity surrounding TL.net. Everyone, especially the forum vets, flame first and ask questions later if someone does something stupid rather than ignoring it or letting the mods deal with it.
I remember a thread I posted in where the OP was some new poster and had done a 1 liner or smth. I just posted some funny thing about him being a future GG.net member. He went on to create 2 more crap threads in short succession. I'm not sure, I guess I felt bad for him so I PM'd him in a super mannered way that we don't do things like this at TL and got him to post 'Plz close' in all the threads.
Unfortunately I don't have anymore instances of being so generous, I will try harder in the future though.
|
On January 04 2009 03:11 Fontong wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 23:46 vGl-CoW wrote: First off, a change of attitude. We (by which I mean YOU) need to be more constructive towards offending posters. It's simply the difference between saying "here is what you should have done" and saying "LOL. NOOB. GET OUT." The problem is the massive are of negativity surrounding TL.net. Everyone, especially the forum vets, flame first and ask questions later if someone does something stupid rather than ignoring it or letting the mods deal with it. I remember a thread I posted in where the OP was some new poster and had done a 1 liner or smth. I just posted some funny thing about him being a future GG.net member. He went on to create 2 more crap threads in short succession. I'm not sure, I guess I felt bad for him so I PM'd him in a super mannered way that we don't do things like this at TL and got him to post 'Plz close' in all the threads. Unfortunately I don't have anymore instances of being so generous, I will try harder in the future though.
Regarding that thread thing: there ought to be general guidelines about the minimum expected burden for new threads, like we have in the strategy forum (requests for help require a replay and short analysis at the very least, this sort of things). I read the closed threads list just for fun and I observed that a huge proportion of these are just one liners, sometimes with a pic, like posters have no clue that a thread should weigh much heavier than an ordinary comment. Also, many threads are just replies to an existing thread. If we had guidelines displayed at the top of the new topic form, most of these shallow threads would be averted.
|
You know man, crappy posters who somehow haven't gotten banned yet (PM me if I'm in this category and I'll try to improve lol) make up an important part of TL. And when they do get banned, it's funny so it's a win win situation!
It may be that you are getting older or more mature and are just starting to notice / be annoyed by it. If every post in every thread were paragraphs of well thought out responses, this forum would be boring as SHIT! Not to say that threads like "warning: adult link" shouldn't be closed... but hell, I got a laugh out of people's reactions to it so it wasn't entirely useless.
I guess the biggest reason why less people are banned nowadays is that fact that rekrul lost his ban scythe a lot of his bans were unfair, but just from pure statistics he managed to do a good job cleaning up the forum.
Ah, I think it's worth a poll:
Poll: Give Rek back the scythe of death (if he wants it)? (Vote): Hell yeah, I'm sick of these trolling newbs (Vote): No, rekrul is unjust and has no heart (Vote): Sure... as long as he doesn't ban me
|
Belgium8305 Posts
On January 04 2009 01:43 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 01:13 vGl-CoW wrote: I suggested restricting it to veterans out of several considerations. If we'd allow anyone to use this sort of system, we'd probably be drowned in reports, which would be counterproductive.
I assure you it works well everywhere I've seen it implemented. Besides: =>You can put a big fat warning on this feature: "Abusing the abuse report feature can get you banned." Scary enough. =>If it is indeed abused, ban the offenders. Although that makes another bannable offense, I suspect that it will overlap with the kind of posters you want to ban anyway. Makes sense? I'm not worried about abuse, it's easy to ban abusers as you indicate. I'm simply worried about the volume of reports as well as the number of justified reports so it seems like this should be a privilege for veterans. There are a few terrible posters with high postcounts, but they'd be reported by the other veterans. I have no prior experience with this type of system though, I guess a trial phase or something would be ideal.
Show nested quote +Also, I would nuance your statement - civility does not necessarily come with the number of posts you have. A high post count doesn't guarantee quality posting, but usually acts as an indicator for it. If someone survives long enough to have a few thousand posts over a reasonable span of time, more often than not it means that person is at the very least a decent poster. It seems logical that the reports this person makes will more often be in line with the decisions a Mod would make, and therefore will be more useful to us.
I respectfully disagree. Look at sites like Slashdot, for example, where a lot of veterans that spit acid on everything that breathes have insanely positive karmas. Well from my experience here on TL, I'd say that most of the veterans really are decent posters, although I certainly think they (and myself, to be honest) could be a lot nicer to newbies. I really don't think it'd be too hard to instill a generally friendlier attitude, though.
On January 04 2009 03:11 Fontong wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 23:46 vGl-CoW wrote: First off, a change of attitude. We (by which I mean YOU) need to be more constructive towards offending posters. It's simply the difference between saying "here is what you should have done" and saying "LOL. NOOB. GET OUT." The problem is the massive are of negativity surrounding TL.net. Everyone, especially the forum vets, flame first and ask questions later if someone does something stupid rather than ignoring it or letting the mods deal with it. I remember a thread I posted in where the OP was some new poster and had done a 1 liner or smth. I just posted some funny thing about him being a future GG.net member. He went on to create 2 more crap threads in short succession. I'm not sure, I guess I felt bad for him so I PM'd him in a super mannered way that we don't do things like this at TL and got him to post 'Plz close' in all the threads. Unfortunately I don't have anymore instances of being so generous, I will try harder in the future though. Yeah, this is the sort of attitude change I feel we need around here. Setting a good example rather than crucifying the offenders. This isn't a fresh idea either, I actually remember some of the Mods saying we needed this exact kind of change even before I was made staff. It just pretty much never happened.
On January 04 2009 03:26 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 03:11 Fontong wrote:On January 03 2009 23:46 vGl-CoW wrote: First off, a change of attitude. We (by which I mean YOU) need to be more constructive towards offending posters. It's simply the difference between saying "here is what you should have done" and saying "LOL. NOOB. GET OUT." The problem is the massive are of negativity surrounding TL.net. Everyone, especially the forum vets, flame first and ask questions later if someone does something stupid rather than ignoring it or letting the mods deal with it. I remember a thread I posted in where the OP was some new poster and had done a 1 liner or smth. I just posted some funny thing about him being a future GG.net member. He went on to create 2 more crap threads in short succession. I'm not sure, I guess I felt bad for him so I PM'd him in a super mannered way that we don't do things like this at TL and got him to post 'Plz close' in all the threads. Unfortunately I don't have anymore instances of being so generous, I will try harder in the future though. Regarding that thread thing: there ought to be general guidelines about the minimum expected burden for new threads, like we have in the strategy forum (requests for help require a replay and short analysis at the very least, this sort of things). I read the closed threads list just for fun and I observed that a huge proportion of these are just one liners, sometimes with a pic, like posters have no clue that a thread should weigh much heavier than an ordinary comment. Also, many threads are just replies to an existing thread. If we had guidelines displayed at the top of the new topic form, most of these shallow threads would be averted. I agree with this, it'd be simple to add and it would diminish the number of one liner trash threads. At the same time I'd be more inclined to hand out bans to people who'd still not follow this guideline, it really irks me when people are too stupid to read the warnings that are right in front of them.
|
On January 04 2009 03:59 vGl-CoW wrote: I'm not worried about abuse, it's easy to ban abusers as you indicate. I'm simply worried about the volume of reports as well as the number of justified reports so it seems like this should be a privilege for veterans. There are a few terrible posters with high postcounts, but they'd be reported by the other veterans. I have no prior experience with this type of system though, I guess a trial phase or something would be ideal.
[Emphasis added]
Hence my feature proposal for a list of worst abusers based on the volume of reports. That way moderators don't have to go through every single flagged comment, only those from people that blink red on top of the list.
|
Not sure if this has been scrutinized by vgi yet in the wall of text but wouldn't a flagging system ultimately lead to those who are tight nit together... post ban this guy or pm others to basically making a flagging system effective mostly thought only bandwagon which is why chill closes threads like that...
And the other side is true as well as if you ban those who use the flagging system because the bandwagon what happens is people get scared to use it and it will never get well used.
For safety any flag system has to have details meaning that it has to be in context with the forum it's in and given at least 2 line explanation to why it is being used but the only problem is you say one liner is the cause is a one liner report. So really one liner's would have to be reported by someone who notices his posting history in that forum and can suggest that he only posts one liners and should be investigated.
|
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
a few observations from my days of moderation:
about mods - people in general think they are good moderators but in reality 99% are not really suited for moderation - main qualities mods should have is an above average patience, intelligence and unwavering respect of fairness and freedom of speech - an important issue is to get all moderators to set the better example always - the primary goal a moderator should have is the health of the forum, not his own popularity, not his clan, not his fans, not his opinions etc..
about offenders - the hardest cases are members with poor intelligence who do not realize their limitations and who have only one social outlet, the forum itself - most trolls can actually be encouraged to be good posters & one can divert the energy of most spammers into something productive - smart trolls in general despite their mayhem respond better to moderation and are less harmful
about mod functions - closing threads is always a double edged sword, in general I rather a mod rescue a shitty thread if it can be done than close it i.e. any new thread with effort put in by the poster one should avoid closing as much as possible; the opposite is true for short shitty single double line threads without links/pics - threads with legal links almost always help the forum - banning* is pointless when the pool of new members is limited or shrinking and in my opinion harmful to most forums; the problem is that to avoid banning you need an active and impeccable moderation i.e u single out the frequent offender, you monitor all his post, you edit when you have too, over and over, you engage him one on one in conversation, 99% are just kids wanting attention. - *but banning smurfs, multiple accounts, sockpuppets etc.. should be relentless
about moderation - the answer to forum moderation is usually never "more" moderators, but "better" moderators, and many times "less" moderators is healthier - the only time you add moderators is if the forum is really growing quickly and you are adding new forum subject categories. - a common mistake in moderation is thinking one can force people to be smart or wiser or that one can force people not to interact with the forum
my feedback on current tl.net quality level - it's fine & has improved - too many opinions (mine included) are currently pointless - if anything, the observations that matter now, in my not so humble opinion, I left highlighted.
/use them or lose them ~
|
On January 03 2009 23:23 HeadBangaa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2009 11:43 H wrote: I used to give a shit about posting but when it all goes unpunished and good post(er)s are just torn down by idiots, who gives a fuck I''ve never seen a post of yours longer than 1 or 2 lines not resounding some already-mentioned inane comment.
this is like the third or fourth time I've seen you post something like this in the past few weeks
and again, I would say look at your own posts before you act all high and mighty
|
Basic guidelines, or at least a link to the full guidelines, needs to be on top of the new topic form; it's already been mentioned. I second making an announcement about it though.
Suggestions about basic guidelines for opening a new thread:
WARNING:The required burden to start a thread far exceeds that of a mere comment. Think of a thread as an article instead. If you've never posted before, we invite you to read: TL.net Ten Commandments, How to Use TeamLiquid, [G] Forum Posting Guide (unofficial). Summary:First make sure it's substantial; no one-liners, single short paragraphs, picture-only, youtube-only, jokes, hoaxes, rants, scams, and the like. See the list of closed threads for examples of what does not constitute an acceptable thread on TeamLiquid forums. Second, use the search function to make sure no similar thread already exists. Select the option to search contents as well, not just titles. If it's a topic of general interest, don't neglect to ask Google as well. Third, make sure it's posted to the right forum and meets that forum's own guidelines. In doubt, ask an admin. Infringing threads will be promptly closed. Severe infringers and recidivists may be banned without further warning. This is short enough that people will read it all if put prominently on the new topic form.
Edit: I've trimmed down the above warning suggestion to make it more compact.
|
On January 03 2009 23:23 HeadBangaa wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2009 11:43 H wrote: I used to give a shit about posting but when it all goes unpunished and good post(er)s are just torn down by idiots, who gives a fuck I''ve never seen a post of yours longer than 1 or 2 lines not resounding some already-mentioned inane comment.
I'd wager you've only read my posts in a certain section pretty much designed for shitty posting. WHAT A COINCIDENCE! I also find it hilarious you preach about post quality when you've been banned twice (take note - I haven't).
|
On January 08 2009 09:56 H wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 23:23 HeadBangaa wrote:On January 01 2009 11:43 H wrote: I used to give a shit about posting but when it all goes unpunished and good post(er)s are just torn down by idiots, who gives a fuck I''ve never seen a post of yours longer than 1 or 2 lines not resounding some already-mentioned inane comment. I'd wager you've only read my posts in a certain section pretty much designed for shitty posting. WHAT A COINCIDENCE! I also find it hilarious you preach about post quality when you've been banned twice (take note - I haven't). There is no section designed for shitty posting. HeadBangaa's past ban history has little to do with his current posting quality, unless you are saying that poor posters never reform. If that were the case, temp bans would be pointless. If you want to continue your disagreement, have a bo3 on Python, Lost Temple, and Luna and post reps.
Getting back to the discussion at hand, I think that more education among new members about what we expect in a thread can help. I think putting a more condensed version of what onepost wrote in the "create new topic" form would be a good idea, maybe in between the text box and the post/preview buttons, forcing your eyes to at least skim over it on the way to the post button.
On January 08 2009 09:24 Physician wrote: - main qualities mods should have is an above average patience, intelligence and unwavering respect of fairness and freedom of speech I would make a terrible mod.
|
|
Most annoying stuff here is when coming back from somewhere, then u start reading some report topic(the games have ended hours ago), it has about 300 - 400 replies, which atleast half is like "GOGO [submit pro]", "GG" or some other oneline crap.. Also I hate the predictions, but I understand they can get some conversation so its ok.. My tip for users, if u have no input to gamereport topics, GOD DAMN, dont post ! (i follow that guideline)
I also dislike that some ppl here chat on topics, come on, use msn, irc, facebook etc. Many admins do this too and I belive it lowers the bar for posting. Some might think he can do it too since admins does it...
Also it would be nice if we would be able to "Posts" for other ppl too, would be easier to report spammers etc.
Anyways I am still happy about tl.net, or I wouldnt be lurking here.
|
What the hell?
A live report thread is for the people posting in it or who can't watch. Good posting in a LR thread would be so lame ....
Predictions and OMG HAHA ENSARE HOLLYSHIT are the thread. A forum is just belated chatting. Its like turn based MSN.
|
Well, IMO, I would guess lot of ppl cant watch proleague live, cause of the time (its midday on euro when its played) so they read it after like me, its not cool to skip xx amount of posts in 1 page . That chatting I am talking about happens in almost every forum and imho it should be illegal in every forum, tl.net has irc channel go there for "omg haha"-stuff.
|
On January 08 2009 19:29 AttackZerg wrote: What the hell?
A live report thread is for the people posting in it or who can't watch. Good posting in a LR thread would be so lame ....
Predictions and OMG HAHA ENSARE HOLLYSHIT are the thread. A forum is just belated chatting. Its like turn based MSN. Yeah, in most LR threads the people who aren't reporting don't post much anyway. I think it only becomes a big problem in threads like "Lecaf vs ACE" that draw a ton more viewers. In those cases there are usually like 5 people LRing anyway....
|
On January 01 2009 13:12 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2009 12:51 thedeadhaji wrote:4) how would you go about implementing such a thing? The same as for terms of service on most websites, upon creation of a new user account. Write in big bad bold something like: "Read the guidelines carefully before you post anything. Infringers may be banned without warning." Sound scary enough.
If you really wanted to get into it you could make a quiz about them and force them to get a perfect score lolol.
|
On January 09 2009 02:12 Fontong wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2009 19:29 AttackZerg wrote: What the hell?
A live report thread is for the people posting in it or who can't watch. Good posting in a LR thread would be so lame ....
Predictions and OMG HAHA ENSARE HOLLYSHIT are the thread. A forum is just belated chatting. Its like turn based MSN. Yeah, in most LR threads the people who aren't reporting don't post much anyway. I think it only becomes a big problem in threads like "Lecaf vs ACE" that draw a ton more viewers. In those cases there are usually like 5 people LRing anyway....
Ok maybe I'm the only one but when I spent my years away from broowar, I would randomly find a day with nothing to do and re-read all of the live reports for the big games I had missed. All that hype talk and spamed excitment is what made the thread for me. I would literallly get so hyped from it. I would never had read threw 30 pages of well articulated savior vs bisu posting, it would have been boring.
|
anyone notice how manifesto has been bringing the pain? he's banned a lot of people + closed a shitload of threads recently. go mani!
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
|
|
United States17042 Posts
Mani looks like he's out on the warpath, which is pretty cool.
About the live report threads: I feel like they're a historical account of what happened in a game, so that good posting isn't necessarily as required. putting together a picture in your head from the pieces can be pretty cool, and sometimes the only way of capturing the excitement of the games (especially if you wern't around to be able to watch the games live) is reading the live report thread. For example, if you have time, go read through the stork/fantasy game thread, or the july/best live report thread. They're both long, full of spam and repetitive remarks, but at the end of game 5 (of the stork/fantasy thread), 3 pages get instantly added by people who were following the game/live report thread. I'm not sure you would really want to trade that historical account of the people for anything.
Attackzerg is right on this one I think, that the attention of the crowd and the bad/worse live reporting is what makes the game exciting.
|
Braavos36362 Posts
I don't think this is a good solution, it opens far too many doors for abuse, if the thread doesn't go how the OP feels, I don't think its his right to be able to arbitrarily close it. That and a Mod usually steps in within a short amount of time anyway.
|
On January 10 2009 05:12 Hot_Bid wrote:I don't think this is a good solution, it opens far too many doors for abuse, if the thread doesn't go how the OP feels, I don't think its his right to be able to arbitrarily close it. That and a Mod usually steps in within a short amount of time anyway. I believe you that it could indeed be abused, although judging from the above I don't see how. If the thread doesn't go the OP's way, isn't it a sign that it should be closed? I mean, either the OP gets blasted for saying something stupid, or the thread derails...
|
On January 10 2009 08:10 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2009 05:12 Hot_Bid wrote:I don't think this is a good solution, it opens far too many doors for abuse, if the thread doesn't go how the OP feels, I don't think its his right to be able to arbitrarily close it. That and a Mod usually steps in within a short amount of time anyway. I believe you that it could indeed be abused, although judging from the above I don't see how. If the thread doesn't go the OP's way, isn't it a sign that it should be closed? I mean, either the OP gets blasted for saying something stupid, or the thread derails...
uhhh... do you know who rpf is?
|
Braavos36362 Posts
On January 10 2009 08:10 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2009 05:12 Hot_Bid wrote:I don't think this is a good solution, it opens far too many doors for abuse, if the thread doesn't go how the OP feels, I don't think its his right to be able to arbitrarily close it. That and a Mod usually steps in within a short amount of time anyway. I believe you that it could indeed be abused, although judging from the above I don't see how. If the thread doesn't go the OP's way, isn't it a sign that it should be closed? I mean, either the OP gets blasted for saying something stupid, or the thread derails... I don't think the OP should decide where and how the discussion flows. Often the subject and discussion may not go the way the OP wants, or proceed how the OP likes. This does not mean that its automatically worthy of closing. Moderators are better judges of that, and the only negative i see is the amount of time between when the OP could close a useless topic and a Mod, which has a negligible effect, so I don't see why we should allow the possibility for future abuse.
|
On January 10 2009 10:13 Nitrogen wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2009 08:10 onepost wrote:On January 10 2009 05:12 Hot_Bid wrote:I don't think this is a good solution, it opens far too many doors for abuse, if the thread doesn't go how the OP feels, I don't think its his right to be able to arbitrarily close it. That and a Mod usually steps in within a short amount of time anyway. I believe you that it could indeed be abused, although judging from the above I don't see how. If the thread doesn't go the OP's way, isn't it a sign that it should be closed? I mean, either the OP gets blasted for saying something stupid, or the thread derails... uhhh... do you know who rpf is? I humbly answer by the negative.
|
On January 10 2009 11:23 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2009 10:13 Nitrogen wrote:On January 10 2009 08:10 onepost wrote:On January 10 2009 05:12 Hot_Bid wrote:I don't think this is a good solution, it opens far too many doors for abuse, if the thread doesn't go how the OP feels, I don't think its his right to be able to arbitrarily close it. That and a Mod usually steps in within a short amount of time anyway. I believe you that it could indeed be abused, although judging from the above I don't see how. If the thread doesn't go the OP's way, isn't it a sign that it should be closed? I mean, either the OP gets blasted for saying something stupid, or the thread derails... uhhh... do you know who rpf is? I humbly answer by the negative. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=76842 He is referring to that thread.
If rpf had had the option to close that thread, we wouldn't have (arguably) one of our most hilarious threads.
|
Another observation: It seems a very significant percentage of closed threads are one of the following: =>Youtube-only =>Picture-only =>Link-only There isn't even text! Couldn't there be a simple check upon previewing/posting that blocks those posts? Also, that could possibly be extended to other similar conditions, like if there's less than 300 characters, less than 10 spaces, or all capitals. It should be trivial to code, and would pay for itself very quickly, wouldn't it?
|
I largely agree with Physisians post. I have a likewise moderator experience from years past on a programming newb forum. Patience and 'rehabilitating' are important tools.
About the 'report this post' feature. There is the risk of a shitload of reports that are a mess to work through. However I see this feature improved with the following setup: - Every user has a reporting quality meter (a number). This is default 0 for everyone. - Everyone can report any post - The moderator will get a list of reported posts, sorted by the reporting priority value. - Every time a reported post is regarded as no-TL-material, all reporters of the post are rewarded by an increase of their reporting quality meter. - Every time a reported post is regarded as ok-TL-material, then all reporters of the post get a decrease of their reporting quality meter - The reporting priority value is: sum_all_reports( minimum(0, user_reporting_quality)) - People with a negative reporting quality value can get back in the postive by reporting posts that others report as well, and having that post be acted upon. - Reports can be automatically purged after some time to save moderators from having to purge the reported posts list automatically. Automatically purged posts of course do not affect related reporters.
This way, people who abuse reporting will have their reporting be in vain, really soon. People who report properly will gain in reporting influence, but will never have something like a moderator status. Fair for everyone, and helpful for the moderators. Of course, this system would need to be implemented still. I would offer myself as programmer, if it were not for me throwing away all my spare time reading LR threads X-) (not that much spare time anyway.)
About LR threads. I love how they are now. 'Shitty posts', close to h-scroll breaking, are fine by me. They are exciting! Like AttackZerg mentions. However, there are posts that can ruin the experience in them, where a poster says GG minutes away from any actual GG, or is just misleading. It can cause confusion, it breaks the excitement and is distracting. I wish moderators would be more strict on them. I know this is not a light request, having been a moderator myself, and I welcome any-and-all improvement. On the global level, by the way, I am still blown away by all the effort that TL is, and am not complaining about bad quality this or that.
|
On January 17 2009 01:47 Badjas wrote: About the 'report this post' feature. There is the risk of a shitload of reports that are a mess to work through. However I see this feature improved with the following setup: - Every user has a reporting quality meter (a number). This is default 0 for everyone. - Everyone can report any post - The moderator will get a list of reported posts, sorted by the reporting priority value. - Every time a reported post is regarded as no-TL-material, all reporters of the post are rewarded by an increase of their reporting quality meter. - Every time a reported post is regarded as ok-TL-material, then all reporters of the post get a decrease of their reporting quality meter - The reporting priority value is: sum_all_reports( minimum(0, user_reporting_quality)) - People with a negative reporting quality value can get back in the postive by reporting posts that others report as well, and having that post be acted upon. - Reports can be automatically purged after some time to save moderators from having to purge the reported posts list automatically. Automatically purged posts of course do not affect related reporters.
This way, people who abuse reporting will have their reporting be in vain, really soon. People who report properly will gain in reporting influence, but will never have something like a moderator status. Fair for everyone, and helpful for the moderators. Of course, this system would need to be implemented still. I would offer myself as programmer, if it were not for me throwing away all my spare time reading LR threads X-) (not that much spare time anyway.)
I find your solution not only unnecessarily complex but also daunting to implement (I'm a software developer).
I've already suggested that moderators look not at a list reported posts (although they could), but at a list of users with most comments having been reported (there should be very few blinking red on top of the list; the rest could be ignored). Instead of inspecting 100 reported comments looking for a pattern, you would immediately see that the 5 top users have had a combined 90 comments reported in the past few days. And it's a lot easier to implement...
|
On January 17 2009 01:47 Badjas wrote: However, there are posts that can ruin the experience in them, where a poster says GG minutes away from any actual GG, or is just misleading. It can cause confusion, it breaks the excitement and is distracting. I wish moderators would be more strict on them. Sometimes my stream is minutes ahead of everyone else's. I post the future.
|
On January 17 2009 02:41 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2009 01:47 Badjas wrote: About the 'report this post' feature. There is the risk of a shitload of reports that are a mess to work through. However I see this feature improved with the following setup: - Every user has a reporting quality meter (a number). This is default 0 for everyone. - Everyone can report any post - The moderator will get a list of reported posts, sorted by the reporting priority value. - Every time a reported post is regarded as no-TL-material, all reporters of the post are rewarded by an increase of their reporting quality meter. - Every time a reported post is regarded as ok-TL-material, then all reporters of the post get a decrease of their reporting quality meter - The reporting priority value is: sum_all_reports( minimum(0, user_reporting_quality)) - People with a negative reporting quality value can get back in the postive by reporting posts that others report as well, and having that post be acted upon. - Reports can be automatically purged after some time to save moderators from having to purge the reported posts list automatically. Automatically purged posts of course do not affect related reporters.
This way, people who abuse reporting will have their reporting be in vain, really soon. People who report properly will gain in reporting influence, but will never have something like a moderator status. Fair for everyone, and helpful for the moderators. Of course, this system would need to be implemented still. I would offer myself as programmer, if it were not for me throwing away all my spare time reading LR threads X-) (not that much spare time anyway.)
I find your solution not only unnecessarily complex but also daunting to implement (I'm a software developer). I've already suggested that moderators look not at a list reported posts (although they could), but at a list of users with most comments having been reported (there should be very few blinking red on top of the list; the rest could be ignored). Instead of inspecting 100 reported comments looking for a pattern, you would immediately see that the 5 top users have had a combined 90 comments reported in the past few days. And it's a lot easier to implement... Hello fellow software developer. It is absurd to call my idea daunting to implement. It takes one extra entity, the report, and one extra field in the user table. Then it takes some pages: report page, report confirm page, list reports page (for moderators), report details page (with action buttons, delete post / ban user / cancel reports...). That's about it. Then the functions: reporting is simply adding an entry to a table. OK-ing reports is the action on the user/post, already existing, then there is, for each reporter, give bonus (+ 1 on entity field), and delete report, or mark historic. canceling reports, for each reporter -1 on user, mark report historic. If posts get deleted through other means, and have reports attached to it, then logically the writers of those reports get a bonus automatically. I think that covers it. This is two days of work.
And for your solution: Do you report users directly? If you do report posts, you got the same extra entity. And the presentation of posts is reduced to an aggregation of their writers. If you report users directly, then moderators will have to look for offending posts by themselves, not a good solution. I agree that there is merit to aggregating by writer though, still sorted on scoring, then with a drill-down to the reported posts by that writer.
However, my proposal adds a self-balancing maintenance-free score to reports, at very little cost of implementation. And then there's some perks, like one could sort users on their (negative) reporting habits, and warn them for trolling with reports. Perhaps take away reporting options for those with a score of -20 or lower (they won't have a means to get it back without moderator intervention, if the user admin page will include this new score field.)
|
On January 17 2009 03:31 Fontong wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2009 01:47 Badjas wrote: However, there are posts that can ruin the experience in them, where a poster says GG minutes away from any actual GG, or is just misleading. It can cause confusion, it breaks the excitement and is distracting. I wish moderators would be more strict on them. Sometimes my stream is minutes ahead of everyone else's. I post the future. You have a good point there. Literally minutes? ouch... well write more LR's then! But some people really seem to be out on writing fake reports... hard to find back.. (I have a very forgiving memory..)
|
On January 17 2009 05:59 Badjas wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2009 02:41 onepost wrote:On January 17 2009 01:47 Badjas wrote: About the 'report this post' feature. There is the risk of a shitload of reports that are a mess to work through. However I see this feature improved with the following setup: - Every user has a reporting quality meter (a number). This is default 0 for everyone. - Everyone can report any post - The moderator will get a list of reported posts, sorted by the reporting priority value. - Every time a reported post is regarded as no-TL-material, all reporters of the post are rewarded by an increase of their reporting quality meter. - Every time a reported post is regarded as ok-TL-material, then all reporters of the post get a decrease of their reporting quality meter - The reporting priority value is: sum_all_reports( minimum(0, user_reporting_quality)) - People with a negative reporting quality value can get back in the postive by reporting posts that others report as well, and having that post be acted upon. - Reports can be automatically purged after some time to save moderators from having to purge the reported posts list automatically. Automatically purged posts of course do not affect related reporters.
This way, people who abuse reporting will have their reporting be in vain, really soon. People who report properly will gain in reporting influence, but will never have something like a moderator status. Fair for everyone, and helpful for the moderators. Of course, this system would need to be implemented still. I would offer myself as programmer, if it were not for me throwing away all my spare time reading LR threads X-) (not that much spare time anyway.)
I find your solution not only unnecessarily complex but also daunting to implement (I'm a software developer). I've already suggested that moderators look not at a list reported posts (although they could), but at a list of users with most comments having been reported (there should be very few blinking red on top of the list; the rest could be ignored). Instead of inspecting 100 reported comments looking for a pattern, you would immediately see that the 5 top users have had a combined 90 comments reported in the past few days. And it's a lot easier to implement... Hello fellow software developer. It is absurd to call my idea daunting to implement. It takes one extra entity, the report, and one extra field in the user table. Then it takes some pages: report page, report confirm page, list reports page (for moderators), report details page (with action buttons, delete post / ban user / cancel reports...). That's about it. Then the functions: reporting is simply adding an entry to a table. OK-ing reports is the action on the user/post, already existing, then there is, for each reporter, give bonus (+ 1 on entity field), and delete report, or mark historic. canceling reports, for each reporter -1 on user, mark report historic. If posts get deleted through other means, and have reports attached to it, then logically the writers of those reports get a bonus automatically. I think that covers it. This is two days of work. *cough* *cough* are you kidding? You needed a huge paragraph just to list the features! Even if you wrote this quick and dirty in VB it might take you longer than that. Plus, everything is way more complicated when it's on the web...
And for your solution: Do you report users directly? If you do report posts, you got the same extra entity. And the presentation of posts is reduced to an aggregation of their writers. If you report users directly, then moderators will have to look for offending posts by themselves, not a good solution. I agree that there is merit to aggregating by writer though, still sorted on scoring, then with a drill-down to the reported posts by that writer. No you don't report users but posts. However a database request (SQL?) to gather posts matching a requirement (flag) is trivial, and then it's just aggregating by user and sorting by count. There's already something like this implemented elsewhere (see your own posts lists, for example) so I assume it would be trivial, just copy-paste then tweak.
However, my proposal adds a self-balancing maintenance-free score to reports, at very little cost of implementation. And then there's some perks, like one could sort users on their (negative) reporting habits, and warn them for trolling with reports. Perhaps take away reporting options for those with a score of -20 or lower (they won't have a means to get it back without moderator intervention, if the user admin page will include this new score field.) It's already been suggested (and essentially agreed upon) that abusing the abuse report function could result in ban, which is much more simple. Honestly I don't like overly-complex Slashdot-like algorithms that attempt to substitute themselves to the good judgement of the admins, especially since TL will never grow nearly as large as Slashdot.
With all due respect, I don't like your idea at all, and I'm sure TL's coders wouldn't either...
|
On January 17 2009 12:04 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2009 05:59 Badjas wrote:On January 17 2009 02:41 onepost wrote:On January 17 2009 01:47 Badjas wrote: About the 'report this post' feature. There is the risk of a shitload of reports that are a mess to work through. However I see this feature improved with the following setup: - Every user has a reporting quality meter (a number). This is default 0 for everyone. - Everyone can report any post - The moderator will get a list of reported posts, sorted by the reporting priority value. - Every time a reported post is regarded as no-TL-material, all reporters of the post are rewarded by an increase of their reporting quality meter. - Every time a reported post is regarded as ok-TL-material, then all reporters of the post get a decrease of their reporting quality meter - The reporting priority value is: sum_all_reports( minimum(0, user_reporting_quality)) - People with a negative reporting quality value can get back in the postive by reporting posts that others report as well, and having that post be acted upon. - Reports can be automatically purged after some time to save moderators from having to purge the reported posts list automatically. Automatically purged posts of course do not affect related reporters.
This way, people who abuse reporting will have their reporting be in vain, really soon. People who report properly will gain in reporting influence, but will never have something like a moderator status. Fair for everyone, and helpful for the moderators. Of course, this system would need to be implemented still. I would offer myself as programmer, if it were not for me throwing away all my spare time reading LR threads X-) (not that much spare time anyway.)
I find your solution not only unnecessarily complex but also daunting to implement (I'm a software developer). I've already suggested that moderators look not at a list reported posts (although they could), but at a list of users with most comments having been reported (there should be very few blinking red on top of the list; the rest could be ignored). Instead of inspecting 100 reported comments looking for a pattern, you would immediately see that the 5 top users have had a combined 90 comments reported in the past few days. And it's a lot easier to implement... Hello fellow software developer. It is absurd to call my idea daunting to implement. It takes one extra entity, the report, and one extra field in the user table. Then it takes some pages: report page, report confirm page, list reports page (for moderators), report details page (with action buttons, delete post / ban user / cancel reports...). That's about it. Then the functions: reporting is simply adding an entry to a table. OK-ing reports is the action on the user/post, already existing, then there is, for each reporter, give bonus (+ 1 on entity field), and delete report, or mark historic. canceling reports, for each reporter -1 on user, mark report historic. If posts get deleted through other means, and have reports attached to it, then logically the writers of those reports get a bonus automatically. I think that covers it. This is two days of work. *cough* *cough* are you kidding? You needed a huge paragraph just to list the features! Even if you wrote this quick and dirty in VB it might take you longer than that. Plus, everything is way more complicated when it's on the web... Things are not any more complicated on the web. Not nowadays. Anyway I'll take that whole comment in jest ;-)
On January 17 2009 12:04 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +And for your solution: Do you report users directly? If you do report posts, you got the same extra entity. And the presentation of posts is reduced to an aggregation of their writers. If you report users directly, then moderators will have to look for offending posts by themselves, not a good solution. I agree that there is merit to aggregating by writer though, still sorted on scoring, then with a drill-down to the reported posts by that writer. No you don't report users but posts. However a database request (SQL?) to gather posts matching a requirement (flag) is trivial, and then it's just aggregating by user and sorting by count. There's already something like this implemented elsewhere (see your own posts lists, for example) so I assume it would be trivial, just copy-paste then tweak. So you suggest a single flag on the post entity will suffice? Perhaps even a counter..
On January 17 2009 12:04 onepost wrote:Show nested quote +However, my proposal adds a self-balancing maintenance-free score to reports, at very little cost of implementation. And then there's some perks, like one could sort users on their (negative) reporting habits, and warn them for trolling with reports. Perhaps take away reporting options for those with a score of -20 or lower (they won't have a means to get it back without moderator intervention, if the user admin page will include this new score field.) It's already been suggested (and essentially agreed upon) that abusing the abuse report function could result in ban, which is much more simple. Honestly I don't like overly-complex Slashdot-like algorithms that attempt to substitute themselves to the good judgement of the admins, especially since TL will never grow nearly as large as Slashdot. Sure, abusing reports could result in a ban. Neither your solution nor mine has anything like automatic banning, so where is your added simplicity? As a matter of fact, your solution will actually not help admins see which users are abusing the reporting functionality since there is no way to trace which user has reported which post. It's lacking that entity that I told you you'd need., whereas my solution has a feature to automatically, without moderator intervention, take away reporting rights from those that abuse it.
Now here come the overly complex slashdot like algorithms: Assuming the user table has a field ReportingScore Assuming there is a PostReport entity with the following fields: UserId PostId Remark (optional) Timestamp State (actual, processed)
// On the forum page, extra code: If User.ReportingScore > -5 // can be tweaked. and Post.Timestamp > Today - 40 // to be tweaked, let's not let old posts be reported Show report post button end if
// Report post page: A simple form, displaying original post with a remarks entry box and an ok / cancel button. No algorithms other than 'add row to PostReport entity' (with additional check if logged in user has an ok ReportingScore)
// Post report confirm page: duh
// Reported users page: select PostUser.Name, sum(User.ReportingScore) Score, from PostReport, User, Post, User PostUser where PostReport.UserId = User.UserId and PostReport.PostId = Post.PostId and Post.UserId = PostUser.UserId and PostReport.State = actual and PostReport.TimeStamp > Today - 10 and User.ReportingScore > 0 group by PostUser.Name order by Score Desc // Display each record, plain and simple, and offer drilldown to a ReportedPostsPerUser page
// Reported posts per user select PostId, sum(User.ReportingScore) Score, from PostReport, User, Post where PostReport.UserId = User.UserId and PostReport.PostId = Post.PostId and PostReport.State = actual and PostReport.TimeStamp > Today - 10 and User.ReportingScore > 0 and Post.UserId = "page parameter's user id" group by PostId order by Score Desc // Display the posts with additional existing queries. The page could offer an option to ban the user and delete the post in one fell swoop. That would then go along the lines of:
// Fast-ban user: select whatever from PostReport, User, Post where PostReport.UserId = User.UserId and PostReport.PostId = Post.PostId and PostReport.State = actual and Post.UserId = "page parameter's user id" // foreach row update user table, increase ReportingScore by one if post not deleted, or --nuked--, do so update report set state = processed end foreach // Deal with user still with existing methods
// Reported post details page select PostReport.Remarks, User.Name, User.ReportingScore, from PostReport, User, Post where PostReport.UserId = User.UserId and PostReport.PostId = Post.PostId and PostReport.State = actual and Post.PostId = "page parameter's post id" order by User.ReportingScore Desc // display post foreach row display User.Name, User.ReportingScore, PostReport.Remarks end foreach Display buttons: .. let's see.. temp-ban-user, ban-user. nuke-post. no-action-but-reports-good, no-action-reports-bad. All buttons but the last one end up with an already existing action, and the 'good reports algorithm'. The last button triggers the 'bad reports algorithm'.
// Good reports select PostReport from PostReport where PostReport.PostId = "page parameter's post id" // foreach row increase user's ReportingScore by 1 update PostReport set state = Processed end foreach
// Bad reports select PostReport from PostReport where PostReport.PostId = "page parameter's post id" // foreach row decrease user's ReportingScore by 1 // or 2... heheh! update PostReport set state = Processed end foreach // //and take that extra action depending on which button is pushed
// Top/bottom reporting users select top 10 User.Name, User.ReportingScore // or bottom 10 from User order by User.ReportingScore // display rows
That about sums it all up. I wrote it in one stretch over the course of one and half hour (dealing with playing kids around here..) There's some extra thought put in the usability here and there that I am not bothering to detail now. Oh yeah, I could have made errors.. pseudocode is so hard to debug. Oh and if you could point out the overly complex slashdot-like algorithms, that would be dandy.
On January 17 2009 12:04 onepost wrote: With all due respect, I don't like your idea at all, and I'm sure TL's coders wouldn't either...
I wouldn't be so sure about that.. Look at the above pseudocode. 90% of it is already required for implementing your idea, my additional feature is 10% of the code. (no I didn't actually count, but in terms of implementation time, that's my overly negative estimate. Yes I am a programmer, I am trained to make negative estimates ;-) )
|
On January 17 2009 18:49 Badjas wrote:
So you suggest a single flag on the post entity will suffice? Perhaps even a counter.. I would go for a flag because otherwise you can't query the offending posts. [?]
Sure, abusing reports could result in a ban. Neither your solution nor mine has anything like automatic banning, so where is your added simplicity? As a matter of fact, your solution will actually not help admins see which users are abusing the reporting functionality since there is no way to trace which user has reported which post. It's lacking that entity that I told you you'd need., whereas my solution has a feature to automatically, without moderator intervention, take away reporting rights from those that abuse it.
My take on this is that if report abuse from a given is so insignificant that we don't even notice it (drowned into the presumed sea of reports) then why would we care about it at all...
Now here come the overly complex slashdot like algorithms: Assuming the user table has a field ReportingScore Assuming there is a PostReport entity with the following fields: UserId PostId Remark (optional) Timestamp State (actual, processed) // On the forum page, extra code:If User.ReportingScore > -5 // can be tweaked. and Post.Timestamp > Today - 40 // to be tweaked, let's not let old posts be reported Show report post button end if // Report post page:A simple form, displaying original post with a remarks entry box and an ok / cancel button. No algorithms other than 'add row to PostReport entity' (with additional check if logged in user has an ok ReportingScore) // Post report confirm page: duh // Reported users page:select PostUser.Name, sum(User.ReportingScore) Score, from PostReport, User, Post, User PostUser where PostReport.UserId = User.UserId and PostReport.PostId = Post.PostId and Post.UserId = PostUser.UserId and PostReport.State = actual and PostReport.TimeStamp > Today - 10 and User.ReportingScore > 0 group by PostUser.Name order by Score Desc // Display each record, plain and simple, and offer drilldown to a ReportedPostsPerUser page // Reported posts per userselect PostId, sum(User.ReportingScore) Score, from PostReport, User, Post where PostReport.UserId = User.UserId and PostReport.PostId = Post.PostId and PostReport.State = actual and PostReport.TimeStamp > Today - 10 and User.ReportingScore > 0 and Post.UserId = "page parameter's user id" group by PostId order by Score Desc // Display the posts with additional existing queries. The page could offer an option to ban the user and delete the post in one fell swoop. That would then go along the lines of: // Fast-ban user:select whatever from PostReport, User, Post where PostReport.UserId = User.UserId and PostReport.PostId = Post.PostId and PostReport.State = actual and Post.UserId = "page parameter's user id" // foreach row update user table, increase ReportingScore by one if post not deleted, or --nuked--, do so update report set state = processed end foreach // Deal with user still with existing methods // Reported post details pageselect PostReport.Remarks, User.Name, User.ReportingScore, from PostReport, User, Post where PostReport.UserId = User.UserId and PostReport.PostId = Post.PostId and PostReport.State = actual and Post.PostId = "page parameter's post id" order by User.ReportingScore Desc // display post foreach row display User.Name, User.ReportingScore, PostReport.Remarks end foreach Display buttons: .. let's see.. temp-ban-user, ban-user. nuke-post. no-action-but-reports-good, no-action-reports-bad. All buttons but the last one end up with an already existing action, and the 'good reports algorithm'. The last button triggers the 'bad reports algorithm'. // Good reportsselect PostReport from PostReport where PostReport.PostId = "page parameter's post id" // foreach row increase user's ReportingScore by 1 update PostReport set state = Processed end foreach // Bad reportsselect PostReport from PostReport where PostReport.PostId = "page parameter's post id" // foreach row decrease user's ReportingScore by 1 // or 2... heheh! update PostReport set state = Processed end foreach // //and take that extra action depending on which button is pushed // Top/bottom reporting usersselect top 10 User.Name, User.ReportingScore // or bottom 10 from User order by User.ReportingScore // display rows That about sums it all up. I wrote it in one stretch over the course of one and half hour (dealing with playing kids around here..) There's some extra thought put in the usability here and there that I am not bothering to detail now. Oh yeah, I could have made errors.. pseudocode is so hard to debug. Oh and if you could point out the overly complex slashdot-like algorithms, that would be dandy. Show nested quote +On January 17 2009 12:04 onepost wrote: With all due respect, I don't like your idea at all, and I'm sure TL's coders wouldn't either... I wouldn't be so sure about that.. Look at the above pseudocode. 90% of it is already required for implementing your idea, my additional feature is 10% of the code. (no I didn't actually count, but in terms of implementation time, that's my overly negative estimate. Yes I am a programmer, I am trained to make negative estimates ;-) ) It looks like your 2 days estimate covers only the development time. But this has a high voodoo index, so expect it to be only the tip of the iceberg; it certainly doesn't include tweaking and debugging, which grows exponentially with complexity. Plus, your solution requires many forms, not included into your pseudocode. Plus, unless you planned on writing it yourself, you would have to feed this to other developers which may not see the big picture immediately, hence not write it as quickly as you would. After seeing your pseudocode I'm less skeptical that it wouldn't work, but even more that it would meet your estimates. Hence my continued objection.
|
Calgary25938 Posts
Can we step back and look at this. Do we really need to code this elaborate feedback system? If you want to pseudomoderate, just PM a moderator.
|
Sure Chill, it's your house.
Regarding onepost's comments.. I'll just say that someone without a proper grasp of relational databases is likely to be a poor judge of complexity on this matter.
I still want to add: PM-ing moderators is very ad-hoc and is more time consuming overall. I thought a major point in this thread is to reduce the workload of moderators.
I don't know who's responsible for coding the forums, but that person could perhaps be hinted to this solution and judge for him/herself.
I'd be willing to give this a try at implementation, but I have to add that I quickly feel burdened with my current bit of life. Oh, and you'd have to trust me X-) It would feel great to give something back.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On January 18 2009 02:14 Chill wrote: Can we step back and look at this. Do we really need to code this elaborate feedback system? If you want to pseudomoderate, just PM a moderator. This. It's not like we're not discussing features like this in MiR; we've got a few options lined up for how we want to make the forum experience better as well as allowing a certain amount of user moderation and when we've come to a decision and coded it you can all enjoy it.
|
Germany2896 Posts
One problem with PMing a moderator is that you do not know which one to PM. Another possibility which should be rather easy to implement is a private feedback forum. Which is a simple forum where only the threadcreator and mods can access a thread. And if a normal user lists the threads he only sees the ones he created.
|
|
|
|