Jump to content


Moderator Feedback


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
47 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   Jeber

Jeber

    Still Version 1.0 beta

  • Forum Admins
  • 4,616 posts

Posted 27 July 2003 - 01:20 PM

After quite a bit of discussion amongst the administrators and moderators, we feel that all the members need a place to post questions and make comments on our moderation of the SFNL forums.  This will also give us, the mods, a place to explain ourselves to you and, with your help, determine how best to serve you.Our overall goal is to keep the forums friendly, helpful and fun.  Our guidelines are the Forum Rules, so please be sure and read them.  Our goal with this topic is to help you understand why we do what we do, and give you a place to either agree or disagree with our actions or request advise on proper forum posting.  As always, you may also PM any mod with your concerns.All we ask is that you post here as you would post in any other topic, in accordance with the rules.  And please be specific.  Comments like "you guys are wrong" doesn't get us anywhere.  Refer to a specific post, word, statement...then we can be specific in our comments.And lastly, keep in mind that we're all human...and that this is still a young forum.  We're trying very hard to do  everything we can to keep this an excellent forum.  With your help and feedback, we can have a site we can all be proud to belong to.
He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher, an idiotĚ
(Douglas Adams)


Jeber Central
Jeber's Journal

#2 OFFLINE   Jeber

Jeber

    Still Version 1.0 beta

  • Forum Admins
  • 4,616 posts

Posted 27 July 2003 - 02:46 PM

Let me start things rolling, and you can comment if you wish.One topic we are having a lot of discussion about is file sharing.  Peer to peer programs, or file sharing programs, are available all over the web, for both the Windows platform and Linux.  The software itself is legal, and has many legitimate uses.  But frequently these programs are used to illegally share music, written material, etc.  Rule #5 prohibits discussions of or links to illegal programs or activities, yet the P2P program itself isn't illegal.  So the context has to determine our response.  Lately we've reacted to some posts that linked to P2P programs by moving them to a "Questionable Posts" area so we could decide what to do.  In some cases, we're still trying to decide.  We don't want to stomp on member's ability to post on any topic they choose, but we also have an obligation to Scot and the general membership to uphold and enforce the rules.So, as Peachy suggested, if we decide to ban all mention of P2P, we'd have to ban all mention of guns, cars,etc.  Anything legal that could be used illegally would have to be removed from posts.  This obviously isn't where we're going.Any ideas or suggestions will be considered.Your thoughts?
He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher, an idiotĚ
(Douglas Adams)


Jeber Central
Jeber's Journal

#3 Guest_Paracelsus_*

Guest_Paracelsus_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 July 2003 - 06:05 PM

Excellent!!!, Jebs :) I think this thread will go a long way in quelling any trepidations other Members may have that this Forum is becoming Fascist B)   (OOPS!!, LabRat grabbed hold of the Keyboard for a second) :lol:  B) I would encourage anyone who has questions or qualms as to the moderation of this Forum to post their thoughts here.  (Just, let's remain Courteous and Respectful... OK??)

#4 OFFLINE   SonicDragon

SonicDragon

    Discussion Deity

  • Forum MVP
  • 4,188 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 10:26 AM

I guess i don't have much to say on this one... i think you guys are doing a great job. I think it is the right decition to ban posts based on context, not keywords :)Keep up the good work :(

#5 OFFLINE   Prelude76

Prelude76

    Multithreader

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 12:13 PM

since i've been busted several times on P2P posts,  let me comment how i feel.  you guys have final say, but i appreciate this opportunity to voice my concerns.what i find acceptable in discussing P2P file sharing programs:- which are popular/recommended- how to set them up / tweak settings- how to tweak them for security- warnings/alerts about RIAA or spyware or adware or virus alerts- linking general P2P news stories of interest to other forum memberswhat is obviously unacceptable:- asking for requests- telling what you trade/share on P2P- linking to P2P sites/forums that have illegal implications (sites that list programs, etc..)- listing ed2k links or bittorrent links or other direct p2p linkssecond list is obviously black-listed and is common sense not to post.  but my first category, some are ok with, others consider gray area and stop the posts.  friendly suggestions:  maybe clear up that 'gray' area?  maybe only discussing news article about P2P is only acceptable thing, maybe  all the first list should be acceptable, or maybe nothing about P2P should be acceptable.  its your choice, you have my feedback on it.  people, please post your feedback on P2P.  and then we'll let you mods have final say.  might help avoid confusion.why i feel the first list is acceptable?  because whether you agree with P2P or not, its here to stay, and is main reason why broadband took off the way it did.  its your choice whether to use it legally or illegally.  it's your risk.  but i think in the future, its gonna be a very popular way to distribute everything.  instead of downloading Mandrake ISOs (free) from ftp sites, it was quicker just using a P2P program.  and once companies realize they can save on FTP costs by having releases distributed by P2P, you will see much more legitimate uses for them.  so in short, discussing illegal trading is a no-no, but discussing legal P2P technologies should not be.

#6 Guest_ThunderRiver_*

Guest_ThunderRiver_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 July 2003 - 01:18 PM

Exactly my point

#7 OFFLINE   Jeber

Jeber

    Still Version 1.0 beta

  • Forum Admins
  • 4,616 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 02:30 PM

I'm glad you brought this up, Prelude76.  I believe I agree with your points, but I'm only speaking for myself at the moment.  The "Mod Squad" still hasn't reached concensus on this topic, so there isn't an "official" position just yet.  Scot's been away for a while and hasn't had a chance to voice his opinion, and since this is his forum, we're waiting to hear his position.  We'll make an announcement as soon as we all agree.But your points are valid.  Like I mentioned before, it's difficult for some to seperate the program from it's uses.  File sharing has many legitimate uses, especially in business.  But it's use for illegal activities has muddied the waters.  In some ways it's like the O.E. situation.  Many people, myself included, don't use Outlook Express due to it's reputation as an insecure mail program, even though they may have not ever been personally effected.  It's reputation preceeds it.  P2P suffers the same bad reputation due to viruses, illegal music swapping, etc.  It is a shame that because some people use a program improperly, it gets a rep as a bad thing.Well, hang in there, everyone...we may have a position we can all agree on soon.
He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher, an idiotĚ
(Douglas Adams)


Jeber Central
Jeber's Journal

#8 OFFLINE   Prelude76

Prelude76

    Multithreader

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 03:44 PM

as i said, i'm cool either way, as long as i know if its allowed to be discussed or not.  i realize there are forums specifically for P2P discussion, but since i get the impression many of us help others with their computers, how does it hurt us to know about latest P2P trends and technologies?  say a customer asks you he's concerned about his daughter using kazaa and the RIAA lawsuits he hears about?  or another customer keeps getting kazaa klez viruses, but can't live without his mp3 downloads? we can act like boy scouts and tell them to stop doing illegal activities, or we could mention other P2P solutions to them. and in due time, i think P2P will become more popular than FTP as main choice of distribution for freeware, patches, upgrades.  so to know about latest P2P networks and pros and cons of various P2P software can only make us smarter.  B)   i doubt our discussions will make people who do not steal software have a sudden urge to  download stuff, and people that have always bootlegged will keep on bootlegging. here's a good example:  i read in another forum that certain ISPs monitor ports that are common to P2P software, and cause their internet connections to drop repeatedly.  dont know if its true or not, but if you had a friend or client who kept complaining about dropped internet connection, wouldnt it be nice to know this bit of information?   :)

#9 OFFLINE   Jeber

Jeber

    Still Version 1.0 beta

  • Forum Admins
  • 4,616 posts

Posted 02 August 2003 - 10:48 PM

Update on P2P:I think we've heard from every admin and mod who wished to express an opinion on this matter, and here's what the present attitude is toward "file sharing" discussions.Discussions concerning any software used for file sharing is ok, as is any discussion of legitimate uses for the software (i.e. how to split a large file to transfer faster...).  Any discussion of illegal uses of any software will be deleted by the first mod or admin that sees it.  Please be sure to read rule #5 for a pretty concise explanaition of the forum policies on this.Please note the use of "present attitude".  As always, Scot and his designated representatives reserve the right to modify any rule should the circumstances change.  If we feel people are abusing the rules, or attempting to find ways around them, the rules may be adapted to prevent this.Our overall concerns are "what is best for the members?" and "what is best for the forum?".If there are questions or concerns...let's hear them.  That's what this topic is here for.And thanks for all your great posts.  This forum is growing and improving every day.
He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher, an idiotĚ
(Douglas Adams)


Jeber Central
Jeber's Journal

#10 OFFLINE   SonicDragon

SonicDragon

    Discussion Deity

  • Forum MVP
  • 4,188 posts

Posted 03 August 2003 - 02:01 PM

Thanks for the update. I think you all are doing a great job :rolleyes:

#11 OFFLINE   muckshifter

muckshifter

    Topic Cop

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 949 posts

Posted 04 August 2003 - 08:19 AM

Can we talk about SEX now?  :D

#12 OFFLINE   zox

zox

    Multithreader

  • Forum MVP
  • 1,234 posts

Posted 04 August 2003 - 11:30 AM

Quote

Can we talk about SEX now?
SEX over P2P would be great :D

#13 Guest_ThunderRiver_*

Guest_ThunderRiver_*
  • Guests

Posted 06 August 2003 - 06:18 PM

Mm...I think action of SEX is better than talking...

#14 OFFLINE   Jeber

Jeber

    Still Version 1.0 beta

  • Forum Admins
  • 4,616 posts

Posted 07 August 2003 - 10:55 AM

I split off the discussion of P2P that was getting going because though it is a valid topic of discussion, it was getting off topic for this thread.  Despite the last three posts above ( :blink: ), I'd like to keep this topic focused on getting feedback from you to help us serve you better.And no, Muck-ster, we can't, at least not here.  Go start your own thread!  :blink:
He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher, an idiotĚ
(Douglas Adams)


Jeber Central
Jeber's Journal

#15 OFFLINE   Jeber

Jeber

    Still Version 1.0 beta

  • Forum Admins
  • 4,616 posts

Posted 21 August 2003 - 01:13 PM

Member zlim brings up a good point:

Quote

Some posters forget that not all of the members who come here are on broadband connections and post huge images in their posts. Please, please, please, post a thumbnail or a clickable link for those of us trying to view the threads and waiting for the thread to load because of all the large images.
edited by JeberWith that in mind, please note forum rule #8:

Quote

8. Concerning images in posts: At this time, Scot’s Newsletter Forums does not permit uploading of images with posted messages. The best way to show other members something is to link to it. To do that, just paste a Web URL (or hyperlink) into your message. No encoding is required. By handling images in this way, you let people choose whether to click or not.It is also possible to display a screen shot hosted on another server by using the forum software's image tag and placing a URL in it. It should be done only when showing a picture is necessary to getting your important point across. Be considerate of people who have slower Internet connections. An image displayed within a message on Scot’s Newsletter Forums should be no wider than 480 pixels. And if you can make the image smaller, please do.Either one of these approaches requires your image to be hosted on another Web server. If you do not have access to another Web server but would like to link to or display an image in a post, please contact a forum moderator for help. While we can't promise to make this possible in all cases, we are working on ways to make it easier.
I admit we mods may have been too lax in enforcing this rule, with the result that many of our members on dial-up encounter certain pages that take forever to load, if they ever do.  Scot's goal in establishing rule #8 was to keep the forums accessable to all members equally.  Images in posts run counter to this goal.So what's your opinion?  Should we be more strict in enforcing this rule?  Should we insist that members who have images in their posts go back and make links to the images?  How would you go about making sure every member has equal access to the forums?  Let's hear your thoughts.
He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher, an idiotĚ
(Douglas Adams)


Jeber Central
Jeber's Journal

#16 OFFLINE   Prelude76

Prelude76

    Multithreader

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts

Posted 21 August 2003 - 02:15 PM

regarding the 480 pixel rule (and that i just posted 2 images at a WHOOPING 770 pixels wide in McAfee Firewall thread  :lol:  ), i think it should be limited to FILESIZE, not pixel width (though we wont like seeing > 1024 wide images coz not everyone has huge monitors either, right?my 2 images are 120kb each.  thats not too punishing for 56k users, i would think.  but you can have a 480 pixel BITMAP that weighs in at 500kb, and that could be a bit too much to handle.being on high-speed, i prefer seeing colourful images posted than having to click to view, but maybe if there was a way to easily toggle [IMG] links on/off, or a permanent option to always block inline images, it would satisfy both 56k and high-speed users, right?

#17 OFFLINE   ross549

ross549

    I live here.

  • Forum Admins
  • 8,481 posts

Posted 21 August 2003 - 03:55 PM

Another option would be to require anyone who posts an image to note it in the thread title. Several other forums that I do this as a courtesy to those on dialup, but have not really made it a rule.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy it.
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

#18 OFFLINE   Jeber

Jeber

    Still Version 1.0 beta

  • Forum Admins
  • 4,616 posts

Posted 21 August 2003 - 04:43 PM

ross549...while I agree that is certainly a polite thing to do, it doesn't address the issue of making the entire forum accessable to all our members.  We don't want to create a forum in which portions are reserved for those with broadband.  Some of our members live in areas of the world that may never see high-speed access.  They are no less full members, with the right to enjoy the entire forum, as anyone else.  Another thought...right now I'm using my desktop machine, and only have dial-up access on it.  I shouldn't have to go log on with the laptop just to enjoy certain threads.This is a lowest-common-denominator situation.  But there may be more than one way to resolve the hi-lo conflict.  That's why I'm soliciting your opinions.
He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher, an idiotĚ
(Douglas Adams)


Jeber Central
Jeber's Journal

#19 OFFLINE   LilBambi

LilBambi

    Australisches Googler

  • Forum Admins
  • 19,304 posts

Posted 23 August 2003 - 06:19 PM

As just one of many dialup users on the forums, I would like to say the following...I find the limitations very helpful to me as a dialup user ... and...As one who also must use 800x600 due to eye sight limitations, I am  thankful for the width limitation that Scot put in the Forum Rules.Overly wide pictures (more than 480 pixels wide) cause the need to scroll horizontally to read any text within ALL messages in the thread where the wide picture is posted. This is highly annoying. Others have noted the same in messages on the board and in PM.Although I like the look of pictures better in 1024x768, and would prefer to use 1024x768 overall, and realizing it would negate the need to scroll horizontally, I alas am not able to read the words in messages if I do so, so it is not an option for me.Just a though for those others who have the luxury of using another resolutions.
Bambi
AKA Fran

Posted Image
My Public Key for Email :: BambisMusings Blog :: Fran's Computer Services Blog :: MyPassionIsBooks Blog :: 5BuckReview :: CNIRadio
"The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." ~John Gilmore (Time Magazine, Dec 6, 1993)

#20 ONLINE   Jeber

Jeber

    Still Version 1.0 beta

  • Forum Admins
  • 4,616 posts

Posted 24 September 2003 - 07:35 PM

I moved and "stickied" this topic here with the idea that you, our members, should have a place to comment on the moderators in the forum.  If you have general suggestions/complaints/comments about the forum in general, please post them in the "Forum Feedback" forum.  This topic is meant to give you a place to make open, as opposed to those in personal messages or emails, comments or suggestions to the mods/admins.  Are there rules you don't understand or want to see changed?  Are there things about the way we do our "jobs" that you wonder about, or would like to make a comment about?  As you can see from past posts, we're willing to try to answer anything you want to discuss...so feel free to post your thoughts.Note: if you have a comment about another member or personal comment about a mod or admin, please PM one of us.  Comments about individuals should not be posted here.
He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher, an idiotĚ
(Douglas Adams)


Jeber Central
Jeber's Journal

#21 OFFLINE   Prelude76

Prelude76

    Multithreader

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts

Posted 25 November 2003 - 08:59 AM

question:If we have MODS on here who get their kicks on zapping/deleting/hidding/moving posts and threads,  could we the 'LITTLE PEOPLE' have some common respect shown to us by at least NOTIFYING US BY PM THAT OUR THREAD/POST WILL BE ALTERED?!?!?  :D edit:it seems that one of the mods had trouble modifying threads, and it was left up to someone else to do it, which led to confusion that left me out of the loop of being notified by anyone.  since most mods take plenty of effort to notify people by PM, i can see now this was simply a mistake to not notify me at all, so i'm withdrawing my complaint.  :w00t:

#22 OFFLINE   Jeber

Jeber

    Still Version 1.0 beta

  • Forum Admins
  • 4,616 posts

Posted 25 November 2003 - 12:25 PM

First of all, after a very brief period of consultation, the thread has been returned and we're working on rewording or tightening up rule #6.  Generally, you're correct in the types of posts the rule was intended to prevent, but there are others that aren't so obvious.  If we're unsure about the nature of a post, we can move it to an admin area, then discuss the post with the mods and admins.  Depending on the consensus, we'll either leave the post there, or return it.  We're not perfect, none of us has delusions of being gods (nice play on words, but undeserved)...we do the best we can to protect the members here.  If some find our rules and their enforcement unbearable, I can't sympathize.  I've seen poorly moderated, and unmoderated, boards.  None of us seriously wants SFNL Forums to become like those.  I can think of more people who have fled from those type boards here than I can those who have left because of our policies.Second, I'd remind everyone that those same rules allow a mod to take any action necessary to protect the forum and it's members.  You are free to question those actions...you may even PM Scot to question them, but in the end, we are allowed to do what we deem necessary.  We always consult each other regarding our actions, and in cases like this one, we will reverse our actions if that's agreed upon.  We'll usually try to notify the topic starter, but again, being human, sometimes that's just not possible due to time constraints or other matters.  I think we're a pretty sensible bunch, and would hope that you folks have come to trust our judgment.  We're not out to get anyone, nor do we have any hidden agendas.  We're just members like you, with the added responsibility of doing whatever is required to maintain the quality of the forums.  There are no "little people" in this forum...there are only members, and those of us who are trying to serve those members are members first.
He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher, an idiotĚ
(Douglas Adams)


Jeber Central
Jeber's Journal

#23 OFFLINE   Gary

Gary

    Forum Fiend

  • No Longer a Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,831 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 07:05 PM

It appears that everything has ben running quite well for almost a year now. :thumbsdown:

#24 OFFLINE   Ozidave

Ozidave

    Multithreader

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,446 posts

Posted 14 December 2004 - 02:40 AM

Re the MS Linux Thread in ATL

Julia said:

It is too close to that now. Thread closed for a while.
How Close is too Close? and until it happens... I hasn't happened? So what is there that you can see that most of here can't?

Arena said:

Closed... hm... a shame... don't see a problem with it... 
Neither can a lot of other people who have passed PM's over it. And lately it seems that we are getting stuck with Moderators PERSONAL Opinions, rather than Moderation.

#25 OFFLINE   havnblast

havnblast

    Discussion Deity

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,878 posts

Posted 14 December 2004 - 03:06 AM

was wondering same thing Ozidave - didn't see a need for it to be closed either




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users