Feedback on today's announcement

Nodiggidy123 said:
The point is.

The mod team has written this mission statement and yet seemingly not enforcing it.

Was a waste of time writing it in the first place
Click to expand...

They are enforcing it just fine.

I'll tell you what I'm tired off, baiting posts with no substance other than the stamping of feet going unmoderated, it troubles me that bickering is a necessary first step, is there really no one on the moderating team who sees certain posts as I do...

I'm well aware that I'm free to vocalize my displeasure or RTM posts, but it's feels a bit like being faced with a patient who has a very large, angry looking rash and needing to tell the doctor where it is he needs to apply the ointment.
 
With the diverse nature of users and innumerable possibilities for topics of discussion, a mission statement that was deemed clear-cut by everyone would be akin to War and Peace.

It's concise, and functional, there is no way to cover everything to everyone's satisfaction without it becoming bloated and for the most part probably ignored due it's size.
 
Nodiggidy123 said:
The point is.

The mod team has written this mission statement and yet seemingly not enforcing it.

Was a waste of time writing it in the first place
Click to expand...

It hasn't been a waste of time, but change doesn't happen overnight.

Clearly the intention is for things to change hence the addition of a dispute forum, recruitment of new underbosses, charters not just for members but for the moderation team as well.

Moderation isn't as easy as some of you make out, and both as individuals and as a team we make mistakes.

The intention is to solidify an already great community - not divide it, but for that to happen there has to be change from everyone, moderators and members.
 
Aww, I do some work for a minute and miss all the drama! :(

cheesyboy said:
I would rather people were allowed to post like a moron, so that we can debate, educate or otherwise feel better about ourselves, than to see difficult beliefs forceably excluded. What good does it do if the only place you can be an intolerant ***** is in the corners of the internet where everyone is an intolerant *****?

Better that they can be challenged, even if their slow-wittedness doesn't allow much room for appropriate growth of thought.
Click to expand...

Seems a good point to me
 
For me, the most successful forums are the ones with the least rules. Every time you make a rule, even a simple one, you are making it much more likely to have to make another rule for that rule, and then so on. This can get out of control as they increase exponentially. The more rules = the more written English = the more "grey" some of them become because construction of said rules in English will be open to interpretation. The more rules that overlap cause even further issues. The whole thing can quickly become a mess and very difficult to manage.

Someone commented early in this thread that the rules should just be "don't be a ****". That's actually not far from the truth. If the mods stick to sensible short statements like "use your common sense" and "we reserve the right to...." then they have most things covered and cannot be challenged. With this power comes responsibility though and the bias should always lean on the side of allowing people to have free reign on opinions.
 
Last edited:
I don't like the idea of the other forum except as a place of appeal perhaps.

If someone takes issue with something they can RTM it and get it reviewed, if something needs any more discussion than that it should be done in GD with visibility and opportunity for counter argument.

Participant said:
There are only two people causing problems here. Everyone else is fine.
Click to expand...

Some threads lately do remind me of kids you see when you're out. You get one who is constantly *poke* ... *poke* ... *poke* ... *poke* ... *poke* ... *poke* ... at the other, then when there is any retaliation "You two stop messing about or there'll be trouble!"
 
Would speakers corner be a correct place to start a thread about this issue but in the wider world more than just the forums? I'm not intending to start one but seems a better place than GD or the private areas.
 
Glanza said:
OCUK bringing the Friday morning drama.
Click to expand...

Yeah :) I've followed this thread from the start. My view is this is a storm in a tea cup. I have no problem with the charter. I also think it won't change the forum though. People will still get carried away and cross lines and moderators will on occasion get things wrong. At least we now have a new forum where infractions can be discussed in private so that the offender and the mods can thrash out a problem. That to me is a very positive step forward.
 
Some people just want to come here for an argument. What the argument is doesn't seem to matter to them much, as long as they can have one. Sometimes it's amusing to watch, other times it's tiring, and can bring the whole forum down.
I doubt those people will ever change, no matter what the charter/mission statement/rules.
 
Enforcing rules only provokes further argument. Some users start these "discussions" (read: intentionally bait worthy arguments) 'cause they know some that random mod with power will eventually show up and start cleaning after them, whether it be intervening with warning posts, deleting other comments, etc.

Imo, rules and rules, and if someone decides to cross the line that has been strictly enforced (which it is not currently...) and known full well they're gonna mess up means they deserve to take a lil' break. Does it really matter if you give them some vacation time to think over their choices/give mods time to decided potential permanent ban, I doubt their life depends on OCUK?

Giving them multiple chances to intentionally derail threads over and over again makes the mods look weak and helpless, and making a mess by having walls of deleted posts does not help the case either. It makes the mods look petty and only derails the thread further, 'cause people will turn up and be all like "what happened here?" (which is what I'm asking myself right now :p)
 
Last edited:
Nodiggidy123 said:
The mission statement says not to speak to other forum members in a way that they might found offensive. Someone found it offensive and it should be removed according to the mission statement

It's not hard to follow the rules
Click to expand...

That isn't true. The mission statement does not say that should any one person find something offensive that it will be removed and the term or phrase banned. In fact, it says exactly the opposite:

It is any individual's right to be offended at something they see or read. That, in itself, should not change anything.
Click to expand...

lafemmefatale found a term offensive, believing it to be derogatory to a group of people. That group of people itself seem not to see the issue as clear-cut as one individual does and now the mod team has to use discretion in this case as to whether we feel it should be allowed or not. This we have pledged to do.

A term will never be banned because an individual doesn't like it.
 
What if it runs the risk of damaging the rep of ocuk by discriminating against minoritys?

I'm not saying that's what's happened but if some one wanted to spin it that way...

I'm not sure I'd want to take that risk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom