Rules and Policy

[Boze (Admin)]

 In Kilkenne's "RWL NEWS UPDATE", he makes a valid and interesting point. If forum members don't want to follow our rules, why don't you make them up? Perhaps this will strengthen the community.

What are your views on gagging, leaving, complaining, etc?

What should the acceptable rules be?

Put down your ideas, and maybe we can get rid some things and make some ammendments.

(Note that you may still not use profanity to show what is and what is not acceptable. Until new rules are created (if ever), we will continue to enforce the current rules with the iron fist of wrath).

[Menatus]

 Boze, I find it quite unsettling and very disturbing that your avatar keeps changing. ;)

As for the rules, I have no problems there. I've never complained about the admins. Except I miss Stormy being one :(

[Boze (Admin)]

 Aye... it's a nifty little PHP script. I mean... I sit here all the time and constantly change my avatar.

Back on topic...

[Vengerak]

 Let's ditch the over-zealous "Profanity" rules.  I mean, Ad was trying to ban words like "lovely" & "Dang" for a while, simply because they resembled the word "(I am so stupid it" (which is itself so far off being "profane" it's not even funny).  I'm sorry, but that's just absurd.

At the very least, people should stop talking about it being "profanity", as most of the words that are barred aren't even covered by the definition of the word "profane", which irks me.

Trying to mediate any & all disputes, getting all teary when people disagree with each other & continually posting "We're all friends here, can't we just get along?" kind've posts should stop, & leaving topics that have the "Well, not that anyone gives a flying crumpet, or anything, but I'm leaving! Not that any of your care, so I'm going..." tone to them should be deleted as a matter of course. Such blatant fishishing for compliments is just embarassing, & watching people fall for it degrades my faith in humanity.

Excessive whinging & bandying around the term "flaming" ("Well, my good man/woman/transgendered individual, I'm afraid you may be just a teensy bit in the wrong, no offence-"  "FLAAAMES!  Argh, why must you FLAME me so?  Moderators, this is a flagrant violation of some rule, if you twist it in an insane manner!"  "This arguing is getting us no-where! *Sob* Let's all just bury the hatchet & have a group hug like civilised human beings blah blah blah...") should just stop as a matter of courtesy.  I mean, God, on any other board flaming would be needless cursing of someone & making references to their mother's sexual appetite, whilst here it equates with little more than constructive criticism.  It just seems so overkill when people claim to have been "flamed" (which, remember, in the literal sense would be having a blow torch taken to you or something...) to tell someone that they're envious of another Warlord's skills, or whatever.

Basically, people should stop being so over-sensitive. Butch up.  & get it into your head that arguments needn't always be stamped out- they're perfectly healthy.  Even should they degenerate into mild insults of someone else or a disrespect of their opinion, offline this is something should have to deal with. Unless things really do get ridiculous, then let it run.  You cannot MAKE everyone like each other, get on, & if they can't say anything nice not say anything at all.  In fact, the attempts of admins & moderators to create such an atmosphere just makes a lot of people feel tense, frustrated & inwardly seething.

We shouldn't even have set rules, in my opinion.  Forum-goers should be left to their own devices, & use their own common sense & courtesy to stick to what is reasonably appropriate.  If something is patently not appropriate, then an intelligent administrator or board moderator &, indeed, fellow board members, will be able to see that it is not, & punish accordingly.

All the problems on this board, more or less, would never have arisen in the first place had not some over-zealous rule covered them in an obscure way.  That farce over Peace's "Wolf Envy" banner, for example.  How ludicrous.  I fail to see what was offensive about it, & even if one could consider it offensive, Jesus, learn to take it a little better.  I am frankly appaled that a man in his forties could be so CHILDISH over what was basically an ironic statement & a denial of the accusation that someone was envious of them as to go complaining to the Administration about it.  Had the people running the board not been so afraid of the most mild offence being cuased to anyone as a result of their own ignorance of what was being said to them & all these absurd rules been put in place, Wolf would never have complained & the whole sorry morass of bad feeling & bitterness would have been avoided.

Anyway, I see that my train of thought has derailed & rambled in random directions, & I appear to be becoming steadily less coherent, so I'll cut off now.

*Does*

[Veranor]

 

Here is an interesting article on the use of Complex Systems to Moderate message boards:

http://ai-depot.com/Essay/Moderation-Emergence.html

I think such a system based upon a user and admin made charter would work quite well, the problem comes with how you would implement such a system (there are some examples given that I find satisfactory), and if an admin would be willing to write one or even accept it. Basically, after writing such a system, one could then filter out low rated users so that difficult problem users could be avoided until an admin/mod can take the required actions.

Another problem that would arise, would be the policing of multiple accounts. You would obviously not want someone with 26 accounts to affect someone's "karma" or "rating" in the specific fields, but multiple accounts can be fun to have for other purposes. So perhaps a one rating of a certain user PER ip address. I realize that some people share IPs and blah blah and there are proxies, but that's not really crucial, and an admin could look into such occurances.

Overall I think this would be a very effective system, if an admin is willing to implement it, I'd be glad to help with any aspect.

EDIT: A quick summary of the article for people who don't want to read it all:

Basically, every user would have a rating in specific fields, which would be the traits of a user. (EX: In our case perhaps: On Topicness, Personality (or some variant to represent how much the person flames), and Depth of Knowledge (or something akin to, do they just spam, or do they make meaningful posts)

Then users could rate another user if perhaps, they see a good/bad post made by the user. Users with a low rating may have a limited amount of posts they can make a day, until after a certain time they learn to stop spamming, and really say what they want in a long thoughtout post. Or some other form of punishment (reporting to admins for a possible gag/ban, or something). Also, the charter would include a community standard for rating, and perhaps the rater's standard (as we all have ideas about what is acceptable).

Thus filtering could be applied (such as on slashdot, and at user's choice), for users that have an average rating below a threshhold ( to be set by the user)

Though, that site is great for anyone interested in emergant systems and artificial intelligence... so I'd recommend you to just read the article and some of the affiliate's articles.

That's my post from the other locked topic, and I figure it's worth re-stating, because the topic was locked like 10 posts after that.

Also...

Here is the ToS from a fairly popular site (Gamefaqs.com)

EDIT: It's too big to post here, so here's the link:

http://cgi.gamefaqs.com/boards/tos.asp

Perhaps something along those lines would be effective. Also, something done on GFaqs that is very useful, is the Members mark posts they find offensive, and catagorize why. The mods view these messages, and then take the appropriate action. If the user marks things that are clearly not offensive, their "marked message accuracy" goes down, and their marks will not even be viewed. I think this would be a great system alone, or with a combination of the system detailed above. I'm pretty sure there is a "report user" button built into Invision Board, so it would not be too difficult to implement.

[Dead Eye]

 I agree with the profainty things Vengerak. Dang and lovely were overboard. Obviosuly there are kids who are around ages like 12 here and their parents wont like swearing. But the dar with a n isnt bad. It was made so you didnt have to say the curse word. If we are subsituting words that were made for a subsituting words, well that aint right.  

But I disagree about flame. Flaming gets you off topic, and it kills the topic. Some people will stop posting in that topic because of the flame. It just screws up the forum. You can have arguments with out "making references to their mother's sexual appetite" If people could have reasonable debates and arguments then it would make it better. I do agree that some things are taken overboard, like for instance Peace's banner, or the topic Kilk made "RWL NEWS UPDATE"

I also think Spam is meant for the spam room. Most of the generel discussion is spam. Spam like Julies or Ashyra's is fine. It stays on topic while making you laugh. And it isnt something like "yea it is" for a post. Spam needs to stop. Maybe the admins and mods should make sure some one who spams gets the warning that it isnt tolerated, instead of letting it fill the forum.

Besides that the rules are pretty good. This is a game for all ages, so you must have a few rules for the older people so that the younger people's parents dont take away the computer from them. Arguments happen, you CAN NOT ignore them and get ride of them. Not all the forum goers agree with each other. But there is a line between an argument and flaming.  

[Boze (Admin)]

 All valid points... but the fact of the matter is that if you give someone something, they are going to take a little more.
A good example would be me.... with tardies to homeroom. I thought "Bah, 7:30. It doesn't matter if I'm there at 7:31." "7:31... I can leave the house five minutes later, get in the extra sleep.... hit the lights just right... I'll be there by 7:32." Well, obviously, this simply continued until I almost got suspended. And then I realized that they do have to be strict in their enforcement. Otherwise, I'm going to take just a little bit more. Part of being a mature adult is realizing, accepting, and following the rules. So next time you ask "Can't we just say this demi-curse? It's not so bad!"... just think for a second.

[Veranor]

 The only problem I have with the demi-curse rule is, if we're not allowed to list less-offensive words or meanings for certain words, how far can you take it? Suppose the banned word was Gris, and then the later demi-curse word that was banned is Grey, can I say , a color with a hexadecimal values (whatever it is for grey), and if that's not allowed, can I describe it, like "Half-way between black and white in grayscale settings," that's my only problem with that rule, it's not very specific, and thus, it causes certain debates. I have no problem following the rules, as long as I know what the rules are.

EDIT: And I better stop doing what you said you did in your post, and get off the forums so I can do my homework...

[Riverpaw]

 Flaming:
I think that flaming should not be tolerated beyond a certain point. We all need to let out some steam at times, and really, who can blame us? However, there is a limit. Also, there should be no difference between stated and implied flames. Oh, and no "but everyone else is doing it, too". Maybe Retto was a bit strict with Peace, but really, I see no alternative.

Gagging:
Well, I like the gag policy. It gives a bit of a cool down period. However, gagged members should be able to start a post stating their side of the story. By the time they are ungagged, forum opinion is usually too biased against them and will remain so for a while.

Banning:
Never ban anyone. Remove all current bans. We need all the members we can get. Of course, we need to encourage good behavior, but I personally don't think permbans help.

Leaving:
There should not be a rule about this. I am personally annoyed by the recent flood of "I am leaving. Say you'll miss me." and such, but the fact is, the point of forums are free speech. As much as it is spam, it is also a right. If it annoys you, just ignore it.

Suggestions:
We need a suggestions box. This thread will soon disappear, but our rants and raves will be forever. We need a way to address our concerns as well as to potentially improve RWL as a whole.

Amendments/Voting:
To improve the "RWL Constitution" (and yes, we should call it that) there should be a system set up for official voting to amend the constitution. To pass, an amendment needs the approval of at least two admins and a certain percentage of active members. There must be a way to prevent inactive members who just "return" fo a second, multiple accounts, etc. from voting. Of course, the definition of "active" is the key here.

[Well Actually I Do Have a]

 Flaming:
Until it reaches a certain point, let it go. Disputes and debates are going to lead to misunderstandings. Coincidentally, people aren't going to like each other. If the member can't handle it, then they're more than welcome to stay out of it. Generally, if someones beings flamed, then they've done something to anger another individual. Whether the person's reaction is justified or not doesn't really matter.

If you don't want to be flamed, then stay out of heated discussions. I've never, if ever, seen someone flamed when they're not participating in the topic. I agree whole heartedly with Vengerak on this issue.

Leaving:
Let the people keep posting these topics all they want. I could care less. If you want to leave the forums, leave. However I don't understand the point of making a topic there if you're not planning on coming back to read it... Just looking for attention.

Gagging:
Never really justified. Should be limited to curse words or extreme offenses.  

[Kilkenne]

 Thanks for taking me seriously, guys.

(Ty for the template, Riverpaw)

Flaming: It's my belief that flaming is okay, so long as it is not horrible, laced with cursing, etc. A prime example was the debate between myself and Deathclaw a while ago that raged for almost a month...That was a series of flames that was tolerated on both sides and worked itself out. Un-acceptable flames are the ones that happen when people come here to intentionally anger people/flame/annoy...You know who I'm thinking of.


Gagging: Good. As long as you tell the person that they are being gagged on somewhere other than the forums...I was enfuriated when I went on after my trip and I was "gagged" for reasons beyond my control, because I wasn't here to talk it out with Ad. (He has apologized, and I've calmed down, I'm fine with that now, I understand there WAS no chance to tell me)

Banning: Go for it. If they come to intentionally cause problems/chaos, off with them. Delete their account, and send them back to the firey pit of stupid from whence they came.


Leaving: If you're leaving, don't make a post. Just go. Leaving posts should be deleted. I made one once, and it was stupid of me to, because when you do, all people do is get all mopey and say "Don't go". If you want to tell someone you're leaving, use an alternate messenger or something.


Suggestions: Elect members to make the charter for the rest of everyone, make it like a republic, not a full out democracy, like the Americans did when they were first forming their government. The charter would be a lot easier to make if people that we elect and the admins just made it.



That's about all. I will have more later when I'm not feeling so tired...I hope you take my suggestions again.

[Menatus]

 Here's the thing: A substitute for [edit: Iron fist] is "I am so stupid". Isn't that Ad flaming us? By twisting our words? Couldnt he change it to lovely?

[RazorClaw]

 Well, lemme see:

First of all, words like dang, shoot, and "Curses upon thee, ye cur!" should be allowed. Things like the word that rhymes with "pit" and starts with sh- shouldn't be allowed, but people who say What the He- (you know the ending) should be warned, but people who say the F-word should be suspended. If they say the F-word, they're probably a crazy person who plays hockey. (That's me...)


Then, for spam, I heartily disagree with Dead Eye on the spam issue. Julie and Ashyra should not be acceptances to that rule. However; it takes 15 seconds to move a topic to the Spa Room or to edit a post. I know I've had posts in the Spa room which said "Don't eat :) (I'm a little brat)" and it was edited, just for FUN, to say "I'm a little brat". Admins and mods should be able to edit posts that are actually spam that AREN'T in the Spa Room.


Admins also should have limits. As I mentioned up there, I had a post that wasn't profane edited to say that. That is abusing your abilities as an admin, Retto. Flaming should have three levels, and they should be labeled by an admin in the post. For instance; Level one spam. "Peace, your post count will be reduced by 10" Level two, lower the count by twenty and give a harsh warning. Level three, (like the topic where Mercenary and Peace and I were all calling each other many nasty names) gag the person.

[bjornredtail]

 Flameing- Flameing should only be concidered personal insults. Nothing more, nothing less. This would not count personal attacks (such as accuseing someone of being a hypracrate). Basicly, the Terrougian policy of "If you can/are willing and able to defend it, Then It's not a flame".

Leaving- Just leave these topics alone. They cause no harm, and sometimes have a lidigt purpace.

Bannings- If nessary, use them. Otherwise, don't. The only case for an immadate banning is porno-spamming, or violateing the law (Software piracy, planning terroist attacks, drug trafficing, threats, etc.). Also, keep in-game actions seprate from in-forums actions. If someone cheats in game, they shouldn't be banned on forums, and vice versa.

Advertiseing- I say make another forum for advertiseing, and advertiseing alone. The point about stopping GPL violateing clones is a bit pointless concidering DAX's policy on the matter.

Gaggings- See Riverpaw's post. I do agree, except that that treatment should only be reserved for those who are willing to follow their gags volentarially.

Post Count- Just get rid of the post count. It promotes too much spamming out of the spam room. Yes, it will de-value your fancy custem title, but I think it's worth it.

Suggestions- I second Killenne on this point. In addation you should still be able to suggest stuff directly to the Admins.

Demi-Curseing- We are re-makeing the rules anyway. You can allow demi-curseing without allowing full curseing, and you can enforce that. I personally don't care either way.

[The Lady Shael]

 Heh, no sooner said than done. ^_^ How's that? Actually, there's some words on this word filter that I almost wish someone would use, because the replacements are amusing.

I think this member-made charter is a good idea though. It seems whenever the admins try to fix things, something goes wrong. We've had problems in the past that were solved without staff members. This forum is to the benefit of the members, and so I see no reason why the members shouldn't have a say in what they're allowed and not allowed to do.

(too lazy to put the categories in pretty bold type like everyone else did)

Flaming: I don't want to say too much on this topic. I pretty much agree with what Kilk said here. Sometimes people get upset, and come running to me, "He just flamed me! Do something about it!" so to satisfy them I offer a gentle reprimand to the opposite side. I've never done anything more than that though.

Gagging: Here I agree with Riverpaw. People aren't gagged without a reason. They need time to think about what they did. Most of the time, I think people know when they're doing something against the forum rules. I don't like it when people say, "I didn't know, I didn't know, you didn't even tell me." like it was a formal invitation to a party. That's just my opinion. It'll probably change. I try to give people second chances. I tried to settle the Peace/Wolf Bite dispute by letting the forum hear both sides of the story.

Banning: I think this is very harsh. I'm not saying to get rid of it entirely, but to be banned, you must've been an abomination. There's only two people ever in the history of the forum that I wanted banned. That's the infamous Badbranch, and Kenny Boy. Man, they gave me headaches. Kenny Boy especially, because I was a mod then, and I must've given him 15 warnings. And he's still not banned. Argh, I tell him not to post something in a specific forum, and he goes off and does it in the next 15 minutes.

Leaving: Heh, I wrote one of these posts a long time ago. Back when I was young, foolish, and oblivious to the dangers of RWL addiction. I like this idea of deleting leaving posts on the spot, because, no one really cares. "Um, well, yeah. We'll miss you. Don't leave. Really. Don't. Okay, fine, if you really want to, go ahead. No, I insist, go on and leave." Of course, on the other hand, it would be nice to know if the person is leaving, to prevent another Raine's-near-assumed-death-experience from happening. But still, seeing /so many/ leaving posts only confirms a diminishing RWL population, and that's something I don't want to see.

Suggestions: I'll leave the suggestions to you guys. I suggest you guys give suggestions. Ha. There we go. My suggestion. Sorry, it's late...