Skeptics Guide to the Universe Forums

Forum Admin => Forum Administration and Rules => Topic started by: Beleth on October 21, 2011, 05:41:18 PM

Title: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Beleth on October 21, 2011, 05:41:18 PM
In honor of the end of the world today, I'm announcing a few tweaks to how things are going to be handled here.
These changes will become effective November 1, 2011.


1) The Global Warming child forum will change from being lightly moderated to being fully moderated.  It will remain members-only, but the tone there will be expected to match the tone of every other fully moderated board such as General or Skep/Sci.  What this means is that the level of bickering and spillover in GW now will simply not be acceptable after November 1.

1a) Politics and Explicit will remain lightly moderated.  There are no current plans to change these boards.


2) The way we are going to handle warnings is going to change.  Right now, a member has to get three warnings in fairly rapid succession before the forum software automatically puts them in Muted (suspended) or Moderated (all posts have to be reviewed by a mod before they show up) mode.  We are going to augment this significantly so that anyone who gets three warnings over a longer period will get suspended for a week.  The fourth warning will result in being placed in the "Needs Approval To Post" membergroup, which means that every post will have to be approved by a mod and that you won't have access to Global Warming, Politics, Personal, or Explicit, until we feel like removing you from that restriction.  The fifth warning will result in a ban.

The warning count will start retroactively as of September 1, 2011.  It will count up to a maximum of two warnings from September 1 to today, and count up to a maximum of two more warnings from today until October 31.  (In other words, you won't get retroactively suspended or banned.)  If you are trying to figure out how many more warnings you can get before something bad happens, stop; work instead on not getting any more warnings at all.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: seaotter on October 21, 2011, 06:54:02 PM
What constitutes a warning?
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Beleth on October 21, 2011, 06:57:13 PM
Getting a PM from a faceless account telling you that you have received a warning.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: craig on October 21, 2011, 07:21:21 PM
I promise to do my best to make the new system work. :angel:
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Bunsen on October 21, 2011, 08:28:08 PM
Not to imply that I'm not entirely fine with these changes, but why?

Give Beleth a place to stand and he'd move the world.  But usually he'd need a damned good reason to go get his lever out of the trunk.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Karyn on October 21, 2011, 09:21:14 PM
This was an agreement between all the mods.  It took us several weeks to piece this together.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Beleth on October 21, 2011, 09:29:08 PM
Not to imply that I'm not entirely fine with these changes, but why?

Give Beleth a place to stand and he'd move the world.  But usually he'd need a damned good reason to go get his lever out of the trunk.

A fair enough question, and flattery on the side - how could I not answer this?   ;)

We've been getting a lot of constructive member criticisms about the nature of GW, so I looked into it.  The criticisms were valid.  In the almost two years GW has existed, it has drifted off course and turned even more ghetto-ey than I envisioned.  What's worse, it has started to drag the rest of the board down with it.  And it's a systemic problem, not tied down to any one member.  So I discussed what to do with the other mods, and we decided that these steps would be appropriate course corrections.

And as always, they're not set in stone.  If they are counterproductive or become unwieldy, we'll rescind them and try something else.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Lukas on October 21, 2011, 10:52:33 PM
Thanks Beleth, this sounds great!
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: SQ the ΣΛ/IGMд on October 22, 2011, 09:53:12 AM
I don't go to the GW threads anyway.
It's just a bunch of childish bickering that I want no part of.

Easy solution - just stay out.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: GoodDerf on October 22, 2011, 09:59:54 AM
I don't go to the GW threads anyway.
It's just a bunch of childish bickering that I want no part of.

Easy solution - just stay out.

That is how I think a lot of members feel about it. It would be nice to see some stats before the policy and after the policy on how many different people post in the GW ghetto. Right now it feels like it is maybe the same 5 or 6 people constantly going at each other.

I like the change idea, I don't want to have to avoid any part of this board simply because of tone.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: uolj on October 22, 2011, 05:15:09 PM
I don't go to the GW threads anyway.
It's just a bunch of childish bickering that I want no part of.

Easy solution - just stay out.

Except if you want to discuss global warming.

And of course Beleth indicated there was spillover into other forums, so staying away wouldn't work perfectly anyway.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Lukas on October 22, 2011, 05:48:16 PM
I don't go to the GW threads anyway.
It's just a bunch of childish bickering that I want no part of.

Easy solution - just stay out.

Except if you want to discuss global warming.

And of course Beleth indicated there was spillover into other forums, so staying away wouldn't work perfectly anyway.

Since FX and Will Nitschke seem to have left (1.5 weeks or so ago), the bickering has died down to zero.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: seaotter on October 22, 2011, 05:49:20 PM
I don't go to the GW threads anyway.
It's just a bunch of childish bickering that I want no part of.

Easy solution - just stay out.

Except if you want to discuss global warming.

And of course Beleth indicated there was spillover into other forums, so staying away wouldn't work perfectly anyway.

Since FX and Will Nitschke seem to have left (1.5 weeks or so ago), the bickering has died down to zero.

What? Where did they go, or why did they leave?
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Bunsen on October 22, 2011, 06:22:15 PM
What? Where did they go, or why did they leave?

Strange.  They both have logged in in the last 24 hours, but neither has posted since the 13th.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: seaotter on October 22, 2011, 06:28:23 PM
What? Where did they go, or why did they leave?

Strange.  They both have logged in in the last 24 hours, but neither has posted since the 13th.

I asked a question in a new thread in gw ghetto the other day fully expected they would be the first to answer and they never entered the thread. I thought it was strange.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: IrishJazz on October 23, 2011, 12:49:33 AM
I have been wondering the same thing.  I didn't think anything would stop the multi-posting FX shore of a suspension.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: JurijD on October 23, 2011, 06:35:20 AM
I have been wondering the same thing.  I didn't think anything would stop the multi-posting FX shore of a suspension.

It's strange that they seem to be logging on but not posting. It's doubly strange that they aren't responding to the new GW study.

Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Anders on October 23, 2011, 08:15:48 AM
So Big Warming finally caught up with them? *sigh*

 ;)

Okay, seems the new rules aren't going impact me very much since I don't post in GW. So I guess it's fine.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Louie on October 23, 2011, 08:48:09 AM
So Big Warming finally caught up with them? *sigh*

 ;)

Okay, seems the new rules aren't going impact me very much since I don't post in GW. So I guess it's fine.

Just to clarify... the changed policy with regards to warnings will be implemented on all the forums, not just GW. Not to imply that Anders has to worry about that, but I thought it handy to point out. ;)
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Bunsen on October 23, 2011, 09:47:50 AM
Not to imply that Anders has to worry about that

I don't know.  Anders did threaten to murder my family last week in a PM, but I didn't say anything - the old warning system was just so spineless, you know?  :P
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Halloran on October 24, 2011, 05:21:12 PM
Ha! "Moderation"
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Johnny Slick on October 25, 2011, 07:24:39 PM
Not that I intend to break this rule, but approximately how long is this indeterminate period of time? More than a week but less than a month? A couple months or so? A year or more? Life? I have to admit, if I stayed here for 5 years I would probably say enough warnable things over that time to get the bane (if banning = 5 warnings).
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Beleth on October 25, 2011, 08:26:46 PM
I am really hesitant to give out a number, even a rough estimate, because someone is going to be a rules lawyer about it.

I'll say this, though: The unit of measurement will be best measured in months... not weeks, and not years.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Johnny Slick on October 25, 2011, 08:38:34 PM
Okay I can start one thread exposing myself to Bunsen a month CHECK
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Bunsen on October 25, 2011, 08:48:48 PM
Okay I can start one thread exposing myself to Bunsen a month CHECK

Probably two or three, actually.

:pervert:  AND THAT'S ASSUMING I REPORT YOU  :pervert:
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: zalty on October 27, 2011, 03:57:34 PM
Instead of having a single-topic sub-forum with a very polarizing subject, why not just throw it in with politics.........
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: JurijD on October 27, 2011, 04:14:55 PM
Instead of having a single-topic sub-forum with a very polarizing subject, why not just throw it in with politics.........

because it's not strictly politics per se but mostly science with a shitload of politics showed up its ass
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Johnny Slick on October 27, 2011, 04:40:10 PM
Also, on this forum it turned into the same 2 or 3 guys spamming links and it kind of began to look like the SGU itself was endorsing AGW denial to the new user exploring the boards. Hence the relegation to the ghetto.
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Beleth on October 27, 2011, 04:46:38 PM
Instead of having a single-topic sub-forum with a very polarizing subject, why not just throw it in with politics.........

because it's not strictly politics per se but mostly science with a shitload of politics showed up its ass

That is the best description of the whole AGW issue I've ever seen!
Title: Re: Moderation Tweaks - October 21, 2011
Post by: Anders on May 07, 2015, 07:28:14 AM
I suggest that all bans - temporary or permanent - be accompanied by the words "Contemplate this on the tree of woe."