December 19, 2007 at 10:45 am #354572
Why would anyone do that???
No one would, brianfast is just mudslinging.
Pronunciation Key – [muhd-sling-ing]
an attempt to discredit one’s competitor, opponent, etc., by malicious or scandalous attacks.
Aside from malicious attacks, it’s also considered mudslinging to discredit someone by manipulation, and by making ridiculously overdramatic and sarcastic statements, so that people reading the thread pick up a general “bad vibe” about the candidate.
What candidates need to learn is that brickfilms.com voters are informed, and talk to each other — and candidates should run on their own merits, rather than the downfalls of others. (That just shows how poorly suited they are for the position, that they’ve decided the only chance they have is to discredit their opponents.)
-Trill, Election CommissionerDecember 19, 2007 at 10:48 am #354573
Night OwlParticipantDecember 19, 2007 at 3:08 pm #354632
Adding a clause to the rules concerning unnecessary threads (eg. “Moderators reserve the right to lock unnecessary threads and relocate the post to a relevant thread.”) would serve the purpose of making it part of the official policy of the (expanded) moderator team. It would be more of a formality, really.
Because, even if they’re annoying – punishing the members for them is only going to earn brickfilms.com more of a reputation for being unhelpful.
I don’t see it as punishing. New members make that mistake often, and I feel my solution is a nice way to rectify it, and one that benefits both the new member (their post is put in a relevant thread, so they join the discussion) and the rest of the community (less clutter).
Is it more important to make the forums better for the senior members, or the new members, in your opinion?
I feel that making it easier for new members will simultaneously make it better for senior members.December 19, 2007 at 3:12 pm #354634
DaveParticipantDecember 20, 2007 at 4:40 pm #354997
chosen1ParticipantDecember 25, 2007 at 12:03 am #356257
TreetahParticipantDecember 25, 2007 at 5:09 am #356323
I can understand how even a slightly experienced member wouldn’t see something as punishing like what you’ve mentioned, Night Owl, but if I were just coming to the website and got even a “nice” PM saying that something I had written had been moved and/or deleted, I would get a little ticked off. Maybe you should implement your policy only after repeated offenses. Or maybe redirect them to the Getting Started forum you plan to enact the first time, then send them a warning PM on the second time around. Because in most cases for halfway intelligent people that are just new (compared to n00bs that are overly stubborn or just plain stupid), one warning is enough to set someone straight, and doing it in the nicest way possible seems to be the best option in my opinion.December 25, 2007 at 5:54 pm #356416
I like your idea of a “Getting Started” forum. I personally feel that it would be a good idea to retain the current F.A.Q. In either case it sounds like you would do well to coordinate w/ the MOI.
Reading through White’s thread I liked the idea of having a mod or two from each time zone. I certainly think this would make the chat a bit nicer at times.
All this said you seem like the right guy for the job.December 26, 2007 at 6:37 pm #356634
brianfastParticipantDecember 26, 2007 at 7:12 pm #356652
In terms of “causing trouble,” do unhelpful, sarcastic responses to newbies count? For example, the four “…What?” posts in this thread. Would these people receive a warning and be temporarily banned on a second offense? This seems a bit harsh but at the same time these people aren’t as likely to leave as new members and currently we’re alienating a lot of new people with rude responses; in that particular case, it appeared the person asking the question wasn’t a native English speaker.
The topic ‘WINTER '08 – Night Owl for Minister of Discussion’ is closed to new replies.