No rules or ruthless enforcement of the rules?

[Darin Chappell]

To be fair, Sybella, Rich's response at the top of page 8 did read,

"Although I do appreciate the suggestions, no, I am not inclined to add more moderators at this time."

I too have offered to serve in some capacity as a moderator here, but Rich wants there to be as few of them as possible. It's his site, so I fully understand that's this is the way it needs to be, whether or not I would have done some things differently. I could always go start my own deal, if I ever had the inclination to do so.

My offer stands, Rich, but you do what you need to do. I know others also would help more, if you ever change your mind. I appreciate the site, regardless.

 

[Stardust]

Scott, I wasn't responding to your thread, it was Dr. Owens thread I was actually responding to.
Rich, not sure it is useful to ask for suggestions if they are not going to be taken and your response is more on the defensive to say the least.
It seems there is a catch-22 here. You ask what can be done, but what most say are more mods and you don't want that. That is exactly why I didn't suggest that, I had read what you said before on that subject. There were other suggestions here as well too. None were addressed either.
So, with that said, it might as well run without rules. You say yourself you do not want to read the whole thread, and that is the only way to catch all and you do not want more mods.

 

[Sybella]

"To be fair" what? Are you pointing out that he stated that he appreciates suggestions? Ok, point taken. It just doesn't feel like a darn thing is appreciated around here.

About him adding mods or not, it is his site and he can do with it what he pleases. What he does with the site is not the issue. My problem with this is, he asks us for our help and we spend our time and energy attempting to...then he complains that HIS time is being wasted responding (by slapping down everything we've offered). Normally I'm quite patient and forgiving but this is not very nice at all. I'm sure I'm not the only one who is getting irritated by this.

And, just to clarify, I wasn't offering to be a mod here. I have enough to do. (Full time mommy of 3, full time household, full time student, full time pets, moderator/admin of 3 forums...and you thought I wanted to add one more as demanding as this one? No thank you! LOL!!) And, there's no way I'd take the job if I did have time for it. There are way too many personal attacks and just plain ugliness in this forum for me to make it my home.

 

[sputnik]

WASTE OF TIME

I think this whole thread has been nothing but a waste of time. I don't expect anything to change when suggestions and input go wiped off the table before even really being considered.

From Rich

So, again, the purpose of this thread was to find out the MAJOR direction you want to BOI to go in.

Input was wanted... or was it? You wanted to find out what people wanted, but basically dismiss people's input.

I appreciate this site also and I certainly do appreciate the work you do on a daily basis to keep it running. I don't envy your job, but gee, don't ask for something if you don't really want it!

 

[Ken Harbart]

Jesus H Christ, everyone needs to just lighten up a bit!

To begin with, there's no favoritism here. No, not every post that seems to violate the rules is going to get a warning, even if I do happen to see it. Just as I will use discretion on the road, so to is it used here. I won't stop 100% of the people I see commit an infraction, nor will I write on 100% of those that I do stop. It's called discretion, folks. The same thing is exercised here.

That being said, if y'all want me to be an anal retentive prick when it comes to enforcing the rules, I can easily do that. Be forewarned that it would become a very user-hostile environment, much worse than what anyone had ever perceived kingsnake to be on its worst day.

On the other hand, I could just sit back and give everyone carte blanche to say and do whatever they please. The only rule would be that there are no rules.

To the disappointment of some, I could care less for either extreme, and have no inclination to let things get to either of the two. Rather, there's a happy median in there somewhere, and enforcing the rules (whether they be of this site, or society in general) isn't as clear as "black and white." Some people may not like the median that's being strived for, but such is life.

I could care less who made the post... if I see it, and feel it warrants a warning, it's getting one. Likewise, there's circumstances where I let a person slide when it may appear to others that individual should have been warned, even if it's an individual that I personally have a rather low opinion of. The name of the individual has nothing to do with whether or not those points are doled out.

As for adding more moderators, I'll second Rich on this one. I feel that it would be an extremely bad move. The BOI, by its very nature, isn't your average reptile forum. The subject matter and volatile nature of this forum necessitate that as few people as possible be given the reins. Increase the number of mods, and the potential for abuse will increase exponentially. Less, in this case, is better.

It took Rich some time and some personal debate to consider approaching me about becoming a moderator. I can appreciate the fact that it's a decision that he did not take lightly. Recently, we brought Dr Jay Owens on board. This wasn't a decision that either one of us took lightly, either.

Anyways, that's just my disjointed rambling on the subject. Take it for what it's worth, folks.

 

[Ken Harbart]

And for those who feel that they need to "lighten up"...

KOZO

 

[Stardust]

I still say rules.
Only if they are going to be enforced though. There were other suggestions here besides more mods, those weren't talked about.
Again, why bother asking if nothing is going to be taken or changed?

 

[WebSlave]

From what I have seen, the general recommendation is to simply add moderators.

I do not want this site overrun with moderators. PERIOD. I've seen what that can do to a site and will not allow it to happen at all. How many times do I have to state my opinion on this issue?

I have seen sites where moderators actually competed for the number of messages they could delete each day. I have seen moderators run sites into the ground when the moderators turned out to have their own competing sites in their best interests. Some sites will simply add on a LOT of moderators initially just to help get traffic flowing to the site.

I don't want the former, and don't need the latter.

Sorry that some people perceive this as a waste of their time, but I needed to get a feel for what people in general here were looking for from the BOI. If anyone can't remember the original reason for this thread, please start at the beginning and read my original message. I could have added as many options to the poll as I had wanted to. I chose just the two that I did for a reason.

 

[Stardust]

There were other suggestions. Sorry don't remember who suggested it, but there was a forum for whiners??? Then one for tattlers, so this way it would be public and perhaps less emails for you if they knew it would become public???

 

[Dave Lawson]

This site is a great tool if it is used for the reason Rich created it for, But here is what I see needs to change:

1. We all need to act like adults !!!!!!!!

2. We need to stay on topic.

3. The moderators need to inforce the rules the same across the board, If Joe blow gets a written warning, warning point or have to pay to come back fo call someone a scumbag then it should be the same for every user.

I have reported many post where a certain someone said that I stole animals, committed burglaries and called me name yet he was not given even 1 warning point, why? But yet others have been given points for doing less.

The rules are rules, if you are going to have them then enforce them fairly if you won't or can't then don't have then at all..... we will just go back to the wild west days and spend all day in free for alls.

4. If a person gets banned and for what ever reason he is allowed to return then the smallest infraction should seal his fate.
If he continues to violate the same rules over and over.

This is only my opinion

 

[bud mierkey]

I agree to 1,2

dave is correct on 1, 2
Off topic posts should be deleted
and behave like adults.
good points

 

[Wraith]

The more things change the more they stay the same.

kingsnake is a popular site that grew in scope and traffic and along with came the resultant 'growing pains'. kingsnake.com also has rules. People eventually got tired of cliques on certain forums, personal attacks and bashing fests, trolls running rampant, and generally, those who just did not want to follow the rules. It was obvious that the forums just could not police themselves on their own. The rules when someone 'up high' enforced them were enforced haphazardly and unevenly across the board due to a lack of manpower. The existing rules were revamped, added to, and amended. Volunteer moderators were brought in whose job was to watch the forums and begin working on better enforcing the rules across the board in a more even and consistent fashion. People then get upset and bitch and whine when it finally dawns on them that the free ride is over and they can no longer easily get away with the stuff they had been getting away with for some time. It was all ok for the rules to be enforced just so as long as it wasn't directed at them. Talk about wanting to get away with 'favoritism'. Under the new moderators, if you got caught breaking the rules - the fun thing to do was go to FaunaClassifieds (or elsewhere) and bash kingsnake and harass and call their moderators nazi's and then possibly (for those inclined to do so) cause more overt trouble on the kingsnake forums and try to chase people off there and over to other sites/forums.

Ok, kingsnake was top dog and FaunaClassifieds just kind of sat there - just simply existing - known only for the board of inquiry and not much else. Once kingsnake started making changes to better account for their growing pains, many people then started coming here more and more to get away from kingsnake and the so-called 'nazi moderators'. As a result these forums have grown in scope and traffic increased. What rules here were revamped added to or amended. Of course with this growth there are more people are around to not follow the rules and just do whatever they want. It is obvious that some folks just cannot police themselves. The rules when they are enforced are enforced haphazardly and unevenly across the board due to a lack of manpower. When the rules are enforced and you get caught breaking the rules - the fun thing to do is bitch and whine about how unfair everything is and (for those inclined to do so) try to cause more trouble on the forums. More people want the rules to be enforced across the board in a more even and consistent fashion. Growing pains all over again. The more things change the more they stay the same.

Now --

Rich has stated very openly that he can't enforce the rules in a consistent manner - not enough manpower or time (or money to make it worth his while). Rich has stated openly that he does not want to bring on volunteer help i.e. moderators.

Rich is asking people... do I enforce the rules or just let people do whatever the hell they want?

As someone else stated - no matter what choices a person can make as an admin anywhere you cannot make all of the people happy all of the time. Typically speaking, Rich can only do what is best for himself and then hopefully for his site and for the majority of those who use his site.

Of course, a vocal majority has (according to the poll) been in high favor of enforcement of the rules. To enforce the rules means Rich needs to do as kingsnake did and bring on help -- bring on moderators. Bring on enough of them to provide the coverage needed to keep the forums clean and make the people happy.

Bringing on moderators means Rich will also have to essentially deal with the same crap that kingsnake has to deal with -- having people undermining and causing trouble for his 'staff', having his staff harassed and called nazis on a frequent basis for doing their job, getting his site bashed on other sites and generally having to deal with those people who will try chase people off here and over to other sites/forums.

If Rich does not have the time or inclination to enforce his own rules and he does not want to go the route of bringing on help then he should just get rid of the rules altogether and let people run wild. no banning. no warnings. no nothing. Then all that is left is the slim hope that by doing so he does not frustrate and chase away all the new traffic he has managed to build up recently.

Catch-22. Just like kingsnke - damned if you do and damned if you don't.


Adrian

 

[Chris Kennard]

Ken...

"And for those who feel that they need to "lighten up"...

KOZO"


That was awesome! Thanks.

KOZO for moderator!

 

[odatria]

What about a forum for thieves, liars, convicts Etc...

There were other suggestions. Sorry don't remember who suggested it, but there was a forum for whiners??? Then one for tattlers, so this way it would be public and perhaps less emails for you if they knew it would become public???

Then we wouldnt have to read all of thier posts unless we go to thier forum! Is that a great idea or what? Then we could also have a dating forum, with different sections for married, divorced, STALKERS Etc...

I think we are on to something here.

But realisticaly this could get confusing. Because some people on this forum would need thier own forum. I can see it now, the exconvictstalkerthiefliarwhinertattlerconartistforum.

What Im getting at is, I dont think we need more forums. I think we need less whiners, liars, thievs, cons, stalkers, trolls etc... Am I dreaming or what? I must be.

O.K. Now that the fun is out of the way.

Really though, I think a whiners forum is a great idea. If you have a complaint, post it. Plain and simple. If you dont want everyone to hear your complaint, then keep it to yourself. This could be a forum that only a moderator could respond to so it doesnt get out of hand. If you something to whine about, post it for all of us to see. Think about how many emails Rich would be saved from reading. I guarantee that half of the people the whine would hesitate before doing it in public.

Just my 2 cents. Or $1.25 depending on how you look at it.

Michael

 

[Chris Kennard]

Whiners forum...

Actually, Darin's idea to make it a "read only" forum was a great idea. If nothing else, it would be an interesting experiment, maybe even an amusing one.

 

[Stardust]

It would actually be funny reading, perhaps it can go in the just for laughs forum, lol.
Seriously, it is a good idea, and the only one I can think of that doesn't require extra mods since you are opposed to that.

 

[bud mierkey]

Here is a Idea

Full rules on the BOI.
That cannot change.
That is the Backbone of this site.
Never change that or the site will not be the same.
Do what you must to ease the whiners.
how about whiner of the week forum.
let us debate the whiners

 

[Blackwater Reptiles]

From what I have seen, the general recommendation is to simply add moderators....... I needed to get a feel for what people in general here were looking for from the BOI. If anyone can't remember the original reason for this thread, please start at the beginning and read my original message. I could have added as many options to the poll as I had wanted to. I chose just the two that I did for a reason.

I do not know if you were writing about what I had posted earlier, but I agree that more moderators won't work. I put forth the idea of having volunteer forum watchers that would notify the existing "crew" of violations... apparently that is of no interest.

I read a lot more than I post. I read a lot less now than I did six weeks ago, and I see my participation here becoming more and more "spectator only." I have most of the animals I'd like to keep, and the ones I seek aren't available on most web sites, so it's pretty well a curiosity thing for me these days. I am very thankful for your hard work and financial investment in this site and I would gladly give of some of my time to help you... but you've pretty well told me (not directly) that you don't want or need my help.... so, thanks for everything... I'll continue to do what it is that I do, and if the site is here, I'll visit it. If it's gone I won't.....

 

[WebSlave]

Whiners Forum:
My gut feeling is that this would be a bad idea. Where is the line between a legitimate complaint and a whine? How many people would I piss off when I took what they considered to be a well thought out complaint sent as an email and simply copied it to the Whiners Forum? And they then follow up that action with yet another complaint/whine. Do you all think I enjoy pissing people off in here? That sounds like a certain road for me to get an overflowing cup of that nonsense in my lap.

What about complaints/whines posted within threads on the site itself? How many posts in this thread alone could be considered to be a whine instead of a complaint, depending on who is reading it? How many of YOU would like to have YOUR post removed from this thread and copied into a Whiners Forum?

Subject to a more thought out project plan, this sounds like a whole lot of trouble to me.

Enforcing Off Topic Posts:
Now enforcing this sort of rule sounds so easy when you simply say it, now doesn't it? But when does a post become off topic? Generally what happens is that someone will make a post as a reply to some other postings in the thread, and in one of the paragraphs there may be a single sentence slightly off topic that someone else objects to. Quite simply, I generally DO NOT edit anyone's messages except in VERY limited circumstances, which includes removing sections of text of the original postings. Messages HAVE to purely be the words of the person who originally posted the message.

So that post with a single off topic sentence has to remain or else I need to delete the entire message. If I delete it, then I get banged because the person posting it will not understand why it was deleted. What's the chances I am going to remember exactly why I deleted that one message out of dozens I would have to do each day? So, whoever takes exception of that one off topic post will then post a rebuttal to it. Now that message is fully off topic in relation to the thread. Yet if I delete it, BANG!, I get a complaint that I am not allowing this person to respond to something offensive in the prior posting, therefore I am practicing favoritism or acting in a prejudicial manner by allowing the statement to stand without anyone being able to post a rebuttal.

Do you all really have any idea how much thought has to go into the enforcement of ANY rule that is made here? Yeah, some are pretty cut and dried, but many of them just are not that simple. I know it all sounds real simple and easy, but there is no such thing as even something as simple sounding as "even handedness", in many many cases.

Heck, if I wanted to enforce the off topic rule STRICTLY, read my opening message in this thread and then figure out how many replies in this thread I could delete by the STRICT rule of any sentence in the message needing to be exactly on topic. Matter of fact, tell me exactly where it was that this entire thread has gone off topic from what I originally intended.

This is a tight rope walking act. Trying to strike a balance between allowing, on one side, information that could be important, even though it may not be posted in exactly the correct place, yet on the other side trying to weed out completely irrelevant junk, spilled over personal vendettas, or someone just trying to derail or hijack the thread.

So again, in case everyone has forgotten the original question, the choices are:

(1) Remove all rules and let this be completely open and unfettered, or

(2) Strictly enforce the rules (as best as can be done with the resources available).

The additional text in #2 was what I had assumed would be understood in the original poll. That was an oversight and obviously invalid assumption on my part. But what it means is that I will give LESS leeway to the poster in instances where the enforcement has to be a judgement call with a LOT of factors taken into account.

Bear in mind that this also includes posts made by brand new members who simply don't know they are supposed to put in their real names when they post. How do you think a new user feels when that happens to them? They probably will feel like I slapped them across the face with the welcome mat, now won't it? I'm sure their spending 20 minutes typing in a post only to have it deleted by this rule violation is going to give them a nice warm fuzzy feeling about this site.

Does anyone understand yet why I posted that poll?

 

[WebSlave]

I do not know if you were writing about what I had posted earlier, but I agree that more moderators won't work. I put forth the idea of having volunteer forum watchers that would notify the existing "crew" of violations... apparently that is of no interest.

Tom - this has been standard operating procedure here for as long as the BOI has been around. Even in the earlier incarnations, people would email me all of the time about infractions or problems they had found.

I did not mean to ignore your suggestion, I simply thought this was fully understood by everyone here. Each and every message posted on this entire site has a clickable link in it that says "Report this post to a moderator". Those links are there exactly for the reason that you proposed. I did not mean to slight you, I just thought that this was already well known and well utilized on this site.

No one needs to have any special authority in order to use that option to contact a moderator. (Actually this message goes to ALL moderators of the forum the message resides in). But bear in mind that it only brings the message under closer scrutiny and does not automatically mean that a moderator will feel the need to do something about the message posted. Everything is subject to a judgment call.