The Review Game
News: We have a new For Fun thread called Chain Story! Go crazy with it.
New Follow Forum Follow Topic
Complex Variable

For some reason, a 10-day trial/parole period sounds about right to me. Why not try: for the first 10 days after the new rules are in place, everyone is on "probation"; after that, they get a warning. If someone new joins the Forum, they get set on a 10-day trial period right from the get-go. Likewise, if someone DOES get banned, they get their trial-period reset. Causing problems during your "probation" will lead to harsher and harsher punishments. E.g., if person X screws up during their first trial period (or, after a warning is given), they get temp-banned; if they screw up in the trial-period immediately following their un-temp-banning, they get a harsher punishment (no warning). Etc.

11/27/2012 #5,461
SolarisOne
so maybe for one or two weeks we go for ban first, but then when the rules are clearer to others, we go with warnings? Yay/nay?

Yay. Yes.

I don't think it's that harsh at all. Past three times, I don't think that person is going to change in a feasible amount of time.

Agree.

11/27/2012 . Edited 11/27/2012 #5,462
Rogue Energizer Bunny
For some reason, a 10-day trial/parole period sounds about right to me. Why not try: for the first 10 days after the new rules are in place, everyoneis on "probation"; after that, they get a warning. If someone new joins the Forum, they get set on a 10-day trial period right from the get-go. Likewise, if someone DOES get banned, they get their trial-period reset. Causing problems during your "probation" will lead to harsher and harsher punishments. E.g., if person X screws up during their first trial period (or, after a warning is given), they get temp-banned; if they screw up in the trial-period immediately following their un-temp-banning, they get a harsher punishment (no warning). Etc.

I think this sounds effective, but I don't know how the mods would keep track of all that.

Speaking of which, mod- and reg-respect needs to make a comeback. Really.

Additionally, what do we do in the case of self-promotion? I feel like that's a more sensitive topic, and I don't know who else has had a problem with it lately.

11/27/2012 #5,463
SolarisOne
Additionally, what do we do in the case of self-promotion? I feel like that's a more sensitive topic, and I don't know who else has had a problem with it lately.

If everyone's all, like, "Dude, we don't care, just shut up!", then yeah, I think the person doing it is a problem.

On the other hand, every once in awhile you find someone who does it in such a way that it's frickin' hilarious.

Speaking of which, mod- and reg-respect needs to make a comeback. Really.

Like an earlier poster said, "we need a sheriff in town."

11/27/2012 #5,464
Rogue Energizer Bunny
Like an earlier poster said, "we need a sheriff in town."

Truth.

11/27/2012 #5,465
RedactedNoLongerWriting

Sherifffffffff... ;_;

so maybe for one or two weeks we go for ban first, but then when the rules are clearer to others, we go with warnings? Yay/nay?

This seems a bit backwards to me. I mean, I can understand it for the people we have now who are aware of this conversation, but if we're talking people who aren't in the OT much right now how are they supposed to know about this rule change and actually understand it? It seems harsh to ban first, without warning. If you were a newb and spammed without realizing it was 'wrong' and then got banned, would you want to come back? Probably not.

Or maybe I'm reading this wrong? I'm not sure. It just seemed strange to me.

11/27/2012 #5,466
Rainbow35

To join in on this discussion: I think I remember seeing spammy posts and sexual jokes and stuff like that in earlier OTs. So I don't think it would need to be outright banned. I know something's different with this one somehow, but there definitely were jokes and stupid-seeming stuff before, so I don't know if those are what's so bad.

But if whatever the problem is is scaring nice people away then it obviously does need to be fixed. I agree with whoever suggested a three-strikes and then ban system for people who are excessively annoying for example posting "SPAM SPAM SPAM" hundreds of times in one post, or something overly sexual when asked to stop.

I don't think there's anything wrong with sexual jokes, in fact now that I remember correctly I think Sheriff and Don used to have some kind of sexual conversations in the OT, which I think were jokes or something, I don't remember 'cause I didn't really read them, but I know they were there. But anyway I don't think there's a problem with sexual posts themselves, but when they dominate the whole conversation it's a bit weird, but you can't really make rules about the frequency of them, really.

I'm not sure what my point totally is, but I guess it's that I agree with all of you but think some of the rules under consideration may be a bit strict considering that similar behaviours (possibly with less intensity or frequency) had previously been tolerated.

I also don't think there's a problem with debates until they escalate and get abusive or something.

11/27/2012 #5,467
Stylistic Nightmare

I think we all agree most of the issues raised here aren't necessarily so bad in and of themselves. Sexual jokes, spamming, whatever the fuck it is; at the proper time, it's fine. But when every second post is a sex joke, when people are breaking pages or spamming when people are having a conversation, and every argument keeps dragging on because neither side is willing to let the other have the final say, it's an issue.

Strict rules are necessary. They work. If you go easy on people, they will continue to do what they've been doing. Nothing gets solved, and we have this conversation again in two months.

11/27/2012 #5,468
thewhimsicalbard

I suppose since I don't really participate in the Globe's OT, I don't really have much say in what goes on in there, but my two cents on Frac's OT on her forum are exactly that: IT IS HERS.

Frac, you are awesome about maintaining a healthy and respectable level of democracy around here. However, at the end of the day, if someone attempts to create an atmosphere that is not to your liking, you reserve that absolute right to tell them, pardon my French, to piss off. This forum is your child, and like all children occasionally it needs some discipline. At the end of the day, as we learned in the Epic Duel with pokinbigfire of Two or So Years Ago, if someone really wants to be a part of what goes on around here, they will have to assimilate to your way of doing things to the point that they get along with everyone else here.

I wouldn't be too worried about instituting a "civility ban". I think that's pretty common throughout the internet, and there are a lot of places (wikis in particular) that are much, much quicker and less judicious with the banhammer than you are. I like to think that much like a parent, for the one time out of a hundred that a parent might be wrong about something, you're best off listening to them, because no kid is right 99 times out of 100. If you think someone deserves a ban, or if you think a policy needs to be instituted, by all means do it. It's absolutely your prerogative.

11/27/2012 #5,469
TinfoilKnight

OH. I wasn't aware this debate was going on.

I think we all agree most of the issues raised here aren't necessarily so bad in and of themselves. Sexual jokes, spamming, whatever the fuck it is; at the proper time, it's fine. But when every second post is a sex joke, when people are breaking pages or spamming when people are having a conversation, and every argument keeps dragging on because neither side is willing to let the other have the final say, it's an issue.

Strict rules are necessary. They work. If you go easy on people, they will continue to do what they've been doing. Nothing gets solved, and we have this conversation again in two months.

I agree with Don here.

11/27/2012 . Edited 11/27/2012 #5,470
Rogue Energizer Bunny
I wouldn't be too worried about instituting a "civility ban". I think that's pretty common throughout the internet, and there are a lot of places (wikis in particular) that are much, much quicker and less judicious with the banhammer than you are.

I agree with this as well. We've always said it was a dictatorship, anyway. XDD

11/27/2012 #5,471
LuckycoolHawk9

I reviewed The Countess for a rule 10 easy fix.

11/27/2012 . Edited 11/27/2012 #5,472
lookingwest
Strict rules are necessary. They work. If you go easy on people, they will continue to do what they've been doing. Nothing gets solved, and we have this conversation again in two months.

True.

I think we should really emphasize the use of the Report Abuse button. If the person(s) are going to far - warn them, then report them. The alert goes to Frac and she can either delegate (tell me or another mod to go sort it out look at it) or look at the issue herself. Make the decision. Done.

Perhaps it can be case-by-case and she can decide how long the ban is given the situation. If it's something minor, no big deal, if it's a second offense, maybe longer.

11/28/2012 . Edited 11/28/2012 #5,473
Fractured Illusion

Okay, so, things to add in lieu of newest posts:

- Change regarding ban: As a general rule, a warning comes first, then ban for one week minimum. After 3 bans, they are out. This is with reservation to do otherwise, should mods deem it necessary.

- Self-promotion regulation.

I personally have incredibly low tolerance for people asking for others to read their stories. That's what the games are for. I am very much pro not allowing people to beg/ask for reviews or readers. That said, discussions about writing (and people's own writing) should by no means be done away with, it's an important part of a lot of people's lives. If anything else should fall into self-promotion, let me know.

So if someone goes to the OT begging for reviews, they'll get a warning, and if they do it again, a short ban.

- There needs to be a go-to line to say to people who are out of line.

I agree. Anyone have any suggestions for a go-to phrase? Maybe, once the rules are done, say "You're violating Rule X, stop or you'll get banned"? That would be clear and concise.

If it's to a lesser degree, ie maybe some people are making too big of a deal of a debate or being too sexual, but it's not in an obvious way that clearly violates a rule, say "You're treading a thin line" or something? I'm having more of a trouble with this.

Then of course there is the report abuse button.

So, if no one tells the person, they get a warning. If someone tells the person, and they keep going, they get a ban (since they ignored the warning).

- List of banned people.

I don't think people banned from OT violations should be in the big banned list, since I don't check it and then will forget to unban, so I will probably keep one linked to in the first post of PQ, I think, for more accessibility.

My biggest problem is going to remember to unban people on time tho, honestly. Just so you all know. If anyone have any remedies for this then please let me know.

- Warnings and bans

What about if someone got a warning for one thing (ie too many sexual jokes) but their next offense was in regards to something else (ie, begging for reviews)? Should they get a new warning? I feel like it's easier to regulate with one warning, then ban, unless mods think circumstances tell otherwise. It could get really drawn out with lotso f warnings and no real punishment otherwise.

-

I think that covered all the new things.

I am gonna work on prototype rules now.

11/28/2012 #5,474
Fractured Illusion

RULES OF CONDUCT (prototype)

The aim for the conversations in the Off Topic threads is for them to reflect public discussions and meetings. It's is a place for several people to come together in a friendly discussion. Try to refrain saying things which you wouldn't in a public setting, especially when it comes to creating a hostile atmosphere.

Breaking the rules will lead to a warning, a temporary ban, or a permanent ban. See specifics here (link or something).

1) No self-promotion. We have several threads in the RG dedicated to getting reviews, so use those, or other forums.

2) No mean-spirited remarks, insults or the likes. If you find yourselves in an argument, take it to private messaging or another avenue. The OTs are not meant to be used for arguments or bad attitudes.

3) Keep your language and general conduct to a Teen rating.

4) If you link to something more mature, mark it as NSFW (Not Safe For Work) with an explanation of why (ie, violence).

5) Be restrictive with sex jokes. A few are fine, but if it goes on for 5 posts or longer, it's excessive.

6) No sexual coming-ons between minors and adults.

7) No spam of the useless kind (ie, spamming numbers).

8)

-

WHEN YOU BREAK A RULE:

First, you will be warned. This could be through a mod, or another RG member stepping in and saying you are violating a certain rule. If you have been given a warning, accept it, do not make passive aggressive remarks or the likes. If you find the judgment unfair, go to Problems/Questions.

If you violate another again after that, you will be banned for at least one week to a month. After you have been temporarily banned three times, you will be permanently banned.

-

WHEN SOMEONE BREAKS A RULE:

You may either either:

a) click the "Report Abuse" button that is in every post beside the Reply button. The report will be given to Fractured Illusion. A mod will then issue a warning, assuming the report is correct.

b) give a warning to the person in the OT. Such a warning should be coherently done. It should suffice to say "You are violating Rule (X) of the OT's Rules of Conduct. Stop, or you'll be temporarily banned." If you do this, please let a mod know by posting in Problems/Questions of this rule breaking and warning.

-

WHEN SOMEONE IS TREADING A THIN LINE BETWEEN BREAKING A RULE OR NOT:

You may point this out to them and say "You are treading a thin line". Should they still continue and progress their actions, the remark will have constituted a sufficient warning.

11/28/2012 . Edited 11/28/2012 #5,475
Fractured Illusion

Have I missed something?

Have I included something that shouldn't be there?

Worded something incoherently?

Basically, any suggestions for changes so far?

11/28/2012 #5,476
SolarisOne
Honestly, Frac, I think this is the most elegant distillation of everyone's views one could make. I like it as-is.
11/28/2012 #5,477
thewhimsicalbard
b) give a warning to the person in the OT. Such a warning should be coherently done. It should suffice to say "You are violating Rule (X) of the OT's Rules of Conduct. Stop, or you'll be temporarily banned." If you do this, please let a mod know by posting in Problems/Questions of this rule breaking and warning.

Perhaps this shouldn't be the prerogative of every single person out there who decides to post in the OT? Otherwise you'd have (sorry I keep bringing this up, by the way, but I feel like it's relevant) a proverbial pokinbigfire hip-firing warnings to everyone who disagrees with him like it's his job. I feel like the "report abuse" button should be just fine, and the only reason that feature shouldn't be used is if the issue is so complicated that you have to take it to P&Q anyway. I think leaving that decision up to the mods is a much safer idea. It's understood that the mods would (and should) be able to issue those warnings within the OT, but maybe that should be a mod-only privilege? I feel like that heads a lot of problems off at the pass.

Also, with regard to Number 5, perhaps you should mention something in the official version of the rules about the maturity level of the conversation being important? That makes your motivation a lot clearer while giving you a lot more leverage in convincing someone that they deserve whatever sanctions they get if they violate the rule, i.e. it makes things a lot easier to justify.

11/28/2012 . Edited 11/28/2012 #5,478
Dr. Self Destruct

This is in regards to the two most recent posts (1476 - 1478) made in the EF Stories thread:

I noticed a Rule 10 occurred, but I wasn't sure what to do about it because it looks like AeonNoctis posted their review an hour after wisedec4u posted hers. Is there a time limit to how long a Rule 10 is valid? I thought it was 30 minutes, but I'm not sure. I'm also not sure if there's really an hour between them, because the Fiction Press time intervals are kind of ambiguous.

11/29/2012 . Edited 11/29/2012 #5,479
The Autumn Queen

They're only eighteen minutes apart (the exact times are out now), so they're within the 30min limit. So I owe wisedec4u a review.

11/29/2012 #5,480
Dr. Self Destruct

All right, cool, thanks for clearing that up, Ohana.

11/29/2012 #5,481
professional griefer

I reviewed chapter five of The Last Leaf by Persevera for a rule ten in Stories EF.

11/29/2012 #5,482
Anihyr Moonstar

Sorry, but because Sica brought this up, I figured I'd mention that I was under the impression that the "time limit" for rule ten had much more room for error (a couple hours still being okay, not just 30min), because this is what it says in the rules:

Unless there are hours apart from C & D's posts, it is usually just an honest mistake when the game is experiencing a larger amount of traffic.

If there is a thirty minute restriction that I haven't heard of, can a mod confirm that so I'm not confused? Thanks. Honestly, I thought the time limit was three hours because of this section in the rules:

Has FP had a normal day, the chapter is not longer than usual, and there are at least 3 hours apart in time between C and D's posts, then it is safe to exclude D.
11/29/2012 . Edited 11/29/2012 #5,483
Dr. Self Destruct

I'd go with the rules over what I say, Tooth. I honestly don't remember where I heard the 30 minutes thing -- could've been for something else entirely. xD

But, just in case, I guess it's best if a mod confirms so we're all on the same level.

11/29/2012 #5,484
The Autumn Queen

Reviewed Crossing the Finish Line Ch 18 to fulfil rule 10 debt.

11/30/2012 . Edited 11/30/2012 #5,485
simpleplan13

So I am finally back! Sorry for my absence, but I was internetless. So my question is what should I do about the RM. It seems like nothing has happened to it since I've been gone. Should I do the quick examination on October and go one like I would've? Or no because asking people who signed up in October to review now isn't really fair. Also, what should we do about December? Should we have it or just pick back up in January?

12/1/2012 #5,486
Anihyr Moonstar

Reviewed Piercing Illusions (Ch9) to fulfill my rule ten debt.

12/2/2012 #5,487
Fractured Illusion

RE: Rules of Conduct

@whimsical

That's a good point, I agree. At the very least for now the power should stay solely with the mods to give warnings. Same with your comment on rule 5, I will make the changes.

If there are no other remarks, I will make the rules official. If any problem arises you can always bring it up here.

12/2/2012 #5,488
Fractured Illusion

RULES OF CONDUCT

in regards to posting in the Off Topic threads

-

The aim for the conversations in the Off Topic threads is for them to reflect public discussions and meetings. It's is a place for several people to come together in a friendly discussion. Try to refrain saying things which you wouldn't in a public setting, especially when it comes to creating a hostile atmosphere.

Breaking the rules will lead to a warning, a temporary ban, or a permanent ban. See specifics below.

1) No self-promotion. We have several threads in the RG dedicated to getting reviews, so use those, or other forums.

2) No mean-spirited remarks, insults or the likes. If you find yourselves in an argument, take it to private messaging or another avenue. The OTs are not meant to be used for arguments or bad attitudes.

3) Keep your language and general conduct to a Teen rating.

4) If you link to something more mature, mark it as NSFW (Not Safe For Work) with an explanation of why (ie, violence).

5) Be restrictive with sex jokes. A few are fine, but if it goes on for 5 posts or longer, it's excessive. A playful tone is alright but we aim to keep at least somewhat of a mature atmosphere in the OT that aims to be all-inclusive.

6) No sexual coming-ons between minors and adults.

7) No spam of the useless kind (ie, spamming numbers).

-

WHEN YOU BREAK A RULE:

First, you will be warned by a mod. If you have been given a warning, accept it, do not make passive aggressive remarks or the likes. If you find the judgment unfair, go to Problems/Questions.

If you violate another rule again after that, you will be banned for at least one week up to a month. After you have been temporarily banned three times, you will be permanently banned.

These are the general guidelines, but mods may act differently if it is fit under special circumstances (ie, depending on the severity).

-

WHEN SOMEONE BREAKS A RULE:

Click the "Report Abuse" button that is in every post beside the Reply button. The report will be given to Fractured Illusion. A mod will then issue a warning, assuming the report is correct.

12/2/2012 . Edited 12/6/2012 #5,489
Fractured Illusion
So I am finally back! Sorry for my absence, but I was internetless. So my question is what should I do about the RM. It seems like nothing has happened to it since I've been gone. Should I do the quick examination on October and go one like I would've? Or no because asking people who signed up in October to review now isn't really fair. Also, what should we do about December? Should we have it or just pick back up in January?

I dont think it hurts to open up for a RM timeslot this month, worst case no one will participate, best case, some review love gets spread :p

12/3/2012 #5,490
« Prev Page 1 .. 173 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 193 .. Last Next »
Forum Moderators: Fractured Illusion Dr. Self Destruct, dragonflydreamer, lookingwest, Lime-Cat, simpleplan13, Imalefty
Rules:
  • Forums are not to be used to post stories.
  • All forum posts must be suitable for teens.
  • The owner and moderators of this forum are solely responsible for the content posted within this area.
  • All forum abuse must be reported to the moderators.
Membership Length: 2+ years 1 year 6+ months 1 month 2+ weeks new member