[Flipside]

Because Forum warnings can affect your future career prospects...

[Qent]

I don't know how forum warnings work. After you get three are you autobanned? Or still manually banned for subforum warnings? Or only banned from that subforum?

[Flipside]

It's a point system that slowly degrades by 5 points a day, the worst a Moderator can do to you is stop you from posting for a few days.

Hey, here's an idea guys, maybe WE should just make blanket assumptions about entire sections of the membership, it seems to be in vogue at the moment...

[Hades]

Part of the problem with HLP's moderation is that it's not really unified or consistent. It behaves more like a lose bunch of vigilantes that randomly step up to enforce their view of 'justice' than a unified team of people working towards the same goal. This has major problems with consistency, as already said.

Moderators on the private boards still need to be held to the same standard as any other global moderator or admin in terms of moderating. If they aren't, this also hurts consistency and frankly I don't want people who are kinda like Omniscraper being able moderate freely as they please, not even for their own project board.

[Flipside]

To be honest, there are guidelines for Moderators to follow, and it's up to other Moderators to make sure those guidelines are kept to. For my own part, I'll admit to not being 100% comfortable with the idea of deleting posts out of threads, but not having read those posts, I'm can't really make a judgement in either direction.

I think the point is at the moment is that Moderation on a Mod that has (a) just been released and (b) is getting a LOT of media attention has to work to a slightly different set of rules to the 'norm' for in here. Mostly I tend to find we are pretty easy going to a point, and all our usual poo-delivery services are probably running as normal, but I think that, especially whilst there is a lot of external focus on the Forum, our usual good-natured combativeness and acerbic, but well-intentioned criticism could run the risk of being misinterpreted as something that it isn't, and whilst the old-timers on here are used to each others habits, it may not be helpful to project the image that this is the acceptable level of conversation, since newcomers who post comments that could easily have come from an established member tend to get pounced on.

I suppose it boils down to the concept that the Mods creators are the ones who will bear the brunt of how it is received by the public, and the public will, in part, judge them by the Forum and its content. During the release phase they are going to be far more conscious of that, so expect a lot more Moderation on that specific Forum for a while.

[jr2]

Well, the problem with moderators/admins acting as a unified team is that they would need centralized leadership that they agree to respect, or they would need some sort of democracy.  In either case, anything that they disagree or feel strongly enough about could be reason for them to 'secede' and go their own way.  This isn't particularly healthy, as everyone probably has their own favorite 'buddies' or people that they mostly agree with, and if that person quits being a mod or admin because of their feelings, then the people that admire them are also likely to be offended.

Currently, it seems that we have a benevolent (or not benevolent, if that is your view.. my view is it's meant to be benevolent) dictatorship, under which are various ... under-dictators, ruling over other, lesser, dictators, who together assist in the rule of their nation-states on behalf of the dictatorship, some of whom have authority that stretches into other nation-states, or who share rule over some of the same nation-states (speaking of the forums as different 'nation states' governed by admins / mods here...)

This system is most likely the best system we can actually get, considering the makeup of HLP, and the fact that it's not like the community 'owns' any part of it; it's a cafe owned by someone else, who lets you come and hang out with your buddies, for free, and of course has the right to enforce order in said cafe as they see fit.  However, the cafe is too big for one person, so they delegate to those members of the cafe as they see fit...  there really is no other way that I think HLP could be sensibly run, given the varying viewpoints we have here.  I've personally experienced what appeared to be personal targetting of myself and my posts, and, after having talked with an admin, taken several chill pills, and a few days to cool off, was able to see how my posts may have possibly been seen by the moderator in question.... it was rather eye-opening.  I didn't mean to cause any offense, however, upon receiving what I thought was a hostile response by a mod (splitlock with thread re-named), I of course became very upset.  However, looking at it from the moderator's point of view, I can see how my post could be taken as ... potentially harmful to the HLP community, as I hadn't been careful enough with my description of the software I was advocating people try. 

Do I think the moderator overreacted?  Yes.

However, I perfectly understand how he came to his decision now, and have come to terms with that, as an unescapable byproduct of people having sole responsibility to police a public forum for free, in their own free time, such as it is.

I also believe that perhaps I may have overreacted to what I considered to be personal belittling directed at myself.. which did not end up to be the case.  Certain people just have different styles, which can clash with others' personal styles of communication.  Both sides do not mean offense, or only mean to come across as slightly annoyed, the other side, which does not understand, takes this as a direct insult, and the situation escalates.  Both sides are most likely both at fault, but hey, welcome to planet Earth. 

I'd say, to get along better: if you feel like grabbing your plasma rifle, don't.  Post your objection in an abbreviated form, stating that you will respond more fully in the next day or so, after you've had time to think with a clear head on the matter.  Patience is the community's ally, at this point.. as well as a bit of self-control and willingness to put aside your own (at least apparently) offended pride for the sake of civility.  Be the bigger person, and, unless you can post with a detached aloofness to any perceived personal insult, avoid posting until you can be perceived as reasonable by any standard.

Take all of the above ramblings with a grain of salt; I'm not trying to come across as some know-it-all or more-perfect-than-you asshole, just sharing some musings.    Also note that (at least in my case) sometimes it's necessary to just take a break from it all and check back in a few months after everything's died down and it's all water well under the bridge.

[Goober5000]

The general policy at HLP is to not delete posts unless they are spam, but this isn't a hard-and-fast rule and it has been bent in the past.  Moderators and especially admins have a fair amount of discretion here.  And that's a good thing, because HLP benefits from a number of different perspectives.  It wouldn't do to have a monolithic top-heavy bureaucracy on the board -- I've seen too many real life examples of that.

Now, I disagree with the decision to delete the posts.  I would have preferred that they be split-locked instead, if someone wanted to remove them from the thread for whatever reason.  And I think the warning was unwarranted; I didn't see anything particularly out-of-line from MattThGeek.

But we should cut the WCS team some slack.  They just released a huge mod that took 10 years of exhausting effort to complete.  It's a huge load off their shoulders and they are probably expecting and hoping that everybody is just as ecstatic about it as they are.  I disagree with the moderation but I don't think sanctions are warranted.  After all, they didn't ban MattThGeek or delete Spoon's review.

[Fury]

WCS should probably be allowed to moderate their subforum however they please.

I disagree. Every board should adhere to same rules unless exceptions are clearly stated in board description and/or sticky topic in said board and approved by admins. How are you otherwise supposed to know what rules apply where?

In addition, if different boards have different rules, then punishments should also be separate which is not possible unless admins create membergroups for each board to deny permissions. And that is way too much work to maintain for any length of time. So if someone is punished in WCS board which follows different rules than rest of the HLP, then they have no grounds for that punishment to affect said person in any other board on HLP.

My personal opinion? Either follow same rules as everybody else or GTFO. I wouldn't give special treatment to WCS, Diaspora, Blue Planet or hell, even SCP or FSU for that matter. They don't like the rules, bring issues up with admins for discussion. Failing that, then they can set up their own forums somewhere else. Which by the way WCS already has done, so it seems even weirder for them to have boards here at HLP.

Now we get to rules. I am well aware that they are very loosely defined here at HLP, but that's because people here tend to have more common sense than in your average internet forum, and admins can discuss things out case by case basis. Though I have to express my frustration that admins are SLOW in such matters, especially since majority tends to skip the matter entirely not saying a word, which does NOT help in reaching a consensus. Back when HLP was basically ran by me and Goober, it wasn't fun trying to decide anything because it was so frustratingly difficult to reach a consensus with admins that weren't even joining in the discussion. And that includes Tolwyn by the way. Admins pamper each other way too much, afraid they'll hurt others feelings, even knowing full well that someone hasn't actually earned the privileges given. But what do I know, I've been out of the loop for so long.

Wait, I got sidetracked and started rambling. Dammit, better stop here.

[jg18]

WCS should probably be allowed to moderate their subforum however they please. It's their subforum, after all! Same goes for individual projects like BtA. Delete, edit, abuse, do as you please so long as the consequences are confined to your subforum. Seems only reasonable. I guess HLP, uh, higher-ups could step in if a subforum leader turned out to be a crazy racist or something, but otherwise, it's their subforum~~~!

My personal opinion? Either follow same rules as everybody else or GTFO. I wouldn't give special treatment to WCS, Diaspora, Blue Planet or hell, even SCP or FSU for that matter. They don't like the rules, bring issues up with admins for discussion. Failing that, then they can set up their own forums somewhere else. Which by the way WCS already has done, so it seems even weirder for them to have boards here at HLP.

Agreed with Fury. Allowing hosted projects to moderate their subforums however they please is effectively carving up HLP into fiefdoms. I for one would be much less comfortable posting in the boards of hosted projects if what I post there could be edited or deleted at any time for any reason. That non-spam posts were deleted (and I read them before they were lost) in this one instance is distressing to me, and I wouldn't be inclined to post in a place where it could happen anytime.

As for users deleting their own posts, my understanding was that users could delete posts or topics of theirs to which no one had replied, although maybe that isn't the case.

[Jeff Vader]

I'd like some uniform rules around here. Letting subforums enforce their own rules would be problematic because
- there are 50 friggin subforums (not counting subforums' subforums)
- at least the WCS board doesn't really provide their own rules in written form
- because of the above, regular users have a hard time knowing what rules they should be following when posting
- also because of the above, global mods have a hard time moderating if they do not know what rules to follow when moderating
- if global mods should not meddle with subforums' moderation policies, why even have global mods?

Just my two cents. Not that I truly care.

As for users deleting their own posts, my understanding was that users could delete posts or topics of theirs to which no one had replied, although maybe that isn't the case.

I think users can still delete any and all of their own posts (except if the thread is locked). Back in the days, they couldn't delete threads they'd started but apparently this has changed. Not sure why.

[jr2]

As for users deleting their own posts, my understanding was that users could delete posts or topics of theirs to which no one had replied, although maybe that isn't the case.

That is the case.  I can delete this post (until someone replies), but not my previous post above.

EDIT: Perhaps not; I don't seem to be able to delete this post, even though no one's replied..

[Jeff Vader]

Oh. 5w337. It tends to be ****, when some people decide to delete their older posts for some dimwitted reason.

[Zacam]

Not to issue this as any sort of an "Official" statement here are my thoughts on the process:

General Blanket Rule: Spam posts, when and where they happen, get deleted. I don't think anybody disagree's with this.

General Public Moderation: (Non-Project-Specific Moderation) Follows the above, and utilizes locks/splits etc as needed. Deletions are considered as a 'last ditch' effort for clean up, usually to follow after either a Monkey or a Ban which can be petitioned for to the Administration. Any deletions take place through a Moderator Quorum.

Global Moderators: Provide support and assistance to the category (non-Project Specific) Moderators, or to respond/co-ordinate with Project Moderators on any issues reported on the board. If in doubt, you can apologize/iron things out later after the issue has been addressed, as per the above guidelines.

Project Specific Moderation: Same as the above, but does have more of an influence that is specific only to the the project being moderated. Project Leadership can either handle the project management or have a dedicated Project Moderator for the forum. Along with the above, -moderate- powers of deletion due to disruptive elements are allowed to maintain a positive community balance, but should ideally be left to a last-resort measure but is left to the discretion of the Moderator/Project Leadership.

Administration: Moderates on all of the above and acts as a go-to for process review of the actions taken by the above categories. Should any other Moderator or general Member place a call to have a Moderators actions reviewed, the Administration team reviews the actions and either Supports it, Reverses it, communicates with the Moderator/Project Moderator, or takes other actions as deemed necessary; Up to and including reviewing that individuals access to Moderation powers.

Edit: To further clarify, I do agree with Fury on the concept that individual Project boards -should- come up with some form of "rule-sets" that they themselves are expected to adhere to. So long as they do not contravene the General Policy rules in any way and maintain upholding those, that is. Everybody should have a clear understanding (or ability to obtain said understanding) in whatever Managed Project board they are in. And in lieu of one being posted, it should be assumed that the General Policy guidelines are the only ones in effect.

[Black Wolf]

That doesn't change the fact that policy at HLP has been to not delete posts except for outright spam.

I know I'm late to the party here, but this. This this this this this.

Subforum or no, hosted project or no, admin or no, we don't delete posts at HLP because we don't like them. Hell, AFAIK, we don't delete posts at all. There shouldn't be special rules for anyone.

Incidentally, I find it very odd that I'm 100% in agreement with Fury and Maththegeek both on this.

[Spoon]

There have been a few occasions where I had to delete posts because a few posters couldn't stop making off topic posts after two split locks. And no doubt there will be more occasions in the future where I will be deleting posts. So I don't in particularly care about silly motto's about not deleting posts at all.

- if global mods should not meddle with subforums' moderation policies, why even have global mods?

There are still 40 other subforums for the global mods to moderate. Overal I'd like the global mods to stay out of my little disturbed and twisted corner of HLP.

[MatthTheGeek]

Like you said yourself, it was after several splitlocks and several in-thread warnings about the behavior of the poster. Which is completely different from outright deleting posts out of the blue.

[NGTM-1R]

Actually I have a serious question here.

WCS is running a separate forum from this site and they tend to refer people with technical or other commentary to that forum, unless apparently they don't like them. They appear to be actively distancing themselves from HLP, to be honest.

Why are they being hosted here?

[General Battuta]

What's the harm?

[Spoon]

Like you said yourself, it was after several splitlocks and several in-thread warnings about the behavior of the poster. Which is completely different from outright deleting posts out of the blue.

True, just pointing out that "Hell, AFAIK, we don't delete posts at all. There shouldn't be special rules for anyone." is false.
ya know, just sayin'

[NGTM-1R]

What's the harm?

What's the good? It's kinda like Mobius trying to run off to GW with a project.