Moderating guidelines

[VijchtiDoodah]

Papercut, you just overreacted a bit.  Unless a moderator explicitly tells you that you've been warned, then you're free. You'll find that we're usually surprisingly lenient people and we let people go for a lot of stuff that they'd normally get slammed for.

A code of ethics is also a great idea, but doesn't work in this kind of a community structure.  If we had any kind of rigid rules, we'd be forced into banning people who don't really deserve to be banned -- it's better as a judgment-based thing (and a group one at that) than anything that would destroy the leniency we have built into the forums.  I could go on and on about this, but I'm sure you get the point.

[Sethamundo]

Papercut, you just overreacted a bit. Unless a moderator explicitly tells you that you've been warned, then you're free. You'll find that we're usually surprisingly lenient people and we let people go for a lot of stuff that they'd normally get slammed for.

A code of ethics is also a great idea, but doesn't work in this kind of a community structure. If we had any kind of rigid rules, we'd be forced into banning people who don't really deserve to be banned -- it's better as a judgment-based thing (and a group one at that) than anything that would destroy the leniency we have built into the forums. I could go on and on about this, but I'm sure you get the point.

Perhaps just a code of ethics stating what a moderator cannot do would suffice instead of including things they must do.

[VijchtiDoodah]

Rest assured that if we see a need to police ourselves, we'll do it -- just as we already have been.  It's taken care of.

[Spyder]

hey i got a solution, dont make gram a modertaor !

[FliesLikeABrick]

The fact is that there is no conspiracy against people.  The fact is that by participating in our forums you recognize that you trust the judgement of the people in charge.  If you don't trust the people in charge and that bothers you, then please just leave instead of stir crap up.

We don't need this here.

Random?, I have just send you a PM regarding what happened with your other account.

I am locking this because I don't like noise like this.  The only people who can ban on here are myself and Ru.  Other moderators can make warnings and stuff and us admins have the ability to look at PMs (though we only do if those are the reason that we're asked to ban someone).

Other moderators can only add warnings to people and 99% of the time the warnings are based on normal posts, not PMs.

I'm locking this because I hate conspiracy theorists and like I said, we don't need this kind of noise.  Our system may not be perfect, but as participating in a forum like this you need to trust the admins.  There is no other way for it to be run in such a way that moderators do not need to be trusted.

As for "code of ethics," the moderators and admins are constantly keeping an eye on how eachother act and are changing their ways to better suit the people of the forums.  We also contact one another or discuss (in our private forum) about how to better serve the forums.  There have been 3 or 4 private threads on various matters over the past few months.

The bottom line is this: you need to trust the people in charge, that is up to you.  If you don't trust the people in charge, you have no choice but to leave.

[Graham]

Hate to get in after Bricks lock but I wanted a final word. Gave the kid a heads up and he didn't like it. He took it personal and got mad, I just joked around in some pms. Didn't think it was such a big deal.

[Outcast]

You're upset because I told you that I decide what is spam in my sections? And that it wasn't clearly defined that it's a warning, even though it was written "First warning" in the subject of the PM, and in the thread itself which I linked you to. It's like seeing a cop pull over a friend of yours who you are driving with, the cop gives him a nice heads up about something, and you argue with the cop that he's wrong. Don't argue with cops.

[FliesLikeABrick]

Just to close this out (Mods, please don't post in locked topics.  I've talked to you about this before).

I spoke to papercut in a PM and cleared this all up, he didn't understand some of the original privileges and restrictions that were in place for moderators.

The fact is that there is no conspiracy against people.  The fact is that by participating in our forums you recognize that you trust the judgement of the people in charge.  If you don't trust the people in charge and that bothers you, then please just leave instead of stir crap up.

We don't need this here.

Listen dude, I think you misunderstood. I was unaware of the abilities that admins and moderators have, and how the whole system works. I thought all of the warnings and bans were held individually and not as a "team" I'm not bringing up any conspiracy. I trust the mods and the admins to have not pulled anything like I said above. I was just making the point that it appeared very possible for that to happen.

I am locking this because I don't like noise like this.  The only people who can ban on here are myself and Ru.  Other moderators can make warnings and stuff and us admins have the ability to look at PMs (though we only do if those are the reason that we're asked to ban someone).

Other moderators can only add warnings to people and 99% of the time the warnings are based on normal posts, not PMs.

There was the information I needed. I thought moderator's could ban as well. Nor did I know that PM's could be viewed by you and Ru. I was under the impression that it is possible for a moderator to pick out someone they don't like, warn them unfairly, and end up banning them. I figured that I was close to having this happen to me by � . I wanted to point out that people can be banned for the wrong reasons, and that without the guidelines for moderator's that are open for me to view, there is no limits to the power of moderators. However your information (which was not openly provided to me without me making the topic) made it clear that such things cannot happen.

I'm locking this because I hate conspiracy theorists and like I said, we don't need this kind of noise.  Our system may not be perfect, but as participating in a forum like this you need to trust the admins.  There is no other way for it to be run in such a way that moderators do not need to be trusted.

I had no problem with the way admins were working. I had never had any trouble with you or Ru. It was some of the mods I found were unjust. Though now I know that my stay at the forums are protected by admins, and not moderators.

As for "code of ethics," the moderators and admins are constantly keeping an eye on how eachother act and are changing their ways to better suit the people of the forums.  We also contact one another or discuss (in our private forum) about how to better serve the forums.  There have been 3 or 4 private threads on various matters over the past few months.

Again I thank you for the information