|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Next
-- Posted by August Rush at 1:05 pm on July 19, 2008
Ok, so i've been here since about 2005. I was an active member on this site when it was mostly used for support. I have seen how the site has changed over the years and it has become much more of a place to socialize rather than to come for support. I was reading Briley 07's topic earlier and I agree that this site is slowly going down the pan and a lot of changes need to be made. I don't have half the answers but one thing I would like to debate is the unquestionable authority of the Moderators. This site is being run by the Moderators. They have a very important job to do keeping this site in order; they do most of the maintenance work for the front of house on this site - making sure topics are in the right places and troll's, spammers are kept out. I would like to express a few thoughts regarding the roles of moderators on this site. Censorship, to start, is an issue that I hold dear to my heart. An internet correspondent of mine, a friend who I had been in contact with for a number of years has recently been executed in China for posting controversial blog posts which apposed the government. I therefore understand the importance of fighting censorship. I don't like how the Moderators have the ability to censor topics, opinions or people that they dislike or disagree with. It's not so much their power that I appose but their totalitarian way of managing the site. Posting a moderator error report is pretty much like asking a dictator to reconsider his actions. Most of the time as they justified the action in the first place they are unwilling to reconsider. Useless! I think something should be put in place to counter balance the Moderators rule on this site. This site has blossomed because it is a community driven social site.. the first real social site on the net (before myspace)... and I think it would be a shame for David, and the Moderators to ignore the community right now. I understand there is an oversight board in place where disgruntled members can go with their complaints to get previous decisions overturned but I don't think this is enough. I propose a diplomatically elected member (or small group of members) who can stick up for the other side. Members with the powers to appose a Moderators decisions because lets face it, they don't usually appose each other.
In politics there are usually two main parties, in the UK there is the government and the opposition; in the states its the republicans and the democrats. I think there should be a similar sort of system on here. That was a bit rushed so there might be a few holes in my arguments but my general thoughts are clear. I would be interested to hear what people have to say about this.
-- Posted by Fenton at 1:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
-- Posted by RockerTori106 at 1:08 pm on July 19, 2008
I love your mind.
Wayyy too much lol. I agree though. There should be some sort of "middleman" between the mods and the members. It's a good idea by far. Someone who could see from both the Moderators AND the Members' point of view.
-- Posted by August Rush at 1:09 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
 FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) 
Three of my friends have been on the OB and they have said they had very little decision making power. I know what it is, its just not working.. in my opinion
-- Posted by August Rush at 1:11 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from RockerTori106 at 9:08 pm on July 19, 2008
I love your mind.
Wayyy too much lol. I agree though. There should be some sort of "middleman" between the mods and the members. It's a good idea by far. Someone who could see from both the Moderators AND the Members' point of view.
lol yes, you probably put it better than I did.
I hope what i wrote made sense lol, im tired! I hope a mod reads this topic
-- Posted by JohnQ at 1:12 pm on July 19, 2008
It's too much work. You all slate the mods but let's face it, they have a lot of shit to do in their own, personal time. If you wish to be a moderator and help make LW a better place, go take the moderator exam and see how well you succeed as a mod. I'll bet you within no time, you'll be getting slated by members for the same reason all the other mods get slated (none, apparently). I have had a few topics deleted due to different violations of the ToS, suck that shit up and stop whining. That's not the trouble with the site. The trouble with LW nowadays is that people that want help can't get it, because the people posting on this god forsaken place lack an IQ of over two digit numbers or are just too bone idle to see the reasoning behind the websites development. Stop fucking crying about the way it's ran. Start crying about the dipshit members that come on here to tell us how good their last wank was and how big their dick's are.
-- Posted by August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
-- Posted by Fenton at 1:18 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar. It's not a vigilant mod-error task force either... it's in place to dissuade grave moderation error/abuse. Believe me, LW moderates itself quite capably, and the mods serve as an even more finite check for the site. As for the "middleman board"... what do you suggest are the requirements for that? I'm willing to bet anyone who qualifies would also qualify to be a moderator, by LW standards.
-- Posted by RockerTori106 at 1:19 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 4:18 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar. It's not a vigilant mod-error task force either... it's in place to dissuade grave moderation error/abuse. Believe me, LW moderates itself quite capably, and the mods serve as an even more finite check for the site. As for the "middleman board"... what do you suggest are the requirements for that? I'm willing to bet anyone who qualifies would also qualify to be a moderator, by LW standards.
Well if they're doing such a great job, why is all this bullshit going down all the time? For the middleman board, it'd have to be someone who respects the mods for what they do, but respects the members for what they prefer as well. It's that simple.
-- Posted by wickedtruth09 at 1:20 pm on July 19, 2008
-blinks-
the shocking is not only did i understand that but on some points i agree O.o
-- Posted by JohnQ at 1:21 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:18 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar. It's not a vigilant mod-error task force either... it's in place to dissuade grave moderation error/abuse. Believe me, LW moderates itself quite capably, and the mods serve as an even more finite check for the site. As for the "middleman board"... what do you suggest are the requirements for that? I'm willing to bet anyone who qualifies would also qualify to be a moderator, by LW standards.
I concur completely. You haven't really thought this through. All you're doing is making more people moderators.. Don't you think moderators were members once? They didn't just acquire the status on making their account and David saying "This'll do." No. Time and effort on the moderators and David's part has been put into place so we have a fair system. Sure, some moderators are deemed as retarded fucks. But as long as they do their job, which is to moderate, then they can be as much of a dick to me, or anyone they want on this forum for all I care.
-- Posted by Fenton at 1:21 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from RockerTori106 at 1:19 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 4:18 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar. It's not a vigilant mod-error task force either... it's in place to dissuade grave moderation error/abuse. Believe me, LW moderates itself quite capably, and the mods serve as an even more finite check for the site. As for the "middleman board"... what do you suggest are the requirements for that? I'm willing to bet anyone who qualifies would also qualify to be a moderator, by LW standards.
Well if they're doing such a great job, why is all this bullshit going down all the time? For the middleman board, it'd have to be someone who respects the mods for what they do, but respects the members for what they prefer as well. It's that simple.
Of what shit do you speak ? There's nothing so terrible going on that calls for the creation and integration of an entirely new moderation checks and balances system.
-- Posted by August Rush at 1:22 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:18 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar. It's not a vigilant mod-error task force either... it's in place to dissuade grave moderation error/abuse. Believe me, LW moderates itself quite capably, and the mods serve as an even more finite check for the site. As for the "middleman board"... what do you suggest are the requirements for that? I'm willing to bet anyone who qualifies would also qualify to be a moderator, by LW standards.
Moderators are appointed by David. I'm suggesting a member appointed by the community. At no point was I suggesting that Moderating was an easy job, and I'm certainly not slating the Moderators, I just think things should be done differently. You've only been here for 59 days and you appear to be a novice. Things were different a few years ago and I think we should take action to make things the way they were
-- Posted by RockerTori106 at 1:23 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from JohnQ at 4:21 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:18 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar. It's not a vigilant mod-error task force either... it's in place to dissuade grave moderation error/abuse. Believe me, LW moderates itself quite capably, and the mods serve as an even more finite check for the site. As for the "middleman board"... what do you suggest are the requirements for that? I'm willing to bet anyone who qualifies would also qualify to be a moderator, by LW standards.
I concur completely. You haven't really thought this through. All you're doing is making more people moderators.. Don't you think moderators were members once? They didn't just acquire the status on making their account and David saying "This'll do." No. Time and effort on the moderators and David's part has been put into place so we have a fair system. Sure, some moderators are deemed as retarded fucks. But as long as they do their job, which is to moderate, then they can be as much of a dick to me, or anyone they want on this forum for all I care.
Where in this did you see that the people who would be a part of this middleman board would be moderators? They wouldn't. But yes, they were members once, but they're turning into power-hungry idiots.
-- Posted by hithere at 1:23 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:05 pm on July 19, 2008
An internet correspondent of mine, a friend who I had been in contact with for a number of years has recently been executed in China for posting controversial blog posts which apposed the government. I therefore understand the importance of fighting censorship.
"therefore?" the first sentence isn't a premise for the second at all. it's a premise for understanding the importance of fighting the desire to censor, which is basically impossible. your friend didn't get killed because of censorship, he got killed because people wanted to censor him. so it seems to me that you would be perfectly fine with your friend being censored, as long as he weren't killed. livewire doesn't execute people as censorship.
-- Posted by Fenton at 1:27 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:22 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:18 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar. It's not a vigilant mod-error task force either... it's in place to dissuade grave moderation error/abuse. Believe me, LW moderates itself quite capably, and the mods serve as an even more finite check for the site. As for the "middleman board"... what do you suggest are the requirements for that? I'm willing to bet anyone who qualifies would also qualify to be a moderator, by LW standards.
Moderators are appointed by David. I'm suggesting a member appointed by the community. At no point was I suggesting that Moderating was an easy job, and I'm certainly not slating the Moderators, I just think things should be done differently. You've only been here for 59 days and you appear to be a novice. Things were different a few years ago and I think we should take action to make things the way they were
Moderators are appointed by David based on their application, and with the input from the rest of the moderators. A member-appointed moderator would be absolutely ridiculous. Would all members get to vote on this moderator? Even the novices, who have no idea what's going on? What about members using bias, and voting for a member who is clearly not moderator material? On a side note, though you bringing it up has nothing to do with the the validity of my argument, I've been here much longer than 59 days. Trust me... I'm not one to advocate for the mods, but this system you're suggesting simply won't help.
-- Posted by August Rush at 1:28 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from JohnQ at 9:21 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:18 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar. It's not a vigilant mod-error task force either... it's in place to dissuade grave moderation error/abuse. Believe me, LW moderates itself quite capably, and the mods serve as an even more finite check for the site. As for the "middleman board"... what do you suggest are the requirements for that? I'm willing to bet anyone who qualifies would also qualify to be a moderator, by LW standards.
I concur completely. You haven't really thought this through. All you're doing is making more people moderators.. Don't you think moderators were members once? They didn't just acquire the status on making their account and David saying "This'll do." No. Time and effort on the moderators and David's part has been put into place so we have a fair system. Sure, some moderators are deemed as retarded fucks. But as long as they do their job, which is to moderate, then they can be as much of a dick to me, or anyone they want on this forum for all I care.
I understand moderators have worked up to their position and I'll say it again.. i'm not suggesting the moderators are doing a bad job. I am simply saying that to make this a more diplomatic place (as it should be) I think it would be a good idea to setup a two tier system.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar.
Yes, i know. I was simply stating that as one of the criteria needed to be on the oversight board. ONE of the criteria. Your using my argument against me. You are stating a truth (that there is more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar) in the hope that that strengthens your argument - and it doesn't.
-- Posted by RockerTori106 at 1:28 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 4:27 pm on July 19, 2008
On a side note, though you bringing it up has nothing to do with the the validity of my argument, I've been here much longer than 59 days. Trust me... I'm not one to advocate for the mods, but this system you're suggesting simply won't help.
Really? You've TRIED it? Tell us about it.
-- Posted by JohnQ at 1:28 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from RockerTori106 at 9:23 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from JohnQ at 4:21 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:18 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:14 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 9:07 pm on July 19, 2008
FAQ: What is the Oversight Board? (click here) Any member nominated to this board you suggest would have to be approved anyway. But why who, Fenton? Well... the moderators, most likely. Besides, they do their job fine. The oversight board is rarely used. Just because you don't see the mods opposing each other, doesn't mean they don't deliberate about most of their non-trivial actions. There's a whole mod forum you can't even see, and I know it's used extensively by all of them.
As far as im aware the OB members are selected at random by a generator if they have for-filled some criteria (blue bar status i think). It's rarely used because its not very accessible. There have been two instances today where I think the OB could have come in handy but all the members are offline. I am simply suggesting a small group of member elected reps with MOD powers to do their job on a full time basis.
There's considerably more to being on the oversight board than simply having a blue bar. It's not a vigilant mod-error task force either... it's in place to dissuade grave moderation error/abuse. Believe me, LW moderates itself quite capably, and the mods serve as an even more finite check for the site. As for the "middleman board"... what do you suggest are the requirements for that? I'm willing to bet anyone who qualifies would also qualify to be a moderator, by LW standards.
I concur completely. You haven't really thought this through. All you're doing is making more people moderators.. Don't you think moderators were members once? They didn't just acquire the status on making their account and David saying "This'll do." No. Time and effort on the moderators and David's part has been put into place so we have a fair system. Sure, some moderators are deemed as retarded fucks. But as long as they do their job, which is to moderate, then they can be as much of a dick to me, or anyone they want on this forum for all I care.
Where in this did you see that the people who would be a part of this middleman board would be moderators? They wouldn't. But yes, they were members once, but they're turning into power-hungry idiots.
You suggested giving them the same power as the moderators, thus it would make them a moderator by all standards. Don't you think it would do the same thing for them? Let's take a step back here and look at what you're saying. 1) Make a NEW board of "middlemen" to sit and fuck with moderator decisions cause some kid that made a post about how big his dick is, or how hard he wants to stab his dad cus he's having a tantrum had their post deleted. 2) Have the community (which, is fucked up with legitimates as isvoid(0)
Check Spelling) appoint some faggot with the IQ of a teaspoon to gain moderator powers. 3) Go against the system, or "better it" as you would say, when it's not the system that's fucked, it's the members sitting posting asking if their dick's too small, or if they should go out on a Friday night because they can't decide instead of posting about serious matters such as they did back when I joined. God damn it. The logic behind your theory is flawed.. Completely..
-- Posted by El Manana at 1:29 pm on July 19, 2008
First of all, I'm very sorry about your executed friend. LW has lost it's true meaning and is now stuck in a limbo between a place to express yourself freely and a support site. This makes it a breeding ground for trolls and spam, especially for the "support" context. I have grown tired of LiveWire's ways (this is not my first account), part of this because of the moderation staff. I am not sure whether this part of the site can ever truly be fixed, be it by people appointed to moderate mods or the promotion of multiple admins, but I'm at the brink of giving up altogether. You're right, the oversight board has next to no power and rarely flexes its muscle anyways. I've witnessed the moderation staff regularly abuse its powers, and there are guidelines on this site that are absolutely ridiculous, like the deletion of posts because there is "gratuitous" use of language or sexual terms. I have witnessed another member leave this site to start his own support forum, which has going pretty well. I myself am thinking about creating my own forum, but not a support oriented one, just a place designed for teen. Somewhat like a hangout site, my forum would have no rules except no posting porn and no threatening another member or encouraging violence. Maybe my liberal views are just seeping into my common sense, who knows? Anyways, I'm going off on a tangent, but I agree with you.
-- Posted by Praise the Lard at 1:32 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from hithere at 1:23 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:05 pm on July 19, 2008
An internet correspondent of mine, a friend who I had been in contact with for a number of years has recently been executed in China for posting controversial blog posts which apposed the government. I therefore understand the importance of fighting censorship.
"therefore?" the first sentence isn't a premise for the second at all. it's a premise for understanding the importance of fighting the desire to censor, which is basically impossible. your friend didn't get killed because of censorship, he got killed because people wanted to censor him. so it seems to me that you would be perfectly fine with your friend being censored, as long as he weren't killed. livewire doesn't execute people as censorship.
How does any of that make sense or have any bearing on this discussion?
-- Posted by Fenton at 1:34 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from RockerTori106 at 1:28 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 4:27 pm on July 19, 2008
On a side note, though you bringing it up has nothing to do with the the validity of my argument, I've been here much longer than 59 days. Trust me... I'm not one to advocate for the mods, but this system you're suggesting simply won't help.
Really? You've TRIED it? Tell us about it.
You don't need to try something in order to tell that the outcome will be a disaster... that's just foolish. As for finding a member "who understands both the mods and the members"... where do you expect to find someone like that, and how?
-- Posted by RockerTori106 at 1:35 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from JohnQ at 4:28 pm on July 19, 2008
You suggested giving them the same power as the moderators, thus it would make them a moderator by all standards. Don't you think it would do the same thing for them? Let's take a step back here and look at what you're saying. 1) Make a NEW board of "middlemen" to sit and fuck with moderator decisions cause some kid that made a post about how big his dick is, or how hard he wants to stab his dad cus he's having a tantrum had their post deleted. 2) Have the community (which, is fucked up with illigitemates as is) appoint some faggot with the IQ of a teaspoon to gain moderator powers. 3) Go against the system, or "better it" as you would say, when it's not the system that's fucked, it's the members sitting posting asking if their dick's too small, or if they should go out on a friday night because they can't decide instead of posting about serious matters such as they did back when I joined. God damnit. The logic behind your theory is flawed.. Completey..
Hon, I did no such thing. I said for them to be a MIDDLEMAN. Not a MODERATOR. They wouldn't NEED to be of moderator stature to do this. "Middleman" wouldn't be a different title. This has nothing to do with the dumb topics about kids posting their size. It has to do with topics that are posted with hopes of a good, meaningful, intelligent conversation. Again, no mod powers here. The "middlemen" that would be appointed would be someone that both the members and the mods feel would be a good asset to the site. You're just being a negative jackass and yes, you're reading what me and August Rush are saying, but you're not THINKING about it and how much it would help the site. Having this option would get rid of the dumb topics you're complaining about. Be a little more open-minded before you blow everything out of proportion. We're making a damn good point.
-- Posted by RockerTori106 at 1:36 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 4:34 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from RockerTori106 at 1:28 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from Fenton at 4:27 pm on July 19, 2008
On a side note, though you bringing it up has nothing to do with the the validity of my argument, I've been here much longer than 59 days. Trust me... I'm not one to advocate for the mods, but this system you're suggesting simply won't help.
Really? You've TRIED it? Tell us about it.
You don't need to try something in order to tell that the outcome will be a disaster... that's just foolish. As for finding a member "who understands both the mods and the members"... where do you expect to find someone like that, and how?
There are members like this. Not a lot, but there are. Like August Rush. He understands mods are doing their job and doing really good at it, but he also understands that there is no need for some topics to be removed.
-- Posted by August Rush at 1:37 pm on July 19, 2008
JohnQ & Fenton
You are looking for holes in my argument. I don't think its important to argue over the specifics here because to be honest im sleep deprived and hungry so my concentration wasn't great when i wrote the initial post. But that aside I think there is a great need for the changes I have suggested. You disagree, and thats fine but lets not get caught up on that. Many other people agree with me, and i'm not just talking about the other people responding to this topic but also the people creating other similar topics. I think you have misunderstood what I have been saying and if I had more energy I would go back and pull apart what your saying but i'm too tired! I am going to ask a few of the moderators to read this topic as i would love to hear what they have to say.
-- Posted by JohnQ at 1:38 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from El Manana at 9:29 pm on July 19, 2008
First of all, I'm very sorry about your executed friend. LW has lost it's true meaning and is now stuck in a limbo between a place to express yourself freely and a support site. This makes it a breeding ground for trolls and spam, especially for the "support" context. I have grown tired of LiveWire's ways (this is not my first account), part of this because of the moderation staff. I am not sure whether this part of the site can ever truly be fixed, be it by people appointed to moderate mods or the promotion of multiple admins, but I'm at the brink of giving up altogether. You're right, the oversight board has next to no power and rarely flexes its muscle anyways. I've witnessed the moderation staff regularly abuse its powers, and there are guidelines on this site that are absolutely ridiculous, like the deletion of posts because there is "gratuitous" use of language or sexual terms. I have witnessed another member leave this site to start his own support forum, which has going pretty well. I myself am thinking about creating my own forum, but not a support oriented one, just a place designed for teen. Somewhat like a hangout site, my forum would have no rules except no posting porn and no threatening another member or encouraging violence. Maybe my liberal views are just seeping into my common sense, who knows? Anyways, I'm going off on a tangent, but I agree with you.
We will see how long this site of your friend's lasts. Neo's website? Just because he has different views than the mods of LW you think this is going to solve all problems throughout different forums on the internet? People will not change under a new moderation team, system, or website. People are who they are, and it seems they either don't want help anymore or they're too worried to post their problems here..
-- Posted by Fenton at 1:38 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from RockerTori106 at 1:35 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from JohnQ at 4:28 pm on July 19, 2008
You suggested giving them the same power as the moderators, thus it would make them a moderator by all standards. Don't you think it would do the same thing for them? Let's take a step back here and look at what you're saying. 1) Make a NEW board of "middlemen" to sit and fuck with moderator decisions cause some kid that made a post about how big his dick is, or how hard he wants to stab his dad cus he's having a tantrum had their post deleted. 2) Have the community (which, is fucked up with illigitemates as is) appoint some faggot with the IQ of a teaspoon to gain moderator powers. 3) Go against the system, or "better it" as you would say, when it's not the system that's fucked, it's the members sitting posting asking if their dick's too small, or if they should go out on a friday night because they can't decide instead of posting about serious matters such as they did back when I joined. God damnit. The logic behind your theory is flawed.. Completey..
Hon, I did no such thing. I said for them to be a MIDDLEMAN. Not a MODERATOR. They wouldn't NEED to be of moderator stature to do this. "Middleman" wouldn't be a different title. This has nothing to do with the dumb topics about kids posting their size. It has to do with topics that are posted with hopes of a good, meaningful, intelligent conversation. Again, no mod powers here. The "middlemen" that would be appointed would be someone that both the members and the mods feel would be a good asset to the site. You're just being a negative jackass and yes, you're reading what me and August Rush are saying, but you're not THINKING about it and how much it would help the site. Having this option would get rid of the dumb topics you're complaining about. Be a little more open-minded before you blow everything out of proportion. We're making a damn good point.
Fuck me, this is ridiculous. What can you expect a "middleman" to do about moderation decisions when he's without moderation power? What you're suggesting, if I've got this straight, is a member, elected by other members, to point out when they disagree with a moderation decision, but have no power to do anything but bring it to the mods' attention? We have that already... any member can do it: FAQ: How do I report a Moderator Error? (click here)
-- Posted by Fenton at 1:39 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from August Rush at 1:37 pm on July 19, 2008
JohnQ & Fenton
You are looking for holes in my argument.
Pardon me, but isn't that the essence of debate?
-- Posted by August Rush at 1:45 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from JohnQ at 9:38 pm on July 19, 2008
Quote: from El Manana at 9:29 pm on July 19, 2008
First of all, I'm very sorry about your executed friend. LW has lost it's true meaning and is now stuck in a limbo between a place to express yourself freely and a support site. This makes it a breeding ground for trolls and spam, especially for the "support" context. I have grown tired of LiveWire's ways (this is not my first account), part of this because of the moderation staff. I am not sure whether this part of the site can ever truly be fixed, be it by people appointed to moderate mods or the promotion of multiple admins, but I'm at the brink of giving up altogether. You're right, the oversight board has next to no power and rarely flexes its muscle anyways. I've witnessed the moderation staff regularly abuse its powers, and there are guidelines on this site that are absolutely ridiculous, like the deletion of posts because there is "gratuitous" use of language or sexual terms. I have witnessed another member leave this site to start his own support forum, which has going pretty well. I myself am thinking about creating my own forum, but not a support oriented one, just a place designed for teen. Somewhat like a hangout site, my forum would have no rules except no posting porn and no threatening another member or encouraging violence. Maybe my liberal views are just seeping into my common sense, who knows? Anyways, I'm going off on a tangent, but I agree with you.
We will see how long this site of your friend's lasts. Neo's website? Just because he has different views than the mods of LW you think this is going to solve all problems throughout different forums on the internet? People will not change under a new moderation team, system, or website. People are who they are, and it seems they either don't want help anymore or they're too worried to post their problems here..
In my opinion I don't think this site harbors a supportive environment anymore. As Briley 07 said earlier the support on this site is pretty much dead. It's got nothing to do with whether people want help anymore or not, this site simply isnt providing it.
-- Posted by MariJani at 1:47 pm on July 19, 2008
I don't like how the Moderators have the ability to censor topics, opinions or people that they dislike or disagree with. It's not so much their power that I appose but their totalitarian way of managing the site.
How could we possibly get away with censorship? I feel like members create quite the uprising anytime ANY slightly borderline action is made, I fail to see how we would be able to legitimately get away with censoring people on the premise that we dislike them. I'm pretty sure that members think that we have more 'power' than we actually do. Basically every action performed is 'cut and dry'. It's not like we have the ability to decide one day that something is allowed, then decide the next that it isn't. All of the guidelines are previously laid out, and are there for all to see. On a sidenote, what exactly do you think we censor? If we were try censoring dictators, then wouldn't you think we would want to delete the 1097429873 topics that talk about how shitty mods are? I mean, if I'm putting myself in the spirit if a tyrant I would assume that I wouldn't want public shit-talking about the government.
Posting a moderator error report is pretty much like asking a dictator to reconsider his actions. Most of the time as they justified the action in the first place they are unwilling to reconsider. Useless!
When you post an MER the moderator that you post it against is not allowed to close it. Meaning, one of the thirty-three OTHER moderators has to take a look at it and decide if you have a legit complaint or not.
I propose a diplomatically elected member (or small group of members) who can stick up for the other side. Members with the powers to appose a Moderators decisions because lets face it, they don't usually appose each other.
You have GOT to be kidding me on that last part. No, really, am I being punk'd? Have you looked at the list of moderators recently? Do you fail to notice that some of them tend to be the most stubborn members that we have? I mean, that would be all fine and dandy if the stubborn ones agreed, but no, we will spend WEEKS debating over simple issues. There is a whole forum dedicated to the debates that we have with each other. I have yet to see a moderator that is afraid to call out another on a poor action being made. Just because we all have to do the same job, and have the same goal, does not mean we are full of sunshines and hugs. It's brutal. :'(
I would be interested to hear what people have to say about this.
From an outside point of view, I don't think it would work, and I definitely don't think you guys would like it. Here's why: What you are suggesting is for a few members to have more power than the moderators, and that they will be able to oppose our actions? Alright. 1) Many members hate authority. Having more members of authority will only sour people more. 2) With such a small group it would be easy to conspire and do something detrimental. 3) Assuming that this group does get the power and such, who would be the people to appoint them? The moderators? How does that solve anything at all? 4) We already have enough problems with the OB. From time to time they decide to TAKE LW DOWN!!!!.. It's really cute, because they hardly get anywhere, but if they had the actual power to do some crazy shit, it would suck. SNACK TIME!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Next
|