Pages: 1 2  Next -- Posted by Bearsy at 8:00 pm on July 27, 2008 IF 20 of them agree to it. And for everyone who disagrees, another one has to agree. Ex: If forty SL's say, "No, don't ban" 60 have to say yes, ban for them to be banned. And if 20 vote no, 40 have to vote yes. Got it? It's hard to make a mistake when you have THAT many yes's! Also SL's can warn now but five have to agree to the warn and it's only a one or two-day warn. I think this site can be truly member one and we can get a hold of control over the nazi regime that is the moderation team, but this might be the only way (while defending us from trolls). What are some opinions on this? -- Posted by Praise the Lard at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 terrible fucking idea if anything fewer members should have the ability to ban not more -- Posted by Bagheera at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 No. -- Posted by Cunning Stunt at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 By the time 20 SLs convened on a target, the mods would have already dealt with it.... -- Posted by DemolitionxXxLover at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 Nah! -- Posted by acausedelle at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 I don't think that is a good idea. -- Posted by Baron Samedi at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Praise the Lard at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 terrible fucking idea if anything fewer members should have the ability to ban not more What he said. -- Posted by Bearsy at 8:02 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Praise the Lard at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 terrible fucking idea if anything fewer members should have the ability to ban not more But the only way to create a balance with the mod team is if more members can ban. That way we can warn the mods also if they get out of line. But not ban, b/c then there might be a new nazi regime. -- Posted by Jehovah at 8:02 pm on July 27, 2008 This has to be the worst suggestion on LW to date. Thread favorited -- Posted by xXlittlexXstarxX88 at 8:02 pm on July 27, 2008 Bad Idea IMO -- Posted by Praise the Lard at 8:03 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 8:02 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Praise the Lard at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 terrible fucking idea    if anything fewer members should have the ability to ban not more But the only way to create a balance with the mod team is if more members can ban.   That way we can warn the mods also if they get out of line. But not ban, b/c then there might be a new nazi regime. warn the mods lol and what would that do reduce the number of bans they can give a day? -- Posted by boothy at 8:04 pm on July 27, 2008 No, simply no. I'm with you for taking away the regime of the moderators, but this is not the right way to achieve it. I think the most vital thing for this site is a change in the rules and generally what is accepted. An open-support site is better than closed one. -- Posted by Phoenix 1989 at 8:04 pm on July 27, 2008 one word for that  FAIL -- Posted by Praise the Lard at 8:04 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from boothy at 8:04 pm on July 27, 2008 No, simply no. I'm with you for taking away the regime of the moderators, but this is not the right way to achieve it. I think the most vital thing for this site is a change in the rules and generally what is accepted. An open-support site is better than closed one. what needs to be done is separate lw into a support forum and a social forum, and have different mods and different rules for them -- Posted by Bearsy at 8:06 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Praise the Lard at 8:03 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 8:02 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Praise the Lard at 8:01 pm on July 27, 2008 terrible fucking idea     if anything fewer members should have the ability to ban not more    But the only way to create a balance with the mod team is if more members can ban.    That way we can warn the mods also if they get out of line. But not ban, b/c then there might be a new nazi regime. warn the mods lol and what would that do reduce the number of bans they can give a day? Yes! -- Posted by Define Your Line at 8:07 pm on July 27, 2008 I don't agree, to be honest - and I'm a Support Leader. -- Posted by Praise the Lard at 8:08 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Phoenix 1989 at 8:04 pm on July 27, 2008 one word for that FAIL how original it's in red text this time -- Posted by boothy at 8:09 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Praise the Lard at 4:04 am on July 28, 2008 Quote: from boothy at 8:04 pm on July 27, 2008 No, simply no. I'm with you for taking away the regime of the moderators, but this is not the right way to achieve it.    I think the most vital thing for this site is a change in the rules and generally what is accepted. An open-support site is better than closed one. what needs to be done is separate lw into a support forum and a social forum, and have different mods and different rules for them That's already been tried, to an extent. Overspill takes over that theory. -- Posted by Slim Shady at 8:10 pm on July 27, 2008 no way, bad idea -- Posted by Bearsy at 8:10 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from boothy at 8:09 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Praise the Lard at 4:04 am on July 28, 2008 Quote: from boothy at 8:04 pm on July 27, 2008 No, simply no. I'm with you for taking away the regime of the moderators, but this is not the right way to achieve it.     I think the most vital thing for this site is a change in the rules and generally what is accepted. An open-support site is better than closed one.    what needs to be done is separate lw into a support forum and a social forum, and have different mods and different rules for them That's already been tried, to an extent. Overspill takes over that theory. what -- Posted by MariJani at 8:11 pm on July 27, 2008 And how do you suppose support leaders would go about banning people without having access to the mod forum, members notes, the members previous history, deleted posts by the member, etc etc etc. Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!' Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for. -- Posted by EmbraceTheHate at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 We don't need SL's on a power trip... -- Posted by Bearsy at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from MariJani at 8:11 pm on July 27, 2008 And how do you suppose support leaders would go about banning people without having access to the mod forum, members notes, the members previous history, deleted posts by the member, etc etc etc. Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!' Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for. There will be a support leader's forum, support leader's member notes, we can check IP's, see what they're deleted psots are, etc etc etc. -- Posted by boothy at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 The two sections would spill into each other, eventually rendering the separation pointless. To stop this? Moderate. Bringing the entire idea to take power away from moderators to a failure, as this would take more power to instate this system. I like your democratic theory, but democracy never works as a voice of a few, nor does it work on a black or white answer. -- Posted by Bearsy at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Fire37 at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 We don't need SL's on a power trip... \ They are already on a power trip. -- Posted by MariJani at 8:14 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from MariJani at 8:11 pm on July 27, 2008 And how do you suppose support leaders would go about banning people without having access to the mod forum, members notes, the members previous history, deleted posts by the member, etc etc etc.    Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!'    Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for. There will be a support leader's forum, support leader's member notes, we can check IP's, see what they're deleted psots are, etc etc etc. So there would basically just be 200 mods running around?  Wouldn't the only difference be that it would take more votes? -- Posted by Bearsy at 8:18 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from MariJani at 8:14 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from MariJani at 8:11 pm on July 27, 2008 And how do you suppose support leaders would go about banning people without having access to the mod forum, members notes, the members previous history, deleted posts by the member, etc etc etc.     Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!'     Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for.    There will be a support leader's forum, support leader's member notes, we can check IP's, see what they're deleted psots are, etc etc etc. So there would basically just be 200 mods running around?  Wouldn't the only difference be that it would take more votes? Yes it will be brill. -- Posted by boothy at 8:19 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from MariJani at 4:14 am on July 28, 2008 Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from MariJani at 8:11 pm on July 27, 2008 And how do you suppose support leaders would go about banning people without having access to the mod forum, members notes, the members previous history, deleted posts by the member, etc etc etc.   Basically, it would be hard to ban someone without knowing anything about their prior conduct, and you couldn't just be like, 'oh, I think he was warned last week, IT'S TIME FOR A BAN!'   Also, I fail to see how banning people from the site is 'supporting' them, which ideally is what SUPPORT leaders are for.    There will be a support leader's forum, support leader's member notes, we can check IP's, see what they're deleted psots are, etc etc etc. So there would basically just be 200 mods running around? Wouldn't the only difference be that it would take more votes? Precisely. Democracy never works as a voice of a few, nor does it work on a black or white answer (just copied and pasted myself to reiterate). Essentially what this person wants is a more democratic system rather than a heir achy, but a democratic system would involve every member to be truly democratic. I don't think LW would fit this kind of system at the present moment, to be honest - for the same reason democracy fails in general. What the people want is not necessarily (or indeed often not at all) what is best for the people. -- Posted by Bearsy at 8:19 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from boothy at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 The two sections would spill into each other, eventually rendering the separation pointless. To stop this? Moderate. Bringing the entire idea to take power away from moderators to a failure, as this would take more power to instate this system. I like your democratic theory, but democracy never works as a voice of a few, nor does it work on a black or white answer. :( But two is too little voices, especially to remove a post, what if someone has two different accounts and is SL on both? -- Posted by boothy at 8:20 pm on July 27, 2008 Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 4:19 am on July 28, 2008 Quote: from boothy at 8:13 pm on July 27, 2008 The two sections would spill into each other, eventually rendering the separation pointless. To stop this? Moderate. Bringing the entire idea to take power away from moderators to a failure, as this would take more power to instate this system. I like your democratic theory, but democracy never works as a voice of a few, nor does it work on a black or white answer.   :(   But two is too little voices, especially to remove a post, what if someone has two different accounts and is SL on both? What are you on about? I was talking in response to Praise the Lord and you responding to me saying "what". Read the convo. Pages: 1 2  Next