An open letter to ILX & mods re: an alternative to the current system

lol

<3 yall

http://i51.tinypic.com/27ywv0g.gif Can I test out my sig now

                                 ============================================
http://i29.tinypic.com/zyfwol.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/tuRPu.gif
clikc to tweet me :')
                                               Respect Anime !!!!
                              >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> انا مثلي الجنس <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< 
http://i30.tinypic.com/309nj47.png
                          凸[-_-]凸 Put this in your sig if you love the McRib!!! 凸[-_-]凸

irl lol

this thread =

http://www.heathersanimations.com/pheonix/pheo8.gif

( avatar ruins garfield

Hey. thats one of my actual livejournal avatars :(

ha ha, you have a livejournal

http://www.minecraftforum.net/download/file.php?avatar=29673_1284258450.png i like the idea of avatars but wld be too lazy to really make good use of them as a feature

See imo having avatars would be exactly like pasting a link to a dumb picture at the start of every post.

http://oi52.tinypic.com/6p0m7d.jpg Maybe Your A Dumb Pciture...

fucking A that dinosaur has a chicken head.

http://i51.tinypic.com/24pmn4j.jpg d-_-b

ha ha, you have a livejournal

Shut up so do you.

:-)

hehehe.

http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/avatarfs/avatar100685_5.gif so glad i revived this thread u guys

(whoops!)

http://images.shaggybevo.com/board/customavatars/avatar610_1.gif This thread looks awesome on an iPhone, btw.

http://i612.photobucket.com/albums/tt203/pplains/Picture-2.jpg

_____________________________________

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

403 Permission Denied

You do not have permission for this request /avatars/Various/Sexy/Ghetto-booty.gif

That said, there are totally things about it that need to work better. People need to get warnings when they're getting close. They need feedback after a ban to explain what happened. It shouldn't (and doesn't btw) happen automatically; mods should review the SBs.

I don't want to sound smug or anything, but these things were pretty much what I suggested a couple of years ago, when the first SB discussions were rolling. I understand that changing the code takes hard work, but on the other hand someone did that work to code the SB system in the first place, even though there wasn't any proper discussion (except maybe among the mods?) on the need for such a system.

On the other hand, AFAIK it doesn't take hard work to turn off the SB system. That's what I said you should do back then, and I still think you should do it, and only turn it back on when the suggested changes to it have been made. If you have a feature that's not essential to the board, and it has some acknowledged flaws, IMO you should correct the flaws before implementing the feature. Now we've had this flawed thing running for two years or something, and to me at least it's supposed advantages haven't compensated for the badwill and paranoia it seems to have generated.

Also, the idea that bans aren't automatic and mods review them is still a bit unclear to me. Has there been a case where someone got 51 or more SBs and wasn't banned for it, because the mods saw the some of them were given for laughs or because of personal feuds or whatever? To me this is how the system should work (people shouldn't get banned because they get SBs for completely inoffensive posts), but from what I've gathered it isn't how it works now?

http://i18.tinypic.com/6cinvq8.gif Mods have explained they look at the SBs when someone is 51ed and decided whether or not any of the SBs should be rescinded, I think that's a fair system. Ultimately there is a person responsible for making the decision to accept the will of the 51.
_________________________________________________
with great power comes great responsibility

Has there been a case where someone got 51 or more SBs and wasn't banned for it, because the mods saw the some of them were given for laughs or because of personal feuds or whatever?

I endorse mods wiping out bans that have obviously been given frivolously or out of malice, but I don't want to encourage Tuomas to post about it

http://www.evilspacerobot.com/evilspacerobot/1001101/uploads/2007/10/nervous.gif dilemma

i don't see why 'personal feud' isn't a legitimate reason for an sb

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b379/Vietgrove/nm100.gifAs far as I'm aware the only SBs that get deleted are those that are from this or that poster's alternative logins, IE duplicates. These are checked v carefully.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b379/Vietgrove/bus2.jpg

So we're back to square one, aren't we?

Wait, shut up AA, never mind.

people shouldn't get banned because they get SBs for completely inoffensive posts

Once again: individuals have very different conceptions of what constitutes "inoffensive".

http://s.myniceprofile.com/myspaceico/21/2176.gif At least we've all agreed that avatars are a go though, right?

If they ever get implemented for real I will go through this thread with a fine SB comb.

Put it to a poll/vote, it will be overwhelmingly against.

sb's or avatars?

polls

ilx

people shouldn't get banned because they get SBs for completely inoffensive posts

Once again: individuals have very different conceptions of what constitutes "inoffensive".

Well yeah, but a message board can't live by moral relativism, that would lead either to no moderation at all (because there's no single thing that's offensive to everyone), or people getting banned for completely trivial reasons (because every jokey or ad hominem SB can be justified by saying "I was offended"). There has to be a standard for what's considered offensive, and I think the current moderation guidelines we have for that are very good - the problem with SBs is that no one's checking whether they match those guidelines.

or people getting banned for completely trivial reasons (because every jokey or ad hominem SB can be justified by saying "I was offended")

you have to get 51, so it's not that subjective

Maybe, but if Kate got several SBs for the initial post in this thread, which is completely sensible and has nothing modworthy about it, then it means people's subjective judgement isn't working well enough, and moderation guidelines are needed.

http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/image.php?u=41065&dateline=1134267096ready to concede on the avatars, I've seen the light

http://www.snowboardingforum.com/customavatars/avatar1615_1.gifit was the wisdom of Lamp and the lol of ENBB that brought me over

people shouldnt give out jokey sb's, tuomas. Isnt that fairer to say than anything else?

Yeah, but as Pash said above, at the moment jokey SBs count just as much as serious ones.

Tuomas! Please man, don't do this today. It's the last day before Thanksgiving dude. I'm just trying to chill out at the office and do a little ilx.

otoh - nvrmind. Just....whatever.

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/hs455.snc4/50499_33986972857_3259204_q.jpgkkvgz it's hard to hear you without your avatar

people's subjective judgement isn't working well enough

uh-huh

how's a mod to call a jokey sb or not? You're preaching to the wrong gallery- wmc already stated that he's uncomfortable with judging the validity of an sb, i'd imagine it's the same for the other mods.

Besides, your basis for judging the 'real' sb's is going to differ from everyone else's. The whole point is that everyone knows what the button does, and mods arent going to police it beyond making sure sock accounts arent fouling it either way

Put it to a poll/vote, it will be overwhelmingly against.

― Mark G, Wednesday, 24 November 2010 12:02 (49 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
sb's or avatars?

― Goths in Home & Away in my lifetime (darraghmac), Wednesday, 24 November 2010 12:06 (45 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Avatars.

how's a mod to call a jokey sb or not? You're preaching to the wrong gallery- wmc already stated that he's uncomfortable with judging the validity of an sb, i'd imagine it's the same for the other mods.

1) The mod checks if the post that go SBd is against ILX guidelines (no racism/sexism/homophobia, no spamming, no personal attacks, etc).

2) If it is, the SB stays. If it isn't, the SB is removed.

This is what I suggested two years ago when this discussion first started.

If people's subjective judgement isn't working well enough then somebody will just have to force them to be subjective in the right way.

http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/41326074/8808425 No one has ever reached 51 through "jokey" or innocuous suggest bans alone. For virtually every person who has been 51ed, the majority of their suggest bans have been for aggressive flaming, snark, abuse, creepiness, trolling or a combination of some or all of the above.