Moderator3 on Sun Feb 11, 2018 9:02 pm wrote:
No no no. You aren't going anywhere.
Dammit. I had work planned for the next month without the distraction of FECC!
On a more serious note, and to reply to a few comments (not necessarily in the order they were written).
You, and others have taken what was written above in the completely wrong way. I can't neccesarily say that I didn't see it coming though...
To be honest, I don't think that would have happened had DJC's post been removed and his name added to the list in the first place. As long as everyone is treated in the same way, then I don't think people are likely to complain. I realise it turned out to be a mistake, but it was an unfortunate one that probably wouldn't have had such a reaction if it had related to anyone other than me or Doc - and I am well aware that we are
both somewhat controversial figures.
Where we did make a mistake, is the post quoted above was supposed to be removed. In fact, we thought it had been. We do not allow members to publicly call for the reporting of other members.
Understood, and your honesty is welcomed.
While we understand that trust in us, the moderators, will not be rebuilt overnight - we want all members to know that we are trying our best.
I think that has been noticed in general, with warnings given recently to people on both sides of the FECC civil war, so to speak, which was why the omission this evening was unfortunate.
A member cannot report something as a "personal attack" if it is not them being attacked.
You ask for comments and suggestions in your post, and I think this is something that could be revised. Not everyone who comes here does so on an hourly or daily basis like some of us sad people, and therefore a blatant attack on a member can easily be missed by the person at the blunt end of that attack. I don't see why it has to be the victim of the attack that reports the issue. An attack on another member is a breach of the rules, no matter who reports it. That doesn't mean I am suggesting that we all go around hunting out attacks by other members of the forum to report in the way that you said had happened in this instance, but I also don't see why a report by a different person makes it any less of an offence, or one that can be ignored. If X clearly attacks Y, then X shouldn't get away with it just because Y doesn't happen to come back here for four days and misses it.
by cs2003 » Sun Feb 11, 2018 10:15 pm
So another name has been added to the list. This is very convenient for that person considering that this has only been done after it was moved to off topic.
A big splash announcement for us and not for DJC.
Not exactly fair.
This comment seems ridiculous. I don't care where or how someone gets warned. And, for the record,
I got warned via private message a few days ago rather than in the public forum at all, and so DJC being warned while the topic is in a different section and less likely to be seen is hardly an issue or unfair treatment of others or preferential treatment of him.
That said, I'm not sure how I feel about the private message route for warnings. Again, the same rule for everyone, I would suggest: public warnings or private warnings - not a mix of the two - that way, no-one can be accused of receiving better treatment than others. And, that way, we can see that people are being treated in the same way for the same things. If private warnings are issued, then there is always the chance that others will feel that person has "got away with it" without knowing the full story, and that, in turn, will lead to resentment.
However, we appear to have made progress tonight, even if, perhaps, that wasn't expected or even intended by any side when it started. I think the special section, long discussed I believe, is a good thing for matters such as these and for, hopefully, being able to nip disquiet in the bud. I think the distrust in moderators that others have mentioned in this thread already is well known - from what we can gather, though, this is to do with previous mods rather than current ones. But, as we can see, it isn't going away overnight. As I said in my post earlier, the "these decisions cannot be discussed" issue is one of the biggest problems here, and has been for a long while, and it is very much a part of what was the fascist era here. If we now have a place where we can actually converse with moderators, and discuss decisions, and I hope we CAN do that as we are doing in this thread (although not for every little thing), then I'm thinking FECC can move forward.
BUT, the people who wanted this section, or these opportunities, MUST NOT abuse it.
As an aside, on the subject of the fascist era, can I just say that it is nice to see that the Guidelines have been rewritten and stripped of the sections that looks as if they were written by Kim Jong Un, sitting at a dilapidated typewriter with only a red ink ribbon, and with steam coming out of his ears!
As a final note, I believe, and have believed for a long time, that a thumbs down button could be utilised on the board for posts that may not break rules but which are still "unhelpful" in our little society here. I'm not saying it should be used if people disagree with someone in what they have said, but it could be used in a way that is basically a disapproval of tone or attitude - a message to the member that this isn't what we want here. Would it be abused or misused? I don't know. But the thanks button is abused and misused anyway. People get thanked left, right and centre for derailing comments, sarcasm, off-topic posts, and so on. And nothing has to be permanent - it can be trialled and see what happens. But I do wonder if it would give people a better idea of what is and is not appreciated within our family here. If ever employed, though, I would suggest that it was used in an anonymous way - we don't need a list of names to see who disliked a post, just numbers (as on Youtube, for example). And I think things are made worse by the list of names saying who LIKED a post, too. The thumbs up/down buttons could just have numbers beside them. Knowing that one member thanked his buddy for sneezing isn't helping things on the board, IMO - and it just encourages the factions that we already have to remain.
As a final, final note - thank you to the mods who have responded to the feedback this evening. This is appreciated, and feels like a step forward.