- x Foman123 x
- |
- Master Forum Ninja
- gamertag: [none]
- user homepage:
Posted by: ash55
This system would mean no elistist "Senior Members" and easy tools to punish people who abuse the system.
Personally, I think the idea is rather pointless because when I'm on the forums, I can usually find the problematic posts anyway (although this would probably make that easier for sure). The most useful "flagging" I get, is from friends on MSN (when I'm away from Bungie.net but still on my computer).
All good points that you have made. I have some responses that I hope will directly address your concerns with this idea:
* First, why not create another tier of membership? The only reason you give is that it would create "elitism." I don't think that this is true. Senior Members would not think that they were so great that they couldn't be bothered to converse with regular members. If you want proof that the system would not create elitism, just look at the moderators - you guys participate in the forums just as much as the regular members. Such a result has not happened with you and it would not happen with Senior Members, who would receive such status PRECISELY because they are mature and wise enough not to resort to petty squabbles about who is a better/worse member.
And completely disregarding the question of whether or not "Senior" status would create "elitism," it would most certainly give regular members something to strive for. I believe that LOTS of members would want to receive "senior" status, and would realize that this can be a much more attainable goal than "forum ninja" status. Members who would not clean up their posting habits otherwise might strive to attain "senior" status and stop posting spam/flames.
* How can a "flagging" system be pointless when even you state that the system would make finding problematic posts "easier for sure"? As both you and prometheus have implied from your use of the word "usually," not all spam jumps out from the main forum page - especially during times of increased activity or in the busier forums. Moreover, spam is only one kind of problematic thread. Moderators still must deal with bad posts that are violations of other rules - a Senior Member who spends a lot of time in any particular forum is much more likely to notice a thread that has been bumped 4 or 5 times by the original poster - such a violation of the forum rules would in no way be obvious or easy to spot, especially if there are responses in between the bumps and/or the bumps are cleverly worded.
One of the most clever methods of bumping I have seen, without naming names, is to reply to a "dead" thread and then immediately edit the reply to say "nevermind" or "delete." This takes the thread to the top of the forum page but does not look like a bump. Only a person who is paying careful attention to the thread or who remembers the thread would notice - if that person is not a moderator, a "flag" system would surely be an efficient way to mark that thread so that a moderator can scrutinize the post more closely.
As I've stated, the flagging system is not intended to be a replacement, but rather a supplement to the current system to make it more efficient, in addition to giving regular forum members a big incentive to become "good members." This system accomplishes both.
* You noted that the most useful flagging you get is from MSN. I agree that MSN and PMs can be extremely useful, but there are two problems with it.
First, I usually visit Bungie.net from work, where we are strongly discouraged from using instant messenger services. I and people like me cannot use MSN to get in touch with moderators. We are relegated to using the "find out which mod is online" program and then PMing the most recent mod or mods.
Second, I have all of the mods' MSN screen names (who have made them available or given them to me) , and I can tell you that at the times that I do get a chance to use MSN, there are many instances when no mods are online in MSN.
MSN is not reliable enough to be an "indirect flagging" method. Nor is PM, because many times - even using KD's program - you send a PM to a mod who does not log in again for the rest of the day. Furthermore, PMing every time you see a bad post can be extremely cumbersome. Anyone who has ever tried to do this can attest to that fact.
* For the above reasons, the flagging system is much more efficient for regular members who are trying to help things out. But this system is also much more efficient for moderators. Imagine logging on to b.net late at night or early in the morning, and you are the first mod to log in for the last hour. You will be able to tell at one simple glance in any particular forum EXACTLY which posts you need to check out first. Moreover, imagine receiving fewer instant messages and PMs with just some link to a post that, by the time you get to it, has long since been shut down.
It is important to note that this system is more efficient for BOTH moderators and members. It is similarly important to note that every member who is mature, knowledgeable of the rules, and willing to help get problematic posts shut down does not necessarily have the time, patience, desire, or (in the case of MSN) even the ability to use the current methods of notifying moderators about bad posts.
I hope this addresses some of your concerns, and while it may have some drawbacks, no listed drawback that I have seen while running this system through the Septagon's crucible outweighs the benefits.
I really think that this system could work if implemented, and if anyone has a reason that it can't that hasn't been addressed yet, please post it.
EDIT: I also am sorry for the long post.... I wanted to address all of the issues raised thoroughly.
EDIT 2: KD's "which mod is online" program is also not a reliable "indirect flagging" method because the damn thing doesn't work half the time... like right now!!!
[Edited on 3/9/2007]