Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: New Rules and Moderator Judgement
  • Subject: New Rules and Moderator Judgement
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: New Rules and Moderator Judgement

As most of you remember, the rules were updated on January 25th to be more high-level and ambiguous. As I understand it, this was an attempt to be more lenient about what automatically warrants a ban and, instead, rely on the judgement of the moderators.

My question is: Is it working?

I was 100% on-board with the new relaxed set of rules, because it finally allowed for dealing with things on a case-by-case basis. Unfortunately, like I mentioned before, the new system relies heavily on the participation and personal judgement of the moderating team. And when a system relies on something else, that means it must be present.

The complaints people have about The Flood are not without merit... It definitiely has a pretty low signal-to-noise ratio at times, I was actually hopeful after the rule change that we would see more a reduction in the "noise". Sadly, though, that doesn't seem to be the case.

So, what's the solution? More moderators? More active moderators? Stricter rules? Stricter enforcement of the current rules? Using the report button? All of the above?

I don't know the answer, but I'd like to know what others think. The intent here is not to re-hash all the tired old complaints that we've done to death. Rather, I'd like to hear people's opinions on the new rules and whether or not they are doing what they are intended to do.

[Edited on 07.05.2011 6:11 AM PDT]

  • 07.05.2011 5:09 AM PDT

My future is certain, I will one day fly away. All because I am saved from the penalty of sin. I know he lives.

I believe that no matter the set of rules that is imposed, people are going to be idiots. I don't know about the mods being more active. I see several throughout the day, and I would like to think that just because they are not vocalizing, dosen't mean that they are not watching.

I think that people need to just try to enjoy what they can, and if some crazy is missbehaving, then posting in his thread is not the proper way of handeling it. Sending a PM is best. All though, sometimes gitting in a wisecrack is extreamly hard to resist.

  • 07.05.2011 5:17 AM PDT

cockburnicus@live.com
New Flood

I think it's better than it was before. The threads that people are complaining about were present before the new rules, it's just that people got banned for making them. Then they made some alts and just continued making "bad" threads.

I feel that I have a clearer idea of what I can be banned for now.

  • 07.05.2011 5:18 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

:)


Posted by: Bulldawg61
I believe that no matter the set of rules that is imposed, people are going to be idiots. I don't know about the mods being more active. I see several throughout the day, and I would like to think that just because they are not vocalizing, dosen't mean that they are not watching.

I think that people need to just try to enjoy what they can, and if some crazy is missbehaving, then posting in his thread is not the proper way of handeling it. Sending a PM is best. All though, sometimes gitting in a wisecrack is extreamly hard to resist.

Pretty much sums it up for me.

  • 07.05.2011 5:19 AM PDT

READ IT.

I won the Star. With this on Week 18.

All the Ninjas want is more people pressing the report button to bump it up that list of theirs... I think.

More people report it, the sooner the mods get to it...

If there is moderators all over the world (Or Americas and Europe? Any from Aus/NZ/Asia/Africa?) then shouldn't there always be someone around to deal with the reports?

  • 07.05.2011 5:21 AM PDT


Posted by: Bulldawg61
I don't know about the mods being more active. I see several throughout the day, and I would like to think that just because they are not vocalizing, dosen't mean that they are not watching.
A moderator need not post to be "active". I think people would be satisfied if the soam topics were simply locked.

As it is, there are times when people can actually tell that a moderator has come online, because they actually see topics get locked.

  • 07.05.2011 5:22 AM PDT

Posted by: Timtaztix
yeah this reminds me of the time i got sent to jail for stealing crocs from target becozs i wanted all of the colors because i only got the green wons for my birthday and i wanted more ;)

Posted by: Bulldawg61
sometimes getting in a wisecrack is extremely hard to resist.

This is my main problem. I have terrible self control.

  • 07.05.2011 5:22 AM PDT

The new rules are vague and I do not like them, despite having liked them before. I've been on the receiving end of numerous bans since that change, and I recall only two (only!) that weren't because of a gray area in the rules, which I still feel moderators were wrong to take action in.

  • 07.05.2011 5:27 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

|Ask Your Ninja |
Any questions about anything, PM me. The only stupid question, is the one never asked.
"But, doctor...I am Pagliacci."
Posted by: bobcast
I hate you unless I'm drunk.

There should be a 'no stupid' clause in the rules.

Personally; When the rules changed I didn't change my posting habits.

I felt the rules were pretty much the same, only with a little more leeway on certain things; Games threads and such.

Honestly; I think The Flood should get reverted back to the old rules.


Oh, and report more.

  • 07.05.2011 5:34 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Why discuss the new rules 7 months after posted? Don't you think enough bandwidth was used to do this in the past 7 months?

  • 07.05.2011 5:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

|Ask Your Ninja |
Any questions about anything, PM me. The only stupid question, is the one never asked.
"But, doctor...I am Pagliacci."
Posted by: bobcast
I hate you unless I'm drunk.

Ever have something happen, and at first you think its a good idea..

Then after awhile... you kind of realize.. it sucks?

Ya; thats why its being discussed 7 months later.
Posted by: JewBallzs
Why discuss the new rules 7 months after posted? Don't you think enough bandwidth was used to do this in the past 7 months?

  • 07.05.2011 5:50 AM PDT

@spawn031

"So much of what we do is ephemeral and quickly forgotten, even by ourselves, so it's gratifying to have something you have done linger in people's memories." John Williams

For me it seems that the old rules worked better. People knew exactly what happened and what was against the rules. I personally like the "layed back" new set of rules (basically just saying don't be a jerk) but I think that especially for new comers many people don't even read them.

It would seem much more difficult to moderate a whole public forum like that, just because as you already mentioned - the new system relies heavily on the independent moderators perspective.

  • 07.05.2011 5:54 AM PDT

What spectagon are you in?

I think the new rules are confusing for newer members, they need to be more specific.

  • 07.05.2011 6:01 AM PDT

Gamers Anon

Achronos: And what's this about a "design team" I've been hearing? Apparently stosh is so awesome he's now considered a "team".

I think we need more mods or just more of the current ones to be active.

  • 07.05.2011 6:09 AM PDT

Posted by: ImTriForceGuy
There should be a 'no stupid' clause in the rules.
The trouble is of course who is deciding what is stupid and what is not.

  • 07.05.2011 6:11 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Both optimists and pessimists contribute to our society. The optimist invents the airplane and the pessimist the parachute. " ~Gil Stern

"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." ~Albert Einstein

"What did I just drink?"~Socrates

Buyer's Guide: Headphones|Google Chrome Themes|Arena Spreadsheet

I think we need more moderators that are a little more strict.

  • 07.05.2011 6:20 AM PDT

Posted by: A Bit Of Zero
This thread would have appealed to me more if it was written with crayons.
Posted by: King Dutchy
I broke one of the cords for my X11s because I couldn't get past the final American course in Doritos Crash Course.

I like the new rule change, its always good to have more freedom to speak about what you want, even if you don't necessarilly agree with how other people exercise these new rules.
I think the only real change I've seen is in the flood, particularly since you are allowed to talk about indiviuals now and have forum games.
Personally I don't think much needs to change, maybe a few more moderators, or at least more active moderaters to lock threads a little quicker when they do get out of hand.

  • 07.05.2011 7:07 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: Rokitz
  • user homepage:

Want to know more about me? Check out my Community Joes interview.

Trying something once will increace your chances of success, because you tried it. Try someting twice, and your chances increase yet again - seeing as you've done it. Try something a few thousand times, and your chances of success is exponentially increased; this increase would likely provide success every time

I've been fighting myself on whether or not I was going to actually post this post. Then I realized that the worst thing that can happen, is I lose my pretty blue bar.

I think the new rules are awesome, and I always have. I've loved them from day one. Maybe it's because I've been able to have a little more fun than most. To me, the rules are general common sense: "Don't say what you wouldn't want to be said to you", "Don't call someone a name that you wouldn't call your mother", "Treat someone how you'd want to be treated" things of that sort.

In my honest opinion, the problem lies with moderation. Don't get me wrong, they're a great bunch of guys. For some though, I can't say I'd walk to worlds end backing them up and agreeing with their decisions. Some, absolutely, but unfortunately not all.

I can't say that I'm for more, or less, mods. I think the number is great, considering they are probably stepping on eachother's toes, and still being able to keep everything in a somewhat orderly fashion.

As far as activity goes, it is what it is. Activity will always hit its off-points. No matter how many we have or how frequently they "check-in", there will always be off-points, that's what the Report Button is for.

No, my main logic is that some of the moderators aren't, not to sound offending, "good". Now, before I go any further, I am not mentioning any names or any hint giving. Though, after posting something like this about a year back. It had my friends in the mod club defending themselves, and--what may have been circumstantial--one of my favorites bounced.

So, what do I mean by "good"? Partially:Posted by: drummer0702
I think we need more moderators that are a little more strict.
This here. For the simple fact that we need our little pegboy back, even if no one could ever replace him, it would be good to see that from the moderation team again.

Now, the other part? Whether they like it or not, they're role models to The Community. Showing what is right while still being able to have fun with it. A few of the mods currently do this very well, and it's awesome to see. Then there's the few that simply don't care (don't follow the rules as well as they should), are all around lazy (being on, ready, able, and in the same forum but not doing anything [H:R, Flood, Septagon]), or being hypocrites (banning someone for something the moderator did in a recent post).

  • 07.05.2011 7:36 AM PDT

"I wanted to make people happy, if only for an hour."
-Busby Berkley

RIP Halo 2

I think it's fine the way it is. It's not like the flood was any better when the rules were stricter.

  • 07.05.2011 7:47 AM PDT

Posted by: RussellTheHippy
I think it's fine the way it is. It's not like the flood was any better when the rules were stricter.
Status quo is not the goal here.

  • 07.05.2011 7:51 AM PDT

"I wanted to make people happy, if only for an hour."
-Busby Berkley

RIP Halo 2

Posted by: Big Black Bear
Posted by: RussellTheHippy
I think it's fine the way it is. It's not like the flood was any better when the rules were stricter.
Status quo is not the goal here.

Changing the rules really won't change the flood. And if you ban more, that's just gonna lead to more alts. No sense in changing the rules again if it won't change anything.

  • 07.05.2011 7:55 AM PDT

Posted by: Rokit
or being hypocrites (banning someone for something the moderator did in a recent post).

This is my main problem with moderation here at the moment. I've never been banned myself, but I've been witness to people being banned for "spam". After banning the Member, the Ninja then proceeds to post something completely off-topic. This does not contribute to the thread in any way. They're meant to be role models... if they post off-topic nonsense, new Members will think it's fine to do it, too.

At the moment, the Ninjas (some of them) seem to place themselves above the rules. It seems they can post whatever they want with no consequences what-so-ever.

Here's an example of a Ninja posting something which could be considered "spam".

Yeah, it was slightly funny. But if a regular Member had said this and it was spotted by a Ninja, I can guarantee that they'd have received a warning at the least.

And Recon: No offence, that's just the first thread that came to mind. I actually think you're one of the better Moderators on the site. Oh, and by the way, my sister doesn't own a webcam. Joke's on you!

[Edited on 07.06.2011 8:55 AM PDT]

  • 07.05.2011 8:41 AM PDT

Hi I'm RT and I like to argue!


Posted by: JewBallzs
Why discuss the new rules 7 months after posted? Don't you think enough bandwidth was used to do this in the past 7 months?
Because making good decisions requires you to re-evaluate past decisions after the fact to determine whether the past decision yielded desirable results and why.

  • 07.05.2011 9:18 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Writer's Corner
6/15/2011 11:39 PM: bobcast [2597260] issued a 3 day ban expiring on 6/18/2011 11:39 PM.
Reason: A Bungie.net Forum Moderator has banned you for violating the code of conduct and/or rules of the forum in the thread below
http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=61704535
Inappropriate. Went a little to far with the butt hole tearing.

I think there should be a first page "quota". What I mean by that is that there should only be so many popularity threads, forum games, and other crap threads.

Also, lock a few more obviously bumped threads.

  • 07.05.2011 9:27 AM PDT

There are many powers in the world, for good or for evil. Some are greater than I am. Against some I have not yet been measured. But my time is coming.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Forum Rules
List of Forum Ninjas

I don't believe that the rules revision was ever intended to "fix" the Flood. Maybe some of you hoped that it would, but that was not likely to be the case.

The older rule set was a jumble of add-ons and ammendments that tried to cover everything. Of course that's impossible. So you get this game of whack-a-mole. Got a particular behavior or post that is annoying? Add a rule. A new meme? Add a rule. Along the way, many trivial things received punishemnts that were overkill. The goal was to get back to the basics.

The basics of course are the Code of Conduct and the Terms of Use. The rules are simply a common sense, combined simplification of the two. With that came a conversation with the web team and the moderators of what our course of action on rule-breaking would be. The goal was to get people to have a clearer understanding of where the broader white lines were. I'm not sure how that clarity was going to prevent people from acting like jackasses in the Flood, or more importantly stop people from responding to the jackasses.

[Edited on 07.05.2011 9:32 AM PDT]

  • 07.05.2011 9:31 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3