What changes would you make...

14 Feb 2010

Haven't been on here for too long, but I wonder what changes people would make to this site, just for fun. I reckon it'd be fun to have a little status bar on the profile, bit like Facebook / Twitter instead of selecting an emoticon, as it's a bit more personal then...

14 Feb 2010

Quote by RIP1306
Haven't been on here for too long, but I wonder what changes people would make to this site, just for fun. I reckon it'd be fun to have a little status bar on the profile, bit like Facebook / Twitter instead of selecting an emoticon, as it's a bit more personal then...

Id change my avatar picture for something of the moment but my camera wont do what it's told :sad:

14 Feb 2010

all things in moderation.
lp

14 Feb 2010

Quote by flower411
all things in moderation.
lp

Did you mean ..moderation in all things..?
Hmmm... the interpretation of the post is clear, as it's intention. Though the two may on occassion differ. Rather like our very own Acceptable Use Policy.
:conundrum:
lp

14 Feb 2010

Hi RIP
I'm pretty much happy with the site as it is but I would like the ability to block some people posts so that if I don't like their style, I don't have to read it :thumbup:

14 Feb 2010

On another site I belong to, the admin people can ban people for (x) amount of time from posting!!!
Also after each post in the forum, there is a small ignore button, you can click this, then you never see any posts by that person, but it does make a nonsense of a long thread!

14 Feb 2010

Actually, I wouldn't change much at all. Perhaps a word limit per entry, as lenght can cause problems especially when "quoted" several times! I think that any idea that Moderators should approve posts first is thwart with danger, as when used by other sites in the past, the policy has all but ruined them.
Plim :sad:

14 Feb 2010

A genuine point, hopefully put clearly in an established thread that asking for thoughts on what might be suggested for changes within the site.
For clarity, the thread is running and not put forward in a contentious manner by the OP (I believe), so I feel my suggestion in this instance is valid and intended as a genuine improvement in the service provided.
This is a suggestion put from a personal standpoint, though not intended in the least to pointed at any particular individual. Though some people may be aware of the basis of my reason for this suggestion, that is not what I intend to raise, so I stress that I am not wishing to discuss or raise as an issue any of my own behaviour, nor that of other individual forum members, but the manner of running of the Fora itself.
Regarding the AUP:
It would appear that though generally the AUP serves a good purpose, and is required as a very 'general' rule of thumb... a 'guideline' for the behaviour of our members, it can at times be enforces as a control measure to very specific instances, which, in my opinion need very specific interpretation.
It is this word 'interpretation' that might find itself fading very much to grey, both here in the forum, by the actions of appointed Moderators, and in the PM-ing/Warning/banning of Members for what has been viewed as 'unacceptable' behaviour.
Genuine Suggestion:
I have nothing against the Moderators of this site as individuals, however, in some cases Moderators have, shall we say a dual-personality on the forum. They have their own reasons for being on the site (as we all do) and of course they have a 'job' to do.
The two can possibly conflict in the fora in how they themselves are perceived, or the nature of their posts are interpreted (that word again).
I should like to see the Moderators wear "Two Hats" as it were... and don the Mod-Hat, perhaps with a 'star' or somesuch visible to display the nature of their post (Moderation/control/direction) , or a Civvie-Hat for the general banter (so that we are sure of the role they are playing). Even two specific accounts for our Mods, with different Avatars, just for clarity.
This would help the helpless (like myself) to be sure when he might be treading on thin ice and might wish to moderate his own behaviour, rather than wait until it is too late.
Also this might help to remove the possibility of having the feeling that Moderation might be being done from a 'personal' standpoint, which wouldn't I'm sure you would agree, be appropriate on a professional and commercial site such as this.
I'm not sure what safeties are in place for our Moderators and Administrators, but I would like to think that there is a form of 'bible' by which consistency can be maintained.
As stated previously, this is a genuine post, with no ulterior motive.
I should hope that open and genuine discussion of such matters, for all to see and contribute to can be facilitated. After all, this is a fun site, for people to enjoy themselves, and I for one wouldn't want to feel that 'personalities' are in control of decisions regarding behaviour, but that fair, balanced and open treatment is given to all.
Best Regards
__random_orbit__

14 Feb 2010

Quote by Sarah
On another site I belong to, the admin people can ban people for (x) amount of time from posting!!!
Also after each post in the forum, there is a small ignore button, you can click this, then you never see any posts by that person, but it does make a nonsense of a long thread!

Now thats what I had in mind :thumbup:

14 Feb 2010

It's not that bad an idea, however you, the members, wont allow it. We have in the past tried to point out when we were posting without a Mods hat on, ie as a normal member, but it was always pointed out by the membership that they viewed everything we posted as coming from 'the management', therefore taking away our ability to be treated as everyone else is. Even having a second 'normal' account wouldn't work, because then you would accuse us of being sneaky and hiding behind it and therefore our posts would still be classed as from 'the management'.
Only a few people actually have a problem with the AUP. Pretty much everyone else manages with it extremely well and cause us no problems. I personally (either as a Mod or a member, take your pick) don't think the AUP covers everything as well as it could, however it does cover pretty much most of it. If people want everything micro analysed because we haven't got the exact wording in the AUP, then perhaps you might want to ask yourselves why? Yes, it's a bit wooly or a bit fuzzy, but that also gives YOU flexibility by not having to worry if you've crossed your "I's" and dotted your "T's"!
If someone is persistently that close to being banned, surely that is more about their character than our wooly rules? We don't make you post anything, you control your own keyboard.
Mal
wink

14 Feb 2010

Quote by flower411
>stuff<
Oh yeah ....I can hear ya laughing but having exactly the same thoughts as Random Orbit is a scary thing to have to come to terms with :shock:
>more stuff<

aside from feeling deep hurt at the above.... wink

couldn't agree more.
lp

14 Feb 2010

Somehow it seems my thread has undergone a little bit of a shift. What was purely an innocent suggestion seems to have evolved into a discussion on AUP / moderators and suchlike which was not my original intention. Certainly didn't want to be stirring up a hornets nest. Seems like I've gotta be slightly more careful what I post on these forums... I apologise for that...

14 Feb 2010

Quote by RIP1306
Somehow it seems my thread has undergone a little bit of a shift. What was purely an innocent suggestion seems to have evolved into a discussion on AUP / moderators and suchlike which was not my original intention. Certainly didn't want to be stirring up a hornets nest. Seems like I've gotta be slightly more careful what I post on these forums... I apologise for that...

no need to apologise in the least Mr RIP, it appears to have opened some comment, and who knows, maybe a little analysis.
No mean-feat at all.
lp

14 Feb 2010

I aint got an issue with the way the site is run.
The admin get what they want... which is cheap labour, (for cheap read free)
The mods and ops get to feel part of the scene..... (from the few that I have actually spoken to it impacts negatively on their sex life being a mod/op)
For some of them it gives them a chance to be in charge.. and that is a key thing for some people.
For some they are genuinely interested in doing something for nothing. A pretty thankless task isn't it??
The mods/ops can't possibly be expected to be automatons they are humans. They could have an exact policy on what to do when etc... but how accurate would that be when they are also dealing with other humans ?
I know that I dislike what I can see of a fair few of the mods/ops. But that is cos I am a human being too. There are a couple that I would happily have carnal knowledge of.... but that is cos again, I am only human. wink

To answer the original poster.. what would I like to see on the site? Probably the ignore function on the site so I can ignore certain posters. I have it in my PM box and I have 400+ people in there.... so having it on the forum would be marvellous. Thanks Santa.

14 Feb 2010

Quote by Dawnie
On another site I belong to, the admin people can ban people for (x) amount of time from posting!!!
Also after each post in the forum, there is a small ignore button, you can click this, then you never see any posts by that person, but it does make a nonsense of a long thread!

Now thats what I had in mind :thumbup:
I use ignore all the time, I just dont read it. Works for me.
All this debate over what? this thread is making the site sound like a battle ground that has constant banning and moderating. Take a chill pill, its not that bad. I can manage by the AUP and you know I dont think I even ever read it its just common sense that applies to 99.9% of websites. In fact I dont even know where to find it.
This is not worth wearing keyboards out over, I'll just use ignore as above lol

14 Feb 2010

Quote by splendid_
I aint got an issue with the way the site is run.
The admin get what they want... which is cheap labour, (for cheap read free)
The mods and ops get to feel part of the scene..... (from the few that I have actually spoken to it impacts negatively on their sex life being a mod/op)
For some of them it gives them a chance to be in charge.. and that is a key thing for some people.
For some they are genuinely interested in doing something for nothing. A pretty thankless task isn't it??
The mods/ops can't possibly be expected to be automatons they are humans. They could have an exact policy on what to do when etc... but how accurate would that be when they are also dealing with other humans ?
I know that I dislike what I can see of a fair few of the mods/ops. But that is cos I am a human being too. There are a couple that I would happily have carnal knowledge of.... but that is cos again, I am only human.
To answer the original poster.. what would I like to see on the site? Probably the ignore function on the site so I can ignore certain posters. I have it in my PM box and I have 400+ people in there.... so having it on the forum would be marvellous. Thanks Santa.

I've found the occasional one or two of your posts difficult in the past, not many, just the overtly anti-man ones usually, this post i can and do wholeheartedly agree with Splendid.
400! On ignore blimey! Mind you i'm probably on 400 peoples ignore biggrin

As for what i'd like on this site? I reckon a thumbs up or down button with a counter on it for the cams or a "knob" alert on cams when all there is on it is a close up of a w*nk :D
]

14 Feb 2010

Quote by flower411
On another site I belong to, the admin people can ban people for (x) amount of time from posting!!!
Also after each post in the forum, there is a small ignore button, you can click this, then you never see any posts by that person, but it does make a nonsense of a long thread!

The thing is....the discussion is not really about the AUP but about the fact that some people feel that one particular mod is coercing other mods into agreeing to ban people that he has taken a personal dislike to.
On top of that when an explanation is asked for, it doesn`t always make sense and in some cases can later be contradicted in conversation or in later threads. These threads have a tendency to disappear "for cleaning" or get locked with people invited to take the issue to pm.
I have nothing to hide .....I don`t need to take it to pm .....the reason for being banned should not be private and the length of the ban should be public......
Then and only then can people moderate their own behaviour because everything is clear and in the open ....why is there always such an insistence on secrecy ??? The only possible conclusion is that bans are being made outside of the rules and the reasons won`t bear scrutiny.
You have a a point there. If it were reflected in criminal law and people were imprisoned for undisclosed lengths of time for undisclosed reasons there would be an outcry. biggrin

14 Feb 2010

Quote by flower411
On another site I belong to, the admin people can ban people for (x) amount of time from posting!!!
Also after each post in the forum, there is a small ignore button, you can click this, then you never see any posts by that person, but it does make a nonsense of a long thread!

The thing is....the discussion is not really about the AUP but about the fact that some people feel that one particular mod is coercing other mods into agreeing to ban people that he has taken a personal dislike to.
On top of that when an explanation is asked for, it doesn`t always make sense and in some cases can later be contradicted in conversation or in later threads. These threads have a tendency to disappear "for cleaning" or get locked with people invited to take the issue to pm.
I have nothing to hide .....I don`t need to take it to pm .....the reason for being banned should not be private and the length of the ban should be public......
Then and only then can people moderate their own behaviour because everything is clear and in the open ....why is there always such an insistence on secrecy ??? The only possible conclusion is that bans are being made outside of the rules and the reasons
won`t bear scrutiny.
Though I guess this is one of those posts that can be taken as antagonistic I really dont think it is. Its an attempt at gaining some undrestanding of how and why things appear different between different posters and different mods. OK, Mods are human too (so i'm lead to believe wink

) and each has their own setr of values that they bring to the table with their own interpretation of the AUP which is fine and onl;y natural and in all but the most rare of cases never needs be questioned. However, there will be a time or two when there needs to be transparency, openess and explanation and that should be forth coming.
Whole heartedly agree with Flowers post.

14 Feb 2010

Quote by foxylady2209
You have a a point there. If it were reflected in criminal law and people were imprisoned for undisclosed lengths of time for undisclosed reasons there would be an outcry.

:lol2: Foxy,

14 Feb 2010

Quote by flower411
I`ve just been invited to a passworded room in chat 3 .
All very melodramatic and surfice it to say I won`t be attending !!
I have said my piece and all I`m asking is that if anybody else has anything to say they should do it in the open. Somebody once spammed my message box accusing me of all sorts of crap because I suggested that if he couldn`t say it in public he shouldn`t say it at all (it wasn`t a mod by the way ! )
My whole point here is that it`s time to get everything clear and for EVERYBODY to be seeing the same thing at the same time ....all these bloody chinese whispers are causing upset and misunderstandings in the extreme. Let`s stop it now and have an open discussion so that everybody can see first hand what is being said.

I invited you to that chatroom so we could discuss your post in a civilised manner. You refused and that's your perogative, however it doesn't give you carte blanche to try and antagonise me or shame me to have this discussion in the open forum.
What I will say is this. Your main post is a load of bollocks. You have now made it very personal. I can back everything up I do. I CANNOT operate as some form of rogue Mod. I cannot bully or cajole all the other mods to my bidding. We do discuss some bans for some forum members but we don't need to. I am not the be all and end all of this site. Everything I do is transparent to the other Moderators and especially to Admin. They are the site owners and our bosses. If I was doing what you think I was doing, I'd be long gone by now.
Now, if you have a complaint about the way I or any mods operate PLEASE contact Admin direct (we can't see what you write) and tell them. They will investigate and if they feel there is a case to answer they will speak to us about it.
Now if you decide to turn this into a public slagging off of Mods in general or me in person, this thread will be removed - is that transparent enough for you?
Mal

14 Feb 2010

Quote by Lost
I aint got an issue with the way the site is run.
The admin get what they want... which is cheap labour, (for cheap read free)
The mods and ops get to feel part of the scene..... (from the few that I have actually spoken to it impacts negatively on their sex life being a mod/op)
For some of them it gives them a chance to be in charge.. and that is a key thing for some people.
For some they are genuinely interested in doing something for nothing. A pretty thankless task isn't it??
The mods/ops can't possibly be expected to be automatons they are humans. They could have an exact policy on what to do when etc... but how accurate would that be when they are also dealing with other humans ?
I know that I dislike what I can see of a fair few of the mods/ops. But that is cos I am a human being too. There are a couple that I would happily have carnal knowledge of.... but that is cos again, I am only human.
To answer the original poster.. what would I like to see on the site? Probably the ignore function on the site so I can ignore certain posters. I have it in my PM box and I have 400+ people in there.... so having it on the forum would be marvellous. Thanks Santa.

I've found the occasional one or two of your posts difficult in the past, not many, just the overtly anti-man ones usually, this post i can and do wholeheartedly agree with Splendid.
]
really? please direct me to any 'anti-man' post I have made. That definitely intrigues me.
lol

14 Feb 2010

Quote by flower411
I`ve just been invited to a passworded room in chat 3 .
All very melodramatic and surfice it to say I won`t be attending !!
I have said my piece and all I`m asking is that if anybody else has anything to say they should do it in the open. Somebody once spammed my message box accusing me of all sorts of crap because I suggested that if he couldn`t say it in public he shouldn`t say it at all (it wasn`t a mod by the way ! )
My whole point here is that it`s time to get everything clear and for EVERYBODY to be seeing the same thing at the same time ....all these bloody chinese whispers are causing upset and misunderstandings in the extreme. Let`s stop it now and have an open discussion so that everybody can see first hand what is being said.

Flower sometimes your right then sometimes your a certifiable arsehole.
For those interested in who spammed Flowers mailbox it was me. I did. Reason being is that i'd had a PM from flower, who i'd never had a PM off of before regarding another member and his thoughts on his political affiliations. After politely flower asking him to stop goading the member as he would more than likely end up in trouble himself and that the member concerned, though having very forthright opinions, was entitled to them did not mean that he was affiliated or a member of the group he suggested. flower returned the PM he was going to continue bating said member until said member outed himself. Oh and to top it off suggested in his PM to me that I could very well be a supporter of the same political party as the person in question and that he was going to block mails from me which he in time did.
I was not to say a little incensed by this as I've spent my entire adult life railing against the racism and bigotry that the party in question, for me, stands for. I hate the insinuation too. so knowing that he wasn't reading my mail, as the mails remained unopened,I put the contents of the mails in the title of the mail instead, quite ingenious I thought, So I then get flower whinging that i'm spamming his mailbox. Easy solution block me I said. Anyway there were three times that happened.
Flower there are times when you make sense and then there are times yoiu are a twat and this time is a rare occasion where I agree with Mal, quite happy to admit I think his style is that of the over keen "Doorman" of the Mod team but in the end thats my opinion and i've not asked others for theirs. He may well be the dogs bollx to others. This time however flower he is on the money with saying your talking bollox
Two faced whining whinging double standard coming from you flower - get a grip or fuck off with your snide comments OK clever to cretin is what you can do seamlessly it seems
You want transparency and openess flower then here it is
Sometimes your just wrong

14 Feb 2010

Quote by splendid_
]

really? please direct me to any 'anti-man' post I have made. That definitely intrigues me.
lol

Christ I couldn't find a specific post if I tried splendid biggrin

but i'll try :lol:

14 Feb 2010

Quote by RIP1306
Somehow it seems my thread has undergone a little bit of a shift. What was purely an innocent suggestion seems to have evolved into a discussion on AUP / moderators and suchlike which was not my original intention. Certainly didn't want to be stirring up a hornets nest. Seems like I've gotta be slightly more careful what I post on these forums... I apologise for that...

*marks RIP down as troublemaker :notes: :lol2: before going to iron brown shirt*
RIP, don't worry about it mate. You started the thread as a bit of fun and I doubt that anybody here would argue that you should change how you post .... yet :giggle:
Right, must go as one of the other mods has demanded my presence to instil a jolly sound thrashing into me to ensure that I support their next ban 'recommendation'.
Don't see why, everyone knows I'm open to cash bribes, the tight :fuckinghell:
Just in case anyone hasn't guessed, I'm joking about anyone else intimidating me!

14 Feb 2010

Quote by easy
Just in case anyone hasn't guessed, I'm joking about anyone else intimidating me!

So you say.................
:giggle:

14 Feb 2010

Quote by Dawnie
Just in case anyone hasn't guessed, I'm joking about anyone else intimidating me!

So you say.................
:giggle:
Was that ok Miss? worship

14 Feb 2010

Quote by easy
Just in case anyone hasn't guessed, I'm joking about anyone else intimidating me!

So you say.................
:giggle:
Was that ok Miss? worship

No, see me in my office first thing in the morning :grin:

14 Feb 2010

So tell me, who made this a 'personal' issue?
and why did it all of a sudden have to be taken 'private'?
and more to the point... whay wasn't I invited?
lp

14 Feb 2010

Quote by flower411
The thing is....the discussion is not really about the AUP but about the fact that some people feel that one particular mod is coercing other mods into agreeing to ban people that he has taken a personal dislike to.

For anyone to even know that then that would mean one member of the Mod team was leaking information. The Mod who was leaking information would not have a sustainable position in my opinion. To be honest though I dont believe what you have said is correct in the first place.

15 Feb 2010

Quote by Mal
I invited you to that chatroom so we could discuss your post in a civilised manner. You refused and that's your perogative, however it doesn't give you carte blanche to try and antagonise me or shame me to have this discussion in the open forum.
>snipped<
Mal

Mal, the thing is, until you made your comments in the above quote, no-one had made any points "personal", and no I feel that the whole level of discussion has taken another turn. One for the worse I might add.
Why might the discussion have had to be taken to a passworded room?...
(If I am wrong, and the room was discuss issues other than those raised up to that point in time in this thread, then please excuse me... however, the general gist of what I'm about to say still stands)
... if discussion were to had by means other than the forum, why not invite all whom showed an interest? Indeed, I think it was I who first raised the point in the thread, as the thread itself offered an opportunity for discussion of the points when far enough removed from any other issues to have it appear a backlash. I was a safe a balanced opportunity for open and clear discussion... for all to see, and add their tuppence h'pny worth.
What I fear about discussion being taken to one side, between the 'invited' only, and in 'chat' is that there is no chance for all to see the progression of an argument, and the growth of a solution or amicable understanding.
Previously noted was the desire to say what might be needed 'out here', why the need to shut it away? It is an issue that effects us all.
Personal experience does tell me that there is a genuine feeling (wrongly or rightly) that the application of the AUP can be at best 'hit & miss', and at worst, a tool to remove or hinder the activities of a member without explanation nor recourse.
The 'tool' of the AUP also being used to hide behind. Quite frankly it is behaviour that is frustrating and unnecessary.
The forum is the place for discussion and suggestion. Why can't we use it as such?
My initial post was an 'idea' that might possibly open up an opportunity for a little improvement. It was not a negative criticism.
And yet, we now see (it appears) the very chance for clarity being fogged by the systems I suggest might, just might be improved.
Can we all just focus a bit?
The direction has now gone, and personality has taken over above content. "you against me" as it were.
lp