The Lounge Guidelines Help Search Members Calendar Blogs

Welcome Guest [ Log In | Register ] ]

> To Have Moderators Or Not To Have Moderators? That Is The Question., Public Service Poll
Bust Improvements
Do you want a few wisely chosen BUSTies as board moderators?
Yes [ 40 ] ** [62.50%]
No (could you explain decision?) [ 12 ] ** [18.75%]
Maybe (discuss concerns below) [ 12 ] ** [18.75%]
Would you like these moderators to act across the board or only in "sensitive" threads?
Yes [ 31 ] ** [48.44%]
No [ 13 ] ** [20.31%]
Maybe [ 20 ] ** [31.25%]
What powers would you like moderators to have?
Delete offensive troll posts only [ 22 ] ** [28.21%]
Delete offensive troll posts and troll threads [ 35 ] ** [44.87%]
Delete offensive, trollish threads and delete users [ 15 ] ** [19.23%]
Delete all offensive material (including comments by established users) [ 2 ] ** [2.56%]
All of the above and additional powers (detail below) [ 4 ] ** [5.13%]
Total Votes: 63
Guests cannot vote 
dj-bizmonkey
post Nov 8 2007, 09:20 PM
Post #1


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 431
From: the depths of my soul


i have been a bit hesistant to get involved in this whole issue, as i am relatively new to BUST. i suppose my only fear would be that newbies might be wrongfully identified as trolls simply because they couldn't figure some of the unspoken rules of the forums. some people are going to be offensive and annoying to us simply because we don't agree with what they have to say and i don't think anyone should have the power to silence some one just because they don't share the same opinion.

that being said, i think we can all definetly agree that creepy freakazoid douchebags like steve have no place in this forum and no one should have to look at photoshopped dead babies for more than 5 micro-seconds (if that even).

i don't like the idea of mods being able to delete entire threads, as the useless ones usually drift to the bottom anyway.

i suppose i'm open to the idea, with some hesitation, but i'm willing to go with the flow and give deference to those posters that have been here since the lounge's inception.

i agree with turbo's comments about trolls actually bringing us all closer and i also like the idea of anonymity (sp?) of whoever becomes a moderator. maybe we could have a list of 5 or 6 busties, vote but have the outcome be secret? or maybe that defeats the whole purpose......i dunno, like i said, i'm willing to go with the flow on this issue.

makes me think of that scene in 'o brother where art thou?' where john toturro says, 'who elected you president of this outfit?' and they have an election, just the three of them. george clooney says, 'well i'm votin' for yours truly,' and john toturro says, 'well i'm votin' for yours truly too,' and delmar says, 'well i'm with you fellers!'


--------------------
"To lose everything at the edge of such a glorious eternity is far sweeter than to win by plodding through a cautious, painless, and featureless life."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mouse
post Nov 8 2007, 09:13 PM
Post #2


Most Likely Procrastinating
***
Posts: 2,534
From: shangri-l.a.


i'm with turbo--i think the mods shouldn't be known, if we do have them..."wisely chosen busties" is a term that makes me shake in my boots. as much as i love this board and you ladies, everyone's well aware that there are definitely certain factions that have their own little hierarchies, and while this is well and fine, if we start picking superlatives of anything there's bound to be conflict. :/


--------------------
jam out with your clam out
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
girltrouble
post Nov 8 2007, 07:35 PM
Post #3


new highs in personal lows daily!
***
Posts: 4,307
From: wherever ink is put in skin...


i've been here (off and on) close to forever, and i don't remember there ever being mods...not even in my early buttacup or later butta days. there were, i think, 3 people who i know were here before me, like maimy, ven, and mandolyn (i think q spice and i arrived about the same time), but far as i remember no mods...

on reflection, i think we ought to have 2 mods. one for steve and his ilk across the boards who can delete posts and threads, and another for the sensitive threads who can temporarly suspend offensive posters in those threads, (and possibly delete posts). the sensitive threads, i think demand a different kind of mod, who knows the thread, but is vigilant for noobs/people who may not be aware that certain threads must be aproached with a different, well, sensitivity. they would warn, and hopefully suspend rarely. if steve or one of his clones appears, the first mod would take care of him in all threads. each mod would have their own tool to deal with their task, but i think the sensitive threads need one that is more deft, more delicate, and can keep things balanced.


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

"what a swell farewell party! we said goodbye to everything, including the lining in my stomach." - garvey, from the film, born bad

"That's one career all females have in common, whether we like it or not: being a woman. Sooner or later, we've got to work at it, no matter how many other careers we've had or wanted." --margo channing, all about eve
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
roseviolet
post Nov 8 2007, 05:17 PM
Post #4


Pacifism kicks ass!
***
Posts: 3,064


Actually, Kitten, I have heard some long-time members say that Bust did have moderators once upon a time. I think it was way back n the late '90s. I believe Quantum Spice has mentioned it before. I have no idea why they were phased out, though.

I am a member of another forum that happens to be moderated. There are a few moderators assigned to each section of the board and two administrators who oversee the moderators. The moderators have certain limitations like those that have been mentioned. They are not allowed to ban users, but they can occasionally suspend someone's account for a week.

I agree that we need to have moderators who can quickly and easily delete obvious troll posts that disrupt the entire Lounge. However, I am exremely hesitant to label anyone as a troll and I would hope that our moderators would feel the same. Insensitive behavior is not always trollish behavior. It may warrent a one week suspension, but perhaps not a total ban.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
turbojenn
post Nov 8 2007, 05:11 PM
Post #5


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 4,721


I think I'm in a small minority here, in sticking to not wanting mods....I've just seen this go afoul WAY too many times in other forums, power-tripping, etc...that I just would rather happily add to my "ignore" list as often as I need to, and accept the culture here as is.

That said, if there *were* to be mods, I would agree that they would need to be hand-picked by LL & Co., and that person remain secret on the board. In that case, I think it could be managed. But, I also agree with pepper in the no-fun, demanding nature of the job (been there, done that), and you've got to go into it eyes open, titanium armor firmly in place. smile.gif

ETA: Another thought that keeps running through my head is how the trolls actually have brought a stronger sense of community here - we all come out of our respective residential threads to bang our heads, and talk pastries, and I've definitely gotten to know so many more busties through our shared experience of interlopers. Strange, but it feels true.

Interesting discussion, here, for sure....lots of good things to think about.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kittenb
post Nov 8 2007, 01:29 PM
Post #6


There is nothing ironic about Show Choir!
***
Posts: 3,261
From: Chicago


QUOTE(anarch @ Nov 8 2007, 01:12 PM) *
Maybe LL would be more receptive if we proposed something modest to begin with (power to delete posts only, and only those consisting of 1. spam, 2. long bible quotes, 3. photoshopped pics - I think we can all agree on those)? Then after a trial period (3 months? I dunno) if no flamewars happen, we could take another poll on expanding the mods' powers. That would take care of Robo-Fundie.


I like this idea a lot. Especially since it would be the first time that the Board had been moderated a trial period would be nice. And I think that the mods would be able to learn where deleting is needed from the converstations going on in the Busting Trolls thread as well as a few others. Of course some of them are just out and out offensive (thinking the pictures) so little debate would be needed in that case rolleyes.gif . However, the ones that we are uncertain about, well everyone does have the ability to "ignore" someone so unless they have a truly horrific avatar, can probably just be ignored.

Does that make sense?

Thanks, bunnyb, for setting this up.


--------------------
In times of destruction, create something.
MHK
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
anarch
post Nov 8 2007, 12:59 PM
Post #7


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 873


I mean, giving mods basic powers would take care of Robo-Fundie, which is the most pressing issue. Then after seeing how the trial period goes, see about proposing expanded powers to LL if enough of us feel it's warranted.

Sorry for the double post. I guess I should learn how to edit my own posts but I'm not feeling up to it right now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
anarch
post Nov 8 2007, 12:55 PM
Post #8


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 873


Maybe LL would be more receptive if we proposed something modest to begin with (power to delete posts only, and only those consisting of 1. spam, 2. long bible quotes, 3. photoshopped pics - I think we can all agree on those)? Then after a trial period (3 months? I dunno) if no flamewars happen, we could take another poll on expanding the mods' powers. That would take care of Robo-Fundie.

I like the idea of anonymous mods. Seems to me anonymity would make the job easier on them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pollystyrene
post Nov 8 2007, 11:21 AM
Post #9


Too many mutha uckas, Uckin' with my shi-
***
Posts: 4,631
From: Chicago


I just noticed your "headline" there, mornington! laugh.gif



--------------------
You went to school where you were taught to fear and to obey, be cheerful, fit in, or someone might think you're weird.
Life can be perfect. People can be trusted. Someday, I will fall in love; a nice quiet home of my very own.
Free from all the pain. Happy and having fun all the time.
It never happened, did it?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mornington
post Nov 8 2007, 09:44 AM
Post #10


now running on biodiesel and sacrificial blood
***
Posts: 2,227
From: the little house on the hill


would it be possible to throw some names around - I wouldn't want anyone to become a mod who didn't want to, so people should be able to opt out. At the same time, I think while the final say on who is a mod should be up to LL (and be kept secret) - maybe there should be a "mod" account - it might help LL to know who we would put forward. Does that make sense? I know it seems like a popularity contest, but personally I wouldn't know who to choose!

I think there needs to a a consensus on what is bad behaviour and what is out-and-out unpleasant. We can all put nasty/stupid people on ignore, but removing robot spam (and innaproriate spam - say escort ads in the survivor thread) and steve's photos needs to be done and done throroughly. I mean, we all discuss trolls anyway, and they usually bugger off after a bit - but maybe some sort of consensus should be given for deleting troll accounts?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pollystyrene
post Nov 8 2007, 08:29 AM
Post #11


Too many mutha uckas, Uckin' with my shi-
***
Posts: 4,631
From: Chicago


QUOTE(culturehandy @ Nov 8 2007, 07:36 AM) *
If moderators are put in place, I don't think that anyone but LL should know who they are. That way one can be accused of favouratism.


I think that's a very good idea, culture. As long as everyone is discreet about their status, it would work.

And I think bunny's suggestion of discussing whether to delete or not to delete on a case-by-case basis (in gray-area cases other than steve....to quote Strong Bad, DELETED!!) is a good idea.


--------------------
You went to school where you were taught to fear and to obey, be cheerful, fit in, or someone might think you're weird.
Life can be perfect. People can be trusted. Someday, I will fall in love; a nice quiet home of my very own.
Free from all the pain. Happy and having fun all the time.
It never happened, did it?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bunnyb
post Nov 8 2007, 08:21 AM
Post #12


The artist now known as I don't give a shit.
***
Posts: 4,053


QUOTE(LoveMyPugs @ Nov 8 2007, 02:30 PM) *
Could we all perhaps vote on which two or three busties we think would make the best moderator? It's a hell of a job so I think many would think twice about voting for themselves. Maybe we could set up some kind of poll for that (not sure how the polls work here). The person with the most votes gets to be a moderator.


pugs, this was suggested in CF (I threw a few names in the hat) but I don't know if we can do this if moderators are to be anonymous... what do people think? should moderators be anonymous so we don't bother them/bug our friends? could we nominate people (and later vote) and then LL could ultimately decide?


--------------------
"Hey, did anyone ever think Sylvia Plath wasn't crazy, maybe she was just cold? " (Lorelai Gilmore)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LoveMyPugs
post Nov 8 2007, 08:13 AM
Post #13







Could we all perhaps vote on which two or three busties we think would make the best moderator? It's a hell of a job so I think many would think twice about voting for themselves. Maybe we could set up some kind of poll for that (not sure how the polls work here). The person with the most votes gets to be a moderator.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
culturehandy
post Nov 8 2007, 07:19 AM
Post #14


(o)(o)
***
Posts: 11,350
From: Oh boobs


If moderators are put in place, I don't think that anyone but LL should know who they are. That way one can be accused of favouratism.

I think that mods should have the power to delete posts only. Deleting threads and accounts would ultimately be left up to LL.


--------------------
Hatred does not cease in this world by hating, but by not hating; this is an eternal truth. --- Buddah, The Dhammapada
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Pugs
post Nov 8 2007, 06:28 AM
Post #15


BUSTie
**
Posts: 79
From: Delaware, the butthole of america


I think the moderators should have the power to delete offensive posts and threads, but should report to LL to have users deleted. That way it kinda keeps the pecking order in check. I have had experiences on other boards where I didn't agree with a user and it got into an argument, only to find out that the person I was arguing with was a moderator and my account was deleted. I think that the moderators should do the main cleanup (see the scary world posts still up) but LL should have the final say so. This method should free up LL a little so maybe more time will be spent on keeping the boards friendly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bunnyb
post Nov 8 2007, 06:13 AM
Post #16


The artist now known as I don't give a shit.
***
Posts: 4,053


pepper, I messed up with question 2 but I put that in my post.

I think anyone that anyone who took up the role as moderator would have to fully comprehend what they were getting themselves into and realise that they are probably going to receive countless PMs and have people disagreeing with their decisions; however, I know there are posters who are willing to take that on because it's potentially better than what we currently have.

I think we should have a thread -like BUSTing trolls or take it outside- where we discuss each troll in turn and decide collectively whether they are indeed a troll and whether their posts should be deleted or not, because obviously we're not all going to agree but we need to talk it through. Ultimately the mod would have the final decision but that requires them to be objective and levelheaded and there are a few BUSTies out there who have those traits. However, none of us are going to disagree with Steve's posts being deleted and he is at the crux of this situation.


--------------------
"Hey, did anyone ever think Sylvia Plath wasn't crazy, maybe she was just cold? " (Lorelai Gilmore)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pepper
post Nov 7 2007, 10:15 PM
Post #17







you know that number two is an either-or and not a yes-no question right?

i think being a moderator will be a horrible, terrible, no good, very bad job. people are going to know that you have the power to delete and are going to come after you to get rid of stuff they don't like and get pissed off if you don't. i'd like to think we'd all be reasonable about it but you know how crazy it gets in here sometimes. i've personally had some serious throw-downs about who's a troll, what's offensive, etc etc (baby shaped pinata, hello!). we all have different ideas about that and we co-exist with some kind of magical happy balance that only blows up out of whack now and then for brief periods. we work it out together, and that's what keeps up going here and, i think, part of what makes this forum so unique and wonderful and tight knit. throwing a mod into the mix might very well change all that. not that i didn't vote yes to a mod with delete powers, i did. those pictures were freaking horrible. i have a small daughter that i hold in my lap sometimes while i'm on the computer. you can imagine how i felt when i all of a sudden could see those. i'm still smarting from it. i would love to have those gone for good so i'm not afraid to venture too deep into the threads again.

six and ft, i HAVE to disagree. psychobitch is so totally a troll. a CLASSIC troll, what with the claims of innocence amist the frou-ferah it creates itself. passive agressive to the n-th degree. i would delete that cow so maude damn fast. someone who comes here for the sole purpose of aggravating and stirring shit up, name calling, starting threads with NO consult in the community forum, etc is not a community member. it has Zero reason to continue it's shit but it persists. not because it's welcome here, it clearly is not. simply because it's spoiling for a fight and knows how to get one. if that isn't a troll than what is?

see? how do we agree on this without knickers getting into knots?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
faerietails2
post Nov 7 2007, 09:15 PM
Post #18


donut-lovin' heathen
***
Posts: 713
From: Suburban Hell


sixel, I agree 100%. i would also agree that looking and psychofemme are just bitches rather than trolls, and i wouldn't delete them either (well, looking tends to delete himself after a while, anyway rolleyes.gif). Lynda was just plain stupid, though I would've deleted some of the posts she made in the abortion thread, in particular. but do I think she warranted entire deletion? probably not.

posts i think would warrant deletion: spam, dead baby pics, the same long-ass bible passages over and over (bible spam?).


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sixelacat
post Nov 7 2007, 08:56 PM
Post #19


Creating demon-radical feminist hybrids since 1974
***
Posts: 690
From: Savoir Faire is Everywhere!


See, I think the hang-up will be on what is deemed "offensive". Some things are obvious, like the nasty pics. But what about some of the other things that have been called "troll behavior" lately? I think "psychofemme" is rude, obnoxious, and condescending. However, I don't think she's a troll and wouldn't want her posts/threads deleted as such. And I feel that way having read all her posts in context. She's a bitch, and to me that's just not the same thing.

"Looking" poses an even more complicated problem. I remember him (yeah, for some reason I think it's a guy) when he first posted last fall. He was pretty much ignored and only posted a few times then went away. When he showed up again, his posts were pompous and inappropriate to the discussion at hand. And yet, at that point I wouldn't have said the posts were worthy of deletion, even with the rapid revisionist fantasy he was making. To me backtracking, bullshitting and lying are still not being a troll, just someone not worth listening/paying attention to. BUT, when he flipped his lid entirely and re-edited all his posts (and added more) to make it seem like "some kids" jacked his computer or account and were posting craziness all over, I ABSOLUTELY would have deleted all his posts. I would not, however, have wanted his account deleted. He is still making some small effort to be part of the community, and I think that as long as he stays on his meds that is fine. It's not like I'm forced to respect or even care about what he has to say.

And I wouldn't have deleted "Lynda" either. Being rude, crude, and socially inappropriate, even in sensitive topic threads, still doesn't merit deletion to me. Not as long as we have the ignore function.

So I guess what I'm saying is that while I think it is an EXCELLENT idea to have some moderators, I would only want it to happen with a "less is more" attitude. I think some home-grown Bustie mods would have more time and inclination to do a more thorough job of clean-up when clean-up is needed (seriously, you couldn't get ALL the pics LL?!), as long as there are strict limits/guidelines to what can be done.

*edited slightly for grammar

This post has been edited by sixelacat: Nov 7 2007, 09:02 PM


--------------------
Are you thinking what I'm thinking?!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bunnyb
post Nov 7 2007, 06:01 PM
Post #1


The artist now known as I don't give a shit.
***
Posts: 4,053


Here it is BUSTies and BUSTers, a poll to vote on whether we want moderators to help us with the ongoing troll problem.
I've kept it simple and covered the basics (you are only allowed three poll questions) and we can always have additional polls for who should be moderators -if applicable, depending on poll results- and other grievances later.

Please add any comments, suggestions and constructive comments about having moderators below. Perhaps we should have an open discussion (with turbojenn and quantumspice weighing in, if possible) about the pros and cons of moderators before we vote our gut instinct (although feel free to vote if you're already convinced/have heart set on it).

Who knows whether LoungeLady will even listen to us and act on any decisions we collectively make but there's only one way to find out!

Happy voting.

eta: okay, I've just realised Q2 is a little unclear answer-wise: let's say that yes is you do want across board powers, no is you only want sensitive thread powers and maybe is obviously maybe to them having full board access.


--------------------
"Hey, did anyone ever think Sylvia Plath wasn't crazy, maybe she was just cold? " (Lorelai Gilmore)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: December 21, 2014 - 11:31 AM