Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes...

[SteveHd]

Getting back to increasing the number of mods, I have an idea: create a nonvoting category -- I'll call it "associate moderator" -- which would have most of the duties of regular moderators but not vote on the bans and thus not be a part of the quorum required.

These associate mods plus the existing mods could provide more coverage of the forums and hopefully quench a fire in an early stage by use of warnings via PM or on the thread. And there would be more "hands on deck" for moving threads, merging threads, and other sundry things.

 

[rbkwp]

Wonderful and Thoughtful SteveHD - Love it'
enz

 

[kalipygian]

A person who regularly displays contempt for the members is not fit to be a moderator.

 

[B_dumbcow]

Getting back to increasing the number of mods, I have an idea: create a nonvoting category -- I'll call it "associate moderator" -- which would have most of the duties of regular moderators but not vote on the bans and thus not be a part of the quorum required.

These associate mods plus the existing mods could provide more coverage of the forums and hopefully quench a fire in an early stage by use of warnings via PM or on the thread. And there would be more "hands on deck" for moving threads, merging threads, and other sundry things.

:smile: I like that idea... maybe giving the more established members, maybe the ones who have been here for a few years and are known to be quite trustworthy, more control over decisions in the site.

 

[Mule]

I voted for changes, but I wanted to clarify. I think that if the current workload for the mod team is too high for them to do the best job possible, then more mods are needed and should be assigned. Also, I've seen moderator roles work very well in other places, so Mod A is responsible for greeting newbies and answering questions, Mod B gets to close and move threads, Mod C puts bans into effect and explains why the ban was done, etc. I also think it is very important for the mod team to give a brief explanation to the membership when someone is banned or temp-banned. It does not need to contain anything private or personal, just show what action violated which part of the ToS. This kind of transparency will encourage consistent and even-handed moderation.

Overall I am quite happy with the mod team here, although I recognize that many members have issues with past decisions. It's a thankless job. I'm glad that we have people who are willing to give their time to try to make the place better.

 

[Mem]

I also suggest that if you see a friend or a good member getting into a flame war with a troll, that it better to contact that friend and let them know that they should cool it, before it's too late.

It's also a good idea to not get involved in your friends' fights. When that happens you later get accused of ganging up on another member.

 

[B_Jennuine73]

I voted for changes because I feel we need more mods to control the trolls.

 

[lucky8]

Oh yeah
Mm
Still dont know what I was waiting for
And my time was running wild
A million dead-end streets and
Every time I thought Id got it made
It seemed the taste was not so sweet
So I turned myself to face me
But Ive never caught a glimpse
Of how the others must see the faker
Im much too fast to take that test

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes
Dont want to be a richer man
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes
Just gonna have to be a different man
Time may change me
But I cant trace time

I watch the ripples change their size
But never leave the stream
Of warm impermanence
So the days float through my eyes
But stil the days seem the same
And these children that you spit on
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations
Theyre quite aware of what theyre going through

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes
Dont tell them to grow up and out of it
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes
Wheres your shame
Youve left us up to our necks in it
Time may change me
But you cant trace time

Strange fascination, fascinating me
Ah changes are taking the pace Im going through

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes
Oh, look out you rock n rollers
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
(turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-changes

Too bad we can't have this song play everytime we open this thread, it'd be perfect

 

[vince]

I want to preface this by saying that I do appriaciate the job the mod team trys to do. Thank you.

Not knowing much about how the moderator teams actually works, I find it difficult to suggest changes. I myself, am very uniformed about how and when they meet, what constitutes a quorum and what their actual duties are. I also do not know how much hands on control the ownership of the site has. I'm not one to talk out my ass about things I don't know about, therefore I hesitate to suggest structural changes. But here goes.

I do think that there is some room for improvement-

Threads that turn into personal flame wars and lose the focus of the OP, could be moved to a special section of the forum. Those kind of threads are like a train wreck- horrifying, but everyone wants to stop and look. They do have some entertainment value after all. So perhaps they could just be allowed to flame-out on their own in a place other than the section they started in. People could stop in to see how it's going from time to time, maybe drop a bomb of their own if they want and leave the participants to duke it out. I dunno, that's one idea.

Trolls are a problem. I do appreciate the problems the mod team has identifying and dealing with a troll. One man's troll is another man conservative pundit after all! Or human rights crusader or anti-circumwhateverist. Perhaps a team of two mods could be assigned to deal only with reported trolls. Using the classic definition of an internet troll, they could, if warranted, ask the person to cool it. If the trolling continues a very prompt warning should be given. If the behavior continues, then weedkiller should be applied by a vote of the full mod team. Here is a handy test for trolls. :smile:

Another idea and it's been said before, is no moderation at all- only enough to keep minors out. Before I joined, I think that was how things worked here. I have heard some people say it was better. I don't have personal experience of that situation, but I'd be willing to give it a try for six months and see how it goes. Let the membership police itself.

Hey, maybe there could be a mechanism where some members could start a petition to ban a troll. If they got enough signatures, the issue could be put to a vote over say, a one week period. The accused could of course present a defense. I think there would need to be a quorum of, I dunno, say 100 members voting and then it should take, let's say a 60% majority to kick it off the island. (I'm just making this shit up as I go along guys. So feel free to kick me)

The danger with that one ^ could be that this would turn into an anti-trolling site instead of a support group for big penises. (it isn't really that anyhow though.. It's porn light with some et cetera and hook-ups thrown in)

Fake photos- not a question for the mod team I think. Just a simple new rule. There should be a requirement that if you want to post pics of body parts, then one of them should have a hand lettered sign with your user ID in it as well. It should be next to one of the body parts in question. No veri-pic, no pics of your sexy bits. That goes for those who only post face or body shots as well. If ya want to post pics of your cat, then it's gonna have to have a proof of a rabies certification.

I didn't read the whole thread so if someone else posted the same idea... pardon.

Sorry for any typos or grammar errors.. I need to sleep.

Speaking of grammar... ah never mind.

 

[Mem]

How about a rule being put in place where you have to post that a picture is not you in your gallery.

A few people already do this and post a few nude pics of themselves and then tag other pics as a favorite porn star.

Not for the obvious ones like celeb pics in the gallery.

 

[mindseye]

How about a rule being put in place where you have to post that a picture is not you in your gallery.

Fair enough. I'm not really Chaka Khan...

I don't know if such a rule is enforceable. Posting copyrighted pictures is a TOS violation unless you own the copyright, and we've enforced that when we have reliable proof, but it happens infrequently. But determining the status of the photograph is a lot easier than determining the status of the subject in the photo.

Even with this photo verification deal -- I could verify that Mem (just using you as an example) has a picture in his gallery, and that there's a sign in the picture, and that the sign reads "LPSG.ORG" and "Mem". But I have no way of knowing if the person holding the sign is Mem, or his roommate, or his brother, or a buddy from work, etc.

Knowing that it's Mem in the picture comes when Mem has shown himself over time to be credible. The member who gets immediately defensive and hyperballistic when someone questions his photos, or the member with the Anglo-white face and the Hispanic-brown pinga, well, they're as un-credible as the guy who claims to have 17" and refuses to upload pictures because he just knows they'll get stolen.

But should we write credibility into the TOS? Yuck. Who among us is qualified to police that?

 

[lucky8]

Personally, I think people just need to mellow out, it's only a big deal if you make it one.

 

[Mem]

Fair enough. I'm not really Chaka Khan...

Then you must be Ricardo Montalban.

 

[mindseye]

Then you must be Ricardo Montalban.

Thank you for not saying Chaka.

 

[faceking]

Looks like 8 Mods voted in the Poll so far. (just Kidding) :biggrin1:

I voted to keep things as is. If anything so more moderators to lift their burden... but I vehemently see the moderation quality here as at least half full. I see a lot of posts pushing the boundaries, and assume there is some warning. I see ppl banned every so often.

The rules are clear... and they have been decent in enforcing them.

An alternative would be a Craigslist environment where if the masses feel a post is out of hand... you can have it removed (if enough ppl complain).

IMHO... the easiest way to eliminate 90% of the bannings and 90% of the gripes on moderators... is remove the Etc Etc subforum. However, that/this sub-forum makes up our "community", per se.

 

[BIGDP]

This is a great discussion! I haven't been a member all that long, but my naive question is: What is the problem?

In any online forum, there probably needs to be a moderating team. To me that is not an issue.

This is a fun site! It feels like some folks are making this site WAY too important in their lives. In this age and time, do you expect everyone who posts to always be truthful and post only their own pics? To me, that is where folks may be naive. This is an online amusement park!

Lucky8 is right. Everyone just needs to mellow out.

Please keep rocking out with your cocks out!
DP

 

[2322]

Fair enough. I'm not really Chaka Khan...

Nor am I John Lovitz.

I don't know if such a rule is enforceable. Posting copyrighted pictures is a TOS violation unless you own the copyright, and we've enforced that when we have reliable proof, but it happens infrequently. But determining the status of the photograph is a lot easier than determining the status of the subject in the photo.

Agreed. It's impossible to police all the pics and videos in the gallery. You'd have to have people send in witnessed affit davits via certified mail to make any legal assurance. That's extremely impractical.

Even with this photo verification deal -- I could verify that Mem (just using you as an example) has a picture in his gallery, and that there's a sign in the picture, and that the sign reads "LPSG.ORG" and "Mem". But I have no way of knowing if the person holding the sign is Mem, or his roommate, or his brother, or a buddy from work, etc.

Knowing that it's Mem in the picture comes when Mem has shown himself over time to be credible. The member who gets immediately defensive and hyperballistic when someone questions his photos, or the member with the Anglo-white face and the Hispanic-brown pinga, well, they're as un-credible as the guy who claims to have 17" and refuses to upload pictures because he just knows they'll get stolen.

Don't people just kinda assume that anyway? When someone goes into the gallery they have got to realize that not everyone is who they say they are. The verification photo doesn't do anything if you have the help of someone else or if you don't show what it is you're verifying.

I will say that Mem is very definitely Mem. He comes across in person just as he does here. You'll never get a verification pic from him though, someone would recognize him.:wink:

But should we write credibility into the TOS? Yuck. Who among us is qualified to police that?

Many people have volunteered to be personal :naughty: verifiers!

 

[Mem]

Mem[/i]. He comes across in person just as he does here. You'll never get a verification pic from him though, someone would recognize him.:wink:

You are silly.
:spankme:

 

[vince]

Agreed. It's impossible to police all the pics and videos in the gallery. You'd have to have people send in witnessed affit davits via certified mail to make any legal assurance. That's extremely impractical.

Don't people just kinda assume that anyway? When someone goes into the gallery they have got to realize that not everyone is who they say they are. The verification photo doesn't do anything if you have the help of someone else or if you don't show what it is you're verifying.

Many people have volunteered to be personal :naughty: verifiers!

It is impossible to verify every pic,I agree with you there. But it wouldn't be necessary if it was required to have one verified picture, before you post any others. Same as was done for the new Gold Membership offer.

I don't think there would be many people getting help from someone else to fake their photos. Most would be embarrassed to ask a friend and what good would it do anyhow? Someone is gonna let me take photos of them and post them here?

If you want to sign up the position of personal verifier, you could start with me! :wink:

 

[D_Kaye Throttlebottom]

bitching about the moderation of a board that you frequent, but don't own is lame as all get out.