mods, members and admin, pull yourselves together

[Gautama]

some of us members are being highly annoyed by how some of you treat our concerns/irritations/inadequacies

[Cyan Kat]

I miss the arcade :(

[Gautama]

:(

[Crests]

I don't understand what's happening.

[Lore]

I think we should have the right to post our opinions about cping things in a civil manner and get answers according to that. It doesn't have to turn into a fight every single time.

 

 

that's all.

[Cyan Kat]

I miss Crests Of Daylight Foaming At The Mouth Part uno :(

[NumbersGirl]

Hey guys I don't want you to think I'm ignoring this or anything, but I am leaving now for an event tonight and won't be home until about midnight, so I likely won't be back on here until tomorrow. Sorry.

[Gautama]

OK, have a good night then!

[Cyan Kat]

The arcade is back :awesome:

[42rock89]

The arcade is back :awesome:

 

Loved that when I first joined but wandering what happened to it when I came back from a long absence, game on! :sneaky:

[AnnaElisabeth]

I think we should have the right to post our opinions about cping things in a civil manner and get answers according to that. It doesn't have to turn into a fight every single time.

 

 

that's all.

 

I agree that it doesn't have to turn into a fight everytime. I think all of us could maybe try to be a bit more civil and understanding of each other. (Not directed at you, Lore, just in response to your post)

[Gautama]

Berluscian, where are YOU. The mods are there to sort things out. It's possible to not just rule things out, but talk, until there is a consensus.

 

If you don't have time, everybody understands I guess. But it's the tone of how

you say that. You can say that larmoyantly, that is an option and is great, because then we feel bad and hysterical and stuff and subsequently you feel good.

( You could also let your doggie add things like:" It's Ian's board, he can do whatever he wants. :smug:" and not comment on that astonishing piece of revelation. :p:nice:)

 

Or you could just say that and still make people feel heard and show that you generally take care.

That would be better, you know.

 

Sorry for picking you out Ian, but I see your ongoing refusal to want to discuss those things as the main source of all that neverending misunderstanding. You see that the mods are there for it.

 

I'm gonna add some more later, if neccessary. Am off now.

[busybeeburns]

Sorry for picking you out Ian, but I see your ongoing refusal to want to discuss those things as the main source of all that neverending misunderstanding.

No you're not and in any event you would be the last person at the moment I'd want to share moderator/admin decision making processes with. Damned if you do and damned if you don't, but let the moderators do their job without this constant criticism.

[mc_squared]

No you're not and you would be the last person at the moment I'd want to share moderator/admin decision making processes with anyway. Damned if you do and damned if you don't, but let the moderators do their job without this constant criticism.

 

:thumbsup:

[Gautama]

Nice. :)

 

Nothing more to add to this, hope you'll listen to the others.

I think the mods understood what this is about and solve it with Lore then.

 

When I say I'm sorry, then I am, btw.

[NumbersGirl]

Okay, I'm back from a little sleep after a lovely company event which involved going to a Detroit Tigers baseball game in nearly 100 degree (37C) heat with humidity so bad you can see the haze on the field. :freak: Not the best "late nate out", but the free drinks were nice. Anywho...

 

 

For discussion purposes, any concerns should probably be limited to after the forum "reset" so to speak (last summer), because otherwise we'll all being comparing apples to oranges, as the forum guidelines as requirement for membership were implemented at that time.

 

- The mods immediately ban spambot advertisers. There is no reason to discuss this with forum members as such advertising is against forum guidelines and I doubt people want to see 'buy gold here forex investors athletic shoes for cheap cheap cheap' stuff everywhere. I would point to an example, but since we immediately ban them an remove the posts, the examples go away. :nice:

 

- The mods choose member(s) of the month each month. We have a vote and come to a decision amongst ourselves each month as to who should be the MOTM, then make the announcement on the first (usually) day of the new month. We don't disclose this until the day of because we want it to be a surprise for the member. We explain our reasons for coming to the decision (the contributions the member made to the board) in the MOTM thread so it is not a secret as to why we decided that.

 

- The mods will ban multiple accounts used by a single person, as this is a clear violation of forum guidelines. Even thought it's not necessary to, there are occasions when we explain why we banned those accounts. For example, during the recent LP5 discussions when one person created something like 20 accounts to troll the board. :freak: When people wondered why oodles of new accounts were being banned, it was no secret as we explained to members in the thread(s) that it was the same person.

 

- When mods issue warnings to members, the warnings are sent via PM to the affected member with a full explanation provided. Obviously it is not appropriate to make an announcement about this on the forum, and people don't usually say "oh hey guess what I just got a warning".

 

- When mods close threads, we usually make a final post stating that the thread is closed (either temporarily or permanently) and explaining why it is closed. We usually provide the explanation (whether it is brief or detailed) so members are aware and it is not a secret. We also make a similar announcement and/or send a message to the thread creator when we merge their thread with another thread (if it is virtually the same topic as a thread that already exists).

 

- When mods disable/ban accounts, there will not necessarily be an official announcement "oh hey look what we just did". If someone notices and asks "uh, why was that account banned", we may (but not always) then respond "they received their 5th warning", "we found out they had multiple accounts", "they were spamming the board", "they posted inappropriate material", etc. These type of disable/bans very rarely happen anyway. In the recent case where the concerns arose, we provided a brief explanation with reference to certain forum guidelines (as full details were not appropriate to provide at the time, and were later explained once the account was opened again).

 

 

Now, members have expressed concerns that the mods are being "too secretive" about too many things. I have provided examples of what we do above, and also explained that we do provide reasons when we do those things, so I personally don't see that as being secretive.

[eff-exx]

( You could also let your doggie add things like:" It's Ian's board, he can do whatever he wants. :smug:" and not comment on that astonishing piece of revelation. :p:nice:)

 

:thumbsup:

 

Err.

[Lore]

Lol @ people defending the mods when the mods just want to ban him. Nothing against the mods, I just find it funny.

 

Edit: uh Carrie, that's info we all know, you haven't said anything new :blank: And if it turns out the banned person is dangerous, of course there must be a post about it. No one needs an explanation about why a wowgold user was banned, it's totally different.

 

Being secretive it's not related to show the rules or not, we all know how the board works.

 

For example: What if all the kels threads die and she still have some members' emails? she could trick them if they don't know about the issue :blank: I know it'd happen outside cping and the mods can't do anything about it, but it'd be nice at least to spread the word here just in case.

 

Same with stalkers like dfit I guess. I mean he even had another members' addresses :blank:

[NumbersGirl]

Edit: uh Carrie, that's info we all know, you haven't said anything new :blank:

Being secretive it's not related to show the rules or not, we all know how the board works.

Lore, the post was made because people were recently stating in a general, overall board-wide sense that decisions are "too secretive" and that we don't communicate our decisions with members. Yes you may know this info, but if people think we're "too secretive" I think it's appropriate to point out that's generally not the case. The post was meant to be generally informative to all members of CPing, not to any one member in particular.

 

 

For example: What if all the kels threads die and she still have some members' emails? she could trick them if they don't know about the issue :blank: I know it'd happen outside cping and the mods can't do anything about it, but it'd be nice at least to spread the word here just in case.

 

Same with stalkers like dfit I guess. I mean he even had another members' addressed :blank:

I guess I'm not sure entirely how to interpret this. It wouldn't be appropriate to display a master list of banned members saying why they were banned. In regard to the xxkels situation, if that person has members' e-mails, they are members who are around in the discussion right now so they know what's up. Since she's banned, she's not going to be able to come on here and get info from a person that joins the site later this year.

 

If members are passionate enough to keep this topic alive, then the xxkels thread would never die anyway as you suggest. The original one has been opened again anyway, so it would be more appropriate to discuss that particular issue there instead of the other thread that was created.

 

And in general, while yes the recent revelations about this person are extremely disturbing, the fact is that this is a discussion site/forum. Moderators/administrators have the task of moderating/administrating the site; they do not have the task/responsibility of moderating real life. Members are free to "spread the word" about their concerns as much as they want within forum guidelines.

[Gautama]

Err.

 

Ha yeah, what to do. :D:shrug:

 

 

 

Ok, I haven't clad my old grudges in silk and honey when comparing Ian to Berlusconi, I am sorry for that. It's just that some of this board's policies remind of current Italy.

Again, for the sake of a solution, I'm sorry.

 

I think I'm not commenting on the Admin's reply to that any further, but you seem to really be pissed off by me, wow. Make sure that I'm annoyed for some reason too. Explanations would help.

 

Ian obviously didn't know that I was actually acting connective rather than critical in that whole sad xxkels-situation.

 

 

I also should stop to announce that I will leave or not come back on a topic when I then never do that. That's dysfunctional- which brings me back to this thread's purpose.

 

Because I'm hardly the only one with dysfunctional bits and pieces of character.

The way and the tone of some of the mods and Ian, when reacting to members' sometimes dysfunctional questions is sometimes dysfunctional too.

 

Which then provokes uproar on the members' side (well, me, Lore and Reilly these days) and then the administrative side is being annoyed, etc. etc.

 

We are all right and wrong in this. We should work that out.

Because Lore, Reilly and me are not and never have been antagonistic just for our entertainment. It would be nice, if you all could understand that.

 

It's the tone that's wrong. Prolly on both sides.

[Lore]

Lore, the post was made because people were recently stating in a general, overall board-wide sense that decisions are "too secretive" and that we don't communicate our decisions with members. Yes you may know this info, but if people think we're "too secretive" I think it's appropriate to point out that's generally not the case. The post was meant to be generally informative to all members of CPing, not to any one member in particular.

 

I said it because when Kels was banned no one said why and no one said she was dangerous, etc. (I mean no official info from the mods, just what Nick posted). All the threads were closed and that was all. Of course that's being secretive, specially in an issue that involves more than 2 members of the forum.

 

 

I guess I'm not sure entirely how to interpret this. It's not like we can have a thread with a master list of banned members saying why they were banned.

 

I've seen banning logs in some other forums, it's about keeping the info available for everyone, specially in these kind of issues. Again, no one cares about how many spambots were banned yesterday for example.

 

In regard to the xxkels situation, if that person has members' e-mails, they are members who are around in the discussion right now so they know what's up. Since she's banned, she's not going to be able to come on here and get info from a person that joins the site later this year.

 

Not everyone visits the site all the time, the threads will die and someone who hasn't been around in mmm a month, won't know anything about this. That's why I think there should be some kind of warning about " potentially dangerous" members. We'll never know how many people she contacted through PMs for example.

 

If members are passionate enough to keep this topic alive, then the xxkels thread would never die anyway as you suggest. The original one has been opened again anyway, so it would be more appropriate to discuss that particular issue there instead of the other thread that was created.

 

And in general, while yes the recent revelations about this person are extremely disturbing, the fact is that this is a discussion site/forum. Moderators/administrators have the task of moderating/administrating the site; they do not have the task/responsibility of moderating real life. Members are free to "spread the word" about their concerns as much as they want within forum guidelines.

 

Well, I think it's important to keep people aware of the dangerous people around. It's not about a mods task, it's about common sense. I'm sure you (mods, cping members, etc) wouldn't want to see another cping member involved in something like this. It doesn't take more than 5 minutes to create a thread about it. A normal thread bumped by regular users would die anyway, mods can make a thread a "sticky" and then it wouldn't :uhoh:

 

That's all. Probably this won't change anything, but I really hope no one else here will be a victim of these kind of things again and I think that discussing the topic will make people aware of this.

[NumbersGirl]

I can understand your concern, particularly since you and so many other people were essentially "duped" by this person. Personally I got the oogy gut feeling that something didn't quite add up with her and made a few comments on the board to insinuate that (without going so far as for the friends to accuse me of being a meanie), but nobody ever would have guessed it was someone posing as somebody else.

 

We did post the reasons for the actions on all 3 accounts when it occurred, so it was very clear:

• xxKels and EnglishSilk accounts were permanently banned because it was one person with two accounts. We didn't just take someone's word for it, we did extensive research to prove it.
  
• MrLick account was temporarily disabled because there was the possibility it was the person above accessing it (to gain info, etc. from members). After further investigation it was revealed that indeed it was the original member posting, so the account was reinstated.
  

And other mods/admin can correct me if they feel otherwise, but when I said "It's not like we can have a thread with a master list of banned members saying why they were banned", I meant just that. If a member has been banned, that means they are no longer on the site, informing people of a person that is no longer there is rather moot in my opinion. If the point was to say "this is how people can get banned, so don't do this", that would be unnecessary because those reasons are stated throughout the forum guidelines. And having a big list of "people you might want to avoid", that might only serve to freak out new members. And banned people could simply claim "hey this site is saying things that aren't true about me, see that list".

 

It really is a matter of general common sense from a user perspective of the internet as a whole; on the internet you can't know for sure what kind of person is on the other side if you've never met them, and neither can we.

[Lore]

I can understand your concern, particularly since you and so many other people were essentially "duped" by this person. Personally I got the oogy gut feeling that something didn't quite add up with her and made a few comments on the board to insinuate that (without going so far as for the friends to accuse me of being a meanie), but nobody ever would have guessed it was someone posing as somebody else.

 

We did post the reasons for the actions on all 3 accounts when it occurred, so it was very clear:

• xxKels and EnglishSilk accounts were permanently banned because it was one person with two accounts. We didn't just take someone's word for it, we did extensive research to prove it.
  
• MrLick account was temporarily disabled because there was the possibility it was the person above accessing it (to gain info, etc. from members). After further investigation it was revealed that indeed it was the original member posting, so the account was reinstated.
  

And other mods/admin can correct me if they feel otherwise, but when I said "It's not like we can have a thread with a master list of banned members saying why they were banned", I meant just that. If a member has been banned, that means they are no longer on the site, informing people of a person that is no longer there is rather moot in my opinion. If the point was to say "this is how people can get banned, so don't do this", that would be unnecessary because those reasons are stated throughout the forum guidelines. And having a big list of "people you might want to avoid", that might only serve to freak out new members. And banned people could simply claim "hey this site is saying things that aren't true about me, see that list".

 

It really is a matter of general common sense from a user perspective of the internet as a whole; on the internet you can't know for sure what kind of person is on the other side if you've never met them, and neither can we.

 

Yeah you're right about the banning list. I didn't think of that

 

And, did you ask for a pic of them all right? To be honest I never doubted of her, she spent a long time here and well, when Nick and her made their thing public I doubted a bit but she sent me some very convicing PMs (without even asking)

[NumbersGirl]

And, did you ask for a pic of them all right?

:nod:

 

Yes I thought it was "convenient" that there was never a pic of everyone together and I "requested" it once in a post. 'twas part of my gut feeling of 2 + 2 = what da fuh.

[Lore]

That was curious but I never thought they'd let him take care of Liam without even meeting Kels :uhoh: I wouldn't leave a baby with someone I just met on the internet, but well, I guess not everyone is like that.