Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Policy & Help >

Policy Miscellany

Page: (1)2 3 4 5 6

08:41 / 25.11.05

A thread for trifling pleas for help, or questions about Barbelith policy, that don’t warrant a whole new thread of their own.

First up:
When mods proactively delete duplicate posts, is there an established convention for which one is put up for the chop?
This morning, another Convo mod and I both tried to clear up a double post independently but pretty much simultaneously. However, both of us nominated a different one. In such instances, it wouldn’t take much for both posts to get deleted.

So, do we have/need a rule?

Less searchable M0rd4nt

08:51 / 25.11.05

Yeah--this has actually happened in the past, I think, leading to some hurt feelings. Personally I go for the first of the posts.

pointless & uncalled for

08:57 / 25.11.05

Although I'm not a mod, wouldn't it make more sense to go for the latter of the posts as they are then the duplicates of the first post?

08:59 / 25.11.05

I'm with SK on this one. Am happy to change though if a rule is seriously needed.

09:07 / 25.11.05

At the moment, I’m like Mordant and mod the first one. I’m sure there was some kind of reasoning behind this, but I can’t remember now and it does seem counter intuitive, like SK says.

FWIW, I say we *keep* the first one and delete the other(s). It’s a more intuitive rule (If there are duplicates, delete the duplicates and keep the original), and if there is a continuing slew of reposts (as sometimes happens) it keeps things simpler because the status of a keepable post never changes to deletable, if you see what I mean.

ONLY NICE THINGS

09:22 / 25.11.05

Yes, except that the duplicate can be created by somebody making a correction in the middle of the posting process - correcting a typo they have seen after clicking "post, for example - and so the second post is more likely to be what they actually wanted to write. That's why I usually move to delete the first one...

09:48 / 25.11.05

Yes, but they’re not strictly duplicates. I suppose as far as a rule goes, we don’t count those and approach them (reposts) as common sense or consultation with the poster dictates.

Our Lady Has Left the Building

10:12 / 25.11.05

I tend to delete the first one, like Haus. I seem to remember that when Cal was still tweaking this version of the board it was asked that moderation requests were somehow made visible to mods to avoid precisely this situation, but of course...

10:16 / 25.11.05

Hmm, thinking about it, it’s not always easy to distinguish a repost from a double-post. Although we should probably discourage people from amending posts that way, it might be best all round to consider the last of a series of repeats (or apparent repeats) to be the desired version.

10:48 / 25.11.05

Funny, I always delete the second one as well. Firm policy needed here.

11:00 / 25.11.05

I leave it for a couple of days, just to make sure that I don't end up accidentally helping to lead to both posts getting deleted. It's not like the board's going to implode for having the odd double hang around for 48 hours.

11:56 / 25.11.05

So, we're agreed on deleting the first one then from now on?

12:07 / 25.11.05

Looks like it, at least until someone makes a better case for the reverse.

12:12 / 25.11.05

Okay, so if we're agreed on that, can we move on to my question about list threads*.

As most of you are probably aware, the music forum is, as ever, filling up with lists, in order to combat this I suggested in the Moderation Requests thread that where it clearly says in the abstract "no lists" lists should be deleted. Does anyone think this course of action is too draconian and, if so, why?

For an example of the kind of thing I'm talking about, see here
For a look at the Mod Requests discussion, see here

*By lists I mean those posts that have very little or no descriptive or explanatory content.

13:13 / 25.11.05

Well, if they are explicitly prohibited in the abstract then I think there’s probably a case for saying that such posts fall into a category of offtopica, and can therefore be treated as such. Do mods in the Spectacle delete spoilers from threads marked *No Spoilers*?

I tend to agree with the view that they can have a pernicious effect on the thread and the board as a whole, so I don’t think that deletion is necessarily an over-reaction. A copy of the list should probably be kept though, and maybe PMed back to the poster. And it would probably be good form to give the poster a nudge and a chance to expand before the post is excised.

13:29 / 25.11.05

Yeah, as long as a copy is sent to the original poster then no harm is done by deleting. They can add comments in and re-post if they choose.

21:15 / 01.12.05

I've been thinking about starting a combination thread in Film Tv & Theatre. One for general questions related to movie/dvd/theatre news and also one that allows Barbelith members to post and discuss their recently watched but perhaps unthreadworthy movies/plays.

As I see it:

Pros:
A greater selection of film talked about.
This mode of thread may lend itself more easily to talking or at least posting once in a while on theatre.
Small questions asked and answered (as there isn't really an equivalent of other forum's Stupid _______ Questions threads).

Cons:
Could lead to the reasonably despised action of listing.
May lead to lessening discussion of individual films in the long run (possibly very little back and forth).

All I could find when searching is The Through the Round Window... What are you watching? thread which in the abstract specifies: Aside from the usual cult TV stuff which normally gets mentioned here, what other stuff are you watching on TV? So it really wouldn't hit the mark.

So before I do create this thread, good/bad/meh idea?

21:35 / 01.12.05

On the list thing, just include the words "no lists" in the abstract.

21:38 / 01.12.05

Also, I really don't know why you're asking for peoples' opinions. Just put the thing up and if the board likes the thread it will float.

Barbelith would become very cluttered if everyone consulted on their planned threads.

22:47 / 01.12.05

Also, I really don't know why you're asking for peoples' opinions. Just put the thing up and if the board likes the thread it will float.

Yes I was being overly cautious and I normally wouldn't take this approach Boboss but the question was not so much "Is it a good thread?" but "Is it a good idea and do you think it would be of benefit to the forum in the long run?". It may take off, it may not. Whether it would sink or swim wasn't really my issue. More that if (and I do realise that it's a big if) it did take off would it detract from or enhance the forum by the large?

I think it would be functional but was feeling some trepidation as to where a thread of this sort might lead. I was asking as a moderator of said forum "What exact effect do you think these type of threads have?" and "Would the FTV&T continue to do well with a marked absence of them?".
Do you see?

Our Lady Has Left the Building

07:00 / 02.12.05

I don't see a problem with it. Perhaps mention in the summary that people should spin out their own threads if there turns out to be a desire to talk about a particular film? I'd be interested to know what Båm'bling's Brutu'ss Begin's as ze regularly starts threads for stuff other people have never heard of. Would ze use a thread like this for hir reviews?

08:43 / 02.12.05

Yes I do see, I think I always did, even if I didn't articulate my clear vision very well in my last post.
I still think you shouldn't worry. Simply write a good abstract, and voice your concerns in the first post.

12:52 / 11.03.06

Has there been a previous thread giving suggestion on how to use Barbelith effectively or is there one that, at least, has given some thought to it?

13:22 / 11.03.06

Do you mean something like this, or this, Shrub?

15:19 / 11.03.06

Thanks Smoothly, but, no, not exactly. Also apologies as my question wasn't particularly clear. A large part of my wondering deals with how to operate within a community effectively and, yes, this often plays into adoption of productive posting styles/an awareness of how your fictionsuit is percieved/what will and won't be tolerated on Barbelith etc. The How to post in Tutorials/ Expectactions of Barbeloids/Wiki although, at times, running along parallel lines wouldn't be totally appropriate within which to develope my chain of thought or ask my question/get answered.
I've been thinking about how different users choose to manoeuvre their fictionsuits through The Barb (not what each bring to the table or what can be expected of them/us/Barbelith as a community)and how this personalised approach clearly must relate to a personalised (perhaps totally unconsciously formed) requirement/need from The Barb. It, perhaps, would be more Conversation than Policy, if you know what I mean?

In effect, an examination of posting style/online personality with regard to use of The Barb and how these posting styles meet our individual requirements (if at all). Asking users to consider what their requirement is and how effective their method of retrieval is. I want a consideration of what might be a beneficial or maladaptive strategy. Also thinking a lot about how intent often gives way to habit.

(I think that it would travel in significantly different territory. Clarification? Would it?)

15:37 / 11.03.06

Also looking to question if everyone's "requirement" differs (similarities and dissimlarities).

16:31 / 11.03.06

Sounds interesting, Shrub. I don't recall an existing thread about that exactly. I say start it.

17:53 / 11.03.06

Yeah not one about that exactly but I had a feeling it still may've been covered somehow somewhere. My thinking is still very unformed and there's a few other threads I want to read again, for consideration, before posting, perhaps some I haven't found yet but thanks and I'll post it eventually.

18:13 / 11.03.06

Cool. There are bits and pieces you might find relevant in here, here, and here.

18:40 / 11.03.06

Oooo I've never seen two of those.

19:20 / 12.03.06

Why not have every member a mod?

19:56 / 12.03.06

Because not every member is trustworthy and has the best interests of the board at heart.

If everyone were given mod status you would be more likely to get bad decisions passed more often. It's even possible that groups of fuckwits could team up and work towards seriously disrupting the board.

20:18 / 12.03.06

Also: every member *is* a mod. See that tab to the right of all your posts? You start off with being able to initiate mod actions on all your own posts and threads - where your vote counts for as much as that of any other mod.

It’s even in the FAQ: You, just by joining the board, become your own moderator, at least as far as your own posts go. If you have to change something, click that link next to your post, under your name, that says "moderate post." And please, use that space that says "Reason for request." It makes life easier for the rest of us that approve the edits.

But as boboss sez, I think you need to establish a little history in the community before anyone’s going to feel comfortable with you having a vote on everyone else’s posts. But, y'know, that's one of the things that makes it a strong community, too - the more worthwhile content you put into barbelith, the more there is for you to do.

08:30 / 13.03.06

Yes, stuff in the FAQ - the stuff about Barbelith future > Tripolitica in particular - was what prompted me to ask the question. It's related to Tom Coates' question at the bottom of this page, about whether we want hierarchy to be institutionalised.

I guess the imprecision of 'mod' in my previous question is akin to the historic problem with using the word "men" as if it meant "humans" - what then is the word for "men"? Since there is a term 'mod' distinct from 'user' I assumed the meaning would be clear.

ONLY NICE THINGS

08:40 / 13.03.06

I think that's probably the answer, then - not every member is currently able to moderate other peoples' posts as well as their own because the board currently is not designed for that to work. For example, if three users decided that they did not like another member, they could by working together systematically delete every post that person made that they came across. Until a balance can be coded in to address that and other issues, not everyone can be a moderator. As a halfway house, people with a degree of history and familiarity on the board either volunteer or are invited to act as "moderators" - that is people with the ability to propose moderation to other people's posts as well as their own.

Page: (1)2 3 4 5 6