New Testingstan

Granted, but what is the expectation of privacy in the open forums? Here's how I think it should work: if there's any doubt, assume it shouldn't be said, even if it has otherwise been public before. That way, you won't accidentally cross a line.

It is generally ok to bring up something said in the thread or recent history in the same forum, but if there's a big gap in time or space, assume it is better forgotten unless they said otherwise. The reason here is maybe last year I was ok saying something, but have since changed my mind and just never erased the old posts.

Even simple things, like a real name, might be something we use here, could be easy for someone to find if they went looking, but don't necessarily want advertised. So, if you don't already have the ok, use the username attached to the post, just to be safe.

let me also take the opportunity here to outline a kind of moderation policy. Suppose somebody wrongs you, what should you do?

#1: try to assume the best in the other person. Go into it believing it as a mistake rather than an attack - there's a good chance it was!

#2: with that assumption, talk to them about it, let them know they made a misstep.

#3: if you don't want to or can't work it out between the two of you, then you can bring in a third party, who should do this same thing - try to be fair and solve the difference by talking it out


If you have mod powers and someone comes to you...

DO:

* ask the accused for their side. This should be the first thing you do, let them know what happened and give them a chance to voluntarily work out their differences or at least to defend themselves

* look over any relevant context to try to understand the big picture. It could be a big misunderstanding on all sides.

* try to move the main disagreement to PMs so they can talk more freely without the peanut gallery. it might be appropriate to temporarily lock a thread if it is out of hand too, though I prefer to avoid that since it leaves things dangling


DO NOT:

* revoke any access, force reactivation, or do bans, with one possible exception being the person is like spam bombing and won't back off. Revoking access, even temporarily, removes their ability to communicate - remember, a temp ban cuts them off from your PMs too!

* make any unilateral decision.

* execute any decision before the accused has had a chance to read your notification and respond - this way, if for example they are banned, they will be able to read the PM explaining why and perhaps send one appealing to someone else before being cut off. (and of course, they should have been a part of the discussion from the start, so it won't be much of a surprise, but still make sure they aren't left in the dark)



The key principles here are that alleged rulebreakers have a right to be heard and it is best to strive for mutual understanding.

That's a good place to start. Thanks for that.

wait i didn't even know there were private forums here

interesting to talk about alleged rule breaking when there are no actual rules at all posted. Now obviously there are apparently rules in an 'everybody knows' sort of way but not actually defined anywhere.

1 - Don't be a jerk
2 - See rule N°1

and 'not being a jerk' is just another way of saying 'don't cross these unspecified social boundry rules everyone's expected to know'

oddly not everyone has the same idea of what being a jerk means.

seems to me that we used to have a fairy decent set of rules x iterations ago written by RedImp which were along the lines of 'don't be a jerk and by jerkery we mean xyz'

I'm not in favour of over-regulation of a discussion board.

nor am i.

over-regulation is another highly subjective thing though. Or are we to assume any rules at all constitute 'over regulation'?

The way I see it, the 'rules' are in the mind of each individual - if you personally feel wronged by someone else, that someone else is the 'alleged rulebreaker'.

So the guiding principle in your own action would be like golden rule stuff. Easy to say generally, hard to get specific, but that's where talking out disagreements is useful.

Manus Dei wrote:wait i didn't even know there were private forums here

yeah we mostly just talk about you behind your back

evilsoup wrote:

Manus Dei wrote:wait i didn't even know there were private forums here

yeah we mostly just talk about you behind your back

bastards

Manus Dei wrote:

evilsoup wrote:

Manus Dei wrote:wait i didn't even know there were private forums here

yeah we mostly just talk about you behind your back

basterds

ftfy

Manus Dei wrote:

evilsoup wrote:

Manus Dei wrote:wait i didn't even know there were private forums here

yeah we mostly just talk about you behind your back

bastards

owned

Wait now it's visible to all members

time to read all your secreats

time to revel inthem

time to print your secrets and rub them all over my body

Wait did the secret forum really just become public

No. When I log out it's no longer visible.

Oh cool thanks

there's no vetting process for people joining the site though
I hope that Manus Dei is just confused since someone gave access to the secret clubhouse

I still don't see it (except with my other account) so it's good.

does this mean i'm one of the cool kids now i'm in the secret clubhouse

No it just means you mentioned not being in it and Phant or Los took pity on you.

evilsoup wrote:there's no vetting process for people joining the site though

this isn't strictly true actually

do we still have the riddle of 'what do we call sdn over here'?