Tom, the point is that SEN stands for above average quality. This extends to not only content but also posting quality. Simply put, we don't want kidiots around here. Those can go to 4chan and the likes.

Now you can't stereotype the kidiot. There's also lots of SENners capable of intelligent discussion and quality contribution but ALSO like to act silly sometimes. Being a long time SENner they know that too much sillyness isn't accepted here and learned to deal with the occasional moderation. If we dropped all standards we would also invite the true kidiots that have nothing to offer. That's why the line has to be drawn somewhere.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Oct 2 2011, 10:12 pm by NudeRaider.

You're misunderstanding me. I'm not asking you to drop all standards. I'm not asking for any changes to any other forum except Null. I'm not even asking for Null to drop ALL of its standards. I just don't think it needs to be more strictly enforced. Let Null be stupid and fun for the people who enjoy stupidity. For people who don't enjoy stupidity, let them go to the thousands of other forums we have here. If somebody starts posting stupid stuff outside of Null, then SEN users can press the report button, and moderation can clean it up.

Well therein lies a differing of opinion. Ex posted this saying that Null should be held up to all general standards, and you think it shouldn't be held up to some of them. Ex believes topics in Null should be beneficial in some way to the community, whereas you believe it should be allowed to fill with nothing of value. I tend to side with Ex.

Also, your whole "don't look if you don't like it" idea doesn't work for moderation; the mods are supposed to look through posts that members make, so it's not really an option to just ignore the topics they think are stupid.

Would you say a countdown from 1000 thread would be acceptable in Null? If so, I'd be interested in hearing your justification.

But my point is, deleting and preventing a lot of these topics isn't going to benefit the community. I've told you what I think the benefits are to having a more lax moderation policy in Null, but the most I've gotten from anybody else for benefits on a stricter policy is "it'll uphold forum etiquette" or something else equally weak.

I don't feel bad for the moderators at all. Moderation is a job they volunteered for. Their job was never as easy as it is now in the history of SEN. Some forums have more moderators than posts they receive per day, it seems.

And yeah, I would. If people want to post in it, then let them. I will never open the thread. If there were an option to hide it, I would. But for whatever reason, some people here on SEN might be interested in a thread like that. It's not my, or apparently your, cup of tea, but as I've said before, nobody is forcing us to participate in it. So let them have their fun, if they're not really hurting anybody. I'd argue that forumgames like the counting game are hardly beneficial, but simply harmless, where other forumgames/threads that have been locked recently are actually beneficial. They're entertaining, and to some people they might be one of the few things bringing people back here.

I don't think they volunteered for it, more that they were contacted about the position and accepted. Though I really wonder if we want people to come back solely for Null.

You could basically call any form of spam "harmless," but that shouldn't make it acceptable to post on SEN. If spam bots came by and flooded Null with legitimate ads, under your jurisdiction, moderators wouldn't be allowed to touch them because they're harmless, and hey, they might actually benefit somebody with one of the ads. Sorry, but I'm not buying that reasoning.

You could argue "Oh well that's spam, but these other things are games, so it's different." Well, let's tack on the word "game" to this scenario. A spam bot posts "The Ad Game" where the goal is for the next poster to click on the previously posted ad before posting. Now, you could make an exception for accounts that appear to be bots, but what stops a regular person from posting the topic from their own personal product or something they want to advertise? Should that spam be allowed? I do not think it should.

If people are only coming back to update a one-word game thread, I won't miss them. That's just a personal opinion, though.

Posting ads like that is against the rules of SEN, but I still get your point.

Nope, no advertising allowed. Thread locked. End of story. Spam is harmful. I'm not saying it isn't. I'm saying stupidity kept in it's designated zone(Null) is harmless. Just like the Shoutbox. The Shoutbox has hardly any standards, and manages to be a real source of community building, in my opinion. I don't see why we can't embrace Null as a more permanent extension of the Shoutbox.

I haven't really thought about it all too much, but if you keep the standards of Null low, you then open up Lite Discussion to a larger range of topics, which might be beneficial since LD and SD seem to be fighting for content, kind of stepping on each other's toes.

It shouldn't be allowed. I think SEN should be strong against advertising, illegal content, flaming, etc. This is clearly advertising, so just lock it up. Our staff is smart, and I think if a thread starts blurring the line like the one you just mentioned, perhaps the moderators can put their heads together and use their brains to come up with a decision. On top of all that, I don't believe many SEN members would bother participating in a thread like this anyway. Even if the thread weren't locked, worst comes to worst, the thread gets a couple posts about the thread being blatant advertising, and drifts away.

There hasn't been a new post in the Welcome forum in nearly 2 weeks. It was by me, and I was responding to a guy a week late. I don't think SEN really is in a position to turn down members. There are plenty of members in SEN's past who had shitty post quality when they started and slowly improved, too, several of them becoming esteemed SEN members. No need to alienate these members, especially when the website doesn't benefit in doing so.

So tell me, what is the benefit of it?

Hot damn.
At first I disagreed with Mr.Waits, but he makes such a convincing argument...

I pretty much agree on all the points made here. I can attest to post quality having a positive correlation to amount of time spent on SEN. Just look at my shiny regular badge, and my shittier-than-now post quality at the beginning.

...But half of me still feels that nothing will come from allowing crappy topics. If people didn't come while regulation wasn't really in effect, why complain about people not coming when it isn't in effect?. I think there can be some degree of lackadaisy (aww yeah improper noun forms), but threads that do not have any input other than "1" "2" "3" (counting) shouldn't be allowed because "gaining members" for the purpose of counting just seems stupid. Might as well close SEN permanently at that point.

That's right, I said it.

I find it humorous that I talked about silliness with an improper noun form of the word lackadaisical.

Quote from TomWaits

Quote from poison_us

Though I really wonder if we want people to come back solely for Null.

Quote

If people are only coming back to update a one-word game thread, I won't miss them. That's just a personal opinion, though.

There hasn't been a new post in the Welcome forum in nearly 2 weeks. It was by me, and I was responding to a guy a week late. I don't think SEN really is in a position to turn down members. There are plenty of members in SEN's past who had shitty post quality when they started and slowly improved, too, several of them becoming esteemed SEN members. No need to alienate these members, especially when the website doesn't benefit in doing so.

So tell me, what is the benefit of it?

There's a difference in fostering a welcoming community and fostering a festering cesspool of topics such as the counting game. There is a great deal of difference between the new members who post such, and those that actively contribute to the community. I do not want a SEN where new members join only for the games. I know I didn't come to SEN for the mafia game. This late in the game, SCI mapping is dead, and we are getting no new members for it. SCII mapping is even worse than dead, from what I'm told, with some actual decent content mixed between the "EVOLVES" or "Merchants RPG" remakes.

You're right, there's no need to alienate potential new members, but when they simply do not prove themselves capable of posting anything better than the Mao game (funny that Kame's been allowed to keep that up as long as she has) or the Rules game that was up before that... You catch my drift. "shitty post quality" is not limited to Null, whereas the limits of this crackdown are. As such, the new members would feel even more out of place in an important section of SEN, whereas even in the "post-crackdown" Null, there's little actual change between 3 weeks ago and today.

I really don't understand why you're crusading so hard against what amounts to nearly no change at all.

How's the Mao game or rules game bad? You posted in both of them. It seems that everything you do you also criticize like it's retarded. And besides, it's not it matters. Some of the shittiest threads (by all of your standards) that we've had for a long time have been open longer than before this... "crackdown" was implemented.

Yea wait...what's wrong with the Mao's game? If I was making it up as I go along I'd see why you'd be mad, but since I have rules set in place and are abiding by them I don't see the issue. Besides Ex even said that games were fine as long as they weren't straight out ridiculous.

Quote from name:Dem0nS1ayer

How's the Mao game or rules game bad? You posted in both of them. It seems that everything you do you also criticize like it's retarded. And besides, it's not it matters. Some of the shittiest threads (by all of your standards) that we've had for a long time have been open longer than before this... "crackdown" was implemented.

They're bad because they're little more than spam. Yes, I posted in them, that doesn't mean that they aren't bad. Can't a poison cajole?

Kame, it kinda is ridiculous, at least to me. But then again, I do hate things that give joy.

I agree, but realistically, with a more lax moderation style I don't see SEN turning into a festering cesspool with loads of threads. I think SEN should strive to be a welcoming community. I don't think threads like http://www.staredit.net/topic/14025/ , http://www.staredit.net/topic/14400/ , http://www.staredit.net/topic/14352/ , http://www.staredit.net/topic/14407/ or even http://www.staredit.net/topic/14371/ are making SEN unwelcoming, though. They might be pointless, stupid, lighthearted, had little or nothing to really discuss, or threads that probably wouldn't have taken off, but are they really harmful to our community? I think what's less welcoming is a nearly fascist warning message, threatening with severity or locking down threads that are stupid mindless fun in a forum that seems to me is geared for that sort of thing.

When I first joined this site I posted a thread suggesting some ideas I thought would help the site. I made my case in a civil manner, I encouraged discussion on both sides, and I asked for any of the staff to jump in and throw their two cents in. I was clearly only looking to help the forum out. Devlin replied with a brief, uninspired answer telling me the reason why it'll never happen has been said before, somewhere. Didn't really explain anything, and kind of came across like I was doing something wrong for even suggesting the idea. The thread lasted an entire 36 minutes before it was locked. As a new member, that had made me feel unwelcomed No more than a week ago I posted something and it was deleted by a moderator. I asked the moderator that deleted the post "why?", got a message saying because my post violated a rule, followed up with a message asking what harm my post was doing, and I haven't gotten a reply since. I didn't feel like my concerns as a member mattered either time. I felt ignored, and I felt unwelcomed. I don't think stricter moderation, or a crack down is the answer. I know this came off a bit ranty and perhaps melodramatic, but it's truly how I feel. Ignore it if you like.

On a scale of 1 - 10, how afraid are you of new members rushing to sign up and spam Null with counting threads as soon as moderation eases back on moderation? Well, it's not going to happen. I understand not supporting SEN going completely moderation free(besides spam, flaming, advertising, etc.) as I've suggested earlier, but what about loosening up a bit. The threads I posted earlier -- would this place be less inviting, or worse, if those were never locked?

Well, with Starcraft 1 not getting any new members, and Starcraft II mapping even worse than that, what do you suggest? You agree that it's in SEN's best interest to get new members, right?
For the record, I've never made a map, and I'm not the only member who's ever contributed to this forum who hasn't either.

The best part about all this is, is that the Mao game is a rather large thread. A lot of people participated in it. Our members are actually enjoying it! So why not embrace that!?

When I joined my first forum I assume 90% of the people reading my posts thought I had some sort of mental retardation. I would bet a lot of the people on SEN today weren't any different. It took a bit of time, but I got up to speed with things. If these members of this cesspool you speak of post poor quality in forums such as Serious Discussion, well, that's what we have moderators for! Give them a chance, and some of them will learn how to be beneficial members to the community.

Because I'm not in Mafia or the Mao game, so I really don't have any other thread to post in.

But seriously, I guess I just get tired of seeing "Topic has served its purpose" everywhere. ;(

Man, I don't even know how that thread deserved 2 severity. Is Farty just salty that he fell for it?

well played, aristocrat.. well played

So first off, you started the thread with "I don't particularly like stirring the pot, and I doubt the last thing the administration(and potentially any of the long-term members) wants is some week-old member suggesting how to run the site, but...(did you really expect me to stop right there? :] )." To me that suggests you at least assumed at some point that your idea would not be accepted or that the administration wouldn't want to hear a suggestion from a week-old member. As a side note, you keep calling youself a new member, but you aren't. I seem to recall you admitting to being some older member in the Shoutbox (YaeXillirion, was it?). Not to mention you named a member who hasn't been around in years and years in the "Dumbest person you know" thread, saying he used to give you a headache.

In this case it isn't that I personally didn't want to hear the suggestion or anything, it was simply that the suggestion had been made many times over the years and had been changed and changed back multiple times as well. The other responses in that thread actually summarized it well, and it didn't seem like more needed to be said as nothing was going to change again. My response of "There are no plans to merge them again. The reason why the exist has been stated many time here and elsewhere." made that clear. I closed the thread because I figured a discussion didn't need to take place about something that was not going to change. We had just added the Lite Discussion forum right before you posted that thread (as TiKels pointed out) and I had no intention to get rid of it so soon.

I'm guessing you're referring to your PM to me on September 20th, right? As mentioned above, you responded to the "Dumbest person you know" thread with the name of another member. Previously in that thread, I made it clear that naming other members was not going to be tolerated, and deleted your post. I don't care if the guy hasn't been here in years, I'm not going to let that slide. I wasn't going to un-delete your post and I wasn't going to to modify my original post to allow the naming of older members. I didn't respond because there was nothing really I could say. I figured that if I responded with something like the prior sentence, you would just argue it again. During my time as a mod here, I've learned that not continuing a "discussion" sometimes works better than trying to get the other person to just accept your side. As it looks from this thread, you wont just accept that this is how we work on SEN and this is who we are. That's pretty much why I didn't respond.

A couple of those threads were troll threads, and admittedly so. I personally would not care to join a site without moderation where people can post whatever they wanted. That's why I don't like or care for 4chan. I like to think I have a sense of humor and at times troll like the rest of 'em, but we'd prefer to make SEN not seem like it consists of unruly children. I'm guessing that was Nude's point earlier when he mentioned the childish jokes on SEN. So to answer this particular question, we'd feel like it was less inviting if it seemed like there were no rules in place to keep the forum tidy. As I said earlier, I'm fine with Null being the section devoted to extremely off-topic threads, but there still has to be some sense of structure there. Like others have said, though, this thread hasn't changed much and Null is still being moderated as it was before. I can't remember anyone complaining about how Null has been moderated in the past, so I sort of don't see what the issue is now.

That's the default reason for closing a thread if the mod leaves the field blank.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Oct 6 2011, 2:09 am by DevliN.

That's the funniest thing about this thread.

I think Ex was just having a bad day and flipped out over nothing.

I agree. I think Excal assumed Null had no moderation before, but that's not exactly true. We weren't giving out Severity to everyone in closed threads, but we were closing threads at least.

I'm not sure it it's related anymore but when I joined Sen, I didn't even know there was a forum. I only found out about it half a year later (yet I was visiting the site almost everyday...).