| Author |
Topic:
Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
Rogue_Follower
Title: Manager: Literature
Registered:
Nov '03
|
Date Posted:
4/19 6:42pm
Subject:
Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
After some delay, the time has come for us to discuss... THE LITERATURE FORUM CODE OF CONDUCT.
dp's retirement thread generated plenty of good discussion, including a lot of suggestions for some sort code of conduct. We collected a number of the suggestions that we liked and formed a rough draft of a Code. We're posting it here for you to comment upon. If you have questions, concerns, criticisms, possible additions, whatever, post them here. 
Literature Forum Code of Conduct
- Treat your fellow posters with respect.
- Treat VIPs, even those who are not users on this site, with respect.
- Do not state opinions, assumptions, personal canon, or rumors as fact. Identify them for what they are.
- Be prepared to back up your points with evidence and facts, as necessary. Likewise, be prepared to explain the reasoning behind your criticism of something.
- Read a book or comic before you review it. Withhold final judgement of a work until you have read it.
- Do not start unnecessary arguments or debates.
- Keep personal confrontations out of threads.
- Think hard about posting, if your post does not make any contribution to the discussion.
- Do your best to post intelligibly.
Also, remember that these guidelines are in addition to the Lit Forum Rules and the TOS. So stuff like no author bashing, no baiting, etc. is already covered by those.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
The_Loyal_Imperial
Title: YAHTZEE Host
RPF Winner - Best GM
Registered:
Nov '07
|
Date Posted:
4/19 6:44pm
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
- Date Edited:
4/19 6:46pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
The_Loyal_Imperial
|
Looks good from where I'm sitting, though I see one thing that may be problematic.
Literature Code of Conduct posted:
Do not start unnecessary arguments or debates.
Perhaps some clarification on what "unnecessary" means, in this situation? What one person considers necessary could be considered unnecessary by another, after all. Just seems a little vague, and could stand to be slightly more specific. Perhaps an example would be useful, here?
-----signature-----
Attack of the Clones was released May 16, 2002.
Star Wars: Republic covered the Clone Wars starting Jan 22, 2003.
What's the next big Star Wars project? Star Wars: The Clone Wars. Fall 2008.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Rogue_Follower
Title: Manager: Literature
Registered:
Nov '03
|
Date Posted:
4/19 6:56pm
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
Yeah, that is rather vague...
How about we replace that one with "Keep lengthy debates and arguments to a minimum." then.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
The_Loyal_Imperial
Title: YAHTZEE Host
RPF Winner - Best GM
Registered:
Nov '07
|
Date Posted:
4/19 7:00pm
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
- Date Edited:
4/19 7:03pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
The_Loyal_Imperial
|
Rogue_Follower posted:
How about we replace that one with "Keep lengthy debates and arguments to a minimum." then.
Seems better, though I'm still unsure. Perhaps a "but not discussion" line? People tend to get those mixed up at times, so you don't want it discouraging what you're seeking to encourage. Lengthy discussions and more-or-less friendly debates/arguments, vs. back-and-forth debates and fights that end up going nowhere.
-----signature-----
Attack of the Clones was released May 16, 2002.
Star Wars: Republic covered the Clone Wars starting Jan 22, 2003.
What's the next big Star Wars project? Star Wars: The Clone Wars. Fall 2008.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Master_Keralys
Title: Lit, EUC
Reduced Time
Registered:
Oct '03
|
Date Posted:
4/19 7:01pm
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
Still difficult. I mean, part of the point of the boards is to have lengthy discussions and even arguments. I think the quality and type of discussion is really the issue.
Back-and-forths, marathon posts, etc. I think are the issue being addressed with the point. How do we encourage good, intelligent discussion, instead of dampening it, with this point?
- Keralys
-----signature-----
God made man. Man rejected God. God became the man Jesus Christ, died and rose again to life, saving man from himself.
The craziest story ever told.
The truest.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
leia7
Registered:
Apr '07
|
Date Posted:
4/19 7:08pm
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
- Date Edited:
4/19 7:10pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
leia7
|
Sorry, didn't see Keraly's post
Should there be a limit on how much you can quote from other people's replies or something similar?
While I don't mind a good debate, I don't always enjoy it when two people's posts and rebuttals run on for about five pages in the thread, each person quoting every single line that someone else said until I cannot even remember what the original discussion was about.
But, this may be considered good-faith debating by others, and I'm not sure where the line would be. I don't have the answer, and I'm not a frequent poster here, but I think it's important.
I know this is crazy. But, maybe it would be a good idea to clarify "respect", just to avoid problems in the future. People who are disrespectful in real life usually do not understand what the word "respect" means.
Finally - does Read a book or comic before you review it. Withhold final judgement of a work until you have read it apply to the discussion thread with spoilers before the book is released?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Rogue_Follower
Title: Manager: Literature
Registered:
Nov '03
|
Date Posted:
4/19 7:18pm
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
- Date Edited:
4/19 7:19pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Rogue_Follower
|
|
What Ker said. The intent of this point isn't to outlaw any debates---that's silly. But we'd like to promote intelligent debates, not mindless back-and-forth arguing. If you're sidetracking the thread and nitpicking someone's posts just for the sake of arguing, that's what we don't want.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Master_Keralys
Title: Lit, EUC
Reduced Time
Registered:
Oct '03
|
Date Posted:
4/19 7:21pm
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
Yes - but insofar as it means, "Don't judge it or review it without reading it." It doesn't mean you can't post reactions to things you hear - but remember that you're hearing them out of context, and you've not read it through all the way (or maybe at all). The point is that posting a reaction of like or dislike for an idea is very different from, "This is the worst book ever!" or "This is the best book ever!" or even "This book is so mediocre!" without having read it. No final judgments. You can comment on your thought of an idea - but you really can't comment on the execution unless you've actually read the execution to know.
How could we word it more clearly to communicate that idea? Thanks for the feedback!
- Keralys
-----signature-----
God made man. Man rejected God. God became the man Jesus Christ, died and rose again to life, saving man from himself.
The craziest story ever told.
The truest.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ulicus
Registered:
Jul '05
|
Date Posted:
4/19 7:26pm
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
Respect is simple to cultivate, I think:
Treat everyone as if they were bigger than you, stronger than you, and were right in front of you with a baseball bat.
Respectful posting would skyrocket. 
-----signature-----
Recipient of Golden Ewokâ˘
Trip Cares
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
leia7
Registered:
Apr '07
|
Date Posted:
4/19 7:40pm
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
Master_Keralys posted:
Yes - but insofar as it means, "Don't judge it or review it without reading it." It doesn't mean you can't post reactions to things you hear - but remember that you're hearing them out of context, and you've not read it through all the way (or maybe at all). The point is that posting a reaction of like or dislike for an idea is very different from, "This is the worst book ever!" or "This is the best book ever!" or even "This book is so mediocre!" without having read it. No final judgments. You can comment on your thought of an idea - but you really can't comment on the execution unless you've actually read the execution to know.
How could we word it more clearly to communicate that idea? Thanks for the feedback!
- Keralys
How about:
Do not write a review in a review thread before you have read the entire book. If you are commenting on a spoiler in a discussion thread before the release date, please keep in mind that you are receiving information out of context. Do not make a judgment on the entire book based on the spoiler until you have read that scene or the entire book.
Yes, it does say in the review thread not to write a review before reading the whole thing, but still...
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Thrawn McEwok
Title: TFN EU Staff
Registered:
May '00
|
Date Posted:
4/20 3:23am
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
- Date Edited:
4/20 3:30am (3 edits total)
Edited By:
Thrawn McEwok
|
- Modding should focus on TONE, not CONTENT.
No-one really objects to the way the Mods Havac out bad language, for example.
Most of the problems, in my experience, come when people present an opinion too aggressively.
The other big problem is when they don't actually further the discussion with their posts - which is obviously a linked issue.
Those are two areas I really try to be mindful of when making my own comments here, and I'd be happy to hear other people's advice on my own posting habits; but I think the really tricky issue here is part of the second point: how to productively further the discussion.
How do we keep the discussion constructive?
One point I'd make is this: "it takes two to tango" is a misleading cliche. It takes two sides to have a productive discussion; it only takes ONE side to derail a debate by refusing to further it.
If someone's complaining, rather than discussing, THEY may be the one at fault.
Any thoughts?
***
Moreover, even with that said, I'm concerned that there's potentially a huge flaw on the enforcement side of this.
By creating these rather vague and subjective standards, with an even vaguer indication about how they're to be enforced, you're opening the door to more disruption: spurious complaints will have to be taken more seriously, and the Mods have a vague right to intervene without tight controls.
I really don't want to see a climate of censorship and accusation.
***
I also have a little survey I need to get some results together for... 
- The Imperial Ewok
-----signature-----
A/T = OTP  "To write one Solo twin as an angstbunny, Master Skywalker, might be considered unfortunate. To write BOTH that way looks like carelessness."
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Jedi Ben
Registered:
Jul '99
|
Date Posted:
4/20 3:37am
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
I think a bit more is needed on the first line:
"Treat your fellow posters with respect"
For anyone who says there shouldn't be anything more needed, I agree entirely but the world just doesn't function that way and you'll get people trying all sorts of tricks ie. It never said anything about whether someone's view deserves respect and other evasions.
I'm not sure it's possible to completely pro-actively prevent such antics but perhaps something like:
"Treat your fellow posters with respect. A SW EU fan can be a fan of as much of the EU as they like without ceasing to be a fan."
On another point: Posting as fact is a flaw which I sometimes fall foul of, unintendedly I might add, to meet that does it mean I have to plaster IMO over a post or does use of provisional terminology act as a sufficient flag to the nature of the post?
-----signature-----
Howe: Why?
Castle: So they can't walk away. So they can't
profit from the pain they've caused.....
Howe: And no second chances...
Castle: I don't do redemption.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Sinrebirth
Title: Hierarch and Chancellor of EUCity
Registered:
Nov '04
|
Date Posted:
4/20 3:52am
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
How about 'never post in capital letters'? Mentally, I always imagine someone is shouting to me when they do that. I imagine everyone else does. Just a pet beef.
Good to see this up, RF. I'm not sure how you can word what is in essence a 'debate constructively' clause, though.
-----signature-----
Sey's Sinre  The Missing Chapters of LotF: Invincible http://boards.theforce.net/Message.aspx?topic=28933751&brd=10477&replies=10 Chapter 2.5 is up now! Featuring Wedge, Dician, Niathal, Daala, Valin and Syal!
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Jedi Ben
Registered:
Jul '99
|
Date Posted:
4/20 3:58am
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
Sinrebirth posted:
How about 'never post in capital letters'? Mentally, I always imagine someone is shouting to me when they do that. I imagine everyone else does. Just a pet beef.
Good to see this up, RF. I'm not sure how you can word what is in essence a 'debate constructively' clause, though.
How about:
"Act in a way that you would like to be reciprocated."
I am assuming people know the term reciprocity though, in essence it's the old rule of act like you'd like to be treated by others.
As for CAPS = shouting, that's been a well-established part of netiquette for the last few years. There does perhaps need to be some attention on use of bold as that can have the same effect. Italics/underline tends to equal emphasis for most people.
-----signature-----
Howe: Why?
Castle: So they can't walk away. So they can't
profit from the pain they've caused.....
Howe: And no second chances...
Castle: I don't do redemption.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Sinrebirth
Title: Hierarch and Chancellor of EUCity
Registered:
Nov '04
|
Date Posted:
4/20 4:16am
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
I thought as much, to capitals. Reciprocity would be a great foundation here, indeed. More importantly, will people be directed to read this before they start posting in, say, the title?
It's lovely to have a code, but will we expect new posters to sign it, or to read it alone?
-----signature-----
Sey's Sinre The Missing Chapters of LotF: Invincible http://boards.theforce.net/Message.aspx?topic=28933751&brd=10477&replies=10 Chapter 2.5 is up now! Featuring Wedge, Dician, Niathal, Daala, Valin and Syal!
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Jedi Ben
Registered:
Jul '99
|
Date Posted:
4/20 4:21am
Subject:
RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
|
Sinrebirth posted:
I thought as much, to capitals. Reciprocity would be a great foundation here, indeed. More importantly, will people be directed to read this before they start posting in, say, the title?
It's lovely to have a code, but will we expect new posters to sign it, or to read it alone?
I suspect awareness and enforcement of the code will fall to the Four Horsemen. (i.e. the Mod Squad)
-----signature-----
Howe: Why?
Castle: So they can't walk away. So they can't
profit from the pain they've caused.....
Howe: And no second chances...
Castle: I don't do redemption.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
