Jedi Council Forums - Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion

Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Books & Comics » Literature »

Post Reply | Active Topic Notification | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
SuperWatto Registered: Sep '00	Date Posted: 4/23 9:33am Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	I think voicing concerns about it possibly becoming too strict is kinda useless. Y'all know that if it becomes too strict, I'll be the first to start yelling... But until then, I think we should definitely show some faith and goodwill and only try to be constructive on this matter. I trust Havac, RF, T2Q and Ker completely to know what 'too strict' is. -----signature----- Trandoshan flatcakes!
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Master_Keralys Title: Lit and EUC Mod On Vacation Registered: Oct '03	Date Posted: 4/23 11:45am Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	Thanks, SuperWatto. It's certainly not our intent to just suddenly be uber-strict, nor is it our desire to curb discussion. (I think I'm beginning to repeat myself.) ChildofWinds - there are a few points worth responding to in what you posted, because they are simply inaccurate. First, as for your style of posting: no one is complaining about it. The post I threw out above is a good example of what is generally a good idea for post style. Opening with what someone posted and responding to it isn't a problem. Doing line by line - and even phrase by phrase - dissections of someone's post is occasionally cool, but is usually unnecessary, even in intense argument. The moderators are here to moderate - not merely to eliminate negative content, but to help generate and direct discussion in a positive fashion. If we're merely maintaining the status quo, without seeking improve the tone of the forum, the quality of the arguments, and so on, then in my opinion we're not doing our jobs. I'm not terribly interested in neutrality in that sense: I want us to establish a positive direction for the board to go, and go there. That doesn't mean we're going to start banning people for getting off-topic for a few posts. ChildofWinds posted: But now people seem to be wanting mods to moderate posting style and stifle long posts or debates or discussions that veer from the topic even a little. I can understand if the off-topic discussion goes on and on for a dozen or so posts that this might be a problem, but if there are four or five posts that go off on a tangent, and then the discussion returns to the main topic, I don't see that as a bad thing. Real face to face conversations do that all the time. Sometimes those tangents lead to some great discussions. And if I'm not interested, I just scroll past. No. No one is saying this; no one has said this. Don't extrapolate from the situation with SOS to the board as a whole. SOS is a unique case, that's been discussed before and elsewhere, and this really isn't the place for that discussion again. We have no problem with topics moving and changing - except that good original topics can get lost because people with an axe to grind push threads in particular directions with some regularity. There's no reason that those hot topics can't be their own threads, and that allows other threads to continue functioning under their original intent. We're not even saying that all threads have to stay on topic - but rather that there should be some respect shown to other posters, including the original posters on a thread. I posted a thread a while back with some particular questions and thoughts that were never addressed at all, because the thread got derailed in the first three replies. I wasn't grossly offended - but it was annoying, and I do think it hurts the boards when that happens over and over again. It apparently needs repeating again: These are not increasing restrictions. These are for clarification of existing restrictions, for the benefit of both the moderation team and the users. CoW, I'd much appreciate it if you would make a positive contribution here. What sort of Code would you like to see? If your opinion is that no such thing is needed, that's fine, but we'd appreciate hearing that or a constructive response in addition to disagreement with what we currently have posted. - Keralys -----signature----- Galactic Forum Alliance Stand for freedom; stand for justice; stand for right!
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Jedi Ben Registered: Jul '99	Date Posted: 4/23 1:56pm Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	jfostrander01 posted: Some thoughts. To my mind, a code is different than a set of laws. Laws are enforced; codes are lived by. Han Solo wasn't a great respecter of laws as a smuggler but he certainly had a code by which he lived. If some conduct is THOU SHALT/THOU SHALT NOT then it needs to be in the laws. The code should be discussed, as we are doing now, agreed on by consensus (not everyone is going to agree on every jot and tittle), posted and then we should try to live up to it. We'll all slip. However, if we assume good faith on the part of all, it should prove elastic enough. If there's consistent bad behavior, the mods can talk to the person privately. If a person is not willing to abide by an agreed on code as a whole, then maybe they need to consider if they really want to be a part of this community. In rare cases, it may need to be suggested TO them by the mods. COW, I think this part of John's post might be of help in showing what the code is and isn't to be. I see it as more an attitude to posting rather than strict enforcement and regulation of. You could alternatively see it as something aimed at getting people to appreciate the spirit of the rules of the Lit forum and not just the letter of them. Law works in part through punishment for transgression, but the greater part is arguably by the acceptance that there is a cetain way to do things that delivers greater mutual benefit than individual anarchy. -----signature----- Other guy: Could I have your autograph? Darth Vader: No, **** off or I'll kill you with a tray! Give me penne all'arrabiata or you shall die! And you and everyone in this canteen! Death by tray it shall be!
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ChildOfWinds Registered: Apr '01	Date Posted: 4/23 7:48pm Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion - Date Edited: 4/23 7:54pm (2 edits total) Edited By: ChildOfWinds
	Keralys: CoW, I'd much appreciate it if you would make a positive contribution here. What sort of Code would you like to see? What I was trying to contribute in my earlier post was my concern about things going too far in aggressive moderating. If what you're planning to do is just clarify restrictions, then I certainly don't have a problem with that. But in your response to Admiral Nick's post, you said, "That may be a valid point, but if so it's one we need to clearly specify that we're going to be engaging in. I think that links to Thrawn's point about tone, too... if we're going to moderate that sort of stuff more aggressively (which I think we're all fine with), great, but the board needs to know that." This suggested to me that things will be more restrictive. I think all of us would like Lit to be a friendly, fun place to be. I'd like to see a code of mutual respect more than anything. I think the most important thing is that posters remember to discuss the content of the post, not attack the poster. I hope you don't mind if I'm a little blunt here, but in a way, I felt that I was "jumped on" a bit in your post, first by being told that you'd appreciate it if I would make a "positive contribution" to the discussion. I thought you were interested in hearing our thoughts about this Literature Code of Conduct, including our concerns. I'm sorry if I misunderstood. Then you said, "No. No one is saying this; no one has said this. Don't extrapolate from the situation with SOS to the board as a whole. SOS is a unique case, that's been discussed before and elsewhere, and this really isn't the place for that discussion again." I wasn't even thinking about SOS when I was talking about off-topic discussion. I was talking about topics in general on the Lit board. It's something I happen to feel strongly about. I do tend to think that natural conversations are hard to fit into little specific boxes. I understand that on the Lit board it helps to try to keep discussions to specific topics so posters can go to a particular thread to talk about a particular topic, but I'm very forgiving of posters going off on tangents from time to time. Those tangents often spice up the discussions . From your code list, I especially like: 1.Treat your fellow posters with respect. I truly think this is THE most important one. I personally know several people who don't post anymore because of this one. I don't post in as many threads as I used to because of this one either. 2.Treat VIPs, even those who are not users on this site, with respect. 3. Read a book or comic before you review it. Withhold final judgement of a work until you have read it. I think it's only fair to withhold final judgment until one has read the book or to review it, so I definitely agree with this. However, I think it's perfectly fine to speculate about what might happen in a book prior to reading it, or to discuss spoilers before reading a work, with the understanding that one only has a small piece of the story and opinions may change later. 4.Keep personal confrontations out of threads. These don't belong on the boards at all. 5.Do your best to post intelligibly. I think we should all strive toward that! In general though, I guess I just prefer the laissez faire style of negative moderation as much as possible. Hopefully, if we are all "Doing to others as we would have them do to us,", as Mr. Ostrander suggested, the mods won't need to delete or interfere in threads too often. On the other hand, I DO like to see the mods actively participating in threads, contributing their own ideas and opinions. So I hope we'll continue to see more of that. Jedi Ben , Thanks! That helps a lot!
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Thrawn McEwok Title: TFN EU Staff Registered: May '00	Date Posted: 4/24 3:43am Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion - Date Edited: 4/24 3:45am (1 edits total) Edited By: Thrawn McEwok
	jfostrander01 posted: Discussion Is A Zero Sum Exercise. The point is to exchange ideas, not convert the opponent. One side doesn't have to "win". They're not going to, anyway. "Agree To Disagree' -- ATD -- and move on. I agree - so much so that I think some people regard "ATD" as a bad cliché of mine. But I guess there are two points I want to make here. Firstly, there are more than just ideas involved. A lot of the 'bad' discussions (SSDs, Clone Army numbers, nature of the Force, Chiss continuity) hinge on a body of relatively concrete (though largely fictional and by no means consistent) information. Sometimes, these discussions can be entirely pleasant - the recent discussion of ship-sizes in Star Wars: Legacy comes to mind... and I've had entirely pleasant and civil (off-site) Clone Army discussions with people who thoroughly disagree with me. One tactic that I suspect often causes debates to develop in a bad way is the "my source says x, so yours doesn't matter" argument. I feel this is subtly different from my usual saw of "this source says x, that says y... the sources don't add up, or at the least, the creators were working at cross-purposes; so what ways can we take this, and what causes the least continuity snafus - and btw, can we ATD?".... but I'll admit to being quite close to this issue. So, beyond the inevitable "It's just a (large, unwieldy franchise built around a kids') movie", what do people suggest? And can anyone PM me any thoughts they have on how I could personally see past the 8km-long lump of bias I'm riding? Secondly... yeah, there' a second point - I think calls for ATD by peripheral participants can have the effect - whether deliberate or not - of interrupting a perfectly healthy debate. There's a phenomenon of negativity about (supposed) negativity that would be depressing if it wasn't so ironic. One thing that's just occurred to me, and which I could probably use myself: maybe appeals to ATD should take the form of "I'm going to ATD", not "we should ATD". If someone doesn't want to walk away from the debate, but recognizes that it's disrupting the boards, then "take it to PM" might be a better move. - The Imperial Ewok -----signature----- A/T = OTP Today's A/T recommendation: "Teetering", by Kidan http://boards.theforce.net/beyond_the_saga/b10477/28653420/
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Master_Keralys Title: Lit and EUC Mod On Vacation Registered: Oct '03	Date Posted: 4/25 1:31pm Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion - Date Edited: 4/25 1:31pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Master_Keralys
	COW - thanks for the response. First off, I can see how you might have understood what I wrote somewhat differently than I meant it. I think as mods we are looking to be more actively engaged in helping move the board in a particular direction. Maintaining the status quo isn't something we are comfortable with. That said, the object of further involvement would not be to curtail discussion or make this a more restrictive place. It would hopefully be a friendlier place, where more constructive conversation would be happening. While I'm glad to hear that SOS wasn't on your mind regarding that, I do not understand where you got the idea that mods would be swooping in like vultures watching for any off-topic deviation. SOS is a unique case, and that's why I mentioned it. As I explicitly said, at no point do I foresee us trying to curtail all off-topic discussion. As you and others have noted, the wandering nature of threads is one of the neat things about conversation, especially on the forums. As we have tried to explain, we're far more concerned about thread wander in particular directions. For example, while it's perfectly legitimate to bring up how one things that Legacy diminishes Luke's legacy, or how you think the Felpire is the absolute best thing since the invention of the hyperdrive, it doesn't need to be in every possible related thread. That's unnecessary thread drift, and it's that sort of thing that we would like to see change. And on the topic of the code itself, it's simply disrespectful to the original poster when you or I completely change the topic, especially within the first few posts. It's against the very spirit of respect that you have emphasized. I appreciate the thoughts and recommendations. I wasn't trying to jump on you for the previous post; I simply find that we tend to get farther when people contribute ideas themselves rather merely criticizing the ideas of others. Thrawn, I like and agree with your points about ATD overall. One point that can be made is that a lot of those discussions don't necessarily need to end - they just need to go somewhere besides whatever thread they've taken over. A really good example of this is the Wherefore Art Thou, Darth thread that BobaMatt and Ulicus had during NRW - it started to take over the NRW thread, and they recognized that, and started a very successful thread of their own that then was no longer in the way of the original thread, but continued the discussion nicely. That was a great blend of respect and courtesy, as well as an example of a really great thread. We are of course thinking about how to deal with the ongoing debates - most of which, at this point, are relatively contained and mostly respectful. I think part of the difficulty with some of those issues is the very personal history that many people here have, and indeed that the board itself has with those issues. The negativity about negativity is indeed a problem. I think if people were content to agree to disagree, a lot of that problem would disappear. I can keep trying to convince Windy that she's wrong about Luke's characterization (since we fundamentally disagree), but if we have a tacit acknowledgment from the getgo that we're not going to bash each other for those views, there's a better solution right there. Beyond that, one thing we can do as mods is step in and curtail that sort of thing. It's already standard policy to edit and warn for "If you don't like it, don't read it" posts, so carrying along the same line is logical. Thoughts? - Keralys -----signature----- Galactic Forum Alliance Stand for freedom; stand for justice; stand for right!
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ChildOfWinds Registered: Apr '01	Date Posted: 4/25 9:17pm Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	Master_Keralys COW - thanks for the response. You're welcome! That said, the object of further involvement would not be to curtail discussion or make this a more restrictive place. It would hopefully be a friendlier place, where more constructive conversation would be happening. I think that's to the benefit of all of us. While I'm glad to hear that SOS wasn't on your mind regarding that, I do not understand where you got the idea that mods would be swooping in like vultures watching for any off-topic deviation. Partly from what you said to Admiral Nick in this thread, and partly from some deleting of posts or warnings I've seen in the past. For example, a while back, warnings were given and posts were deleted for being off-topic in the thread of one issue of Legacy because a character and event that were discussed in that thread were in a different issue of Legacy. I'll admit that to me, it seemed unnecessary. When I got the impression from your response to Admiral Nick that even more aggressive moderating might be a thing of the future, that concerned me. at no point do I foresee us trying to curtail all off-topic discussion. As you and others have noted, the wandering nature of threads is one of the neat things about conversation, especially on the forums. I'm glad to know that you feel this way! I appreciate the thoughts and recommendations. I wasn't trying to jump on you for the previous post; I simply find that we tend to get farther when people contribute ideas themselves rather merely criticizing the ideas of others. Okay. Thanks for clarifying. It wasn't my intention to criticize the ideas of others. It was that I was "getting a bad feeling" from your comments that maybe you and the other mods were leaning toward "moderating more aggressively", and I saw that as being more restrictive with more deleting of posts for minor things such as off-topic discussions. And since Rogue Follower's initial post welcomed all comments or concerns, I decided to voice mine.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Jedi Ben Registered: Jul '99	Date Posted: 4/26 1:56am Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	Hmm, I don't know COW, I don't really see the Mods making more work for themselves, do you? (For clarification: This is a half-serous, half-one-liner statement.) -----signature----- Other guy: Could I have your autograph? Darth Vader: No, **** off or I'll kill you with a tray! Give me penne all'arrabiata or you shall die! And you and everyone in this canteen! Death by tray it shall be!
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DS_Emp_Viper Registered: Sep '01	Date Posted: 4/26 2:09am Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion - Date Edited: 4/26 2:39am (6 edits total) Edited By: DS_Emp_Viper
	It would be nice to have guidelines on how people should treat eachother, but I don't think those guidelines should be zealously enforced. I've seen to many forums and discussions die from over-zealous mod's and timid writers. I certainly think that if a discussion gets off track(as they certainly do sometimes) and veers towards personal attacks that someone should say "Try to keep to the COD". If the attacks don't stop after that, then mods defiantly should be involved. But I'm completely opposed to a binding COD that the mods enforce like it's man's law. Perhaps if we had a mod team with more experience, competency, and trust-worthiness I might actually buy into the idea. Sadly I've seen mods delete and edit things with the people they disagree with(whether I was involved in the discussion or not) and it is quite disturbing to see that nitpicking policy. Also, other mods simply ignore everything and that is certainly a problem as well. I think trying to find the balance as a mod would be a difficult one, and I'm not sure all of our mods are up for it. Call me pessimistic, but giving more power to the mods doesn't sound like all that great of an idea. [quote]That said, the object of further involvement would not be to curtail discussion or make this a more restrictive place. It would hopefully be a friendlier place, where more constructive conversation would be happening.[/quote] I find that amusing because that is exactly what it would do. It might just curtail and restrict the discussions that you are opposed to, but it certainly would restrict people and it's disingenuous to act like it won't. -----signature----- And now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Master_Keralys Title: Lit and EUC Mod On Vacation Registered: Oct '03	Date Posted: 4/26 7:57am Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion - Date Edited: 4/26 8:08am (1 edits total) Edited By: Master_Keralys
	DS_Emp_Viper - hmm. I think it's first worth pointing out that the Lit Code of Conduct isn't a tightening of the rules, in any way shape or form. It's an effort to clearly state the already existing policies we have here, and to do so in a way that makes it clear both to long-time users and newbies that this is the way this forum works. There is nothing new in here in terms of rules. Certainly we're not going to be editing people's posts for grammar or intelligibility. (You have no idea how tempting that can be sometimes. ) Regarding your second paragraph - the mod team's "experience, competency, and trustworthiness" - I would simply say that the points you raise are very serious. In particular, making the accusation that we're not all "up for [finding the balance as a mod]" is extremely serious. The accusation that we're not acting in good faith is not one to be made lightly. I'm not necessarily offended by this, but if it's a problem you think is as serious as you make it out to be here, you really need to back it up with action. You should probably contact mods you feel have been a problem directly, and if you don't feel that accomplishes its necessary end, then get in contact with the administration team. However, to the best of my knowledge you've not even taken that first step - and we are all open to hearing feedback from the users at any time. I've sent you a PM to follow this up. If you're not willing to take that kind of proactive steps to deal with the problem, I'd ask you to at least try to give us the benefit of the doubt - to at least believe that we're acting in good faith (as I can attest we all are). Finally, as mods, even if we were more involved at an administrative level, it would always be with the intent to stimulate discussion. And, whether you believe it or not, firmer and more active moderation than we have here - if done correctly - actually encourages livelier discussion, not the contrary. (I'm not throwing that out there blind, because I've seen it on other boards which are far more strict than this one.) I make no claims that we'll find that balance perfectly, but we would certainly do our best. It's also worth noting that there isn't much discussion here that we're opposed to. Even people that we've gotten on to about constantly derailing threads with particular topics have always been welcome to start new threads on that topic so they can continue discussing it in a way that doesn't get in the way of the original thread, and that's certainly not going to change. Whether you can trust us to do that or not is your own business, of course, but if it's such a serious problem in your mind, please follow up as I laid out above. - Keralys -----signature----- Galactic Forum Alliance Stand for freedom; stand for justice; stand for right!
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Rogue_Follower Title: Manager: Literature Registered: Nov '03	Date Posted: 4/26 9:06am Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	Sigh. This Code of Conduct does not "give more power to the mods." Do I have to put that in all caps and bright flashing text? The major points of the code are already covered under the existing rules, in one way or another. The code is intended to clarify the rules, not extend them. It's a set of best practices, not laws.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Ulicus Registered: Jul '05	Date Posted: 4/26 11:45am Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	Master_Keralys posted: Certainly we're not going to be editing people's posts for grammar or intelligibility. (You have no idea how tempting that can be sometimes. ) You should. At least with thread titles.... -----signature----- Recipient of Golden Ewok™ 23 / 4
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
dp4m Registered: Nov '01	Date Posted: 4/26 7:53pm Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	Rogue_Follower posted: Sigh. This Code of Conduct does not "give more power to the mods." Do I have to put that in all caps and bright flashing text? The major points of the code are already covered under the existing rules, in one way or another. The code is intended to clarify the rules, not extend them. It's a set of best practices, not laws. We do know that people requested the flashing "DO NOT POST SPOILERS" marquee go away and then everyone completely forgot to, y'know, not post spoilers... -----signature----- "Looks like you're about to get pwned" - Eric Cartman "On another note, 'diplomacy' is one of the most versatile words in the player character arsenal. It covers pretty much any conceivable action in any imaginable scenario." - Darths & Droids
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Excellence Registered: Jul '02	Date Posted: 4/27 8:23pm Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	The sky writing didn't always work, even then. -----signature----- My utilisation of complex locution to ask what's more pathetic, fans who worship their movie actors, or the actors who couldn't give a damn, is more a reflection of my own superincumbent mental actuity than any circumscribed lexicon. Don't you agree?
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
patchworkz7 Registered: Mar '04	Date Posted: 4/28 6:23am Subject: RE: Literature Forum Code of Conduct Discussion
	A rule from another forum, but one that I think is applicable to this one and is actively needed: Another forum's rule posted: You are free to disagree with other people’s interpretation of things but you are not allowed to invalidate, dismiss, or otherwise ridicule their point of view. It ties into the difference between discussion and creating a negative atmopshere. I see way too much of this going on between posters. There's a huge difference between "I don't see that in this story, and this is how I took it" and "that's just dumb, and doesn't make any sense. Are you sure you even read it? Do you know anything about SW?" It's not about smothering discussion, but making sure that the discussion is reasoned, based on facts, and that subjective readings are respected. There's so much in SW that can be taking subjectively that this becomes a huge problem very often and making it clear that respect of other poster's views is essential is really important in any sort of attempt to create a healthier environment. It is not needed to slam another person's reading of SW or a text (or their intelligence, taste, etc) to disagree with their viewpoint and express a differing one. -----signature----- Original Fiction & essays "Does God Limp?" in HOUSE UNAUTHORIZED http://www.smartpopbooks.com/allbooks/2007.html#house "All Her Suicides" appears in: Vestal Review #31 Winter Issue On Sale Now
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 - Previous | Next | Reload

Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Books & Comics » Literature »