Time to update the JC rules ?

Discussion in 'Communications' started by malkieD2, Aug 20, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
  1. malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA

    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2002
    star 7
    Thats kinda my point, and again returns to the original point of this thread - you have a published set of rules and policies, and you either need to follow them, or update them to suit what the current needs of the forum are. If the published policy doesn't actually work in practise then change the policy. Otherwise, follow the policy that you have all agreed on.

    It doesn't actually matter what the rules are, providing they are being adhered to, which simply isn't happening.

    I agree that the thread in question should have been locked as an attempt at lighthearted trolling, but locking it ahead of any troubles goes against your published policy. (although I'd prefer not to focus on specific examples, as it derails the point I'm making about the JCC mods not adhering to the published policies)

    So, which is it to be?
  2. TwiLekJedi Pretty Ex-Mod

    Member Since:
    Jun 14, 2001
    star 10
    how about applying other, more important rules? that doesn't make this rule any less valid, gives us the right to do what's good for the forum and doesn't actually violate anything at all
  3. malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA

    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2002
    star 7
    having one rule superceeded by another just adds to the confusion

    like I said above, you just need to arrive at a set of policies which you think work, then stick to them, or update as necessary
  4. Souderwan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 3, 2005
    star 6
    Malkie, good rules are enablers of good policy, not mechanisms of control. One of the inherent problems with any system where there are large numbers of people being controlled by a smaller group of people is a certain degree of suspicion about the motives of those above them. This is particularly true in a system where there isn?t complete transparency in the actions of the controlling group.

    Explicit rules that are strictly adhered to are sometimes necessary?especially in large organizations where a mistake by either the management or the other members of the organization might result in something catastrophic (death, equipment damage, etc.). The cost of those explicit rules, however, is that it can stifle innovation, reduce contribution, and create a top-down system of organization control. These controls are put in, despite this known cost, because the risk to the organization is too high not to have them.

    If we were talking about an organization like that, I might agree with you that the rules need to be explicit, clear, and strictly adhered to.

    We?re not.

    We?re talking about an organization where any ?mistakes? have (or should have) an inconsequential impact on the lives of the members. As such, the rules we have in place should be minimalist in nature and rarely adjusted (as frequent adjustment of rules creates just as much confusion as rules that supersede each other). The benefit of this approach is that you get more vitality, creativity, and innovation in the community. The consequence is that you have to live with the occasional ?wrongly? locked thread or inappropriate banning (something you have a process to deal with). It also requires more of the user base to police themselves and establish the expectations of what is acceptable.

    Mod action should be a rarity, because that?s how the rules are set up. Personally, I like it that way.


  5. malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA

    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2002
    star 7
    I don't think you are entirely understanding my position. I'd have no issue with minimalistic rules and policies, providing they accurately represented what was expected of the userbase and the administration. To have a policy place, and then have a moderator do the opposite simply shouldn't occur. Either they follow the rules and policies which are in place, or they alter the rules (even removing some) to represent how the forum will be run.

    That is what motivated this thread, and we still haven't reached a point where whats published is being done.
  6. George_Roper Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 1, 2005
    star 7
    I think malkie just wants clear rules that are applied consistently. I don't see the problem, really. There have been times where I've been edited when other similar things were posted quite regularly. It didn't irritate me that it got edited. It irritated me because other similar and even worse stuff had been left unedited even by the same mod. Either it's okay, or it's not.
  7. dp4m Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2001
    star 9
    So things decided by judgment calls are never, ever going to occur?
  8. ObiWan506 Former Head Admin

    Member Since:
    Aug 5, 2003
    star 7
    Overall the rules are followed the best that they can be. The JCC is anything but absolute. Many times there are two sides to a story. That's part of the culture of it. The rules are there to guide everyone but some discretionary calls will be made. Calls like that are part of a JCC moderator's role. It won't change. Rules can't be conformed or watered down to be specific. That cannot be done with the JCC. If you see something that you don't understand or think was incorrect, PM a JCC moderator. Ask for a clarification. We're not perfect. Point stuff out to them if you think it was against the rules. If something is edited, but another instance is not; maybe it was missed. Point it out to the JCC mods. Talk to them.

    That's all we can really say on the subject. If there's an example in the future that you see fit to point out, just PM that to a JCC moderator and they will get a clarification for you. But in a general sense, this conversation is going in circles without any conclusion. This is all there is to say in regards to following and/or changing the rules and guidelines. They are followed with a discretionary attitude. If you see any specific examples in the future, PM a JCC moderator.
  9. George_Roper Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 1, 2005
    star 7
    Of course they are going to occur. No one is asking for them not to occur. But if one mod is making one decision in a certain set of circumstances and another mod is making a significantly different decision, or if the rules seem to imply something else should happen, there is a problem. Clear rules allow mods to make better judgment calls. Also, if the rules are clear, there is less chance of a misunderstanding or a user feeling that their thread was incorrectly locked, their post incorrectly edited, etc.

    EDIT: the boards aren't going to come crashing down if the rules are left as they are. I just don't see the point of making rules if they aren't clear when a user refers to them. It seems like it just makes more work for the mods in the end.
  10. malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA

    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2002
    star 7
    The example above is a clear cut example of a mod doing the exact opposite of what is published in the rules and policies. It isn't a grey area, or a judgement call, it is someone not following a clearly defined policy.

    Exactly, and that's the problem here.
  11. Jada Chapter Rep Charlotte, NC

    Chapter Rep
    Member Since:
    Apr 20, 2006
    star 6
    I'm a stickler for rules and rules being followed to the letter of the law and yet I fail to see how beating this particular horse is going to work in the long run.

    It's an internet message board with volunteers "working" for it and some of them put in a lot of time. There are avenues to take if there is a problem with a moderator locking a thread for no good reason or making an edit for no good reason, etc.

  12. ObiWan506 Former Head Admin

    Member Since:
    Aug 5, 2003
    star 7
    malkie, it sounds like you're talking about a specific instance. PM a JCC moderator. Explain the situation you're talking about and they can work with you on it.
  13. ObiWan506 Former Head Admin

    Member Since:
    Aug 5, 2003
    star 7
    As I review this thread more, I must be honest. We've come full circle on this discussion. All we can do in this thread is talk about general circumstances and I think I've summed up a nice conclusion on that in a post I made a few posts up. So generally speaking, this thread has served it's purpose. Now, if you have a future circumstance where you don't understand something, PM a JCC moderator. No one is discouraging you from bringing forward examples in PMs, but on general discussion, this thread has come full circle.
Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.