[WTH] Comms is too anti-discussion

why are you baiting me malkie?

that's not right. you just gave me basically a "talk to the hand".
that's not very modly.

i thought we were tyring to work something out.


FF

 

why are you baiting me malkie?

His comment was not baiting, and you have already been directed to where to get your answers. Let's not drag this thread off-topic.

Of course, if anyone wants to see what so-called "biased moderation" really looks like, they can continue to take this off-topic.

Kimball Kinnison

 

But that works both ways..

so the plan is to let us rot away in a shell of a GIL that will have no visibilty once ROTS is in the can?

When did anyone say that the plan was to let any thread rot? Was that statement above not designed to get a reaction from the administration?

There are multiple options that you can use to achieve your goals by using the existing procedure, but it takes some planning on your part.

For example, a person could demand a social thread in the Senate, but it isn't going to happen, not just for the person making the request, but for anyone. Continuing to demand such a thread isn't going to make it happen any more readily.

However, just because the Senate isn't set up for social threads, doesn't mean the person can't have one in Community, or where ever such threads go. Just ask the mod in question.

 

okay, well before everyone gets all hostile, i just want to say that i was directed to a thread to get answers from that was locked. and i went there, looked it over, and saw nothing that addressed my particular questions, as i said, it seemed like a lot of the party line stuff.

but i had more questions, so i voiced my opinion. that's all. and i can't do that in a locked thread.

you want me to leave it alone, i will.

as long as you guys can live with the fact that you make people cry.

i certainly didn't mean to derail a thread about having discussions by having a discussion.



FF

 

If the thread is locked, there is a very simple feature called a Private Message that you can use to discuss the matter directly with the moderators involved.

Until then, the JCC mods have made a decision that is consistent with the rules. Other alternatives have been presented to you. Take them up with the appropriate individuals. DO NOT continue to hijack this thread.

Kimball Kinnison

 

Basically, the JCC thread was, for the most part, pointless. The JC Communications Forum is to resolve board-wide issues. I'd actually even go as far as to say complaints about pop-up ads have more relevance in here than the JCC social thread thread. Why? Because the JCC mods have dominion over the JCC and they have clearly enunciated the rules as to social thread creation. Don't like it? PM THEM FIRST! Don't like their answer? PM SAPE OR KK NEXT! If you still haven't gotten a satisfactory answer, you *might* post a Comms thread or you might realize that you'd be better off jumping in the line for a social thread.

First off i wanted to discuss the issue with all of the jcc mods and all of the users in the jc. Pm's simply can't do that. To me having the the discussion out in the open is good way to get input from people who wouldn't have been able to get involved if the discussion took place as a series of pm's.

Second, if my thread didn't belong here why didn't KK, raven, sapes, or any of the jc mods lock it sooner.

Third, if you read the thread you would see that i'm in line for a social thread.

 

First off i wanted to discuss the issue with all of the jcc mods and all of the users in the jc. Pm's simply can't do that. To me having the the discussion out in the open is good way to get input from people who wouldn't have been able to get involved if the discussion took place as a series of pm's.

It's not appropriate to raise the issue in Comms first without so much as even DISCUSSING the issue with the JCC mods first.

Why?

Because you had a question about the JCC. You did not have a question about the boards, the administration, the owners, the ads, etc. You had a question about a SINGLE forum.

If you have a question about a single forum -- in your case "What's the deal with the social thread policy?" -- they will answer your question. If the answer is not satisfactory to you, you have two options: 1) ask them if you can open a discussion in that forum or 2) PM an Admin asking for further clarification.

What could possibly be useful about bringing something up for all members of the JC to see -- even those for whom JCC is an epithet or a scary place -- without having all of the facts at hand or following proper procedure?

Would you present something factual to your boss, teacher, etc. without making sure your facts are correct?

 

It's not appropriate to raise the issue in Comms first without so much as even DISCUSSING the issue with the JCC mods first.

Which is the main issue everyone can work to overcome.

Why does it seem like so many mods come to comms already defensive?

Because an issue was brought up here, regarding their forum, and it's the first they're hearing about it, yet alone given the chance to "fix" it..

I don't know why some people do this.. A desire to call the mods out? A sense of the dramatic? Who knows...

This was the perfect example. This topic could have just as easily been PM'd to a mod, and the person could have asked to start an informative thread within the forum.

But human nature tells us that if a topic starts out antagonistic, it is going to have an uphill battle from that point on.

 

It's not appropriate to raise the issue in Comms first without so much as even DISCUSSING the issue with the JCC mods first.

Why?

Because you had a question about the JCC. You did not have a question about the boards, the administration, the owners, the ads, etc. You had a question about a SINGLE forum.

If you have a question about a single forum -- in your case "What's the deal with the social thread policy?" -- they will answer your question. If the answer is not satisfactory to you, you have two options: 1) ask them if you can open a discussion in that forum or 2) PM an Admin asking for further clarification.

What could possibly be useful about bringing something up for all members of the JC to see -- even those for whom JCC is an epithet or a scary place -- without having all of the facts at hand or following proper procedure?

Would you present something factual to your boss, teacher, etc. without making sure your facts are correct?

In the future i will probably pm a mod first. As for the members of the jc who don't care about the jcc, i don't see why they would care if there is a comms thread about it or not. Again pm's don't allow everybody to get involved, a thread does. I thought comms was a place for users and admins to interact. I didn't realise that for some thing to be discussed in comms it had to be a board wide issue. If that's the case then there are many threads that shouldn't be here, not just mine, so don't single mine out. What facts did i have incorrect?

 

In the future i will probably pm a mod first. As for the members of the jc who don't care about the jcc, i don't see why they would care if there is a comms thread about it or not. Again pm's don't allow everybody to get involved, a thread does. I thought comms was a place for users and admins to interact. I didn't realise that for some thing to be discussed in comms it had to be a board wide issue. If that's the case then there are many threads that shouldn't be here, not just mine, so don't single mine out. What facts did i have incorrect?

Comms threads are for single-forum issues after proper measures have been taken ahead of time.

In YOUR case, you followed none of those procedures. I'm singling you out because it was the most convenient example given in the opening post. My comments could just as easily apply to anyone else who doesn't follow the same procedures.

 

No offense to anyone, but this seems very simple to me. Comms isn't anti-discussion, it's usually the people that come in here mad and post forcing the moderators to be extra harsh that makes some topics not last very long.

This sums my opinion up:

Comms is often a forum that starts off being used correctly and quickly turns south by the inappropriate and repeated actions of a few that cause the entire thread to turn into a disaster.


Just my two cents.

 

Well, what about the stickies in JCC, one of which is the JCC rules and policies? Which is perfectly able to have replies, and all JCCers and JCC mods would see that people were posting in the stickies. Why not ask there?

 

^ ^

Also a good point.

 

Dp4m, i don't think that procedure is outlined anywhere. I wasn't able to find it in the JCC, in the comms rules thread, or in the tos. According to KK's guidelines what i posted in here was fair game.

Droideka, your suggestion didn't even cross my mind. It's a good one. I will remember it the next time i have a policy issue to discuss.

 

I hate the mentality of always just PMing a mod. This place is supposed to be a community and if I have a compliant I want all to hear it not just a single mod. I think NJOfan was well in his rights to start that thread especially since there is nothing in the rules about that.

Second of all, I can't stand when mods lock a thread saying, "No more discussion" but the topic is lively. Even if the rules can't be changed it's still good to have a place where people can discuss it.

These two items put me off from doing a whole lot of discussion in comms.

 

I hate the mentality of always just PMing a mod. This place is supposed to be a community and if I have a compliant I want all to hear it not just a single mod. I think NJOfan was well in his rights to start that thread especially since there is nothing in the rules about that.

Which makes you, sir, a part of the problem.

Who benefits from the complaint?

 

Which makes you, sir, a part of the problem.



Why? Because I disagree with a rule that, to me, makes no sense? How about explaining it to me instead of giving me a snide response.

 

But again, you are missing the entire point of why such a system exists.

PM'ing the appropriate forum mod is just the start. Sometimes, like with a question of "why was my thread locked?" It doesn't need to go any further, because a simple answer is best.

At the basic level, it alerts the forum mods that there is an issue with their forum. That's just common courtesey, and prevents anyone from getting blindsided.

Secondly, such an exchange can occur on a non-antagonistic level. A user can say "I think __ and __. I want to start a general topic within the forum, or discuss it in the rules thread."

And lastly, and perhaps more importantly, starting off in private can eliminate any misundersatnding and/or clear any misconceptions before they are brought out in the open, so the discussion can focus on what it was intended to focus on.

If the first step doesn't achieve suitable results, then a person can bring it up the next level, and then the next level.

The system is in place to generate a limited amount of accountability, but it also serves to blunt the effects of adding emotion into the mix.

Like with anything though, the system can't work if it isn't used, or is continually being bypassed.

If you can't see the difference between that procedure, and immediately jumping into comms with a thread like "MALKIE IS UNFAIR, I WANT THIS CHANGED NOW," I don't know what to tell you. (just as an example)

 

What we're trying to say is that almost all problems on the boards can quickly and easily be handled by a simple PM to a mod as opposed to posting a Comms thread that often accomplishes little more than bad feelings unnecessarily.

 

What we're trying to say is that almost all problems on the boards can quickly and easily be handled by a simple PM to a mod as opposed to posting a Comms thread that often accomplishes little more than bad feelings unnecessarily.

Thanks, Sape for posting that, even though I still disagree, you at least did it without an attitude which can't be said for the post above you.

 

Why? Because I disagree with a rule that, to me, makes no sense? How about explaining it to me instead of giving me a snide response.

Because, quite simply, you're violating the rules of the Comms forum.

Comms is not here to discuss individual issues (such as bannings). If you have an issue with a specific moderator's actions, contact an administrator via PM.

Which means that:

This place is supposed to be a community and if I have a compliant I want all to hear it not just a single mod. I think NJOfan was well in his rights to start that thread especially since there is nothing in the rules about that.

You're making it sound like any complaint you have, no matter how trivial or singly-focused, you feel have have the *right* to clutter the Communications Forum with your own personal agenda.

This is not only a selfish attitude, but one that is detrimental to the community as a whole. The community you feel you're helping.

So, what I was asking above is: who benefits from you complaining in public for something that could be complained to a better source for handling your complaint than the Comms Forum?

You never answered that one...

 

You're making it sound like any complaint you have, no matter how trivial or singly-focused, you feel have have the *right* to clutter the Communications Forum with your own personal agenda.

This is not only a selfish attitude, but one that is detrimental to the community as a whole. The community you feel you're helping.

I wasn't talking about locked threads and such but more about NJOfans thread.

And why the hell do you think I have an agenda? This isn't politics for crying out loud.

 

If you can't see the difference between that procedure, and immediately jumping into comms with a thread like "MALKIE IS UNFAIR, I WANT THIS CHANGED NOW," I don't know what to tell you.

I never remember posting that.

I didn't intend to start a controversy with my thread. If you read it you'll see that i had an issue, i brought it up in a well thoughtout and respectful manner, and i also presented what i thought was a reasonable to solution to that problem.

In terms of this being antagonist, who's the one pointing fingers and posting in caps? I feel i've remained calm throughout all of this.

Dp4m, if you had an issue with how i went about addressing my concerns with the social thread policy, you should've said that you did when it happened. You're 2 weeks too late.

 

Dp4m, if you had an issue with how i went about addressing my concerns with the social thread policy, you should've said that you did when it happened.

According to him he should have PMed you actually.

 

Dp4m, if you had an issue with how i went about addressing my concerns with the social thread policy, you should've said that you did when it happened. You're 2 weeks too late.

I already said above I was using you as the example as you were the one mentioned in the first post and that this could be construed as my thoughts on anyone posting something similar.

Again, once you post something in Comms -- it's fair game for everyone. Part of the charm...