Jump to content


Forum Moderation Rules


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
33 replies to this topic

Bulldog_Drummond #1 Posted 17 November 2019 - 11:35 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33576 battles
  • 10,751
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

One of the difficulties I have with the forum rules is that they are both prescriptive and woolly.  

I don't understand what they mean, and I wonder whether most mods do

For example

 

Be constructive

When posting, please make sure you do so with good intentions. Refrain from posting when you don't have anything positive or constructive to say on the topic.
Your post should contribute to the discussion or the solution of the issue being discussed.
If the only purpose of your post is to be negative, it is not worth posting.

 

Now if this were strictly applied it would lead to at least half of all posts and threads being deleted, since most are just negative whines about WG and/or the game.

But they are not.  Why is that?

On the contrary, so far as I can see it is used as a catch-all for posts and threads that are not strictly in breach of the rules but which have irritated someone

This is the most egregious example but the forum posting rules generally could benefit from a re-write

 



The_Naa #2 Posted 17 November 2019 - 11:56 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 9456 battles
  • 1,634
  • [QSF-C] QSF-C
  • Member since:
    11-10-2017

do agree. the rules are somewhat vague. they just somewhat guide you towards the right path.



Blubba #3 Posted 17 November 2019 - 11:57 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 61026 battles
  • 2,414
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

It just makes it easy for a moderator to take down a post without having to go through some lengthy explanation. A get out of jail free card if you will.

I can't see them being rewritten because as it stands, it's easy to police.



Bulldog_Drummond #4 Posted 18 November 2019 - 12:17 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33576 battles
  • 10,751
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostBlubba, on 17 November 2019 - 10:57 PM, said:

It just makes it easy for a moderator to take down a post without having to go through some lengthy explanation. A get out of jail free card if you will.

I can't see them being rewritten because as it stands, it's easy to police.

 

I actually wouldn't have a problem with a catch-all rule like "We will delete anything we feel like at our absolute discretion"

But if there are rules it seems not unreasonable that they should have clarity and that both posters and mods should be obliged to comply with them



XxKuzkina_MatxX #5 Posted 18 November 2019 - 01:02 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,631
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

Maybe, just maybe you could find a compromise between what you want to post and what the topic of discussion is about. That way you'll have less problems with the rules. I know it always sounds better in your head but that's not the reaction you often get, is it? Start with yourself and by knowing that these forums don't exist wholly for your own entertainment. They got other functions and other people who might want different things. That's an essential part of being really clever.


Edited by XxKuzkina_MatxX, 18 November 2019 - 04:22 AM.


Spurtung #6 Posted 18 November 2019 - 04:12 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 75056 battles
  • 6,861
  • [WG_PT] WG_PT
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013
I noticed that they have removed a rule concerning discussing other games. There used to be one saying you could discuss but not promote nor attempt recruiting, which is acceptable, but completely censor it...?

SGT_Sprocket22 #7 Posted 18 November 2019 - 09:10 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 30512 battles
  • 507
  • Member since:
    02-14-2014

View PostThe_Naa, on 17 November 2019 - 10:56 PM, said:

do agree. the rules are somewhat vague. they just somewhat guide you towards the right path.

Much like the Bible....which I don't read...but if I did....actually I wouldn't....sorry...carry on.



SGT_Sprocket22 #8 Posted 18 November 2019 - 09:22 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 30512 battles
  • 507
  • Member since:
    02-14-2014

View PostSpurtung, on 18 November 2019 - 03:12 AM, said:

I noticed that they have removed a rule concerning discussing other games. There used to be one saying you could discuss but not promote nor attempt recruiting, which is acceptable, but completely censor it...?

I think I'm guilty of doing this. Over on Officers Mess, I persuaded DITS to buy Rome: Total War on Steam.



Homer_J #9 Posted 18 November 2019 - 09:52 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 32930 battles
  • 36,128
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostBlubba, on 17 November 2019 - 11:57 PM, said:

It just makes it easy for a moderator to take down a post without having to go through some lengthy explanation. A get out of jail free card if you will.

I can't see them being rewritten because as it stands, it's easy to police.

 

^^This.

 

The rules used to be very specific which led to endless arguments over what exact rule had been broken by our resident forum lawyers.  They were rewritten to give moderators more discretion.



OIias_of_Sunhillow #10 Posted 18 November 2019 - 12:06 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 26285 battles
  • 3,460
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    07-20-2011

View PostBulldog_Drummond, on 17 November 2019 - 10:35 PM, said:

One of the difficulties I have with the forum rules is that they are both prescriptive and woolly.  

I don't understand what they mean, and I wonder whether most mods do

For example

 

Be constructive

When posting, please make sure you do so with good intentions. Refrain from posting when you don't have anything positive or constructive to say on the topic.
Your post should contribute to the discussion or the solution of the issue being discussed.
If the only purpose of your post is to be negative, it is not worth posting.

 

Now if this were strictly applied it would lead to at least half of all posts and threads being deleted, since most are just negative whines about WG and/or the game.

But they are not.  Why is that?

On the contrary, so far as I can see it is used as a catch-all for posts and threads that are not strictly in breach of the rules but which have irritated someone

This is the most egregious example but the forum posting rules generally could benefit from a re-write

 

 

 

It's the same catch-all that the police come out with; "Someone matching your description......"



Captain_Kremen0 #11 Posted 18 November 2019 - 01:02 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 39315 battles
  • 2,426
  • [TFMB] TFMB
  • Member since:
    06-04-2011
"was observed to commit a "public order" offence"......

Gruff_ #12 Posted 18 November 2019 - 04:55 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22826 battles
  • 1,317
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    09-22-2011
I reported the locking of the M3Lee thread, one that was entirley on topic and constructive and today it is unlocked :)

Miepie #13 Posted 18 November 2019 - 05:46 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 4753 battles
  • 1,408
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-19-2018

View PostGruff_, on 18 November 2019 - 04:55 PM, said:

I reported the locking of the M3Lee thread, one that was entirley on topic and constructive and today it is unlocked :)

Hmm? That first one is still locked… Or was the second one locked for a while as well? :confused:



Gruff_ #14 Posted 18 November 2019 - 06:35 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22826 battles
  • 1,317
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    09-22-2011

View PostMiepie, on 18 November 2019 - 04:46 PM, said:

Hmm? That first one is still locked… Or was the second one locked for a while as well? :confused:


Oh my you are right, for a moment I thought that they had the commonsense to reopen the original thread and faith in humanity had been put back towards positive for a few minutes - but no business as usual in the WG office :facepalm:



Bulldog_Drummond #15 Posted 18 November 2019 - 07:04 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33576 battles
  • 10,751
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 18 November 2019 - 12:02 AM, said:

Start with yourself and by knowing that these forums don't exist wholly for your own entertainment.

 

That is a point of view, certainly.

18:12 Added after 7 minute

View PostHomer_J, on 18 November 2019 - 08:52 AM, said:

 

^^This.

 

The rules used to be very specific which led to endless arguments over what exact rule had been broken by our resident forum lawyers.  They were rewritten to give moderators more discretion.

 

As I say, I'm happy with mods being given full discretion.

What seems very odd to me is using or not using "unconstructive" entirely at random.



XxKuzkina_MatxX #16 Posted 18 November 2019 - 08:13 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,631
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostBulldog_Drummond, on 18 November 2019 - 10:04 PM, said:

That is a point of view, certainly.

 

Nope, that's apathy with a red rubber nose.



Bulldog_Drummond #17 Posted 18 November 2019 - 08:24 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33576 battles
  • 10,751
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 18 November 2019 - 07:13 PM, said:

 

Nope, that's apathy with a red rubber nose.

 

Thank you, Rudolf, for your point.  Every comment is valuable.

On your wider point, yes, the only reason I post here is indeed for my personal amusement.  

Why would anyone do otherwise?

This is an online game, not a forum dedicated to finding a cure for cancer.

 



XxKuzkina_MatxX #18 Posted 18 November 2019 - 08:47 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,631
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostBulldog_Drummond, on 18 November 2019 - 11:24 PM, said:

Thank you, Rudolf, for your point.  Every comment is valuable.

On your wider point, yes, the only reason I post here is indeed for my personal amusement.  

Why would anyone do otherwise?

This is an online game, not a forum dedicated to finding a cure for cancer.

 

And how is that working for you so far? Did you just realize that the rules are ambiguous after 5 years and 10k posts?



Bulldog_Drummond #19 Posted 18 November 2019 - 08:57 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33576 battles
  • 10,751
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostXxKuzkina_MatxX, on 18 November 2019 - 07:47 PM, said:

 

And how is that working for you so far? Did you just realize that the rules are ambiguous after 5 years and 10k posts?

 

This isn't a question about me, it's a question about what the rules mean.

Feel free to explain what in your opinion "unconstructive" means



XxKuzkina_MatxX #20 Posted 18 November 2019 - 09:33 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,631
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016

View PostBulldog_Drummond, on 18 November 2019 - 11:57 PM, said:

This isn't a question about me, it's a question about what the rules mean.

Feel free to explain what in your opinion "unconstructive" means

 

It's a question about your own satisfaction with the rules or the lack thereof. A fair guess would be that this dissatisfaction stems from your tendency to come into conflict with them. Like i said before, there is nothing wrong with the rules or at least i never had a problem with them. It's your own interpretation of how these forums are supposed to be and how they work. A faulty interpretation in my opinion that triggered creating this thread and often gets you in trouble.

 

In short, the rules are fine, your posts and forum practice are not.


Edited by XxKuzkina_MatxX, 18 November 2019 - 09:40 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users