See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1993570.0I will declare a poll winner by considering who voted what, not just by counting votes. Polls on forum administration are always advisory, but in this case I don't care very much who owns the thread, so I don't see any reason why I wouldn't put the winner of this poll in charge of the thread. Though if the thread becomes problematic again, the thread owner will have to be replaced. lightfoot - "I would go with a largely hands-off option, no directly blasting other people, no posting marketing crap, simple stuff"
arklan - "if mods are needed, i have the time to do it"
Erkallys- "I candidate if this is needed. At least I have no hatred toward me as well as any fanboy." - "I would not be too strict on moderation, and I am available all day long."
infofront- "I'm not a prolific poster, or well known personality, but I'd volunteer to help moderate. I started the "unmoderated" wall observer thread because I believe in the laissez-faire nature of Adam's thread."
Lauda - "I could create one, and would if someone were to get something like ChartBuddy running again." <-- from another thread but related to this one. empowering - "I probably have the necessary erratic mental health condition..." "...So I guess I will throw my hat in - happy to do it, not fussed either though."
|
|
|
|
|
That period of slowness was caused by some maintenance I'm doing. It might happen a small handful of additional times over the next ~8 hours (but hopefully it won't).
On the bright side, I've done several things which should significantly improve average forum speed once I'm done here.
|
|
|
|
I'm performing maintenance on the search system. As such, native forum search will be disabled for up to a few days. You can still use the Google search on the search page. |
|
|
|
|
Option 1 wins the poll. This is fine with me. It's technically very easy; I already finished the technical changes. Please come to rough agreement on a single listed owner. Once one exists, I will unlock the thread.
If you want to do some complicated organizational structure, that's fine, but it's probably best to figure it out later, since I won't unlock the thread until someone is taking responsibility for it.
It's not technically possible to have more than one moderator of a thread, or to apply additional posting restrictions to the thread, or to prevent posts from counting in that thread, unless I create a new section for it.
Here are the votes. Parentheses mean that the person has never posted in the WO thread.
Option 1
marcus_of_augustus
Syke
notme
iCEBREAKER
Gyrsur
Spaceman_Spiff
Wekkel
edgar
EAL
d5000
STT
Searing
arklan
yefi
icey
xhomerx10
DieJohnny
gentlemand
AlexGR
freedomno1
Hunyadi
redsn0w
explorer
Karartma1
criptix
JayJuanGee
PoolMinor
lightfoot
owlcatz
Torque
Miz4r
chennan
kurious
keewee
Denker
petahashminer
troleybüs
xyzzy099
ssmc2
Paashaas
m0gliE
sirazimuth
Globb0
Dotto
ShroomsKit_Disgrace
actmyname
InvoKing
User705
julian071
harrymmmm
Muhammed Zakir
soullyG
Digigami
_javi_
BlackFlag
RayX12
dave00
FractalUniverse
eXpl0sive
Stevenirving
siggy
cmacwiz
_Django05_
CoinHeavy
cgt99
Todorius
fichtn12345
MNDan
DrMsEr
machasm
Biro Bob
Scofield
discobean
ivomm
hodl_2015
Icygreen
QuantumMiner
(Quickseller)
(killyou72)
(coralreefer)
(Machina_US)
(LeGaulois)
(Mongwapogi)
(Maskedman)
(khufuking)
Option 3
Dabs
iCEBREAKER
jbreher
edgar
qwk
EAL
arklan
yefi
DieJohnny
freedomno1
explorer
criptix
Dafar
Torque
chennan
kurious
keewee
troleybüs
infofront
BlindMayorBitcorn
ibminer
Karpeles
Holliday
bones261
Globb0
Dotto
empowering
European Central Bank
julian071
Chainsaw
cafucafucafu
soullyG
TeeBone
DARKHOLDER
Iranus
flipperfish
stan.distortion
Last of the V8s
Stevenirving
_Django05_
CoinHeavy
kludzins
ğºŞæ
bitserve
fichtn12345
deepcolderwallet
discobean
Pajulapoiss
Icygreen
QuantumMiner
Italiacoin
SalmonBraker
(minifrij)
(botany)
(Quickseller)
(whywefight)
(U2)
(LeGaulois)
(magneto)
(BlackMambaPH)
Option 2
conspirosphere.tk
Dabs
jbreher
stereotype
edgar
EAL
arklan
yefi
DieJohnny
AlexGR
freedomno1
explorer
DaRude
mymenace
CoinCube
troleybüs
infofront
silverfuture
Karpeles
Globb0
Dotto
Chainsaw
starmman
soullyG
hv_
TeeBone
MrBig
flipperfish
stan.distortion
FractalUniverse
Last of the V8s
Stevenirving
fallinglantern
bitserve
dasein
hodl_2015
Icygreen
(Joel_Jantsen)
(U2)
(LeGaulois)
(Guajiro)
Option 5
Soros Shorts
EAL
DieJohnny
Meuh6879
freedomno1
petahashminer
troleybüs
ssmc2
m0gliE
veleten
YourMother
actmyname
mindrust
Lesbian Cow
Muttley
Hawkix
_javi_
MrBig
Coinnosaurus
stan.distortion
lemmyK
DrMsEr
Scofield
0rganic
degxtra1
(Quickseller)
(dida)
(Wapinter)
(Joel_Jantsen)
(U2)
(killyou72)
(LeGaulois)
(TheQuin)
(FlamingFingers)
(jbah01)
Option 4
OgNasty
notme
iCEBREAKER
edgar
smooth
EAL
Chef Ramsay
d5000
STT
DieJohnny
chennan
troleybüs
pooya87
Karpeles
birr
Muhammed Zakir
Pente
FractalUniverse
cmacwiz
droizs
Biro Bob
(botany)
(LeGaulois)
(Maskedman)
(TheQuin)
(jbah01)
|
|
|
|
|
If option 1 or 3 occur, who are the candidates for new listed owner / mods? Someone please compile a list.
|
|
|
|
Having some regular user do it will just become too much for them (and then there's the issue of what they choose to remove or not and cries of censorship). Just assign some mods to the Speculation section since it doesn't have any mods at all or promote another Global. If that board has some specific mods they can probably keep on top of it.
Official forum staff are bound by policies and a certain culture. I think that the WO people want some autonomy. The thread is exempt from the following rules from the perspective of bitcointalk.org mods:
- Off-topicness (in relation to either Speculation or the topic itself). Still don't understand why we should allow off topic postings. If people want to talk about something that isn't related to the wall charts then they can do it in any of the other relevant threads in Speculation. - Double-posting etc., within reason. I don't see any good reason why it should be allowed in there. The point is to minimize what bitcointalk.org mods have to look at there. If it still counts towards post-count/activity removing signatures wont do much. People might even try exploit it by spamming in there (especially if we allow double posting).
It doesn't make rational sense for sig campaigns to pay for posts there, since posters there won't actually be advertising anything. (Maybe they're insufficiently rational, I'm not sure...) I don't view activity farming as a big deal since you can only get 1 point/day regardless. It probably would be better to prevent post counts from increasing there, but I can't easily do that without putting it in a dedicated section. |
|
|
|
This post? The more traditional setup (which I read in a statistics textbook) is something like: Flip a coin. If heads, answer yes to the following question regardless of the truth. If tails, answer honestly.
Question: Have you ever done drugs?
Yes
No You can use statistics to get meaningful info out of this even though the randomness is slanted toward Yes, but I don't remember off the top of my head what you're supposed to do exactly to remove the random effect. (Maybe you can just subtract half of your total respondents from Yes? And it probably changes statistical confidence, etc.) In my previous post I changed it so that the randomness is evenly distributed, which makes it easier. Though on the other hand, you really shouldn't rely on random.org if the question is truly sensitive.
|
|
|
|
Doesn't that sort of negate or skew the results?
No, it's fine. I particularly liked the diversity of the tangencial subjects discussed in the thread so, in consciousness, I can't vote for any of those three options. Not even in the slight expectation that a new moderator will be flexible about its rules or banning will occur only in very extreme and blatant cases. That'd be cheating. If any of those options are chosen and, for any reason, the offtopics continue we will be again at this point.
Since option 1 is in the lead, I already wrote a draft of a policy change for that one, possibly addressing your concerns: The Wall Observer is now owned by the forum. The listed owner is responsible for maintaining it. If the owner fails to maintain it (ie. I start getting too many complaints), then they will be replaced.
The thread is exempt from the following rules from the perspective of bitcointalk.org mods:
- Off-topicness (in relation to either Speculation or the topic itself).
- Double-posting etc., within reason.
(The thread owner can and should enforce those rules to some degree, however.)
A warning will show up about the above rule exemptions when you try to report a post in the thread.
Signatures won't show up in the thread anymore. |
|
|
|
|
The Wall Observer thread is currently locked because it attracts way more off-topic posts than we want to deal with. Continuing the status quo is therefore not really an option. The thread can continue if the situation is changed in such a way that we don't have to constantly clean up its trash, however.
I will be looking at who voted what, and I might publish it here. Mostly I'm interested in hearing from participants in the Wall Observer thread.
Vote for every option that you consider acceptable.
|
|
|
|
I think I have seen my post count shrink with 6 posts, which isn't a big deal for me at all, but I was wondering, how does one end up with an inaccurate post count?
- There are a few rare mod/admin actions which change your real number of posts but neglect to update your post count. - Errors can occur which can cause it to drift from the real value. - If your account is fairly old, then previous post-count recounts will have counted your MOVED: redirection topics, even though these are not counted when you make them. I fixed it this time so that these topics are not counted, undoing the previous erroneous recounts. |
|
|
|
|
People shouldn't be obsessive about post counts...
I did a global recount of user posts starting yesterday. Your post count had been inaccurate.
|
|
|
|
Any plans on banning Qtum, since it's almost definitely them/their team behind the spam? Without strong evidence, I can't ban the subject of spam because then you could get anyone banned by spamming "for" them. |
|
|
|
|
The Wall Observer thread is in Speculation, so when you start using it for any off-topic thing that comes to mind, the posts get reported and then deleted. This has happened too much and for too long in the Wall Observer thread.
Maybe it'd be OK from our perspective to move the thread to Off-topic and then let people use it as they wish, but is that what the posters there really want? I just don't get the point of the thread. If you want to talk off-topic, you can create multiple dedicated threads in Off-topic.
|
|
|
|
|
I wiped all of those spam PMs, and the senders are all banned.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
