Bitcoin Forum
August 24, 2019, 07:32:50 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Rules of Self-Moderated Threads  (Read 941 times)
TwitchySeal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 600



View Profile
September 26, 2016, 10:18:20 PM
 #1

Last week I was informed of the rules of self-moderated threads by hilariousandco.  I can't find them posted anywhere, so I'm hoping he was misinformed.  


The only official looking rule I've seen is the one you get when your post is deleted by the OP of a SM thread (which I also think needs to change):

Quote
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

I don't think it's  ok to give anyone the right to dictate who can and can't post in the main forums.  
All users who post in self-moderated threads should be expected to follow forum rules and local rules if any are posted in OP.

It get's worse....

According to hilariousandco, users who start self-moderated threads have the right to privately black list any user without saying a word about it in the thread or to the black listed user.   All they have to do is inform a mod they don't want a user to post in their thread anymore.  The mod then informs the blacklisted user that they will be banned if they post again in the thread.  Doesn't matter why or what has been posted in the past, the mod is just following the rules.

I would like to suggest that the mods/admin stop going out of their way to keep "self-moderated" thread starters happy.  Transparency is good.  Self-moderated threads are opaque. (<---does that word work like that?)

Why not just enforce the General Forum rules and leave it at that?  The fact that op has power to delete any post they want doesn't mean they should be entitled to the power of the ban hammer also.  


1566675170
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566675170

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566675170
Reply with quote  #2

1566675170
Report to moderator
1566675170
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566675170

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566675170
Reply with quote  #2

1566675170
Report to moderator
1566675170
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566675170

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566675170
Reply with quote  #2

1566675170
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1566675170
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566675170

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566675170
Reply with quote  #2

1566675170
Report to moderator
1566675170
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566675170

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566675170
Reply with quote  #2

1566675170
Report to moderator
1566675170
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566675170

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1566675170
Reply with quote  #2

1566675170
Report to moderator
gentlemand
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1924


Your dearest bum chum


View Profile
September 26, 2016, 10:22:41 PM
 #2

Anyone posting on a self moderated thread who's been here a while knows the score. That's why so many altcoin threads are dissed when they're self moderated. If you've got the nads then you don't bother starting one.

SaltySpitoon
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2226
Merit: 1929


Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?


View Profile
September 27, 2016, 01:42:05 AM
 #3

Last week I was informed of the rules of self-moderated threads by hilariousandco.  I can't find them posted anywhere, so I'm hoping he was misinformed.  


The only official looking rule I've seen is the one you get when your post is deleted by the OP of a SM thread (which I also think needs to change):

Quote
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.
You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

I don't think it's  ok to give anyone the right to dictate who can and can't post in the main forums.  
All users who post in self-moderated threads should be expected to follow forum rules and local rules if any are posted in OP.

It get's worse....

According to hilariousandco, users who start self-moderated threads have the right to privately black list any user without saying a word about it in the thread or to the black listed user.   All they have to do is inform a mod they don't want a user to post in their thread anymore.  The mod then informs the blacklisted user that they will be banned if they post again in the thread.  Doesn't matter why or what has been posted in the past, the mod is just following the rules.

I would like to suggest that the mods/admin stop going out of their way to keep "self-moderated" thread starters happy.  Transparency is good.  Self-moderated threads are opaque. (<---does that word work like that?)

Why not just enforce the General Forum rules and leave it at that?  The fact that op has power to delete any post they want doesn't mean they should be entitled to the power of the ban hammer also.  


A user who blacklists someone from their thread must notify them. A moderator can be an intermediary I suppose, I've actually done so before when explaining self moderated rules to both parties, but it can't be a secret blacklist.

If someone is banned from posting in a thread, they can create their own thread. By general forum rules, if someone has their posts deleted but they repost them, they are banned. The same applies to self moderated threads.

The Pharmacist
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1610
Merit: 3067



View Profile
September 27, 2016, 01:54:45 AM
 #4

I can't stand self-moderated threads, and I avoid them like the plague.  Why take a chance that what you spent time writing is going to get deleted?  And it could be deleted by a moderator, too, so there's that.  I always associate those types of threads with scammy and gatekeeping behavior.

ndnh
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1001


New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit


View Profile
September 27, 2016, 02:27:46 AM
 #5

I beg to differ. If a user derails your thread even after repeatedly asking him not to post in the thread, you can get a mod to interfere. Nothing wrong with that.
Joel_Jantsen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302
Merit: 1234


Can I merit you with some Flags? 🚩


View Profile
September 27, 2016, 05:18:12 AM
 #6

I'm okay with the way it's working right now.I tend to have no-tolerance over some of the Yo-Bit signature posters ,expect a few good ones.I can simply add a warning that members with Yo-Bit signature and low quality posts are not allowed to comment on this thread,your replies may get deleted if I find them spammy.Nothing wrong with that I feel.

.BitDice.               ▄▄███▄▄
           ▄▄██▀▀ ▄ ▀▀██▄▄
      ▄▄█ ▀▀  ▄▄█████▄▄  ▀▀ █▄▄
  ▄▄██▀▀     ▀▀ █████ ▀▀     ▀▀██▄▄
██▀▀ ▄▄██▀      ▀███▀      ▀██▄▄ ▀▀██
██  ████▄▄       ███       ▄▄████  ██
██  █▀▀████▄▄  ▄█████▄  ▄▄████▀▀█  ██
██  ▀     ▀▀▀███████████▀▀▀     ▀  ██
             ███████████
██  ▄     ▄▄▄███████████▄▄▄     ▄  ██
██  █▄▄████▀▀  ▀█████▀  ▀▀████▄▄█  ██
██  ████▀▀       ███       ▀▀████  ██
██▄▄ ▀▀██▄      ▄███▄      ▄██▀▀ ▄▄██
  ▀▀██▄▄     ▄▄ █████ ▄▄     ▄▄██▀▀
      ▀▀█ ▄▄  ▀▀█████▀▀  ▄▄ █▀▀
           ▀▀██▄▄ ▀ ▄▄██▀▀
               ▀▀███▀▀
        ▄▄███████▄▄
     ▄███████████████▄
    ████▀▀       ▀▀████
   ████▀           ▀████
   ████             ████
   ████ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ████
▄█████████████████████████▄
██████████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██████████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████                   ████
████▄                 ▄████
████████▄▄▄     ▄▄▄████████
  ▀▀▀█████████████████▀▀▀
        ▀▀▀█████▀▀▀
▄▄████████████████████████████████▄▄
██████████████████████████████████████
█████                            █████
█████                            █████
█████                            █████
█████                            █████
█████                     ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
█████                   ▄█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▄
█████                   ██          ██
█████                   ██          ██
█████                   ██          ██
██████████████████▀▀███ ██          ██
 ████████████████▄  ▄██ ██          ██
   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀ ██          ██
             ██████████ ██          ██
           ▄███████████ ██████▀▀██████
          █████████████  ▀████▄▄████▀
[/]
hilariousandco
Below Average Member
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1643


KnowNoBorders.io


View Profile WWW
September 27, 2016, 08:35:26 AM
 #7

There are obviously pros and cons to self-modded threads. Obviously scammers and unscrupulous people will abuse them, but they're also useful for honest thread-starters who just want to keep trolls and shitposters out. I would prefer there be more options for self-moderated threads where the OP can either blacklist users from even posting there in the first place or bar entire usergroups from posting and this would cut out Staff having to be involved which is better for everyone. As an example, you could choose to block newbies to stop people from just creating a new account to continue trolling or if you wanted to create a giveaway thread but only allow it to Seniors or Heroes and above or whatever you could do that too.

There are also negatives to creating a self-modded thread though as many people either tend not to post in them or look upon them with suspicion, but I guess that's up to the OP to weigh up the pros and cons but if they're unhappy with the moderation here and want to do it themselves I think that should be their right to do so.

████████████████████████████
████████▀▀ █▀ █▀ ▀██████████
█████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
██████████▀     ▀  ▀████████
███████▀ ▀  ▄█▀▀▀█▀▀████████
██████▄      █▄  ▀▀  ▀██████
██████         ▄▄█▄ ▄ ▀█████
█████ ▄         ▀▀ ▄ ▀ █████
██████▌          █▀█▀ ▐█████
███████  ▄▌         ▄ ██████
████████▄█         ▄████████
█████████▀     ▄▄ ▄█████████
████████████████████████████
.JACKMATE'S...........
.
MAJESTIC..
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
.
..WIN 1 BITCOIN ON EVERY PREMIER LEAGUE MATCHDAY..
████████████████████████████████
████████████▀█▀ ▀█▀█▀███████████
███████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████████████
███████████▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
█████████▀▄ ██▀▄▄▄ ▀ ▄▀█████████
███████▀ ▀█████▄▄▄█▄▄▄██████████
███████▀▄████████▀  ▀█ █▐███████
███████ ▀█████████▄█▀▀██ ███████
████████ ███▀██████ ▄ ██ ███████
████████▌▐▀▄ ██████████ ▄███████
█████████▄██▌▐█████▀██ █████████
████████████▄▀▀▀▀▀▄ ▀▄██████████
████████████████████████████████
.
.JOIN US - IT'S FREE! .
TwitchySeal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 600



View Profile
September 28, 2016, 02:05:15 PM
 #8

I beg to differ. If a user derails your thread even after repeatedly asking him not to post in the thread, you can get a mod to interfere. Nothing wrong with that.
Are you begging to differ with me?  I think you misunderstood me if so.

I have no problem with enforcing the rules, especially the ones that keep a thread on topic.

I'm okay with the way it's working right now.I tend to have no-tolerance over some of the Yo-Bit signature posters ,expect a few good ones.I can simply add a warning that members with Yo-Bit signature and low quality posts are not allowed to comment on this thread,your replies may get deleted if I find them spammy.Nothing wrong with that I feel.

I agree with you, we should be able to establish and enforce guidelines to keep threads on topic, troll free etc.  My point is that there's no good reason that this can't be don transparently.

No user should be encouraging questions and asking for opinions publicly while privately going to mods to have users blacklisted for bringing up valid issues.

For example:
(this isn't just about Betcoin)
Betcoin refuses to list any rules for their new self-moderated thread other than "no spam" because what they want to delete any post that brings up their scummy behavior.  They really just want to bump their thread and peacefully thank their sig campaign shills for all the compliments.

They have never asked me not to post in their thread because that would contradict the transparent image they try to fabricate.  Instead they just ask mods to do it for them.  

This is what Betcoin wants players to believe (they are referring to me here):

Quote
Quote from: Betcoin.AG
The staff looks at all the work you put in and appreciates your work ethic and commitment.  You really should be earning good bitcoin and building equity instead of having everything deleted from Betcoin or moved to the next page of the forum as more posts are added.  Ultimately, you just waste time while keeping Betcoin on the front page of the thread which means more traffic, more signature campaign members, etc.  We think you have a strong work ethic and could be a great contributor as you once were.  The amount of time and energy you have put in so far is truly remarkable.  It shows us that we have something special because every great company has people this passionate, but we want to channel your passion to help you more as you once were a great member of the community.  We look forward to your thoughts.
Quote from: Betcoin.AG
We would not stop you, because this is the proper forum for it.  We would encourage you as you ask important questions.  We are working on a wide variety of things right now from all of our members including you but asking multiple times a day just is not necessary.

You are definitely helping bring in new users and we appreciate it.  

Again, I am just the forum rep and this has also been a good experience for me as well.  
Quote from: Betcoin.AG
We would actually much rather have you back in the community.  Our staff is working on much of the great feedback you and all of our players have provided.  I am the forum rep and as advised by owners, staff etc. going back and forth in a forum is never productive, but staying on the first page in the thread is very beneficial for Betcoin as the referrals from BitcoinTalk have never been higher.  We will continue to work hard to make everything as perfect as possible at Betcoin and you will always be welcome back.

They should not be able to pm mods to do their dirty work for them.


A user who blacklists someone from their thread must notify them. A moderator can be an intermediary I suppose, I've actually done so before when explaining self moderated rules to both parties, but it can't be a secret blacklist.
This is good to hear.  But it's not whats being enforced.

There are obviously pros and cons to self-modded threads. Obviously scammers and unscrupulous people will abuse them, but they're also useful for honest thread-starters who just want to keep trolls and shitposters out. I would prefer there be more options for self-moderated threads where the OP can either blacklist users from even posting there in the first place or bar entire usergroups from posting and this would cut out Staff having to be involved which is better for everyone. As an example, you could choose to block newbies to stop people from just creating a new account to continue trolling or if you wanted to create a giveaway thread but only allow it to Seniors or Heroes and above or whatever you could do that too.

There are also negatives to creating a self-modded thread though as many people either tend not to post in them or look upon them with suspicion, but I guess that's up to the OP to weigh up the pros and cons but if they're unhappy with the moderation here and want to do it themselves I think that should be their right to do so.
I agree with everything here.

What if self-moderated threads were all grouped together:

Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Marketplace > Gambling > Self-Moderated

ndnh
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288
Merit: 1001


New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit


View Profile
September 28, 2016, 02:27:32 PM
Last edit: September 28, 2016, 02:48:43 PM by ndnh
 #9

I beg to differ. If a user derails your thread even after repeatedly asking him not to post in the thread, you can get a mod to interfere. Nothing wrong with that.
Are you begging to differ with me?  I think you misunderstood me if so.

I have no problem with enforcing the rules, especially the ones that keep a thread on topic.

I mean I politely disagree with these statements:

I don't think it's  ok to give anyone the right to dictate who can and can't post in the main forums.  admins and mods can ban dictate who can and can't post in the main forums, and can't I keep those who are spamming in my thread out?

I would like to suggest that the mods/admin stop going out of their way to keep "self-moderated" thread starters happy.  Transparency is good.  Self-moderated threads are opaque. (<---does that word work like that?)     well, I agree it can be abused, but I am okay with how this works at the moment so mods may help keep out spammers from threads.

Why not just enforce the General Forum rules and leave it at that?  The fact that op has power to delete any post they want doesn't mean they should be entitled to the power of the ban hammer also.    it is I think up to the mods to decide (ban) not the OP


(edit. Added my thoughts in italics  Cool)



Quote
According to hilariousandco, users who start self-moderated threads have the right to privately black list any user without saying a word about it in the thread or to the black listed user.   All they have to do is inform a mod they don't want a user to post in their thread anymore.  The mod then informs the blacklisted user that they will be banned if they post again in the thread.  Doesn't matter why or what has been posted in the past, the mod is just following the rules.

I am not sure about this, can't the mod use his discretion in choosing whether he should or should not act? AFAIK the mod could simply turn it down or not reply at all.



I only noted while making this post that you are talking about a particular context.
botany
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 1064


View Profile
September 28, 2016, 03:09:52 PM
 #10

There have been instances when starters of self-moderated threads have deleted all posts in their threads, months later.
There can be no reason for such actions

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1266136.0
TwitchySeal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 600



View Profile
September 28, 2016, 04:40:33 PM
 #11

I beg to differ. If a user derails your thread even after repeatedly asking him not to post in the thread, you can get a mod to interfere. Nothing wrong with that.
Are you begging to differ with me?  I think you misunderstood me if so.

I have no problem with enforcing the rules, especially the ones that keep a thread on topic.

I mean I politely disagree with these statements:

I don't think it's  ok to give anyone the right to dictate who can and can't post in the main forums.  admins and mods can ban dictate who can and can't post in the main forums, and can't I keep those who are spamming in my thread out?

I would like to suggest that the mods/admin stop going out of their way to keep "self-moderated" thread starters happy.  Transparency is good.  Self-moderated threads are opaque. (<---does that word work like that?)     well, I agree it can be abused, but I am okay with how this works at the moment so mods may help keep out spammers from threads.

Why not just enforce the General Forum rules and leave it at that?  The fact that op has power to delete any post they want doesn't mean they should be entitled to the power of the ban hammer also.    it is I think up to the mods to decide (ban) not the OP


(edit. Added my thoughts in italics  Cool)

None of my suggestions would prevent any mod or self-mod thread starter from keeping spammers out of their thread.

I am all for enforcing rules against spam.

According to hilariousandco, users who start self-moderated threads have the right to privately black list any user without saying a word about it in the thread or to the black listed user.   All they have to do is inform a mod they don't want a user to post in their thread anymore.  The mod then informs the blacklisted user that they will be banned if they post again in the thread.  Doesn't matter why or what has been posted in the past, the mod is just following the rules.

I am not sure about this, can't the mod use his discretion in choosing whether he should or should not act? AFAIK the mod could simply turn it down or not reply at all.



I only noted while making this post that you are talking about a particular context.

This is what I was told. 

Doesn't matter what you do it for. They don't want you to post in there and have asked me to tell you to stop. If you want to try change the policy then you're free to create a thread in Meta to discuss it.




Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!