Too strict
About right
Too lenient
Don't know
I think you've mis-understood the comments.
What we've said, typically, is that whingeing about neg rep is likely to get you more neg rep - that's all. It's not really a moderating affair - neg reps are one way for members to express their disapproval of posts made by other members, that's all.
That's different to saying "neg reps rules are not up for debate" - I'm fairly sure no moderator has said such a thing.
And yes, of course the rules are up for debate and discussion - I mean, blimey, what do you think this thread is for?
I hate all of you, impartially.
Why should people behave any differently in an online world? Yes ideas should be discussed and analysed, dicephering who wrote them, why and evaluating any evidence to support any idea or comment. Debate is great.
I suggest to you that people will read what is written and people have thoughts and feelings based upon those writings. They will not be virtual feelings but the real thing.
Just to clarify:
Netiquette - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Netiquette ... "network etiquette", is a set of social conventions that facilitate interaction over networks, ranging from Usenet and mailing lists to blogs and forums. ... The points most strongly emphasized about USENET netiquette often include using simple electronic signatures, and avoiding multiposting, cross-posting, thread hijacking, and other techniques used to minimize the effort required to read a post or a thread.
Analogy fails in my experience. Have you never walked into a bar full of regulars and everyone turns and watches you? Hardly being treated the same as the regulars.
Inside of the bar the regulars comfort themselves that all is well because they agree with each other that it is. Even though their private conversations are broadcast to the world for all to hear to offend or cheer as may be.
Then I'll try again. I originally responded to David Bailey about whether we should include rules specific to newcomers in the Ceroc Scotland Forum rules. I disagreed, citing the fact that newcomers have equal responsibility to self-moderate their behaviour. Capische?
At no point have I stated that. There is very little on this Forum that annoys me, but having my words twisted in this manner is one of them. If you are saying that "I do not want rules specifically about newcomers", please say that. Your continual reference to "existing" rules suggests, however, that you think I'm talking about ALL the rules (since there are no existing rules specific to newcomers).
There are no existing rules (and I'll underline this again ) specific to newcomers, so your question makes no sense to me.
Perhaps we can move on?
Your missing the point
If I walk into a bar for the first time and say this bar has got a poor reputation what should the response be ?
I dont know how many newbies we have had on here in the last 6 months , a 100 ? I dont know only one has come to my attention
If i choose to say to the regulars "who you staring at you **** ", then im going to get a reaction. Its not rocket science
If I go into a new job, I can either say on my first day , isnt my manager crap or say where the drinks machine both will get different responses
Hmm, I'm not sure about the idea of, pandering to every 'newby's' ignorance's.
I can just imagine it now........ The first 100 posts, you can say what you like and no ones allowed to challenge you, or say anything that might be taken the wrong way?... "you gotta love me, I'm the baby! "
Surely a little common sense should prevail!
I agree with Stewart and his pub analogy!
The rep buttons, neg and pos are there for people to show their feelings about posts (and maybe their opinion of the attitude of the poster).
Some, will use the feedback as educative. As it often gives a good insight into the minds of mind set of the fellow members Others unfortunately, will take it to heart and forever harbour negative feelings towards the 'repper'
Its up to the individual to the decide how to take it.
Maybe firstly though, they should have a look in the mirror and say to themselves, "this 'is' how i'm coming across on the forum, do I value that persons opinion and do I want to change? If not, laugh about it, disguard it and MOVE ON!
Last edited by Lory; 8th-October-2008 at 05:10 PM.
MODERATOR AT YOUR SERVICE
"If you're going to do something tonight, that you know you'll be sorry for in the morning, plan a lie in." Lorraine
Interactions between people require at least two actors. As a general rule, if one person inspires a similar reaction from most other people, the cause is that person, not most other people. This is true of all forms of social interaction - on-line, off-line or whatever.
In most relatively civilised on-line forums, the way people are treated is primarily determined by the way they act. Being new or not has relatively little bearing on this (and nor should it - human behaviour is horribly easy to positively reinforce and very hard to negatively reinforce). Should a forum be reasonable - and I've found this one to be generally quite reasonable - then people by and large get the reactions their actions warrant. For myself, if someone reacts badly to me, the first place I look is my own behaviour.
Any semi-structured social group develops something analogous to a culture: a set of norms, practices and (virtual) artefacts that are broadly accepted on the forum. These are typically far more important and powerful than any rules. These dictates are nearly always tacit, like all good cultural manifestations. More importantly, trying to encode norms into rules will fail: norms are far more fluid and reactive than formalised rules can ever be.
Administrators and moderators can establish the norms and practices when a forum is relatively new. They can reinforce or attempt to change the norms and practices over the life of the forum. Generally, trying to change them is going to fail: you have to change the expectations of everyone who uses the forum (or introduce a whole lot of new people who with within the new frame). As a rule, this happens organically and is very, very difficult to direct.
There are a number of broad categories of characters that you see on forums: flamer, guru, troll, newbie, cluebie, pedant, spammer, etc. I typically find they're useful getting a grasp on the particular forum. The best way to spot a person's established role is to see how other people respond to that person. Always interesting...
Yes I understand your point on comments attracting attention.
I read your evidence of the 1 in a 100 and do not disagree.
I have also suggested to a number of people about why they are not on the forum and some read and some won't post because of the opinion they have made about the forum. Probably the real question is whether the forum has a poor reputation or not?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks