Website ides:
1. make "downloads" it's own button and make it red or some other color...it's currently under projects or something which makes it hard to find.
2. Server passwords should be another button.
would make it easier for newbies to find the thigns they need to play
course these should only show up on login....
thoughts?
zicada's platform and questions thread
Moderator: ALFA Administrators
On playing together: http://www.giantitp.com/articles/tll307 ... 6efFP.html
Useful resource: http://nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
On bad governance: "I intend to bring democracy to this nation, and if anybody stands in my way I will crush him and his family."
You're All a Bunch of Damn Hippies
Useful resource: http://nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
On bad governance: "I intend to bring democracy to this nation, and if anybody stands in my way I will crush him and his family."
You're All a Bunch of Damn Hippies
-
HATEFACE
- Dr. Horrible
- Posts: 1068
- Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 3:17 am
- Location: A seething caldron of passive aggressive rage.
Why do we need a revolution?
“In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.” - Open Message to the Executive Branch.
These, and other similar issues, can easily be solved. I agree with both of these points,- new players are always asking about it, so its definitely time to make it easier.Castano wrote:Website ides:
1. make "downloads" it's own button and make it red or some other color...it's currently under projects or something which makes it hard to find.
2. Server passwords should be another button.
would make it easier for newbies to find the thigns they need to play
course these should only show up on login....
thoughts?
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." -- Richard Dawkins
GWT,- inventor of scratching.1. Kool Herc or Grand Wizard Theodore?
Why must I chose ?2. Blondie or Grand Mixer D.S.T.?
Pioneering turntabalism in hiphop.3. What is the claim to Hip-Hop fame for each of the four names above?
Grandmaster Flash4. Grandmaster Flash or Afrika Bambaataa?
Yes4. Run or D.M.C.?
Who ?5. J-Trimm or J.J. Fad?
Never was much of a Tupac fan.6. Tupac or the Notorious B.I.G.?
Jazzy Jeff! Easy!7. Dj Jazzy Jeff or The Fresh Prince?
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." -- Richard Dawkins
-
Nalo Jade
- Githyanki
- Posts: 1407
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 1:27 pm
- Location: Paso Robles, CA (-8 GMT)
- Contact:
Since Indio is getting some interesting questions regarding Moderation and it seems it cannot be avoided, I will ask a couple questions regarding it...
If we assume that GF's platform created a referendum regarding moderation...I am sure not all the votes went on that issue alone, however no one can deny that his platform had a significant affect on the outcome of the election.
With that said...
I understand you have no intention of removing the moderation all together, from our chat in IRC, however you are committed to removing the Anon status of the moderators.
I understand you are willing to site examples of books and other excellent references on the subject, first I would love to take a look at your sources and be enlightened...but second.
If its not broke (which you have implied that it is now working since things have settled down...) why try and fix it until it becomes broke?
What harm will come of letting things go? All the Admin's are aware of who the moderators are, we have a way to report abuse.
In your proposed plan the above will not change, the Admin's will still know who the moderators are, and the Admin will still be responsible for keeping abuse in check.
What changes if we know who they are besides potential for moderators to be intimidated by their peers?
The current format allows for this situation to happen...your proposal will not allow it.
Moderator 1 is good friends with member A.
member A posts something a little out of line, maybe a cute cat picture that is spamming a useful thread.
Moderator 1 edits the post and PMs member A stating, "your post was removed as it added nothing to the current thread and could be considered unwanted spam by the original poster, please refrain from intruding on a discussion unless you have something meaningful to add."
member A replys to the PM with "I hate you."
member A and moderator 1 (in there non-moderator persona) get into IRC and they chit chat remaining friends.
This situation is one of the many reasons Admin chose to make the mods Anon this time, moderation has been tried and failed in the past, I think the new route should be carried out until something "needs" to be fixed.
So my questions are ...
Do you think you will reconsider the Anon proposition, and instead wait to see if it become needed before attempting to change the current situation?
What do we actually gain from making the moderators non-anon...the same checks and balances will still be in place, the general membership cannot "discipline" a moderator, they will simply have to report any alleged abuse to the Admin...won't it only make them more "gun-shy"?
and lastly, if you are so eager to reveal the moderators, if you become an Admin, will you be tempted to reveal the identities of the moderators to your close friends...as long as they don't tell anyone else?
If we assume that GF's platform created a referendum regarding moderation...I am sure not all the votes went on that issue alone, however no one can deny that his platform had a significant affect on the outcome of the election.
With that said...
I understand you have no intention of removing the moderation all together, from our chat in IRC, however you are committed to removing the Anon status of the moderators.
I understand you are willing to site examples of books and other excellent references on the subject, first I would love to take a look at your sources and be enlightened...but second.
If its not broke (which you have implied that it is now working since things have settled down...) why try and fix it until it becomes broke?
What harm will come of letting things go? All the Admin's are aware of who the moderators are, we have a way to report abuse.
In your proposed plan the above will not change, the Admin's will still know who the moderators are, and the Admin will still be responsible for keeping abuse in check.
What changes if we know who they are besides potential for moderators to be intimidated by their peers?
The current format allows for this situation to happen...your proposal will not allow it.
Moderator 1 is good friends with member A.
member A posts something a little out of line, maybe a cute cat picture that is spamming a useful thread.
Moderator 1 edits the post and PMs member A stating, "your post was removed as it added nothing to the current thread and could be considered unwanted spam by the original poster, please refrain from intruding on a discussion unless you have something meaningful to add."
member A replys to the PM with "I hate you."
member A and moderator 1 (in there non-moderator persona) get into IRC and they chit chat remaining friends.
This situation is one of the many reasons Admin chose to make the mods Anon this time, moderation has been tried and failed in the past, I think the new route should be carried out until something "needs" to be fixed.
So my questions are ...
Do you think you will reconsider the Anon proposition, and instead wait to see if it become needed before attempting to change the current situation?
What do we actually gain from making the moderators non-anon...the same checks and balances will still be in place, the general membership cannot "discipline" a moderator, they will simply have to report any alleged abuse to the Admin...won't it only make them more "gun-shy"?
and lastly, if you are so eager to reveal the moderators, if you become an Admin, will you be tempted to reveal the identities of the moderators to your close friends...as long as they don't tell anyone else?
"The reasonable man adapts to fit the world. The unreasonable man adapts the world to suit him. Therefore all progress is achieved by the unreasonable." - unknown
removed self from forums, contact via E-mail. Adios.
removed self from forums, contact via E-mail. Adios.
Like i mentioned on IRC, the plan is to run a quick poll and see where people in general stand on the subject.So my questions are ...
Do you think you will reconsider the Anon proposition, and instead wait to see if it become needed before attempting to change the current situation?
What do we actually gain from making the moderators non-anon...the same checks and balances will still be in place, the general membership cannot "discipline" a moderator, they will simply have to report any alleged abuse to the Admin...won't it only make them more "gun-shy"?
and lastly, if you are so eager to reveal the moderators, if you become an Admin, will you be tempted to reveal the identities of the moderators to your close friends...as long as they don't tell anyone else?
The arguments for and against have been gone over several times allready.
Finally, I have said several times I would never want to 'reveal' the moderators. That would be very illogical. But yes, the fact that a handful of people will actually know who they are, is one of the arguments against anonymous moderation, since there's allways a chance somebody would slip,- intentionally or otherwise.
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." -- Richard Dawkins
-
MorbidKate
- Dungeon Master
- Posts: 1627
- Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 10:45 pm
- Location: GMT -5 (EST)
Nalo, the more the mods fell in love with voicing their opinions... and some did it intentionally to try and undermine moderation themselves... the easier it was to figure out who they were. Being Anon doesn't work because it doesn't take long for folks to discover who they are anyway. Plus, now that it appears some Admin hand-picked people that were clearly against moderation themselves so some Admin used the Anon status to hide what they were doing. And that was part of the concern from the very beginning.
Have the Mods be known to everyone with the understanding that any griefing on either side will be dealt with. Players are protected from Mods with a personal agenda and Mods are protected from griefers.
Kate
Have the Mods be known to everyone with the understanding that any griefing on either side will be dealt with. Players are protected from Mods with a personal agenda and Mods are protected from griefers.
Kate
"We had gone in search of the American dream. It had been a lame f*ckaround. A waste of time. There was no point in looking back. F*ck no, not today thank you kindly. My heart was filled with joy. I felt like a monster reincarnation of Horatio Alger. A man on the move... and just sick enough to be totally confident." -- Raoul Duke.