Forums

Catch It While You Can

llama47
batgirl wrote:

So, drinking on the job should be discouraged perhaps.

Rare sass from BG grin.png

EscherehcsE

Maybe I'm late to the party, but I just noticed that the mods are locking any COVID threads except for the the one started by @btickler many moons ago. What's the thinking on that decision? So if you want to make a post on COVID stuff, it has to pass btickler's muster?

Edit - Not that I have any desire to make COVID posts...

IMBacon

Lock covid posts but allow counting posts.  Yea...makes sense.

StormCentre3
batgirl wrote:

The thread that was locked deserved to be locked - days ago.  It was allowed to go on long after it lost its way.  Mods can, indeed, move/lock threads on a whim.  Doing the correct thing doesn't seem to be a guiding principle anymore. 

I think “interpretations” lie at the center of the issue. Martin made reference to the “official policy”. Such a thing exists.?

The problem is - any thread can become locked regardless of the topic because bozo blatantly  violates ToS. A topic can spiral out of control quite quickly- the OP not present. How much leeway is given varies widely. Interpretations vary from Staff to mods- so clearly somebody is getting it wrong.
Site control of chat forums begins with it’s formatting, establishing better defined guidelines. This format makes that task impossible. Perhaps this is the point all-along.

llama47
EscherehcsE wrote:

Maybe I'm late to the party, but I just noticed that the mods are locking any COVID threads except for the the one started by @btickler many moons ago. What's the thinking on that decision? So if you want to make a post on COVID stuff, it has to pass btickler's muster?

Edit - Not that I have any desire to make COVID posts...

Sort of like Elroch's topics, BT promised to moderate the discussion by blocking people.

As I recall there were too many nutters early on posting misinformation.

llama47

Oh, and politics.

So it's a COVID only topic. No Trump or China etc.

EscherehcsE
llama47 wrote:
EscherehcsE wrote:

Maybe I'm late to the party, but I just noticed that the mods are locking any COVID threads except for the the one started by @btickler many moons ago. What's the thinking on that decision? So if you want to make a post on COVID stuff, it has to pass btickler's muster?

Edit - Not that I have any desire to make COVID posts...

Sort of like Elroch's topics, BT promised to moderate the discussion by blocking people.

As I recall there were too many nutters early on posting misinformation.

So moderation duties are now being farmed out to non-mods? Hmm...

llama47
EscherehcsE wrote:
llama47 wrote:
EscherehcsE wrote:

Maybe I'm late to the party, but I just noticed that the mods are locking any COVID threads except for the the one started by @btickler many moons ago. What's the thinking on that decision? So if you want to make a post on COVID stuff, it has to pass btickler's muster?

Edit - Not that I have any desire to make COVID posts...

Sort of like Elroch's topics, BT promised to moderate the discussion by blocking people.

As I recall there were too many nutters early on posting misinformation.

So moderation duties are now being farmed out to non-mods? Hmm...

What do you mean by "now"?

Elroch's topics are old, and neither evolution nor COVID are against TOS. Mods shouldn't disallow them in the first place. They only consider it because people go off topic so easily.

IMBacon
EscherehcsE wrote:
llama47 wrote:
EscherehcsE wrote:

Maybe I'm late to the party, but I just noticed that the mods are locking any COVID threads except for the the one started by @btickler many moons ago. What's the thinking on that decision? So if you want to make a post on COVID stuff, it has to pass btickler's muster?

Edit - Not that I have any desire to make COVID posts...

Sort of like Elroch's topics, BT promised to moderate the discussion by blocking people.

As I recall there were too many nutters early on posting misinformation.

So moderation duties are now being farmed out to non-mods? Hmm...

Walmart employees have to supplement their income somehow.

batgirl

 

StormCentre3 wrote:
 

I think “interpretations” lie at the center of the issue. Martin made reference to the “official policy”. Such a thing exists.?

Well, if by "official" you mean directions handed down... yes.   No political/religious discussions in all the forums is one that was handed down directly for Erik, which is why I say it's a fact.  I guess that would also make it official. 
Is there an official handbook that contains specific policies... not that I'm aware of. There's a mod handbook that's supposed to serve as a guide, but it's pretty pointless.

StormCentre3 wrote:

 

The problem is - any thread can become locked regardless of the topic because bozo blatantly  violates ToS. A topic can spiral out of control quite quickly- the OP not present. How much leeway is given varies widely. Interpretations vary from Staff to mods- so clearly somebody is getting it wrong.
Site control of chat forums begins with it’s formatting, establishing better defined guidelines. This format makes that task impossible. Perhaps this is the point all-along.

I agree that things are way too vague and often seem contradictory.  This has been brought up numerous times with no effect.  A lot of what mods do should be common sense but as we all know, nothing is more uncommon than common sense. 





StormCentre3

All the COVID threads are a good example of the poor formatting here.

I agree - all the new threads on the same topic need to end. Discussion should take place in a Chat Room. Perhaps with a title of Chess and Your Health. A subtitled topic COVID is created for discussion of the current situation. All such discussion takes place in the room under the sub-heading.

The is no need, it’s really quite backwards, to allow each and every member the opportunity to post a new thread on existing topics - just to be the OP. Time to abandon that brainstorm. It’s a dud. No power of any sort in controlling who or what can be posted is given to any member. If policies are broken, staff/mods have complete control. 

This OP business is nonsense. Topics should exist in separate chat rooms already established in general terms. Everything under the Sun. New ones can be added or archived. The room is moderated by volunteers or staff. This blocking by OPs in their personal thread is another retarded idea. The practice leads to endless squabbles and backwards thinking. Threads often become personal agendas, differences of opinions squashed. Discussion longevity now is a roll of the dice. 

petitbonom

Mmm.........Post 35 by Batgirl .  If you felt it was right to be locked , for whatever reason , why didnt you request it ?   ( or did you?, or if you did not, why not?)

Post 37 by IMBacon.    from your comment I take it that the site is King. In fact that indicates to me that ( as in the knife fight scene in Butch Cassidy)  there are no rules in that what was said yesterday may change today . That leads to the question whats the point of having any rules?  ( or guidelines), given that tomorrow it could turn 180° 

If the Mod thinks a forum is off topic to me it seems sensible to contact the OP and ask them if they want it locked.  

Back to Batgirl, I do agree that operating upon a ' whim' is not a sensible or logical way to succeed  in business.

 

 

 

 

 

IMBacon
petitbonom wrote:

Mmm.........Post 35 by Batgirl .  If you felt it was right to be locked , for whatever reason , why didnt you request it ?   ( or did you?, or if you did not, why not?)

Post 37 by IMBacon.    from your comment I take it that the site is King. In fact that indicates to me that ( as in the knife fight scene in Butch Cassidy)  there are no rules in that what was said yesterday may change today . That leads to the question whats the point of having any rules?  ( or guidelines), given that tomorrow it could turn 180° 

If the Mod thinks a forum is off topic to me it seems sensible to contact the OP and ask them if they want it locked.  

Back to Batgirl, I do agree that operating upon a ' whim' is not a sensible or logical way to succeed  in business.

 

 

 

 

 

Its an internet site, they can do what they want.  People will whine about their "rights" here, and when you try to explain that the only "right" they have is to be able to come here. 

And as far as the "rules"?  You are correct.  They are both poorly and unevenly enforced.  But again, its an internet site they can make up/change/willy nilly the rules as they want.

It would just be nice to have some semblance of normalcy instead of "Hey Fred!  Spin the wheel if rules today so we know what to and what not enforce." 

"But its casual Friday.  I thought on casual Fridays we only enforce every other rule?   

"By golly you are right!  And hey!  nice Hawaiian shirt there pal!"

batgirl
petitbonom wrote:

Mmm.........Post 35 by Batgirl .  If you felt it was right to be locked , for whatever reason , why didnt you request it ?   ( or did you?, or if you did not, why not?)

I didn't because it's not up to me to do their job.  
It shouldn't have been locked because it was off topic - ironically, it really didn't do that until after it was moved to Off Topic -  but rather because it had devolved into political rants and aggressive behavior both of which defy posting policies.   
I also don't think locking or deleting threads should be the OPs call.  

 

StormCentre3

An OP can effectively abandon a thread without leaving much of a trace. He is the owner, afforded such luxuries.

IMO - members should not be the owners of threads/topics with any control or power regarding  the what/who or how.

The site in effect owns  the Topics it has created for discussion in that they are the sole moderator. (Nobody actually owns a Topic). A place /room for everything. 10 major categories (Rooms) with a dozen sub-headings should cover the cosmos.

Room #10 Nonsense- 1. Counting threads 2. … etc. Let the fun begin. (If a big enough server is found).

 

justbefair

As a relatively new mod, I think I have been impressed to see how much help is provided to members- both those with premium accounts and those without it.

Hundreds of questions are answered every day by mods for longtime users and people new to the site.  Hopefully, we get most of the answers correct but it's amazing how many little centers of activity there are on this site. I have been here on the site for 14 years and there's still a lot I'm learning.

I understand that there are sometimes actions taken which can be perceived as over moderation.  I think we are all trying to avoid that. I think that the forum remains very useful to the chess.com community.

 

 

llama47
justbefair wrote:

As a relatively new mod, I think I have been impressed to see how much help is provided to members- both those with premium accounts and those without it.

Hundreds of questions are answered every day by mods for longtime users and people new to the site.  Hopefully, we get most of the answers correct but it's amazing how many little centers of activity there are on this site. I have been here on the site for 14 years and there's still a lot I'm learning.

I understand that there are sometimes actions taken which can be perceived as over moderation.  I think we are all trying to avoid that. I think that the forum remains very useful to the chess.com community.

Mods are very helpful and friendly. I definitely won't complain about that.

I'd rather there be a few more rules plus more enforcement.

Woollensock2
Guys I just can’t stop laughing whenever I come across these sort of topics. It’s so hilarious it’s better than spending a few hours at Hyde park Speakers corner , listening to all those learned gentlemen discussing everything from prehistoric caveman to gay rights . .......keep chomping on the cud guys lol 😂