Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ComradeRob
OK.
From now on, shit posts are being deleted. Any complaints can be directed to nobodycares@****off.com.
|
Hey, no one told me I'd been rehired
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ComradeRob
I've always been against aggressive moderation, but since the current situation calls for it, I'll be aggressively moderating until people start to take the hint.
|
I don't think aggressive moderation is a good idea at all, it's never yielded anything good. I held that opinion before I became mod and was stupid for not bringing it with me.
It's easy to think that it helps or is justified, but really, for an arena such as AD to survive, we need to accept hideously biased comments and snide remarks. A lot of people are provoked by them, and it would be better if threads stayed on topic, but not every post can be pristine and thoughtful.
That said, the stuff that went on in Methedrine's thread was clearly out of line. I think Rumad should've been banned a few times ages ago, and Hicks definitely should've had a week long ban. Note that I don't advocate deleting their crap. If someone wants to be a dick, let it be known that they are a dick, it's not exactly helping them. A ban is a better 'punishment' because, unlike deleting posts/threads, it does not destroy information or attempt to silence anybody. It does not take away anything* that can't be regained.
Bans should come in three categories: temporary, permanent and blacklist. The former can be used as a warning of sorts. A three day or week long ban should put a bump in the road for rampant flamers. If someone regs a new account while their normal account is temp-banned, their normal account should be perma-banned. After all, they have made it quite clear that they don't need it, right? Blacklisting should only be for problem children**. Every ban should be preceded by a warning, and temp-bans should come with a PM detailing
why a person was banned and how they should modify their posting to avoid being banned again. This latter point is very important, because (at least when I was mod) no one was ever told why they were banned. Hell, I wasn't even told, it had to be an AD*** thread for anyone to talk to me about it. And that's the normal case, if you want to know, someone has to make a fuss about it on the relevant forum.
The final point that speaks against deleting/modifying shit posts is this: It's ****ing tedious work. No one can be bothered with it in the long term. So it's a temporary fix that lacks long term effects.
* Well, reg dates, but then they've been known to change as well (Hi Karm!)
** People who regularly not only abuse other users, but break the rules. People who are normally unaffected by bans should probably be warned and eventually blacklisted if they do
*** A bit ironic, considering I was banned for something I did on GD.