1. DEAverification will be stepping down as
administrator, and unfortunately also as Gen Trek
moderator.

2. Another person will be coming in as fourth
administrator. While LizardLaugh, Lisa
and I already know who we're going to ask for this
post, you'll understand that we will not be able
to tell you who it is until we've actually talked
with them .

3. The Neutral Zone will be changed to a forum
with a minimum amount of moderation. It will not
turn into a completely moderated forum, and so it
will still be possible to hold heated debates.
However, as we've already been editing out porn
and similar things for a long time now, that means
we're legally bound to also moderate other illegal
material - strong hate material and personal
mail addresses could not be posted anymore. Before
doing this, we will open a thread in QSF asking
people for input.

I should also note that one of the people we're
strongly considering asking as a moderator for this
is RobL. While he's been going around claiming
to be a troll, this is someone who very clearly is
not a troll - I wish we'd noticed how he spends a lot
of time thinking about how to make the BBS a better
place before he felt the need to campaign on his own.
I think that by making a mod we'd be able to direct his
energy in a much more positive way.

4. The policy will be amended to forbid people
accusing each other of using alternate usernames.

5. Templates will be created for warnings handed
out by moderators. Feel free to post suggestions on
this in the BR.

6. Something needs to be done about the reactions of
some of the moderators. If we publicly celebrate when
a member is banned or enter into long arguments with
them or flat-out flame them that will only cause
them to attack with full force - if you look at some
of their own boards that's a phenomenon that is clearly
visible. Fortunately, I think the templates will solve
much of this problem. And also, as Saavik said,
debating these people will only feed their persecution
complex - let's not be doing that.

In addition, as soon as I am able to finish these
technical upgrades (I'm aiming at tomorrow), the
following measures will be implemented:

1. People with less than X posts will no longer be
allowed to post in TNZ. X will also be decided after
getting input in that QSF thread.

2. Users with less than 100 posts will be prevented
from creating new threads, posting in TNZ, or posting
more than once every three minutes.

Until these measures are implemented, registration will
be staying off - that's still the only fail-safe anti-troll
method, after all.

quote:

---

1. DEAverification will be stepping down as administrator, and unfortunately also as Gen Trek moderator.

---

I'll miss you DEA.

quote:

---

2. Another person will be coming in as fourth administrator. While LizardLaugh, Lisa and I already know who we're going to ask for this post, you'll understand that we will not be able to tell you who it is until we've actually talked with them.

---

I'll let saavik respond to this.

quote:

---

3. The Neutral Zone will be changed to a forum with a minimum amount of moderation. It will not turn into a completely moderated forum, and so it will still be possible to hold heated debates. However, as we've already been editing out porn and similar things for a long time now, that means
we're legally bound to also moderate other illegal material - strong hate material and personal mail addresses could not be posted anymore. Before doing this, we will open a thread in QSF asking people for input.

I should also note that one of the people we're strongly considering asking as a moderator for this is RobL. While he's been going around claiming to be a troll, this is someone who very clearly is not a troll - I wish we'd noticed how he spends a lot of time thinking about how to make the BBS a better place before he felt the need to campaign on his own. I think that by making a mod we'd be able to direct his energy in a much more positive way.

---

Personally, I think someone like plm would be a better choice; all personal feelings on RobL aside (and I do have a lot of them), I haven't seen him actively posting in TNZ.

quote:

---

4. The policy will be amended to forbid people accusing each other of using alternate usernames.

---

Excellent.

quote:

---

5. Templates will be created for warnings handed out by moderators. Feel free to post suggestions on this in the BR.

---

This one confuses me; what do you mean by "templates"?

quote:

---

6. Something needs to be done about the reactions of some of the moderators. If we publicly celebrate when a member is banned or enter into long arguments with them or flat-out flame them that will only cause
them to attack with full force - if you look at some of their own boards that's a phenomenon that is clearly visible. Fortunately, I think the templates will solve
much of this problem. And also, as Saavik said, debating these people will only feed their persecution complex - let's not be doing that.

---

Good idea, yet again.

quote:

---

In addition, as soon as I am able to finish these technical upgrades (I'm aiming at tomorrow), the following measures will be implemented:

1. People with less than X posts will no longer be allowed to post in TNZ. X will also be decided after getting input in that QSF thread.

---

Good idea, yet again.

quote:

---

2. Users with less than 100 posts will be prevented from creating new threads, posting in TNZ, or posting more than once every three minutes.

---

Also good.

quote:

---

Until these measures are implemented, registration will be staying off - that's still the only fail-safe anti-troll
method, after all.

Finally, I'll note again that as much as we would like it to be otherwise, we cannot extend permanent bans. I wish we could, but they're far too easy too circumvent, either
by masking someone's IP address or by simply doing hit-and-run attacks. It's clear that that is impossible to enforce permanent bans, and so our energies shouldn't be directed towards that - our energies should be directed to keeping the BBS relatively clean. It's worked remarkably well for
the past 2.5 years - I'm sure it'll continue to work for well into the future.

---

Well, it's good to see some changes being made, even if I don't agree with all of them.

4-GOM

If you make HIM a mod, I'll flat out resign...

Is it just me, or did this by a MIRACLE appear after DEA resigned?

And WAS HE KICKED OUT?

Good grief...

And as far as post count goes, you'll have to shut it down in Misc too...the spammers will just go there...

But, Kudos on some of the ideas...

I like everything I've read except for:

Robl as the Moderator of TNZ. Not a chance.....he never posts there, he's not part of that community and he's not established a level of confidence to be partial and fair with the posters there. You need someone like Plm or Reno to be the Mod there.

Now, I have no problem with Robl being a moderator of General discussion or other forums he participates in as I've never had an issue with him personally.

I agree Misc. should have post counts removed, otherwise, your asking for any spam that's in the lounges to be moved to Misc and overload our already overworked Barcode * Co.

Other than that, I think you've made some great decisions and set some good precedents down to build on.

On a personal note, I'm sorry to see you leave Dea. I sincerly hope you'll continue to post here.

------------------
"If God dropped acid, would he see people?"

"If I melt dry ice, can I take a bath without getting wet?"

RobL as moderator. ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FUCKING MIND????????

Dump DEA, and hire ROBL (yeah, I know, different position...but even so..that is how it reads...). Are you on DRUGS?!

He may be nice and polite and helpful, but he is sneaky and underhanded and does NOT have our best interests in mind. Are you FUCKING BLIND!?!?!?!

Fine. Hire him...and prepare for the mass exodus. Nice going. Stupid move. Real stupid.
But wait...he has lots of friends in TK who can take our moderator positions. NO problem! My stupid!

DEA was doing good things for the board, trying to get it under control. Why not just make ROBL admin and rename it Troll Kingdom II now.

Over and out now. DEA, we'll miss you. The board was finally starting to get under control with the troll crap. We saw what you were doing. Oh well.

Carry on. What the fuck hold does ROBL have over you all?

I'm off to do something more useful. I won't find it here today, obviously.

------------------
----Beware Romulans bearing gifts - It's the logical thing to do!
Here's to Pon Farr, when Vulcans go TOO far!
----Half-Romulan, Half-Vulcan - Passionately logical. Or is that logically passionate?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr Light:
And I must strongly protest the suggestion of putting the king of the fucking trolls in as a MODERATOR. Those fuckers are pledged to destroy everything this board stands for, and now we're putting them in positions of power?! What is this, Weimar Germany? I don't care how much this guy puts on a pretty face when talking to you guys, I've seen the real shit that goes down. This absolutely disgusts me. The trolls are the ENEMIES of everything this board stands for, out to destroy this community with their vile shit. This board is not made for the small minority of assholes who make a mess of it; it's for the 95% of good people who come here.

---

WORD. Then again, I've never quite understood the meaning of people who come here proclaiming they're trolls. Surely not to expect a warm welcome? Or is this to scare them away?

"Hello... I'm John the Spammer."

"Hi John... Have a moderator position."

"Duh?"

"Yeah... We really like you"

"Urm..."

"Of course, we could also factor in that you have a reputation as a spammer... And that spamming is one of the things on our list of warnable offenses... But hey! Let's not do that - because we like all posters equally and if word gets out to the spammer community that you're a mod here, I'm sure they would all NOT follow you here"

If someone could please allow me back into the Commodore's Lounge, I would appreciate it.

A list of possible TNZ mods:

label (get someone else for FoT)
Barcode (get a replacement in Misc)
plm135
Defiant
Marlowe
The Master
Captain Maestu

If anyone else has TNZ mod suggestions, please state them. I would also volunteer for TNZ duty.

LL I agree about RobL. I like him. But - I do NOT trust him. Not one bit.

quote:

---

Originally posted by LizardLaugh:
In all fairness.... Rob is pretty ok.

---

But are we talking about the guy who has "The Skinofevil Fan Club!" in his signature? We are, aren't we? Mod him and, frankly, I'm out of here.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zun:
It's not about how nice he is, or not. It's his image. And that really, really sucks.

---

Actually, this is a valid point....I personally don't have any problems with him, but, it's obvious many do. That being the case, he won't be able to effectively moderate simply because the perception against him by so many won't allow it.

As for Tamek....are you seriously quitting? Is this related to Robl or something else?

Give it some time, I really don't think they'll end up making him a mod Tamek, too many people including mods have problems with him and in order for us to effectively run this board, we must at least as a mod team be on the same page if we have any prayer of successfully working together well. Some of apparently can't do this....which basically means all of us can't do this.

------------------
"If God dropped acid, would he see people?"

Other than that I'd recommend one of the current mods that posts there on a regular basis. LL or Label would be excellent choices.

I concur that RobL would be a risky choice - and would certainly cause dissension among the current staff.

MISC will have to have its post count removed as well to have the current system work.

quote:

---

Originally posted by label:
Actually, this is a valid point....I personally don't have any problems with him, but, it's obvious many do. That being the case, he won't be able to effectively moderate simply because the perception against him by so many won't allow it.

As for [b]Tamek....are you seriously quitting? Is this related to Robl or something else?

Give it some time, I really don't think they'll end up making him a mod Tamek, too many people including mods have problems with him and in order for us to effectively run this board, we must at least as a mod team be on the same page if we have any prayer of successfully working together well. Some of apparently can't do this....which basically means all of us can't do this.

[/B]

---

It's related to RobL and that crap lisa pulled earlier this week.

That and the fact that I just don't like modding with my hands tied behind my back.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
In light of the events of the past few days, we've
decided to implement the following changes:

---

Assuming that you're not using the royal "we" I'd be curious about who that "we" includes. But don't tell me. I'm afraid that I might already know.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
1. DEAverification will be stepping down as
administrator, and unfortunately also as Gen Trek
moderator.

---

Yeah, losing him as a Mod is the unfortunate part.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
2. Another person will be coming in as fourth
administrator. While LizardLaugh, Lisa
and I already know who we're going to ask for this
post, you'll understand that we will not be able
to tell you who it is until we've actually talked
with them .

---

I'll email you privately about this matter. While some of my thoughts on this are public knowledge, there are some things a gentleman shouldn't say even in a place like this.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
3. The Neutral Zone will be changed to a forum
with a minimum amount of moderation. It will not
turn into a completely moderated forum, and so it
will still be possible to hold heated debates.
However, as we've already been editing out porn
and similar things for a long time now, that means
we're legally bound to also moderate other illegal
material - strong hate material and personal
mail addresses could not be posted anymore. Before
doing this, we will open a thread in QSF asking
people for input.

---

Unless I'm mistaken this is what you've already said is the policy for TNZ. Is it just that you need someone to enforce it?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
I should also note that one of the people we're
strongly considering asking as a moderator for this
is RobL.

---

Gee, I wonder whose bright idea this was.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
4. The policy will be amended to forbid people
accusing each other of using alternate usernames.

---

As I've previously stated, I believe that warnings should only be issued for this "offense" in the event that it is part of a larger campaign of trolling. The idea that trolls are justified in trolling because people accuse them of being trolls is so self-defeating. While I understand the reasoning behind this move, I have to say I doubt it will accomplish anything more than having us enter more warnings in the utility.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
5. Templates will be created for warnings handed
out by moderators. Feel free to post suggestions on
this in the BR.

---

"____(1/2/3) warning(s) for _________ (flaming/trolling/spamming/other/etc) goes to ________(name). Warnings are issued for violations of BBS Policy. Any questions about Moderation action should be directed to the QSF Forum. Discussion of moderating action outside of QSF is also in violation of the BBS Policy."

That said, I think requiring a template that disallows Mods from explaining their actions in the post in which they make the warning artificially ties our hands and only invites an explosion of whining in QSF.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
6.And also, as Saavik said,
debating these people will only feed their persecution
complex - let's not be doing that.

---

It's nice to see that you are actually reading this forum.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
1. People with less than X posts will no longer be
allowed to post in TNZ. X will also be decided after
getting input in that QSF thread.

2. Users with less than 100 posts will be prevented
from creating new threads, posting in TNZ, or posting
more than once every three minutes.

---

Unfortunate, but I'm resigned to it. Nothing we can do to change that now.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
Finally, I'll note again that as much as we would like it
to be otherwise, we cannot extend permanent bans. I wish
we could, but they're far too easy too circumvent, either
by masking someone's IP address or by simply doing hit-and-
run attacks. It's clear that that is impossible to enforce
permanent bans, and so our energies shouldn't be directed
towards that - our energies should be directed to keeping
the BBS relatively clean. It's worked remarkably well for
the past 2,5 years - I'm sure it'll continue to work for
well into the future.

---

Are you on crack?

How can you say this has worked for the past 2.5 years when everyone else in this room recognizes that it hasn't worked for six months or more?

And, yeah, maybe banning Slarus until 2147 was overkill. But what we must, repeat must, recognize is that people who post alternate usernames while they're serving a ban must receive some form of discipline. That means issuing them warnings for it. That means extending their bans. No, not until the next century. But an extra 1 day for every post that they make illegally seems reasonable to me.

The ban is only permanent if they choose it to be permanent. It's up to them.

If you take no effort to actually enforce a ban, then there's no point in actually issuing a ban. And if there's no point in the bans, there's no point in issuing warnings which lead to a ban. And if there's no point in issuing warnings, there really is no point in having Moderators.

In effect, I feel that my job is in danger of being completely pointless. The only thing that allows me to have a shred of credibility with the dumbasses in ENT is that fact that warnings I issue could lead to bans they'll have to serve. But if the bans aren't enforced, they have absolutely no incentive to take me, or the policy I represent, seriously.

If you doubt that, just take a look around.

quote:

---

Originally posted by LizardLaugh:
A list of possible TNZ mods:

label (get someone else for FoT)
Barcode (get a replacement in Misc)
plm135
Defiant
Marlowe
The Master
Captain Maestu

---

Some quality people. The irony is that the person best qualified to be the TNZ Mod is DEA. DEA's philosophy was that it should be, as much as possible, a self-moderated zone. I suppose that's not possible now. But the person who goes in would need a similar sensibility. Or at least understand that flames that would get warnings and discussions that just couldn't happen outside of TNZ must be allowed in TNZ, or else TNZ wouldn't be TNZ.

I'd volunteer to go over there myself, but due to lack of time I haven't been a regular in there for months and so I'd lack the kind of credibility with the regulars that LL is right to say is needed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by T'Bonz:
I know of one or two persons (two would be better) to replace Tamek (not that ANYONE could replace him (SNIFFLE!!!!)) if you're interested.

---

SON OF A BITCH!!!

I can't believe we have to go through the whole process of getting another ENT Mod AGAIN. This is what Hell is I guess.

T'Bonz, why don't you go ahead and post your suggestions. It'll be awhile before we get anyone anyway with how things work around here. Arturo hasn't been as active lately, ditto for Vektor so I'm going to have to really rethink my suggestions for the spot. Any ideas you have, StarMan, would also be welcome. IIRC, it was your idea to recruit Tamek wasn't it? That's a pretty good track record as far as I'm concerned.

T'Bonz, could you also post somewhere in the BR a new letter assignments thingy. Looks like our workload just went up again.

------------------
". . . that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." -Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg 1863

Where is Saavik?

Edit: I'll 2nd Demiurge's strong endorsement of plm135. Why he isn't a Mod yet continues to amaze me.

He's levelheaded, cool and calm (well except for one post once, lol!) and knows the folks in ENT. quite well. He would work well with us, and would be willing to do it.

I'll take Tammie's letters for a few days, until things settle down. This is fucking depressing.

quote:

---

1. DEAverification will be stepping down as administrator, and unfortunately also as Gen Trek moderator.

---

Major, MAJOR loss here. The man has eperience and wit that has and could serve the BBS well. Since he has apparently stated his approval of these changes, or at least most of them, would it be possible to reinstate him if he agreed to come back? Lord only knows we could usee the help.

quote:

---

2. Another person will be coming in as fourth
administrator. While LizardLaugh, Lisa and I already know who we're going to ask for this post, you'll understand that we will not be able to tell you who it is until we've actually talked with them .

---

quote:

---

3. The Neutral Zone will be changed to a forum with a minimum amount of moderation. It will not turn into a completely moderated forum, and so it will still be possible to hold heated debates. However, as we've already been editing out porn and similar things for a long time now, that means
we're legally bound to also moderate other illegal material - strong hate material and personal mail addresses could not be posted anymore. Before doing this, we will open a thread in QSF asking people for input.

---

quote:

---

I should also note that one of the people we're strongly considering asking as a moderator for this is RobL. While he's been going around claiming to be a troll, this is someone who very clearly is
not a troll - I wish we'd noticed how he spends a lot of time thinking about how to make the BBS a better place before he felt the need to campaign on his own. I think that by making a mod we'd be able to direct his energy in a much more positive way.

---

quote:

---

4. The policy will be amended to forbid people accusing each other of using alternate usernames.

---

quote:

---

5. Templates will be created for warnings handed out by moderators. Feel free to post suggestions on this in the BR.

---

quote:

---

6. Something needs to be done about the reactions of some of the moderators. If we publicly celebrate when a member is banned or enter into long arguments with them or flat-out flame them that will only cause
them to attack with full force - if you look at some of their own boards that's a phenomenon that is clearly visible. Fortunately, I think the templates will solve
much of this problem. And also, as Saavik said, debating these people will only feed their persecution complex - let's not be doing that.

---

quote:

---

1. People with less than X posts will no longer be allowed to post in TNZ. X will also be decided after getting input in that QSF thread.

2. Users with less than 100 posts will be prevented from creating new threads, posting in TNZ, or posting more than once every three minutes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr Light:
And I must strongly protest the suggestion of putting the king of the fucking trolls in as a MODERATOR. Those fuckers are pledged to destroy everything this board stands for, and now we're putting them in positions of power?! What is this, Weimar Germany? I don't care how much this guy puts on a pretty face when talking to you guys, I've seen the real shit that goes down. This absolutely disgusts me. The trolls are the ENEMIES of everything this board stands for, out to destroy this community with their vile shit. This board is not made for the small minority of assholes who make a mess of it; it's for the 95% of good people who come here.

---

You know, the funny thing about RobL is that he may proclaim to be a troll, but he's probably further from being a troll than most people are. Back when he noticed some problems with the way the BBS was run, problems that were in fact there, he decided to do something about it - unfortunately we didn't recognise it and invite him to the moderator team then, so he sort of became an activist. But rather than trying to cause trouble (which to me is what is a troll's intentions) he wants to improve the board. On the Slipstream BBS, he's actually been immensely useful in trying to inject some sense and moderation there - he tends to understand what this policy wants to do. RobL isn't a troll - he's a political activist.

But you know, as I said, we're only considering him as a mod. That's what I posted this here and not in public, because I wanted to get your opinions on this. It's unfortunate that this is now public knowledge - it again shows why we need to keep BR stuff confidential.

Label:

quote:

---

Robl as the Moderator of TNZ. Not a chance.....he never posts there, he's not part of that community and he's not established a level of confidence to be partial and fair with the posters there. You need someone like Plm or Reno to be the Mod there.

---

Fair enough. I'd like Reno too, indeed. It would have to be a moderator different from regular moderators, non-partisan, and able to recognise what kind of content could get us in trouble and needs to be removed and what is part of a heated debate.

quote:

---

I agree Misc. should have post counts removed, otherwise, your asking for any spam that's in the lounges to be moved to Misc and overload our already overworked Barcode * Co.

---

Yeah, I should have added Misc to that list. Oversight.

Zun:

quote:

---

It's not about how nice he is, or not. It's his image. And that really, really sucks.

---

I'd absolutely hate for mod appointments to be based on image. People who are popular aren't always the people we need - sometimes it's the people with an opinion of their own.

Saavik

quote:

---

Assuming that you're not using the royal "we" I'd be curious about who that "we" includes. But don't tell me. I'm afraid that I might already know.

---

Well, the administrative staff. That's always been the group of people who make decisions. I believe we're pretty much in agreement over the actual changes part of my post, rather than the proposals.

quote:

---

Unless I'm mistaken this is what you've already said is the policy for TNZ. Is it just that you need someone to enforce it?

---

Yeah. As it is right now, it's basically a mess. We're deleting some stuff (pornography), but for some other stuff (Skinofevil's rape threads) it's suddenly the TNZ that doesn't exist. That's a position that's not legally viable - you can either not moderate at all, or you have to moderate it and screen out all illegal content. If we get rid of pornography, we have to get rid of the rest too.

quote:

---

Gee, I wonder whose bright idea this was.

---

Mine, in fact. I've observed RobL on the Slipstream BBS, and the man really makes a lot of sense. He understands fairness, and he really wants to work against people who try to bring down the board - he wants to improve it. He's chosen a rather unusual avenue for that, but his intentions are very good.

quote:

---

As I've previously stated, I believe that warnings should only be issued for this "offense" in the event that it is part of a larger campaign of trolling. The idea that trolls are justified in trolling because people accuse them of being trolls is so self-defeating. While I understand the reasoning behind this move, I have to say I doubt it will accomplish anything more than having us enter more warnings in the utility.

---

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, to be honest.

The idea behind this is that we do not want to foster an atmosphere where having dual usernames seems like the logical way out. Back in the pre-Starbys time, we never had such problems - no one simply considered it.

quote:

---

That said, I think requiring a template that disallows Mods from explaining their actions in the post in which they make the warning artificially ties our hands and only invites an explosion of whining in QSF.

---

Oh, it'd still be possible to explain it. You could point out for what kind of comment exactly they're being warned, for instance.

quote:

---

Unfortunate, but I'm resigned to it. Nothing we can do to change that now.

---

Actually, I liked the suggestion SomeGuyWhoseNameIForget made in the ANNC thread, about only having the no-new-thread rule apply to certain fora. I'm thinking especially of not allowing new threads to be posted in QSF, because people who complain about unfair banishments in QSF with less than 100 posts really are suspect. But then a big problem is, newbies with less than 100 posts may also be more likely to ask questions there, which is what QSF is also for. What do you (all) think?

quote:

---

How can you say this has worked for the past 2.5 years when everyone else in this room recognizes that it hasn't worked for six months or more?

---

Well, they're wrong. It's worked pretty well. If I look at other communities of this size, the board is really very very friendly.

quote:

---

And, yeah, maybe banning Slarus until 2147 was overkill. But what we must, repeat must, recognize is that people who post alternate usernames while they're serving a ban must receive some form of discipline. That means issuing them warnings for it. That means extending their bans. No, not until the next century. But an extra 1 day for every post that they make illegally seems reasonable to me.

---

Fair enough. We do need to work something out on this. Zun made a suggestion on how to interpret policy which I think was good, saying that if someone gets 30 warnings, they can actually get a three-month ban - once they'd come back from their one-month ban, they have 24 warnings still on record, and then when they come back from another month, they have 18 warnings on record, and then after the three months warnings are erased. While that's not clear under current policy, I'd personally be in favour of amending the rule to indeed make it like that - but we can't be applying it retroactively.

quote:

---

Some quality people. The irony is that the person best qualified to be the TNZ Mod is DEA. DEA's philosophy was that it should be, as much as possible, a self-moderated zone. I suppose that's not possible now. But the person who goes in would need a similar sensibility. Or at least understand that flames that would get warnings and discussions that just couldn't happen outside of TNZ must be allowed in TNZ, or else TNZ wouldn't be TNZ.

---

Yes, that is pretty much exactly the profile we need.

quote:

---

About darned-diddley-iddley time! But do you really think asking for membership input will setele things any further? It's liable to be just as contentious, with about as much hope for consensus as complete acceptance of ENT as canon.

---

Oh, there wouldn't need to be a consensus, as we make the final decisions - this isn't a democracy, after all. But sometimes some good suggestions actually come from the Suggestions forum .

quote:

---

I don't go to TNZ very often, except when there might be something involving me directly (like the Bodhi schtick). Even so, this rings a major warning in my brain. I cannot trust someone who promotes a place like Troll Kingdom with ANY type of administratve position on this BBS. For that matter, why wouldn't you off the same chance to other troll-like personages here?

---

quote:

---

Actually, I liked the suggestion SomeGuyWhoseNameIForget made in the ANNC thread, about only having the no-new-thread rule apply to certain fora. I'm thinking especially of not allowing new threads to be posted in QSF, because people who complain about unfair banishments in QSF with less than 100 posts really are suspect.

---

quote:

---

But then a big problem is, newbies with less than 100 posts may also be more likely to ask questions there, which is what QSF is also for. What do you (all) think?

---

one forum for "Political Issues" (perhaps with a more diplomatic title) and a seperate forum for "Technical Questions"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cirrus:
ironically (very ironically, taking into account actions from this time last year), that was me

---

No, it was a89ares - I hadn't read your ANNC post yet when I posted this .

quote:

---

create a new forum - QSF is already overflowing with politics to the point where anything else is hard to read

one forum for "Political Issues" (perhaps with a more diplomatic title) and a seperate forum for "Technical Questions"

[/B]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Neroon:
And you wouldn't consider is sig line disruptive and encouraging to others to troll? Even though he seems to have been reasonably well-behaved at Slipstream, I still am not convinced. But it's not my choice to make. I am not about to quit over this, because my little corner of the BBS is pretty much without incident, and easy place to mod. But I don't get a good feeling from the idea, either.

---

Yeah, the sig clearly is a problem - even if a large part of Troll Kingdom is mostly just an extended version of QSF, where people complain about the policies. But yeah, I agree, it's a problem, as is his own insistence on being a troll, even if he's not.

But that would be one of the side benefits of having him as a mod - we could ask him to drop his troll feathers, which I don't think suit him anyway.

The problem is here he has a very negative reputation. If that could be changed or amended, in terms of public perception, than perhaps it would be feasible. But, ultimately, that is up to RobL, is it not?

It occurs to me that it would offend many of the current staff that have worked so hard to regulate behaviour that RobL specifically condones - and it may cause that job to become considerably more difficult due to the perception that entails.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
You know, the funny thing about RobL is that he may proclaim to be a troll, but he's probably further from being a troll than most people are. Back when he noticed some problems with the way the BBS was run, problems that were in fact there, he decided to do something about it - unfortunately we didn't recognise it and invite him to the moderator team then, so he sort of became an activist. But rather than trying to cause trouble (which to me is what is a troll's intentions) he wants to improve the board. On the Slipstream BBS, he's actually been immensely useful in trying to inject some sense and moderation there - he tends to understand what this policy wants to do. RobL isn't a troll - he's a political activist.

---

No, I was a political activist. The difference between RobL and I was that I followed the rules. I did not side with those who have declared war on your website. I demonstrated constructive work toward the betterment of the site. Now, when I was nominated for Modship, it was controversial because of some stupid things that I had said. But no one threatened to quit over me.

I think, Christian, that you may have to consider the fact that RobL is shitting you. The opinion of yours is so diametrcially opposed to so many other people. I know it's your site and you can hire whoever the fuck you want to. But I don't think this is a good idea. If you're going to install someone over TNZ of all places, it needs to be someone with credibility, which RobL lacks with everyone but you apparently.

If he does so well at Slipstream, great. Make him a Mod there.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
We're deleting some stuff (pornography), but for some other stuff (Skinofevil's rape threads) it's suddenly the TNZ that doesn't exist. That's a position that's not legally viable - you can either not moderate at all, or you have to moderate it and screen out all illegal content. If we get rid of pornography, we have to get rid of the rest too.

---

Porn is "illegal" in and of itself because we're not a registered porn site and aren't doing the background checks to make sure the models are above age. There's nothing "illegal" about Skin's rape thread. Yeah, it's in bad taste, but that's what TNZ is for. Bad taste. Bad taste should not be against the policy.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, to be honest.

The idea behind this is that we do not want to foster an atmosphere where having dual usernames seems like the logical way out. Back in the pre-Starbys time, we never had such problems - no one simply considered it.

---

This ain't the good ol' days.

What I'm saying, Christian is that if I see some newbie posting under the alias, Slarus Made DEA His Bitch, and I mention the possibility that perhaps this newbie is actually Slarus in "disguise," I don't think I should be warned for that.

This is a discussion forum. We're supposed to be encouraging people to use their brains, not run away from them. Pointing out the obvious shouldn't be a warnable offense.

Now if I'm Dennis Bailey starts suggesting that everybody that happens to disagree with him may be Slarus, well, yeah, that should be warnable. Because it's part of a larger campaign of trolling on Dennis' part.

quote:

---

Originally psted by Christian:
Oh, it'd still be possible to explain it. You could point out for what kind of comment exactly they're being warned, for instance.

---

Well, of course I can do that. What we need to be able to talk about is why such and such a post is a warnable offense. When someone makes a ill-advised 'joke' about Arabs, or about Jolene Blalock's vagina, I need the latitude to explain why that's flaming or trolling.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
Fair enough. We do need to work something out on this. Zun made a suggestion on how to interpret policy which I think was good, saying that if someone gets 30 warnings, they can actually get a three-month ban - once they'd come back from their one-month ban, they have 24 warnings still on record, and then when they come back from another month, they have 18 warnings on record, and then after the three months warnings are erased. While that's not clear under current policy, I'd personally be in favour of amending the rule to indeed make it like that - but we can't be applying it retroactively.

---

It's really quite simple. Also, it is fully within Policy as it is written now. Maybe not clearly, but then again, we don't need to specify what trolling is, precisely, either.

Here goes: Slarus has 30 warnings. Or more. According to Policy, he has 'six or more warnings accumulated within three months' and thus gets a ban for a month.

Then, he comes back. And he might very well still have accumulated 'six or more' warnings within the past three months. Policy also states that warnings don't vanish once you get a ban - they only vanish after three months. This paragraph is very clear on that - kudos to whomever wrote that particular section of Policy.

So he'll still have, I don't know, 28 warnings from the past 3 months? Possibly even 30. (I haven't studied That Insanely Cool Warning List That DEA Made Just Before His Vanishing that deeply.) So, according to Policy, he should get a one-month ban immediately after he returns. Poof! He's gone for another month.

And then, it's December, and he returns again. Still with quite a lot of warnings on his record, within the past three months. Which earns him another one-month ban.

Then, it's January (happy birthday, Zun!) and he returns. Policy states every warning is cancelled after exactly three months. (Again, good job to the person who wrote that!) So he's clear.

This isn't cheesy rules-lawyering, this is simply reading Policy as it is now and applying some logic to it. Granted, it does not explicitly say that he deserves a three-month ban; it does say, however, that he deserves a one-month ban, another one-month ban, and another one-month ban.

I rest my case. And remember, never argue with a statician!

Oh yeah, I think it sucks that DEA left, and echo some of the statements aired above. I also think that in his absence, LizardLaugh should be posted in TNZ, since I think an Admin should be in TNZ. Since Christian and Lis spend most of their time satisfying the Trekkian internet world's need for news, that leaves one... Unless, of course, that Person Who The Admins Are Thinking Of Adding To The Administration would be stationed there.

***

Also, I'd like to say that we need more mods for the following places:

* Enterprise
* General Trek Discussion
* That Forum The New Admin is coming from

***

Finally, where'sSaavik? made the somewhat offhand remark of making RobL a moderator at the Slipstream BBS. I actually think that is a very good idea. Let him 'train'. See if it works out. See how the troll world reacts, see if they follow him there. See if he can be trusted. And most of all, if after a month you still think RobL would be an excellent addition to the Trek BBS staff, you can state in his opening Announcements thread that "blah blah has been a moderator at the Slipstream BBS for quite some while, and I think he does an excellent job blah blah convincingcakes" and it would reduce member anger, I think. Also, get him to lose the sig. Period. Now. Not the day before he's made a mod. Until then, I'm still fervently against making RobL a mod.

***

Finally, DEA really would be a good choice for TNZ because he knows what's right and what not. He also has stated that he favors the new changes. He is also very muchly loved by all the members. And finally, he'd be excellent in TNZ. If you don't want to give him That Much Power again since there's already a replacement admin, make him a normal mod. I don't care.

Adding my signature because this was quite a post and because I forgot what it looks like.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demiurge:
[b]Christian, it's a matter of perception. If he is percieved in that manner at Slipstream, then perhaps he should eventually be made a mod there? Not sure what the situation is there - never even looked at that sight, myself.
[/b]

---

Slipstream right now is doing wonderful. We had a bit of a crisis two months ago which actually mirrors the current situation here a bit, even if it was more extreme - trolling problems, people advocating lifetime on-sight bans anyone they labeled a troll, and more things like that. The BBS policy was then reaffirmed and reinstated there, and it's been going pretty well there - the membership there seems to have seen through his troll disguise and now is listening to his suggestions. (Any other Slipstream observers, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong in this perception )

But frankly, he'd be more use as mod here, also to voice his opinion in the BR. While his opinions may sometimes go a bit far in one direction, he'd provide a nice counterweight to other opinions here that go a bit far in other directions.

quote:

---

The problem is here he has a very negative reputation. If that could be changed or amended, in terms of public perception, than perhaps it would be feasible. But, ultimately, that is up to RobL, is it not?

---

Oh, yeah, definitely. He'd certainly have to change things like his sig if he became mod. And perhaps already do so a while before he became mod (again, if he were to become mod). That's again why this wasn't set in stone.

Saavik:

quote:

---

No, I was a political activist. The difference between RobL and I was that I followed the rules. I did not side with those who have declared war on your website. I demonstrated constructive work toward the betterment of the site. Now, when I was nominated for Modship, it was controversial because of some stupid things that I had said. But no one threatened to quit over me.

---

I think RobL himself has also generally tried to respect the rules. In fact, if you read his posts, it becomes clear that he's a strong believer in the policy - most of his actions flow from what he perceives to be violations of the policy, and that is in principle a good motivation. Of course, some of the ways in which he's chosen to do that aren't as appreciated by us administration, but I suppose that's similar to the concept of civil disobedience to try and get a point across.

But that would be one of the benefits of having him as mod - he'd be able to direct his policy-protecting energy in a positive way.

Again, though - this is not something that was a decision set in stone. We first wanted your input. If he were to became a mod, he'd clearly need to change his public appearance. Right now, it looks like he will not be part of the initial set of TNZ moderators.

quote:

---

Porn is "illegal" in and of itself because we're not a registered porn site and aren't doing the background checks to make sure the models are above age. There's nothing "illegal" about Skin's rape thread. Yeah, it's in bad taste, but that's what TNZ is for. Bad taste. Bad taste should not be against the policy.

---

True, Skin's rape threads aren't in principle illegal, so that was a bad example. But thinks like racially-oriented flames, death threats and things like that are. We've got to moderate all of that out, and if we do, then we can't maintain this fiction of TNZ not existing, so we have to install mods. And if we install mods, we might as well use the opportunity to get rid of things like the skinofevil threads.

quote:

---

What I'm saying, Christian is that if I see some newbie posting under the alias, Slarus Made DEA His Bitch, and I mention the possibility that perhaps this newbie is actually Slarus in "disguise," I don't think I should be warned for that.

---

If there's a username like that, the admins will be able to take action. But what if there's a newbie posting under an alias that says, for instance, 'JohnBrooke'? In that case people should not be starting this witchhunt against new people.

In addition, there's also the problem that someone who posts under the name Slarus Made DEA His Bitch may not necessarily be Slarus. What if you've got someone with a grudge against Slarus who goes on a trolling spree just to get Slarus 6 extra warnings? That's why we as administration need to be absolutely sure before we say someone is the same person.

quote:

---

Now if I'm Dennis Bailey starts suggesting that everybody that happens to disagree with him may be Slarus, well, yeah, that should be warnable. Because it's part of a larger campaign of trolling on Dennis' part.

---

It should apply to everyone. Saying that someone who disagrees with them is someone else will always lead to extra paranoia and problems. If we just forcibly get rid of people initiating alternate-username-witchhunts, that will be far less of a problem.

quote:

---

Well, of course I can do that. What we need to be able to talk about is why such and such a post is a warnable offense. When someone makes a ill-advised 'joke' about Arabs, or about Jolene Blalock's vagina, I need the latitude to explain why that's flaming or trolling.

---

Well, then we include an [explanation] slot as well, though usually that won't be necessary. If someone flames, for instance, you can just say '[user], you have received a warning for saying 'you bloody asshole!,' in accordance with the BBS policy on flaming.'

But for some things, like trolling, an [explanation] slot might come in handy, though it'd have to be short - the longer such an explanation is, the more people can nitpick it apart. And also, the longer such an explanation is, the bigger the chance of the person giving the warning including emotionally-charged language.

What we'd probably need is separate templates for separate types of offenses - flames could be straight-out, trolling would have to be a bit longer. Would that work?

quote:

---

Maybe it's just late, but I'm really not following you on the math. Is this continuous 3-month bans?

---

quote:

---

Christian: I still think RobL would be a great mod and I hope he'll be a mod here someday, but it's pretty clear that it's not going to happen now, isn't it?

---

And more venom from the masses means more days like this where you've got to take time out spending hours appeasing everyone... Not that I'm implying you don't care about the BBS, but it's apparent you'd rather not be tied up in matters that distract you from your main interest, Trektoday.

------------------
"That's not a lie, it's a terminological inexactitude" -- Former U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig, defending himself against accusations of lying, 1983.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:
Let me draw some attention again to the following sentence : [b]Right now, it looks like he will not be part of the initial set of TNZ moderators.

I'm not deaf to all these reactions, really . I still think RobL would be a great mod and I hope he'll be a mod here someday, but it's pretty clear that it's not going to happen now, isn't it?[/B]

---

I agree with everything that Lizardlaugh says (and it saves me a hell of a lot of typing! lol!)

BUT - what scares ME and I'm sure disquiets most of us, is that you really do seem to want him as a mod, and seem to only be deferring it until a later time, and only possibly because of the reaction of all of us in here. It seems to me that you're not seeing what we all are seeing, and that is rather scary. If all of us, who DEAL with him on a daily basis, are seeing these things about him, and we're all urging caution, doesn't this ring some alarm bells?

I really do agree with LL. I like RobL, he is personable and often very helpful, has been helpful to me upon occasion. That does not mean that I trust him. I just can't shake the feeling that he is playing us, or playing a double game with us. I would be VERY hesistant to give him power of any kind here!

If RobL turns out to be a good Mod then he will facilitate better communication and and discussion among the Andromeda fans. Better discussion and communication will lead them to a better understanding of the show. A better understanding of the show will lead to the realization that Andromeda sucks. The faster that realization comes the sooner they will stop watching the the sooner it will be cancelled.

If RobL turns out to be a bad Mod then he will destabilize the Slipstream community, divide Andromeda fandom, lead to disaffection for the show and the eventual cancelation of the Andromeda.

Either way, it's all good.

ME too!

The Terran BBS

------------------
Beware Romulans bearing gifts - It's the logical thing to do!

Here's to Pon Farr, when Vulcans go TOO far!

Oh NO! They're turning the ENT Vulcans into the TNG Romulans, who used to be the TOS Klingons!

(not at you, Neroon)

Look, I know I am just some dumb schmuck who can't even spell IBM, but I would appreciate knowing what's going on. Especially because that "fake thread" had a post in it attributed to me which I NEVER made!

Oh, and P.S., I did post in that Che thread, Neroon, before I came here, but I really don't think you have anything to be concerned about. He's not very good at posturing (you'd think Sardonica would give him a tutorial in how to make something utterly false seem at least 25% credible), and everyone else can see w'sS?'s joke for what it was.

Anyone with Netscape composer could just change the words and text in the fake thread - it doesn't require a vast amount of HTML knowledge. So speculation as to who seems to be a moot point right now.