Fiddleysquat wrote:
Uncle Xyzzy wrote:
People don't need to be told that their topic has been moved; we have search and many other useful ways to find it.
The first time one of my topics was moved, I ran into it almost immediately; it's not that hard.
But sometimes newer people aren't that good at utilizing all of the forum's tools. They don't know, for instance, that they could access it by checking the post history, etc. Or they might think it was deleted instead of moved and make another one, assuming it's a glitch because nobody told them what happened.
Precisely. Or, as has also been mentioned before, other new folks might look at the threads in a particular forum, see four of the same thing, and then create their own thread on the same topic without opening the others to see that they got moved.
Furthermore, if this forum offered us the ability to auto-subscribe to threads that we post in (or create), that would be even easier than doing a search. I belong to 3-4 other forums where this is an option, and I love it. I love going to my user Control Panel and viewing my subscriptions and knowing that if there has been any new post in a thread I posted to, I will see that thread in bold on my subscription list. If I don't care about it any more, I can delete it from my subscriptions to de-clutter my page.
It appears that you can manually subscribe to threads here, but the thing that's so useful on those other boards is the ability to set it to automatic.
Quote:
I really think mods should be left to their own devices.... If one mod disagrees with another mod, it opens up discussion about more specific issues which could bring about clarification of rules (or the spirit of the rule is clarified)
I agree!
Hey guys. My two cents' worth.
I think things are going fairly well the way they are. I've written the next sentence 3 times now and still can't get it exactly right, but: Whatever the definition of a mod is, I mean, whatever capabilities and responsibilities you get when the admin staff makes you a mod, you should be able to exercise those capabilities. Because, of course, nobody would be given those capabilities if the admin staff didn't see them as responsible and mature enough to handle them.
Basically.... here's an analogy.
If I suddenly won the lottery and decided that I was going to hire a general handyman, I would look for a person that could build stuff, fix stuff, do plumbing, electrical, painting, installing things, maintenance, lawn work... etc. Now, if I was going to hire one, I should go out and find someone that could do
all that stuff.
On the other hand, if I could find some folks that were good general handymen, and hired each of them to do a different job - the first handyman was told ONLY to paint, the second ONLY to work on plumbing, the third ONLY to build and install stuff, the fourth ONLY to work in the yard... then I wouldn't really be hiring general handymen. Yeah, they were each capable of being a handyman, but at MY house, they were each doing only one job, so at my house, I had a plumber, a painter, an electrician, a landscaper....
What if the landscaping guy finished his whole job, and was just sitting around looking for something to do... and offered to help the plumber (who had a big emergency and needed help) but I told him "no, you don't help with the plumbing, because you're my landscape handyman." I'd be sitting around with broken plumbing for twice as long, because the single assigned plumber couldn't do it all by herself, but a person who was available and capable of helping, was told not to step outside his boundaries.
Or, if a large painting job came up, the whole room would get done in 2 hours if everyone stopped what they were doing to help, but since only one guy was allowed to do it, the job took 10 days.
It's like that with the mods here. If someone is made a mod by the Admin staff, then the staff is sure that they are mature and responsible enough to handle all of the duties that a mod, by definition, has. Asking the admin staff to change the mods' responsibilities is like asking them to take all the mods, and change them from being mods into being just... post fixers, or spies for the admins, or whatever. Just like telling my handyman #4 that all he can do is mow and hedge-trim, makes him my landscaper rather than my general handyman.
Quote:
That being said, I don't particularly care for the public nature of disciplinary actions. For example, editing posts and posting to note that a thread has been moved or a post deleted seems excessive. I think those kinds of things need only be discussed between the moderator who made the action and the user that the action is made to. The rest of the forum really doesn't need to know that this use posted in the wrong forum or made a double post. It really wouldn't hurt anyone to keep those things private, I guess.
I personally have always felt that having a short factual note saying "EDITED: reminder, don't double post", or "stay on topic please" or "post deleted" is a good reminder to everyone else in the thread, and it not only serves as a warning to others, but may actually apply to multiple people. It also removes confusion, for example, when someone posts, causing a ruckus, and then that post is deleted - to the bewilderment of someone coming along after the post is deleted, and wondering what all the ruckus was about! If I see a note saying "post deleted", I know that I missed whatever got people upset, so I'm not confused about people's responses to seemingly nothing, the way I would be if the post was just deleted completely.
Now if the comment is put in by someone who is NOT a mod, then that is inappropriate. And that's not a matter of opinion, it's in the rules.
Furthermore, in my opinion, if the comment is scolding or personal in any other way (such as if the person got a warning or a strike for doing it), it is also not appropriate. The personal communication needs to be saved for PMs. But the factual information, so that the person isn't confused about how their post got changed, or thinking "i thought I posted _____ but it's not there, maybe it didn't go through and I should type it up and resubmit the post!", etc.
Jasujo wrote:
The staff had access while the forum was down so we could iron things out and get used to all the new features. There are still things we need to work on, but it was better on a closed setting where we could test things than run it fresh live.
My last two cents' worth - when the forums originally went down, I thought it was due to a server overload or something that had completely disabled them and made them stop working. I visited daily and kept seeing the splash page note about the hamsters. I was really surprised, when the forums came back up, that we all still had our usernames and stuff, because the last time I remember the forums being down so long was when they crashed and we all lost our usernames and our post counts and... whew. that was a mess. Anyhow, point is, I did not realize that the forums had been down for upgrades until about 5 minutes ago when I read it in this very thread. I saw the new graphic at the top but didn't realize that it was an upgrade, I just figured the settings just got changed in getting the thing back online.
I don't feel so neglected as some folks since I'm not here posting all the time like I used to be, but truly, if the forums were purposely taken down for upgrades, some warning would have been nice - and doing it during a major neo site event was a little wonky on the timing imho (i kept coming here to see what people were saying about altador cup... too bad); alternately, if the forums DID crash, and it was decided afterward to upgrade while it was down, then I really think it would have been nice to see that information on the splash page so we'd know what to expect.
I'm not saying all that to gripe, but just explain the perspective of someone who had no idea what was going on.
Ok? That's it for now.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
. 
