Well done again OOT........ - Page 2

diebitter · #11 10-13-2006, 02:49 AM

jared

100 percent spot on

NT! · #12 10-13-2006, 11:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to this as official. I'll wait for objections.

[/ QUOTE ]

i really don't feel the need to defend trainwreck threads, my main objection to jared's idea is that it creates a lot of extra work for mods to protect idiots from themselves. suspend people who ask for a link for a week? come on, we're being told not to temp ban people for clearly awful posts but we're suspending someone for a week for being curious? it doesn't add up to me.

i also don't think this will be any serious deterrent to trainwrecks. a certain sector of OOT loves to do it and they'll just use gimmick accounts or communicate it via AIM.

best thing we could do is add something to the sticky about protecting yourself from trainwrecks and put the onus on the OP where it belongs.

NT

Ryan Beal · #13 10-13-2006, 11:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
best thing we could do is add something to the sticky about protecting yourself from trainwrecks and put the onus on the OP where it belongs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Astroglide's sticky included something like that, but I disagree with you here. It's often really not entirely the OPs' fault. The best way to prevent these things is to go after the people who actively try to trainwreck threads and inform the OPs about what not to do. Again, we did this in the past, but it's fairly clear now that some of those guidelines and rules have been forgotten or ignored by more than a few members.

citanul · #14 10-13-2006, 01:49 PM

wtf NT,

theres like eleventy bagillion of you oot mods. actually doing your job isnt something you get to complain about. and if its decided that your job includes banning people who seek to trainwreck, then so be it. the defense that "if we stopped them from doing it here theyd just do it on AIM or something" is ridiculous. let them do it on AIM then, fine.

im going ot reboot now because my computer for some reason isnt letting me use apostrophes.

c

NT! · #15 10-13-2006, 02:40 PM

cit,

i'm not complaining about doing my 'job.' even with three or four active OOT mods I would guess we answer a LOT of complaints and PMs compared to most others.

this is yet another OOT-specific policy that looks like it's going to be imposed on the mods, which i happen to disagree with. it's also going to be wildly unpopular in OOT if it's enacted.

my personal view is that we shouldn't be holding the hands of posters who don't protect themselves or accept the risks of this type of thing. i'm happy to delete the threads if that's what's needed - hell, i can even see banning people who trainwreck someone - but what then? that person gets a new account the next day. leftovers from the trainwreck get turned into avatars and inside jokes get repeated in every other thread.

unless admins want to start tracking down IPs and making some permanent bans, it's got no teeth. if you really want to retaliate against people who trainwreck others, just IP check all their accounts, make all their email addresses public and post links to their search results on dogpile, google, facebook and myspace.

NT

[censored] · #16 10-13-2006, 03:34 PM

are people really that upset because someone got AIMed? I think the posting of the picture was out of line and should be deleted/ dealt with going forward but I don't think sending instant messages which are easily blocked from unknown senders is not something to make a big fuss about. Who cares really? I thought Daryn handled it perfectly, deleted the info in a timely manner and moved on. Trying to control what people do off of 2+2 and punishing them for it seems ridiculous to me

This really isnt even a trainwreck.

Ryan Beal · #17 10-13-2006, 03:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
cit,

i'm not complaining about doing my 'job.' even with three or four active OOT mods I would guess we answer a LOT of complaints and PMs compared to most others.

this is yet another OOT-specific policy that looks like it's going to be imposed on the mods, which i happen to disagree with.

[/ QUOTE ]

What other OOT specific policies have the admins forced on the mods? I'm curious, because most of the way OOT has been moderated for a long time now came from astroglide and [censored].

[ QUOTE ]
unless admins want to start tracking down IPs and making some permanent bans, it's got no teeth.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why wouldn't we? This is exactly the kind of thing we take seriously. I'm generally perfectly willing to run searches on the IPs of members who are causing trouble. Most mods PM me the IP or account they want me to look into, and I provide them with the details.

Sniper · #18 10-13-2006, 08:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not complaining about doing my 'job.' even with three or four active OOT mods I would guess we answer a LOT of complaints and PMs compared to most others.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should not discount the amount of PMs received by other mods wrt OOT silliness [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Mat Sklansky · #19 10-14-2006, 02:02 AM

ryan and i will do whatever is needed.

just ask

NT! · #20 10-14-2006, 02:50 PM

RB,

the lifting of certain well known exiles and the incongruity in the severity of punishment for 'accessory to trainwrecking' vs. our recent banning patterns is what i am referring to

Mat and RB,

also, again, i am not really in favor of IP banning trainwreckers, i'm just pointing out that if you want to have this type of policy this is what it would take. and that's part of why i don't like the idea in the first place.

if it's what you want to do i suggest that any trainwrecked thread gets moved to mod forum, admins handle all IP checks and bannings necessary, and the OP takes a break as well.