Forum Changes - An attempt at an Open Dialogue
Fri Jul 02, 2004 3:55 pm
Well, we've probably all seen the posts in General Talk that have now been deleted. I wish that everyone had approached me first to try and understand my true feelings on various matters, but what's done is done. The most important thing is, it's crystal clear that not everyone is happy with the moderation, the rules, and how the forum is being run.
Despite popular opinion, I am actually open to suggestions as long as they are discussed in a civil manner. I'm therefore creating this thread to start an open dialogue, to try and figure out ways how we can improve the forum, and make this a better place for everyone.
Let me just say now, if all you have to contribute is "Fuck you Andrew!", please don't bother. I want to hear your concerns and I want to improve the forum. Hurling insults isn't going to get us anywhere. Let's be mature and civil about this.
These are the most pressing issues as I see them:
Amendments to the forum rules - Any suggestions?
Enforcement of rules - How should this be changed? Do you feel some rules are being applied too quickly or in the wrong situations?
Warnings - Should these be more public? Should there be "warning points" that are assigned and accumulate, resulting in harsher punishments?
Punishments - How many warnings should be given etc
The moderation - I realise people feel a little bitter about this, but please be mature and civil. Do you feel we should back off a little bit in some cases, moderate other areas that need more attention, etc?
Please keep a few things in mind:
1. My mission has always been to make sure everyone is civil to one another, so that we can have interesting discussions and share information without being attacked. I'm not going to adopt an anything-goes, no-rules style forum; such a forum wouldn't be worth posting at.
2. I feel that it's still in everyone's best interests to maintain order. If threads get way out of control, it's best to lock them. If flame wars erupt, action will be taken so that the discussion can be salvaged. People who constantly cause trouble will be warned and eventually banned if they just keep ruining the forum for everyone else.
It's been brought to my attention that my image isn't so good, that I don't appear to accept criticism, opinions or suggestions. I'm hoping that this thread will prove otherwise, and will result in some criticism, opinions and suggestions that will improve the forum. But again - please be civil and mature about this. I want your feedback and I'd like to improve the atmosphere around here.
One final note about what took place in the General Talk forum - as much as it angered me and I wish those posters had taken a different approach, I am willing to forgive. The banning is a temporary measure to allow me to post this and explain my position, inviting civil discussion about ways to improve the forum.
I feel that those posters crossed the proverbial line, and that some punishment should stand. However, if those people truly want to continue posting here after some of these issues are addressed and we have resolved our differences, then great.
If you're willing to give me a second chance, then I'll gladly extend you the same courtesy.
OK. Let's start amending those rules together.
Despite popular opinion, I am actually open to suggestions as long as they are discussed in a civil manner. I'm therefore creating this thread to start an open dialogue, to try and figure out ways how we can improve the forum, and make this a better place for everyone.
Let me just say now, if all you have to contribute is "Fuck you Andrew!", please don't bother. I want to hear your concerns and I want to improve the forum. Hurling insults isn't going to get us anywhere. Let's be mature and civil about this.
These are the most pressing issues as I see them:
Amendments to the forum rules - Any suggestions?
Enforcement of rules - How should this be changed? Do you feel some rules are being applied too quickly or in the wrong situations?
Warnings - Should these be more public? Should there be "warning points" that are assigned and accumulate, resulting in harsher punishments?
Punishments - How many warnings should be given etc
The moderation - I realise people feel a little bitter about this, but please be mature and civil. Do you feel we should back off a little bit in some cases, moderate other areas that need more attention, etc?
Please keep a few things in mind:
1. My mission has always been to make sure everyone is civil to one another, so that we can have interesting discussions and share information without being attacked. I'm not going to adopt an anything-goes, no-rules style forum; such a forum wouldn't be worth posting at.
2. I feel that it's still in everyone's best interests to maintain order. If threads get way out of control, it's best to lock them. If flame wars erupt, action will be taken so that the discussion can be salvaged. People who constantly cause trouble will be warned and eventually banned if they just keep ruining the forum for everyone else.
It's been brought to my attention that my image isn't so good, that I don't appear to accept criticism, opinions or suggestions. I'm hoping that this thread will prove otherwise, and will result in some criticism, opinions and suggestions that will improve the forum. But again - please be civil and mature about this. I want your feedback and I'd like to improve the atmosphere around here.
One final note about what took place in the General Talk forum - as much as it angered me and I wish those posters had taken a different approach, I am willing to forgive. The banning is a temporary measure to allow me to post this and explain my position, inviting civil discussion about ways to improve the forum.
I feel that those posters crossed the proverbial line, and that some punishment should stand. However, if those people truly want to continue posting here after some of these issues are addressed and we have resolved our differences, then great.
If you're willing to give me a second chance, then I'll gladly extend you the same courtesy.
OK. Let's start amending those rules together.
Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:22 pm
1. Getting rid of egarret...
seriously, I think settling things in private only works in logic. I'm going to talk from experience here. What happened between me and him caused me leaving the boards. Everything happened privately. heres a brief rundown:
I said that I'd rather shaq over kobe in a shaq thread, and recieved my first warning (although that was never said) and was asked to stop provoking members. I disagreed, becuase it didnt provoke members, and a fairly decent discussion came out about shaq and kobe. Me and Egarret went back n fourth about 5 or 6 pm's untill i said in a michael finley thread thatwhat makes finley a great player is he is unselfish and doesnt force things, unlike other shooting guards. No flames or even a hint of that came about, and yet i recieved a second warning and a "if you think im joking, do it again" statement from guess who. I went to the trouble to get Egarrets msn email and i added him, and tried talking to him in realtime. We both couldnt agree, and i still stand by my belief that it wasnt provoking.
Working things out privately only work if both parties are willing to talk and respect the other persons opinion. That doesn't happen with Egarret, and it was the reason that i, someone who has been around nlsc since 1998, once an assistant webmaster, who is also friends with the owner, was so disgusted by egarrets attitude that i left. If someone like me who has been around for 6 years and at one point co-ran the site was willing to leave after one instance of trying to resolve a matter, what chance would someone new have? not much..
Enforcment of the rules should be just that. Enforcement of any rules broken. Not a thread being locked simply becuase it goes slightly off topic or a disagreement. If its a fullblown flame, like the aussieland one, then sure, lock that fucker. But if its a disagreement, and its not derogitory, let it keep on going. When I look back at my favourite threads, i think back to ones that ben and i argued for days (and somtimes weeks) about. like the darko thread, or the ones about mj.. they were great becuase we disagreed and we both learnt points from the other side. if either thread were around today, they would have been locked almost immediately.
I know you intentions are good andrew, but remember this: your first mission here is "My mission has always been to make sure everyone is civil to one another". When a moderator isnt civil to a poster, what example does that set? I know this might sound like im beating a dead horse, but everything was ok at nlsc before he was mod.
This is just my experiences and my opinion. I realise Egarret is here to stay and thats why i left. Somtimes you lose all respect for a person and you cant bring yourself to being anywhere near them, except to punch them. Its like how shaq feels with the lakers now...
seriously, I think settling things in private only works in logic. I'm going to talk from experience here. What happened between me and him caused me leaving the boards. Everything happened privately. heres a brief rundown:
I said that I'd rather shaq over kobe in a shaq thread, and recieved my first warning (although that was never said) and was asked to stop provoking members. I disagreed, becuase it didnt provoke members, and a fairly decent discussion came out about shaq and kobe. Me and Egarret went back n fourth about 5 or 6 pm's untill i said in a michael finley thread thatwhat makes finley a great player is he is unselfish and doesnt force things, unlike other shooting guards. No flames or even a hint of that came about, and yet i recieved a second warning and a "if you think im joking, do it again" statement from guess who. I went to the trouble to get Egarrets msn email and i added him, and tried talking to him in realtime. We both couldnt agree, and i still stand by my belief that it wasnt provoking.
Working things out privately only work if both parties are willing to talk and respect the other persons opinion. That doesn't happen with Egarret, and it was the reason that i, someone who has been around nlsc since 1998, once an assistant webmaster, who is also friends with the owner, was so disgusted by egarrets attitude that i left. If someone like me who has been around for 6 years and at one point co-ran the site was willing to leave after one instance of trying to resolve a matter, what chance would someone new have? not much..
Enforcment of the rules should be just that. Enforcement of any rules broken. Not a thread being locked simply becuase it goes slightly off topic or a disagreement. If its a fullblown flame, like the aussieland one, then sure, lock that fucker. But if its a disagreement, and its not derogitory, let it keep on going. When I look back at my favourite threads, i think back to ones that ben and i argued for days (and somtimes weeks) about. like the darko thread, or the ones about mj.. they were great becuase we disagreed and we both learnt points from the other side. if either thread were around today, they would have been locked almost immediately.
I know you intentions are good andrew, but remember this: your first mission here is "My mission has always been to make sure everyone is civil to one another". When a moderator isnt civil to a poster, what example does that set? I know this might sound like im beating a dead horse, but everything was ok at nlsc before he was mod.
This is just my experiences and my opinion. I realise Egarret is here to stay and thats why i left. Somtimes you lose all respect for a person and you cant bring yourself to being anywhere near them, except to punch them. Its like how shaq feels with the lakers now...
Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:28 pm
NBA_Fan_23 wrote:I know you intentions are good andrew, but remember this: your first mission here is "My mission has always been to make sure everyone is civil to one another". When a moderator isnt civil to a poster, what example does that set?
No argument whatsoever. We have to follow the rules too, we should be civil to posters as we ask them to be civil to each other. Our approach can be improved.
Keep 'em coming, I'd like to hear to a lot more before we all start agreeing on some changes.
Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:28 pm
I think there definitely are some loopholes in that constitution that should be patched up. I forget, but there was at least one good point (regarding the rules) that Psycho Jackal had in his rants.
I believe warnings should be public so that other users can see what was wrong and not emulate such actions. However, a PM and email should be sent as well in case the user missed it. I visit another forum and its a system of 3 warnings and on the 3rd warning, you're baned. Each warning lasts one month, although that might want to be lengthened for this forum (or make an exception, eg, a total of let's say, 6 warnings, expired or not, and you're gone). People get warnings there, but hardly do you see a poster get baned or attempt a coup like there was today.
I have a suggestion that doesn't really fall under these categories. The majority of the forums I visit have two general boards: one where you can't flame, and the other where you can mildly flame. I recommend this (naturally the one where you can flame attracts far more people and posts) as you can put topics where you don't want people to start flaming each other in one forum and stuff you don't mind getting out of hand in other.
I believe warnings should be public so that other users can see what was wrong and not emulate such actions. However, a PM and email should be sent as well in case the user missed it. I visit another forum and its a system of 3 warnings and on the 3rd warning, you're baned. Each warning lasts one month, although that might want to be lengthened for this forum (or make an exception, eg, a total of let's say, 6 warnings, expired or not, and you're gone). People get warnings there, but hardly do you see a poster get baned or attempt a coup like there was today.
I have a suggestion that doesn't really fall under these categories. The majority of the forums I visit have two general boards: one where you can't flame, and the other where you can mildly flame. I recommend this (naturally the one where you can flame attracts far more people and posts) as you can put topics where you don't want people to start flaming each other in one forum and stuff you don't mind getting out of hand in other.
Last edited by FanOfAll on Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:39 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:33 pm
I think the forum is ran just fine. People should bear in mind that this is no more than a nba live website and no more, nothing to rip your hair for 
but I think it's a great place for NBA Live fans and we members can have an effect on the atmosphere
but I think it's a great place for NBA Live fans and we members can have an effect on the atmosphere
Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:43 pm
Yay..those annoying spam heads went away
Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:47 pm
Old School Fool wrote:Yay..those annoying spam heads went away
Please, let's not get into that. As hurtful as some of the remarks were...the point has been made. I'd like to hear everybody out.
Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:55 pm
Man I'm just going to add my little bit and if I think of anything else I'll do it later. Keep in mind I don't see private conversations so I don't know everything that goes on, but I'll talk about what I can see.
Like I said to Andrew earlier today, and as Tuomas also mentioned the main concern is Nba Live. But the forum is important and there's a reason why so many of us have stuck around for so long. Many have left too for various reasons.
The main concern in my opinion has already been mentioned by Matthew. Let things roll even if an argument breaks out. We have gotten to the stage where threads are being locked because they could potentially turn into an argument. Well then we're potentially ruining some good discussions .
People should be warned for continuous serious offensive behaviour, stuff which gets too personal, or is only posted to be negative. The petty shit which Psycho was banned for should not even be looked at. Yes the guy is argumentative and that's great he contributes heaps to the forum. And how many open minded Laker fans have we had on this website? Not many. I just think it has become too strict. Let's have some fun. We don't need to alienate people who have been supporting the place for so long.
Like I said to Andrew earlier today, and as Tuomas also mentioned the main concern is Nba Live. But the forum is important and there's a reason why so many of us have stuck around for so long. Many have left too for various reasons.
The main concern in my opinion has already been mentioned by Matthew. Let things roll even if an argument breaks out. We have gotten to the stage where threads are being locked because they could potentially turn into an argument. Well then we're potentially ruining some good discussions .
People should be warned for continuous serious offensive behaviour, stuff which gets too personal, or is only posted to be negative. The petty shit which Psycho was banned for should not even be looked at. Yes the guy is argumentative and that's great he contributes heaps to the forum. And how many open minded Laker fans have we had on this website? Not many. I just think it has become too strict. Let's have some fun. We don't need to alienate people who have been supporting the place for so long.
Fri Jul 02, 2004 5:25 pm
Let me just say now, if all you have to contribute is "Fuck you Andrew!", please don't bother.
Ah shit there goes my argument
Great idea Andrew, this is pretty much what was needed...
Like I said to Andrew earlier today, and as Tuomas also mentioned the main concern is Nba Live. But the forum is important and there's a reason why so many of us have stuck around for so long. Many have left too for various reasons
The fact is, while we're all here initially for NBA Live, alot of us who have been around a while are purely around for General Talk. I've made alot of friends at the NLSC, and I have alot of fond memories of the place. The reason I didnt take any particular side with this whole even today is because I dont want to see the NLSC ruined or anything like that, because it used to be so good, and it probably still could be.
As far as arguments go, I cant see anyone just letting them serve their course, as much as I'd like to see that but I do have two suggestions, number one would be let an argument go as long as it remains vaguely about the topic. Like if someone's saying "go fuck yourself you poof" that's not on topic, but dont lock the thread just delete those particular posts. My second idea (and favourite) is to impliment a "give and take" rule. If someone wants to "flame" another person, they've got to be prepared to take whatever comes back at them. Speaking to EG today one of the things he mentioned was the amount of people involving themselves in arguments, then expecting protection. I say fuck that. If someone's going to argue, and the other person is offended by it they can complain but dont answer back. If someone is willing to make a derogatory comment, they can expect to get something back. Also another thing would be to keep arguments contained. Dont let them spill out to the point where the two people rip into each other on each and every thread, that would just get annoying.
Locking threads should only be done if its completely necessary, i.e someone's repeating topics (another "do you believe in God" pops up for instance) then lock it but dont lock anything because of an argument unless it gets really bad (Aussieland). It just agitates people.
I think the forum is ran just fine. People should bear in mind that this is no more than a nba live website and no more, nothing to rip your hair for
It used to be alot more than just an NBA Live website, and I think that's why alot of us are concerned.
There's more I wanna say, but I'm otherwise occupied at the moment lol.
Fri Jul 02, 2004 5:29 pm
Jae. wrote:My second idea (and favourite) is to impliment a "give and take" rule. If someone wants to "flame" another person, they've got to be prepared to take whatever comes back at them. Speaking to EG today one of the things he mentioned was the amount of people involving themselves in arguments, then expecting protection. I say fuck that. If someone's going to argue, and the other person is offended by it they can complain but dont answer back. If someone is willing to make a derogatory comment, they can expect to get something back.
That is awesome
I say YES to that. 
Fri Jul 02, 2004 5:35 pm
I've had my run-ins with EG, and you know what I'm talking about, Andrew. My brief banning from the board was unwarranted (I forget what it was for), and not having this to post on occasionally actually made me more productive.
The moderating is too inconsistant and too strict. A bias can definately be seen, like that of a teacher with the "problem" children of the class - that person is given detention for talking, while the teacher's pet is given a finger pressed to the lips: shhhhh!
The thread that I started - trying to continue a thread about God - that was headed in a great direction, save for a few flames, was ruined because the second thread was locked. Because of that, a rare philosophical topic was closed, and all because of a misinterpreted and misenforced rule.
The rules do need to be modified. I'm not sure of any specific modifications, but something needs to be done about spamming. I, personally, am incredibly sick of people who have been at the site for 2 months who have more posts than I do, and then they brag about them. Like Tuomas (I think) said, this is JUST A WEBSITE. The post count does not matter whatsoever. I've posted hundreds less than a lot of these people, yet my word count is probably close to the same if not more. It's incredibly annoying to see three '1000 Posts - Shout Outs!' and then a huge list of people, and then that huge list of people (who are mostly other spammers) posting their thanks for the shout out...it's a web page, not an award ceremony!
Note: this is nothing against those people, it just bugs the shit out of me. I know Ben and I started this back on the black and blue board, but that was an accomplishment...we were the first, and we actually made posts of merit with minimal spamming....
The board needs to be fun again. It's boring to me now, as all the posters seem to be less informed on issues within the NBA or in life, and the discussions are like those one would hear passing by a locker room in a junior high. The focus of the message boards needs to return to NBA Live and to distance itself just a bit from the NBA and general talk (which is just stupid bullshit 90% of the time). While those areas are good for variation, there's so many posters in the NBA section who probably don't even play Live or download the rosters or patches or anything....the board is getting away from the entire concept behind the NLSC: the Live COMMUNITY. No longer are we a community of NBA Livers, we have everyone who can type a name and a two word message.
ANyway, I'm outtie....tired....
The moderating is too inconsistant and too strict. A bias can definately be seen, like that of a teacher with the "problem" children of the class - that person is given detention for talking, while the teacher's pet is given a finger pressed to the lips: shhhhh!
The thread that I started - trying to continue a thread about God - that was headed in a great direction, save for a few flames, was ruined because the second thread was locked. Because of that, a rare philosophical topic was closed, and all because of a misinterpreted and misenforced rule.
The rules do need to be modified. I'm not sure of any specific modifications, but something needs to be done about spamming. I, personally, am incredibly sick of people who have been at the site for 2 months who have more posts than I do, and then they brag about them. Like Tuomas (I think) said, this is JUST A WEBSITE. The post count does not matter whatsoever. I've posted hundreds less than a lot of these people, yet my word count is probably close to the same if not more. It's incredibly annoying to see three '1000 Posts - Shout Outs!' and then a huge list of people, and then that huge list of people (who are mostly other spammers) posting their thanks for the shout out...it's a web page, not an award ceremony!
Note: this is nothing against those people, it just bugs the shit out of me. I know Ben and I started this back on the black and blue board, but that was an accomplishment...we were the first, and we actually made posts of merit with minimal spamming....
The board needs to be fun again. It's boring to me now, as all the posters seem to be less informed on issues within the NBA or in life, and the discussions are like those one would hear passing by a locker room in a junior high. The focus of the message boards needs to return to NBA Live and to distance itself just a bit from the NBA and general talk (which is just stupid bullshit 90% of the time). While those areas are good for variation, there's so many posters in the NBA section who probably don't even play Live or download the rosters or patches or anything....the board is getting away from the entire concept behind the NLSC: the Live COMMUNITY. No longer are we a community of NBA Livers, we have everyone who can type a name and a two word message.
ANyway, I'm outtie....tired....
Fri Jul 02, 2004 5:37 pm
Funny how when I said all this "over modding" was stupid months ago I was banned for "insubordination" 
.... you really want to improve the NLSC then that should be the first thing to go.. the mods/webmaster of this site are no "better" or superirior to any other poster.. they should be treated with respect I agree but people should be alowed to critizise them without fear of deletetion etc.. "insubordination".. seriously..
The mods complain about all the "spammers" and not posting useless posts but I think the mods are the biggest offenders on this forum.. What is the point of posting "Topic moved to" blah blah everytime a topic is moved? Who gives a? It is really annoying when you come onto the forum to read 50 new posts.. and 25 of those are from mods saying "post moved to" etc..
Also I am going to criticize Andrew because he says he is welcoming it.. and if i get banned.. meh...
but if you don't want spammers then why have all the topics "Yay I reached 1000 posts" again who gives a? and why does the webmaster have a countdown to 10,000 posts in his sig? Is it that important? Are you proud to have over 2000 "Your post has been moved" posts? ..
Why when Andrew posts about something he diagrees with is the post locked afterwards? So no one can reply?
This is the first time in 3 years I have seen Andrew welcome change.. we shall see what changes.. Also I think the forum is the least of the NLSC's concerns.. the site is in terrible shape.. Most links are broken or dead.. It really is poorly maintained in my opinion.. I know you are just going to say.. "David is just saying that because he runs nbalive.org" "the rival site".. Whatever.. but remember I was a member of the NLSC long before I joined .org and I still think the concept that Tim started all those years ago was a great idea. I just think now it is being poorly run.. that is my opinion.. you can just dismiss it as "bitter rivalry" or you can take it onboard and meet the challenge and improve the NLSC to what it should be. Its up to you..
.... you really want to improve the NLSC then that should be the first thing to go.. the mods/webmaster of this site are no "better" or superirior to any other poster.. they should be treated with respect I agree but people should be alowed to critizise them without fear of deletetion etc.. "insubordination".. seriously.. The mods complain about all the "spammers" and not posting useless posts but I think the mods are the biggest offenders on this forum.. What is the point of posting "Topic moved to" blah blah everytime a topic is moved? Who gives a? It is really annoying when you come onto the forum to read 50 new posts.. and 25 of those are from mods saying "post moved to" etc..
Also I am going to criticize Andrew because he says he is welcoming it.. and if i get banned.. meh...
but if you don't want spammers then why have all the topics "Yay I reached 1000 posts" again who gives a? and why does the webmaster have a countdown to 10,000 posts in his sig? Is it that important? Are you proud to have over 2000 "Your post has been moved" posts? .. Why when Andrew posts about something he diagrees with is the post locked afterwards? So no one can reply?
This is the first time in 3 years I have seen Andrew welcome change.. we shall see what changes.. Also I think the forum is the least of the NLSC's concerns.. the site is in terrible shape.. Most links are broken or dead.. It really is poorly maintained in my opinion.. I know you are just going to say.. "David is just saying that because he runs nbalive.org" "the rival site"..
Whatever.. but remember I was a member of the NLSC long before I joined .org and I still think the concept that Tim started all those years ago was a great idea. I just think now it is being poorly run.. that is my opinion.. you can just dismiss it as "bitter rivalry" or you can take it onboard and meet the challenge and improve the NLSC to what it should be. Its up to you..
Fri Jul 02, 2004 7:39 pm
From conversations I've had with various people, I have a feeling change is going to come this time around. We've gone on too long without a change, it's time we had one.
I'll make my apologies about my actions later. Be sure, I will make them and explain as to why I am making my apologies. I will explain all my actions, this isn't the place nor the time.
Moderator. That's my problem, not various moderators, just one. I don't think a site can be run properly when a moderator moderates by using favoritism. This has happened, please don't deny it.
Secondly, I've said this before, the grip is much too tight on the posters. It's too tight on where it shouldn't be tight and where it should be tight, it isn't.
What I mean to say is, harmless fun...a bit yakking off at the mouth, a bit of sarcasm shouldn't be locked down right away. Just because it has the potential to become a flame war, doesn't mean it will. Give the fellow posters a chance to step in and in a buddy'ly fashion say, shut the fuck up man. It isn't worth it. If someone like Shane tells me to just give it up, it's of no use bickering, I'll most likely (I say most likely because I'm hard headed) listen to him. Pff, it's dead with. No need to lock the topic, no need to see Mr. Mod & no reason for (unjust) punishment. (I'll get back to this in my explanation about my actions.)
I had summed up pretty well on MSN, the NLSC is like college, the students & the teachers.
Most of the "teachers" are relaxed and we can relate to them, making them just one of the guys. Yohance is just one of the guys, I can talk smack with him, he knows when we're messing around.
Mr Mod however, who wants to talk to him? See, it all has to do with the image we have folks. If Mr Mod can manage himself in some way, I'm all for him modding the forum. If he's not willing to change the way he is or atleast try, I guess I'm finished.
I'm glad I could talk you into opening this thread Andrew, we were under the impression that you were not open to suggestions (I wonder why...) I'm glad you were chill enough to forgive the shit I pulled of and actually listen to how I felt about my punishment. I'm glad you actually listened to everything I had to say.
Mr Mod here, just resorts to blocking people, I've jumped off the deep end he says.
*shrug* The moderation is one of the first things that must change. I'm glad others have come forward and said that the moderation is a problem. By keeping it quiet, we didn't help ourselves and we didnt help the forum. We decided we'd just up and leave, we didn't consider taking it up with Andrew for a simple reason, hey...he's the one who picked the Mod, he won't want to listen to us instead of us. Yet, we never actually tried.
My problem is quite clear, EG and his attitude of immense superiority. Please, spare me. You're either one of us or you're Mr. Mod. You can't be both. I'm not teaching EG to mod, but try and remember how things were before EG. Not all that bad. We were in no need for a super-hero calling himself Mr. Mod.
Jae, about the protection stuff, I'd like to talk this over with you in private. I've spoken to Andrew about this and in some way, some tiny way...he thinks I might have a point. Thus he created the thread to let us solve it, he's put it into our hands.
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one to have problems with moderation. I don't consider myself a vet or anything, vets are guys like Matthew, Shane, David and others, these guys are ancient, these are vets. When newbies like me have a problem with the moderation, it's probably the newbie's fault, but when vets such as the guys I mentioned have a problem, it's a definate problem.
It's a good thing we have been given the chance to solve this with suggestions, idea's and what not. It shows the NLSC has some faith left in it's posters.
So yeah, all in all...my suggestion to EG is: Get an attitude fix or give up your moderating duties. It can't continue this way. After Matthew, I left, after me someone else would leave, after him another...what would you be left with?
Once again, I'm gratefull to Andrew for re-instating my posting abilities.
I'll make my apologies about my actions later. Be sure, I will make them and explain as to why I am making my apologies. I will explain all my actions, this isn't the place nor the time.
Moderator. That's my problem, not various moderators, just one. I don't think a site can be run properly when a moderator moderates by using favoritism. This has happened, please don't deny it.
Secondly, I've said this before, the grip is much too tight on the posters. It's too tight on where it shouldn't be tight and where it should be tight, it isn't.
What I mean to say is, harmless fun...a bit yakking off at the mouth, a bit of sarcasm shouldn't be locked down right away. Just because it has the potential to become a flame war, doesn't mean it will. Give the fellow posters a chance to step in and in a buddy'ly fashion say, shut the fuck up man. It isn't worth it. If someone like Shane tells me to just give it up, it's of no use bickering, I'll most likely (I say most likely because I'm hard headed) listen to him. Pff, it's dead with. No need to lock the topic, no need to see Mr. Mod & no reason for (unjust) punishment. (I'll get back to this in my explanation about my actions.)
I had summed up pretty well on MSN, the NLSC is like college, the students & the teachers.
Most of the "teachers" are relaxed and we can relate to them, making them just one of the guys. Yohance is just one of the guys, I can talk smack with him, he knows when we're messing around.
Mr Mod however, who wants to talk to him? See, it all has to do with the image we have folks. If Mr Mod can manage himself in some way, I'm all for him modding the forum. If he's not willing to change the way he is or atleast try, I guess I'm finished.
I'm glad I could talk you into opening this thread Andrew, we were under the impression that you were not open to suggestions (I wonder why...) I'm glad you were chill enough to forgive the shit I pulled of and actually listen to how I felt about my punishment. I'm glad you actually listened to everything I had to say.
Mr Mod here, just resorts to blocking people, I've jumped off the deep end he says.
*shrug* The moderation is one of the first things that must change. I'm glad others have come forward and said that the moderation is a problem. By keeping it quiet, we didn't help ourselves and we didnt help the forum. We decided we'd just up and leave, we didn't consider taking it up with Andrew for a simple reason, hey...he's the one who picked the Mod, he won't want to listen to us instead of us. Yet, we never actually tried.
My problem is quite clear, EG and his attitude of immense superiority. Please, spare me. You're either one of us or you're Mr. Mod. You can't be both. I'm not teaching EG to mod, but try and remember how things were before EG. Not all that bad. We were in no need for a super-hero calling himself Mr. Mod.
Jae, about the protection stuff, I'd like to talk this over with you in private. I've spoken to Andrew about this and in some way, some tiny way...he thinks I might have a point. Thus he created the thread to let us solve it, he's put it into our hands.
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one to have problems with moderation. I don't consider myself a vet or anything, vets are guys like Matthew, Shane, David and others, these guys are ancient, these are vets. When newbies like me have a problem with the moderation, it's probably the newbie's fault, but when vets such as the guys I mentioned have a problem, it's a definate problem.
It's a good thing we have been given the chance to solve this with suggestions, idea's and what not. It shows the NLSC has some faith left in it's posters.
So yeah, all in all...my suggestion to EG is: Get an attitude fix or give up your moderating duties. It can't continue this way. After Matthew, I left, after me someone else would leave, after him another...what would you be left with?
Once again, I'm gratefull to Andrew for re-instating my posting abilities.
Fri Jul 02, 2004 7:49 pm
glad that things are working out after out in some way
but even I remember some days of the more "laid-back" moderating, and I remember when me and Slam Harder (yes I was a n00b back then (like I still am
) ) got in a fight against some other guys (no names mentioned). But that time the discussion DIDN't end in a locked thread, but pm:s and apologies and it all worked out
That was something
Fri Jul 02, 2004 7:49 pm
welcome back PJ, reactivating accounts that got banned for irrelevant shit is one step into the rite direction
but what about Homer? from what i know his account hasnt been reactivated yet...kinda weird...
but what about Homer? from what i know his account hasnt been reactivated yet...kinda weird...
Fri Jul 02, 2004 7:56 pm
Tuomas wrote:But that time the discussion DIDN't end in a locked thread, but pm:s and apologies and it all worked out
it did get locked, just checked it
this is a problem, but that time the conversation was tolerated longer
Fri Jul 02, 2004 11:30 pm
haha finally.. u guys are following my suggestions from that thread..
those threads were just waaay too full of hate/flames. andrew probably made this thread so that we could start out fresh.
Tuomas wrote:Tuomas wrote:But that time the discussion DIDN't end in a locked thread, but pm:s and apologies and it all worked out
it did get locked, just checked it
those threads were just waaay too full of hate/flames. andrew probably made this thread so that we could start out fresh.
Fri Jul 02, 2004 11:32 pm
I don't want to overstep my bounds, but EGarret needs a lesson in banning. He seems to be a bit trigger-happy these days. I know Homer and PJ have always had it in for eachother, and agree that they did cross the line a bit, but 2 weeks? ouch. Maybe 2 days. I know Homer and he's not the type to cross the line too much. PJ I don't know AS much, although he does seem a bit more fiery. I think warnings would have been fine.
Probation: I think a new type of punishment should be instituted. Probation should limit the ammount of posts per day or week or month if the user steps out of line. I know this is kind of weird, as I have never seen it in any other forum, but hey, that's just my opinion.
Moderator institution. I know and love all the Moderators but think that next time a Moderator is to be added, we, the people should be able to vote on it in a poll/thread. I don't know if this is routinely done, seeing as that I am fairly new to this forum, but feel that if it's not, it should be.
Contribution: I know that contributions ($) are always wanted, but there should be some sort of paypal account or address that we could send money in. At the end of the month, whoever has donated the most should get something in the ways of a prize. Nothing that costs money, like a special patch or something. I don't have much money, but I'd be willing to scrounge around under my carseats for some money to give to the great NLSC!
With the money, you could set up a hosting site only for contributers to host their patches. Not there own .com, that would be a little much, but a server so they can post their patches in, or have their own section.
That's my 2 cents, even though it seems like much more then 2.
Probation: I think a new type of punishment should be instituted. Probation should limit the ammount of posts per day or week or month if the user steps out of line. I know this is kind of weird, as I have never seen it in any other forum, but hey, that's just my opinion.
Moderator institution. I know and love all the Moderators
but think that next time a Moderator is to be added, we, the people should be able to vote on it in a poll/thread. I don't know if this is routinely done, seeing as that I am fairly new to this forum, but feel that if it's not, it should be.
Contribution: I know that contributions ($) are always wanted, but there should be some sort of paypal account or address that we could send money in. At the end of the month, whoever has donated the most should get something in the ways of a prize. Nothing that costs money, like a special patch or something. I don't have much money, but I'd be willing to scrounge around under my carseats for some money to give to the great NLSC!
With the money, you could set up a hosting site only for contributers to host their patches. Not there own .com, that would be a little much, but a server so they can post their patches in, or have their own section.
That's my 2 cents, even though it seems like much more then 2.
Fri Jul 02, 2004 11:45 pm
I pretty much agree with everything said. I have had no beef with EG, but I can see where it gets a little strange around the forums. I think you should put being a member/poster before you are a mod, not a mod before being a member/poster. Andreas Dahl, Qweet, James, and Yohance all put being a good member above being a mod. They contribute freely and don't go around locking and moving topics like crazy.
Also, this thread is a good idea because as I look down through NLSC issues, one of the only things I see that were suggested and took place were more smileys.
I think earlier in General Talk, when Jackal brought up every rule and explained how they were all violated most of the time was an eye-opener. (I saved the post on my PC in case anyone wants to see it.). I think the warnings should be in public.
Also, like someone else said, the moderating is inconsistent. The n00b jail thread got locked after 5? posts, but we had a whole thread on "Have you ever smoked weed" that never got locked.
And I think Jackal's and Homer's bans were unnecessary, especially not that long. It was just nitpicking pretty much on each others english, but it is not like any of the two speak %100 correct English. Then getting banned for 2 weeks?
Sometimes just letting all of the steam off like Jackal did is a step in the right direction. Let's hope this can be the second one.
Also, this thread is a good idea because as I look down through NLSC issues, one of the only things I see that were suggested and took place were more smileys.
I think earlier in General Talk, when Jackal brought up every rule and explained how they were all violated most of the time was an eye-opener. (I saved the post on my PC in case anyone wants to see it.). I think the warnings should be in public.
Also, like someone else said, the moderating is inconsistent. The n00b jail thread got locked after 5? posts, but we had a whole thread on "Have you ever smoked weed" that never got locked.
And I think Jackal's and Homer's bans were unnecessary, especially not that long. It was just nitpicking pretty much on each others english, but it is not like any of the two speak %100 correct English. Then getting banned for 2 weeks?
Sometimes just letting all of the steam off like Jackal did is a step in the right direction. Let's hope this can be the second one.
Sat Jul 03, 2004 12:26 am
Wellllll, I've been visiting the site since 98. This is a site about a game and I come for gamerelated stuff. In my opinion, as long as the nbalive-related stuff is relatively spamfree on the boards, all is good. I'm more of a reader then a poster but I have noticed topics on all the nba live related stuff is reasonably 'clean'.
So some people like to argue, so what, it never stopped me from posting or reading as long as I can read and post about nbalive.
The forums have a lot of content, so what if some people flame. The content is there. If someone goes completely overboard, ban him or delete his posts.
The way I see it, the people that work hard at this site should only watch over making these forums a good source of nba live information and discussion. I can't see how people bashing eachother at general talk is going to diminuish the great value this forum has towards nba live related material. So why invest your time in controlling individuals who are looking for some outrageous and sometimes interesting discussions or some people who are just downright childish. Those people will always roam the boards, no matter what rules you imply and how you enforce those rules. I think it's wiser to focus on maintaining the value the forums have towards nba live.
This topic is just evidence that time that could have been invested into the main goal of the site is being wasted on an overvalued part of this site that has nothing to do with NBA Live. I think maybe Andrew and others have lost sight of the main goals. There can't be any fun in policing over generally childish or irrelevant discussions, so why not spend less time policing and more time adding content.
And I can't wait to play the newest rosters and the 95-96 patch...
Yes I'm talking from a selfish nbalive fan's point of view. But then again, this site is for fans of nba live.
So some people like to argue, so what, it never stopped me from posting or reading as long as I can read and post about nbalive.
The forums have a lot of content, so what if some people flame. The content is there. If someone goes completely overboard, ban him or delete his posts.
The way I see it, the people that work hard at this site should only watch over making these forums a good source of nba live information and discussion. I can't see how people bashing eachother at general talk is going to diminuish the great value this forum has towards nba live related material. So why invest your time in controlling individuals who are looking for some outrageous and sometimes interesting discussions or some people who are just downright childish. Those people will always roam the boards, no matter what rules you imply and how you enforce those rules. I think it's wiser to focus on maintaining the value the forums have towards nba live.
This topic is just evidence that time that could have been invested into the main goal of the site is being wasted on an overvalued part of this site that has nothing to do with NBA Live. I think maybe Andrew and others have lost sight of the main goals. There can't be any fun in policing over generally childish or irrelevant discussions, so why not spend less time policing and more time adding content.
And I can't wait to play the newest rosters and the 95-96 patch...
Yes I'm talking from a selfish nbalive fan's point of view. But then again, this site is for fans of nba live.
Sat Jul 03, 2004 1:21 am
I'm going to have to second what Hefty said about the celebration threads. It's spam celebrating spam.
Sat Jul 03, 2004 1:42 am
First of all, I have't seen any of the posts that Andrew said have now been deleted. I don't know what it was that PJ and Homer got banned over. I don't really know what made Andrew create this thread in the first place. A little preamble would help...
Seeing as to how you're open to suggestions... how about a "Banned Users" thread like they have at the .org forums where the mods state the reason for the ban, length of the ban etc? Don't give me all that yap about "copying this copying that". I think this would be a good thing to have in a forum and kudos to the guys at .org for coming up with it in the first place.
Anyway, I do think that the moderation has gotten a little bit out of hand lately. I wasn't aware that moderators could ban users on this forum. In my opinion, that should be left to the site admin.
And like someone already said, I'd like to see some new moderators added to the forum. At the moment, I think there are 5-6 moderators out of which, hardly any show any kind of interest in doing their job. Heck, I bet Old School Fool would make a better moderator than some of the oh-so-mighty ones at the pedestal now.
The only person I can think of right now that would make a good moderator is Metsis... imo one of the more quality posters around.
I don't like EXPLOSIVO's idea about "contributions" in the form of money to the website. That would basically mean paying someone for getting a patch done... which is totally against the spirit of the community.
Anyway, it's good to see that you're willing to listen to the members of the forum. It's about time.
Seeing as to how you're open to suggestions... how about a "Banned Users" thread like they have at the .org forums where the mods state the reason for the ban, length of the ban etc? Don't give me all that yap about "copying this copying that". I think this would be a good thing to have in a forum and kudos to the guys at .org for coming up with it in the first place.
Anyway, I do think that the moderation has gotten a little bit out of hand lately. I wasn't aware that moderators could ban users on this forum. In my opinion, that should be left to the site admin.
And like someone already said, I'd like to see some new moderators added to the forum. At the moment, I think there are 5-6 moderators out of which, hardly any show any kind of interest in doing their job. Heck, I bet Old School Fool would make a better moderator than some of the oh-so-mighty ones at the pedestal now.
The only person I can think of right now that would make a good moderator is Metsis... imo one of the more quality posters around.
I don't like EXPLOSIVO's idea about "contributions" in the form of money to the website. That would basically mean paying someone for getting a patch done... which is totally against the spirit of the community.
Anyway, it's good to see that you're willing to listen to the members of the forum.
It's about time.
Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:00 am
lol. whut's wrong with old school? . but yeah i agree with that "banned users" thread. it sounds good.
. but yeah i agree with that "banned users" thread. it sounds good.
Sat Jul 03, 2004 4:35 am
I don't have any beef with anyone here.
I haven't been posting here much either. But from what I saw, things were not looking good. When I joined back in January, this place was pretty good. Especially the NBA talk and the General talk. I loved the discussions I had about how Yao Ming will evenutally be the best player in the NBA and other discussions about Kobe Bryant. The one thing I dislike about this place is whenever we bring up the name "Kobe" in a thread, then it gets locked. Like Kobe8Mvp said before, nobody notices the "Kobe thread" because it's a sticky and it's been there for such a long time. We really don't need it there because half the time, I don't even know what discussions people are having about Kobe. I have to go back 4 or 5 pages to see where everybody is currently at. I think we should get rid of the Kobe thread because it is discriminating to him. I don't see a thread of any other players. And there are so many constructive arguments about Kobe that pop up in other threads. And what's wrong with that???
Another issue I have with this site is that the threads get locked too quickly. I remember when I first came here, I actually enjoyed reading what people were saying. And now-a-days, everything's getting locked. Like that discussion about MJ vs. Kobe @ 25, why did it get locked?? It was such an interesting discussion. Even Andrew himself posted in it and I did not get to refute my position.
As you can see, my main problem with the site is that the threads get locked too early and most of the time, unnecessarily. And that is starting to make me lose interest in this site. When discussions are being killed like that, it makes this site boring. It's so boring that I can't even think of anything to post. Before, there were always some intriguing discussions and it was fun to post in those threads. Now everything is dull and boring. No discussions about who is better than who. And if someone mentions the name "Kobe," then the thread gets locked. Now I don't have any beef with Egarret, but I agree with what somebody mentioned above. We need to have a vote as to who will be the moderator. This should be an environment where we cannot be scared to post whatever is in our mind.
And last but not least, I know Andrew is in a difficult position. I know some people are saying stuff about this forum. But in my opinion, It is very hard to run a place like this. And I feel that Andrew deserves to be commended for running this place for so many years. Andrew, I just want to let you know that I really respect you. And this place is still in great shape. And I hope that you look at what people have said in this thread as constructive critisism. There are no hard feelings. THANK YOU for running this place where all NBA LIVE users can get together and form a community. Without this place, I don't know where I would be able to download face patces and learn how to use DBF editors and all the cool stuff. This forum is now a part of my life and the lives of so many others in our community. Now, the NBA Talk and General Talk threads might not be in the best shape, but all the other threads are awesome. And with slight adjustments, this can be the same place it used to be. Maybe even better. So keep it up Andrew.
I haven't been posting here much either. But from what I saw, things were not looking good. When I joined back in January, this place was pretty good. Especially the NBA talk and the General talk. I loved the discussions I had about how Yao Ming will evenutally be the best player in the NBA and other discussions about Kobe Bryant. The one thing I dislike about this place is whenever we bring up the name "Kobe" in a thread, then it gets locked. Like Kobe8Mvp said before, nobody notices the "Kobe thread" because it's a sticky and it's been there for such a long time. We really don't need it there because half the time, I don't even know what discussions people are having about Kobe. I have to go back 4 or 5 pages to see where everybody is currently at. I think we should get rid of the Kobe thread because it is discriminating to him. I don't see a thread of any other players. And there are so many constructive arguments about Kobe that pop up in other threads. And what's wrong with that???
Another issue I have with this site is that the threads get locked too quickly. I remember when I first came here, I actually enjoyed reading what people were saying. And now-a-days, everything's getting locked. Like that discussion about MJ vs. Kobe @ 25, why did it get locked?? It was such an interesting discussion. Even Andrew himself posted in it and I did not get to refute my position.
As you can see, my main problem with the site is that the threads get locked too early and most of the time, unnecessarily. And that is starting to make me lose interest in this site. When discussions are being killed like that, it makes this site boring. It's so boring that I can't even think of anything to post. Before, there were always some intriguing discussions and it was fun to post in those threads. Now everything is dull and boring. No discussions about who is better than who. And if someone mentions the name "Kobe," then the thread gets locked. Now I don't have any beef with Egarret, but I agree with what somebody mentioned above. We need to have a vote as to who will be the moderator. This should be an environment where we cannot be scared to post whatever is in our mind.
And last but not least, I know Andrew is in a difficult position. I know some people are saying stuff about this forum. But in my opinion, It is very hard to run a place like this. And I feel that Andrew deserves to be commended for running this place for so many years. Andrew, I just want to let you know that I really respect you. And this place is still in great shape. And I hope that you look at what people have said in this thread as constructive critisism. There are no hard feelings. THANK YOU for running this place where all NBA LIVE users can get together and form a community. Without this place, I don't know where I would be able to download face patces and learn how to use DBF editors and all the cool stuff. This forum is now a part of my life and the lives of so many others in our community. Now, the NBA Talk and General Talk threads might not be in the best shape, but all the other threads are awesome. And with slight adjustments, this can be the same place it used to be. Maybe even better. So keep it up Andrew.
Sat Jul 03, 2004 9:43 am
Mr. Shane wrote:The focus of the message boards needs to return to NBA Live and to distance itself just a bit from the NBA and general talk (which is just stupid bullshit 90% of the time). While those areas are good for variation, there's so many posters in the NBA section who probably don't even play Live or download the rosters or patches or anything
Ripper wrote:I think maybe Andrew and others have lost sight of the main goals. There can't be any fun in policing over generally childish or irrelevant discussions, so why not spend less time policing and more time adding content.
I think that's a good point. The NBA Live forums aren't usually the most troublesome, and many of the rules have been devised to cut down on flames in the General forums.
ruffryder8 wrote:Andreas Dahl, Qweet, James, and Yohance all put being a good member above being a mod. They contribute freely and don't go around locking and moving topics like crazy.
I'll come back to the locking topics later, because that certainly is an issue, but as far as moving topics go, that's just to keep things organised. There wouldn't be much point having different sections if any topic could be posted anywhere.
ruffryder8 wrote:Also, like someone else said, the moderating is inconsistent. The n00b jail thread got locked after 5? posts, but we had a whole thread on "Have you ever smoked weed" that never got locked.
That's a fair call, I can understand the complaint. But it really depends on the topic. I didn't really know what to make of that thread, so I left it to the judgement of another moderator - EG came along first. The difference in topics is that one was a general interest topic, while the other didn't seem to have a purpose.
ruffryder8 wrote:And I think Jackal's and Homer's bans were unnecessary, especially not that long. It was just nitpicking pretty much on each others english, but it is not like any of the two speak %100 correct English. Then getting banned for 2 weeks?
Others have brought up similar points, I don't mean to keep picking on you by quoting you ruffryder.
That wasn't just the result of that thread, basically a decision based on the fact Jackal and Homer have been exchanging shots for a while now. Perhaps it wasn't a correct decision, but the reason behind it wasn't quite so petty.ruffryder8 wrote:Sometimes just letting all of the steam off like Jackal did is a step in the right direction. Let's hope this can be the second one.
It was still a very immature thing to do, and quite hurtful as it became quite personal. I am open to appeal, but I can appreciate that it may not have seemed that way.
David wrote:Funny how when I said all this "over modding" was stupid months ago I was banned for "insubordination" .... you really want to improve the NLSC then that should be the first thing to go.. the mods/webmaster of this site are no "better" or superirior to any other poster.. they should be treated with respect I agree but people should be alowed to critizise them without fear of deletetion etc.. "insubordination".. seriously..
It's not so much not being able to speak out, it's more a matter of being civil. If someone is warned for flaming, and they respond with "Fuck you, moderator!", that's not really constructive criticism, is it? I don't object to constructive criticism, but I admit that I take exception to snide remarks and personal attacks. When the basic message isn't just "I feel there's a problem with the moderating - you guys are too tight/leniant/inconsistent/whatever" but merely a personal attack, it's kind of hard to take it seriously.
About the word "insubordination" - when I was looking at some other forums to see what kind of rules might help control things in the General boards, that was one of the rules that I saw. It wasn't intended to suggest that the moderators are so much better than everyone else, but rather a concise way of saying someone is repeatedly ignoring warnings for poor behaviour.
David wrote:The mods complain about all the "spammers" and not posting useless posts but I think the mods are the biggest offenders on this forum.. What is the point of posting "Topic moved to" blah blah everytime a topic is moved? Who gives a? It is really annoying when you come onto the forum to read 50 new posts.. and 25 of those are from mods saying "post moved to" etc..
I see your point. I felt that I needed to post a brief explanation/notice about for the posts that are being moved, but if that is unnecessary, it's something that we don't have to do.
David wrote:Also I am going to criticize Andrew because he says he is welcoming it.. and if i get banned.. meh... but if you don't want spammers then why have all the topics "Yay I reached 1000 posts" again who gives a? and why does the webmaster have a countdown to 10,000 posts in his sig? Is it that important? Are you proud to have over 2000 "Your post has been moved" posts? ..
It's a joke, a parody of the board the Pistons had in the 2004 Playoffs. It was meant as a joke, though I can see how it's a little hypocritical.
David wrote:This is the first time in 3 years I have seen Andrew welcome change.. we shall see what changes.. Also I think the forum is the least of the NLSC's concerns.. the site is in terrible shape.. Most links are broken or dead.. It really is poorly maintained in my opinion.. I know you are just going to say.. "David is just saying that because he runs nbalive.org" "the rival site".. Whatever.. but remember I was a member of the NLSC long before I joined .org and I still think the concept that Tim started all those years ago was a great idea. I just think now it is being poorly run.. that is my opinion.. you can just dismiss it as "bitter rivalry" or you can take it onboard and meet the challenge and improve the NLSC to what it should be. Its up to you..
I've always been open to suggestions, but I probably have not done a very good job of showing it. I've always been open to appeals, but attacking me personally is not really making an appeal.
Broken links are obviously no use to anyone. That's something that I'd like to handle with the addition of more staff.
Jackal wrote:*shrug* The moderation is one of the first things that must change. I'm glad others have come forward and said that the moderation is a problem. By keeping it quiet, we didn't help ourselves and we didnt help the forum. We decided we'd just up and leave, we didn't consider taking it up with Andrew for a simple reason, hey...he's the one who picked the Mod, he won't want to listen to us instead of us. Yet, we never actually tried.
(Emphasis in the quote is mine) I can understand why you felt that I would not be open to an appeal...but the fact you jumped to that conclusion makes what transpired somewhat hasty. How could you know for sure that I wouldn't listen to you if you never asked? I know, you expected the worst, and some of my actions are to blame for that. But I think confirmation of your fears would have justified your actions as a last resort.
To throw out a historical example, Ho Chi Minh did not adopt communism and attempt radical revolution in Vietnam until all other means of liberating his country failed. When it became clear that no one was willing to give Vietnam freedom - after a couple of international conferences where the issue was raised - he turned to more drastic measures.
Just the way I see it. But what's done is done, and I think it is in our best interests to resolve our differences and improve the forum, not only so that all the current members feel better about this but the forum is a better place that new members want to be a part of.
EXPLOSIVO! wrote:Probation: I think a new type of punishment should be instituted. Probation should limit the ammount of posts per day or week or month if the user steps out of line. I know this is kind of weird, as I have never seen it in any other forum, but hey, that's just my opinion.
It's interesting, but I get the feeling it would basically be the same as banning or suspension. From what I've read in this thread, most forum members would prefer the last resort moderator action (banning, suspension, etc) to truly be last resort measures, with a member really having to overstep the line for such measures to be considered.
hotshot wrote:Seeing as to how you're open to suggestions... how about a "Banned Users" thread like they have at the .org forums where the mods state the reason for the ban, length of the ban etc? Don't give me all that yap about "copying this copying that". I think this would be a good thing to have in a forum and kudos to the guys at .org for coming up with it in the first place.
I'm open to that idea, but last time a suggestion was made that was taken from a feature on nbalive.org, a couple of the nbalive.org team members openly criticised us for stealing the idea. I'm prepared to adopt features that make the forum better, but I don't want to cause any more NLSC vs nbalive.org problems.
One way or another, the warnings should be more public and more numerous before drastic measures are taken; I certainly get that message, and I agree. I was not aware that it was causing such problems because I was never approached about it. It's not a matter of not wanting to see problems, it's a matter of being shown the problem. But again, what's done is done.
propulsionDJ wrote:The one thing I dislike about this place is whenever we bring up the name "Kobe" in a thread, then it gets locked. Like Kobe8Mvp said before, nobody notices the "Kobe thread" because it's a sticky and it's been there for such a long time. We really don't need it there because half the time, I don't even know what discussions people are having about Kobe. I have to go back 4 or 5 pages to see where everybody is currently at. I think we should get rid of the Kobe thread because it is discriminating to him. I don't see a thread of any other players. And there are so many constructive arguments about Kobe that pop up in other threads. And what's wrong with that???
The Kobe thread was created to control the amount of discussions that were all turning into Kobe related topics. It has been attempted on some other forums (I believe RealGM was one) with players such as Kobe and LeBron.
Perhaps it's time to close or at least unsticky that thread and relax that rule. The only thing is, if 10 different threads spring up about the same Kobe-related topic, that's a little excessive. If that should happen, I think we mods are in the right to either lock or delete those additional topics. But I think people are mature enough to handle the responsibility of keeping down the number of identical topics, so I'm not greatly concerned.
propulsionDJ wrote:As you can see, my main problem with the site is that the threads get locked too early and most of the time, unnecessarily. And that is starting to make me lose interest in this site. When discussions are being killed like that, it makes this site boring.
Told you I'd get back to that point.
I'm certainly guilty of this, unfortunately some of my experiences as admin have resulted in a knee-jerk reaction to posts that are starting to turn ugly. Deleting the offending posts and issuing more warnings about flaming and going off-topic - basically, moderating the discussion so that it stays on topic - sounds like a better idea.
propulsionDJ wrote:And last but not least, I know Andrew is in a difficult position. I know some people are saying stuff about this forum. But in my opinion, It is very hard to run a place like this. And I feel that Andrew deserves to be commended for running this place for so many years. Andrew, I just want to let you know that I really respect you. And this place is still in great shape. And I hope that you look at what people have said in this thread as constructive critisism.
Thank you for the kind words and vote of confidence.
But I realise that the problems are not solved yet. The rules and policies still need to be amended. I want to hear more concerns and ideas for changes.
I'd like to thank everyone for keeping this civil so far. It shows that you do care about the site and are interested in providing feedback that is beneficial to the site. I really do appreciate it.