Moderator: Forum Administrators
vijayjohn wrote:None of the items in red deserve an immediate ban without prior warning.
dEhiN wrote:vijayjohn wrote:None of the items in red deserve an immediate ban without prior warning.
Why do you think so?
These things are clearly in red in the policy, which usually means something severe.
Why do you think if someone posts personal information about someone else, or graphic sexual stuff, they should first get an official warning and only a ban after a second infraction?
We can't really have a discussion about changing policy without an explanation of why someone thinks something should be changed.
Johanna wrote:Or did you mean that we should give people a warning and if they don't care and there's a second infraction, we should give them yet another warning. OK, other forums use that model so we could switch to it too. But sooner or later we need to ban someone who doesn't listen or the forum would become completely impossible to moderate.
vijayjohn wrote:Johanna wrote:Or did you mean that we should give people a warning and if they don't care and there's a second infraction, we should give them yet another warning. OK, other forums use that model so we could switch to it too. But sooner or later we need to ban someone who doesn't listen or the forum would become completely impossible to moderate.
That sounds much more reasonable to me.
linguoboy wrote:What buy-in do we have from the moderation team on this? Because if they're not committed to reading these suggestions, evaluating them, and actually implementing some of them, I don't see any point to contributing to this thread.
linguoboy wrote:How does the procedure to modify the existing forum policy work anyhow? Luís said it was decided by majority vote of the mods, but what does that mean exactly? 50% + 1? Of which group of mods? Does the board owner have an absolute veto over any approved changes?
linguoboy wrote:Because, again, if we need more than 50% of the mods to approve a change before it takes effect and we don't have at least half of them willing to read, review, and discuss our proposals, it's pointless to make them.
dEhiN wrote:If we were to change things so that there's no infraction that would immediately result in a ban - even a short-term, temporary one - and instead we issued warnings, what do you think is a reasonable amount of warnings to issue before a ban is issued?
Also, as far as I understand the current forum policy and practice, warnings are issued privately.
Do you think that warnings should be publicly made?
The devil's advocate to this is that not everyone might want all their peers to know they've been warned; it can be embarrassing.
From what I recall reading in the discussion on the Random thread, you (and Vijay) expressed a fair amount of distrust in the moderation team in regard to the interaction between those on the team and everyone else. Even when Luís, Car, and Johanna all expressly said that there would be no repercussions for anyone complaining, their words were met with disbelief from Vijay
So, rather than one (or all) of us suggesting something, perhaps a starting point could be what you/Vijay would consider to be a show of good faith that we, the mod team, do want to change?
I'm not singling out you or Vijay
and hopefully there will be others involved in this policy discussion besides you two and the mod team
It's just that you two were the only ones in the Random thread discussion who shared grievances.
vijayjohn wrote:I don't know; I can't tell you how to do your job, only try to make some suggestions, and I would rather defer to someone who already moderates a forum with such a policy. I will venture a guess of twenty. That seems more reasonable to me than one to three.
vijayjohn wrote:Then IMO they should be able and allowed to request this from the admins and global mods and not be punished in the process of requesting it, regardless of how disrespectful the admins and/or global mods supposedly find them to be. This means, among other things, that the link that banned users are provided in case they want to contact them should be valid and lead to an operational e-mail address. This was not the case when I tried to appeal my own ban, and I find no reason to believe that it has changed since then.
vijayjohn wrote:I am willing to post the full text of what I wrote in my e-mails to the admins and global mods at the time to prove it.
vijayjohn wrote:If the admins and global mods can offer convincing and consistent evidence that they will not ban us - something that they have never done - then and only then can we rest assured that we will not be punished. Otherwise, no matter how many times they insist today that we won't be banned, they could change their minds about banning us tomorrow, and we would be helpless. They don't face any threat from us since we don't have any authority over them.
vijayjohn wrote:Honestly, I think we are the only ones left and everyone else with grievances to share has already been driven out by the harsh moderating style on this forum.
dEhiN wrote:Even when Luís, Car, and Johanna all expressly said that there would be no repercussions for anyone complaining, their words were met with disbelief from Vijay and sarcasm from you.
dEhiN wrote:vijayjohn wrote:Honestly, I think we are the only ones left and everyone else with grievances to share has already been driven out by the harsh moderating style on this forum.
That's possible; if that's the case, that's a shame. However, there's also another possibility: not everyone who has been around for several years or more sees the moderating style of this forum as harsh. A third possibility is also that others who had grievances in the past have found a way to resolve their grievances without leaving this forum.
1.1 Do not choose an offensive username.
1.2 You are allowed to have only 1 account. If you create any others, they will be banned and there will be consequences. If you have a deactivated account, see 1.6; you are to ask for that to be reactivated instead of creating a new one.
1.3 Contact the forum administrators or global moderators via PM if you want to change your username. It may only be changed once in any 6 month period, and three times in a 2 year period.
1.4 If you for any reason can't log into the forum and need to contact the forum administrators and global moderators, send an e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
Ex. Your account is deactivated, you've forgotten your password and can't reset it using “I forgot my password”, or you're currently banned.
1.5 If you haven’t made any posts from your account and it's older than 2 months, your account may be deleted in an account purge, without your consent.
1.6 If you have made at least one post, you may deactivate your account by contacting the forum administrators or global moderators.
• This is is done instead of deleting an account, since deleting the account completely destroys the ability to follow threads.
• All it leaves is the account’s username. However, all posts will remain.
• Your account must remain deactivated for at least 6 months.
• You must contact the forum administrators or global moderators for reactivation. You can do so via the contact form or e-mail.
• If you discuss it with the forum administrators or global moderators first, deactivation for a period of less than 6 months is possible with a good reason.
2.1 General guidelines:
• Be nice to other members and visitors to the forum.
• Treat people the way you would want to be treated.
• Be civil, show respect for other members and their views.
• Use normal netiquette.
2.2 Do not:
• Ridicule, mock or insult other members.
• Post for the sole purpose of getting reactions from other members (in other words, do not troll).
• Fill the forum with a lot of meaningless posts.
• Speculate that someone is a troll or spammer or call their posts trolling or spam.
• Do any backseat moderating, that is to tell other members what to do or write, how to behave, that they are breaking the rules or should be banned.
2.3 Language - We do not censor language. Cursing is permitted as long as it is not used to offend another.
2.3.1 Examples of what is allowed:
• “That’s fucking great!”
• “This book is fucking stupid!”2.3.2 Examples of what is forbidden:
• “You’re a fucking idiot!”
• “Fuck you!”
2.4 If you think that someone is breaking the rules:
• Report the post, there is a button for that in the header of all posts.
• Do not comment on it or reply to it in the thread itself.
• Private messages are reported in the same manner as posts.
• Linking to a blog, personal or commercial website which contributes to a post or topic.
• Linking to a survey with an academic purpose, if you ask the forum administrators or global moderators for permission first.
• In signatures, links to non-commercial sites that have to do with languages.
• In signatures, links to a personal blog or website, as long as it’s non-commercial.
• Posts whose sole purpose is promoting any website or blog, non-commercial or otherwise.
• In signatures, links to commercial websites.
• Unauthorized posts whose sole purpose is getting answers for a survey.
• Private messages advertising commercial goods or services, as well as non-genuine romantic private messages, seeking to mislead another user.
• Joining for the sole purpose of promoting a website or a blog, non-commercial or otherwise.
4.1 Keep posts on topic, if you feel the need to discuss something that is not, do so where it is appropriate, or create a new thread. If a discussion goes off-topic for more than one page, the moderators may split it into a separate thread.
4.2 Do not post in old threads unless you have something that contributes to them. Similarly, do not create a new thread unless you have something to contribute about the topic.
4.3 Do not create a new thread if one already exists, however exceptions can be made for threads that are very outdated, and should be made for threads which have had their topic completely changed through off-topic posts.
4.4 Do not write posts with identical or very similar content in multiple sub-forums. If you want input from speakers of several different languages or people from several different countries, post it in the General Forum, the General Language Forum, or in one of their sub-forums, which one depends on the topic and type of thread.
• Using the given name of another user if it is already common knowledge.
• Posting the personal details of a non-user that are public knowledge.
Ex. “The President of the United States lives in the White House”, “Elvis lived at Graceland”.4.5.2 Forbidden:
• Posting another user’s personal information.
Ex. Account details, addresses, phone numbers, IP addresses, etc.
• Giving away another user’s identity without permission.
• Exchanging any personal details of a non-user that are not public knowledge.
Ex. “Zhang Ziyi, the lead actress in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon lives at [her address]”.
• Links to torrents or downloadable material in the public domain, or material to which the user owns the copyright.
• Explaining how torrents work for users who wish to download legal material.
• Links to streaming content which does not break any other terms.
• Discussions about piracy.4.6.2 Forbidden:
• Explaining how to obtain illegal or pirated material.
• Linking to downloadable illegal or pirated material.
Ex. Copyrighted books, films, music, software, etc.
• Non-sexual flirting, regardless of gender.
Ex. “You’re cute”, and “I’d take you out for dinner”.
• Posting sex-related posts in the appropriate thread.
Ex. The random threads, but not in threads with a specific, non-sexual subject.
• Clearly artistic historical works depicting nude people.4.7.2
• Sexual flirting.
• Graphic depictions of sex.
• Graphic depictions of body parts and fluids.
• Pictures or drawings that:
- are clearly pornographic
- show pubic hair (including the mons pubis if there is no hair)
- show nudity with the genitalia covered by a hand or object
- show exposed breasts
- show genitalia
4.8 Editing posts
• Correcting typos, spelling errors and grammatical errors.
• Clarifications of what you meant, before too many have answered.4.8.2
• Deleting all of the content.
• Twisting the content so that the actual meaning of it becomes something else.
4.8.3 The ability to edit your posts will be taken away for a year should these rules be continuously broken or ignored.
• Posting a picture which you hold the right to, unless another Unilang member is visible in it, in which case you need that member’s
• Posting a picture which you don’t hold the right to if you have been given permission by the person who does.
• Posting a picture belonging to the free domain.
5. Private messages
5.1 The rules for behavior on the forum also apply to private messages.
• Forwarding a private message to the forum administrators and global moderators if a rule violation is suspected.5.3
• Posting any private message on the forum without expressed consent by the author.
linguoboy wrote:Because--as Vijay has stated repeatedly at this point--the moderating team has made this promise to him before and broken it. I don't understand why you don't understand how that leads to a situation where we don't have trust in the promises of the moderation team.
dEhiN wrote:Discussions on forum administration (of which policy falls under) and any voting is done by the global moderation team, which means all global mods and forum admins. So basically all the blue and green guys. The language forum mods (the purple guys) are only responsible for the moderation of their respective language forum(s). The initial delineation, from what I understand, of global mod vs forum admin was that the global mod group was created to help the forum admins out with general moderation duties: moderation of the general forums, helping language forum mods when necessary, and moderation of any language forums that don't have a language forum mod. The forum admins would then be able to focus on actual administration of stuff. However, I'm not sure if there was ever a split of access and responsibility from the start, but currently the two groups are effectively the same in both access and responsibility. (I say effectively because as far as I can tell, there is no difference whatsoever in both aspects, but perhaps there is some technicality I'm not aware of).
linguoboy wrote:Last time I was banned (July, 2016)
dEhiN wrote:hopefully there will be others involved in this policy discussion besides you two and the mod team.
If we were to change things so that there's no infraction that would immediately result in a ban - even a short-term, temporary one - and instead we issued warnings, what do you think is a reasonable amount of warnings to issue before a ban is issued?
Also, as far as I understand the current forum policy and practice, warnings are issued privately. Which, if so, would mean that others are not privy to who gets a warning. So, let's say we have a policy change that says 3 warnings and then a ban. If someone gets 3 warnings and then continues to break policy, they would get a ban. But to everyone around them, it might appear that they were banned randomly for no reason. Would you like to see that changed? Do you think that warnings should be publicly made? (The devil's advocate to this is that not everyone might want all their peers to know they've been warned; it can be embarrassing).
But not everyone might want others to know why they've been banned.
Especially considering that the current policy allows for short-term bans wherein the banned person can return to the forum after their ban is over. They might come back and be embarrassed to find out that all their peers know why there were banned. Would it not be better to only show who has been banned (and perhaps for how long)?
If you don't have any trust whatsoever left in the promises or the word of the mod team, then what recourse is there? From my recollection, when this sort of thing happens offline - where two parties reach an impasse due to mistrust - a third-party negotiator is called in; someone who both parties independently trust, but who is impartial to the outcome.
kevin wrote:dEhiN wrote:hopefully there will be others involved in this policy discussion besides you two and the mod team.
I don't want to become too much invested in forum politics, but okay, I'll share my opinion on the questions you asked.
2.3 Language - We do not censor language. Cursing is permitted as long as it is not used to offend another.
Irusia wrote:Is allowing swearing really necessary?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest