Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Recent changes to Health and Relationships forums

Announcements Posted on
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    I will break down each point and why it will cause more problems than good.



    An insult isn't defined in your site rules. What one person may deem an insult, another person may not. This is completely respective of the environment said person was brought up. You should really have a strict outline in place defining which are offensive terms and what is classed as an insult to stop unfair situations arising. Don't forget, some people pay money to use this site.



    Again, trolling is not definitely set. What one moderator may deem trolling, another moderator may not. Its totally down to the mentality of the reader and their approach to whats presented to them. Also, whats stopping certain mods taking personal agenda's against certain members straight away to get them banned? I'd like to know this please.



    Spam isn't defined. People have been warned for posting a picture in humour yet another member posting the same picture elsewhere hasn't been warned. Why is this allowed to happen? I agree that pornographic images or anything of that sort should be dealt with abruptly but again, judging by your site rules, there is no direct definition of spam.



    What is stopping moderators giving out strikes to get rid of certain members purely because they don't like them or have a disagreement with them? Please, I'd like to know your plan of action to stop this happening as inevitably this is becoming a bit of a dictatorship. Surely, TSR should be a democracy in its ways where people have freedom in what they do to a certain extent just like the UK. You even have a moderator called democracy, use his name as an example for your ways.



    What about helpful medical diagrams that can help fellow members? This is absurd and again you are letting the actions of a minority ruin the experience for the majority, which is wrong. The trolls have won if thats the case.


    Surely, if you're going to impose strict moderation you need a strict quota of definition for what is being moderated. Otherwise you'll have moderators unknowingly enforcing things purely because they think its against site rules. All this is moderators getting more control and becoming a dictator like forum where the members are controlled. Its beyond ridiculous and stops freedom of speech in a way. I will campaign against this.

    :fuhrer:
    I agree. :adore:
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    I will break down each point and why it will cause more problems than good.



    An insult isn't defined in your site rules. What one person may deem an insult, another person may not. This is completely respective of the environment said person was brought up. You should really have a strict outline in place defining which are offensive terms and what is classed as an insult to stop unfair situations arising. Don't forget, some people pay money to use this site.



    Again, trolling is not definitely set. What one moderator may deem trolling, another moderator may not. Its totally down to the mentality of the reader and their approach to whats presented to them. Also, whats stopping certain mods taking personal agenda's against certain members straight away to get them banned? I'd like to know this please.



    Spam isn't defined. People have been warned for posting a picture in humour yet another member posting the same picture elsewhere hasn't been warned. Why is this allowed to happen? I agree that pornographic images or anything of that sort should be dealt with abruptly but again, judging by your site rules, there is no direct definition of spam.



    What is stopping moderators giving out strikes to get rid of certain members purely because they don't like them or have a disagreement with them? Please, I'd like to know your plan of action to stop this happening as inevitably this is becoming a bit of a dictatorship. Surely, TSR should be a democracy in its ways where people have freedom in what they do to a certain extent just like the UK. You even have a moderator called democracy, use his name as an example for your ways.



    What about helpful medical diagrams that can help fellow members? This is absurd and again you are letting the actions of a minority ruin the experience for the majority, which is wrong. The trolls have won if thats the case.


    Surely, if you're going to impose strict moderation you need a strict quota of definition for what is being moderated. Otherwise you'll have moderators unknowingly enforcing things purely because they think its against site rules. All this is moderators getting more control and becoming a dictator like forum where the members are controlled. Its beyond ridiculous and stops freedom of speech in a way. I will campaign against this.

    :fuhrer:

    Couldn't agree more :adore:
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I suppose the main thing I'll say at this point is that no moderator would ever be allowed to pick a target and get them unfairly banned; we have checks in place to stop this kind of thing.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I love the idea for the diffferent sub-forums, not too sure if the ban on images is necessary when they could just be moderated?
    • 24 followers
    Offline

    (Original post by AreYouDizzeeBlud_x)
    I will break down each point and why it will cause more problems than good.

    An insult isn't defined in your site rules. What one person may deem an insult, another person may not. This is completely respective of the environment said person was brought up. You should really have a strict outline in place defining which are offensive terms and what is classed as an insult to stop unfair situations arising. Don't forget, some people pay money to use this site.

    Again, trolling is not definitely set. What one moderator may deem trolling, another moderator may not. Its totally down to the mentality of the reader and their approach to whats presented to them. Also, whats stopping certain mods taking personal agenda's against certain members straight away to get them banned? I'd like to know this please.

    Spam isn't defined. People have been warned for posting a picture in humour yet another member posting the same picture elsewhere hasn't been warned. Why is this allowed to happen? I agree that pornographic images or anything of that sort should be dealt with abruptly but again, judging by your site rules, there is no direct definition of spam.
    If you actually bothered to read the rules it says to "follow the spirit of the follows than the exact wording of them."

    this tbh, refutes everything you have said.

    What is stopping moderators giving out strikes to get rid of certain members purely because they don't like them or have a disagreement with them? Please, I'd like to know your plan of action to stop this happening as inevitably this is becoming a bit of a dictatorship. Surely, TSR should be a democracy in its ways where people have freedom in what they do to a certain extent just like the UK. You even have a moderator called democracy, use his name as an example for your ways.
    Actually no. The users who cause a disrupt in H&R will be ones who are likely to be affected. Simply be helpful and why would we ban you?

    There really is no disliking here. And no, no one was ever banned from TSR or any of its forums because they were "disliked".

    What about helpful medical diagrams that can help fellow members? This is absurd and again you are letting the actions of a minority ruin the experience for the majority, which is wrong. The trolls have won if thats the case.
    Actually no, helpful medical diagrams such as those explaining the anatomy of a penis to someone who thinks he might have erectile dysfunction?

    Surely, if you're going to impose strict moderation you need a strict quota of definition for what is being moderated. Otherwise you'll have moderators unknowingly enforcing things purely because they think its against site rules. All this is moderators getting more control and becoming a dictator like forum where the members are controlled. Its beyond ridiculous and stops freedom of speech in a way. I will campaign against this.
    Just remember, moderators take decisions as a team.

    H&R is to ask for advice by the way, or post an opinion on a subject related to the sub-forum. We ask you to be civil. Spamming for rep isn't being that.

    :fuhrer:
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'm pretty sure this is how Nazi Germany started.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangoh)
    read the thread....




    such as... if your allowed to mention them....?
    Well, AAM and AASM is the obvious answer but the supermods and admins keep an eye on us in general as well.
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Thanks for ruining the forum moderators!
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by I am Nick Clegg)
    I'm pretty sure this is how Nazi Germany started.
    Main difference being that the Allies haven't forced us to give up the Rhineland and our army... there's also a notable lack of Hitler-like figures, as everything we do is done as a team.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I am definitely in favour of breaking H&R down, but I feel that some aspects of it have been rushed through or improperly considered with regards to the moderation.

    Instead of preventing the posting of images inline, why not just pre-moderate them? You talk about the new moderators that have been brought in so I think the resources are there - if you prevent images from being embedded or attached, people will just post links to stuff offsite. At that point, all bets are off so better to keep it above ground and carefully monitored.

    (Original post by S-man10)
    If you actually bothered to read the rules it says to "follow the spirit of the follows than the exact wording of them."
    In other words, they're open to interpretation. Many would consider this to be part of the problem.

    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a_t)
    Thanks for ruining the forum moderators!
    We'll see how it goes, shall we?
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Why no images? That's what makes it funny
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ch0llima)
    I am definitely in favour of breaking H&R down, but I feel that some aspects of it have been rushed through or improperly considered with regards to the moderation.
    We have discussed it at great length and have gone through about 5 different proposed structures before deciding on this one. It's definitely not rushed.
    Instead of preventing the posting of images inline, why not just pre-moderate them? You talk about the new moderators that have been brought in so I think the resources are there - if you prevent images from being embedded or attached, people will just post links to stuff offsite. At that point, all bets are off so better to keep it above ground and carefully monitored.
    It's not possible to pre-moderate images, sadly.

    In other words, they're open to interpretation. Many would consider this to be part of the problem.
    Perhaps, but it also gives us the flexibility to deal with people intent on causing trouble in a calculated manner.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangoh)
    What if the supermods & admins don't like us, I get that expression of some supermods & 1 admin
    As paid employees of Acumen they would lose their job if they abused their positions.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fleur de lis)
    We did consider adding 'and Emotional Wellbeing' to the title, but decided against it in the end. Do you think something along those lines would help?
    How do you define what it takes for someone to get a "strike"? Also can we fight against any strikes we get.
    • 21 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by I am Nick Clegg)
    I'm pretty sure this is how Nazi Germany started.
    Agreed.

    They'll be asking us to provide photographic evidence that we've got blonde hair and blue eyes next to stay as a member or sign up.

    :fuhrer:

    Fight The TSR Dictatorship.

    Freedom Of Speech!
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RightSaidJames)
    It's not possible to pre-moderate images, sadly.
    Whilst I understand that, surely it is more dangerous to only allow links to outside websites (which due to no images people will no doubt blindly follow), as these could be anything from highly offensive/obscene images (which would be easily and quickly reported if post on-site) to links to pages containing malicious code.....

    If people start clicking every link to see images and it's a fraud/forgery website they're taken to.... Or even something like a bit.ly shortened domain of an image - they have no idea what image they are going to be seeing or what page they will be visiting!
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Revenge negged by a mod :teeth: How professional.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Mods can use rep however they like, you know. It's only rep, after all.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by neillya1)
    Whilst I understand that, surely it is more dangerous to only allow links to outside websites (which due to no images people will no doubt blindly follow), as these could be anything from highly offensive/obscene images (which would be easily and quickly reported if post on-site) to links to pages containing malicious code.....

    If people start clicking every link to see images and it's a fraud/forgery website they're taken to.... Or even something like a bit.ly shortened domain of an image - they have no idea what image they are going to be seeing or what page they will be visiting!
    To be honest I think people will just stop posting images, as most of them are spam anyway.

    And there is plenty of potential to trick people using links already, but it's not very common.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: July 30, 2011
New on TSR

So how did you do?

Come into the GCSE forum to share your grades

Article updates
Useful resources

Quick Link:

Unanswered Report a problem Threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.