1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Important Questionnaire #20: RF Rule 2

Discussion in 'The Interview Place' started by Sunstone, Jun 1, 2020.

?
  1. I strongly agree with the statement.

    9 vote(s)
    36.0%
  2. I mostly agree with the statement.

    7 vote(s)
    28.0%
  3. I neither agree nor disagree with the statement.

    3 vote(s)
    12.0%
  4. I mostly diagree with the statement.

    4 vote(s)
    16.0%
  5. I strongly disagree with the statement.

    2 vote(s)
    8.0%
  1. Sunstone

    Sunstone De Diablo Del Fora
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    73,473
    Ratings:
    +33,341
    Religion:
    Non-Theistic Mysticism
    This questionnaire is important to me: I am gathering member feedback to help me make better policy decisions. Please help out by responding to it.

    RF Rule 2 reads in its entirety:

    2. Discussion/Dispute of Moderation
    To ensure that members respect and abide by moderation decisions, and to respect the privacy and reputation of our members, there must be no discussion of the moderation of content or members in public areas. Furthermore, members whose content was acted upon (either edited or deleted) may not re-post the content anywhere on the forum without staff permission.

    In all cases of dispute, members are to create a thread in the Site Feedback forum and politely discuss their case with the staff team, rather than with individual staff members. Threads in Site Feedback will only be visible to the member who created the thread and the staff team. Site Feedback discussions are considered part of moderation between members and staff and may not be discussed in public areas. General issues and concerns about moderation can also be directed to Site Feedback.


    How strongly do you agree or disagree with this statement: "Overall, RF Rule 2 is reasonable."

    Please pick which one of these five options is closest to your views. If you do not see an option that suits you, please accept this poll was not designed for you, and move on.

    OPTION ONE: I strongly agree with the statement.

    OPTION TWO: I mostly agree with the statement.

    OPTION THREE: I neither agree nor disagree with the statement.

    OPTION FOUR: I mostly disagree with the statement.

    OPTION FIVE: I strongly disagree with the statement.
     
  2. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    7,372
    Ratings:
    +5,196
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age
    I agree just so long as we are in agreement that site policy can be discussed at least somewhat so long as we don't get into individual cases of moderation. I think we should for example be allowed to create threads within reason for example asking, "Should RF adopt a different type of frubal?" and that in some cases, the discussion could prove useful to the staff despite being created by a member, such that staff may learn how members feel.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  3. Secret Chief

    Secret Chief Meghalayan Ape

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    3,594
    Ratings:
    +1,480
    Option 2 for me.

    The only part I think should be looked at is the current banning of generalised (rather than individual) discussion/debate on modding issues in public areas. If such matters could be aired in public, I should think it might be educational all round. Naively, I can't see a downside.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  4. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Hihg Intellajence Kwoshunt.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    166,466
    Ratings:
    +51,499
    Religion:
    Bokononist Atheism
    We should be able to openly discuss moderation.
    It's analogous to policing in the real world.
    The light of day is essential for a fair process.
    Otherwise enforcement becomes imperious.
    Moreover, when police are to police themselves, this is ripe for corruption.
    Open forums address those problems.

    I know it would have problems.
    And it won't ever happen.
    But a guy can dream.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  5. Evangelicalhumanist

    Evangelicalhumanist "Truth" isn't a thing...
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    Messages:
    6,546
    Ratings:
    +6,417
    Religion:
    None, a humanist who doesn't even worship humans
    Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done. I've never been a fan of secret trials and star chamber justice.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  6. Terry Sampson

    Terry Sampson ζει

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2019
    Messages:
    3,517
    Ratings:
    +2,942
    Religion:
    Creedalist Xian
    I'm afraid to check any option other than #1 for fear of getting dinged for it. What about you?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. sun rise

    sun rise "Let there be peace and love among all"
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    48,052
    Ratings:
    +20,187
    Religion:
    Love
    That was the reason for my #2 vote as well.

    To me the discussion would analogous to threads like this one - in other words discussing the rules and general questions about them but not calling a mod to task for an action. There are various levels of discussion that could ensue such as these inciting examples:
    • @Sunstone is a stupid mod who did not let me give my honest opinion. - not allowed
    • @Sunstone made a mistake in interpreting the rule against being nasty - not allowed
    • When I wrote XXXX for a certain word, I was slapped on the wrist for being nasty but when someone wrote (the real word which was replaced by ****) that was let slide. How should that rule be interpreted - allowed - a question about how rules can be interpreted.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Useful Useful x 1
  8. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Hihg Intellajence Kwoshunt.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    166,466
    Ratings:
    +51,499
    Religion:
    Bokononist Atheism
    It's a concern.
    But given the subject of the thread & the answers in the poll,
    we should be able to give reasons.
    Otherwise...
    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  9. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    38,407
    Ratings:
    +12,118
    Religion:
    Judaism
    I strongly agree with the statement.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  10. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Rival's Wife

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    63,024
    Ratings:
    +22,161
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    I agree with the intent, to try to keep things civil, but, at the same time, transparency is nice, an open discussion (that is "extra enforced" on rules to keep it a discussion and not a place to throw tantrums and accusations) can also help people better understand the rules, the whys, and hopefully do away with some of the "totalitarian mods out to get us" conspiracies.
    And on a related note, I do favor the right of the accused to face their accuser. Both to reach an understanding of what was done, and hopefully reduce tantrum-fueled reports when someone is just being proven wrong.
     
    • Useful Useful x 2
  11. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    7,372
    Ratings:
    +5,196
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age
    I think the reported shouldn't face the reportee, but that the reported has a chance to make the case for removing their own infraction.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  12. KAT-KAT

    KAT-KAT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    7,372
    Ratings:
    +5,196
    Religion:
    Hinduism with some New Age
    This wasn't the original discussion, but since reports were brought up, I thought the staff might like to know my idea...

    I have observed on forums that half the time someone reports someone else, the solution is sometimes a bit harsher than the person doing the reporting intended. I don't think too many report with the thought, "I'd like to add to this person's warning count." They just have a problem with the post, how it made them feel, how they were treated, etc.

    Now I'm not saying if you make people mad enough, they won't want to exercise the biggest remedy against you.

    But let's say someone mildly offended me, and though I was trying to be a good member and report the offense, what I didn't know was my post was the final nail in the coffin to get the person banned. I think in grave cases, if it's not already done, members should actually be asked, "Hey, do you want this person to get a warning?"

    And if this stuff is already implemented, I'm sorry. I'm speaking on behalf of the things I've seen not here, but other places. Sometimes people just want others to intervene and see if they can't mend the bridge, when reporting.

    And my suggestion isn't that the staff is mishandling reports at all, I wouldn't know one way or the other, they are probably doing a fine, excellent job... just that while we are kind of taking this forum to new heights, I thought you should know my thoughts.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  13. gnomon

    gnomon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Messages:
    9,280
    Ratings:
    +1,640
    Religion:
    atheist
    I strongly agree with the statement.

    But honestly.......sometimes the Site Feedback thread is a never ending loop of being utterly ignored. But that is perhaps another issue.

    I appreciate your attempts to valuate certain policies.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  14. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Hihg Intellajence Kwoshunt.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    166,466
    Ratings:
    +51,499
    Religion:
    Bokononist Atheism
    You see results?
     
  15. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    2,647
    Ratings:
    +2,149
    Religion:
    none
    • Like Like x 2
  16. lewisnotmiller

    lewisnotmiller Grand Hat
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    17,157
    Ratings:
    +9,304
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Strongly agree.
    As someone who has 'peered behind the curtain' I'd be loathe to add further workload to and second guessing of decisions.
     
Loading...