Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

#ActualShadowFlar3

Posted 29 July 2014 - 09:57 AM

Numbers, let's use them!

 

1) I looked into it when I hit 1000 and didn't get crossbones. FYI I was also about to publish 2 articles before I ran into an issue with the site moderation and decided not to do it. I'm familiar with how little the crossbones means, "know how forum works" and can also point it out to you that articles are not part of the forums.

 

2) Where was this referring to? Please use "Selective Quote" button. Apparently you don't know how the FORUM works. Assuming it relates to where I answered second quote from slicer...it doesn't make sense. If you got something to say about my interpretation or opinion on your system, refer to the parts where I discuss it.

 

3) What? Maybe I didn't get your numbering right? Can it make some sense as an answer to third part in any way...no?

 

4) The problem is contained and restricted to the one area. But it's still a problem arguably.

 

5) That's even worse than I could have ever imagined from the scraps you provided earlier.

 

 


Let's break this down, because it's obvious you're having a little trouble understanding what I'm proposing:
 
First of all, the idea is that only people who are contributors / who have good reputation / who are good contributing members to the forum can opt-in. It's not a free-for-all where literally anyone can opt-in. And it's not a "sub-forum". When a new user makes a post, it gets sent to one of the "mentors", they can approve it or not, and if they don't they can send the new member a message helping them out. If the mentor doesn't approve / disapprove of it within twenty-four hours, it gets sent to another mentor.

 

A post by a beginner, assigned to _one_ of the sub-moderators? And 24 hours before automatic re-assignment? Did you really think this through? What kind of hours do you think people spend on this site and in this case only to respond to a series of noob posts? Those posts could easily get assigned to someone who isn't actually online ATM and bounce back and forth for a long time. It could easily take something like 30 hours on average.

 

 

 


I suggest doing this, but also having the mentors remove posts which are essentially "what language should I use?" threads, and direct the new members to helpful resources.

 

So wait, the sub-moderators both approve and disapprove the posts that get "assigned" to them" but also can remove posts (from where)? What are you on? What I can't still figure out from your "extensive research into your brilliant idea nobody just quite understands the way you do" is whether the beginner posts are actually published anywhere and in which case.

 

I think I'll stick to how I interpreted it in the first place. Being a limited visibility pool of posts (such as subforum) that any spare sub-moderator could dip in when he has time makes much more sense.

 

 


Many other forums have this system for different reasons. Experienced forum members review "new" members posts and make sure they follow the rules.

A system where each post gets assigned to _one_ of the moderators and no other moderators can do anything with it? Sure they have. No, the moderators do what they can when they can when they see moderation is needed, they aren't exclusively assigned symmetrical cases on arbitrary basis unless it their paid day job.

 

 

 


Considering that I know you're very intelligent (from reading your previous posts), I assume that you're doing it because you think it will make my argument look bad.

I have no interest in make you look bad, I'm only interested in how to handle the problem. I'm only highlighting the fact that you're proposing building a heavy and redundant system that establishes the opposite of your intentions due to your limited scope in planning and less than punctual phrasing. Unknowingly.


#1ShadowFlar3

Posted 29 July 2014 - 09:55 AM

Numbers, let's use them!

 

1) I looked into it when I hit 1000 and didn't get crossbones. FYI I was also about to publish 2 articles before I ran into an issue with the site moderation and decided not to do it. I'm familiar with how little the crossbones means, "know how forum works" and can also point it out to you that articles are not part of the forums.

 

2) Where was this referring to? Please use "Selective Quote" button. Apparently you don't know how the FORUM works. Assuming it relates to where I answered second quote from slicer...it doesn't make sense. If you got something to say about my interpretation or opinion on your system, refer to the parts where I discuss it.

 

3) What? Maybe I didn't get your numbering right? Can it make some sense as an answer to third part in any way...no?

 

4) The problem is contained and restricted to the one area. But it's still a problem arguably.

 

5) That's even worse than I could have ever imagined from the scraps you provided earlier.

 


Let's break this down, because it's obvious you're having a little trouble understanding what I'm proposing:
 
First of all, the idea is that only people who are contributors / who have good reputation / who are good contributing members to the forum can opt-in. It's not a free-for-all where literally anyone can opt-in. And it's not a "sub-forum". When a new user makes a post, it gets sent to one of the "mentors", they can approve it or not, and if they don't they can send the new member a message helping them out. If the mentor doesn't approve / disapprove of it within twenty-four hours, it gets sent to another mentor.

 

A post by a beginner, assigned to _one_ of the sub-moderators? And 24 hours before automatic re-assignment? Did you really think this through? What kind of hours do you think people spend on this site and in this case only to respond to a series of noob posts? Those posts could easily get assigned to someone who isn't actually online ATM and bounce back and forth for a long time. It could easily take something like 30 hours on average.

 


I suggest doing this, but also having the mentors remove posts which are essentially "what language should I use?" threads, and direct the new members to helpful resources.

 

So wait, the sub-moderators both approve and disapprove the posts that get "assigned" to them" but also can remove posts (from where)? What are you on? What I can't still figure out from your "extensive research into your brilliant idea nobody just quite understands the way you do" is whether the beginner posts are actually published anywhere and in which case.

 

I think I'll stick to how I interpreted it in the first place. Being a limited visibility pool of posts (such as subforum) that any spare sub-moderator could dip in when he has time makes much more sense.

 


Many other forums have this system for different reasons. Experienced forum members review "new" members posts and make sure they follow the rules.

A system where each post gets assigned to _one_ of the moderators and no other moderators can do anything with it? Sure they have. No, the moderators do what they can when they can when they see moderation is needed, they aren't exclusively assigned symmetrical cases on arbitrary basis.

 


Considering that I know you're very intelligent (from reading your previous posts), I assume that you're doing it because you think it will make my argument look bad.

I have no interest in make you look bad, I'm only interested in how to handle the problem. I'm only highlighting the fact that you're proposing building a heavy and redundant system that establishes the opposite of your intentions due to your limited scope in planning and less than punctual phrasing. Unknowingly.


PARTNERS