Brainstorming

[SlayerOfLight]

@Noah oh well, good thing there aint anyone who insults diffrent groups of people then, isn't it...

[Regulus]

Anything can be considered trolling, from a certain point of view.

[SlayerOfLight]

Anything can be considered trolling, from a certain point of view.

first ''trolls'' were individuals who wreak havoc on the internet for fun. Now... everything can be concidered trolling, and as well EVERYONE can be accused of being a troll by the most stupid reasons.

[DGFone]

Here's a better example that applies more to why the rule was made. You are standing in the street watching someone paint their own house and you go over to tell them you disapprove of their color choice. If you wanna tell new members the rules, that's one thing, but the problem is when you start acting like the police and trying to get things done your way. Case in point, a member once PMed another member on this site saying they should change the species of their original character. How exactly does that keep the "forum running smooth"?

Except that the analogy you are looking for is that you an your neighbor live in the same house. And they are doing more than just repainting it. They want to tear down a wall.

1. I am pretty sure that in this case, other members should be allowed to express concern over such changes.
2. They should be able to point if the wall removal is within the rules or not in the first place.

This is why we need to be able to backseat mod. So that we can correct the mod's mistakes.

p.s. Your case in point is completely wrong.

[AdAstrα]

@Noah oh well, good thing there aint anyone who insults diffrent groups of people then, isn't it...

Because they already got banned LOL.

I definitely agree that the backseat moderating rule has to go, or at least change a bit. I don't see what's wrong about alerting Mods to certain situations and helping out etc. Obviously if it gets out of control it could become an issue, as with most other things. But the rule itself is kind of unnecessary. I'm assuming that potential new Mods are chosen based on certain traits that a person has to posess in order to do a good job, but how are you going to know if a person is "Mod material" if they don't dare do anything in fear of being accused of backseat modding? On other forums I've been on this has been encouraged by the staff not only because it helps keep everything in order, but also because choosing new Mods gets easier if you know what traits and qualities people have.

[Azdgari]

Umm... yeah, we should discuss mod actions in public. I kinda like the profanity rules as they are to be honest, but seems like everyone else wants to drop some F bombs so I guess we'll let 'em fly... Honestly the only rule MLK needs is "everybody calm down" and everything would be fine. If the staff are working well and the members are cooperating, then the forum will run perfectly smoothly even with the rules we have now.

You shouldn't ban people before warning them directly; ie saying that "If you cross the line one more time like this, you'll be banned." That was if somebody does it again, they know that they're absolutely asking for it. That would help with some of the disputes, I think. ;3

[Noah]

I definitely agree that the backseat moderating rule has to go, or at least change a bit. I don't see what's wrong about alerting Mods to certain situations and helping out etc.

You guys are missing the point. We are not talking about "alerting mods to problems", we want that from you guys. We are talking about when someone micromanages the forum when they are in no position to do so (heck, mods don't even need to be doing this). Let me give you some examples.
*If a member sends someone a message asking why they created a topic
*If a member sends someone a message asking for verification of something they claim
*If a member attempts to nose their way into someone's personal life
*If a member abuses the report system in a friviously manner
*If a member takes it upon themselves to act like someone who owns the place.

And what the heck is with this "new member" nonsense. No1curr if you help the new members out, but all of the examples listed above (all of which really happened) occured to older members.

Case in point: Nobody thought I deserved my ban for what I did, accept for the person who gave it to me, damn I even asked the staff and they didn't think so either but just because one single solitary person did, nothing was done about it.

I've suggested this before, and I'm gonna suggest it again. Let the staff vote on whether to warn someone. Because I'm honestly getting mixed signals. Do mods have the right to use their descretion when it comes to who gets a warning and who doesn't? (Something I've seen the staff do repeatedly since I joined the team) Or do mods need to follow the rules exactly? (Something I've been told in response to me doing the first one)

To be honest, I don't even give warnings without first talking it over with some of the other members of the staff individually. It works out fine for me. But even if this rule goes nowhere, rest assured I'll still be getting a second opinion before I ban a user lol

And seriously? Making a backseat modding rule because someone ONCE said something in a pm. Big deal...

/implying that's the only incident

[SlayerOfLight]

Oh I got banned for saying "if steve jobs is in hell he is probably using the computers he sells". I mean wow big deal. Who did i offend? People who worship steve jobs? I also never got an explanation as to why I got banned for saying that and I asked TWO mods. Think then act, not the other way around.

And seriously? Making a backseat modding rule because someone ONCE said something in a pm. Big deal...

you got banned for only saying that? well, thats just rediculous... its getting really strict arround here.

[AdAstrα]

Thanks for clearing up what you mean by backseat moderating Noah. I understand the rule better now.

[Regulus]

Oh I got banned for saying "if steve jobs is in hell he is probably using the computers he sells". I mean wow big deal. Who did i offend? People who worship steve jobs? I also never got an explanation as to why I got banned for saying that and I asked TWO mods. Think then act, not the other way around.

And seriously? Making a backseat modding rule because someone ONCE said something in a pm. Big deal...

you got banned for only saying that? well, thats just rediculous... its getting really strict arround here.

lol, I thought that comment was funny, and not offensive. Maybe it would help if I knew the context of which it was posted, but I don't even...

I definitely agree that the backseat moderating rule has to go, or at least change a bit. I don't see what's wrong about alerting Mods to certain situations and helping out etc.

You guys are missing the point. We are not talking about "alerting mods to problems", we want that from you guys. We are talking about when someone micromanages the forum when they are in no position to do so (heck, mods don't even need to be doing this). Let me give you some examples.
*If a member sends someone a message asking why they created a topic
*If a member sends someone a message asking for verification of something they claim
*If a member attempts to nose their way into someone's personal life
*If a member abuses the report system in a friviously manner
*If a member takes it upon themselves to act like someone who owns the place.

So, backseat moderating isn't really moderating at all? Why didn't you (or anyone else, for that matter) say so earlier?

If this is true, then eliminate the rule altogether, and replace it with "don't micromanage the forum."

As another rule to be added, I sarcastically suggest "don't confuse anyone by doing stuff like this."