I got an idea that may or may not work, anyways I'll mention it.
I got an idea about a janitor title in this site. You know, someone that cleans up the mess of others and help the Mods and Admins to organize the site's forums and stuff.
Also a janitor can be like security cam in terms of the users' behavior and things like that. Its just an idea, so its not needed to happen.
Those duties are already filled by our editors (and higher ranks) and moderators, and both do a pretty great job of that already. For example, I've rarely happened upon a spam topic or problem post before the offensive content was edited, split or removed by a moderator.
All of us are human though, and we do miss things. If you notice something that needs to be cleaned up or fixed, the best thing to do is report it to someone with the necessary privileges or post here in the Sites subforum (as you have been). Though, perhaps a thread could be made for the general reporting of problems in movie descriptions and wiki pages to cut down on the number of threads being made.
Actually... what exactly is wrong with mini-modding? I don't really get it.
(To be frank, it just sounds like something petty moderators would complain about because they feel like lowly regular users are stepping on their toes, but I don't think anybody here is like that.)
I'd say complaining about it is probably in the same stupidity level as complaining about necroposting (which is also something that makes no sense).
There's a few problems, which might not necessarily be experienced by the members of this particular forum, but why tempt fate? That in mind, the arguments below are addressed towards a hypothetical forum, not specifically the TASVideos forum.
The first is simply one of encouraging second-guessing the decisions of the moderators. Assuming the moderators are doing their jobs to the best of their abilities, they won't generally be making overt mistakes, but there's a lot of gray areas where people can pick sides. Unfortunately, once this kind of argument gets going, it can easily end up requiring moderation in itself (pointless flamewars where one side is defending the current mods and the other side is attacking them)...which gets you into "the mods are violating my right to free speech!" territory. This doesn't end well.
The second is that mini-modding leads to people being presumptive about what is and isn't allowed, which can lead to a hostile atmosphere. People like to be able to tell other people that they're wrong, whether justified or not. Imagine a newbie shows up with a WIP of a playaround and is told to shut up and go home because TASVideos is only about playing for speed. By the time the moderators get to the post and "fix" things, it's likely too late; the newbie has decided TASVideos isn't for them.
Putting the above another way, one of the jobs of the moderators is to be the "bad guys" when there's a problem. They're the ones who can come in and tell someone "No. You're wrong. Shut up." And we trust that, if they have to do that, they have a good reason for it. You absolutely do not want other forum members to think they have that kind of power!
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
The first is simply one of encouraging second-guessing the decisions of the moderators.
I didn't think "mini-modding" meant "question moderators' decisions". I thought it meant "act like you were a moderator even though you are just a regular user". Have I missed something?
The second is that mini-modding leads to people being presumptive about what is and isn't allowed, which can lead to a hostile atmosphere. People like to be able to tell other people that they're wrong, whether justified or not.
And this differs from a "non-mini-modding" forum how, exactly?
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
I'd also add that while it's not noticeable, we have an automated anti-spam feature in place that scans each post for objectionable material. It looks for things which are robot posts, or paid for posts, and are dislike posts from our loyal members.
If someone comes here to spam, they may just find that all their posts and account simply vanish, prior to anyone even noticing that they exist.
Regular users do not have to worry, you won't be triggering the spam filter.
The staff gets a real time log of every post, as well as "suicide posts", where we see every time someone came here to spam and was automatically dealt with. Gives us a good laugh.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
The staff gets a real time log of every post, as well as "suicide posts", where we see every time someone came here to spam and was automatically dealt with. Gives us a good laugh.
That got me curious: How much spam is posted to tasvideos.org (that we never get to see)?
The staff gets a real time log of every post, as well as "suicide posts", where we see every time someone came here to spam and was automatically dealt with. Gives us a good laugh.
That got me curious: How much spam is posted to tasvideos.org (that we never get to see)?
I can't tell you any accurate metrics (because I don't have any), but one suggestion of mine eventually led to the creation of http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=67.
Moderators commonly split spam topics off to a thread in the (for non-staff users invisible) Staff forums, which I think we could make public, but give a warning that you're about to see possibly malicious web site and/or inappropriate language (because these appear there). It's not too bad in the end, maybe like 1 spam post per week or so (spammers post in bursts, so there can be weeks without any spam posts and then several ones per day).
All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Warp wrote:
Nach wrote:
The staff gets a real time log of every post, as well as "suicide posts", where we see every time someone came here to spam and was automatically dealt with. Gives us a good laugh.
That got me curious: How much spam is posted to tasvideos.org (that we never get to see)?
Well, many would be spammers are cut out from even registering, so it skews attempts. I initially implemented the system after I noticed about 20 different real spam attempts in a short time frame.
I recall seeing a dozen separate spam attempts that committed suicide since I put the system in place. There's probably a bunch that I didn't see (even though I can, I don't constantly watch the log).
Shortly after I put the system in place, I also noticed a significant decrease in attempts over time, so those behind some of these may have gotten frustrated and have given up.
The times it gets really funny is when we see someone make a couple spam accounts in a row, and they all suicide. Would be spammers usually make a second account after the first one is terminated and tries again with the same results. I saw once someone that made three accounts, one after the other, each committing suicide within 5 minutes.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4083
Location: The Netherlands
Kurabupengin wrote:
Like that Mona Vampire thing? Also...funny? Yeah, it is at first but not when is too much.
No, Nach refers to "suicide" spam posts that are automatically deleted before they are even posted in the forum.
The Mona the Vampire stuff was just a desperate, failed troll. Just ignore it and forget about it, otherwise you're giving the troll the attention he seeks.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Mothrayas wrote:
Kurabupengin wrote:
Like that Mona Vampire thing? Also...funny? Yeah, it is at first but not when is too much.
No, Nach refers to "suicide" spam posts that are automatically deleted before they are even posted in the forum.
To further clarify, there's several classes of annoying posts.
Robot posts.
Paid for posts to advertise some products.
People who come here to bash TASing or TASVideos.
People with other problems who come here to be disruptive.
The system I put in place is designed to only handle the first two categories.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
To further clarify, there's several classes of annoying posts.
Robot posts.
Paid for posts to advertise some products.
People who come here to bash TASing or TASVideos.
People with other problems who come here to be disruptive.
The system I put in place is designed to only handle the first two categories.
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Kurabupengin wrote:
How about the other two?
The problem with the other two is that it's very hard to differentiate between them and real posts. I'd rather let 1000 troll posts through than accidentally automatically delete a real user.
I do have some ideas in mind to improve the system to handle more, but until I can be certain there's no side effects, I'm not putting anything in place.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
I have no idea what kind of system is already in place, and this is probably something you have already thought of, but I suppose it would be relatively easy to automatically log the first post or couple of first posts a new user makes into some file that can be regularly skimmed by an admin to quickly see if some troll or disruptive person has created an account just to vandalize or annoy. The log can then be flushed afterwards.
