Discussing the new guidelines

fantasy221
Thoroughly Obsessed
fantasy221
Thoroughly Obsessed
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:46 pm

Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:27 pm #1

There's been requests for a thread to be opened for people to discuss the new board Guidelines. This is where all discussion should take place. I've posted a FAQ (see here) based on the questions we've already received. If anyone has any other further questions, they can be posted here, or PM'd to any of the mods. While we intend the purpose of this thread to be used as a space to get clarification, we know that you guys will likely chime in with your likes and dislikes of the new policy. We can't guarantee that any changes will be made but know that we promise to listen carefully and consider any well-reasoned suggestions amongst ourselves.
Quote
Like
Share

HoserLauren
Exceptionally Obsessed
HoserLauren
Exceptionally Obsessed
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:07 am

Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:13 am #2

Well... I still have a question that hasn't been answered in the new FAQs :)

What exactly constitutes giving someone a "strike"? The only thing that was described is "antagonizing behavior". What exactly is that?

I know this is a space for getting clarification, but since you are expecting people to chime in with likes/dislikes I might as well. I'm not the biggest fan of this strike thing. I'm sorry but it seems to me like one mod got mad recently then all of the sudden these rules popped up. On such a site where most major decisions have been public, I guess I'm a little disappointed that this just appeared out of the blue as messages handed down by the mods. :shrug:
Quote
Like
Share

fantasy221
Thoroughly Obsessed
fantasy221
Thoroughly Obsessed
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:46 pm

Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:45 am #3

HoserLauren wrote: I'm sorry but it seems to me like one mod got mad recently then all of the sudden these rules popped up.
The guidelines grew out of a situation between two members recently that had grown out of hand. The mods felt that there needed to be some kind of written rules that we could apply to everyone. I'm the one posting these but they aren't MY rules - all of us had our say in crafting them.
Quote
Like
Share

CdnBlueRose
Exceedingly Obsessed
CdnBlueRose
Exceedingly Obsessed
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:15 pm

Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:06 am #4

I'd like to say as well that these didn't pop up all of a sudden. There have been a few instances in the past where members have complained to moderators about another member's behavior, but things were always settled relatively simply. However, we recently got to the point where we felt some guidelines needed to be in place to ensure situations are handled as consistently as possible going forward.

Also, I don't believe it would serve good purpose for us to narrowly define "antagonizing behavior", as what would antagonize me and drive me to tears and sleepless nights may not bother the next person at all, and vice versa. In general terms, any member who sends harassing emails and/or PM's to another - correspondence that is hurtful, vengeful, nasty, etc. - that would be an example of antagonizing behavior.
Quote
Like
Share

meshe
Exceedingly Obsessed
meshe
Exceedingly Obsessed
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 11:35 am

Mon Mar 03, 2008 11:52 am #5

I'm in agreement with rules 1 - 3, but am a little bit 'put off' by rule 4. It seems that in the past this type of behavior has been handled by the mods and the members who were involved and the rest of us were oblivious. I like to be oblivious :D and I think that rule #4 will only cause more hard feelings. Who do we go to when a mod is 'out of line'? Who decided that the mods should be the ones to make all the decisions? Do the mods own this site and get to make all the decisions without discussion among the members? I realize that we needed the rules 1 - 3 and I believe those have been thoroughly discussed, but I'm very uncomfortable with the last rule and the way it was handed to the lowly members. And yes, that's how it makes me feel. As if I'm not important and my opinion isn't important. I appreciate all the hard work that's gone into the database for the swaps. I think it's absolutely awesome. I wish I had enough knowledge to do something like that, but I don't. My 2 cents worth and only my opinion, but I felt the need to express it. Not to be a smart ass, but did I just violate rule #4? (okay, maybe this is a tad bit smart assy :lol: !!)
Quote
Like
Share

Marlene
Absolutely Obsessed
Marlene
Absolutely Obsessed
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:02 pm

Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:31 pm #6

well I am a lowly? member too Meshe. :rolleyes: :lol:
I had no clue that all this kind of stuff was going on behind the scenes.
That is why I was shocked to see the message about punishing system, strikes and stuff.

So I have no idea who we are talking about, what the discussion was about.
At first I thought you guys meant the discussion Nursie and me had, but I know I never send nasty pm's and she did not sent those either.


We used to be an open group. discussions were fought in the open.
I am not a big pmer with the mods, so I am oblivious to what is going on behind the scenes it seems.

It just feels weird. I can totally understand the other 3 points but I am sad.

Just wondering, maybe people started to pm because heated threads were closed?
this is a question.

where is the time where we did everything together? as a group? decide stuff. :cry:

Quote
Like
Share

Potok-fan
Exceedingly Obsessed
Potok-fan
Exceedingly Obsessed
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:43 pm

Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:35 pm #7

CdnBlueRose wrote:Also, I don't believe it would serve good purpose for us to narrowly define "antagonizing behavior",
In general terms, any member who sends harassing emails and/or PM's to another - correspondence that is hurtful, vengeful, nasty, etc. - that would be an example of antagonizing behavior.
I agree with that, and so I'd like to see rule 4 re-written a little, because right now it says
wrote:sometimes personalities can clash. If this should happen, either party (but preferably both), should notify the mod team at the first sign of trouble.
What's the first sign of trouble? Just a personality clash? One time, somebody disagreed with something I'd written here, too sharply I thought. I felt they were too emphatic about what a bad person I sounded like.

At least that's how I read it at the time. What I did was just to walk away and tell myself I was not going to respond and just stopped reading that thread altogether. Now I feel fine about it and I don't even feel bad about that BOer anymore. (so I hope that it's ok to raise this as an example - please don't try to figure out who it was. You'll probably all be on their side anyway :lol: )

It was just a stupid minor thing, but of course it *could* have blown up into a THING. Was me disagreeing the "first sign of trouble"? If I'd posted a forum post asking for clarification, "I understand this to mean you think I'm a bad person - is that true?" would that be the first sign? What if I'd PMed to say "I wanted to let you know that I was offended by what you wrote in the forum, because blah blah blah"? At what point do we call in the mods?

If we do need rule 4 I'd much prefer one that says something like If you start to get harassing emails and/or PM's - correspondence that is hurtful, vengeful, nasty, etc. - then contact one of the moderators.
Quote
Like
Share

fantasy221
Thoroughly Obsessed
fantasy221
Thoroughly Obsessed
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:46 pm

Mon Mar 03, 2008 5:04 pm #8

meshe wrote: I'm in agreement with rules 1 - 3, but am a little bit 'put off' by rule 4. It seems that in the past this type of behavior has been handled by the mods and the members who were involved and the rest of us were oblivious. I like to be oblivious :D
You'll still be oblivious :D

I think the thing with the 4th guideline is that we realized that we couldn't hold someone accountable for breaking a rule that they didn't know about, which is why they're now posted for everyone to see. But I think if you look at it, we're not really asking anyone to do anything that 1) they don't do anyway or 2) isn't common sense. The only thing that's really "new" are the repercussions.
Quote
Like
Share

msjoanna
Exceedingly Obsessed
msjoanna
Exceedingly Obsessed
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:37 am

Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:51 pm #9

The general understanding that I've gotten from lots of places on the board is that "a reasonable amount of time" is generally understood to be approximately six months. I don't actually see that referenced in the rules. Is that understanding accurate re: offering TBRs?

Thanks for the new database. It's great to have this info collected for me. I'll be double thrilled if the relays are eventually added and/or if I have the ability to add records of owed books myself. So much more convenient than my ever-changing post in the Owed TBRs thread.
Quote
Like
Share

CheriePie
Beyond Obsessed
CheriePie
Beyond Obsessed
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:53 pm

Wed Mar 05, 2008 12:07 am #10

msjoanna wrote: Thanks for the new database.  It's great to have this info collected for me.  I'll be double thrilled if the relays are eventually added and/or if I have the ability to add records of owed books myself.  So much more convenient than my ever-changing post in the Owed TBRs thread.
As soon as I find time, the ability to add your own records, such as for private swaps and such, will soon be available, hopefully by the end of the week.
Quote
Like
Share