Forum Rules Update

[Andy]

Hello all,

Over the past few weeks a discussion has gone on between moderators about the forum rules. After a very lengthly discussion, the rules have been amended and updated. You can see the new rules at http://www.betaarchive.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4

Please read them carefully. Not a lot has changed from the old rules but one or two things have. Never the less, the rules do sometimes slip some peoples minds so I'd like to ask that everybody re-reads them to refresh their memory.

Andy (Admin)

[KenOath]

A rule I would be implementing, is the constant hammering by members,
of those who do actually make a post that breaks the rules...

A Prime Example is this post..
Sure, the poster was a nOOBcake leacher, But why do such posts always
bring the procrastinators out of the woodworks, who take every possible
chance they can get, at flaming someone for a mistake, & do so feeling
they have the right to do it, thinking that it's their opportunity to belt the
bajingo's out of someone & get away with it...
Get this people, Life is a mirror, smile at it, you'll get a smile back, frown
upon it, you'll be disliked & frowned upon yourself...
People often judge others by how they are themselves...
I could give you quite a few good examples of members here who
reflect that fact to the tee, but i'm not here to throw stones so I wont
bother...
When a nOOBcake makes a post, report it so the authorities can take the
appropriate action, don't act like you have the authority to flame the poster
youself, it jacks me off, & lessens my opinion of you as i'm most certain
does others here...
The thread above should've been deleted, not left open for those with a
bad attitude to further thier post count by throwing mud & make yet
another trashy post of no value to the forum...
I get jacked off at logging in just to read such crap, as i'm sure others
would agree with...
Although the above example wasn't the worst I've seen here, there's been
worse, but it's an example of more useless trashy posts that amount to
bad air...

[Andy]

Ken,

I actually think the post above was a civilized conversation in the end, and I don't see that any one of those posts was a "flaming" post. They all gave some information the op may not have known. Yes, the user may be considered a "noob", but just because of this it doesn't make the topic a flaming topic. The conversation and wording was civilized, so I see no problem.

If you still disagree, perhaps you could try and make it clearer? Maybe suggest wording for a rule we can add? Maybe it would help me understand the problem from your perspective.

[Andy]

I have now added rule 15 and 16 outlining Moderating and Flaming. I hope this will solve some if not all problems.

I should note that the rules are going to be more heavily enforced from now on.

[WinPC]

Well I'm glad you updated the rules. I've seen this place go from a forum for Ex OSBA Members with lot's of logical discussion, to just another place where people, many of which who had nothing to do with OSBetaArchive come to say things like "LOL" or "THATS SOOOOOOOOO FUNNY LOL!!!!". Not that I'm against everyone here who never joined OSBetaArchive, and I'm not saying that I joined OSBetaArchive either, since I never did, but many of the people here just make pointless posts like "LOL", and start a lot of non-computing related conversations. In my oppinion, BetaArchive has gone too off-topic, and maybe since the rules have been updated, it can finally go back on-topic again. And I'm sure you're right about the flaming and the insults. And again, too much of the discussion here is general discussion. Maybe the updated rules can bring back some of the logical OS discussions that this place once had.

[KenOath]

Ken,

I actually think the post above was a civilized conversation in the end, and I don't see that any one of those posts was a "flaming" post. They all gave some information the op may not have known. Yes, the user may be considered a "noob", but just because of this it doesn't make the topic a flaming topic. The conversation and wording was civilized, so I see no problem.

If you still disagree, perhaps you could try and make it clearer? Maybe suggest wording for a rule we can add? Maybe it would help me understand the problem from your perspective.

I made onother big post here, then thought bugger it, if you don't get what
I said above then i'm batting my head on a wall, & opted for this shorter
post instead...
I'm just going to accept the fact i'm too strict & getting too old to bother...
When someone breaks the rules, why do people feel they have the right
to carry on like they have some form of authority here & further thier
post count making posts pointing out the rules, then another member
makes the same post, & another,& another,& another until 10 posts
later, long after the offending s**tbreak has given up bothering to even
read the post after the 2nd one, the indians just keep rolling in playing chief....
You have a rule here that says when a spammer makes a post, members
are not to bother replying, hows this any different...

Here, let me quote you...

Spam
2. Posting Spam, replying to Spam or encouraging Spam is strictly forbidden. Doing so will result in a warning. Repeat offenders will be banned. In some cases, an instant ban may be necessary.

[Andy]

Its different because the post you gave above was not spam, it was simply a member not reading the rules, asking a question and getting a response. Spam is more defined as someone coming on, posting a link to their site, porn, etc and then leaving and never coming back. Spamming is also considered posting something totally off topic in another thread.

I hope you can see where I'm going with this.

[KenOath]

Its different because the post you gave above was not spam, it was simply a member not reading the rules, asking a question and getting a response. Spam is more defined as someone coming on, posting a link to their site, porn, etc and then leaving and never coming back. Spamming is also considered posting something totally off topic in another thread.

I hope you can see where I'm going with this.

Yeah I can see where you're going with it...

Its different because the post you gave above was not spam, it was simply a member not reading the rules, asking a question and getting a response. Spam is more defined as someone coming on, posting a link to their site, porn, etc and then leaving and never coming back. Spamming is also considered posting something totally off topic in another thread.
Maybe i'm just being too critical of the posts, & should just choose to
ignore the members who make the posts...
Shame their wasn't an "Ignore user" button here, there'd be a lot on it...

I hope you can see where I'm going with this.

That's usually the case with everyone who comes here to make a request,
thier post isn't contributing, it's spam, & usually pretty obvious, 99%
of the time it happens, as is the case with the follow up posts by those
who play cheif, as I mentioned above...

[Andy]

The problem is, if I remove every suspected spam post, and I remove one that really wasn't spam, who is going to get all of the stick? Me. This is what I'm trying to avoid. The post you questioned was not spam. It was a legitimate question but the op simply didn't bother reading the rules. It in no way can be considered spam. If the op doesn't want to come back thats fine.

Also, I have already locked the topic, so it can be of no more concern.

Also, in the future, if you, or anyone for that matter, has a complaint to make about any topics or posts, let me know and I'll deal with it in whatever way is fit. If you consider it spam, tell me, or I probably won't know what I'm looking for.

[WinPC]

Well, again, I'm glad the rules were updated, otherwise, this place would continue to turn into just another place to say things like "THATS SOOOOOOOOOOO FUNNY LOL!!!!!!!!!!!" if they hadn't been updated. It's pointless posts like that, that are a big reason why I want to come here less and less everyday.

[Andy]

Well, again, I'm glad the rules were updated, otherwise, this place would continue to turn into just another place to say things like "THATS SOOOOOOOOOOO FUNNY LOL!!!!!!!!!!!" if they hadn't been updated. It's pointless posts like that, that are a big reason why I want to come here less and less everyday.

Thats the exact reasons the rules were changed, to stop posts like that. However, the post mentioned does not do that, so I don't see what the problem is. I can only guess its a reason to fault the rules in some way to get at me. Who knows. I try my best and I only get it thrown back at me.

Nobody until now has known this but around 1 month ago I was extremely tempted to switch this site and its FTP's off and never return. I never want that to happen, so try and make an effort to help me when it comes to stuff like this. Instead of scrutinizing, try to make a suggestion to help.

[mrpijey]

I feel I am not enough informed about the situation here to be of any help really, but as a former forum admin for several sites I see that things can get out of hand in forums.

Remember people, running a community such as BA is no easy task, I can't imagine the kind of thoughs that is going through Andy's head but I can relate since I have been in similar situations, times when I just wanted to pull the plug, delete the files and never look back. But the backbone of the community are the people. If a member is unhappy that voice should be heard, but without the risk of getting hammered by other members.

Unless it is of a critical nature a friendly reply is usually what's needed, some may post things without realising the consequence of that post. I have myself sometimes posted stuff that people wanted to bash my head over, but I usually got a friendly warning my a mod, thread got locked down, or someone in the thread pointed out that it was inappropriate.

But when it comes to spamming, flaming etc it is quite hard to determine what it what, especially for a moderator that defines it in one way and members defines it in another. In those situations I usually let the moderator decide. And members will react and hopefully report me, or try to help. There will always be some kids whining and acting like jerks, but as with every conflict it's out job to be part of the solution, not the problem.

Remember, moderators can't keep updated on every updated thread. So it's up to us members to try to keep a civil tone, and if someone gets out of line we point it out in a civil way, or we report so the moderator can take notice. And for those of you that have been members a long time, you are well known and your post count and membership period speaks for itself, you are veterans and have the power to make BA the best community ever.

[Kenneth]

Here's an idea:

1. A new member registers.
2. E-mail Validation.
3. Trial Membership. (They get 10 posts before they get moved into PA. [Pending Approval])
4. If they can use the English language properly, bump them up to a member.
5. Get 10 Contributing posts.
6. Advanced Membership.

[Andy]

Here's an idea:

1. A new member registers.
2. E-mail Validation.
3. Trial Membership. (They get 10 posts before they get moved into PA. [Pending Approval])
4. If they can use the English language properly, bump them up to a member.
5. Get 10 Contributing posts.
6. Advanced Membership.

That wouldn't work for several reasons.

1. Its too much work for me, I am not around 24 hours to accept applications.
2. I don't understand how they can make 10 posts if they are not a "member" of the main forum. They'd have nothing to reply to and therefore nothing to prove themselves.

[Kenneth]

Forget the Idea.

[mrpijey]

Here's an idea:

1. A new member registers.
2. E-mail Validation.
3. Trial Membership. (They get 10 posts before they get moved into PA. [Pending Approval])
4. If they can use the English language properly, bump them up to a member.
5. Get 10 Contributing posts.
6. Advanced Membership.

Good ideas, but not practical in real life. As Andy pointed out, it's too much administration, and all this won't weed out the "bad" people anyway. E-mail validation exists already when you register, so no hit-and-run spammer will easily get in. We also got a kind of "trial membership", before your contributing posts you got only access to chat, but not to the core of BA, the betas. Perhaps one can restrict some areas of the forum more to weed out the leechers, but it won't help in the long run anyway.

Not all people are good at writing in english, in fact some write like they used a direct translation from babelfish or something . But it's usually not how they write that matters, it's WHAT they write.

Contributing posts already exists, we do see if a new member is just here to leech (and therefore won't make any useful posts since his interest isn't in chatting, it's in downloading). Perhaps the limit could be raised, or put into multiple levels. 20 posts to view members public FTP:s. 30 posts for private FTP:s. 50 posts for BA mirrors. etc. (numbers are examples only!). In that timeframe we'll see if a member is decent, if he has some functional brain cells and perhaps even a member with great potential to further the cause of BA.

But again, members have to help here, admins can't be around 28 hours a day to monitor everything on the forum.

[empireum]

I also agree that the "most efficient" way to weed out the leechers is either to leave it as it is or to raise the number of contributing posts required to gain access to the servers. Let's say to 50. Or 100. That would put a number of people off, I bet. 10 posts are easily and quickly made so people quickly try if they can get in somehow. But 50 or 100 posts are something else.

[hounsell]

20 posts to view members public FTP:s. 30 posts for private FTP:s. 50 posts for BA mirrors. etc.

Actually, I think a staged system like that would be better, as the initial posts would be reasonable, and you'd be able to identify the leachers before they reach the level to get access to the top servers. Such a system would attract the potential contributers, without being too much to put them off. I dont think I would have bothered with this forum originally if the post count needed was 50. I think I would have been put off by that, but now I'm a contributing member (in my opinion anyway )

[KenOath]

Thats the exact reasons the rules were changed, to stop posts like that. However, the post mentioned does not do that, so I don't see what the problem is. I can only guess its a reason to fault the rules in some way to get at me. Who knows. I try my best and I only get it thrown back at me.

I'm not going to bother trashing this thread any more, seems you
again didn't get the drift of the point I was making so i'll give it to you
via PM...
& again, I didn't say the above example was a post of members flaming
someone, I said it was another example of members enjoying taking
every opportunity to hammer someone at the 1st chance they get, acting
as though they have the power to do so...
It makes an environment on the forum that i'm most certain, respectable
members don't like to have to logon & read, & generally leaves bad air
in the place...
I could go on & say I don't know why you locked that example of a post I
gave above other than to make me look like the bad guy, but I'm not
bothered by it...
The point here is this, if people don't have moderating rights, then
they don't have the right to speak out & diss someone for making a
mistake, they do it because you let them...
There's every chance that if the said member was informed the right
way about the mistakes they make, they'd be more likely to actually
stay & contribute, instead, they get jumped on by those here who
take every opportunity at doing so, & go on doing so because
you wont put a stop to it....
I'll continue this via PM...