Court of Arbitration and other ideas

Tolomar · March 31, 2006

NO!

any disputes between staff and members should be taken care of between the ppl involved and the Admins privately...no one elses business...thats just makes it gossip and conversation pieces

aka what Dirk says goes...enough said

Tolomar · March 31, 2006

NO!

any disputes between staff and members should be taken care of between the ppl involved and the Admins privately...no one elses business...thats just makes it gossip and conversation pieces

aka what Dirk says goes...enough said

Yellowlab · March 31, 2006

The "this is a club" mentality may seem excessive, but it is the law of the land here. I believe the phrase was, "Think of Simtropolis as a benevolent Dirktatorship." And it is a pretty benevolent Dirktatorship we have here. Simtropolis is free, it provides an unbelievable support system for the game and a great social network, and it's free (did I mention that?).

Dirk created, finances, and runs much of the day-to-day operations of this site. He has appointed co-administrators who he has felt show exceptional qualities that he wants in his forums, and the administrators choose the moderators, chat ops, etc. who keep the forums from descending into anarchy.

What in effect is being proposed here is a system of moderators being appointed based on their site popularity. Many of the moderators here are far from the most popular members here, and many of the most popular members here will never become moderators. It is a meritocracy, not a populocracy (yes, I am aware that is not a word).

Furthermore, a forum in which members can air their grievances to other members is just a gigantic flame. Simtropolis is not going to have a forum for members to trash each other over he-said-she-saids. The admins and mods on this site have to deal with that crap all the time and it is not about to be aired for public viewing. There is more than adequate opportunity for members who feel that they are wronged to air their grievances here. The difference is that it isn't public.

Simtropolis is basically a club. You signed up to use the site and agreed to the site rules. Those site rules include that the say of admins is final, followed by moderators. Simtropolis is not a country; members were not born into it, they do not hold citizenship here, and they are free to leave whenever they choose to do so. Members choose to sign up here, they hold their membership as long as they are in good standing (and it is rare, and requires great misconduct, for a permanent banning to occur), and are free to leave they please. Simtropolis is a club, and Dirk gets to be club leader because he created it. That's just the way 'dem cards fall.

Yellowlab · March 31, 2006

The "this is a club" mentality may seem excessive, but it is the law of the land here. I believe the phrase was, "Think of Simtropolis as a benevolent Dirktatorship." And it is a pretty benevolent Dirktatorship we have here. Simtropolis is free, it provides an unbelievable support system for the game and a great social network, and it's free (did I mention that?).

Dirk created, finances, and runs much of the day-to-day operations of this site. He has appointed co-administrators who he has felt show exceptional qualities that he wants in his forums, and the administrators choose the moderators, chat ops, etc. who keep the forums from descending into anarchy.

What in effect is being proposed here is a system of moderators being appointed based on their site popularity. Many of the moderators here are far from the most popular members here, and many of the most popular members here will never become moderators. It is a meritocracy, not a populocracy (yes, I am aware that is not a word).

Furthermore, a forum in which members can air their grievances to other members is just a gigantic flame. Simtropolis is not going to have a forum for members to trash each other over he-said-she-saids. The admins and mods on this site have to deal with that crap all the time and it is not about to be aired for public viewing. There is more than adequate opportunity for members who feel that they are wronged to air their grievances here. The difference is that it isn't public.

Simtropolis is basically a club. You signed up to use the site and agreed to the site rules. Those site rules include that the say of admins is final, followed by moderators. Simtropolis is not a country; members were not born into it, they do not hold citizenship here, and they are free to leave whenever they choose to do so. Members choose to sign up here, they hold their membership as long as they are in good standing (and it is rare, and requires great misconduct, for a permanent banning to occur), and are free to leave they please. Simtropolis is a club, and Dirk gets to be club leader because he created it. That's just the way 'dem cards fall.

mtbrocket · March 31, 2006

Voar Tok; It is interesting what you said. If it is true that a topic creator can not create rules for that topic then anyone can go into any topic and post irrelevant replies. That allows bullies to force themselves on other people’s forums and push other people out of popular forums by harassment. That is not very polite but it happens all the time and don’t think the moderators catch it. Cops rarely got after people who drop cigarettes out of car windows too. The term used on Simtroplis is to take a forum hostage. The person who started a forum should have some say over what it is about or else the forum descends into chaos and is locked out. I have found that the unwritten but dominant rule over member replies is nothing more than "popular ideas get praised and unpopular ideas get trashed". One member can’t compete against the one hundred members that have negative replies.

Moganite; You got it, make a separate place for people with grievances to do so in public. I think there would be a reduction of complaint based forums.

Tolomar; Gossip is universal. People will gossip if regardless of the existence of a court of arbitration. However, I don’t think posting grievances is gossip.

-Dan

mtbrocket · March 31, 2006

Voar Tok; It is interesting what you said. If it is true that a topic creator can not create rules for that topic then anyone can go into any topic and post irrelevant replies. That allows bullies to force themselves on other people’s forums and push other people out of popular forums by harassment. That is not very polite but it happens all the time and don’t think the moderators catch it. Cops rarely got after people who drop cigarettes out of car windows too. The term used on Simtroplis is to take a forum hostage. The person who started a forum should have some say over what it is about or else the forum descends into chaos and is locked out. I have found that the unwritten but dominant rule over member replies is nothing more than "popular ideas get praised and unpopular ideas get trashed". One member can’t compete against the one hundred members that have negative replies.

Moganite; You got it, make a separate place for people with grievances to do so in public. I think there would be a reduction of complaint based forums.

Tolomar; Gossip is universal. People will gossip if regardless of the existence of a court of arbitration. However, I don’t think posting grievances is gossip.

-Dan

Jasoncw · March 31, 2006

As far as I can see, the club analogy fits the social environment and the management of online forums. How is that excessive, and why do you disagree with it, why is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" wrong?

Voar Tok has a good point. The court system would basicly be a board of moderators.

99% of people on the internet know what a bump is, but I should tell you that this is a thread, not a forum. Forums and subforums are like folders on your computer, and threads are like files. The files are what are worked with and the folders are what they're organized with. You shouldn't act like you're in tune with Simtropolis and the internet if you're not.

Jasoncw · March 31, 2006

As far as I can see, the club analogy fits the social environment and the management of online forums. How is that excessive, and why do you disagree with it, why is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" wrong?

Voar Tok has a good point. The court system would basicly be a board of moderators.

99% of people on the internet know what a bump is, but I should tell you that this is a thread, not a forum. Forums and subforums are like folders on your computer, and threads are like files. The files are what are worked with and the folders are what they're organized with. You shouldn't act like you're in tune with Simtropolis and the internet if you're not.

dev · April 1, 2006

Originally posted by: moganite the main reason here works as well as it does is that a moderator can be removed alot easier than a corrupt offical or a real dictator.

quote>

But corrupt moderation is rarely removed/noticed...corrupt administration I might also add...I'm not trying to start anything...I'm just being honest.

mtbrocket · April 1, 2006

Here are some informal rules I came up with from observing the forums. People are supposed to be polite on Simtropolis, I think we should go beyond politeness and should therefore respect the topic and respect the creator’s wishes. Two reasons are that a topic creator has limited time and can’t respond to everyone and forums get locked down when the forum loses focus. This isn’t lording over anyone, this is asking for cooperation.

Authors of a topic should control the topic of a forum and make rules dictating what the discussion should focus on. If a topic is about American presidents the posters should not talk about their favorite cheese.
Once a point of view has been established ten other people do not need to establish the same point of view. By following this rule the number of replies is reduced and it would allow others to post. I call the phenomena the Fox New Multiplier Effect. The same point of view gets repeated again and again by different people. If people are free to speak their mind in Simtropolis they should not be drowned out by a group of people all saying the same thing.
When someone has an unpopular opinion they should not feel the need to protect themselves with disclaimers. An example of this is "dev" adding that he is not trying to start anything. Members should be able to post a new point of view without fear of reprisal from ten other members. This builds on rule number two in that if one person posts an unpopular view ten people attack the view and often times the person.
People who are not interested in a topic should not leave a reply. I think it is only polite and shows respect for other people’s interests.
The meaning of text will change just from the reading of it. Call it the Bart Ehrman Rule of Text Transmogrification. Readers will always add their own interpretation to a given text. Some times the best thing to do is to sit back, take a deep breath, clean the mind of preconceptions and see it from the author’s point of view.

Setting all that aside lets get back into focus. Did anyone actually read the Discover Magazine article I am referring to? The whole reason I posted this topic is to think about how it relates to Simtropolis and if we can use its ideas to make this a better place. So far I have not received a single reply from some one who has. It is called "Brave New World" by Steven Johnson. I like the corn field idea.

Here is a link to it:

http://www.discover.com/issues/apr-06/departments/well-intro/

-Dan

mtbrocket · April 1, 2006

Here are some informal rules I came up with from observing the forums. People are supposed to be polite on Simtropolis, I think we should go beyond politeness and should therefore respect the topic and respect the creator’s wishes. Two reasons are that a topic creator has limited time and can’t respond to everyone and forums get locked down when the forum loses focus. This isn’t lording over anyone, this is asking for cooperation.

Authors of a topic should control the topic of a forum and make rules dictating what the discussion should focus on. If a topic is about American presidents the posters should not talk about their favorite cheese.
Once a point of view has been established ten other people do not need to establish the same point of view. By following this rule the number of replies is reduced and it would allow others to post. I call the phenomena the Fox New Multiplier Effect. The same point of view gets repeated again and again by different people. If people are free to speak their mind in Simtropolis they should not be drowned out by a group of people all saying the same thing.
When someone has an unpopular opinion they should not feel the need to protect themselves with disclaimers. An example of this is "dev" adding that he is not trying to start anything. Members should be able to post a new point of view without fear of reprisal from ten other members. This builds on rule number two in that if one person posts an unpopular view ten people attack the view and often times the person.
People who are not interested in a topic should not leave a reply. I think it is only polite and shows respect for other people’s interests.
The meaning of text will change just from the reading of it. Call it the Bart Ehrman Rule of Text Transmogrification. Readers will always add their own interpretation to a given text. Some times the best thing to do is to sit back, take a deep breath, clean the mind of preconceptions and see it from the author’s point of view.

Setting all that aside lets get back into focus. Did anyone actually read the Discover Magazine article I am referring to? The whole reason I posted this topic is to think about how it relates to Simtropolis and if we can use its ideas to make this a better place. So far I have not received a single reply from some one who has. It is called "Brave New World" by Steven Johnson. I like the corn field idea.

Here is a link to it:

http://www.discover.com/issues/apr-06/departments/well-intro/

-Dan

Jasoncw · April 1, 2006

So you are such a busy person that you can't read over a few extra short posts, but you expect us to go hunt down that article? Since you had written alot in your first post, I thought that you had summarized the idea of the article in terms of Simtropolis. But after reading it, it doesn't have anything to do with this conversation other than "should the moderation be more democratic," so it doesn't really matter if anyone read it or not.

You still haven't addressed anything the other people in this thread have said.

If you think that you, the creator of this thread, has the right to make rules for the common good of the thread, then why is it that Dirk, the creator of this entire site, doesn't have the right to make rules for the common good of the forums? I think we should stop to vote on the rules of this thread.

Jasoncw · April 1, 2006

So you are such a busy person that you can't read over a few extra short posts, but you expect us to go hunt down that article? Since you had written alot in your first post, I thought that you had summarized the idea of the article in terms of Simtropolis. But after reading it, it doesn't have anything to do with this conversation other than "should the moderation be more democratic," so it doesn't really matter if anyone read it or not.

You still haven't addressed anything the other people in this thread have said.

If you think that you, the creator of this thread, has the right to make rules for the common good of the thread, then why is it that Dirk, the creator of this entire site, doesn't have the right to make rules for the common good of the forums? I think we should stop to vote on the rules of this thread.

SamFlash · April 1, 2006

Originally posted by: Jasoncw So you are such a busy person that you can't read over a few extra short posts, but you expect us to go hunt down that article? Since you had written alot in your first post, I thought that you had summarized the idea of the article in terms of Simtropolis. But after reading it, it doesn't have anything to do with this conversation other than "should the moderation be more democratic," so it doesn't really matter if anyone read it or not.

You still haven't addressed anything the other people in this thread have said.

If you think that you, the creator of this thread, has the right to make rules for the common good of the thread, then why is it that Dirk, the creator of this entire site, doesn't have the right to make rules for the common good of the forums? I think we should stop to vote on the rules of this thread. quote>

I vote "yes". Wait, change that to "no". Hold on, hold on, make that a definite "maybe". Umm, just what are we voting on?

This has been an interesting discussion but it's starting to become just a tad heated. Before a moderator steps in and shuts it down we need to lighten up a little. The reality is it's Dirk's site and will be run the way he wants for as long as he wants, and that's the way it should be since it's a product of his blood, sweat, tears and money.

SamFlash · April 1, 2006

Originally posted by: Jasoncw So you are such a busy person that you can't read over a few extra short posts, but you expect us to go hunt down that article? Since you had written alot in your first post, I thought that you had summarized the idea of the article in terms of Simtropolis. But after reading it, it doesn't have anything to do with this conversation other than "should the moderation be more democratic," so it doesn't really matter if anyone read it or not.

You still haven't addressed anything the other people in this thread have said.

If you think that you, the creator of this thread, has the right to make rules for the common good of the thread, then why is it that Dirk, the creator of this entire site, doesn't have the right to make rules for the common good of the forums? I think we should stop to vote on the rules of this thread. quote>

I vote "yes". Wait, change that to "no". Hold on, hold on, make that a definite "maybe". Umm, just what are we voting on?

This has been an interesting discussion but it's starting to become just a tad heated. Before a moderator steps in and shuts it down we need to lighten up a little. The reality is it's Dirk's site and will be run the way he wants for as long as he wants, and that's the way it should be since it's a product of his blood, sweat, tears and money.

Voar Tok · April 1, 2006

SkiGeek posted this somewhere else, and I think that it really applies here.

"Dirk's sandbox, Dirk's rules."

Everything that you have suggest mtbrocket, is already requested of members in the forum rules. If you haven't read them, I suggest that you do.

Voar Tok · April 1, 2006

SkiGeek posted this somewhere else, and I think that it really applies here.

"Dirk's sandbox, Dirk's rules."

Everything that you have suggest mtbrocket, is already requested of members in the forum rules. If you haven't read them, I suggest that you do.

mtbrocket · April 1, 2006

Jasoncw, now you are just being nasty in both the topic and the PMs. Keep your anger out of the forum please. No one said anything about what Dirk can and can’t do. It was established from the start that it was his web site. Also no one is forcing you to read the article. Once again, if you have no interest in the topic then don’t spam it please.

SamFlash, you got it right. A leading cause of lock down is a rise in tempers. I have no interest in getting angry.

Continuing with the speculation:

I have another idea. How about a toggle switch for topic creators to turn on and off the ability to have replies? This would be very useful in the CJs where sometimes people can be a little zealous in the number of replies. Of course if the CJ updates were separated from the replies it would be a moot point. We will have to wait and see what Dirk has in mind.

-Dan

mtbrocket · April 1, 2006

Jasoncw, now you are just being nasty in both the topic and the PMs. Keep your anger out of the forum please. No one said anything about what Dirk can and can’t do. It was established from the start that it was his web site. Also no one is forcing you to read the article. Once again, if you have no interest in the topic then don’t spam it please.

SamFlash, you got it right. A leading cause of lock down is a rise in tempers. I have no interest in getting angry.

Continuing with the speculation:

I have another idea. How about a toggle switch for topic creators to turn on and off the ability to have replies? This would be very useful in the CJs where sometimes people can be a little zealous in the number of replies. Of course if the CJ updates were separated from the replies it would be a moot point. We will have to wait and see what Dirk has in mind.

-Dan

vidioman · April 1, 2006

We'll never get it, don't even bother trying.

I've learned alot of good life lessons here, btw.

vidioman · April 1, 2006

We'll never get it, don't even bother trying.

I've learned alot of good life lessons here, btw.

Jasoncw · April 2, 2006

lol, that's one of the problems with PMs, no one knows what you're talking about, and if we posted our PMs, or did them in public in the first place, they'd get deleted and locked anyway. Basicly, my pms to him are telling him to respond to peoples ideas, and then I was/am getting annoyed with his attitude, that I called pompous.

I think that authors of threads being able to lock their own threads would be good. When I was thinking about doing a cj, I was going to do it all in one post, so that everyone could read it, and then post about it afterwards. In CJs, I ussually skip the fan comments. It's probably possible to modify the forums to do that too (who knows how long it would take, it might not be worth it). I don't see what that has to do with a democratic/improved moderation though.

I'll say what I've already said about improving the moderation:

-Moderators need to keep and submit records of what they do.

-Moderators need to pm the offenser saying what they did wrong.

With the first one, the admins know what the moderators are doing, and they can react if the moderators aren't representing the admins the way they want. With the second one, members know what they did wrong, and if they think the moderator is in the wrong, they know which moderator to report. If a moderator really isn't doing what they should be, and the admins really know about it, I don't think they'd have a problem firing them.

I think those two things are very easy changes that have no risk of hurting the forums (so "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" doesn't apply).

The rules are already indirectly democratic because if the members don't like them, they will leave. So Dirk can't do anything that the members really don't like. The problem with dictatorship in real life is that people can't leave, and have no alternatives when the dictator starts getting mean. On the internet, people can leave at the drop of a hat, and it's the owner of the site that is hurt, not the member.

Jasoncw · April 2, 2006