Forum rules update

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by James R, Aug 7, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. chimpkin C'mon, get happy! Registered Senior Member

    Again, still here b/c my wife locked up my pistol without telling me she had done or asking my permission...
    Happy about that ATM...
    Anyway, digressing, sorry, back to the regularly scheduled program...
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    We must remember that at least one member of Sciforums has committed suicide.
    Prior to that, she spoke about it at the forums.
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    I agree. This is why I have no intention of deleting all such threads or of banning people who post them. I think we really need to deal with this kind of thing on a case-by-case basis.

    In the case of promoting or encouraging suicide I agree with you. Discussing it is a different matter. But like I said, I think it will need to be decided case by case.

    I understand your good intentions, but I think people need to realise that sciforums is not a help line or a mental health service. It's a discussion forum. Certainly I think we ought to encourage any person who proclaims a suicidal intent to seek professional help.
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member


    An idea is that
    1. moderators develop a protocol for dealing with people who proclaim suicidal attempt and have this protocol ready
    2. a post (or private message) where a poster proclaims suicidal intent be reported and the moderators deal with that according to said protocol.
  8. Gustav Banned Banned

    14. A Private Message, whether from another member or from a moderator, is private and should not be posted to the public forums without the express permission of the author.

  9. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    I agree . Confidential. Not to say that if you are the receiver it is at your discretion. Lots of people say it . People do it too. Sad but true.
    Private message means private message to Me , but there is no guarantee implied or granted . You take the risk when you tell someone something . I try not to violate trust . Not so easy sometimes and the trust can be violated if I deem it is in the best interest of the reveal-er. Not that we always make the right choice . We are humans and humans are fuck ups . You too Frag. I seen you fuck up and take the heat . I got to give you kudos though cause you take the heat pretty fucking good . Flexible like a ken doll made out of Gumby. Well hears Wishing you the best . make a wish in a well just for the fun of it
  10. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Gustav, PMs within the context of these forums have nothing to do with or in common with Government business. This is a privately owned discussion group and PM are not posted to or accessible, from the public portion of the forum. Their privacy status is completely within the governing authority of the forum administrator(s).

    What is posted publicly is public, what is shared by PM is assumed a Private Communication.
  11. Gustav Banned Banned

    our ruleset is a collaborative effort of the community, regardless of whether one is a member or mod. please try to understand this. we the community, benefit from these rules that aim to mirror the freedom and rights we enjoy in a modern society. i did not sign up here to abandon the the notions of fairplay and justice. did you?

    what are you advocating here? we have a private ownership of a forum that operates in a public space and they get to do whatever they please? leave. there are many other forums where that cater to those of a fascist bent. this is not one of them

    once again, very specifically, if any of the mods communicates in an official capacity thru pm's with me, do so without the expectation of privacy
  12. Gustav Banned Banned

    if you wanna speak off the record, just say so

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  13. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member


    I encourage that a statute of limitations be introduced for how long an offending post can earn its poster infractions or warnings.

    Two suggestions:

    1. For issuing infractions for offending posts: a limit of one month on the numerical day after posting a post.
    This is for easier calculation and clarity; for example, if a post was posted on February 25, it can last earn infractions by including March 25, GMT.

    2. A post can be reported and moderated at any time, regardless how long ago it was posted.

    We must take into account that things may slip the attention of posters and moderators, so it is reasonable to have no limits on reporting and moderating.

    But just like in regular law there are statutes of limitation so that an offense or crime cannot be persecuted indefinitely (other than for a few exceptions), so we should have a statute of limitation as to how long after posting a post is infractionable.

    If an offending post was not reported or noticed a month after posting, then most likely nobody was offended enough by it, so there is no need to issue infractions.

    We should encourage posters to be alert, to act timely, and to move past offenses instead of holding on to grudges.
  14. Gustav Banned Banned


    i believe that is affirmed by these.....

    time stamps are not a concern in doling out infractions

    "might" is the keyword as time stamps are not a concern in doling out infractions

    but some may as time stamps are not a concern in doling out infractions


    satisfied, signal?
    the nazis aint got shit on these folks

    there is no turning over a new leaf in sci.
    no capacity for reinvention.
    no change of heart possible
    no regrets can be expressed
    no youthful indiscretions

    you will be fucked over at anytime on the whim and fancy of the nazi mods of sci.
    and they will go back 11 years to do so

    an idealistic vision of sci that is in direct contradiction with the sentiments of the staff
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2011
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    You need to get some perspective. The Nazis committed genocide. I moderate an internet forum. See the difference?
  16. Gustav Banned Banned

    i can concede that point with ease
    it is however disappointing that it is the only issue you appear to have with my post
  17. seagypsy Banned Banned

    This creates a problem. When mods tell you something in PM, you can't hold them to it because you aren't allowed to reveal publicly what they have said. For instance, Two mods have agreed with me int eh past that Bells was wrong in a couple of situations. One even suggested blame maybe should be directed at her being menopausal. One said, in a particular situation that I was being more civilized than she was. The one that called her menopausal said that all the mods know she is not so useful as a mod with the members but only as a mediator between the mods themselves and that's why she is there. And that her poor behavior with members is forgiven because of her hard life. But I can't prove that any mod said these things because I am not allowed to show those PMs to the public. Basically both of these mods admitted that her behavior was inappropriate but that nothing would be done because of the pitty factor that is held for her.
  18. seagypsy Banned Banned

    I second the first suggestion. A statute of limitations is very reasonable and fair.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page