Rules Discussion

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

Also, moderator action isn't an allowed subject. I will allow it for discussion of my own decisions, but if you have a problem with a moderator or admin otherwise, it will need to be take up in private.

I submit that this sounds like policy I have passionately challenged elsewhere, and while I appreciate the purpose, something about sassing/trolling mods for trying to talk you down informally compounds the original offense and is strongly and Officially Frowned Upon. -Also, stupid to (peeve) off someone who could ban you. I believe that is your intent, but forbidding discussion of moderator actions is far too autocratic for my blood.

Respectfully submitted, BU

[Aeson]

The reason for the rule is discussion of a moderator publicly can only achieve one thing, and that's to convince Ming or I to reprimand the moderator. It's not going to help convince the moderator involved, and will likely lead to further moderation (of the sort being discussed) if anything.

Discussion about the rules is of course ok here in Site Feedback. This has implications on moderation, but can be done without needing to make a moderator (who is just a poster who has volunteered to help the site out) the topic of debate.

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

Sir, I am all for not being subjected to abuse for intervening in situations, but I don't get the argument you make in the first paragraph, unless you want to slyly encourage abuse of your staff, which I refuse to believe of you... I much prefer the second paragraph.

Do you mean to have this thread locked?

[Aeson]

No, I moved it out into it's own thread since it's a discussion I think is important to clear up... whereas the topic of the thread it was originally in was different.

[Aeson]

I'm not sure why you say the first paragraph would encourage abuse of the staff. What I mean by it is by requiring feedback about site moderation to be carried out in private is to keep all the "fluff" from getting any public exposure. This cuts out all that fluff (since the admins will likely just laugh at people who bring it up) and leave only the serious issues to be dealt with. I find this much better than the fluff being public. Especially when that fluff is directed at specific individuals, which in and of itself is against the rules to post in on-topic areas of the site.

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

The reason for the rule is discussion of a moderator publicly can only achieve one thing, and that's to convince Ming or I to reprimand the moderator.

Perhaps you said moderator again when you meant member the second time? All seems to compute, given that change.

As I said, I'm all for not taking abuse for doing the job, and since that is the intent of the rule, (yes?) the rule is better if it says that - discuss the offense, not the moderator. Nice parallel to discussing the topic, not the poster, and for the same reason; staff are people, too.

Notwithstanding appearances.

[Aeson]

Yah, that's the intent of the rule. Staff are people too, and are also protected by the rules. For the same reason discussing what a specific poster has done is not allowed. It's just sometimes people might not realize the same rule applies to staff and posters, or that there's some sort of special case for moderators. The only special case is me, since the only check on my authority is public opinion. (And my other personalities, but they're all useless.)

[Lancer]

So Ming is now a full on admin?

[Aeson]

Ming has been an admin since shortly after I took over management.

[AAAAAAAAH!]

I'm pretty sure Civfanatics doesn't allow discussion of moderator actions. Clearly Apolyton should follow their glorious example.

[Aeson]

They do have about 3 to 4 times as much traffic and a lot more activity.

This rule doesn't apply to the OT of course, since the OT doesn't have moderator actions.

[Ming]

Either way has it's strengths and weaknesses. There are problems no matter which way you do it.

IMHO, If you have a problem with a mod/action, that's why god made PM's.

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

Hmm. Is there anywhere rules changes are being logged/published besides random posts?

[Ming]

In the OLD DAYS, I used to maintain the site rules and keep them up to date the in FAQ that was highlighted so that all posters could view them.
I can't remember the last time it was updated

This is what is currently in the FAQ...



General Posting Rules:

Do not post anything that violates the laws of your country, the laws of the Netherlands (the site owners’ country) or the laws of the United States of America (the country where Apolyton is hosted).
Hate speech based on sex, sexual orientation, race, religion, age, disability will not be tolerated.
Do not engage in explicit sexual discussion (including explicit pictures, links to explicit sites or explicit discussions of sexual acts).
Do not use more than one login to post. If you grow weary of your login, you may request a username change by sending a private message to an administrator.
Do not violate the privacy of any member of Apolyton. This includes disclosing private communications or any personal or private information about an individual.
Do not plot, plan or discuss anything that would involve harm to any individual/organization/corporation/website, even if the discussion does not technically break any laws. Apolyton strives to maintain good relations with other civilization sites. We are aware that some users are members of multiple sites but we suggest that if you have any issues with those other sites you take them up with the relevant site rather than posting about them here.
Do not post commercial advertisements. However, if you have an interesting Civilization-related mod or project you want to let people know about, please do so! If you are in any doubt about which side of the line your post falls on, please ask a moderator for guidance.
Signatures can only contain normal-sized text. They may be in any format or color. All other general rules also apply to signatures.
All posts should be made in English, with the exception of posts in the Spanish Civilization Site forums, which may also be made in Spanish. Exceptions to this rule can be requested.
Constructive criticism of the site and offers of help are always welcome. Please post your views in the 'Site Feedback & News' forum, or send a PM to one of the administrators.
Posts in on topic forums should be relevant to the forum in which they are posted and should stay on topic as far as possible. Threads or posts in the wrong forum or thread may be moved, closed or deleted. Bad language may also be removed from on topic forums to preserve the family friendly nature of the site
Be nice to newbies!
Do not be a jerk. From time to time Apolyton staff are bound to make mistakes, despite their best efforts. Please try and work with us to improve things and bear in mind some things might take longer than you expect.



Special Off Topic Forum Rules:

The Off Topic Forum will be moderated more lightly than other forums.
Topics that might be considered 'spam' or 'trolling' in on topic forums will more often be tolerated in the Off Topic.
Posters who want to have serious debates can insert the label "[serious]" into their thread titles. We'd ask users to respect their wishes and remain on topic in those threads. If you wish to have a lighthearted thread on the same subject, start a new thread.
Jokes / mild name-calling / banter etc. are allowed as along as their attitude is jovial or humorous. Malicious personal attacks, attacks that are deemed to be aimed at driving other users from the site and personal threats will not be tolerated.
There may be some quirky traditions in the Off Topic that appear to break some of the main site rules, such as the Finnish thread. These are allowed.

[Ming]

As you can see... it's been a while since they have been updated. But this is what is currently in the FAQ