Forums Updates

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Forums Updates, effective December 11, 2003

Personnel changes: Gary Wilcox has been made super moderator.

FindingFantasy has been made moderator of the "My BDSM Life" forum.

More individual forum moderators will be announced as they are decided.


Policy Changes: A revised Code of Conduct is in the works. After Jinn's approval, the new Code will go into effect as it is posted.

Henceforth, threads and posts shall remain intact, except in cases of:

Threads or posts made by previously banned members in a new pseudonym.

Threads or posts made by members, in other pseudonyms, whose posting privileges have been suspended for Code violations.

Threads or posts violating the terms of the Code of Conduct, as agreed upon by the moderation staff and the site administrator.

[Jane SC]

Congratulations, Gary. I am sure that you'll make a fabulous 'super moderator', and thanks you for your friendship and help since I first set foot in this forum.

Also congratulations to Finding Fantasy whose postins here I admire. I feel certain that the new rule changes are for the better.

And thanks to everyone who has made me welcome here, and has made my visits so informative and fun.

Love, Jane.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Forums Updates, effective December 15, 2003

Personnel changes: redEva has been added to the moderation staff. She will be taking over supervision of the Sexual Fantasy forum.


Policy changes: The new Revised Code of Conduct has been posted in General Talk. All members are encouraged to read it through and make sure they understand the new Code.


Upcoming changes: Coming soon will be an area on each member's profile to add their sex and BDSM role. Now, others will know whether each member is male or female and dom, sub or switch.

[sm4hg]

...what will happen if Jinn violates the COC??? Whom do I report this? NOT that I think such outrageous thing will ever happen. It just came to my mind.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Jinn is God.

If Jinn violates the COC, then it was meant to be.

[Tiger]

If you found me violating the CoC, I would have to personally escort you out of the forums so that no one else knows about it

But don't worry. I was kidding . That won't happen because I want the CoC to be that way, seriously.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Forums Updates, effective December 18, 2003


Site changes: Areas for gender and BDSM role have been added to user profiles. Members are encouraged to have a look and fill in the appropriate areas of their profiles.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Forums Updates: March 29, 2004

Personnel Changes: slavelucy added as moderator.

Moderation Staff improved to cover all threads. Moderators will now cover threads as follows:

Finding_Fantasy
- Comments and Suggestions
- Other BDSM Stories
- My BDSM Life

Lord Douche
- General Talk
- Site Announcements
- Story Feedback

redEva
- Author's Place
- Story Ideas
- Sexual Fantasy

slavelucy
- Critic's Circle
- Knowledge Base
- Personals


The above personnel changes have been institued to ensure the forums run more smoothly and with greater efficiency. Members are asked to read the BDSM Library Forums Revised Code of Conduct and become somewhat familiar with it. If members see post that violate that Code of Conduct they are encouraged to report those posts to the Moderator of the thread. To report a post, simply use the Report Post to Moderator link at the bottom right corner of the offensive post.

The Moderators have been given their new, farther-reaching responsibilities in an effort to keep each forum within the bounds of the Code of Conduct and to make sure everything remains clean and civil.

Any members with questions concerning the new personnel changes should ask a Moderator, Gary Wilcox or BDSM_Tourguide directly via private message.


Policy Changes: Moderators are now responsible for their own threads' maintenance and disposition. Any member with comments, questions, concerns or suggestions as to the disposition of a thread or posts within that thread should discuss these comments, questions, concerns or suggestions to the thread moderators.


In essence, the new changes to policy and personnel have set up an informal heirarchy so that members' concerns and suggestions may be answered quickly and efficiently and so that every thread is supervised so that any Code of Conduct violations may be dealt with swiftly.

[boccaccio]

Originally posted by BDSM_Tourguide
Forums Updates: March 29, 2004



In essence, the new changes to policy and personnel have set up an informal heirarchy so that members' concerns and suggestions may be answered quickly and efficiently and so that every thread is supervised so that any Code of Conduct violations may be dealt with swiftly.

=============

Yep, that's why I drop by here -- so that I can have an informal "heirarchy" {sic} with whom to share my concerns and address my suggestions. And perish forbid we children should have any unsupervised threads.

I'm sure you folks all mean well, but, sometimes, as a great architect once wrote, "Less is more". It's the internet for goodness sake, not the cub scouts.

If you ask me, we've got more moderators now than we've had individuals requiring moderation in the entire life of the forum.

But, as long as we're creating hierarchies ...

Hey, Moby! Can I be vice-curmudgeon? Or, if that's already taken, perhaps deputy under-curmudgeon? Do fig-leaf clusters come along with position?

Boccaccio

[Curtis]

Perhaps this should go under Comments and Suggestions, but since the post I'm responding to is here, this's where my reply is going. Move it if you want to.

I agree with boccaccio, but I'm not as polite. At the time that Gary was considering stepping down as super-moderator, I PMed him, and among other things told him that I thought there were too many moderators, and that I didn't care for the heirarchical system. Now, we have MORE moderators and a cemented-in heirarchy.

I think the ideal system would be to have four equal moderators and if three of them agree on something, that's the rule. Speed in decisionmaking is not something to aspire to. The faster a decision is made, the less consideration went into the making off it. What I'm looking for is a consistency of application, which we're not going to find with each moderator having his or her own little fiefdom. The rules will be (have already been) applied differently in one (or three) sub-forum than they are in another.

The concept of an appeals process is a fine one, but I have to question whether it exists other than in theory. Tourguide made no secret of how he thought our last 'crisis' was badly handled but, even though he had the authority, he did nothing to overule the decision(s) made. Maybe that was because no one went through the proper appeals procedure, but it was evident from what was being posted in three different threads that the Forumites were asking for some action to be undertaken, and none was.

I believe that there's going to continue to be an enormous reluctance to overule a decision once made. No one wants to contradict a friend, or make them look bad in a public forum, and that's understandable, but it means that in practice moderators are likely to prove to be independant Barons. I'd rather see them as part of a parliament. If you must keep this heirachy thing, why not have mods be required to check their decisions with the super-mods BEFORE they enact them? That would improve consistency.

Remember -- speed kills.

[GaryWilcox]

First of all... what's the difference between a mod and a supermod? Well, a mod is designated to effect a specific forum; supermods effect all forums. When things must move between forums, the supermods are needed. We have twelve forums that need someone to watch out for. Most of these will never need any kind of moderation.

Why, you ask, then do you need a moderator for them? Because of what we might not see coming. We never said we were planning to do more. We simply want to be able to do the same stuff, more efficiently. This isn't a paying job for any of us. And we can't be here all the time. With slavelucy added, we were able to divide up the forums and effectively step back TG and myself from doing the day to day work. We're a lot less necessary than we were before... but there will still be moments when, hopefully, you'll be glad we're around.

Whatever ideas you have of what makes a forum work, great. I have my own. I am responsible for the bright idea of bringing LD and slavelucy in. So, let it fall on me. Give them your support and try not to jump at shadows. Trust 'em to keep things running the way Jinn wants.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Originally posted by Curtis
I believe that there's going to continue to be an enormous reluctance to overule a decision once made. No one wants to contradict a friend, or make them look bad in a public forum, and that's understandable, but it means that in practice moderators are likely to prove to be independant Barons. I'd rather see them as part of a parliament. If you must keep this heirachy thing, why not have mods be required to check their decisions with the super-mods BEFORE they enact them? That would improve consistency.

This is one issue that Gary and I will be discussing with the moderators soon.

As it stands right now, the moderators have autonomy to do what they want in their own threads. However, important or controversial decisions are to be discussed and made democraticly.

We're not trying to indiscriminately mete out justice swiftly and blindly, we're trying to be more efficient. There's a difference.

I have no qualms about contradicting any moderator on these forums, even Finding_Fantasy, but I'm not going to do it unless I feel there's a good reason for it.

A democratic heirarchical structure will, in the long run, help the members, not murt them. Especially if we start having more members sign up tot he site. And that's what we're looking at is the eventual signing up of more and more people. We want to get the threads covered now so that when we have another thousand members or so, we're not left playing catch-up.

[boccaccio]

C'mon we don't need an appeals process. Just let people say what they want to say.

Gees, we've got people, including yours truly, writing stories about every ghastly perversion (and one or two not so ghastly perversions, too ;-) under the sun at this web site. Of all the sites on the internet, shouldn't this one be about pushing the envelope, and not about 'moderation' and 'appeals' and 'hierarchy'?

If a troll comes along now and then, so what? We've all seen worse.

If someone appends a thought to the wrong thread, so what?

Lighten up, folks. If I wanted to frolic under the all-seeing eye of Roberts' Rules of Order, I'd have become a Republican.

Mr and Madame Chairpersons -- Can't we get back to the main topics on the agenda -- sex and violence? ;-)

Boccaccio

[Curtis]

boccaccio, a junior member? How is it that when Mobius changed his name he kept his count, but when you and Lady Amanda changed yours you started over from scratch?

Okay, three points: First, it's good that you're looking ahead to when posting increases. It's already on the rise, and there's no reason that I know of to believe the trend won't continue.
Second, boccaccio, this one I disagree with you about. The Library and Forum sections perform different functions. Having as little moderation as possible in the Library is a good thing, but we've had multiple examples (Kostly, Brenda, the list goes on) of why moderation is needed in the Forum. Just take a look at the "Why Are BDSM Girls So Fat" thread, also known as "The Thread That Refuses To Die". Also, though I realize you were trying for humor, and though I'm all in favor of sex and violence, this IS the proper place to discuss this topic. The Library and some of the other sub-forums are the proper places for our favorite topics, but there are also sub-forums that exist for the express purpose of talking about the important stuff, and this is one of them.
Third, Gary, you've gotta stop taking complaints about the process as personal attacks on you. I was just talking to Fox about hubris earlier today. What an amazing coincidence! I don't want to disillusion you, but you are not responsible for everything that goes wrong on this site. Some days, you're not even responsible for half of it. In this, if in nothing else, take your cue from Tourguide.

[Finding_Fantasy]

Originally posted by boccaccio
C'mon we don't need an appeals process. Just let people say what they want to say.

Hey it's nice to be able to say what ever you want to but what's to stop me from saying that someone is an asshole, a moron, or what ever other insults my fingers can type? Should we allow these things to slide? Should we allow people to insult each other, berate each other, or other hurtful things?

Is it right to allow these things to happen?

Absolutely not.

Wouldn't you want someone to step in and resolve a situation from a somewhat unbiased opinion? If there is a squabble that is getting out of hand in the public forums is it not better to have a mediator/moderator to make sure things don't go to far?

I think so.

Do you want someone who is a constant trouble maker, such as Whipit, to have free rien; to berate people; to insult and hurt?

I should hope not.

And that is why we have moderators. And why do we have so many moderators? Because there are times when one, two, or even more of us are gone for an extended period of time, for what ever the reason may be. Also, there is a better chance of one of being on when something happens and help smooth things out before they get too far gone.

What I find funny is that people consistantly complain when new rules are made and "leaders" are picked, especially if it is not them who did the rule making. If they aren't in control, it doesn't matter what the ones who are in control do, nothing the can appease them. But if something happens to them, if they get insulted or attacked they always seem to be the ones that scream the loudest, demanding that something be done.

I don't see how everyone can get so bent out of shape about having a few rules and moderators for the good of the site in general.

In reality, how many posts have we really edited?

How often have we supressed someone's right to free speech?

How many times have we let heated discussions go without stepping in, closing or deleting a thread?

How many people have we banned without first giving ample warning?

We have let a heck of a lot more slide than we have interfered in. Those who oppose the moderators always seem to dwell only on the few negative aspects, the few times we have intervened and don't even seem willing to recognise the amount we let eveyone "get away with."

Also, a few more things those who are complaining might want to remember.

This is a free site, at least the forums are. And since it is free, I should think that you would at least be willing to live with a few rules and a few people to enforce them. You cannot have it all.

The moderators are all volunteers. We do not get paid for what we do. That, in it self, should warrant a little more respect that what we are given. At least in my opinion.

The moderators are human and have opinions of there own. Just because the post an opinion that contradicts yours does not mean they are saying you are wrong. Nor does it mean that they are censoring you. They are simply using their god given right to post their opinions that you all seem to constantly be screaming about.

No matter where you go in the world, there are rules. Not because we wish to restrict you, but because we wish for this to remain a pleasant place to be; a place that won't get shut down for copyright infringement; a place where we can safely express our opinions without fear of being made fun of. This place is no different, nor should it be. That again is just my opinion.

The bottom line is:

There are going to be rules and there are going to be moderators and you need to learn to live with it. If you have a comment or suggestion of a way that we can improve upon a rule, by all means suggest it and it will be discussed and given honest consideration. But please realize that, just because you don't like them, neither the moderators nor the rules are going to go away.

(Steps down from her soap box)

[Jones, Nikka]

I think it is a good Idea to have more moderators. With LordDouche Down Under and slavelucy in Europe, the GaryWilcox / redEva team in the east coast and TG and FF out west, the forums are covered practically full time.
Also if one of the moderators is out of line because of a personal implication in a forum discussion, there are more chances another moderator can step in and help everyone keep their cool.

[fetish101]

people like whipit exist because people give them reasons to exist. Why do you think Whipit came back so often? Either he really does have no life and suffers from some sort of obsessive/compulsive behavior, or he was feeding off the attention and general hoopla made over him. If everybody just ignored people like that they probably won't come back, as they aren't getting the response they desire.

That all said, it was Jinn's idea to get rid of posts like that, so there's really no point in discussing it anyways..

[boccaccio]

Originally posted by Curtis
Having as little moderation as possible in the Library is a good thing, but we've had multiple examples (Kostly, Brenda, the list goes on) of why moderation is needed in the Forum.

The list doesn't go on very far, Curtis. That's my point. In two or three years here, I've probably seen less than five individuals who needed, um, discipline. For this we need half a dozen moderators, super-moderators, and above them all the Supreme and Benign Wizard of Aahhhhhs, Jinn, himself?

Not to mention more tedious threads about moderating and group politics and dynamics than we have about writing and reviews? (Or at least it seems like it to this reader)

As FF so aptly puts it "How many posts have we really edited... how many people have we banned?" Very few ... because there have been very, very few posters and threads which really and truly required intervention, even though we've belabored the point endlessly.

Trolls and trouble-makers are self-identifying and easily ignored. We don't need an armada of moderators to tell us when there's an idiot in our midst. And don't misunderstand, I have nothing against any of the moderators as indidividuals; I've had nothing but friendly exchanges with most, if not all, of them. I have no personal axe to grind, here. No one is bothering me or preventing me from putting my occasional two cents in about something. I just don't find the forum as entertaining as I used to. It's like a subcommittee meeting in here, any more.

Once in a great while someone will come along who needs to be kicked out; fine, we can do it when the time comes. But in my opinion we don't need to bring in the SCHISM (Supreme Court Harnessing Innumerable Sadists and Masochists :-) ) to do it.


Boccaccio

[Jane SC]

In two or three years here, I've probably seen less than five individuals who needed, um, discipline. For this we need half a dozen moderators, super-moderators, and above them all the Supreme and Benign Wizard of Aahhhhhs, Jinn, himself?

Somewhat belatedly, I have to say that I agree with MoonfruitUK, and disagree almost completely with Boccaccio.

I am a member of another Forum/Bulletin Board and, a few months ago, the whole edifice came tumbling down because, in the Owner/Moderator's absence in hospital, two members decided to have a fight on line. It became really vicious, escalating wth appalling rapidity and ended up with threats of writs and all sorts of legal action against the Forum, its owner and its members.

That, dear friends, was an up-market, supposedly highly intellectual, academic forum................ Yet within 48 hours two members had brought the whole thing to its knees, to the degree that the owner had to shut it down for fear of being dragged into acrimonious litigation.

Of course, Bocaccio is right - in the 'best of all worlds' we would have no need of moderators. BUT sadly this world is inhabited with vain and argumentative human-beings, some of whom find great joy in picking fights over the most trivial of disagreements, and who revel in destroying other people's pleasures.

So I am delighted that we have such a strong of effective team of moderators; I have been lucky enough to have got to know many of them at a personal level since becoming a member here, and without exception they strike me as laid back, amusing and highly tolerant individuals who I feel totally confident will use their powers wisely and discreetly.

Thanks guys and gals, you are doing a wonderful job, and it's great to know that you are there if we do have a member stepping out of line and threatening the wellbeing of this wonderful Forum. Keep up the good work..............

Love
Jane.

PS. DON'T ask to have my child, Gary............. I am in enough trouble wih my Owner as it is already!!! Hugs, J.

[redEva]

...So I am delighted that we have such a strong of effective team of moderators; I have been lucky enough to have got to know many of them at a personal level since becoming a member here, and without exception they strike me as laid back, amusing and highly tolerant individuals who I feel totally confident will use their powers wisely and discreetly.

Thanks guys and gals, you are doing a wonderful job, and it's great to know that you are there if we do have a member stepping out of line and threatening the wellbeing of this wonderful Forum. Keep up the good work..............

Love
Jane..

Thank you dear for kind words - and yes - while all is good there is no need for police - but one thug can bring it all to unrest!

...
PS. DON'T ask to have my child, Gary............. I am in enough trouble wih my Owner as it is already!!! Hugs, J.

ROFL - if he can not - can i ?

[moonfruituk]

I think the point about having near-on 24 hour moderating avaliable is a really good one, and makes sense. Things can turn nasty very quickly sometimes.

Having the forums divided up between moderators also makes a lot of sense, as it means each person has a manageable amount to deal with, rather than having one or two people trying to oversee what is becoming an ever-larger forum.

I like having moderators in general, if only because I've seen things turn very nasty on another forum I'm a member of: another group of people were intent on wrecking our community, victimising it's members and generally being nasty and destructive, and it took the moderating team a long time to keep it all under control and 'safe' for everyone to post there. And that kind of thing could happen anywhere, and if it were to happen here, then you'd be begging (and grateful) for the moderators.

I'd like to thank all the moderators for their hard work, and for their care for these forums and their posters. I've been impressed with the generally pleasant and helpful atmosphere I've found here.

[Finding_Fantasy]

Originally posted by moonfruituk
I'd like to thank all the moderators for their hard work, and for their care for these forums and their posters. I've been impressed with the generally pleasant and helpful atmosphere I've found here.

Thank you very much moonfruituk. It is always nice to know that we are apprciated by at least a few members of this site and not resnted!

[GaryWilcox]

Originally posted by moonfruituk
I'd like to thank all the moderators for their hard work, and for their care for these forums and their posters. I've been impressed with the generally pleasant and helpful atmosphere I've found here.

I'd like to invite you to have many children with me.

Seriously, thank you for the vote of confidence.

[moonfruituk]

gary, ff, it's my pleasure. People don't realise how much guys like you do, and, well, i figure if someone's doing a good job then you should tell them, especially when there are so many negative opinions around.

gary, thanks for the offer... 'fraid someone else has dibs tho hehe

[fetish101]

I guess I'll put this in here.. I love the new version of Vbulletin! Looks so much nicer, all the necessary buttons/commands in convenient spots..so much better!

[matte]

I love the new look too... !