The Role of a Sweeper

Discussion in 'THE TEMPLE' started by Maljonic, Jun 30, 2005.

  1. Maljonic Administrator

    The Terry Pratchett Unseen Message Board holds to a very libertarian attitude towards freedom of speech and not deleting posts and users’ comments; conversations conducted here are, for the most part, good and friendly. The main problem the message board will face is that of spam, i.e. dozens (hundreds in some cases) of empty posts for the sole purpose of unbalancing the stability of the community; or unwanted ads by people who join the boards with no other purpose than to leave behind a free link to their business, a business that is often of questionable moral and/or intellectual value.

    [list:d398d74193]A Sweeper’s main task is to remove these unwanted posts at the request of the board’s members.

    Trolls: the problem of trolls is similar to spam in that it clogs up the boards with pointless posts and undermines the balance of the community; the difference with trolls is that they don’t always start out that way, or it’s more difficult to decide right away if that is what they are. For this reason it is up to the membership of the board as a whole to decide what to do about them; Sweepers are not to take matters into their own hands and go above the wishes of the board members, or act without their permission.

    The Sweepers are also here to help guide Newbits (new board members) and assist them with technical difficulties, they may instruct them in the Ways of the board, though it is expected that any established member will also be able to do this.[/list:u:d398d74193]


    Members please feel free to add to, correct and dispute any of the above until we have hammered out all the particulars. :)
  2. Mynona Member

    Please add the part that the sweepers will also be there to guide the newbits. And help with whatnots.
  3. Maljonic Administrator

    [quote:6a65507823="Mynona"]Please add the part that the sweepers will also be there to guide the newbits. And help with whatnots.[/quote:6a65507823]Amended. :)
  4. Tephlon Active Member

    [quote:a079704cc2].. people who join the boards with no the purpose than to leave behind a free link to their business ..[/quote:a079704cc2]

    That would be "no other purpose"?

    Also I noticed in the "Members Writing's" part of the board:
    [quote:a079704cc2]...There aren't any news yet for this topic...[/quote:a079704cc2]

    "any news items" or "There isn't any news yet..." Right? (I hope of course that it will be filled with stories soon, but even so... :)

    Edit: Remove random Code
  5. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    Actually, the plural form is correct. However, morale should be changed to moral. Otherwise, fine.
  6. Maljonic Administrator

    Thanks for the corrections. The news is right as it is though, as Buzzfloyd said; it just looks a little odd because we're not used to seeing it that way, the plural of new. Like you say, it shouldn't be there long anyway. :)
  7. Marcia Executive Onion

    [quote:8f57394f7c="Tephlon"]
    Also I noticed in the "Members Writing's" part of the board:
    [quote:8f57394f7c]...There aren't any news yet for this topic...[/quote:8f57394f7c]

    "any news items" or "There isn't any news yet..." Right? (I hope of course that it will be filled with stories soon, but even so... :)

    [/quote:8f57394f7c]

    I think this is a British English vs. American English thing. We treat collective nouns differently.
  8. Tephlon Active Member

    So one new, two news?

    Right, I read that as "News items".

    Blame it on English not being my first language, and American TV.

    Cool, free english lessons!
  9. Guest Guest

    Do you really have one new and many news in America? Tell me you're lying. And don't confuse the Dutch, I like them! :p
  10. prettybutterfly New Member

    I've never heard that, "aren't any news" is grammatically, technically correct it's just that Brits don't use it any more, I didn't realise americans did. Just one of those things I guess :)
  11. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    No, it's the other way round. In American English you say, "There isn't any news." In British English you say, "There aren't any news." In British English, the first way would be acceptable, but you would be more correct to say it the second way.
  12. sampanna New Member

    Minor hijack plus rant:

    [quote:7a87e20dcd]Originally posted by Buzzfloud:
    No, it's the other way round. In American English you say, "There isn't any news." In British English you say, "There aren't any news." In British English, the first way would be acceptable, but you would be more correct to say it the second way.[/quote:7a87e20dcd]

    Tell me about it! We learn British English in India, and I keep running into trouble here .. in Minnesota, they speak Minnesotan .. not even American English. Sometimes my students don't understand the words I use .. even when there isn't an issue with the accent.
  13. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    Heheh! :D The other trouble with British English as compared to American English is that the rules are not always as clear. There are plenty of things that are unacceptable in American English but are OK in British. We have a lot of ambiguity.
  14. Marcia Executive Onion

    I recently noticed that in a lot of British newspaper and magazine articles, sentences end with prepositions. Even though I know there are times when it is necessary to end a sentence with a preposition for it to make sense, it grates on me when there is another way to word the sentence.

    'No news [i:51c0d81b4e]are[/i:51c0d81b4e] good news' just doesn't sound right.
  15. fudgecake New Member

    You can't end a sentence with a preposition, which is why if you're a little kid and your parent brings the wrong story to read to you at bedtime you can't say "What did you bring that book that I didn't want to be read [b:b948ebc311]to out of up for[/b:b948ebc311]?" because that's 5!!

    Ahem... :| Sorry about that. I tend to think I'm clever. I'll go hide now... Carry on! :D
  16. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    Actually, you [i:8a350d016a]can[/i:8a350d016a] legitimately end a sentence with a preposition, in British English at least. The superstition against it is a longstanding one. But, as someone once said, "This is the kind of thing up with which I will not put!"
  17. OmKranti Yogi Wench

    lol, Grace. That made me laugh.
  18. Mooseman New Member

    woah, I never knew that the English language could be such a topic! I'm reading this like :shock: "wha?"
  19. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    just wanted to say that I expect to be visiting the original topic of this thread later tonight, or some time this weekend.

    i think we need to finalize what a moderator should be doing before we start to look at who's going to be a permanat moderator.
  20. Maljonic Administrator

    I think we also need to make a sticky thread or page somewhere, that can be linked to right from the front page, with our posting rules and policies on, seeing as the both are interconnected.

    We could just copy over the same thing from the other boards, then delete it from there seeing as it really belongs to us anyway?

    I was also thinking the same about the introduce yourself thread, that we should bring it over here then delete it from over there? :)
  21. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    I dunno if we need to delete the old ones... I'm not dead set against it, but I'd like to hear some reasons for it.

    As for sticky threads of rules, absolutely... but I don't think we need to cut and paste the guidelines... i think they need to be gone over carefully and reevaluated.

    I'd like to make that a top priority, that we discuss all the political stuff (Big and small) and get it sorted out quickly. we can use this forum to keep things out of the main discussion areas, and if people don't want to participate in the decision making process then they won't have to even be aware of it if they choose.

    of course, if they don't want to participate, that doesn't mean they wouldn't have to abide by the community rules...

    but anyway, more on this later.
  22. Maljonic Administrator

    I agree, we do need our rules sorting out as quickly as possible, we can hardly tell people they're in the wrong if we don't have any. I also think it's great that we have a seperate place to discuss this now, so it doesn't clog up the lighter hearted general discussions. :)

    I was just thinking to delete the old ones, the introduction thread really, so it doesn't keep cropping up all the time on the old boards, being used by the trolls and such that we left behind - I don't know, it just feels like it's kind of ours or something, guess it doesn't really matter?
  23. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    eh, I'm very much inclined to leave it for others to use as they see fit. if they don't want it, it'll just be burried and ancient history. let's face it, there WILL be a new culture on those boards. hopefully if we all have links to these boards in our sigs there, we'll get most of the new members here too.

    as for our rules, for right now i'd say the old ones stand until changed... anyone disagree?
  24. Maljonic Administrator

    I agree that the old rules should stand, we need a copy of them here though; I'm just thinking it's abit odd to have identical documents on both sites, unless we want to rewrite them a little bit, I don't mind though. :)
  25. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    i expect we'll rewrite bits, dunno how major it will be.

    anyway, we can't delete all the instances of the guidelines on the old site if we wanted to... tony's posted several of them.
  26. Buzzfloyd Spelling Bee

    I don't think we should delete them. People who wander onto there and read over the history of the site should be able to see what the rules were that we were trying to enforce.

    It's pretty clear that we've all gone now and that our rules therefore no longer apply.
  27. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    I'd like a more detailed account of what sweepers can do.

    I wouldn't mind us having the power to 'ban' but to only ban people after public consent. But into todays case if people come back after they've been banned-such as Junty today- we can reban them immitately. Since once people have been coventried/banning, it's us saying 'we do not want you in this community'. I think if you come back after that it can be considered trolling.

    Went do we move topics? After a request by a member? Does the request have to be from the member who made the topic? or can it be anyone?

    If a topic is in the wrong place...like a Watch Topic in the Witch book? Or in the temple? Can we move it with being requested?

    If a thread has been Hi-jacked can we spilt them into two threads? Do we only do that if it has been requested? Could I request it? (then do it my self)

    Can we detele troll posts? or can we only detele obivous spam.
  28. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    I think we ought to tread cautiously with most of that stuff. raise a motion, get a second, if there's no objections carry it out.

    Things like paypal spam, I say we delete on sight. if it turns out to be relevant or shouldn't have been deleted, I understand that we CAN recover it, but by and large, anything that's going to be deleted needs to be addressed BEFORE deleting.
  29. Maljonic Administrator

    I have to say again that when a post is deleted it can't be recovered, it's gone forever, removed from the database entirely - so we do have to be very careful with that. It's one of the reasons for the dungeon dimensions I guess, so we can move stuff in there instead of deleting it. Moving stuff is much safer, you can move things any number of times - put it back where it came from or whatever. Also when you move a topic, which someone has already so you'll know this, you can opt to leave a link behind to where you moved it to, which is good in case it was started in the witch books forum for instance and someone came back expecting it to be still there - they can click on a link and be taken to its new location and everyone's happy.

    I don't think we'll ever need to split threads, but again it's not so terrible, nothing gets deleted by splitting a thread.

    Locking a thread is also an option that can be undone just as easily if needed.

    I think I mentioned deleting posts in that special title thread, I'm not going to do that, I'll gho back and change it, I'll just move the thread into the temple when the time is up and lock it, then start a new thread explaining special titles. That way nobody loses any of their posts, and there's a record of what's gone on.
  30. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    right. Okay, Deleting posts is a No No.

    should we then consider locking and moving spam to the dungeon dimensions forum? or is it safe to delete that junk?

    also, i really don't think splitting threads would be an issue. hijacks happen. if a polite request won't bring things back on topic, then maybe we could look at a split, i guess.
  31. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    Ok. I think the only posts that should EVER be deleted should be obvious spam.

    Anything else should either be moved to an apropreate forum. So move a book thread into the right book forum (and leave a link) and any other threads that we think a inapprate to the Dunguoen forum.

    Spilting thread wil be rare... only when there is a good hi-jack in an already good thread, but we should work out the rules on it. Can does the creater of the thread have to suggest it or can anyone?

    Also when would it be right to lock a thread? suggestions rules?

    Should Mods be able to ban people (after a community vote that is- but after a community vote and a person comes back, they can be reban striagh away?). I don't think it's complete wise or fair to expect Mal to have to do all the banning?
  32. Maljonic Administrator

    Yeah, I think we can just move stuff to the DD, especially if we're not sure; I don't think we'll get the same level of spam that the old board did anyway, I think there may be a loophole in the code on the old place that allows automatic registration for spam programs or something.

    Still it might be fun if it did happen if members simply post 'spam' three times or something, to confirm that's what it is so it can be deleted? :)
  33. Maljonic Administrator

    I don't think banning will come up that often to be honest, I can't see me being rushed off my feet with it - plus there's no way to make it possible for moderators to ban people anyway.

    As for splitting, it's usually the members that request that kind of thing to make life easier. :)
  34. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    Yeah, or we can leave it in there locked for a time period and if no-one raises any questions about it we'll detele it? or something.I think having a 'junk' forum is a good plan. We can just bump anything we're not sure of in there.

    Perphaps we could have a sticky in there called objections. Everything that gets put into the Dungeoen 'junk' forum, is locked. And if people have any objections they post in the sticky thread riasing them. I suggest locking the posts and having a sticky thread becuase it will keep all the 'objection' arguements in one place rather than have them dotted around on singular threads?
  35. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    I think for things like splitting or locking or moving or whatever, someone, even a mod, could suggest it and if no one objects, then fine.

    locking threads would need careful consideration, but i'd think in general a spam thread or troll propoganda could qualify for instant lockdown.

    something like lock it, move it to the dungeon dimensions, and have a thread in the temple asking for a group decision. if the group says unlock it, then we put it back and unlock it.
  36. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    On the spilting, does it have to be the person who made the thread to suggest it, or just any member? If I want to spilt it, would I have to wait for someone to suggest it? Or could my member side suggest it to my mod side or would another mod have to do it?

    I know is not that big a deal, I just want to be clear from the start how everything will work.
  37. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    same thing really, I'd say anyone can suggest it, and if a second party seconds the motion and no third party objects, then fine.

    I definately think that your "mod side" suggesting it and your "member side" agreeing is bollocks.

    that sort of logic would see me registering a new account for each separate email address and labeling them The Seven Garners...

    'there's Agressive, Paranoid, Hyperactive, Inactive, Trenchmouth, Ban-em-All, and Trollbait, and they ALL vote a party ticket! mwahaha!'


    defiantely needs a second party to second a motion, and some stuff might warrant a vote, particularly if there's an objection.

    now, splitting, locking, and moving threads.... i don't expect it to be necessary very often, particularly splitting threads (how would that even work?), and where it is necessary, I expect it'll either be so damn simple that no vote is needed, or else too important not to mkae a big deal of.

    we should definately, at least for right now, work with a suggestion/approval model. motion raised, motion seconded, THEN action.
  38. Marcia Executive Onion

    I think obvious spam threads should be deleted, not locked. People don't usually respond to spam posts; they are usually repeated one-post threads. They are going to take up the same space on the boards whether they are locked or open. The only way to stop spammers from potentially filling up the boards is by deleting spam.

    I also think that we don't usually need to vote for a moderator to delete spam. I think the mods can take it for granted that nobody wants to see "MAKE $$$$$$MILLIONS WITH PAYPAL!!!!!!" posted 5 times.
  39. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    I'd be inclined to agree, but we'll see if any carrots crop up with objections.
  40. Maljonic Administrator

    Especially if we have clear rules stating the type of threads that will be deleted, like the ones on Maljonic's Dreams about website pimping:

    http://maljonicsdreams.com/phpbb2/about525.html

    Obviously we attract our fair share of loonies on MD, but to be honest we haven't had that much to do; a few threads deleted because they fell into the categories mentioned in our rules. Splitting a thread has never come up before.

    I do suggest we make a set of posting rules, with the above rewritten for here included in them somewhere; we can then have a link that reads 'please read this first before posting' right at the top of the forums above or underneath:

    'Board Usage FAQ • Search • Memberlist • Profile • Albums • '

    so it's seen from every page. Members will get used to it being there in no time and not see it, but newcomers should see it right away and it will be their own fault if they don't read it and end up breaking our rules.

    I think it's more important that we get these 'posting guidlines' sorted out first than worrying about moving, splitting and locking threads - niether of which are that big a deal - and also be flexible in the future if something comes up that doesn't fit our original thoughts and ideas, change things that don't work and add things that come to mind that seem more appropriate.

    We could get bogged down for months with this if we try and get everything perfect before we impliment anything, leaving ourselves with nothing at all until we do.
  41. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    I agree Mal. We've got a small but concerned reactionary element right now, and some conservative elements as well... then there's some liberal and radical elements to deal with...

    the thing is we need to sit down and work TOGETHER first.

    I think everything we've been discussing so far is part of the whole guidelines process, as this is going to be an involved document, but we shouldn't loose sight of the objective.

    for those who're joining us late, i think the objective is "settling in and establishing any necessary protocols"

    once that's done, then we just get on with life
  42. Maljonic Administrator

    That's true, I think we aslo have to keep it concise and not over complicate the document to the point where we're writing ourselves into jumbled quagmire of literary documentation and legalese mumbo jumbo.
  43. Tephlon Active Member

    Agreed. Legalese is the worst thing to be read.

    I like Garner's setup. Inappropriate thread goes to Dungeon Dimensions, is locked and anyone can object. Is there a way to contact the threadstarter in order to advise them why thread was moved/locked? Or a reason added to the post?

    I think splitting should be on threadstarter's request, although I can see why a big discussion in the "Introduction thread" would be split out.
    Also: Hijacks are part of the fun here (were/there?), but if you're starting a serious discussion and jokes happen, you might want to keep it serious.

    See this thread. The discusson about new/news (Which I inadvertently (sp?) started) could be split out. But threads tend to come back to their original topic or die out.
  44. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    Pfft! I suggested moving threads to the dungoen and lock them a whole mintue before garner!


    On the spilting, I say if anyone suggests a thread spilting we do it. It won't happen that often and it;s not like the thread gets deleted. I'd also say that it has to be a majour Hi-jack- like a few pages, not a few posts.

    On the member side suggesting to the mod side. The point i'm trying to get accross is...um... If a mod wants something done, do we who do we need a seconded from, any other member?

    Also, if a someone suggests doing x, could I say 'I seconded that' Then perform X.


    Also if someone suggests doing x and someone disagrees, I don't think the matter of weather X is right should take place in the thread, but the discussion should take place here. to keep the main board free of buerocratic conflict. If a arguement does occur on the main board, i don;t think it should be moved or anything, I don;t think this should be a rule as such, just something more to be aware off and to think about.
  45. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    well, i mean, okay we know ben's a reactionary who doesn't want us to do ANYTHING, but he's a valued member of the community and thus we need to listen to his concerns...

    you've seen that he felt waiting two hours was insufficient time on a simple decision like moving a thread. I think that's ridiculous, and anything short of deleting a post CAN be undone, but i think we need to answer the question of how much time should a simple maintainance matter require before we can act on it?

    i mean, personally, if Toast were to start a thread on her artwork and someone else inadvertently turns it into a thread on the outcome of taking dates to museums, i could understand if toast wanted it unhijacked. once upon a time we'd just say "oy, let's keep this on topic", but now appearantly we're supposed to faff around with splitting threads, moving them, and god knows what all else... SO, if the toastling were to say "I'd like my thread kept pure please, can we split this" and other people (or even just person) says "yeah, that suits. sorry about the hijack", then a moderator can come along and do this bananana thing, whatever it is.

    And then Ben can complain because we didn't wait until it had been sent out, querried, sent back, signed in triplicate, and eventualyl given over to the Vogons for PROPER delay and deliberation.

    *shrug*
  46. Tephlon Active Member

    [quote:32881cf55a="Rincewind"]Pfft! I suggested moving threads to the dungoen and lock them a whole mintue before garner![/quote:32881cf55a]
    Sorry Rincewind, you're right. Apopopologgies!

    I would say the first person to suggest task X should be the one to perform it when it gets seconded. However, this might lead to delays.

    Like I said in the other thread, 24 hours for moving a thread is ridiculous, 30 minutes for banning equally so. (Paraphrased)
    There needs to be a set of rules for the mods so people can complain if a mod goes "beyond the call of duty" in a bad way.

    edit: to add quote (Damn next page)
  47. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    and there needs to be rules so a mod can do their job without being brought up for it by someone else.
  48. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    What we need to do is start actually making these rules.
  49. Tephlon Active Member

    [quote:8be4375241="Garner"]and there needs to be rules so a mod can do their job without being brought up for it by someone else.[/quote:8be4375241]

    Right, sorry forgot to mention that, but yes, those rules for the mods are there to protect the mods also.
    As a normal member you have the right to complain, but if it's covered in the mod-rules you set yourself up for ridicule. (And thundersporking/stabbing)
  50. Electric_Man Templar

    [quote:9dacaf6064="Garner"]well, i mean, okay we know ben's a reactionary who doesn't want us to do ANYTHING, but he's a valued member of the community and thus we need to listen to his concerns... [/quote:9dacaf6064]

    Yes, listen to me, apart from the times when I say "I agree" seemingly

    Right, snarky comment down, I feel I'm owned at least one

    [quote:9dacaf6064="Garner"]you've seen that he felt waiting two hours was insufficient time on a simple decision like moving a thread. I think that's ridiculous, and anything short of deleting a post CAN be undone, but i think we need to answer the question of how much time should a simple maintainance matter require before we can act on it?

    i mean, personally, if Toast were to start a thread on her artwork and someone else inadvertently turns it into a thread on the outcome of taking dates to museums, i could understand if toast wanted it unhijacked. once upon a time we'd just say "oy, let's keep this on topic", but now appearantly we're supposed to faff around with splitting threads, moving them, and god knows what all else... SO, if the toastling were to say "I'd like my thread kept pure please, can we split this" and other people (or even just person) says "yeah, that suits. sorry about the hijack", then a moderator can come along and do this bananana thing, whatever it is.

    And then Ben can complain because we didn't wait until it had been sent out, querried, sent back, signed in triplicate, and eventualyl given over to the Vogons for PROPER delay and deliberation.

    *shrug*[/quote:9dacaf6064]

    I'm not the first person to say this by no means, but we need to sit down and thrash out rules, policy and everything. This should not be rushed.

    After this is all sorted out, and there's a policy saying that someone asks to move a thread, then someone agrees and it's done, then fair enough, feel the speed. There was no policy at that point in time, it was basically being made it up as we go along.

    I'm sure we have enough Message Board experience on here to cover pretty much everything that could happen, so it's not like we're being chucked into the unknown.

    Making this board a place a good place to live (online) is worth a few weeks of debating that allows everyone to join in, and it's not like anything is going to be the ruin of us if a thread isn't moved or stickied in the meantime. We lived without that on the old board didn't we?

    The only thing that would affect us if we did nothing is a blatant jug-style troll attack, but we decided that that and spam would be deleted months ago.

    It's not about taking the time to get it right each and everytime, it's about taking the time now to get it right.
  51. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    I agree ben. We gotta take the time to do it properly now.
  52. Orrdos God

    Yes.

    I'd also like to say that once the exact powers of a mod have been put in place, then we need to give them freedom to operate.

    Basically, the mods are mods cause they have the backing of the community, and should be able to make judgement calls if and when required.

    I'm not saying carte blanche, but freedom to do things like, moving threads or making a sticky without having to have a public debate on it isn't too much of a hassle.
  53. Rincewind Number One Doorman

    Yes, we don't want to have little why did he move my thread arguements hi-jacking all over the board.

    I also suggest that we have a 'mod Objections' sticky in the temple. If people have a problem with a mods action they raise it there, not in the thread in question. Thus, we can keep bauerocratic(sp?) arguements in once place.
  54. Garner Great God and Founding Father

    One thing to point out...

    Do you know how the old boards established their policies? I know a lot of people here just came into the place after the rules were set up.

    They were set up by simply doing things and if they worked, keep doing them. if they didn't, stop doing them.

    I think sticking and moving threads can be done without deliberation because they are minor things and can be undone very easily.

    Banning problem posters, deciding board policy, and actually purposefully establishing new rules will require time, deliberation, and careful thought.

    don't lose perspective simply because things are "new".

Share This Page