/sugg/ - Suggestions / Meta

I'll leave my 2 cents then

-Firstly, the chan-wide NSFW ban, which I'm guessing is the complaint you'll hear about the most here. There are a myriad of reasons to disagree with that call, but after reading the reasoning behind it in post >>532 there's even more to be unhappy about

-Secondly, the post deletions that happened a while ago. Yeah, it's been dealt with, but not only is the community still recovering from that, the way you guys handled things were terrible. And I do mean terrible: contradictory statements; refusal to give further information; stating stuff with 100% certainty in a somewhat aggressive manner which later proved to be false, to name a few. And no, I'm neither lying nor over-reacting, I'll gladly look for the posts in question and post the links to them if people say this is untrue

-Thirdly, and this is more of a personal guess than known fact, but it feels like you're listening to the moderators rather than the community. It's important to note the website exists for the community and as such should have us in mind when making the rules. The way I, and, hopefully, some other people look at the user levels like is the following:

-Admin: Makes rules, oversees the website
-Moderator: Enforces rules

However, looking at how much of a neat conclusion the >>162 thread was supposed to have ended with, and then the sudden and unexplained change of rules, it made me think the decision was made on IRC (which, by the way, something which pisses me off. Chan-related stuff should be discussed in front of the chan's community, not on IRC where most of that community isn't even present). Now, re-reading that thread we can see how at least one mod was exceedingly vocal when expressing his belief that all NSFW content should be spoilered, so the way I see it it's not unreasonable to believe this had something to do with your decision. Then again, as I said, it's a guess

This is all I could remember at the moment. If something else comes to mind I'll post that as well. On the other hand, I did like the bit of humour you guys added to this board - Trollthreads and Moderator Scapegoating

I don't give two shits about the NSFW spoilering (which isn't a ban or even censorship, you childish cunts).

Everything else >>541 said rings true with me though. It feels like there's a lot of underhanded shit going on here, and we're left in the dark and given conflicting statements on a LOT of things.

Whether it reflects information hiding or general disorganization, it's not setting a good precedent.

I'm personally very happy with the board.

However, a question I have to ask.
Is it appropriate to post gore, if spoiler'd? I know that it's similar to people doing other NSFW stuff such as Pornography, but I know the rules on Guro/Gore are often debated.
This doesn't really effect me, but since you said ask a question, I figured I'd ask.

>pic is what I mean by "Gore"/"Guro" to avoid confusions.
plznoban

Guro and shock porn are absolutely not allowed whatsoever. It says so on the Rules page.

>>541

Responding to each respectively:

1) I'm still thinking about the NSFW rule, and whether or not I made a completely retarded decision. I said I absolutely would not change my mind, but I'm becoming increasingly conflicted on that with all the complaints, being much worse than before. However, I'm also afraid that if I did change it back, I'd appear indecisive, and also piss off more of the userbase into leaving.

2) I have a fairly large number of things I need to look over, even outside of Uboachan. To be honest, I'm frequently behind on what's happening on the boards, and I look to my moderators to keep me up to date. Now I know what happened, and it's been taken care of, but I'm really not sure what was going on before I stepped in near the end. Maybe I'm not as present as I should be, I'm not sure. If you believe my moderators handled the situation in a way that was unacceptable, please email me with a detailed explanation. You can contact me at "seisatsu AT uboachan DOT net".

3) Your hunch is right. The change was made after a discussion with the moderators on IRC. At the time, the NSFW argument had been going on for several weeks iirc, and it appeared, perhaps incorrectly, perhaps not, that there was a large portion of the userbase on either side of the conflict. I had been simply watching it and doing nothing because after several weeks of discussion no consensus was being reached in the argument.

My mods finally urged me that I was the owner, and I had to make a decision, so I tried to make the one that I thought would work for the most people, rather than the one I agreed with most. Now I'm not so sure if that was the right move. The NSFW rule makes us a weird chan, and I'm starting to fear it may drive away newcomers, who may not read the rules because they expect them to make sense.

As a side note, I urge people who want to be more involved in the community to join us on IRC, since more discussions tend to happen there. For the same reason, users who aren't IRC regulars will never be chosen for staff positions.

>>542

I may consider using weird shit like polls and surveys to help me get a better feel of the community's general stance when another such divided argument comes up.

>>544
I understand that completely, I've read the rules. :j

My question was more about if the usage of gore/guro [ or since we're at it, the rest of the banned/butnotillegal/ picture genres. ] was relevant.
I lost the thread which I was going to use an example, however it was the Visual Novel thread where somebody posted a picture of [one of the many] Kara no Shoujo's death scene to show one of the major parts of the storyline since it revolves around murders. They spoilered and warned people, so that they'd know that they'd be shown the [technically against-the-rules content] of the picture.

>>543

See >>544

(Also I deleted your image sorry.)

You should also note that we are now explicitly disallowing loli/shota, since drawn CP is illegal in Canada. Silly Canucks.

>>546

That's an odd case and I'm not sure how to handle it. I may make an exception in the rules or just say no.

>>548
That's perfectly fine, I was expecting it to get deleted anyway.

Yeah, it's a weird scenario which is why I was asking unfortunately.
In my personal opinion it should be based more on the severity of such.

For example: A werewolf game, and you post picture of the werewolf looking anthromorphic: should be legal.

Showing that same anthromorphic werewolf taking 4 dog-penises up his butt whilst masturbating should not.

Same could be said in relative severity about gore, and the likes.

Anyway; I'm done spamming your thread, I'll let you get back to helping other people and the likes. :j

>>549

Changed "furry" to "furry porn" in the rules. Good catch.

I'm not an unhappy user, but I'm thinking that a poll on things like the NSFW thing might be a good idea.

>>551

I agree. Poll is up.

>>551
Somehow I don't think an online poll aka a "who can find the most proxy servers" contest is a good way to settle stuff like this; lets keep the settling to genuine discussion.

>>553

Better to have juked numbers than unclear numbers.

>>553

Maybe, but I'd like to see how it goes. That's also why I added a comments section to the poll. We had a general discussion for weeks and I couldn't get any sort of feel for how the community was actually divided on the issue. This is simply a way of collecting additional data.

After thinking for a bit, I remembered one last thing that bothers me slightly, which is "Anonymous ## Mod" posting. Every time I see one I'm left to wonder why would a mod want to put the mod tag on his post (thus giving it additional weight), yet at the same time does not want his name associated with that particular post. It might be just me, of course, but if confuses and annoys me a bit


>>545

I couldn't have hoped for a better reply. That you would so easily admit to those faults, and even confirm something which was little more than an educated guess is more than just commendable; it's a very good step in the right direction as well

As for rethinking the NSFW-spoilering decision, I think it's a very good idea. Regardless of whether it is changed or not, being flexible with one's decisions can't possibly be seen as a bad quality, and it will also make users feel like they can suggest things freely, knowing they're talking to an open-minded person

Same goes for not having as much time available for Uboachan as you'd like. There would be no shame in making a post which said you weren't sure of what had happened, but were looking into the matter, instead of stating the deletions weren't mod-related because the deletion log wasn't showing them. It's not easy for one to reprimand another for having life outside of the internet, and I'm sure even the most bullheaded of us (trolls aside) would understand

As for unacceptable mod behaviour, I'd only really classify one post as such, not for the incorrect information which was being stated as fact, but rather by the disrespect with which it addressed the general community. It's not enough to warrant action, at least not in my opinion. But if I keep seeing this type of behaviour from said moderator I'll be sure to contact you

Once again, confirming something which not only had no tangible proof, but also made the motives for that choice public (motives which you don't seem to be proud of), is more than just commendable, and I'm sure I'm not alone when I say this

But I can't get the whole IRC business out of my head. It's being given way more importance than it should have, in my opinion. This is supposed to be a chan, why are there so many potentially important things being discussed elsewhere at all? And even if we ignore this "discuss chan stuff on the chan" argument, I only see one reason for, and a lot of them against

For -
Real-time communication (for obvious reasons)

Against -
Real-time communication (you can take as much time as you want making a post, providing for a well-structured and thought-out opinion)
Very low number of community members get their say
The nature of IRC means if you aren't there 24/7 (which is obviously impossible) you're going to end up missing discussions, while in here it's up for everyone to see from the moment it's posted onwards

And I'm sure I could think of at least one more reason, but I believe these are enough to make my point

Leaving all that aside, I have to admit nothing made me more confused than this statement: "users who aren't IRC regulars will never be chosen for staff positions". Now, I had a discussion with Writer on >>85 thread, and thanks to him I understood why mods should have to go on IRC, since there are clear advantages in having real-time coordination between the staff members. But why make it a prerequisite? Can't someone who's active on the chan become a mod, and be required to go on IRC for as long as he remains one?

>>556
> "Anonymous ## Mod"
Yeah, that always bothered me a bit to; for pretty much the same reasons.
I got the impression, after all that's happened, that it was the "rouge moderator"; but I still don't know.

> discuss chan stuff on the chan
I think that if any big decision making discussions are happening in IRC, then there should at least be an updated thread about what's going on in IRC, concerning the discussion. Like, to get opinions on what was being said.

>>556

Wow, that's a big post. Since most of it is comments (and thank you for those), I'll just address the questions.

First off, I'm not sure why moderators post as anonymous. I don't think it's a problem; it shouldn't really matter which mod is doing the work as long as they're doing it properly, and I can generally find out if they aren't. Also, rule 7 of the moderator guidelines and instructions states:

* Don't post with a moderator tag unless your post is relevant to moderation. Posting as a moderator in normal discussions gives unwarranted weight to your opinion.

Given this, I don't really see a problem — more of a small curiosity.

As for the IRC business, you need to understand that a lot happens on IRC, and both platforms have their ups and downs. However, they're also two parts of the same community. Moderators are obviously required on IRC for matters requiring quick attention. In addition to that though, the boards and IRC being parts of the same community, I wouldn't want to hire a moderator who's only familiar with half of the community, especially seeing as the staff is in charge of moderating the IRC as well. I hope that makes sense.

Also, I can get a better grasp of a user's personality and mannerisms on IRC. (I'm there all the goddamn time.) I can't really get to know someone who only posts on the boards, and I'd rather hire staff who I've been familiar with for some time before their application. If you're running a community, the last thing you want is for one of your staff members to surprise you; I'm sure you know the way I mean.

>>558

In the interest of full disclosure, here is the current version of the Moderator Rules, Guidelines, and Instructions.

http://pastie.org/private/3x9tktr3yithzjllmbg8qw

>>545
>Going back on the NSFW rule

Sorry for jumping back to this and all.
But maybe you don't need to just say yes or no for it. Perhaps you could compromise with something to keep it spoilered for those who don't want to see.
Like you could have that hovering mouse-over would make the spoiler become the actual picture that has been spoilered.

Or maybe even have a little tick box that will spoiler all pictures that have been spoilered for that IP and if it's been left unchecked then the spoilered stuff would remain unspoilered.

I don't mind either way on this rule, but maybe instead of it just being so clear cut there could be improvisations. I'm guessing it would be a whole lot more difficult than just saying yes or no to it xD

>>558

It is a big post. My fingers are bleeding. But "credit where credit is due", and credit was indeed due, as you just further proved by posting the moderator rules for all to see

Just to clarify, I'm not bothered by mods posting as anonymous or as regular users. Only by being anonymous while using the mod tag. It looks like it isn't just me, either. But I guess if they follow that relatively new rule it won't really matter from now on

I understand your point of view on the staff member recruitment issue. I don't agree with it (in fact, we've had 2 rogue mods in a rather short amount of time), but I understand where you're coming from

Having said that, you did just say the IRC was one of two parts which compose this community, which kind of goes with what I was saying about discussions of new ideas not happening on the chan. It really needs to be included, as the other half of the community it is; all the more seeing as those discussions solely affect the chan itself. In my opinion, of course

>>561
I can't speak for Seisatsu or the rest of the staff so this post isn't definitive, but we've had more or less of a general consensus to moderate anonymously outside of /sugg/. I don't think it's for any specific reason just that the moderators should in general be anonymous. Or maybe I just forgot the reason.

Also who was the second rogue mod?

Okay, I'd like to bring up some points in a post I made a little while ago, >>538 particularly the first part. Maybe whichever mod decided to delete the posts in /sugg/ did so because the people who made the posts were trolling. I can't say I blame that mod for doing what s/he did, but s/he made the wrong move. Deleting a troll post expresses your frustration with the post and only encourages more trolling. Now, if those posts contained something illegal or grotesquely offensive, yes, they need to be removed, but in any other case they should just be ignored. I know it's hard, but the only way to get rid of a troll is to give them no attention until they get bored and give up. New threads are very easy to start, and IP bans are very easy to evade.

>>562

I see. It's not something I'll have a problem with anymore either way, I think

The name of the second mod was never disclosed, and curiousness aside I don't really think it matters much. As for the first, I meant Snow, of course. People might have described him as a troll mod, but I don't really think that's the case. He was acting the way he was because he was trying to make a point, not just make everyone go "imad imad"

>>564
>The name of the second mod was never disclosed, and curiousness aside I don't really think it matters much.
So you don't think it's important that we know which one of the mods was fucking with the users?
Also Snow (the mod) is female.
Also, it seems like posts are still getting deleted, and I'm afraid of this post getting deleted just because I mentioned Snow.

Not trying to stir shit up again, just saying.

>>565

Considering he's already been dealt with? No, I really don't. It's a simple case of curiosity as far as I'm concerned

I haven't seen any more deletions since the thread That Guy opened died down, though I might just not know about them

As for Snow's gender, I'm going off a post where he stated he was a guy. Doesn't really matter to me, because >gender on the internet

>>566
>>565
>>564
I'm not aware of the existence of a second rogue mod.

>>561
Discussions about the boards happen on IRC sometimes, but they usually aren't game-changing (apart from the ones in the mod channel.) If any very important discussions come up, I'll try to get a counterpart discussion on the boards.

Thank you for your opinions. The discussion in this thread seems to be dwindling and/or hitting upon the same subjects now, so I've unstickied it.

As always, please continue to post any comments, complaints, concerns, or questions on this board in a dignified manner.

>>568

Well ok then. Wasn't aware Snow was behind the latest deletions as well

Hey, Seisatsu, before you even think about adding post editing, can you make absolutely certain that it displays whether the post was edited by the user or a mod, and at what time? I don't want mods dicking around with posts without us being aware of it.

>>573
The mod edit feature is disabled in the configuration. Even administrators can't edit posts. I plan to keep it this way since I see no good reason for mods to be able to dick around with posts.

Normally I'd troll a thread like this, but actually…? This is a good thread. Hopefully this will be a step in getting the site and community back on track. Good work, Seisatsu.