Polls are open for TFF Rules.

Shirotsume

Not The Goddamn @dmin
#51
Kerrus said:
can you guy stop having polls that are open for half a day and then expire? Please?
This poll was open for four days.
 

ArchfiendRai

Well-Known Member
#52
I can live with these.

When will we be doing mod voting and stuff?
 

Zephyrus

Searching for the six-fingered man.
#53
Shirotsume said:
Kerrus said:
can you guy stop having polls that are open for half a day and then expire? Please?
This poll was open for four days.
How DARE you leave that poll open for four days, allowing the unwashed masses access to democracy?

Screw you guys, I'm going home. :<
 

Shirotsume

Not The Goddamn @dmin
#54
ArchfiendRai said:
I can live with these.

When will we be doing mod voting and stuff?
After I figure out the best way of setting up mod nominations without it turning into a shitstorm of drama.

I hope to set up nominations around thursday night or friday morning, and let them run through the weekend.
 

chronodekar

Obsessively signs his posts
Staff member
#55
Damn.

I've been away from my usual internet connection (and consequently nTFF) due to Easter. The result? I missed both votes. (chronodekar cries a bit)

Onto more productive thoughts, the idea of admin+backup (whatever form its in - am still confused with it) and the rules look fine to me. Can nitpick for the sake of it, but I like how things are stated. Great job everyone! :)

If I correctly understand things, the next step is voting or deciding on mods/admin, right?

Or did I miss that too?

-chronodekar
 

foreverzero

Well-Known Member
#56
I'm afraid you did. We decided on nick 012000 as the admin. He just seemed like such a trustworthy guy. And for the mods we made the decision to give it to whoever posted "First!", "Second!", and "Third!" in the moderator voting thread. It seemed the most fair way to choose mods, but alas, zeebee1 took all three positions.




In all honesty, we haven't gotten to decisions about the choices for moderators and the admin just yet.
 

chronodekar

Obsessively signs his posts
Staff member
#57
foreverzero said:
I'm afraid you did. We decided on nick 012000 as the admin. He just seemed like such a trustworthy guy. And for the mods we made the decision to give it to whoever posted "First!", "Second!", and "Third!" in the moderator voting thread. It seemed the most fair way to choose mods, but alas, zeebee1 took all three positions.
ROTFL !!!!@!!! :D:D

You gave me a shock when you mentioned nick, but I realized the funny as soon as I read the second sentence. Such a classic joke line, that.

Good to know that my vote might still be relevant.

-chronodekar
 

Cherry_lover

Well-Known Member
#58
I can't seem to read the percentages for the votes, although it's annoying that the harsher option for banning people won. I would much rather this be somewhere that welcomes people, not bans them unless it really has to.
 

NuitTombee

Immortal Capo
#59
You can see the percentages here. http://www.polljunkie.com/poll/frjgst/tff-rules-poll/view

You can click the little icon in the top right of each category to see a pie chart view.
 

Ninsaneja

Well-Known Member
#60
Cherry: We voted on rules that are so lenient that the punishments almost have to be brutal for the rules to mean anything.
 

PCHeintz72

The Sentient Fanfic Search Engine mk II
#61
Cherry_lover said:
I can't seem to read the percentages for the votes, although it's annoying that the harsher option for banning people won. I would much rather this be somewhere that welcomes people, not bans them unless it really has to.
Considering alternative 1 won for personal attacks, I do not think you really have all that much of a problem...
 

Stormfury

Well-Known Member
#62
You basically have to post childporn, and then write a fanfic about how the kid in the picture is the person you are arguing with's kid and you are the one raping them to get banned.

Can you avoid doing that?
 

Xon

Well-Known Member
#64
Ninsaneja said:
Cherry: We voted on rules that are so lenient that the punishments almost have to be brutal for the rules to mean anything.
Brutal punishments? Those are basicly stock boilerplate you see anywhere with moderation!
 

Cherry_lover

Well-Known Member
#65
Ninsaneja said:
Cherry: We voted on rules that are so lenient that the punishments almost have to be brutal for the rules to mean anything.
Well, true, I just don't overly trust admins and mods to make such decisions in a fair and reasonable manner, so I tend to prefer not giving them too much power....

I accept some people do need to be banned, but I think it should be avoided whenever at all possible (although I do make somewhat of an exception for trolls). Unless you absolutely have to ban someone, it shouldn't be done.

PCHeintz72 said:
Cherry_lover said:
I can't seem to read the percentages for the votes, although it's annoying that the harsher option for banning people won. I would much rather this be somewhere that welcomes people, not bans them unless it really has to.
Considering alternative 1 won for personal attacks, I do not think you really have all that much of a problem...
Well, yes, true....

Xon said:
Ninsaneja said:
Cherry: We voted on rules that are so lenient that the punishments almost have to be brutal for the rules to mean anything.
Brutal punishments? Those are basicly stock boilerplate you see anywhere with moderation!
Yeah, but I've dealt with moderators that pretended to be reasonable and fair whilst using such rules before. They very rapidly drop any pretense at following any real "procedure" or fairness if you actually attack them personally or criticise their way of doing things.

Hell, even I find it difficult not to do so, when running my own forum. When you have a ban-hammer and someone is pissing you off, it is really tempting to use it. It's just a general feature of absolutely anyone who has had power ever, and I'd rather not give them the opportunity if at all possible.
 
Top