Skip to content
Queen crest Queenzone.org

Moderation (or lack of it)

74 posts Page 4 of 5
Thread

Posts in chronological order

Search forum
U
whirled peas<br><font size=1>Give peas a chance wrote:
This reminds me.. I left before the election. I wonder how well Charles Baer did?


He lost. Now he's selling pinas coladas in Aruba.

Cheers.

Mr. Tampon Tea.
B
'I think if a majority of people on here think that a certain person's baehvaiour is unacceptable, then something should be done about it, don't you think?'

No. I think the majority of people on here should learn how to moderate themselves and what they reply to - it's simple enough and this advice has been ignored for years.
Cleveland May 24 to June 4th 2007 - I came, I saw, I fucked off home again.
E
If anything goes, maybe we should put a big disclaimer on the board.

..Yes, I am 18 years of age or older..

Just a shame that people have to act like idiots for attention on a noticeboard. How pathetic must their real lives be?

I've always said that some moderation is necessary; however, majority rules, and the majority seems to think it's not necessary.

I'm not going to get my panties in a wad over it. I've been around here long enough to know to take everything posted with a grain of salt. It is annoying, though, when you look at the Queen General section and see threads such as, "Does anyone have any sex tapes of people with Down's Syndrome?"
P
There have always been idiots that post crap here, always will be. However it's getting worse and worse and happening more often.

The idea of just ignoring them is great, but it's just not going to happen. People will always reply no matter how often people say just ignore it. I have been here since 1997 and people said ignore it then, and 8 years later people are still saying the same thing.

The fact is some things just need to be deleted, that does not mean the person needs to be instantly banned, but some posts should not be allowed.
Queen Archives - http://www.queenarchives.com Queenpedia - http://www.queenpedia.com
F
OK- tell me WHO would taht be...? Richard and Barb are already doing a lot to keep it "sane". Who else do you think could?
http://www.queenzone.com/queenzone/forumnew/forum_topic_view.aspx?Q=696327 Wanna trade? Here's my list...
E
I would say that the moderators have shown a great deal of restraint...

Good thing I am not a mod.. I would, no doubt, piss all of y'all off. ;-)
M
If we should pretty much allow anyone to post whatever they want then let's welcome Jake Britt back.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Brandon wrote: [/QUOTENAME]... and now the "best you can offer is Mr. Jingles? HA! He's... just pathetic.[/QUOTE]
K
I agree a moderator is needed since the board is becoming more offensive and less informative. The posters who are starting up are very young and these childish posts are starting to lose QZ members.

and I cannot say I blame them one bit!

Kriz >:(
Long Live Queen!!!
E
Mr.Jingles wrote:
If we should pretty much allow anyone to post whatever they want then let's welcome Jake Britt back.


Oh yeah, and don't forget TED! Actually TED and Dudley would most likely get along smashingly..;-)
S
Fenderek wrote:
OK- tell me WHO would taht be...? Richard and Barb are already doing a lot to keep it "sane". Who else do you think could?


BPP, _amadeus_, John Lydon, Mr Knoxville... ;)
E
WAK UPP AND SMEELL THE FFUCKIN' COOFFEEEE!!!

(wonders who remembers this)
P
Krizzy wrote:
I agree a moderator is needed since the board is becoming more offensive and less informative. The posters who are starting up are very young and these childish posts are starting to lose QZ members.


The site has several moderators, just that people complain if they ever use their power. Of course people complain if they don't use it.

I remember back in the day, when I removed a certain user from the website after receiving god knows how many complaints about them. There will be some people who will remember. Anyhoooo I banned them and all hell broke loose. You would think I had just killed somebody.
Queen Archives - http://www.queenarchives.com Queenpedia - http://www.queenpedia.com
L
<b><font color = "crimson">ThomasQuinn wrote:
Well, my dear pseudo-liberals (in the right-winged sense), such as Lisser and 'Sir' Archie: this is not an ideal board, not everyone has self-control, so I say SENSIBLE moderation is a good idea.

Richard and YV have had moderator-functions for as long as I know, but they have been (understandably) cautious in using them. The only thing I and the other 'lefties', as our elitist immitation-noble Archie called us, want to make clear is that we want Richard and YV to use their powers a bit more freely.

This is not QOL, and comparing possible moderation on this board with the power-abuse on QOL is quite frankly an insult to Richard and YV, as it shows a lack of trust in them. I'm quite sure they will not abuse their power, and I don't think we would need more moderators (unless Richard and YV think so, and in which case reliable and respectable QZ-ers who already have a natural authority would be chosen (and I do NOT consider myself part of that group, ok?!)), so there shouldn't be a problem.

The problem with your reactionary view is exactly what is the problem with the entire conservative view: you are not willing to take a chance to make something 'good' if you think that the current state is 'sufficient'.


Thomas, I am not against any sort of moderation. I use proper ettiquette and discretion on this board so any moderation would not bother me and probably wouldn't even affect me or the majority of us. It is not an issue to me for Barb or Richard to moderate. I am 100%positive that they would never abuse any such power they have, that is given and it's been proven over the years. What I hate to see is Barb or Richard wasting time each day patroling the board looking for stuff that is "not appropriate" according to "QZ rules." Barb and Richard have not set up rules bc we should be able to control ourselves. I know that not everyone has self control like you said, but so what as long as I have self control and can skip over what I don't care to read. I take care of me and I am responsible for me. I can't help what other people choose to post on here but I can't help what I choose to read on here.

Every day that I read the newspaper I skip over any headlines that aren't appealing to me. If every headline is appealing to me, then I read every story.

It shouldn't be as hard as some are making it. It really should be an individual decision on here as to what we want to read and what we want to skip. What if Barb deletes a thread considered to be offensive to you but is something I've been looking for information on?

I repsect everyone's opinion and choice on here to want moderation or to not want it. I don't care one way or the other if we have moderators or a moderator. It won't affect me really. I just hate to see Barb having to babysit and that's exactly what it will be, babysitting. Barb's hobby is Queen. She won't even be able to enjoy her hobby if she has to devote a large portion of her day to patrol QZ all day and make sure no one is offending anyone else. I'm going to continue to ignore the trolls and self moderate. You all do what works best for you.
Wo ist das kamerahhhhhhhhhhh!!! NJ!!!
E
PieterMC wrote:
Krizzy wrote:
I agree a moderator is needed since the board is becoming more offensive and less informative. The posters who are starting up are very young and these childish posts are starting to lose QZ members.


The site has several moderators, just that people complain if they ever use their power. Of course people complain if they don't use it.

I remember back in the day, when I removed a certain user from the website after receiving god knows how many complaints about them. There will be some people who will remember. Anyhoooo I banned them and all hell broke loose. You would think I had just killed somebody.


Oooh..I remember that..