Temporary Forum Closures (including DISCUSS RULES)

[Vote_For_Pedro]

There is an easier way.

Staff can be required to post with a sock whose custom title identifies them. This identifies them and makes their posts go through the same process as members.

An example.

 

[constance]

Eh. I do not like socks.

However that is not a bad idea, even though i don't like socks.

I don't like socks.

No offense, historic protestant.

 

[ClarityofPurpose]

Historic protestant: do you think that staff would suddenly comply with the rules and other staff would enforce the rules on staff members if they used a sock? Those who will play favorites will play favorites regardless. Just as those who will violate the rules will do so no matter what their ID is.

 

[drstevej]

Eh. I do not like socks.

However that is not a bad idea, even though i don't like socks.

I don't like socks.

No offense, historic protestant.

The entire time I was on staff Erwin encouraged staff to use socks when debating.

This would be one useful reason for a sock.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Socks are icky. There has to be a simpler way than that. Besides, recently there was a suggestion to rid the site of socks so to encourage them in an official capacity seems a little counter-productive, and potentially problematic in terms of... "You can't ban socks. Staff used them to post in DR..." etc.

Mostly though it's the icky thing.

 

[ClarityofPurpose]

Might I suggest that staff just not moderate where they post?

 

[constance]

Clarity -

Then there is complaint that they are not in touch where they moderate.

I think that having everyone go through the same moderation in the forum is the way to go, myself. I'm happy to have my posts moderated.

 

[ClarityofPurpose]

Constance: Ma'am that would work as well I'm sure.

 

[Tawny]

As far as I am aware. All posts whether staff or member will be moderated. As many of you know, I have no problem with deleting ANY post, so I will apply the same when 'approving' them.

OKay I have only just come to this thread after having stuff going on in real life. If there are any questions that have not been answered by the lovely Meh et al, please post them and I will do my best.

 

[AngelAmidala]

There is an easier way.

Staff can be required to post with a sock whose custom title identifies them. This identifies them and makes their posts go through the same process as members.

This is a pretty interesting idea. And it is an easier way for staff posts to be treated the same as member posts. Like you I do remember (and continue to encourage) Erwin's thoughts on sock accounts in terms of use for debating.

I have absolutely no problem if a staff member wishes to comment on a suggestion or something else in a thread as their sock which needs to be approved by Support.

However, say there's a specific question that requires a response from a team or a staff level. Would it be acceptable from the member's perspective to see an "official" answer of that nature coming from a staffer's sock account? (Providing the sock account has something in their user title indicating which staff member they are.) Or should those types of questions be answered with someone's staff account and unapproved by the staffer so that Support Team can approve it?


I'm quoting DrSteveJ, but anyone can answer.

Thanks in advance!

 

[drstevej]

This is a pretty interesting idea. And it is an easier way for staff posts to be treated the same as member posts. Like you I do remember (and continue to encourage) Erwin's thoughts on sock accounts in terms of use for debating.

I have absolutely no problem if a staff member wishes to comment on a suggestion or something else in a thread as their sock which needs to be approved by Support.

However, say there's a specific question that requires a response from a team or a staff level. Would it be acceptable from the member's perspective to see an "official" answer of that nature coming from a staffer's sock account? (Providing the sock account has something in their user title indicating which staff member they are.) Or should those types of questions be answered with someone's staff account and unapproved by the staffer so that Support Team can approve it?


I'm quoting DrSteveJ, but anyone can answer.

Thanks in advance!

Just like Mod Hat posts are more official. The staff sock could simply insert in the title line:

OFFICIAL ALPHA ANSWER
OFFICIAL SUPPORT TEAM ANSWER

or whatever is appropriate (ex. see title above)

This handles the issue.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Personally, I don't see how logging out, logging on as a sock, posting, logging back out of the sock identity and back in as staff identity would be simpler than disapproving one's own post.

I don't particularly like socks, either. I think staff members using socks can be thought of as a form of "professionalism," where a person separates their professional identity from their real personal identity. I only use my real name on the nets for professional stuff, but even that degree of lack of transparency sometimes causes me to question my personal integrity. Integrity, I think, has as much to do with authenticity and avoiding fragmentation as it does with honesty.

I personally think all these aspects of integrity are Christian values, or at least values consistent with Christianity that official forum policy should not discourage. I would probably put use of socks in a 1 Corinthians 14 category. It's OK that some may view it one way, and some another. Since a member's individual conscience may be involved, though, it is better not to make rules either requiring or forbidding it.

 

[ClarityofPurpose]

I personally would think that it would be preferable to just hold staff members posts to the same standards as regular members posts and moderate them the exact same way.

Or:
Perhaps some one should be assigned to police the staff. A kind of internal affairs person.

 

[CaDan]

I personally would think that it would be preferable to just hold staff members posts to the same standards as regular members posts and moderate them the exact same way.

Or:
Perhaps some one should be assigned to police the staff. A kind of internal affairs person.

It's a tech issue with vbulletin. Moderator posts automatically bypass the full moderation process.

 

[ClarityofPurpose]

It's a tech issue with vbulletin. Moderator posts automatically bypass the full moderation process.

Then perhaps there needs to be a "department of internal affairs" who investigate the staff.

 

[Crazy Liz]

It requires a flip of the switch.

As I mentioned before, there are several factors incorporated into the June 11 due date.

- support team training
- DR policy discussion
- Conciliator discussion
- support/conciliator discussion
- policy/rule issues backlog being discussed by exec

Now that June 11 is less than a week away, can you give us a progress report on these items?

 

[constance]

Once the Support Team and conciliators have the kinks worked out we should be good to go.

 

[ClarityofPurpose]

Once the Support Team and conciliators have the kinks worked out we should be good to go.

can you give some indication of what can be expected?

 

[Naomi4Christ]

can you give some indication of what can be expected?

We have already outlined the procedures that the new forum will follow. Do you have something else in mind?

(I'm sure that we will be happy to repeat these procedures rather than have everyone trawl through the old threads - not trying to fob you off).

 

[ksen]

Now that June 11 is less than a week away, can you give us a progress report on these items?

Once the Support Team and conciliators have the kinks worked out we should be good to go.

CL, you're a conciliator. Is there good progress being made?