Lol!
That's twice in this whole affair I've heard someone suggest I make these comments privately.
To tell you the truth, I don't care much for private messages on this site (except in rare cases, of which you've been one) since I very much like the whole community idea thing here. Furthermore, if I've managed to drop one or two sane things of value in that post, it may be heard by more than just Dip33 who's been fairly deaf to my suggestions.
But I'll let you know, dear Zultar, that I've actually written him privately a few times during this mess. Obviously, that had no effect. But if I post here, and some like you agree; and if on top of it Dip33 has some profound respect for someone who does agree with me, then it can be hoped that he'll be moved by the suggestion and change his strategy on the forums.

It can be hoped...

LOL. Apparently I am not the only one who was concerned with his language skills.

Once again, a bad verbal slip! I hate when i make those, and yet it seems like i do so often!

Don't hold your breath, Cachimbo.

Just like cheating and creating multi-accounts? :)

But this isn't verbal. It is written, D33.

Now you are just being picky, D.

They are so similar. For all intents and purposes we are talking. Although had we all been in the same room im sure we would be yelling. It would be so funny to se.

@ Draug: I try to hold my breath only when I've just inhaled insane amounts of pot.

Otherwise, I do enjoy the whole inhale/exhale process of breathing.

+1 Cachimbo. Unless he actually takes drugs. Which is bad.

@zultar - I know, but I had to write it. :-)

Like your apology, dear Dip33: "I will not take drugs."

Im tempted to +1 draug, but hed still be at -2 from me.

Thanks for starting this thread abge, I admit I've been dragging my feet over coming up with the mod guidelines, mainly because of wanting more time to see the results of the mute / like changes (correlation doesn't imply causation, but things seem to be a bit less bitter)


For me when it comes to webDip mods there are three big questions:

- How should mods be able to enforce certain game-related rules in the forum (like cheating accusations etc), but otherwise have to take a totally hands-off approach?

- How do the most well-balanced / reasonable mods get chosen without creating inner-circles of friends?

- (The bigger one, which hasn't been much of a focus recently) How should mods respond where there is ambiguity between whether someone is a multi-accounter or a couple of close friends/relatives?

Thanks for chiming in, Kestas.

Since we have your attention, any chance we could get our mod shields back? People seemed to like us having them.

For what it's worth, I think the way the mods are chosen is fine. We may consider asking for applications, so to speak, but I think the mods should be choosing the mods. We often know more about the players than other people and we need to have mods that the current mods feel comfortable working with. We seem to have a diverse pool of mods, so I don't think there's risk of an elitist club forming. Also, I've noticed that TDs have become a nice training ground for mods (that's how Geo and I got here).

Kestas, while you're here:

If you really want the forum to be self moderating, one suggestion I'd have is to make the forum more like reddit. Add a -1 button, and allow users to automatically mute a post that has a sum of less than, say -5.

My thoughts on these, briefly cause I doubt anyone cares.

- How should mods be able to enforce certain game-related rules in the forum (like cheating accusations etc), but otherwise have to take a totally hands-off approach?
***I think that the points deduction on the part of the mods worked great! During the brief time that abge was fining repeat offenders the number of situations where the rules were broken fell off drastically and the ones that did come up were accusing without actual game links.

- How do the most well-balanced / reasonable mods get chosen without creating inner-circles of friends?
*****The mods now are great, so whatever you were doing before seems to have worked fine. The only mod I'm not a fan of is yel and that's cause he hasn't been one long enough for me to form an opinion of him yet, I was a fan of geoframs tournament work so he's already good in my book.

- (The bigger one, which hasn't been much of a focus recently) How should mods respond where there is ambiguity between whether someone is a multi-accounter or a couple of close friends/relatives?
***This I would say that the close friends must not be allowed to play together unless they make passworded games and warn every player outside of their group what they are getting into, repeat offenders end up banned. By watching these people it should be pretty easy to see if a bunch of new suspicious accounts join their games, if so then proving they are multi's shouldn't be that difficult.

I would also REALLY like to see the mod flag reinstated! It was a huge help explaining to new players who to listen to/who's profile to click for direction to the mod email.

'During the brief time that abge was fining repeat offenders the number of situations where the rules were broken fell off drastically and the ones that did come up were accusing without actual game links. '

pics or it didn't happen... no i mean stats, can you prove your conjecture with eh, proof?

First of all, kudos to Abegemacht for trying to pull together a sensible discussion on this issue. I have a few comments:


"First off, many people wonder why cheating accusations aren't allowed on the forum."

I am happy for cheating *accusations* to be kept off the forum. Indeed I often urge other members to respect this rule. What needs to be made clear is that the recent debate regarding Diplomat33 / Mr V. was *not* a cheating accusation, but a discussion of a case in which you, the mods, had confirmed the cheating as a fact.


"People also wonder why we do not like exposing cheaters to be ridiculed."

It's not about letting cheaters be ridiculed, it's about letting the community know that action is being taken, that justice is being done, and that cheating is being appropriately punished.


"This is the same reason we don't put scarlet letters on cheaters."

I agree that this would be massively counter-productive.

Yes. I'm hosting anon games for anyone angry at me to try and take it out on me in a game, but you' ll have to find me first!

I general though we avoid saying who has been caught cheating unless we have elected to attempt to keep this person and all their accounts off the site. Ridiculing a known unbanned cheater will only encourage him to create a new account.

Anyway give yebellz a break guys - modding isn't easy lol. I hope you guys aren't making him second guess agreeing to join the mod team.

To yebellz - hang in there lol. What you're looking at right now is probably the most psychologically exhausting component of modding, but there are rewarding aspects sometimes, like when people thank you for a job well done.

Well, i say thanks yebellz. you were polite and serious, and did judging to the best you could. Like the president, who does the best he can and everyone wont be happy with all his decisions but he still does his job.

I support the mods and their work and whilst I know this thread isn't solely about D33 - I think they called it right, although I only feel they called it right after they gave a fuller explanation - he is young, better to know who he is than ban him. What I don't understand is what we mean by 'a self-modulated forum'. It seems to me that people can say and do anything and it is anything goes and that they are encouraged to moderate themselves UNTIL someone says something the mods don't like and then they are told off about it. I'm happy to have a self moderated forum or a forum with rules but don't pretend it is to be self moderated and then tell people off - decide what you want and keep to it.

My take on Kestas' questions

- How should mods be able to enforce certain game-related rules in the forum (like cheating accusations etc), but otherwise have to take a totally hands-off approach?



- How do the most well-balanced / reasonable mods get chosen without creating inner-circles of friends?

- (The bigger one, which hasn't been much of a focus recently) How should mods respond where there is ambiguity between whether someone is a multi-accounter or a couple of close friends/relatives?

My take on Kestas' questions

- How should mods be able to enforce certain game-related rules in the forum (like cheating accusations etc), but otherwise have to take a totally hands-off approach?

---Generally this works well IMHO - whenever someone makes or asks about making an accusation, someone usually advises them to contact a mod. However, I think that when people arn't making accusations I think the mods can still contribute to the debate but should take their mod hats off and not speak for the mods. This will allow them to abide by the hands off approach you advocate. I think kestas should look at the D33 thread and let us know if he thinks the mods were being 'hands-off' or not.

- How do the most well-balanced / reasonable mods get chosen without creating inner-circles of friends? Elections every year.

- (The bigger one, which hasn't been much of a focus recently) How should mods respond where there is ambiguity between whether someone is a multi-accounter or a couple of close friends/relatives? I'm happy to play with people who are friends but maybe we should request that they advise the other players at the start of the game?

"but don't pretend it is to be self moderated and then tell people off "

That would be like saying we are free here in the US so anything goes... No a self moderated forum can still have rules just like a free society still has laws. The rules are: no cheating accusations on the forum and no discussing ongoing games unless prearraigned, *especially* gunboat games and no spamming the forum. It's really only three of them with two being real clear and the third being a bit at the mods discretion.

Re an inner circle: It's going to happen. The mods will never bring an internal disagreement over handling a situation ot the forum and they *shouldn't*. It doesn't belong here. But because of that, it is always going to appear to be an inner sanctum of power. There is no way to avoid that without holding periodic elelctions for mods and allowing for more transparency in the mod process so the people can vote in our out mods. But that is too unwieldy to be put in effect. So we stick with the status quo and continue down this path. There is nothing wrong with the path. It works well. But don't pretend there won't be those who are discontent not only with individual responses but with the whole process as the conspiracy folks see conspiracies everywhere.

@jmo: "***I think that the points deduction on the part of the mods worked great!"

Unfortunately, this breaks down into punishing people in games for stuff done in the forum. It's apples and oranges. Plus someone with 50,000 wouldn't mind a fine of 100 , and someone with less than 100 doesn't mind, cause they can get it replenished...

@Draugnar - I'm happy to have a self moderated forum with rules but those rules should be set out in advance. The rule about no cheating accusations and no discussing ongoing games are fine. But if there is no rule about speaking about someone who has been banned then the mods shouldn't invent a rule when that happens and chastise people for breaking it.

@Maniac - I think that was an unfortunate turn of events. I hear you and was the first to respond to both yebellz "new mod" exuberance and to fortknox's chastisement by challenging their authority in that particular case. Had Mr. V's description never had the "mutil of D33" written to it, of course, none of this would ever have happened. But I saw the bog ol' X and had to go see what was what and yebellz had posted that info and... well... here we are.

I think in the future, the mods shouldn't do that particular action again and I'm sure they won't with the shit it stirred up this time. I also think, seeing as I have apologized for the trouble my posting caused, an apology from the mods for their role in all this (at least chastising us for breaking an unwritten and unknown rule) is in order as well.

But I wouldn't hold my breath for the latter...