Help Develop FerrariChat.com Rules and Punishment…

Can you have the moderator simply reject posts without a single lower case character?

 

So does this mean the Bible thumpers will stop preaching to us? After all, that's not tolerant of those who don't believe the way they do.

Can't say anything bad about terrorists either, as they only have a different viewpoint and ethical system.

Can't talk about speeding, that's breaking the law. Might offend somebody

Can't have a bikini thread, that's gender bias

Can't even ask if females are here, that's gender biased too.

HORSEFEATHERS! Such a statement is unworkable with as diverse a crowd as we have here. If you're really going to throw that kind of language in, just eliminate the Off Topic forum and restrict the discussion to cars only.

 

I agree with Tillman - I think we have to encourage open discussion, but really only limit the very obscene or derogative. I think a lot of the times things *can* be thrown around in jest. Few could resist a good Irishman or Newfie joke for example. I think moderators can make a good judgement of harsh racism or religious persecution (ie. using the n-word or its similars in a derogative manner, taking shots at someone's religion) and use those. The tone of a discussion is easy enough to read to see if the motivation for a comment is hate or a jovial attitude.

I would just be careful of wording everything in such extremes - just word the rules so that moderators have leeway to delete or ban when necessary.

There's enough Texas boys on the board I can't see them being down with too much regulation ;-).

 

>>Please, it is the rule of common courtesy...the board has had too much of a 'tolerance', but when Mako got banned, way more cheers than jeers were heard except for Ellen. Get a grip. This is a hobby, a diversion for most of us...if I wanted drama, I'd stay at work. I agree with the TX thing, but we have guns too...
FWIW

 

! I never noticed the button and I was searching all over for one before I posted!!! Sorry about that.

 

Perhaps I should keep my mouth shut... because I have something "not too nice" to say.

Whatever this community may think of Allanlambo, when he is routinely called "Ellen", it's a horribly sexist technique. Naming him "Ellen" suggests that replacing his given name with a female one is somehow insulting and degrading. Is there less credibility when he carries a female name? Is there less need for decency when he carries a female name?

I'm not trying to start a flame war... just trying to suggest that if we're serious about banning regious, racial, and sexual intolerance then we should drop the "Ellen" deal.

-Daniel

 

I'd rather ignore him, but he won't go away. I didn't start the Ellen thing, so can we settle on anencephalic sloth?

 

>I think this needs expanding to include genderism and religion-ism

What, we have to be politicaly correct now?

Here's my politicaly correct reply. *SHOVE IT*



>Sort of makes EllenLameBro redundant does it not?[/QUOTE]

Better that it should not.

 

And even report it if its old... we don't want new members doing searches running across nasty "hate" posts... if you notice them, report them and we'll clean them up.

On the stated rules, we should probably explicitly state that you can report a post by clicking on the "!" button at the top right of each.

 

This is just my point of view on that...
1) Changing a female's name into a male's name can be similarly belittling. Thus, I don't see it as particularly sexist... nobody wants to be called the sex that they aren't.
2) Mispronouncing someone's name is a common "ribbing" technique... slightly annoys the person... fairly common.
3) Nicknames often evolve that way; and its usually the people that *do* a lot of ribbing and nicknaming that end up getting ribbed and nicknamed the most. (And that certainly applies in this case.)

If we start moderating such common human interaction as that, this forum will stop being natural human interaction. The hard part, of course, is recognizing when playful ribbing goes over the line to hateful or vulgar or harmful personal attacks. Its a gray area... not something you can really write rules for... rather, something that you want to rely on good judgement. More on that in a moment...

 

Hmmm... I guess it depends upon how you take "bigotry". I'd definitely agree if we said something like "predjudice" or tried to assert threads be free of all sexual, religious, etc. references.

Perhaps we should say:

2. Threatening or attacking members personally will NOT be tolerated. This is grounds for an immediate ban.

3. Threatening, attacking, or even insulting people (singly or as a group) on account of their race, sex, or religion will NOT be tolerated. This is grounds for an immediate ban.

Between those two, I think we cover our concerns... we don't want hate mongering here... we don't want the posts of a few to drive away classes of people... we don't want anybody to feel unwelcome before they've even joined.

Does that work any better? I don't see that as disallowing bikini threads. Or asking about females or law breaking or even bible stories. We're not trying to make F-chat politically-correct or religion-free... we're just trying to make sure it stays hate-free. JMNSHO.

 

Or maybe its time to create a FAQ list... to make it easy at first, we can just identify the FAQs and give lists of links to the threads. Over time, we can enhance that by adding nice summarized answers along with the links to threads for those that want to dig further.

The topmost sticky thread in each forum could be that forum's FAQ. A closed thread maintained by the moderators of that forum.

 

Not sure how I'd word it, but I'd like to add a warning along these lines:

Please do not post comments that will destroy threads by causing an argument that is not relevant to the topic of the thread. Users who repeatedly destroy threads by posting the same argumentative or argument-generating comments may be banned.

This is an anti-troll clause.

 

Let me take my best shot to see if I understand.

Holy ****ing **** that nica is rollin with a cracker up in dat Escalade.

What is this man?

This is supposed to be a place where we can **** around and chat with other Ferrari owners and enthusiasts. Not even Ferrari, theres other European and American cars that we talk about. There is a breaking point, but dont punish on first instinct. The game of baseball, 3 strikes and your out. We should have that here. You get three and time to join a new forum.

We need to get more civilized and understanding.

Im not religious, im not racist, im not sexist, but I am a human.

Thats all I have to say.

 

I really agree with this! Today I was in the library when someone posted a "whip cream" thread with no warnings on the title. I clicked it, and rather quickly figured out what it was. I was glad not too many people were around, other wise I would be in big trouble with the university.

 

Guess it's the libertarian in me, but I just don't see Fchat being broken so badly right now as to require all these rules. I suppose there needs to be something for moderators to do.

The trolls don't bother me, because I just ignore the idiots. Life's too short to spend time on trolls and such, whether in real life or online, and certainly not worth getting worked up over. Let them stew in their own juices.

I'd hate for a few folks to press their need to be protected onto the rest of us, and make this place so stuffy that it's no longer any fun. I don't begrudge Rob making a buck off the board, but I'd hate to see the character be squeezed out of it. Granted, most people wouldn't push it, but there will be that faction that insists on being offended and will try to push the 'offenders' off the site, citing these rules as validation. That's the concern.

 

Hodeehohoho. And here we go...

Sure why not? After all, virtually every topic has been touched on, and is in those vast archives. Soon, there need to be no posts at all, except for current affairs, new models, off topic and such, and we can just close this forum down entirely.

 

Given the advertisements I saw in the free newspapers on the Berkeley campus when I visited, I doubt anything would have happened really.

____

But I think Brian's got the right idea there.

New Ideas: Several discounted memberships for "Archivists" - members who will assume some responsibility to compile all of the old F1 vs. 6spd, Diablo v. 550, Buying a Mondial, Buying a 308, Buying a ___, etc. into filed archives for new members to peruse.

They would have a small quota of archives to create monthly on an honor system. The archives would have a link somewhere and be mentioned somewhere in the new member signup page (ie. A list of Questions Not to Ask - See Archives).

 

I can live with those rules.

 

S P O T O N! Are the sponsors going to be happier if the membership dwindles because the whole experience changes? Let's not make this a clique. It is, after all, the internet not a police state.

Come one come all.

DL

 

One other thing...Look at the title of this thread. "Rules and Punishment???" I am happy to report that I managed to get through Kindergarten 34 years ago and turned out alright...despite what my wife will tell you!

What is this becoming?

Breathe.........

DL

 

There have been numerous comments suggesting warnings before bannings. It just occurred to me... do people think Rob just popped up and banned Mako with no warning?? I guarantee you that Mako has gotten tons of warning and counseling on his behavior. I, myself, have had a several-post PM thread with him discussing what is or is not acceptable in just the last week. I'm sure Rob has had many discussions with him in private.

Mako's response... he absolutely refused to apologize... and then in another thread a few days later, he goes out of his way to do EXACTLY the same ugly behavior... such that I had to delete exactly the same hateful nonsense out of his post again.

If there's anything that should be clear from history to-date is that Rob is NOT into heavy moderation... that he is very tolerant... and that people get lots of mild warnings before any strong actions are taken.

The whole point of this rules discussion is NOT to add new rules... most of those rules have been in place for a long time... its simply to make sure there is a clear statement of what's NOT okay... so that nobody is surprised if they are "disciplined" for violating the rules. More on that...

 

First, these aren't new rules for the most part. Second, there are others who do feel its broken... there are quality people who are going away because they can't tolerate the excess nonsense. Over time, you'll continue to lose quality posters and continue to gain people who just enjoy vulgar arguments. If you're okay with that trend, that's okay with you. But some of us don't want to see Fchat de-generate that way.

I too ignore them... but when it takes me an hour to read Fchat rather than 20 minutes because I am having to skip over dozens of troll posts followed by the dozens and dozens of responses that they illicit... then eventually Fchat value-to-time ratio gets too low. For many good Ferraristi, we've already reached that point.

Let me turn this around on you... do you see any real evidence of Rob or the other moderators kicking lots of people off and squeezing the character out of it??? Do you really see it getting stuffy here???

What I see is the volume of trolling and personal attacks starting to squeeze out and drown out some of our favorite Ferraristi... and that is causing the character of Fchat to degrade. The addition of moderators is meant primarily to allow growth, which allows more and more points of view and more and more overall expertise, but without letting that growth to destroy Fchat's character. And as you add moderators (beyond just Rob), you need some minimal rules to facilitate consistency and clarity. And rather than Rob dictating those rules, he's encouraging the Fchat community to suggest what they should be. Isn't that what the Libertarian in you would want?

It is unfortunate but absolutely true, as any community grows, so must organization and rules. We're not trying to change Fchat into something different... we're trying to preserve it as it was despite the growth.

 

Are the sponsors going to be happier with 6000 bickering teenagers who are here just because its a great place to generate flame wars, or with a mere 2000 Ferrari owners actively discussing their passion? There are dozens and dozens of forums on the internet where you can advertise to bickering non-Ferrari owners... if you look at the sponsor list here, most are targeting Ferrari owners and the rest are targeting Ferrari nuts.

The goal here is to maximize all things Ferrari... to maximize the number of Ferraristi... and unfortunately, with the Internet the way it is, you have to establish rules and enforcement of those rules or the bickering hordes of trolls will overrun and destroy any community as it grows. I have seen dozens of great communities die out on the Internet... you can ignore that reality... or you can pull your head out of the sand and try to actively deal with that reality.

And final point...