Overview of Staff Hierarchy

[Null]

I haven't sperged about forum meta in a while. If you're not interested in that sort of thing, this thread is of no value to you.


Forum staff are spread out as shown. This is actually a bit ahead of where we're at. Soon, Chris mods will also be Lolcow mods, and Off-Topic mods will also be able to moderate chat.

Since the foundation of the forum, the staff's operated under very simple and loose ideas. With small boards, these are very effective. Ban people who are annoying. Since the community is only a handful of people, it works. Anyone who doesn't get along is obviously unwelcome and as a result they probably shouldn't be posting there. There isn't disagreement, and if there is, it's between one or two people. It's easy to agree to disagree when you work on a micro level. Macro gets complicated.

The forums aren't small anymore. The days when you can kick out anyone who's simply disagreeable are quickly evaporating. The forums receive 1000 posts a day by about as many unique registered users. We counted 2,000,000 page views in October. When I first started running the forum, I had every board marked as read constantly. I was on top of shit. That's not the case anymore. I have gradually slipped behind and now I rarely even read 10% of posts made in a single day. It's just not in my capacity.

From the sheer volume of information we see on a daily basis, there's also a problem in handling users. People are now expecting an even application of the rules. There's also a problem of communication. Mods have cleaned up discussion considerably, but people get pissed when their posts are deleted, especially when they don't know why. It's a natural thing and it's understandable. People also still get confused and nosy when they see a ban they weren't there for.


In the future, expect the following. This is still on the table, but I'm pretty set on it.

User Management

• A redesign of the warning system. Every rule on the board will be clearly assigned a point value. I am generally not in favor of arithmetic when dealing with people, but there's not much else I can do here. People sperg out about their bans and publicly lie about what they've been banned for. Heavy utilization of the warning system will create a paper trail.
• Visible ban messages. I'm also thinking of turning the user's profile into their warning record (visible to all).
• I also intend on writing a uniform guide for mods when dealing with problems. It's impossible to specifically cover everything, and instinct is one of the things I trust of moderators, but my main gripe is communication. If posts are deleted, for instance, there must be a message. If it's 1 or 2 posts, their authors in private. If a huge chunk of the thread is deleted, it's probably better to make a post explaining why.

Boards

• Chris' boards will be merged under the Lolcow category (a la Jace's). So will the mods.
• There will be a clear distinction between off-topic and on-topic boards in terms of tone. Some things are simply unacceptable in a lolcow forum. That will be detailed.
• I'm also going to attempt, at some point, to explain etiquette when dealing with a person in the thread that is about the person (i.e. a lolcow visit). The short of that is: Don't make the thread about you, don't spam questions, chill the fuck out.
• I don't know how I'm going to do it, but I need to sparse out the Lolcow board. There's too many active threads in there and it's hard to keep track of your favorite people when they constantly get set to page 2.

And some other stuff, like a wiki. I assume if you're read this far, you have an interest in the health of the community and don't mind wordy monologues. If you'd like to contribute to a wiki about people and groups of interest, PM me.

That's about it.

 

[Silver]

• I don't know how I'm going to do it, but I need to sparse out the Lolcow board. There's too many active threads in there and it's hard to keep track of your favorite people when they constantly get set to page 2.

Sub-boards, groups vs individual people?

 

[KingofManga420]

Sub boards would be cool. You could separate them with stuff like 'Gamers', 'Artists', 'SJW' and the like.

Also TJChurch subforum when?

 

[Pikonic]

Sub-boards, groups vs individual people?

That and their means of communicating.

Lowcows can be broken into*:
-Lolherds (groups of people like Loveshies and SJWs, with a subset to our SJW individuals)
-DeviantAutists (people who use DA, like Rose and DF01)
-Oldcows (people who are 30+, like Iconoclast and Raven)
-CowTube (people who communicate through YouTube videos)
-[something snippy and clever for writers] (People who write like TJ)

You could also have a lolcow sighting board for POI who have visited us, because that's where a lot of people are gonna go.

*Those names kinda blow and I'm sure others can do better.

 

[Dunsparce]

Divide lolcows into two Catagories:
-These lolcow's are fat and I would not have sex with them
-These lolcow's are skinny but I would still not have sex with them

 

[ON 190]

Visible ban messages. I'm also thinking of turning the user's profile into their warning record (visible to all).

Most certainly this.

 

[Null]

Sub-boards, groups vs individual people?

@Venusaur suggested that yesterday, but my concern is that (while that helps), it wouldn't make sense. If you're browsing for Lolcows, why would Wizardchan/Love-Shy.org appear in a different place than Fschmidt? From an organizational standpoint, that's insufficient.

I think what I'm going to do is more stringently filter threads based on what a lolcow is. Take a look at this:

If it doesn't meet the middle, it shouldn't be in Lolcow. Each little area should have its own board where it's relevant. I think the big issue arises in the green. You have a thing that exists and is online, but is largely decentralized. Boards like Wizardchan and Love-Shy.org are easier to allow in Lolcow, but once you start talking about anything (bronies, sjw, tumblr, etc) it becomes harder to permit.

 

[Holdek]

Why aren't you currently an admin? What is your role now? Is Brook no longer an admin under this plan?

Also, a listing out of who has the power to ban, lock threads, etc. and under what circumstances, would be helpful.

 

[Watcher]

Why aren't you currently categorized as an admin? What is your role now? Is Brook no longer an admin under this plan?

Null is under the Admin section in that chart he posted in the OP.

He also demoted Smokedaddy and set him to the "Founder" admin group. I'd assume that's what he did with Brook as well. Sorta not an official admin but they would still have the powers they used to.

EDIT: Upon rereading the chart (Founders) is under global mod.

 

[Holdek]

Null is under the Admin section in that chart he posted in the OP.

I meant now. Like his name isn't red, he's not listed under Friends of the People, etc. I've reworded my post to make it more clear.

 

[Watcher]

I meant now. Like his name isn't red, he's not listed under Friends of the People, etc. I've reworded my post to make it more clear.

He hasn't been listed under Red for a while. Afaik Null isn't going anywhere.

 

[Null]

I meant now. Like his name isn't red, he's not listed under Friends of the People, etc. I've reworded my post to make it more clear.

My name has never been red. Why does my name have to be red ?

 

[Holdek]

My name has never been red. Why does my name have to be red ?

It doesn't, but the other admins are red.

 

[FramerGirl420]

My name has never been red. Why does my name have to be red ?

LIES!!
You totes came into chat one day asking if you looked better blue or red. You were red for like, a whole ten seconds.
And then we all told you that red looked ugly on you.
Then you changed back to Null Classic Blue. Same colour as Sonic's arms. And we all rejoiced.

 

[RecordStoreToughGuy]

I think visible ban messages or some kind of message communicating an infraction (User was banned/suspended/spergatoried for this post) would be useful for newer members who actually care about not only contributing, but not being shitposting sperglords. Trolls won't give a shit, but people who are actually here to contribute could benefit by seeing where the boundaries are and what happens when they're crossed.

 

[Male]

make melchett red again

 

[Red_Rager]

I think visible ban messages or some kind of message communicating an infraction (User was banned/suspended/spergatoried for this post) would be useful for newer members who actually care about not only contributing, but not being shitposting sperglords. Trolls won't give a shit, but people who are actually here to contribute could benefit by seeing where the boundaries are and what happens when they're crossed.

That would be useful, every online community has its own quirks and lurking only does so much.

 

[HG 400]

make melchett red again

This.

 

[Clown Doll]

people who are actually here to contribute could benefit by seeing where the boundaries are and what happens when they're crossed.

To quote another poster, too much rules-lawyering kills online communities, by either unwittingly sanctioning shitposting via lax rules or creating an oppressive atmosphere. Then you'll end up with pointless rules-haggle with people demanding the rules to be moved one centimeter to the left or the right.
-Edit-
I've re-read your post and I agree with your idea about the "user was banned for"-messages.

Yeah, but what's the alternative? If you just ban people you don't like, that causes as many problems.

The point was that the rules don't have to be nailed down to a tee to not invoke nitpick, but if the forum moderation has been functioning well thus far, I see no reason why it would swing heavily into the opposite direction if "User was banned for this reason"-mechanic was implemented.My bad reading caused me to go on an off-topic rant and I failed to see that the guy's post was only about the ban messages which I agree with instead of making rules super apparent and detailed.

 

[Null]

To quote another poster, too much rules-lawyering kills online communities, by either unwittingly sanctioning shitposting via lax rules or creating an oppressive atmosphere. Then you'll end up with pointless rules-haggle with people demanding the rules to be moved one centimeter to the left or the right. The current system is fine.

Yeah, but what's the alternative? If you just ban people you don't like, that causes as many problems.