NihilusRavager7780 wrote: someone is doing this. for what reason i do not know. it needs to stop before chaos ensues

kev360 wrote: as the last standing thread on this topic i think we should start negotiations here...from what i can tell, none of the mods are actually banned, right? there have been threats left and right, but i don’t think anyone has pulled the trigger yet...

so, here’s the deal, from what i can tell. 90% of mvc hates where it is right now. thats what we can all agree on. there is a split on what to do. some say make the rules stricter, get rid of the flamers, and try to make everyone happy. the other side believes that that will destroy what makes moviecodec great.

so, i’d like to find a middle ground...

1. i would say outlaw flaming in the following situations:
-flame topics
-repeated harassment (on the scale of derdev vs skittles or me and a few others vs read this if your stupid. if the flames die down, then come back up, lets say twice, then bans would be in order.)
-if any other rule is broken (no matter how small, if it is done while flaming, there should be a ban, no warnings, and all around more severe then if done normally)

2. i say the rules should loosen up on:
-suicide (i recognize that this was a problem in the past, but that was because of people actually contemplating suicide who were on here. if the person has stated that they are thinking about suicide, and a member in response to that tells them to, it should be ban-worthy. not if it is just an insult. should be considered a type of flame.)
-discrimination (discriminatory words should not be banable. should be considered a type of flame.)

3. now, what may be the biggest problem right now...a lot of members are questioning the honorably or certain mods. this is where things get truly complicated...we have 9 moderators. 4 of them are active right now (SA-X, Totalitus, Tyreaus, and firewolf81). despite that, there are a few more who seem to be “around”. so, i would propose a three strike system against mods. a mod would get a strike when they banned/didn’t ban someone who did not/did (respectively) deserve a ban. to determine a strike, a member would bring it to the attention of the moderator staff privately, and if 4 mods agree that it was unjust, that would be a strike. if there are three strikes within a year of each other, then that mod would be proven unfit for his/her position. from there, the mod team could present Bjarne Lundgren with the situation, and away his verdict. this is the only way i can see to insure that the mods won’t become corrupted.

this is the system i would propose. feel free to reject/change any/all of it, i just thought i’d get it out there. i’d really rather not have the whole situation worsen, but i’m afraid that if we don’t try something, it will.

Tyreaus wrote:

I agree with everything, except would like to add that the three-strike rule for mods should only be taken moderately and not officially, as a moderator may prove to be unfit in other ways (as in myself). More than that, it’s sometimes that we simply forget or overlook something, as we are not omniscient.
Albeit that, I believe something should be put into place such as that for at least a sort of “guideline” as to when moderators are or are not doing their job correctly.
Also, sort of an add-on to number one, but I personally think we shouldn’t be flaming members who basically have just arrived or are still fairly (a few days or so) new. Not to make it a bannable offence of course, but more to discourage that type of behaviour, as really, nobody wants to come to a site where the first thing that happens to them is they get flamed for ridiculous things that may be untrue. (I believe many can agree on that)
But, yeah, my cents.

Green_Ninja wrote: ..Lmao..

Does no one see me as a mod or something?

kev360 wrote:
ah, yeah, i meant to add that on. if a mod goes nuts and say, bans everyone on the sight, it would be ridiculous to just give him/her a warning. and, as for the slip up thing, thats kinda why i was saying it should be looked at by at least 4 other mods. if they decide that it was just an honest mistake, then they can disregard it, but if they decide that the mod knew better, or at least really should have, then they can put a strike up.
my inner elitist really does die on the inside when i read that...but, yeah, i guess i can get behind that. if someone is new to this sight (we’ll have to decide whats 'new' also), you shouldn’t just spontaneously flame em. i mean, sure, if they have it coming, but if they just say 'hey'....now, the problem with that is, while i would back off if a mod told me to stop, a lot of members here would not. 'discouraging' only goes so far. you could edit posts to stop it, but that could get pretty tedious.

bAyBeE_ChRoNiC wrote: i still dont know what the fucks going on and ive been here the whole time