Protect the Initiative Forum from Mod Abuse

[AlbinoClock]

A thread I just made in this forum was gassed, presumably by Corpsegrinder because he thought it was illegitimate. The purpose of the thread was to allow me to use the name CorpsegrinderClock. I was using the avenues laid down for me by the rules of our forums to make a point about a problem of interpretation of rule 6. While the moderator in question, presumably Corpsegrinder, may think that the question is illegitimate, the initiatives forum should not be policed in such a manner if we're to have an actual process.

If I can't demonstrate that a rule, or an interpretation of a rule, is stupid through the use of that rule, what kind of dialogue do we really have here?

Therefore, I'd like to add a rule to the charter protecting polls in the initiative forum from the intervention of individual mods on pain of removal from the staff. Without such a rule we do not have a democratic process in which the community participates.

[miracle fruit]

well it wasnt gassed

it was sent to the spam forum to be rendered invalid and hopefully riddled with hentai like machine gun fire

[FLOUNDERMAN_CLOCK]

It was a satirical thread and didnt belong in initiatives. It was funny, and you had a point, but it didnt belong there.

[AlbinoClock]

well it wasnt gassed

it was sent to the spam forum to be rendered invalid and hopefully riddled with hentai like machine gun fire

Same thing. It ceased to be an initiative illegitimately.

It was a satirical thread and didnt belong in initiatives. It was funny, and you had a point, but it didnt belong there.

I disagree. That's why we vote.

[miracle fruit]

petition to bar ribsclock from the initiatives forum completely

[minipoll]cvr9gr[/minipoll]

[DWARFINATORclock]

youre only allowed to vote on what ribs allows you to vote

[AlbinoClock]

The thread violated the rules. You did not qualify for any of the exceptions stated within the name-change rule, therefore your thread was gassed.

This thread does not state what the rule would actually be regarding the process by which mods could moderate the initiatives forum, unless you are suggesting that the forum simply be unmoderated.

One moderator shouldn't have the ability to decide that a vote is invalid.

[DiscoBallClock]

One moderator shouldn't have the ability to decide that a vote is invalid.

The thread violated the rules. You did not qualify for any of the exceptions stated within the name-change rule, therefore your thread was gassed.

.

[GreyClock]

While I agree with Corpse moving your initiative, I do like the idea of protecting initiatives a bit more. Maybe threads here could have a gas-meter or something? Like three mods need to click the button before it actually gets gassed? Whatever, I'm just thinking aloud. However I do think that should we choose to instate this, we also need clear punishment in case your thread does end up gassed. Tit for tat.

[DWARFINATORclock]

While I agree with Corpse moving your initiative, I do like the idea of protecting initiatives a bit more. Maybe threads here could have a gas-meter or something? Like three mods need to click the button before it actually gets gassed? Whatever, I'm just thinking aloud. However I do think that should we choose to instate this, we also need clear punishment in case your thread does end up gassed. Tit for tat.

every time a thread in initiatives gets gassed grey will be renamed to poopbutt mcpooperson

[Slurpee]

If I can't demonstrate that a rule, or an interpretation of a rule, is stupid through the use of that rule, what kind of dialogue do we really have here?

If you feel a rule is stupid, there are more appropriate avenues for discussing it than parody. Parody doesn't open a dialogue, it just subjects one side of the argument to mockery. But that's beside the point. It's not why your thread was gassed. Staff policy currently is to approach discussion levelly no matter what kind of idiotic childish flailing nonsense we suspect it to be. Your thread was gassed because you did not meet the qualifications for Rule #6, but furthermore you are not supposed to make your own threads for Rule #6.

If you feel your case meets ALL of these qualifications, contact an administrator and request that they put it to a community vote.

This is the ONLY WAY to obtain an exemption, and attempts to vote yourself into an exemption or applying without meeting the qualifications is an attempt to subvert and thereby break the rules. No, you are not protected from breaking the rules in the Initiatives subforum.

The Initiatives forum's stated purpose is and always has been to allow you to post polls which can be included in the next election if there's enough support. Just like voter initiatives in real life. It's not a place to protest, it's a place to enact actual change that users feel would be beneficial to the crew at large.

If you don't like something about Rule 6, you need to make a poll in this forum that says, in precise language, what you want to change about it. If you don't have a problem with the rule, but have a problem with its applicability to Blob's case, the appropriate avenue to discuss that would be a clear, structured argument in the discussion thread, like Clam was doing. You argue your case and ultimately let democracy decide. Your opinion is not so important that you get to stage a coup while everybody else speaks with their votes. If you try it, and don't break any rules in the process, staff policy dictates that you be allowed to, but don't expect everybody to suddenly change their minds about an issue just because you transparently changed tactics, and don't expect to be exempted from the rules if you do break them (which you did) just because you're attempting to put a point across in the process.

[patriotclock]

I voted Yes regardless of what the original thread in question was.

[Topcatyo]

The thread has been moved to the spam forum where it belonged.  There has been no foul play in the Initiatives forum.

I voted no

[Kombucha]

How do I vote for getting rid of the Initiatives forum entirely because so far it's been really, really fucking stupid.

[AlbinoClock]

This is the ONLY WAY to obtain an exemption, and attempts to vote yourself into an exemption or applying without meeting the qualifications is an attempt to subvert and thereby break the rules. No, you are not protected from breaking the rules in the Initiatives subforum.

Well the equally bullshit Blob naming poll is gone now, so I'm ok with mine being gone, since it's been handled even-handedly.

I still would like to see a clear set of protections for legitimate polls so that moderators can't just gas them to advance their own agendas.

[AnkhClock]

While I agree with Corpse moving your initiative, I do like the idea of protecting initiatives a bit more. Maybe threads here could have a gas-meter or something? Like three mods need to click the button before it actually gets gassed? Whatever, I'm just thinking aloud. However I do think that should we choose to instate this, we also need clear punishment in case your thread does end up gassed. Tit for tat.

I actually like this idea a lot. IMO if your topic is gassed (which usually happens because you didn't read the rules) you should be prohibited from making another topic in the initiatives forum for a certain amount of time. Also maybe a scatter because scatters are funny.

[GreyClock]

Ankh I thought you edited my quote with "a bit more" but you didn't. It's in my original post. I'm not sure why. Brain fart.

I still would like to see a clear set of protections for legitimate polls so that moderators can't just gas them to advance their own agendas.

Then suggest something a little more concrete?

[FLOUNDERMAN_CLOCK]

I still would like to see a clear set of protections for legitimate polls so that moderators can't just gas them to advance their own agendas.

Dude your poll about taking corpsegrinder's name wasnt a legitimate thread to be voted upon. Let it go.

[AlbinoClock]

Dude your poll about taking corpsegrinder's name wasnt a legitimate thread to be voted upon. Let it go.

Scroll up darlin.

[VCRClock]

Albino, I respect your concern about not having initiatives gassed for bullshit reasons. If I saw an instance of blatant, undemocratic mod abuse in the Initiatives forum, I'd obviously do my best to correct that. Incidentally, if I somehow overlook such abuse, please let me know about it.

Ideally, we're already protected from Initiative forum mod abuse by voting staff members into place. People don't vote for people they think are going to arbitrarily silence any initiative they don't like. They vote for people who they would trust to make judgement calls that aren't stupid or totalitarian. (And if they do, we have other moderators to put those in check.) The Corpsegrinder name change thread was gassed on a few different technicalities -- including one that I guess means that name change proposals are already subject to subjective staff judgement calls -- but in reality, the deciding factor was probably because it appeared to be a test of the system, or proof of concept, that had either already made its point or wasn't really necessary. I don't know which; I didn't gas it. Common sense suggested that you weren't sincere about becoming CorpsegrinderClock. If you'd told me after it was gassed that you were actually sincere about it, and were otherwise qualified under the provisions of Rule 6, I'd have restored the thread for you.

If I haven't addressed your concerns here, let me know.