BLOG PIECE: Nexus moderation system overhaul, etiquette and ethos

[dartmaul15]

Just tought i would drop byy and clarify a few things regarding my previous post.

 

No, i did NOT give away my credit card info. I provided proof of purchase by, if memory serves me right, sending them a message cotaining a picture of my Steam library with skyrim in it. I actually obught the Collectors edition (i got the game, a t-shirt, the paper map, the goty map, the sketchbook and the statue)

 

ALso, europeans does mostly bank cards (can't be overdrawed) and credit cards. At least we do in norway ;) I haven't even heard about debit cards.

[LadyMilla]

I still think the fake account thing will be an issue with ip changers it seems to still be an issue

 

VPNs/Tor might hide them temporarily, but sooner or later they do something that gives them away.

Am I right, blaketheman?

[rekuli]

There are already some very good posts a little below that handle the IP blocking and arbitrary address assignment issue in detail, whe don't need to re-do this every few posts :-) Fact is, that IP blocking will only temporarily shut off such people, and the networks they access need additional constant monitoring by personnel that blocks their accounts the moment they are spotted. And the innocents that happen to currently use the blocked IPs because their provider assigned them on their current login are the frustrated folks that have to prove they're not the wrongdoers.

 

By the way:

It is amusing how few people know some things about other countries, especially when thinking of the background of globalization. Just to add to the confusion concerning credit/debit cards in Europe:

 

I am german, but in my fourty years I have travelled most of Europe (including the british isles, England/Scotland and Ireland), Scandinavia and some other countries bordering to the Mediterran Sea or the Caucasus. I don't really know what you mean when you say „credit card” or „debit card”, fact is: almost each country has its own rules, some card systems (prepaid or chip cards) are „loaded” with a certain amount of cash, others work like normal Visa or bank cards which you can draw until you hit the limit of credit. There is a diversity of systems depending on national laws as well as the bank you're with, but in general, there are some cards that work all over the world the same way, like Visa. As long as you have a plus in your bank account and not fully drawn your daily allowance, you're free to go shopping.

Edited November 22, 2012 by rekuli

[WaltC]

Drake, your original post before you edited it kinda summed things up perfectly. Not from a chest-beating stand-point, but from a statistical stand-point. The people complaining are very much in the minority. I'm aware of that, yet I always get baited in to replying to these people :facepalm:

 

Although I've been using and enjoying Nexus as a mod resource for several years, I finally decided to take a look at your forums after reading your well-written and concise blog today! In reading through this thread, however, I was a bit surprised to see that your blog was written to address such august personages as "Anotherbogusaccount" and "lickedmysplit" (excuse any misspelling on my part, please)...;) You, sir, have the patience of Job! Without a doubt.

 

Your efforts are obviously directed at adults, but these individuals seem little more than teenagers displaying prepubescent angst sprinkled liberally with the expected but irrational authority complex. These folks should be thrilled that you even deign to address them--I'm sure they are. Someday they'll mature to the point of being able to express that sentiment adequately, I'm sure. Right now, they seem squarely stuck in the thumb-in-the-mouth entitlement stage where all that exists in the world belongs to them and how dare anyone tell them what to do with it.

 

Certainly, this is but a microscopic sample of what you must patiently endure each day in order to bring this terrific site to an adult community which is very appreciative--just possibly not very talkative about it. For games like Skyrim which I have nearly 200 hours in at the moment (and I'm probably at the low end of the scale among those who like the game), I cannot imagine enjoying it so much if not for the wonderful mods that I've been able to find and download from Nexus--NMM has overall been a joy to use and an unbelievably handy and useful tool. So, thanks again...for all that you and your fellow stalwarts provide for so many of us, and miraculously, for no expense on our parts! Mod makers are generally an excellent bunch of people and surprisingly enough I find them to be experts on the mods they create! As is evident to most, so much can be gained by simply listening to them.

 

The one comment I remember reading that I thought was very amusing was the complaint about (paraphrased) "receiving snotty and immature responses from moderators." I thought that particularly funny, because when a person sends snotty and immature comments to a moderator, just what sort of comment is he expecting in return? He should be delighted that his comments earn any response at all, imo.

 

Anyway, batten down the hatches, man the ramparts, and keep up the good work! Just wanted you to know how well-appreciated it is!

 

Yours,

 

WaltC

[askfor]

I used to work as USENET news admin, and I was in charge of abuse handling. Our policy was to ALWAYS warn offenders before locking the account. It worked in all cases but one. All of the offenders never repeated their mistakes, except that one. The only exception was a guy with username 'bulldog' who ignored the warning and tried to settle the score with me physically when his account was locked. When he saw me he decided that I was too big for him, turned 180 degrees and left the building :-). I was told about it by somebody else. So, you might want to reconsider the warning policy.

 

Please do something about tag system. The authors are prevented from tagging their own mods, and there is an ugly red warning about tags next to every new mod. Either allow authors to tag the mods, or remove the warning or, maybe, make the warning less offensive.

 

Users are not so eager to add tags, so I often need to post forum message asking them to tag the mod.

 

Edited November 23, 2012 by askfor

[pippinstrano]

<snip>

All recognised mod authors (those authors who have 1,000 unique downloads and are able to access the mod author private forums) will now be able to hide posts that have been made in their own file comments. When an author hides a comment the content of the post will be fully hidden (with no option to see the original content) and the text will be changed to read "The author of this file has requested this comment be checked by our moderation team and it is currently awaiting moderator review". It will then be sent to a moderation pool. Moderators will be able to login to this page and see all the posts that have been hidden by mod authors and are awaiting review. At this point the moderation team will assess whether the mod author was justified in removing the comment.

 

If the moderator agrees that the post breaks our rules then it will be fully hidden from the file comment topic, never to be seen in public again. If the moderator goes one step further and decides that the hidden post was bad enough to warrant an informal warning, a formal warning or a ban then the post will be updated on the authors comment topic to read "This user was given an informal warning/formal warning/ban for this post". Mod authors will be able to choose whether they want that information to be public (they can leave it there for all to see) or whether it's hidden from public view. I know some mod authors will like the idea of showing that people have been warned or banned for trolling their threads as it will act as a warning to others. I also know some mod authors won't like that idea, so we're going to leave that one completely up to you.

</snip>

 

A few questions, if I may -

 

1) "fully hidden from the file comment topic": just so I know that I am reading this right, the post in question will not appear in the listing users' see at all, is that correct? Once hidden, there isn't a stub that say "Hidden post" or something, just the post is removed from what most users see entirely? I am hoping this is the case, but I wanted to confirm this.

 

2) any chance mod authors will be able to have posts hidden that have been edited by the original poster to read "Ignore this" or something similar? Not to say that the original poster did something wrong, but rather because the post contains no useful content at that point?

 

3) any chance mod authors will be able to have posts hidden that are duplicates of earlier posts? Not necessarily as a statement that the poster of the duplicate post has done anything wrong (though there could be some debate there, I suppose), but again, because it contains no useful content? There have been posts around this issue in this topic, but I didn't see a definite answer.

 

4) lastly, any chance the mod author could designate one or more other users to moderate one or more of their file comment sections? I know of more than one author / team I'd love to help by doing their file comment moderation (having no modding skill myself). This was asked by a couple other posters on this topic, but I read all the posts and saw no answer.

[lordrichter]

I applaud the attempt at transparency.

 

I ran a successful multi-line dialup computer bulletin board system for many many years back before the turn of the century. While the scale is different, the issues are the same, and the biggest issue, as I observed over time, is not the malefactors who visit, but the admins who run the place. More specifically, the user perception of the admins who run the place. This perception is borne out of the behavior of the admins, and the people the admins trust to do their bidding, in how they behave, how they respond to others, and how they handle the people who break the rules. After all, how do we really know that the people running the place are any better than the people who they are passing judgement on? Transparency will help.

 

However, not all is peaches and cream. I was not encouraged by the way that some people responded to the "enthusiastic posts" in response to the blog posting. I am an independent person with my own thoughts, so I read this thread with interest and amusement. I was not as interested in what the "enthusiastic posts" said as I was in how the admins responded. The Vampire Dante posted ":rolleyes:" when a more proper action would have been to simply stand down and not post anything. Even Dark0ne, “the law”, got caught up in the fray ("I never realised the Nexus had some(sic) many psychology professors") and I guess I expected more from that quarter. No matter how much I agree or disagree with the post they were replying to, or the sentiment that TVD and Dark0ne expressed, I should have never actually seen them express it in that manner. I think that this reflects on the character of both. Certainly not fatally, but definitely not well.

 

Now, I realize that people have their own opinions and may or may not agree. I'm not stating absolutes here, just opinions. What I am observing is not exactly unfamiliar to me.

 

My point for bringing this up is that, given the language in the Terms of Service, the transparency and the warning system is not only a good idea, it is absolutely required. It would be very easy for moderators, admins, and particularly Dark0ne, to abuse the Terms of Service. How the Terms of Service are applied depends on the character of the people applying it.

 

Through your use of any Nexus site you agree that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, threatening, related to piracy, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of UK law.

 

This statement applies whether or not you are aware that the material violates it. I am not saying that it will be abused, but it certainly can be abused. The statement is absolute, meaning that posting a false or inaccurate statement, or posting anything that is in violation of a UK law, even if you are completely unaware that it is false, inaccurate, or illegal (in the UK), is a violation of the Terms of Service. I, for one, am not an expert on UK law, and there is no way that I can tell whether something that I am not aware of makes a statement false or inaccurate, or even whether a mistake in typing or a misinterpretation made by the reader could result in the perception of a violation of this statement. In fact, the only prudent action for this very message would be to not post it since I cannot be absolutely sure that it does not violate this statement. Therefore, should you never see this post, you will know why. Of course, a reasonable interpretation would not hold someone accountable for information beyond their knowledge, but whether that holds true on Nexus goes back to the character of the person judging.

 

However, the reason that you are likely to see my post lies in these two Terms of Service items:

 

It is important to also acknowledge that there may well be rules and etiquette that may not be mentioned here but are still upheld by administrators and moderators of the site.

What Robin says goes irrespective of whether there has been a breach of the terms of service or not.

 

The first statement says that any undocumented etiquette can catch up the unwary poster. The second one says that Robin can toss anyone out just because he dislikes the cut of their jib. Both of these are entirely dependent upon the character of the people judging and any such ruling would appear to be completely arbitrary. Were this post to catch me up in some way, it would not matter because here would likely be a place I would not want to visit.

 

So, yeah, I welcome the changes in the blog for transparency and warnings. However, I am not under any illusion that it means anything. There is nothing in the terms of service that actually says that they have to follow said policy. Quite to the contrary, Robin can specifically decide not to on a mere whim. Not that I think he would, routinely, but then that comes from my reading of Robin's character, and all I know about that is what I read here on Nexus.

 

The opinions expressed in this post are entirely my own. No harm, slander, or harassment is intended. All statements are factually accurate, to the best of my knowledge.

[blove]

...I ran a successful multi-line dialup computer bulletin board system for many many years back before the turn of the century..

 

Ahhh, multiple user accounts doing daily turns to FidoNet and dominating Barren Realms Elite. Good times.

[Hickory]

I welcome the changes in the blog for transparency and warnings. However, I am not under any illusion that it means anything. There is nothing in the terms of service that actually says that they have to follow said policy. Quite to the contrary, Robin can specifically decide not to on a mere whim.

 

Of course he can. What do you think? That this is some commercial 'property' where goods are bought and sold, protected by trade laws? The Nexus is a free service, owned and run by Robin. He IS the law, with regard to what happens on his network -- internet, UK and international laws aside. He answers to nobody. That you think the implementation of (more) transparency means nothing shows a very rigid thought process.

 

The opinions expressed in this post are entirely my own. No harm, slander, or harassment is intended. All statements are factually accurate, to the best of my knowledge.

 

Spoken like a lawyer. :)

[Korodic]

Always moving forward in a positive way. Wish the government was more like this >.>

 

Robin for president! (or prime minister or something...)

 

On a side-note, he promised us all Ferrari's if he could! That's enough for my vote :D