"Spam"

[Edley]

Dear Mod-Persons,

I don't understand the spam policy. Is it enforced all the time or just on things that certain mods don't like? I'm fine with them stepping in and redirecting a thread back on topic, but it doensn't seem to be enforced evenly.

 

[CK]

Dear Mod-Persons,

I don't understand the spam policy. Is it enforced all the time or just on things that certain mods don't like? I'm fine with them stepping in and redirecting a thread back on topic, but it doensn't seem to be enforced evenly.

On certain things mods don't like.

 

[Max Payne]

Dear Mod-Persons,

I don't understand the spam policy. Is it enforced all the time or just on things that certain mods don't like? I'm fine with them stepping in and redirecting a thread back on topic, but it doensn't seem to be enforced evenly.

I can't speak for everyone, but I only enforce what I see. I've been saying that it should be enforced properly, but every time I do I get shit flung my way about how it shouldn't be enforced at all.

 

[CK]

I can't speak for everyone, but I only enforce what I see. I've been saying that it should be enforced properly, but every time I do I get shit flung my way about how it shouldn't be enforced at all.

It should be enforced but there needs to be some kind of agreement. Not to lax and not to strict. Imo the omegle thread was a bit too far.

 

[Max Payne]

The thread was spam. Even the topic creator admitted this.

 

[CK]

The thread was spam. Even the topic creator admitted this.

Thats all fine but it was mixed signals. One min yops posting in it like everyone else then the next mako's closing it out of nowhere.

 

[Max Payne]

Yopy had no problem with the closure though.

Maybe it is mixed signals.

 

[Makoeyes987]

Well I talked to Yop afterwards and he said it made sense despite being amusing, and yeah, it was pretty obviously spam.

No one was warned for it (since that'd be unnecessary and yeah, it would be seen as mixed signals), but while it was rather strange for that to happen, the fact it was closed due to that reason should be understandable.

 

[Edley]

A little more consensus between mods would be nice. You guys don't need to discuss every action you take in committee, but there's gotta be some common ground.

 

[CK]

Yopy had no problem with the closure though.

Maybe it is mixed signals.

I know he didn't but it should've been closed if it was spam when the first mod/admin came along.

 

[Max Payne]

A little more consensus between mods would be nice. You guys don't need to discuss every action you take in committee, but there's gotta be some common ground.

I completely agree.

 

[Max Payne]

I know he didn't but it should've been closed if it was spam when the first mod/admin came along.

I don't really think Yopy likes being the bad guy, and you know aaron wasn't going to close it.

 

[CK]

A little more consensus between mods would be nice. You guys don't need to discuss every action you take in committee, but there's gotta be some common ground.

yeer yeer

 

[Makoeyes987]

Yeah, that was our fuck up then

 

[CK]

I don't really think Yopy likes being the bad guy, and you know aaron wasn't going to close it.

aarons not allowed to be a mod apparently so he doesn't count.

 

[Ⓐaron]

I still haven't gotten a good answer on why every goddamn spam thread that comes along needs to be closed. Or why a thread for posting funny quotes is spam.

 

[Sheva Alomar]

Make a spam section.

 

[CK]

Make a spam section.

inb4warn

 

[Max Payne]

aarons not allowed to be a mod apparently so he doesn't count.

hasn't stopped him

 

[Munatik]

Here are some of the relevant points in the brand new shiny Rules post:

We consider ourselves pretty lenient on spam, and it's okay for a few posts in a thread to be off-topic. As long as the topic doesn't stray from its original topic too much after that. When a thread goes off-topic too much, a moderator will - if possible - post a warning or two at his discretion and choice of leniency. If the topic doesn't go back on topic after that, continued off-topic posters will receive warnings, and the topic could also be shut down.

....

*Spamming - Posting without contributing anything intelligent or relevant to the discussion at hand, or just posting to be annoying. Table-breaking, long strings of nonsense, and gratuitous use of enormous, multiple, or offensive images are examples. Obnoxiously long repetitions of characters and soliciting also falls into this category.

Is there a problem with the definitions and/or wording here? Nevermind that we were given a lot of time to amend and revise what was stated here before they were posted today. At any rate, I think we should adjust these paragraphs as well if they need adjusting.

 

[Ⓐaron]

hasn't stopped him

Only when the consensus is pretty clear that the member base wants something done fucker. Sorry if that occasionally results in me clashing with other staff

Here are some of the relevant points in the brand new shiny Rules post:

We consider ourselves pretty lenient on spam, and it's okay for a few posts in a thread to be off-topic. As long as the topic doesn't stray from its original topic too much after that. When a thread goes off-topic too much, a moderator will - if possible - post a warning or two at his discretion and choice of leniency. If the topic doesn't go back on topic after that, continued off-topic posters will receive warnings, and the topic could also be shut down.

....

*Spamming - Posting without contributing anything intelligent or relevant to the discussion at hand, or just posting to be annoying. Table-breaking, long strings of nonsense, and gratuitous use of enormous, multiple, or offensive images are examples. Obnoxiously long repetitions of characters and soliciting also falls into this category.

Is there a problem with the definitions and/or wording here? Nevermind that we were given a lot of time to amend and revise what was stated here before they were posted today. At any rate, I think we should adjust these paragraphs as well if they need adjusting.

Yeah I basically don't see how the Omegle thread falls into that category at all, and the procedure for warning about a thread closure before carrying it out definitely wasn't followed.

 

[Makoeyes987]

A thread with no discussion value, specification on what it is, with nothing but a few quotes in the title, and laughing at people on a random chat site, doesn't make a thread a "funny post" thread, nor something that's entitled to be left open. It's spam.

The reason its not allowed or left open, is because it's against our spam policy which we've drafted and enforced in the first place.

@Integra

LOL, no.

 

[CK]

MY OPINION IS BETTER GTFO

 

[Sheva Alomar]

Seeing as I've only been here since last month and am still kind of new on the TLS scene, can you explain as to specifically why you oppose a spam section?

 

[Ⓐaron]

A thread with no discussion value, specification on what it is, with nothing but a few quotes in the title, and laughing at people on a random chat site, doesn't make a thread a "funny post" thread, nor something that's entitled to be left open. It's spam.

The reason its not allowed or left open, is because it's against our spam policy which we've drafted and enforced in the first place.

Riddle me this, why is there no discussion value in funny quotes and what in the spam policy Munatik quoted prohibits "funny quote" threads"?