Moderators editing posts

[Mrs.McCall]

But where does it begin to get stupid?

Say, for example again, I posted a thread about Ulrika Johnson presenting a new show. Another user then mentions she got re-married and then the next 4 pages are all about her former marriages. They then mention she met one husband on her show Mr Right and then the next two pages talk about her other shows and how bad they were.

This means that after my initial post, 6 pages were completely unrelated to the new show I've posted about. I'd then find the subsequent pages after my post off-topic because the thread wasn't about Ulrika Johnson directly.

Sorry to go on about Ulrika Johnson and I hope I haven't confused everyone with my haphazard explanations but what I am trying to get at is, even though 4Chan was mentioned, was there really a need for the thread to be just about 4Chan?

[:....:mike:....:]

I should bloody well hope so, between re-checking all of the rules and thinking of my argument it took me 10 minutes

But seriously, its general concensus that that thread was over-edited, and Joey has admitted that publicly. We do not believe we are above everyone else, we are all prone to mistakes, that's life. I wish people would drop the "moderators think they're god" think, because we really don't.

There is a difference between mistakes and doing it on purpose. Obviously those mods did it on purpose. If they ever considered looking at a post both ways, maybe just maybe these mods will do a better job. :rolleyes:

[Thetan]

I can see why you may feel this should be allowed and I'm not disputing that but under the current rules, my example would be off topic. The conversation about 4chan had no direct relevance to the actual rick roll, it was a brand new conversation about the site itself and therefore, was off-topic to the actual thread itself.

I can see why this is annoying but I have to moderate under current rules rather than what people think the rules should be.

Ok, im sorry if this sounds rude, but please read the rules. It says an offtopic post would be something not relevant to the the thread topic. 4chan is definately relevant to the topic of rick rolling, so it is not off topic.

[Mr.Sam]

Do not make off topic posts - Off topic and random posts are not allowed. Your post must be related to a post made earlier in the thread or about the thread itself.


[below is basically saying don't post meaning less - which is the same as the two rules below.]
It's always nice to have a high post count, it may seem as though people will respect you more with a higher number beside your name, but it doesn't really mean anything on these forums. We respect each of you whether you have 1 post or 1000.

We don't want replies like "i dono" or "why" or "yeah". We have set the forum so that any message must contain at least 9 characters, do not try to get around this by adding meaningless characters.

It is not allowed to post any messages that others consider to be meaningless or pointless or not relevant to the discussion

-------------------------

all the rules above are pretty much saying the same things, if they were merged and edited it would be much more clear.

the rules should be merged changed to something like:


Do not make off topic posts - Off topic and random posts are not allowed. Your post must be related to a post made earlier in the thread or about the thread itself, posts that are there for the sake of post count and/or the moderator believes are meaningless to the thread are not allowed.

[Mrs.McCall]

There is a difference between mistakes and doing it on purpose. Obviously those mods did it on purpose. If they ever considered looking at a post both ways, maybe just maybe these mods will do a better job. :rolleyes:

In all fairness, I always review an entire thread before I moderate it. Unless, of course, it's one of those threads that's been going on since 2005 where I'd usually review the last 10 pages rather than the last 500 or so!

[:....:mike:....:]

In all fairness, I always review an entire thread before I moderate it. Unless, of course, it's one of those threads that's been going on since 2005 where I'd usually review the last 10 pages rather than the last 500 or so!

K, let me give you an example.

If I made a thread about Sulake and then someone started to talk about Habbo, then that is branching off not off-topic. And don't say that is different because it is not different then stated earlier about the other thread with repetitive edits from mods.

[Callum.]

But where does it begin to get stupid?

Say, for example again, I posted a thread about Ulrika Johnson presenting a new show. Another user then mentions she got re-married and then the next 4 pages are all about her former marriages. They then mention she met one husband on her show Mr Right and then the next two pages talk about her other shows and how bad they were.

This means that after my initial post, 6 pages were completely unrelated to the new show I've posted about. I'd then find the subsequent pages after my post off-topic because the thread wasn't about Ulrika Johnson directly.

Sorry to go on about Ulrika Johnson and I hope I haven't confused everyone with my haphazard explanations but what I am trying to get at is, even though 4Chan was mentioned, was there really a need for the thread to be just about 4Chan?

But the forum is meant for discussion right? I'd much rather just visit one thread about one person, than 5 about different aspects of them. You know when you read a thread, and think something you'd like to say, I think you'd like to post it in the thread already about the person, than make a new one.

[Catzsy]

See, Alex has hit the nail on the head. There is a lot of grey area.

I just think that a thread about a rick roll should be about the rick roll rather than the website that contributed to it. Other moderators may disagree with me but some may agree. It's all about your own interpretation.

I am, however, willing to admit that I did over-edit that thread and I was perhaps a bit too strict.

If its any help I remember when the rule change came in because the Smods at the time contributed to the discussion with ---MAD--- amd Sierk.

This is Sierk's direction of the off-topic rule change:
http://www.habboxforum.com/showthrea...ighlight=topic


Now I also remember that this meant a subject could evolve as the thread progressed as long as it was not random and did contribute constructively to the thread and not turn to spam which is why it is important to read the whole thread.

I am sure if I am wrong about this that MAD or Sierk will comment.

[Mrs.McCall]

K, let me give you an example.

If I made a thread about Sulake and then someone started to talk about Habbo, then that is branching off not off-topic. And don't say that is different because it is not different then stated earlier about the other thread with repetitive edits from mods.

Interesting example. It depends what you posted about Sulake... if you posted how Sulake are making a new habbo-type website and then someone posted about how Habbo lags all the time, that is off-topic and not branching out because it's not related to Sulake's new development.

[Tristan]

But where does it begin to get stupid?

Say, for example again, I posted a thread about Ulrika Johnson presenting a new show. Another user then mentions she got re-married and then the next 4 pages are all about her former marriages. They then mention she met one husband on her show Mr Right and then the next two pages talk about her other shows and how bad they were.

This means that after my initial post, 6 pages were completely unrelated to the new show I've posted about. I'd then find the subsequent pages after my post off-topic because the thread wasn't about Ulrika Johnson directly.

Sorry to go on about Ulrika Johnson and I hope I haven't confused everyone with my haphazard explanations but what I am trying to get at is, even though 4Chan was mentioned, was there really a need for the thread to be just about 4Chan?

Yes, it'd be fine. Although that wouldn't happen and I feel your examples are quite exaggerated, that'd still be fine.
Also, 4chan relates to Rick Rolling and was introduced in the original post. The posts formed a chain or "branched off" which is allowed.

EDIT: Yeah, that's the rule change I remember! It was done because it was found that it was becoming far too harsh.