|
dingus
Jul 12, 2006, 2:41 PM
Post #1 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Particularly since I was told only last night that my request to edit my own content on the thread in question wouldn't be allowed because it's sufficiently buried and no one really reads it anymore.
Do we own our own data, or not? It is cut and dried, that simple.
And the answer on rocknannys.com is the same as it has always been...
NO.
We do NOT own our own data on this site and apparently never will. You hit the send button and they own it. For a sthat lives breathes and dies on user input this is SHAMEFUL.
You need to start paying people for their submission, imo.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jul 12, 2006, 11:32 PM
Post #2 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Dingus, you'll be interested to know that Tim the code guru is now writing code so that even in locked threads a user can edit their own content.
The thread that Amber refers to was locked around 2 years ago with her full knowledge and approval. This was done to protect her information which was bieng drowned by some rather ugly and nasty trolls. The thread was indeed dead and buried under 2 years worth of posts. We did this with the best of intentions and as mentioned with the full knowledge and blessing of the OP. Now 2 years later the OP wants the decision reversed talk about fickle. I feel like I have had sand kicked in my face over this. Yeah please protect me from the bullies, oh OK, zap, the thread is locked. Now 2 years later I'm getting dogpiled for something that we did to accomodate a user.
Well the thread may just be unlocked and everyone can have at it. No way am I going to make that mistake again. Sheesh, try to do the right thing and it is never right. Reminds me of that saying, if a man asks a question and a woman is not around to hear him, is he still wrong? Damned if I do and damned if I don't. Tell me dingus what would you have done? I tell ya I need the wisdom of Solomon in this job.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Jul 12, 2006, 11:38 PM
Post #3 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Hey Phil, no good deed goes unpunished, eh?
But to say it's fickle to change your mind 2 years later... well, a lot can change in two years. There might be unanticipated consequences, that you want to correct. There might be a NYT article. And you might go back, thinking you are entitled to edit your own posts, per site policy, be denied, and be annoyed about that.
But anyway...
I'd like to echo dingus's statements in the other thread about you, tim and jay. I don't always agree, but I think you guys do a good job most of the time.
Cheers,
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Jul 12, 2006, 11:41 PM
Post #4 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ philbox ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Wouldn't it have been shorter and more to the point to just admit that there was a bug/oversight in the code and leave it at that? :?
I commend you for staying relatively sane while the mods are being shat on, but if at the end of the day it was a technical 'glitch' that prevented someone from editing their post, then that is what it was and it wasn't your fault.
Asking Dingus for advice isn't going to help you :wink:
Edit, 'cause someone posted between phil and me....
Edit x2, what would appear to be 'fickle' behavior may well be just that, but it would have gone completely unnoticed by all if the OP had been able to edit her post from the beginning (and, as I understand it, the way it should have been).
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 12, 2006, 11:49 PM
Post #5 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Tell me dingus what would you have done? I tell ya I need the wisdom of Solomon in this job.
Hmmm, about the good Dr I presume?
Setting aside the validity of some of his issues with the management AT THAT TIME, what would I have done?
It woulda been wrong back then probably. But now I have come to believe in the supertaco 'Whack-A-Mole" moderation.
Its very simple... a user goes over the line and management doesn't like it, that user and all her posts are gone gone gone, no explanation necessary or expected. A total whack job, gone in 60 seconds, one or two SQL statements I suspect.
Anyway, no need for elaborate policies or 'fair enforcement.' No need for hand wringing or committee meetings. Just whack the fucker and bury the dead. But the thing is, at ST its the site owner that does it, not a 'volunteer.'
Summitpost took the original approach of keeping all mods anonymous. They were so anonymous that I didn't know there were any for over a year! They were doing their puritan mod thing and I didn't know about it and neither did anyone else. A slip of the fingers outted the policy and well, it still works but they've had their challenges.
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? You see what I'm hinting at here Phil?
Now that has nothing whatsoever to do with my beef against site policy about user owned data. Competely different topic.
There is no justification for the lack of a user controlled delete button.
Now finally, back to the good Dr. It isn't fair to take his final days out of context without the leadup. He had mnajor problems with climbing noobs lording it over more experienced climbers, and all the little puritan things that went on back then. Amber was certainly a big part of that.
While he was (is) mean spirited, he didn't attack Amber because she fell off a mountain and we all know it. He attacked her because she was management and it served his meanness to do it, as well as make his central point.
I always felt that as long as mods and admins kept their prying fingers off my posts, I didn't care how experienced they were. Still don't for that matter.
But that was at the heart of it. It wasn't *just* him being a vicious asshole, though that was certainly the hemmeroidal part of it.
Rambking I know, you caught me off guard,.
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jul 13, 2006, 12:07 AM
Post #6 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Just so we are all clear, locked threads meant that nothing could be done in those threads including self editing. This will change when Tim finishes writing the code to allow self editing even in locked threads.
Dingus, we too have a whack a mole type site function. We can nuke a user and all of their posts and their profile are gone gone gone. We usually reserve this for the mrs. gumsunto's from Nigeria who is offering to give us millions of $. Our other tool is to use the perma tarpit, this way the users posts are preserved for all time thus showing the other user what a tool they have been. We rarely use this tool. One has to have had a long history of being a complete tool for this to have been used. We usually give far too many second chances.
Mostly we rely on user moderation and self moderation. In other words the users know best what behaviour they like to see around here. I trust the users to keep the other users in line through self policing of threads. For the mods all they really need to do is have a quiet word in the thread and things usually get back on track.
This policy has stood the site in good stead. We now no longer need to play net nanny as it should be. There is less of a need to have huge numbers of mods pouring over every post looking for small infractions. This is a good thing that we no longer have to do that.
We still need mods to move things around to more apropriate forums and to innject some advice from time to time into threads. We also need to remove double posts that the site somehow manages to drop in to threads from time to time. Of course we also reserve the right to hit spammers and scammers right between the eyes with the aforementioned nuke button.
We DO listen to the users, people of your standing dingus are listened to more intently, same goes for jt512 and others of his long standing connection to the site. I very much do apreciate the fact that you will spend the time to participate in making the site a better place. Same goes for all who participate in these types of threads. We can't improve if you don't voice your opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jul 13, 2006, 12:18 AM
Post #7 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: Now 2 years later the OP wants the decision reversed talk about fickle. I feel like I have had sand kicked in my face over this. Yeah please protect me from the bullies, oh OK, zap, the thread is locked. Now 2 years later I'm getting dogpiled for something that we did to accomodate a user.
That thread was locked and removed, while we were told (lied to) that it was deleted and could not be recovered. A huge rue ensued, followed by a couple of weeks of debate, followed by decisions, folowed by the thread *magically* reappearing in Community, with orders to edit/remove any images or context that was "presumed" to be inappropriate. -- Inapproppriate for whom; the Pope or Ron Jeremy..? The thing is, there was nothing in that thread that was even remotely beyond PG-13 and/or isn't shown on prime time television every night. Hell, daytime soaps are far far worse, then there's Jerry Springer!
But hey Phil, you've now called Amber "fickle" in 2 different threads this evening (clearly kicking the sand in her eyes!), so I hope you feel good about yourself and the official Admin stance you've taken.
Go ahead and kick some more sand in Ambers face, because I doubt she's had enough lately! :evil:
{edited, because it isn't fucking worth it!}
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 13, 2006, 12:19 AM
Post #8 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
You asked me what I would do. I wouldn't lock threads, edit posts, none of that crap. If I deciced a poster was over the line. WHACK! No explanation, no 2nd chance, GONE. And I wouldn't wring my hands about it after the fact. I wouldn't leave their bloody entrails as an example either, as I don't think what was done with ptpp was right either.
A poster goes, all her posts should go with her, every last one of them. GONE.
That's what I would do.
Now how bout that delete button?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jul 13, 2006, 12:23 AM
Post #9 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
It's happening dude, just gotta give the code guys the time to write it.
tgreene, huh, water under the bridge now mate, keep on dredging though.
|
|
|
|
|
devils_advocate
Jul 13, 2006, 12:34 AM
Post #11 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2006
Posts: 1823
|
In reply to: The thread that Amber refers to was locked around 2 years ago with her full knowledge and approval. The thread was indeed dead and buried under 2 years worth of posts.
Now this concerns me.
I would like to think that the crap I pull out of my ass and post on here will be around for everyone to scratch their head at for years to come.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jul 13, 2006, 12:52 AM
Post #12 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
In reply to: In reply to: tgreene, huh, water under the bridge now mate, keep on dredging though. Water under the bridge for whom..? You'll notice I removed portions of my post, but you made my point for me. How can something so unresolved, ever be considered water under the bridge..? :evil:
So feel free to PM me with any unresolved issues and I will gladly try to resolve said issues. You should understand though at the outset that I am in an advanced stage of Alzheimers, in other words something that may be a huge deal for you may in fact not be that big a deal for me and in all likelyhood I may well have forgotten a lot of the background to the issue.
That said if I have insulted you in the past then let me apologise unreservedly. Yes we do discuss issues in the mods and eds forum and undubtably your name may have come up in relation to certain threads. As dingus pointed out I am quite opinionated, I have never seen myself as such so I may have to take a closer look at how I post so that I do not overwhelm others. You too are fairly strongly opinionated and attract your share of detractors. I've never seen myself as amongst those.
I have defended you in the past tgreene when issues came up. I can't remeber the specific instance that you mentioned but then edited out as to who said what aboutn whom. You obviously got something third hand and took it to heart. As I said, sorry if you got a bad impression of me. I do like to think that I try to be likeable to all, I don't succeed at times. The current broohaha is a case in point. I let things get to me, I'm only human like the rest of you.
Do I need to justify my continuing position as an admin to you, nope. I do try to be fair and to make the place a better place for you the users to enjoy. I do this without recompense. I don't get paid to waste my time here, same as you, same as pretty much all of us. I spend my time hanging out here because I enjoy the friendly repartee with people like yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jul 13, 2006, 12:56 AM
Post #13 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
Gimmie a handjob, and we'll call it square! :boring:
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jul 13, 2006, 1:27 AM
Post #15 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
If you are gonna have a kill button that powerfull it would be nice if you gave posters a chance to repent before you killed them. Everyone drivels something bad once in a while. late, tired, drunk whatever. Give em one chance to repent and if you don't like the tone of their reply then you kill em.
|
|
|
|
|
wideguy
Jul 13, 2006, 1:41 AM
Post #17 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 15045
|
This part of the conversation is pretty pointless.
What you put on the web is permanently recorded in probably a hundred different places within 36 hours of you posting it. Edge nailed it, if you think you might even remotely possibly regret your words at a later date, better not put it out.
If it gives someone the warm fuzzies to be able to edit their words on this or any other site, I say let them go nuts. The original words are still out there, somewhere, and they will crop back up again if it interests someone.
Let Amber edit, don't let Amber edit, it doesn't matter. Her words will still be out there.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jul 13, 2006, 1:58 AM
Post #18 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
So Wide, are you actually suggesting that soliciting a handjob from Phil may come back to hurt me..?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I guess he'll just have to use more lotion then! :mrgreen:
|
|
|
|
|
ddt
Jul 13, 2006, 4:26 AM
Post #20 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2005
Posts: 2304
|
While this post does not answer the question (yet), it does share some thinking on the topic.
DDT
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Jul 13, 2006, 7:20 AM
Post #21 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
not editing anything in a locked thread is a standard property of phpbb. it just didnt backfire before so nobody saw a need to change it. now we all see that need and theres no need to start bickering about it.
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Jul 13, 2006, 12:00 PM
Post #22 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
as for owning data...here's my take on it:
when i post something on rc.com, or myspace or wherever, the sentences and words i post are changed into digital form, ultimately represented by zeros and ones. put them together in another way--the 0's and 1's that is, not the words--and you basically get a really big number.
one single number.
how can i own the number 45?
it's an interesting question, dingus, and i'm not being cute.
but with this (relatively) new form of communication, message boards, forums, usenet, etc, comes new protocols for how things work. and despite having been around for decades, i think the internet/www is still in it's infancy.
things won't start to gel, i don't think, until we see the kids who are just getting out of diapers now hit maturity. i'm guessing most of us who use this site are all old enough to remember a time before email was an everyday office and home thing. before google and myspace and everything.com.
of course, since we all remember that, when we become/became exposed to this new internets, we based how we interact on what we did before. telephone calls. written letters. actual thumbtack and paper message boards. this works on certain levels, and on certain levels it breaks down.
my point about things not gelling until the diaper brigade grows up has to do with them not remembering other forms of communication. memos, typewritten forms, film cameras. to them, the internet has always existed.
when cars first were introduced, someone had to decide which side of the road to drive on. since horse drawn carriages were typically driven with the driver on the left, someone put the steering wheel on the left. this is a sensible transitional thing, as you need to steer both a carriage and a car. but what about speed limits? parking? licensing? surely what worked for the horse and buggy would and did not transfer over. and along the way, i'm sure some mistakes were made in the decision making process...
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 13, 2006, 2:45 PM
Post #23 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Wow how funny and ironic to see Dingus support CENSORSHIP aka Whack-a-mole. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Yeah well roughster you can't EDIT THESE WORDS.
You were the poster child of meddelsome people editing words that weren't yours, often AFTER arguing with the participants of a particular thread.
You were replaced with a string of computer code. The code does a much better job than you ever did.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jul 13, 2006, 3:57 PM
Post #24 of 35
(9080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: not editing anything in a locked thread is a standard property of phpbb. it just didnt backfire before so nobody saw a need to change it. now we all see that need and theres no need to start bickering about it.
Bingo. I added a few lines that make an exception for the original author of a post (and no one else) to edit even in locked threads or fora. I believe the diff was about 7 or 8 lines, nothing special. The changes have been live since yesterday around lunchtime (when I had time to make them).
This issue simply hadn't come up before. I'm kind of reluctant to work on the old codebase when I ought to be spending any available time on the new (Gossamer) plug-ins, but this was obviously necessary to bring the workings of the current software in line with our expressed policies.
To wit: You own your words; we republish them on the web. You can edit them (or remove the text entirely), but you can't un-write them. Once they're out there, and other people read, quote, or respond to them, you've set events into motion that cannot be undone. I don't think this is unreasonable, especially since there's nothing we can do about realities like the Googlebot caching the text of your posts at any given point in time.
Nonetheless, we have always maintained that authors (and only the authors) are free to edit the stored text of their submissions as they see fit. (Furthermore, we do not delete the text of posts that moderators mark 'deleted'; they are simply not retrieved from the database when a topic is viewed. So the griping about heavy-handed deletions within the thread are also irrelevant -- they can be reversed with one line of SQL. The only person who can irrevocably destroy a post is the author.) The workings of the software (some of the small fraction of the original phpBB code that remains in our deployment) were inconsistent with this, so I patched it to bring it into line with our policies and expectations. Feel free to verify this yourself by editing a post of your own within a locked thread. And please quit pointing fingers at people like Phil and Jay who had nothing to do with it.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jul 13, 2006, 4:10 PM
Post #25 of 35
(9078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Dingus, You can try diversion tactics all you want, the fact remains your flip-flop is nicely recorded on the net. The high and mighty Dingus supporting censorship, what is the world coming to. You want a little ketchup with that crow?
Sure, catsup and crow sounds fine. So what? I've modified my opinion a slight bit. I've changed.
But I see you haven't. Edit THIS.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
