Replacing Statuses

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

So this rule was put in to place by the mod team for some reason. There is the basic timer that you can't post multiple statues before 15 minutes. And there is the other one that you can't delete your status and then replace it. 

 

Ok, so the first rule make sense, it'll stop people from spamming, but it's not really needed anymore. YCM has about 60 active people, and the same 5 statues last many hours these days. Chances are, if you post a statues, you'll still be in the top 5. The new statues replaces your old one in the visible side bar, so bumping someone out will only happen if your status was bumped out of the top 5 in the last 15 minutes. It's highly unlikely

 

The more offending rule is the second one. By deleting my status, there is honestly no way to bump someone out of the status bar. I might wanna add more, or maybe something cool happened that I wanted to share. It's also a sheet thing to moderate because unlike the first spam rule there's no way to really track it. If a mod sees it, then you get funked, otherwise you get away with it. It is, by nature, an unusual punishment.

 

Neither of these rules were ran by the community, the mods just slapped them down and told us to go fish, which isn't ok. 

 

So I ask the mods, what positive change came from these unnecessary regulations?

[Tormented]

I will bring this up with the mod team and see what conclusion we can come to, I think there is merit in being able to replace statuses if you're fixing/amending or otherwise adding additional context.

 

I'll get back to you once a discussion has occurred.

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

At the moment, not much discussion has gone by, but I'll try to fill in the reasoning for why those two rules were implemented in the first place. 

 

---

 

First one, as you already know, is intended to cut down on status spamming. This isn't like Twitter or Discord where you can repeatedly post new comments one after another. Granted, it isn't as busy nowadays, but you can wait a while before posting a new status. If it's a related subject / background info, you can simply add it in a reply. Share the status bar with other members and just wait a while before posting a new one.

 

Second one was probably implemented at the time due to certain members deleting their statuses and reposting them with completely different ones. Granted, we know that autocorrect kicks in more than it should be and often leads to "misspelled" / "wrong" words, which you can't correct as the status bar does not permit you to edit things. It is technically an unenforceable rule, yes. 

 

---

 

On a personal note, I'm fine with lifting that second rule on deleting statuses if it's only for correcting typos or whatnot (as those things do happen and not worth punishing for). Just note that members who do this on a regular basis will be cracked down on (least in the sense of deleting your statuses repeatedly and making it harder for members to respond; surely you can't have that many autocorrect failures that would require you to repost it multiple times in a day.) 

 

With additional info, you can post it in a reply (though YCM's system tends to be screwed over a bit in showing a few of them). If there's a lot, then you should likely take it to threads instead because of the much higher character limit (taking into consideration the new limits on status length) and replies won't be screwed over as they are in statuses. 

 

---

 

This isn't the opinion of the entire mod team (as you would need to ask the rest of them), but at the moment, Tormey and I are generally fine with lifting the second one. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

At the moment, not much discussion has gone by, but I'll try to fill in the reasoning for why those two rules were implemented in the first place. 

 

---

 

First one, as you already know, is intended to cut down on status spamming. This isn't like Twitter or Discord where you can repeatedly post new comments one after another. Granted, it isn't as busy nowadays, but you can wait a while before posting a new status. If it's a related subject / background info, you can simply add it in a reply. Share the status bar with other members and just wait a while before posting a new one.

 

Second one was probably implemented at the time due to certain members deleting their statuses and reposting them with completely different ones. Granted, we know that autocorrect kicks in more than it should be and often leads to "misspelled" / "wrong" words, which you can't correct as the status bar does not permit you to edit things. It is technically an unenforceable rule, yes. 

 

---

 

On a personal note, I'm fine with lifting that second rule on deleting statuses if it's only for correcting typos or whatnot (as those things do happen and not worth punishing for). Just note that members who do this on a regular basis will be cracked down on (least in the sense of deleting your statuses repeatedly and making it harder for members to respond; surely you can't have that many autocorrect failures that would require you to repost it multiple times in a day.) 

 

With additional info, you can post it in a reply (though YCM's system tends to be screwed over a bit in showing a few of them). If there's a lot, then you should likely take it to threads instead because of the much higher character limit (taking into consideration the new limits on status length) and replies won't be screwed over as they are in statuses. 

 

---

 

This isn't the opinion of the entire mod team (as you would need to ask the rest of them), but at the moment, Tormey and I are generally fine with lifting the second one.

Second one was probably implemented at the time due to certain members deleting their statuses and reposting them with completely different ones. 

 

What's wrong with this?

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

Second one was probably implemented at the time due to certain members deleting their statuses and reposting them with completely different ones. 

 

What's wrong with this?

 

As I already mentioned, some members were abusing this by posting stuff that was otherwise against the rules (i.e. causing drama). Granted, if we don't see it (or if someone doesn't screenshot / report it), then you won't get penalized. 

 

There's nothing inherently wrong with deleting/reposting, but make sure you have a good reason for doing so and don't abuse the privilege. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

So if I don't post for Drama

 

Like say I note Brazil lost agaisnt Belgium

 

Then find out I won a 1000 dollars. Why can't I delete the former to post the latter

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

So if I don't post for Drama

 

Like say I note Brazil lost agaisnt Belgium

 

Then find out I won a 1000 dollars. Why can't I delete the former to post the latter

 

Issue with deleting statuses is that members cannot respond to them once gone and ends up being annoying (in this scenario, more on the World Cup because members likely do have opinions on it and want to talk about the game). Outside that, nothing's wrong. Though if you really needed to say you won $1,000, you could wait a little while before posting it again. 

 

Your other status would still be there 15 minutes later generating some discussion. 

 

===

 

Again though, outside of Tormey and I speaking about this matter in the mod area (and Flame making a note about the provision on handling abuse cases [if you repeatedly delete your statuses, which would also fall under the 15 minute rule thing to an extent]), we haven't come to a definitive decision over this matter. 

 

 

Should be alright to remove that rule, but not going to do it until other mods weigh in on the matter. Just note this is just for handling the "deletion of status" rules. Stuff like the controversial topics in status bar will be addressed in the other thread. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

If someone really wants a discussion on the matter, why can't they make their own status. And delete+replace doesn't bump anyone up or down, it just replaces your old spot on the 5 shown statuses

I think the situation doesn't merit the rule

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Bump

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

Discussion of the matter has been slow lately (well, only half of us have said anything about the issue; self included). Part of it was probably due to the mention thing being broken in the mod area when bringing up the other issue [should be fixed now]; other part, I am not certain on.

 

All I can do is just ping the other mods in the discussion thread for it and hope we get a more solid consensus of the matter in a timely fashion. Make sure we're all on board with a decision (or speak up thereof) before something passes without all of us weighing in.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Pretty sure it isn't a matter of bumping anyone anywhere, and the issue was with using it to bypass status locks.

 

I think the solution is simple, in limiting delete/replace to statuses that haven't been locked.

 

Deleting statuses is allowed, so depriving members of the ability to comment is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

And Sakura, not to tell you how to do your job, but...

Granted, if we don't see it (or if someone doesn't screenshot / report it), then you won't get penalized.

this comes off as "it's okay if you don't get caught" which would be a policy that discriminates (albeit unintentionally) against members such as winter that are often, if not constantly, held under scrutiny by both the mod team and an active portion of the member base. This is important to avoid for both the rule in question as well as the team's attitude toward rule enforcement in general.

 

I get that you mean no harm by the words, but in the same vein as "members under 13 can just lie" it is something that probably definitely shouldn't be said.

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

I'm trying not to chew out the rest of the team (or any individual members) here, but one of the problems is well, enforcement of the overall rules that are actually in place (which is something the team needs to fix; myself included).

 

Another issue is timezone differences and offsite lives; things happen and there's no guarantee that there will be at least one staff member online at all hours of the day to patrol the site and catch any rulebreaks (and yes, there are certain hours where we're all asleep or at work/school, etc). If you guys do see something that shouldn't be here and we're not around, please screenshot and report it so we can address it when we get there.

 

====

I have no issue with reposting statuses that weren't locked (which would normally boil down to any flaming/personal attacks in the status bar for the most part, or if the discussion got heated to the point where such a lock was warranted). However, you would need to ask the rest of the team for their opinion, and us being slow on decisions isn't making things better [but better to have it worked out properly than rush it and things backfire hard].

[Phantom Roxas]

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Delivering penalties to users who abuse a feature to post content that is otherwise against the rules hardly counts as "discrimination". The issue isn't the team supposedly "discriminating" against one user or another, but that a user would be posting inappropriate content because they believe the mods won't catch them in the act.

I didn't say winter doesn't do stupid things.

 

He isn't the only one. Lots of people on this site post statuses that do not follow the current rules (myself included). I'm not asking for winter to be held to a lower standard, I'm saying everyone else should be held to a higher one. As best I can tell, Sakura was able to grasp my sentiment. I'm not trying to start any fights or sling any accusations.

[Phantom Roxas]

I didn't say winter doesn't do stupid things.

 

He isn't the only one. Lots of people on this site post statuses that do not follow the current rules (myself included). I'm not asking for winter to be held to a lower standard, I'm saying everyone else should be held to a higher one. As best I can tell, Sakura was able to grasp my sentiment. I'm not trying to start any fights or sling any accusations.

 

Fair enough. More often I see the suggestion of holding rule-breakers to a lower standard, so I'm all for holding everyone else to a higher standard instead.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

the one time I used it to bypass locks, it was asking for a warn. That's not the norm

 

This Situation:

So if I don't post for Drama

 

Like say I note Brazil lost agaisnt Belgium

 

Then find out I won a 1000 dollars. Why can't I delete the former to post the latter

 

Is the one I care about

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

So, it's been over a week since Sakura's post. Any news on this?

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

At the time of writing (well, at least after I did a mass mention of the team in the mod area), only about half of us said anything about the matter. One of the big things is potential abuse of this rule such that the member will always be on the index page at any given time [though we are aware that certain days/times will have old statuses and not move too much].

 

Deleting for typos is fine (or those of us who said something don't have much issue with it) as we know sheet happens with autocorrect and whatnot at times, but refer back to the abuse case.

 

=====

It would've been nice to get an overall consensus on the matter at this time, but mentions are apparently bugged in the staff forum so notifications aren't given. Will need to ask Tormey to look into it again (though the rest of us could just check the section if a new post comes up without the need for mentions).

=====

 

That being said, how many of you want the rule on deleting statuses to be modified to permit reposting due to autocorrect / misposting issues? 

[Phantom Roxas]

Reposting due to statuses should be fine. It really shouldn't take more than a second or even a third attempt to correct a typo, so it should be fine to allow that as an exception.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

I'll be perfectly honest I don't really care much either way I just don't want to change the rule unless I know multiple people actually want this changed.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

I'll be perfectly honest I don't really care much either way I just don't want to change the rule unless I know multiple people actually want this changed.

winter wants it changed, I wants it changed. Boom, multiple.

 

 

In all seriousness, if a mod can go this long without properly weighing in, I can't say the issue is particularly important to them. I get waiting so people don't feel cut out, but stuff this trivial being haulted because so much of the staff doesn't care either way is just silly.

[Phantom Roxas]

winter wants it changed, I wants it changed. Boom, multiple.

 

 

In all seriousness, if a mod can go this long without properly weighing in, I can't say the issue is particularly important to them. I get waiting so people don't feel cut out, but stuff this trivial being haulted because so much of the staff doesn't care either way is just silly.

 

The issue isn't that particularly important at all anyway. You joke by pointing to you and Winter as wanting it changed, but it's not like there's been any other voices anyway. Not sure if you want any bigger change than just the need for edits, because that seems like a fair exception.

[Nathanael D. Striker]

Just allow reposts for edits, please. I do it all the time, yet no one notices

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Is there actually any harm in allowing deleting and posting something totally different though? Any kind of problems that could bring up are already present in the current ruleset.

 

It may seem like a case of "why get rid of this rule when the benefit is minute" but frankly I see no valid reason why the rule should have existed in the first place. Giving the site a simpler rulebook is a benefit in and of itself.

 

Keeping arbitrary rules for the sake of nothing is just lazy

[Phantom Roxas]

Is there actually any harm in allowing deleting and posting something totally different though? Any kind of problems that could bring up are already present in the current ruleset.

 

It may seem like a case of "why get rid of this rule when the benefit is minute" but frankly I see no valid reason why the rule should have existed in the first place. Giving the site a simpler rulebook is a benefit in and of itself.

 

Keeping arbitrary rules for the sake of nothing is just lazy

 

This just feels similar to the thread about controversial statuses, where even though the current rules make something explicitly clear, we have to double down on it by making it more clear that this is a problem.

 

Giving the site a simpler rulebook means nothing when people want to abuse loopholes around those rules. It's not that the rules are "arbitrary", it's that the rules need to cover as many specific circumstances as necessary to prevent that loophole abuse.