1. 

   Faye Lanks
   

   Coquette
   Joined: Nov '10
   Posts: 702

   Previously, we’ve operated on a “don’t be a dick” method of policing, which, due to none of us being overly dickish, hasn’t really had to be enforced in any outwardly shouty ways, but as we get bigger, we’ll need a formal Code of Conduct so we can say “Hey, you! We don’t want you here anymore because of THIS, THIS and THIS.”
   I doubt we’ll HAVE to enforce this very often <3 because we love you all (especially you!)

   http://nukezilla.com/code-of-conduct/

   last updated 02/01/2012 - Previous revisions are available for review

   Chronicly depressed writer, lover and thinking gamer.

   Posted 3 months ago #
2. 

   John Kershaw
   

   Pro
   Joined: May '08
   Posts: 465

   I think it'd be wise to remove "god knows".

   Might need clarity on "offensive speech". As I think keeping it 100% clean and fun all the time isn't super healthy. But, neither is allowing hate-speech.

   Not sure about the English thing, doesn't seem like a necessity for a code of conduct. If we get a bunch of Spanish peeps and they want a Spanish thread, I don't think they should have to break the CoC to have one.

   " you consent to us naming and shaming you if you’re outed" woah, absolutely not. We do not post private information, and we don't post harassment. The CoC says this. If you're booted out it'll be as quietly, calmly, fairly and undramatically as possible. Otherwise, the mods are just inciting drama, aren't they?

   I'm the ee eye see of the nuke-double-zilla

   Posted 3 months ago #
3. 

   Faye Lanks
   

   Coquette
   Joined: Nov '10
   Posts: 702

   hmmm... I saw a couple places do that, figured it was a nice extra incentive to not be a dick, but I see your point.

   People purposely using another language to exclude others is a pet peeve of mine, which is why that made it in there, but I see your point. I'm still partial to stating it's primarily (at the moment) and english language board, though.
   I removed the term "offensive speech" because I realised that two terms meaning "Racism and bigotry" is superfluous (which is where I was coming from)

   With regards to swearing, swearing is explicitly stated as allowed, although it's recommended to use it in moderation.

   I'm making previous versions available to view so the process is transparent.

   Posted 3 months ago #
4. 

   John Kershaw
   

   Pro
   Joined: May '08
   Posts: 465

   Good plan with the revision history. So, are people not allowed to talk in code?

   Posted 3 months ago #
5. 

   Faye Lanks
   

   Coquette
   Joined: Nov '10
   Posts: 702

   If it's private, why is it being posted on the board and not, say, in an email? At a certain point, you're arguing specifically for the exclusion of certain people. If we started talking using a Cipher I made available to only you and I, sure we can have a conversation but it creates unnecessary obfuscation and means Pete or Mikular can't come in and comment on what we're saying. Even worse, we could be giggling to ourselves because every post is a comment on how big Pete's nose is or how we think Mikular looks big in those jeans, which is kinda mean. I think it becaomes a problem when someone becomes a problem by using their language as a weapon, which I've had experience of in the past.

   Common sense/Admin discretion is still a factor with all of the cases though. And if we suddenly get a huge multilingual/cryptographic influx of visitors, it's probably time to revise it anyway.

   Posted 3 months ago #
6. 

   John Kershaw
   

   Pro
   Joined: May '08
   Posts: 465

   I'm uncomfortable with the idea it's specifically against the rules to have an inside joke. If we were taking the piss, that's harassment, but if we're just joking with ourselves and have no better place to do it, it's completely harmless imho.

   Doesn't the negative you're trying to prevent fall under bulling or general harassment + common sense?

   Posted 3 months ago #
7. 

   Faye Lanks
   

   Coquette
   Joined: Nov '10
   Posts: 702

   An inside joke is something else, and it's not like it is a hard and fast rule to be executed by unfeeling robots, more of a guideline, like the message about not being potty mouth. The statement about it being a primarily english-speaking board was removed in the first revision, though, as you made a good case for removing it.

   Posted 3 months ago #
8. 

   Mikular
   

   Member
   Joined: Jun '09
   Posts: 279

   And these jeans are perfect. Bitch.

   Posted 3 months ago #
9. 

   John Kershaw
   

   Pro
   Joined: May '08
   Posts: 465

   "Phishing and attempting to obtain another person’s information (passwords, etc.) is a dick move and we reserve the right to remove content that concerns us and take further action where needed"

   If anyone is phishing they will be banned on site from everything. No questions. No warnings. No need to call it a "Dick move", nobody does phishing who gives a damn about that.

   This is also a separate issue to one of posting personal information and respecting privacy. I think the phishing needs to be in it's own graph, if you think it's necessary. Personally, I really don't think it's needed. that's like having in the CoC "please don;t hack the site and steal passwords". Not posting any personal information of somebody else however, is sensible.

   Might need to clarify "will be dealt with appropriately". Warning, then a week ban, then a perma ban?

   "content deemed as spam may be removed without warning" WILL be removed without warning. Also, people need to make sure not to reply to spam threads.

   yey feedback

   Posted 3 months ago #
10. 

    John Kershaw
    

    Pro
    Joined: May '08
    Posts: 465

    Question; does the CoC apply for unregistered users commenting on the front page? As the site grows, we'll soon have a lot of them. Most will probably be idiots.

    Thinking, I suppose that's an issue for the CPM to deliberate on. We could simply ban/moderate unregistered user comments.

    Posted 3 months ago #
11. 

    Faye Lanks
    

    Coquette
    Joined: Nov '10
    Posts: 702

    I'll edit this shortly with your suggestions.

    My gut instinct is to not enforce it on people who don't know better, but ignorance isn't really a defence either. I'd be happy to manually moderate unregistered comments so CoC non-compliant comments can be easily filtered out.

    In relation to "will be dealt with appropriately" warnings, I think that's sufficient. We really don't need to tie ourselves down to one set recourse because we won't always need to step in, alternatively, there are other steps we may prefer to use, case-by-case posts may need to be deleted, threads locked, warnings/bans issued; although I do agree with escalating punishment.

    Posted 3 months ago #
12. 

    John Kershaw
    

    Pro
    Joined: May '08
    Posts: 465

    Perhaps when somebody is unregistered, they get a super abbreviated version of the CoC with a link to the full one. They are joining in with our community after all.

    Posted 3 months ago #
13. 

    Faye Lanks
    

    Coquette
    Joined: Nov '10
    Posts: 702

    updated.

    Considered a "Updates to the Code of Conduct are effective with immediate effect from publishing" but I dunno if this is live as an enforceable yet. Something to consider.

    I think with regards to unregistered people, a simple "don't be a dick" along with the link would suffice. unless you want to do it as bullet points like this...

    - be courteous
    - don't spam, phish or break the law
    Click here for more

    Posted 3 months ago #
14. 

    John Kershaw
    

    Pro
    Joined: May '08
    Posts: 465

    That was what I was thinking. I guess have the CoC first draft sorted first. I don't think we need to worry about updates. If anything big changes we'll pass it past everyone first, otherwise you can just assume it's all good.... though, maybe having one line in their which basically says "if you use the site, you agree to this CoC." as oppose to agreeing once, then us being allowed to change it later.

    Posted 3 months ago #
15. 

    Adushan
    

    Minister of Tourism and Embezzlement
    Joined: Mar '10
    Posts: 731

    I find it difficult to say 'be courteous' to people using the site. When people passionately defend their view they don't want to listen to (read) your view and might insult it/you.

    Oh also I don't mind people advertising gaming related stuff on the site and asking us for opinions. Obvious spamming isn't acceptable, but I wouldn't hate a separate section in the forums for advertising.

    Posted 3 months ago #
16. 

    Faye Lanks
    

    Coquette
    Joined: Nov '10
    Posts: 702

    @adushan; you're making a case for flaming there and I strongly disagree with it. There is no reason to not be courteous while you use the site. Take, for example, this story (chosen for it's relevancy). Notice the difference between Marianna and Dyne; While they both have the same basic opinion of "I disagree with the sentiment behind this peice", Marianna expresses that opinion and then goes on to make a constructive comment and Dyne expresses that opinion and punctuates it with a personal attack. One of those things, I think, is unacceptable, especially since the kernal to Dyne's argument is a valid on that he's since ignored by getting caught up in a slanging match with everyone else.

    In terms of making a new space for advertising, I think that's solely up to John (since he's the forum admin). I put in the clause about "If there's space for it, take it upon yourself to post it" for that very reason, but putting any more loopholes about what's acceptable advertising is potentially damaging to the forum as a whole; remember that we're Nukezilla, not Kickstarter.

    Posted 3 months ago #
17. 

    John Kershaw
    

    Pro
    Joined: May '08
    Posts: 465

    In the example you give, I think it would be pretty terrible to say Dyne should be banned from the site. Their argument falls very far within the limits of the tolerable in my opinion. I really hate the idea of forced-politeness. If I think somebody's a dick and can't use my judgement to know when to call them out, I'll just take my discussion elsewhere.

    Excessive use of aggressive, angry, offensive banter should be dealt with, but we're not children and I think we can cope with a bit of rough and tumble.

    First and foremost we need to trust people, rather than be overly harsh to try to prevent something which may never be a problem.

    No ads in the forum. None. No. People would just spam the shit out of us for no benefit to us.

    Posted 3 months ago #
18. 

    Faye Lanks
    

    Coquette
    Joined: Nov '10
    Posts: 702

    Maybe we have different opinions of tolerable then, but I'm not saying forced politeness, I'm making an argument for there being recourse for someone who is being a dick and flaming. We should have the power to to say "hey, why don't you calm down a bit, eh?" which is just as easily doing in the comments too, without going through official channels.

    Posted 3 months ago #
19. 

    John Kershaw
    

    Pro
    Joined: May '08
    Posts: 465

    Yes, and that's exactly what the CoC is there for. Put the word "Excessive" in there and I think it's fine. If somebody is an arsehole ones and the rules say they should be banished, that sets a pretty poor precedence imho. People are people, and some people make mistakes.

    Posted 3 months ago #
20. 

    John Kershaw
    

    Pro
    Joined: May '08
    Posts: 465

    http://nukezilla.com/code-of-conduct/

    There you go

    Now, where should the link to it go in the forum?

    Posted 2 months ago #

Reply

You must log in to post.