New one strike rule
 

To mods: There should be better communication to Ledgies about the new, zero-tolerance "one strike and you're out" rule. Right now it is buried in a thread from Penguin that many of us did not read because we thought it was yet another thread about the sale. Not everyone is interested in reading about the pending sale, therefore we are not reading these threads. You should have a thread called "New Rules Effective Immediately". And, until you communicate better about this, you shouldn't ban people and you should reinstate the people you banned yesterday.

A sticky thread at that top of each forum titled "READ THIS MESSAGE" should be sufficient communication...IMO.

Why not err on the side of clear and effective communication? :shrug: Especially when imposing dramatic new rules. Plus the FAQs haven't been changed. I don't even notice if there is a new sticky--that one from JS has been up forever so I glaze over them. But if the subject of the thread was clear then I would have opened it. As it is, I had no idea about the new rules until told through another source.

Who got banned :eek:

For what it's worth, all parties involved in yesterday's little spat should have been banned, not just half. It's not like the two banned members went on the attack without being provoked. Which has been going on for months, if any moderators had bothered to pay attention.

You know, now that I think of it...if there are going to be drastic changes to the rules and strike system, shouldn't all of the mods be present to enforce this rather then just one? Doesn't seem right to me.

Ryan and Foxy.

I just think it's odd. We've had no moderation for several months and now this drastic change right before the board is sold. And notice of the change not clearly stated in the thread subject.

Wow - This is the first I hear of this. Just out of curiosity, what thread lead to that? I know he and BW got into it a little, but I thought they were joking :eek:

On edit - I realize this topic might be better suited for PM's -- but the PM's appear to be broken. So, if anyone wants to email me at [email protected] and enlighten me, I'd appreciate it!

I'd just add that if you look at the view counts, it's pretty evident that not a lot of people have read that sticky. 100 here...100 there...maybe 300 in total actually opened it, most of those may have not even read it.

being the OCD person that I am, I always look at stickies first, but many people, for reasons Ryan pointed out, may not.

I don't know, maybe I'm the only one. But I don't respond to things like "Read this message". Maybe because anytime I get an email with a similar subject, it's some dude in Nigeria wanting my checking account number?

I am curious...

Do some people prefer 3 strikes so they can sit on the fence after breaking two?

^^3 strikes allows time and room to question/appeal and to clarify or explain a post. One strike means the moderator makes a decision and you're out for a lifetime.

The Ledge can obviously have whatever rules it wants, but I don't understand why the need for the big change when it is being sold anyway. Especially since we've had almost no moderation the past few months. We've gone from being able to say whatever we want to one strike and you're out.

Not to mention warnings/suspensions/etc. were frequently given.

I do not know all the facts in this instance though.

I see...that makes sense in allowing time for explanations. Perhaps it is the wish of the new buyer to have the rule change? :shrug: As for moderating the past few months, yes I believe Ryan was out on 6/26 (never forget?)...but there is sugar and suze that I have noticed on-line. I even caught a glimpse of mario the other day! And, was The Ledge ever about "saying whatever we want?" I'd be curious how you came about having that thought.

I don't mean the moderators haven't been around, I mean the rules haven't been enforced. All you have to do is go through threads from the past few months and see that moderation basically stopped. The name-calling and swearing was all over the place. I personally don't care because I believe people can just maneuver through that stuff how they wish.

As stated by Marty in his post, the policy change was "effective immediately," and, after nearly 700 total views in three days, we all felt that more than enough people had to be aware of the change.

On average, we get less than a fourth of that number in daily visitors (both registered and unregistered).

No worries... all of the moderators are present and are enforcing this. We may step in and mediate situations individually, but when it comes to decisions regarding strikes and bannings, we've always handled it democratically.

^^What's the reason behind the change in rules?

The answer is there if you want to see it.

What I've seen is erratic, inconsistent moderation ranging from overkill to complete absence for months. I've recently seen a moderator come in and scold a member publicly in a thread while telling the rest of us to take our issues with moderators to PMs. And now I see a dramatic change, effective "immediately', taking us from no moderation to extreme clampdown. And for no stated reason, as if we aren't a community, but just a bunch of "members" who should feel lucky to be here and happily submit to control.

We had previously tried quietly stepping back a little, to give people the chance to moderate their own behavior, but that was taken advantage of and a change needed to be made to help curb the ever-increasing number of severe rule violations.

We -- the moderators and Marty -- knew the decision wouldn't be popular with some visitors, but it was deemed necessary to help make a smooth transition from Marty's ownership to that of any potential buyers.

The "Three Strikes" policy may have changed, but the rest of the guidelines remain as they've been for seven years.

Now, with all due respect, anything more that we say on the matter will just be repetition.

Really? For what purpose?

He was never as good a mod as you, right Chrissy?

All Sugar did was ask for people to stop the bickering. :confused: Take the fight to PMs.....no big deal IMO.

Randomly picking people to strike or ban is not new around here...all parties who break rules should be banned. Or none of them should be.
Marty made his new position very clear and if rules were broken, I guess we should have expected this. .

The Sticky with the bold "PLEASE READ" was the first thing I noticed when I logged on to the board, after it was posted by Marty. It still jumps out at me as soon as I sign on.........it is at the top of every single forum with capital letters. :shrug: With all the hard work, money, and time that Marty and Lis have put in to their site, it must be rather disheartening to watch all that has happened in the last few years, esp on the Chit Chat Ledge. :nod: I really hope they can find a buyer who is willing to deal with all the drama, and keep the forums up and running.

Personally, I see the 1 strike rule as a way for Marty and Lis to weed out the and elements before they sell to whomever. You can argue whether or not the
way its been done is right or not, but maybe theyre trying to clean things up before the new owner takes over and maybe decided to shut everything down because they dont like what they see? Just a thought.

Trying to moderate that thing was at times like tyring to fight off a beast with a fork. Don't knock it until you've tried it. :lol:

I am going to say something-at great risk for getting pummeled. I just e-mailed a friend, also a member here. I just don't understand how these websites became so dramatic and unfriendly. To the point of bannings and websites shutting down because the owners don't want to deal with it anymore-we are admirers of one of the best and oldest still productive bands in the world. I have gone to many concerts-Fleetwood Mac has very unique mellow, peace-loving crowd. I truly believe I have walked by many of you at one time or another in my life-I've live on the east coast, and I've lived in the west. Now that this is on its way to being shut down, where are the fans going to go????? Please everyone, get a grip and don't ruin it for everyone, let things go........

Back to hiding under a rock

Donna

I just remember how much it sucked when the board was down for a week...and how happy I and everyone was when it came back.

We've lost that lovin' feeling...;)

Take the "fights" to PM's/e-mail or let it go and you won't get booted. Simple. :wavey:

Yes, that's what I was doing. :nod: I was just asking for a more fair and transparent process and better communication. And maybe a few more days to let people learn about the new rules before enforcement. Going from an experiment of no moderation (per what JS has said) to one strike and you're gone is dramatic and I would give at least a week and a couple of reminders to make sure people were aware of new rules. Like I've said a zillion times, the owner and moderators have a right to do whatever they want, but I wish they were a little more open to feedback instead of getting defensive every time someone challenges them or makes a suggestion.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/147/3...bb46822f21.jpg
Welcome to the new & improved ledge.

How cozy.

There's a culture that's developed here where many have decided it is okay to be mean and bully others. It isn't.

will the banned people get a chance to re-register with a new owner?
just curious....

I suppose that will be a choice for the new owner.

You're forgetting of course, that people become different people as soon as the log onto the internet. What would normally be a spirited debate in "real life" suddenly becomes a viscious, bloodsucking tirade in which insults and flamebait are tossed out without any real goal, except to go down in a blaze of glory. :rolleyes:

I guess some can't see a difference between being a ball breaker and an asshole..........:shrug:

If so, that will provide for an interesting two weeks or less. :lol:

What do you mean?

Question: why are some people still getting warnings while others got banned with no warning? :confused:

Because as long as the ledge exists, moderating has never followed those rules set by the moderators themselves.

(And I should know, I've been around here for ten years now)

All those litle rules are only there to keep the naive happy, to make them believe there's some kind of fairness here, but meanwhile it has always been pretty arbitrary.

My feeling is that some of the people banned over the years, if they were to come back would not last very long.

I agree. Do we really need another round of The Arizona Ranger and some of the other kind souls that have visited the boards? Again, I think a lot of this assumes The Ledge will continue to function.

Will The Ledge continue? If, say, Fleetwood Mac buys the site, they certainly aren't going to want The Ledge. I can see them wanting the information (as a certain employee of theirs once tried to steal information directly from the site in the past), such as the discography, maybe The Blue Letter Archives, the Q&As, but why would they want to keep a problematic message board?

Not some people. One person.

The mods all felt that since Liam McConville has only been here a few weeks, it would be best to give him a warning.