question about the community guidelines

[piksil_demon]

im not sure where to post this as its not off-topic, but dosnt really fit into any of the categories provided.

so in the "do nots" of the community guideline it states that you shouldn't-

• Resurrect or bump very old inactive threads without very good cause.

As a person that hates vague statements, i request this to be updated to be more specific.
this should include an explanation for what a long time is, as that term is relative to the individual (for me its 10 million years as i view time in relation to the age of the universe) however, for a 12 year old it would probably be 2 weeks.

furthermore, i request that this guideline gives examples of that "very good cause" entitles. once again, because this is relative to the individual. for me it would be to prevent the world blowing up, but for others it may be because it may be because they liked a joke that was told in it.

its obvious that these two terms are ment to be seen from the point of view of the admins, but as individuals we dont quite know what they consider a long time, or a good reason

the reason i put this in a thread as opposed to sending it to the admins is to both alert the community of the loop hole (i love me some anarchy), as well as to hear your opinions on what these two terms entail.

 

[ShaunJS]

Here is an appropriate place.

To answer your question there is a good reason some of the guidelines are not super specific. Because many of the situations they cover are very case by case. For example if we specified that "after 3 months no topic can be bumped" you might find users always bumping on the last day of that threshold as a loophole, or worse yet there might be perfectly good reason to bump a thread older than an arbitrary time limit.

We don't want users bumping old topics for no reason, but sometimes there's perfectly valid reasons to do this and this can apply to very old threads. Often the older the thread the better your reason probably ought to be. If you're resurrecting say, an old game in progress thread because you have major new updates that are relevant to it, cool.

We want to encourage you to use your best judgement and do things with the right intentions. Not just do things that obey the rules to the letter.

Moderators are allowed to use their best judgement and make subjective calls. If they weren't, then our rules could all theoretically be administered by machines and not humans

If you're not sure about a specific edge case then just ask! If you act with good intentions and the community's interests at heart you're not going to get into trouble.

 

[piksil_demon]

Here is an appropriate place.

To answer your question there is a good reason some of the guidelines are not super specific. Because many of the situations they cover are very case by case. For example if we specified that "after 3 months no topic can be bumped" you might find users always bumping on the last day of that threshold as a loophole, or worse yet there might be perfectly good reason to bump a thread older than an arbitrary time limit.

We don't want users bumping old topics for no reason, but sometimes there's perfectly valid reasons to do this and this can apply to very old threads. Often the older the thread the better your reason probably ought to be. If you're resurrecting say, an old game in progress thread because you have major new updates that are relevant to it, cool.

We want to encourage you to use your best judgement and do things with the right intentions. Not just do things that obey the rules to the letter.

Moderators are allowed to use their best judgement and make subjective calls. If they weren't, then our rules could all theoretically be administered by machines and not humans

If you're not sure about a specific edge case then just ask! If you act with good intentions and the community's interests at heart you're not going to get into trouble.

so very old is after 3 months? then by the rules of the guidelines there should be no problem with a mass amount of people bumping it for the lolz because it dosnt say you cant bump for no good reason, only "dont bump for no good reason if its really old"

if your not going to give people atleast an idea of what your mean when you say "very old" and "very good reason" then its without substance, and purely subjective. under such vague rules an admin could hypothetically punish a member whom they distaste for seemingly no reason under the excuse of "under my opinion..."

what you should do it look at actual laws, and how they deal with vague, and subjective terms. then implement them.

lets assume this is law binding, do you really think you saying as a prosecuter "he bumped a really old post for no good reason" in the court of law would hold up if you gave no context in the contract how old "very old" is, and what a "good reason" is?

the reason im requesting less vague terminology is so its more easily agreeable that a rule was broken. otherwise this forum could reflect kids running from parent to parent until they get the answer they want

 

[ShaunJS]

I'm sorry I'm afraid it's not going to happen!

Actual law making and court rooms have very little relevance to our community guidelines. They are what they are, guidelines. Our moderators are free to do as they see fit and interpret those guidelines as best they can. (We are also free to remove their moderator status should we feel they are not working in the community's interests. That's our call to make.) Our Moderators often ask one another and discuss how best to enforce certain guidelines and discuss specific cases with each other until they come to an ideal conclusion. This is what we want.

Specific guidelines will not prevent people who want to behave badly from behaving badly. All they do is allow people who want to behave badly to point to a rule they did not "objectively" break, making them appear to have a good argument for their behaviour (but they don't. They behaved badly.).

By being non-specific, we are free to decide on a case by case basis what is, and is not reasonable.

I repeat, If you act with good intentions and the community's interests at heart you're not going to get into trouble.

 

[Nocturne]

Nope, that isn't going to happen. The more rules there are the more difficult it is to police them and the easier it is for people to work around them... We have a great staff of people on this forum and we trust our moderators 100% to act in the best interests of the whole community and not in petty or self serving ways. As for that comment in the guidelines about necro-bumping, we can't be specific as it is very much case dependent. Some forums get more traffic than others, some posts are actually worth permitting a necro-bump and some users have a really good reason for it. You can't make a single hard and fast rule that takes all these things into account, and you just have to trust that the staff will be understanding enough to decide what is an appropriate bump and an appropriate timeframe.

Also note, that we are not ogres and I don't think there is a single member of staff that would not revoke a decision if the user PM'd them to explain things or to request that a topic be permitted a bump etc... in a reasonable way. The staff we currently have are all fantastic and very understanding.

EDIT: Ninja'd by Shaun!

 

[piksil_demon]

I'm sorry I'm afraid it's not going to happen!

Actual law making and court rooms have very little relevance to our community guidelines. They are what they are, guidelines. Our moderators are free to do as they see fit and interpret those guidelines as best they can. (We are also free to remove their moderator status should we feel they are not working in the community's interests. That's our call to make.) Our Moderators often ask one another and discuss how best to enforce certain guidelines and discuss specific cases with each other until they come to an ideal conclusion. This is what we want.

Specific guidelines will not prevent people who want to behave badly from behaving badly. All they do is allow people who want to behave badly to point to a rule they did not "objectively" break, making them appear to have a good argument for their behaviour (but they don't. They behaved badly.).

By being non-specific, we are free to decide on a case by case basis what is, and is not reasonable.

I repeat, If you act with good intentions and the community's interests at heart you're not going to get into trouble.

so you admins can remove power from those moderators if they abuse their power without question, moderators can remove the power of members if they abuse their powers, i assume that in the interest of having a fair government, then the members have the ability to strip the power of an admin, perhaps through a vote, if they abuse their powers, yes? otherwise it seems that once again- the guidelines wording could be used to the advantage of those who have more power

 

[ShaunJS]

Nope.

This isn't a democratic society with a government. It's a forum service that YoYo Games provides. We have the right to revoke you using the service for any reason at all.

Do you think we're going to be holding admin elections next year or something?

 

[piksil_demon]

Nope.

This isn't a democratic society with a government. It's a forum service that YoYo Games provides. We have the right to revoke you using the service for any reason at all.

so you openly admit that the way its set up is unfair :/
a system built on trust is never as good as a system built on rules. people mistrust eachother all the time, and can abuse that trust, but rules are definite. even if their broken everyone can atleast agree it was broken

 

[Nocturne]

so you admins can remove power from those moderators if they abuse their power without question, moderators can remove the power of members if they abuse their powers, i assume that in the interest of having a fair government, then the members have the ability to strip the power of an admin, perhaps through a vote, if they abuse their powers, yes? otherwise it seems that once again- the guidelines wording could be used to the advantage of those who have more power

Hmmm... nice idea, but that's not how it works sorry.... this isn't a democracy! While this is a community forum and it is moderated by community members, it still belongs to a company and the Admins are also company employees. So, if you have an issue with an Administrator you would need to talk with one of the other Admins or email support at YYG and express your concerns that way. Note that we do take any type of complaint from members about anything related to staff (or even other members) very seriously, and investigate all problems thoroughly.

so you openly admit that the way its set up is unfair :/

I would say that this is actually fairer. All users have the absolute right to complain and can contact any member of staff, administrator or YoYoGames at any time, and the very flexibility of the rules also means that you are treated like a person and everything is dealt with on an INDIVIDUAL and PERSONAL level, which is far better than simply having someone quote the rules at you and leave you without anything to say in the matter.

This is not something we have just arbitrarily decided, btw... After many years of running this forum and testing different structures, the more flexible the rules are the better it is for everyone. For example, on the old GMC we had a very strict no bumping rule which was constantly criticised. As were a few other rules like always having a demo for a WIP game... on this forum that has all be relaxed a great deal and we now try to deal with things on a case by case basis.

 

[ShaunJS]

so you openly admit that the way its set up is unfair :/
a system built on trust is never as good as a system built on rules. people mistrust eachother all the time, and can abuse that trust, but rules are definite. even if their broken everyone can atleast agree it was broken

You will struggle to find a community forum for any piece of software or game or product that instils a right in its members to veto the decisions of it's admins or the people who are providing the platform in the first place.

You are very much free to your opinions, but I disagree with your analysis on how a community forum should operate and how it should structure its rules and have explained those reasons thoroughly.

I don't believe more needs to be said on the matter, so I am making the subjective choice to close this thread. But if you want any further clarification on the structure of the guidelines for any specific content you wish to post or you are worried about whether an action would be considered rule breaking feel free to contact me by PM. =)