EVERYONE READ: forum standards **UPDATED May 19th**

[phr]

I think we should ban the therm "junkie." I find it offensive.

 

[pinpoint]

^lmao that's what I'm saying man, where does the bullshit end? No more referring to oxycontin as oxy, I find it offensive and slang. Just because the liberal media labels homosexuality as 'sensitive' people are programmed to feel offended at any mention of it.

Anyways, back on topic.

 

[Coolio]

It's not the mention of the word 'gay' that is offensive, it's the use of the word as a synonym for 'bad' or 'undesirable' or 'stupid' that is.

 

[Kenaz]

It's not the mention of the word 'gay' that is offensive, it's the use of the word as a synonym for 'bad' or 'undesirable' or 'stupid' that is.

It's not even so much that this particular phrase is homophobic as that it looks unprofessional and juvenile. We want to come across as responsible users who are promoting harm reduction, not adolescents who still snigger every time someone mentions "Butte, Montana" or "Dick Cheney."

Why not instead say something like:

SWIM (Someone Who Isn't Me) -- "SWIM" is annoying and will not provide you with any kind of legal protection should you post incriminating information. Don't use it.

If you want a higher standard of serious discussion on the forums, your standards should reflect that. Just a thought from someone who makes a (meager) living writing.

 

[Jabberwocky]

i edited out djsims "it's gay comment". in his defense im sure he never meant it in a derogatory way

 

[Unknown]

Im going back to my original thought of: "I have way better things to do with my time then trying to convince people from the internet that using the word "gay" is offensive." I personally don't give a shit about what others say, because I don't let that shit get to me. Some people will read something on the internet, and feel like it's their duty to fix it!!!

Moving on...

Replying to everyone's comments: The purpose of this thread is to give an understanding of what is and isn't allowed. If all the members read the rules before posting, then there wouldn't be an issue. Also, we don't need anymore mods. We could have 1000 mods, and the same behavior will still occur if members don't pay attention to the rules. We aren't going to give new members a hard time on this. We will guide them to the rules, so next time they post, there wouldn't be an issue. The modstick only comes into use when active members break these rules.

 

[johanneschimpo]

The way I feel (and by "feel" I mean "am sure of"), this thread is preaching to the choir. If someone is posting in/reading this thread, there is a very high chance they already follow the rules, use the report button, etc. A few (I hope many) people might stumble upon this thread and read it and learn, but we all know people don't care about "boring bureaucratic shit." If they did, this thread wouldn't exist.

So I'm hoping that this thread served its purpose and the staff gained some ideas/insight to help improve OD. Finally I'm hoping that whatever changes are implemented as a result of this (and all other happenings) help with the dissemination of positive information to all who seek it.





(EDIT: I used word "hope" a lot. I feel like Barack Obama.)

 

[beta1]

^
Thats what I was "hoping" as well. There is hardly any reason a new member would read this, but not the rules first. But for the people that know the rules already, this is a good spot to try to help figure out ways to make OD a little bit better/manageable.

 

[djsim]

Seriously though these 'quick question' threads that generate 'yes', 'no', '10mg', '20mg' answers should go in BDD whereas actual intelligent discussion generating threads deserve to stay in OD. For those who don't follow the rules we should have a more publicly humiliating warning system to deter future behavior. Yesterday I came to OD and the entire front page was either moved or closed, that should tell us that verbal cautions are obviously not working.

Yes, this was why I created this thread to begin with. We have a whole new wave of members here at BL, which is great, but it's not entirely clear to people that OD is halfway between BDD and ADD (advanced drug discussion). I dont know what the answer is though b/c as you said, a lot of these verbal warnings just aren't getting through. However, the cautions I have issued have been well received thus far... Ha, in other circumstances I'd tend to ignore the guy who locks all the posts and sounds like a broken record ("please read the forum guidelines and standards before posting again...")

In addition, I've said this before and I'll say it again. Users with greenlighter status should not be allowed to create new threads in OD until they reach bluelighter status. This would solve 80% of the problem. It would give new users time to see how OD is run.

You're absolutely right. I'll run it past the other mods...
Of course taking away a greenlighters right to post altogether may be problematic, so I also think a mod-approval should be req for greenlighters, that way they actually get feedback regarding what they should and shouldnt do.

Keep the feedback coming guys (probably should've had this thread open the whole time now that I think of it )

 

[Mr Blonde]

Personally, I disagree with the idea of greenlighters not being able to post in OD. For a start, they may be in the minority but there are some new users who have either been reading the site for a while or they have read the rules, and post decent material here. As has been pointed out, when it comes to new users sometimes it just takes a nudge in the right direction and they get the idea and follow the guidelines of the forum. As moderators, we're here to not only help keep the forum clean but also to help people learn how the community works and give them the advice they need. Not allowing new members in here seems kind of exclusionary and counter-productive to the idea of helping them fit in. Just because someone has posted 50 times in Basic Drug Discussion doesn't mean they have got the idea of what belongs in here and what doesn't, and personally what annoys me more is people who have been members here for a while, have decent post counts yet still continue to break the guidelines for OD.

I'm also not too warm on the idea of having greenlighters threads needing approval first, though admittedly it is a better option then disallowing them from this part of the site entirely. If there seems to be enough support for the idea, I'm open to creating a poll for the users of OD to gage more accurately how many are in support of this, and also running it by other staff members.

 

[johanneschimpo]

I fell asleep while watching a basketball game, and when I woke up in a haze at 2am, this is exactly the image I had in my head. Thought I'd share.

It must be the optimist in me. And yes, I did draw it with MSPaint.

 

[blau1005]

Replying to everyone's comments: The purpose of this thread is to give an understanding of what is and isn't allowed. If all the members read the rules before posting, then there wouldn't be an issue. Also, we don't need anymore mods. We could have 1000 mods, and the same behavior will still occur if members don't pay attention to the rules. We aren't going to give new members a hard time on this. We will guide them to the rules, so next time they post, there wouldn't be an issue. The modstick only comes into use when active members break these rules.

So what is the expected response to these threads?

A suggestion to read the guidelines, a UTFSE and some suggested links related to their question?

Just reporting and a flat out UTFSE doesn't do much, IMO, neither does actually answering the question.

Is there a way to ensure more new members read the rules prior to posting? And to have them understand that their question has probably been answered before?

 

[djsim]

i edited out djsims "it's gay comment". in his defense im sure he never meant it in a derogatory way

Whoops, that's a "nicht nicht" on my part
Didnt mean to offend anyone

 

[pmmcl]

wow, didn't mean to spark a debate about the "gay" thing...

it really doesn't bother me that it was said. I used to use it in that fashion all the time, until I weaned myself away from it after getting some gay friends. And even then, I let one or two slip, and it barely phased them.

That said, I wasn't really commenting on the defamatory sense. It's just as an official moderator's post, it just felt a little out of place. Just as you wouldn't use informal language in a college paper. That's kinda where I was going with it. I didn't mean to spark a debate on when or when not to use the word. It's just a word, they all should be taken with grains of salt.

 

[pinpoint]

to set the record straight, I was not suggesting to disallow greenlighters from posting or accessing OD; I was suggesting that we disallow them from creating new threads (either altogether or with a mods approval). this isn't a drastically limiting world-ending change, but I know it would stop 8 out of the 10 locked threads from ever being posted in the first place.

 

[johanneschimpo]

BDD should be OD's training wheels, not its garbage dump. The whole process could use a makeover.

 

[bow-viper1]

I completely agree with the intentions of these rules, but I also can't help but think that almost every single question that could be asked HAS been asked. And if no one ever posted a thread on a subject that had been covered and resolved, there would only be a few new threads everyday.

And unfortunately, I'm really not sure what to do about it. But, I really feel that being so strict with some of the rules could leave us with little to talk about. I also see some new threads on subjects that have been discussed to death that end up leading some very informative discussions.

Just to clarify, I really do agree with the intentions of the people who authored these guidelines, but I think you have to be really careful in how you go about it..

 

[Unknown]

So what is the expected response to these threads?

A suggestion to read the guidelines, a UTFSE and some suggested links related to their question?

Just reporting and a flat out UTFSE doesn't do much, IMO, neither does actually answering the question.

Is there a way to ensure more new members read the rules prior to posting? And to have them understand that their question has probably been answered before?

I dont really have a problem helping out new members. The standards are for all members to abide by, either by mods pointing it out, or by them finding it themselves. The big issue is when active members disregard the rules when they know better.

 

[beta1]

I dont really have a problem helping out new members. The standards are for all members to abide by, either by mods pointing it out, or by them finding it themselves. The big issue is when active members disregard the rules when they know better.

I agree. Things like this are far better received by new members than "search for it faggot".

Yeah, its a little more of a pain in the ass, and theres no obligation being just a BLer. But the people not willing to help out, shouldn't also be bitching about the quality of OD threads either, IMO.

 

[Jabberwocky]

bump.

read this god damn thing people, please. OD has really been a little dull with topics lately. which, in turn, makes the people of OD, mods included, more of a chore than an enjoyment for our duties here. please use BDD and other forums. make yourself aware of what is accepted in here.