Updated Message Board Rules & Guidelines

Bring up to keep a reminder this is Great if was enforced but sadly too many DID not See it or Read it .....

Per wrote:Here is a slightly modified version of the rules & guidelines based on all the feedback I received in the topic and through private messages:

Rules:
- do Not use inappropriate language, links or images
- do Not post private messages you have received or sent
- do Not post any sort of contact information for other members
- do Not discuss specific blocks made by yourself or other members
- do Not single out other members by name and discuss them in a negative context

These rules will always be enforced by us and will lead to deletion of the topic/reply, a warning and later a ban if necessary.
Guidelines:
- do Not post the same topic in different categories (find the most suitable category and post it there instead)
- do not spam a topic with multiple similar replies
- do not go off topic intentionally, respect that others might be interested in discussing the given topic.

Unlike the rules, guidelines will NOT be enforced by us (except in some rare cases), they are simply meant to guide you to use the forums in the best possible way.

Permalink

actually trevor...I had been thinking since last night...now that the warning 'adult content' IS in place for the singing areas....You and the singsnap crew...'definitely' need to take up the issues with the threads......you 'need' to have the same type of system for the message boards and threads....I think the 'off topic' needs to have a filter system and warning that can be used...I also think that any thread that does not follow family oriented status..needs to be moved to an adult content folder that should be used....this issue to me is getting out of hand....and every tom,dick, and harry can be surprised by ...*sexual, violent, or other various graphical images, profane language, and continual sexual thoughts*... that go on and on to no end.......there DOES need to be separation here...like there is separation in the singing areas......I DO believe this needs to be one of singsnaps priorities.....if you cannot make the message boards to be 18+...then you need to have a filter system put into place....until you do..there will be total contradiction between the singing areas and the message board areas...one has filters, the other doesnt, yet these areas both belong to singsnap.......

*...although these are not considered to be harmful to 'some' adults,... it may seem that way to others here in singsnap.....we adults are all different and have different viewpoints...

Permalink

for those who didn't know the forum rules LOL. Here they are :)

Permalink

Ya know...
I'm reading these rules/guidlines and thinking about the difficulty in both enforcing them, and for the community as a whole to know what words they can and cannot use, and I've come up with an idea.

I don't know how hard this would be to impliment..

Let me start by mentioning a common message board content control feature that can be HORRENDOUSLY annoying...

In many message boards they institute a 'Banned words' feature, that takes specific words, and disallows their posting.
One BIG problem with this, is how the feature assumes any combination of those letters should be blocked.
There. I just said a word I couldn't say if that feature was in place.
Assume.
Instead I would have ended up with something like one of these... depending on admin settings.

***ume.
Hineysume.

Not too good.. huh?

If the admin understands better how to create the settings they'll know to block it only if theres a space before and after the blocked content... but then you still can't mention, for instance, that Mary, who carried Jesus in her womb, was said to have ridden her ass to Bethlehem..
(Sorry, best example I could think of - just another word for Donkey.. really.)
and other words using the blocked word as a PART of the statement in an offensive way would NOT be blocked, unless specifically banned themselves.

This method of auto-blocking/changing/banning obviously has many flaws and isn't too good.

BUT..
Could it be altered thusly?

Could Singsnap institute a version of this in such a way that disallowed words, when the computer detects them, it instead gives a "Are you sure?" screen before allowing the post?

The way it would work is, say I used the Mary example above.. (empty space before and after the word, so definately would be on a blocked list, even if done correctly by admins)

The 'nag screen' would say something like "The Content wizard has detected questionable content in your post.
If this content is used in an offensive manner, it breaks the message board TOS.
Please review your content and verify you really wish this to post before proceeding."
and shows the post still in editable format.

Depending on the Admin's desire, the program could either show what word caused it's activation, or could let people guess... I'd prefer it to show...
And hopefully they'll set it up correctly so that words like "assume" will NOT trigger...
But the "are you sure?" feature would still allow false triggers to be posted, instead of the infuriating re-re-rewriting you have to do at some places.

It would be a bit annoying.. but it would be a way to teach what words are considered allowable.. no question that way of if arse or hiney can be in a post.

And it COULD be a feature that's only turned on for people in moderation for prior abuse perhaps?

What do ye all think?

It's a rough idea, I'm sure there's room for improvement.

(editted to add i's which for some reason I don't seem to be typing correctly today.)

Edited on April 28, 2008 at 5:33 PM Permalink

I posted this some where else. This is just my opinion but, I think it would work. I've seen it on other sites and even seen it done here on occasion.

It would make sense to me to have (admins) equipped with the tools to moderate certain posts. Say if the thread is all fine and dandy and some person comes in and posts an offending pic or says something offensive..or is obviously trying to cause trouble..then those particular posts could be deleted/moderated. Problem is..I only ever see less than a hand full of admins on these boards ever

Permalink

I vote for Jo to be an administrator (if she wants to be one)

Permalink

More admins would definitely be a good idea! I second Jo's nomination (if she wants to be one)

Permalink

More moderators, and them having the power to EDIT or DELTE POSTS, instead of entire topics, WOULD be good. :)

My suggestion above is intended as a suppliment to that.. to reduce Moderators workload, and help people police themselves.

PS, Why isn't this post, or the entire current rules/guidelines a sticky????

Edited on April 28, 2008 at 6:12 PM Permalink

I third the nomination of Jo to Admin. (but is this a democracy?) I'm thinking....no. ;)

Permalink

I'd volunteer as Admin too if they'd have me.

Permalink

Though I'm sure everyone's hearts are in the right place, there would so many hazards with allowing members to oversee the boards themselves. Imposing one's own sense of morality and justice upon others is a game that is not for the faint of heart. I feel it's a job best left to the people that own and run the site, since it is they who have ultimate responsibility for content. I've seen boards with moderators who were power happy and would kick chatters out of rooms, not because they said something that was objectionable, but because it was something the moderator simply didn't agree with. At the same time, the same moderator would allow their chat buddies total freedom for discussion, regardless of topic or language. Even on this board, I've seen threads eliminated and comments deleted, not because of the language, or because it was sexually oriented, but because the post expressed an opinion they simply didn't like.

It's important that, as the message board becomes more regulated, the rules apply equally to everyone and that it doesn't simply become another good 'ol boy network.

Permalink

pickinchooz, you have a great point. However what you are describing is human nature. Even the people the own and run the site are subject to that.

You said you've seen threads eliminated and comments deleted. The ONLY people that can do that is staff. Admins do not have the power. Admins simply advise staff of what is going on; they are the eyes and ears, so to speak. The staff is miniscule compared to the amount of members, so utilizing members that are already quite active on the forums just makes sense. Staff is sensible enough to choose admin that are not "power happy". I've personally seen no abuse from any of the admins. I think they are very fair. Kudos to the admins I know: Peachy and Connie especially are the most visable on the boards I frequent. (General, Off Topic and Beliefs)

I will repeat and wholeheartly agree with your last statement:

you said:
It's important that the rules apply EQUALLY to everyone. (edited a little to show the part I agree with.)

Permalink

well I nominate Monique as an adminstrator too!

Permalink

... and I never said at any point that the deletions were done by anyone but staff. It's been pointed out many times that only staff has that power. I only said that there have been deletions. And there have been.

We now return to our regularly scheduled programming...

Edited on April 29, 2008 at 9:40 AM Permalink

After moderating, administrating, owning sites in the past, I finally realized that the reason I have an internet account to have fun.. This means the last thing I wish to have (over friends I want to socialize with) is authority. I have enough issues with this in real life. I want to sing, not be hated.

I was VERY excited over forming a site for middle-aged artists (all types)- problem is, I'd be spending most of my time pulling my buddies off've each others necks, It can't work.. I have loads of friends, and most can't stand each other :(

I think we get to a point where we realize having authority is only an honor the first few hours you are designated as having it.

Edited on April 29, 2008 at 3:34 PM Permalink

don't think of it as authority...think of it as being elected to be the voice of reason ;o)

Permalink

pickinchooz wrote:... and I never said at any point that the deletions were done by anyone but staff. It's been pointed out many times that only staff has that power. I only said that there have been deletions. And there have been.

We now return to our regularly scheduled programming...

Permalink

Quote:
"don't think of it as authority...think of it as being elected to be the voice of reason ;o)"

===============================

There's little room for that among charged emotion and chaos LOLOL. not to mention, what fun is it being a bboard participant if you yourself can't exercize the right to (at times) transcend "reason" ?

Edited on April 29, 2008 at 3:38 PM Permalink

We need a new colour....orange? light blue? silver?...for the new category of Informal Advisor :)

Permalink

tumeric is an odd color aint it? or is is it just odd flavor? giggles away

Permalink

well...I guess I would rather hear it from somebody I like and respect if I am being a putz. So, I guess if a "friend" gets mad and stays mad at you for trying to get you to behave....then are they really a friend? I also understand the room that is emotionally charged thing too....that is why some folks make better supervisors. They know how to keep themselves in check and be a good example. But everybody is human and has their own biases.

Edited on April 29, 2008 at 3:44 PM Permalink

Binky- wrote:

pickinchooz wrote:... and I never said at any point that the deletions were done by anyone but staff. It's been pointed out many times that only staff has that power. I only said that there have been deletions. And there have been.

We now return to our regularly scheduled programming...

what ya watchin? chooozy ummm is it G rated? giggles

I was watchin' ... reruns of something... next thing I know the dog was lickin' my face to wake me up...

Permalink

Assuming reason will work, "voice of reason" need not have authority. I try to always be reasonable without having any authority. IMHO, people for the most part DO listen to reason, however a person can make an impression without the designated title "boss"

Permalink

**faints*** u a putz?? no way is that a bad thing though?? i just not sure ;0)

ladylikepsych wrote:well...I guess I would rather hear it from somebody I like and respect if I am being a putz. So, I guess if a "friend" gets mad and stays mad at you for trying to get you to behave....then are they really a friend? I also understand the room that is emotionally charged thing too....that is why some folks make better supervisors. They know how to keep themselves in check and be a good example. But everybody is human and has their own biases.

Permalink

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” - George Bernard Shaw

Permalink

Binky- wrote:**faints*** u a putz?? no way is that a bad thing though?? i just not sure ;0)

ladylikepsych wrote:well...I guess I would rather hear it from somebody I like and respect if I am being a putz. So, I guess if a "friend" gets mad and stays mad at you for trying to get you to behave....then are they really a friend? I also understand the room that is emotionally charged thing too....that is why some folks make better supervisors. They know how to keep themselves in check and be a good example. But everybody is human and has their own biases.

Putz is a yiddish word. It can mean idiot; or, it's a slang term for penis... Both are brainless.

Permalink

giggles oh okay hahahaa

Permalink

lol....I can be an idiot ;oP

Permalink

ladylikepsych wrote:lol....I can be an idiot ;oP

Name me one person here who CAN'T????? lol ;)

Permalink

milesofborg wrote:

ladylikepsych wrote:lol....I can be an idiot ;oP

Name me one person here who CAN'T????? lol ;)

I don't know anyone that would fit that description, lol.

Permalink

Ya know, it's funny you should bring up the word "putz." In one of my favorite movies, Grumpy Old Men, the words "putz" and "schmuck" are bandied about on a regular basis. They are both yiddish words and considered vulgar terms. You can't get much more G rated than this movie, but the censors finally caught onto it. Now, when they show the movie on television, those words are dubbed out, lol. Shows you what lengths the word police will go to in order to *protect* us.

Permalink

i never thought of that pick.....interesting! I do like those words though and use them in my vocab quite frequently. I didn't realize that they were considered vulgar to some...

Permalink

Always it's very important to remember that "SHTOONK" is ALWAYS spelled with two "O"s !!!

Permalink

pickinchooz wrote:

milesofborg wrote:

ladylikepsych wrote:lol....I can be an idiot ;oP

Name me one person here who CAN'T????? lol ;)

I don't know anyone that would fit that description, lol.

i cant be. cos im not allowed....lol

Permalink

monique for admin.yeahhhhhhhhhh

votes in for monique being admin......shes cool and she talks a whole lot of sense.......get ya votes in now..

Permalink

nice to join

Permalink

Per wrote:Thanks for all the replies yesterday on the message board topic I posted. Here is a slightly modified version of the rules & guidelines based on all the feedback I received in the topic and through private messages:

Rules:
- do not use inappropriate language, links or images
- do not post private messages you have received or sent
- do not post any sort of contact information for other members
- do not discuss specific blocks made by yourself or other members
- do not single out other members by name and discuss them in a negative context

These rules will always be enforced by us and will lead to deletion of the topic/reply, a warning and later a ban if necessary.

Guidelines:
- do not post the same topic in different categories (find the most suitable category and post it there instead)
- do not spam a topic with multiple similar replies
- do not go off topic intentionally, respect that others might be interested in discussing the given topic.

Unlike the rules, guidelines will NOT be enforced by us (except in some rare cases), they are simply meant to guide you to use the forums in the best possible way.

What do you think?
Am I getting closer to what you guys want here on the message board?

I hope so :)

Edited on May 28, 2008 at 9:42 AM Permalink

OOPS, TRYED TO JOIN IN BUT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW TO DO IT. SOUNDS LIKE WONDERFUL FUN SORRY I CAN'T JOIN IN I JUST HAVEN'T GOT THE KNOW HOW TO DO IT!!! (SAD FACE)

Permalink

i vote for jo, monique, ladylike and myself for admin.......

here here.......

Permalink

IMO anyone who moderates the boards should not be people who are and have been active as participants themselves. Bias comes to mind. And taking off your admin hat and putting it back on doesn't work..

Features should be installed to kick a person like in chat for being rude or disrespectful.. No scolding in the middle of the boards by an admin. We are not childen.

I just think that you can't play and moderate at the same time. It's like in business. You can't manage and then try to be their friends. It will not work. :)

Permalink

I've seen admins beat somebody over the head just for asking a question and scolding them "to search the boards before posting." Not all ppl know exactly how to use the boards. Admins are agents of SS and should treat the clients with some respect. Just an opinion, I shall run for cover now.

Permalink

LadyDi821 wrote:IMO anyone who moderates the boards should not be people who are and have been active as participants themselves. Bias comes to mind. And taking off your admin hat and putting it back on doesn't work..

Features should be installed to kick a person like in chat for being rude or disrespectful.. No scolding in the middle of the boards by an admin. We are not childen.

I just think that you can't play and moderate at the same time. It's like in business. You can't manage and then try to be their friends. It will not work. :)

Di,
I totally and completely disagree with you. Any time a person has felt my representation of Snap as an admin has conflicted with my personal views or mode of interaction, it has been publicly and directly addressed. I think that actually has happened one time, perhaps two. On the contrary, I have been told many times how fair I am in dealing with situations that arise.

Not everyone automatically inserts bias into how they respond. Some folks actually put their brain in gear before their fingers go in motion. That is not to say that ALL admins can't watch to be more sensitive to how they say things. They can. However, to unilaterally say admins should not be active participants is unfounded. It actually seems that unless an admin IS active, how are people going to know who they are.

We may have to agree to disagree on this point. Similar to how we do not agree on the message boards should be limited to age 18+.

Permalink

LadyDi821 wrote:IMO anyone who moderates the boards should not be people who are and have been active as participants themselves. Bias comes to mind. And taking off your admin hat and putting it back on doesn't work..

Features should be installed to kick a person like in chat for being rude or disrespectful.. No scolding in the middle of the boards by an admin. We are not childen.

I just think that you can't play and moderate at the same time. It's like in business. You can't manage and then try to be their friends. It will not work. :)

LadyDi I so agree with you..........It will not and does not work!!!!! smiles

Permalink

LadyDi821 wrote:IMO anyone who moderates the boards should not be people who are and have been active as participants themselves. Bias comes to mind. And taking off your admin hat and putting it back on doesn't work..

Features should be installed to kick a person like in chat for being rude or disrespectful.. No scolding in the middle of the boards by an admin. We are not childen.

I just think that you can't play and moderate at the same time. It's like in business. You can't manage and then try to be their friends. It will not work. :)

I just found this page and have read most of this thread.. I have to say on the subject of "Admin", have to agree and disagree with this and the last two opinions.

I agree that someone participating in a contest, for example, should not also be a "admin"..the old saying about "the fox guarding the hen house" comes to mind.

However, as both a room owner and admin in rooms on Pal-Talk, I also know that it is absolutely possible to participate in the chat and admin the room at the same time. Admins not fulfilling their duties properly can be and are dismissed.

In Chat rooms trouble makers or those breaking rules can be bounced, in contests, it is not possible for hosts to remove or block the same violator. This results in unnecessary drama and downfall of some contests. I feel that contests, in particular, should be monitored more closely or give the host the power to admin his own contest. Thank you for considering my opinion.

Edited on May 28, 2008 at 9:22 PM Permalink

milesofborg wrote:

ladylikepsych wrote:lol....I can be an idiot ;oP

Name me one person here who CAN'T????? lol ;)

Me :)

although I suppose i was kind of being an idiot in my footloose video - Could of broke me webcam.

Oh if you do want to go and check it out then go ahead :)

Permalink

jimbuhu wrote:

Malcan wrote:Per, I participated in many message boards for many years... all of them have moderators. The person who starts the thread is a moderator and has the ability to delete posts that are considered disruptive. Why not have such established practice at SS?

That is Something I wish we did have .... for Contest organizers ... to be able to police their thread. Comments can always be provided in PM .... Also that woul eliminate the Spamming of anyones Contest unless permission was granted by a Contest organizer ....

AMEN TO THAT!!!

Permalink

The reason why so many of my threads were deleted was because of the content posted. The post(s) should have been deleted, as opposed to deleting the entire thread(s).

Edited on May 29, 2008 at 2:43 PM Permalink

LadyDi821 wrote:IMO anyone who moderates the boards should not be people who are and have been active as participants themselves. Bias comes to mind. And taking off your admin hat and putting it back on doesn't work..

Features should be installed to kick a person like in chat for being rude or disrespectful.. No scolding in the middle of the boards by an admin. We are not childen.

I just think that you can't play and moderate at the same time. It's like in business. You can't manage and then try to be their friends. It will not work. :)

I agree with you 100%.

Permalink

guns68 wrote:I've seen admins beat somebody over the head just for asking a question and scolding them "to search the boards before posting." Not all ppl know exactly how to use the boards. Admins are agents of SS and should treat the clients with some respect. Just an opinion, I shall run for cover now.

Great guns! lol

Permalink

I wanted to enter this contest......but couldn't find the rules.............can anybody enlighten me? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Okay, that was "tongue in cheek" but isn't this supposed to be a contest.....not a debate? How about just using the good ole "Golden Rule", "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"? If we ALL followed that one.....we wouldn't need any others.
Nuff said.
ANd thanks for allowing me to say it.
Judie

Permalink