Policy Change

Sep 16, 2005 02:20 Policy Change
(I made a post about this in www.winbolo.us but I thought it'd get more attention here. Read on.)

The policy, as written, is a policy written for a world of black and white. I understand why it's done that way, but because of all the stuff happening in #winbolo almost daily, policy needs a change.

The no-flooding rule is a good one, but there's volumes that it simply does not address. Why don't we like flooding? In short, it disrupts conversation. That's why in the policy it states that floods, if for reference, are perfectly okay, because it goes in with conversation.

The black and white policy phrasing doesn't address gray areas of flooding, and if you've been in the channel recently you'll know what I'm talking about: the little constant mini-floods. While they don't really go against policy, they're not really nice to have in the middle of a conversation. And even in the policy it states its vision is to have a channel where people don't feel "constrained", and the constant onslaught of mini-floods really doesn't lend itself to a free and open discussion.

We need a policy addition that somehow addresses this. Personally I wouldn't have a problem with giving mods descretion over what's disruption of conversation or not, but as always there's little chinks and cracks in everything.

---Nova

(p.s.: I deliberately left some things a little unelaborated in the spirit of discussion.)
Sep 17, 2005 13:16
Might be a good idea to note that Nova is talking about the #winbolo IRC policy and not the WBN forum policy.

You can check out the IRC policy at:
http://www.winbolo.us/policy.htm

It would be helpful to provide some examples of the gray areas (with nicks changed to protect the noobish). I would actually like as few rules as possible, but I do understand our community has a good number of people that love attention (yes CF I'm talking about you).
Sep 17, 2005 16:04
All the "mini-floods" have been good examples of gray areas in policy. Not big enough to flood but still a major pain in the ass. I think that if we established another numerical limit (i.e. 3 lines repeated within 10 lines of each other) then people are just going to dance on the line. So rather than creating more and more policy and creating more and more loopholes let's just give mods descretion on this one.

(and thanks for pointing out that this is the IRC policy, I was going to mention that but I wasn't sure how to fit it in)
Sep 17, 2005 22:13
These are good thoughts, but I'd like to lean toward giving a little more leeway to the ops having the ability to kick/ban on things that are in the gray area based on a 'common sense' approach. I would stress that this would NOT allow ops to be any harder on the people they don't like.
Sep 17, 2005 23:22
Acro wrote:
These are good thoughts, but I'd like to lean toward giving a little more leeway to the ops having the ability to kick/ban on things that are in the gray area based on a 'common sense' approach. I would stress that this would NOT allow ops to be any harder on the people they don't like.


I couldn't agree more:

Nova drifts into the unknown realms of policy

On the .us server...

-DAllen
Sep 19, 2005 22:51
More votes, please.