FrostJaeger
Banned Member
It's not the worst idea. Give all NTSE mods power to moderate posts before they go public (essentially the feature that Sya is talking about) so everyone still gets to give their feedback, but only stuff someone on the review staff or actual staff thinks is valid makes it through to the public eye.
Well that's why you open it to all of them Frost, so that all the staff can see it.As much as it pains me to say this, in my opinion not all of the review staff or "actual" staff are non-biased - which would again raise the problems of censorship and some people's feedback being more valid then others.
As much as it pains me to say this, in my opinion not all of the review staff or "actual" staff are non-biased - which would again raise the problems of censorship and some people's feedback being more valid then others.
Oh this...this reminded me. Doesn't the news forum go through an approval system before post show up? Couldn't we do something like that for NTSE? I personally would rather all post be allowed and bad ones be removed(and discipline given), but I still think having to get a post approved before it goes through would be better than a 'private review' system. That way any bad post are stopped before they're even seen.
Even if there's a better way out there, one we've tried it people will be against chaining it unless it fails. It's much better to look at all our options talk them out, figure out which one seems to be the best and -then- try that.See what we all think that away we have evidence, if we dislike it universally we dial it back.
"Other forums have done it" is a bad excuse, because "Everything has been done before." It's not like we're working with original ideas here. I bet you can find places that have an open system work. After for a time it was working for SARP without even any real rule enforcement. The problem with 'trying it' is that mentality you posted.
Even if there's a better way out there, one we've tried it people will be against chaining it unless it fails. It's much better to look at all our options talk them out, figure out which one seems to be the best and -then- try that.
I'm honestly not sure what the old system even was, reading through that old thread. Frost claims that's what the old system was, but so far I haven't found any indication that it is as he says. I'll take a closer look in a few minutes, but I need to post elsewhere first.
I was going off of what you said, I don't know anything about it.
Sorry for quoting myself and all that, but I'd like to expand on this with a personal anecdote: Staff members routinely "Like" my first post in NTSE threads but delete my subsequent posts in the same threads (alongside the submitter's own freak-outs).The high drama here on SARP only ever ensues and escalates because a submitter takes suggestions as an attack, at which point they insult the person giving criticism, who subsequently gets riled up and yells back at them.
Basically this.
- Grow some thicker skin and stop taking everything as a personal attack.
- Let the staff handle actual disruptive behavior.
The mystery box system was never implemented @FrostJaeger . @Wes tried to do it for about a month or two, but at least half of the evaluators never responded to submissions so it was reverted to "submitter and approver."@ArsenicJohn claimed it was the "old system," @CadetNewb, not me. I merely claimed it was the "mystery box," as, well, that's what @Fred (and @Wes, if memory serves) called it.
Wait. So basically we've done this "secret submissions" thing for a month-long trial already and it sucked?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?