[Runner]

I hardly see why this would make someone not ant to go into chat. What's so bad about it? Make one topic and let Admin do the rest. That's a pretty suckish reason to not go in, in my opinion.

Well, let's face it, if you were a chatter, you would have to always worry about making one false move, or getting mad and/or saying something bad by accident. One false move, and you're out. It's like that one game, Minesweeper or whatever, when if you accidentally click the wrong mine, you lose the whole game. Nobody wants to go into a chat where it would be so easy to get kicked out forever.

And about people getting mad, some people can't help it. There's members who can be very annoying to the point some people just can't help but explode. Let's face it, in real life, if you were at school and people were being annoying, would you get mad, or would you somehow be all calm? No.

Which is why it's scaring people away. Paranoia isn't fun. Paranoid chat is even less fun.

Sure, there may not always be mods in chat, but as I learned recently, mods can read the backlogs of chat. So, it's extra scary.

Edited by Runner, 14 September 2011 - 06:22 PM.

[Admin]

I can assure you that the intent isn't to remain hovering over anyone who enters chat with our fingers ready to click and remove their access at the slightest hint of a broken rule. I think the Guides and I all understand what online life is like. We know there are trolls... We know there are annoying people... We also know that there are people with nothing but the best intentions who sometimes make mistakes. If anything, I have worked really hard to give people the benefit of second (and sometimes 3rd and 4th) chances because I know what it is like. I think we try to be fair. Now the downside to all this fair ness and chances are people who say 'whatever' and try to wreak havoc anyway. This gives us a tool to block them out. Let's use the school example... Can you imagine how nice it would be if your school was able to lock out the annoying people from the building? I know that my intention isn't to eventually reach a point where everyone is locked out so that the hallways are quiet... That's the last thing I want because it would be self defeating for me to want to clear out people from a site I work hard to keep running for as many people as possible to enjoy. I give you two examples to wrap this up... 1) I think an example of my/our forgiving nature is the person who helped prompt this whole change being approved to enter chat again and 2) We have been running approvals for weeks now and not one person has been kicked out yet 110 people (as of riht now) have been approved to go in. I don't want to make chat a horrible place to be... That is why we need some control over who can enter so that the other chatters and mods know there is a method of doing so.

[TamaMum]

One of the easiest and simplest ways to make Chat a nice place to visit is to behave nicely towards others - even the annoying ones (they can't report you if you're being nice to them and it annoys the heck out of them without you breaking any rules).

If that really is beyond you, and you are getting mad then just stop responding to someone if they are trying to start a flame war. No one likes attention seekers but if you keep replying to them then you give them all the attention they hoped for.

Like Admin says - it's not one "strike" and you're out. Members get lots of chances to change or learn from mistakes (way more than 4th chances IMO).

Usually we try to moderate by PM and ask why something happened or make suggestions on how to avoid a similar problem occuring.

OK - I will admit that you CAN get kicked straight out if you are going to do something totally lame like post an inappropriate link or post reams of abuse or plain spiteful messages towards members (any members... even ones you find irritating)... that's the kind of behaviour not welcome in Chat.

No one gets kicked out "for no reason" - there's usually some prior behaviour involved - and even if you don't know what it was, the member who was kicked usually knows why (even if they don't want anyone else to know why).

Chat's supposed to be somewhere you can meet friends and make friends without having to worry about being bullied or abused or put down just because you're not the same age as everyone else or interested in the same things as everyone else.

Likewise no one should enter Chat and expect to have everyone stop what they are doing and pay attention to them.

Neither is it reasonable to interrupt a friendly conversation between others to try to take it off topic and onto a subject you want to chat about... nor expect other members to stop what they are chatting about to "teach" you or explain something in detail to you - especially when you can spend a little time reading through previous replies on the board to bring yourself up to speed with what everyone has been chatting about (or use Google to research and read up on something you don't know about...)

Sometimes these things are not obvious - or they have to be learned.
(Like the fact that you should follow the site rules in Chat even when a mod is not there....)

[Runner]

Yeah, okay, I guess maybe I shouldn't be too paranoid. But you know, one of my best friends nearly got kicked from chat (He was lucky Admin was willing to give him one more chance), all because of this annoying person who CONSTANTLY annoyed all of us regular chatters over and over, to the point it was almost like spam (It's hard to ignore people when you're trying to talk with someone and then you get all these messages, or snide remarks) All because my friend got mad at this girl and started fighting with this girl a lot, my friend got reported alot by this girl who purposely continued irking him, and then nearly got kicked from chat forever. This really upset me, since nobody seemed to see that my friend is a nice guy, but like most human beings, is nice only if you don't get on his bad side.

[TamaMum]

Yeah, okay, I guess maybe I shouldn't be too paranoid. But you know, one of my best friends nearly got kicked from chat (He was lucky Admin was willing to give him one more chance), all because of this annoying person who CONSTANTLY annoyed all of us regular chatters over and over, to the point it was almost like spam (It's hard to ignore people when you're trying to talk with someone and then you get all these messages, or snide remarks) All because my friend got mad at this girl and started fighting with this girl a lot, my friend got reported alot by this girl who purposely continued irking him, and then nearly got kicked from chat forever. This really upset me, since nobody seemed to see that my friend is a nice guy, but like most human beings, is nice only if you don't get on his bad side.

Ah well... that sounds to me like an excellent example of why it's better to ignore someone totally instead of replying to them and giving them attention in a flame war.
Of course it is not easy. But can you see why older, smarter members can help younger, inexperienced ones learn by behaving in a way that shows you can rise above childish behaviour?

As mentioned, no one gets kicked out "for no reason" - there's usually some prior behaviour involved - and even if you don't know the whole story, your friend does (and so do Admin and the TamaTalk staff).

[Runner]

Ah well... that sounds to me like an excellent example of why it's better to ignore someone totally instead of replying to them and giving them attention in a flame war.
Of course it is not easy. But can you see why older, smarter members can help younger, inexperienced ones learn by behaving in a way that shows you can rise above childish behaviour?

As mentioned, no one gets kicked out "for no reason" - there's usually some prior behaviour involved - and even if you don't know the whole story, your friend does (and so do Admin and the TamaTalk staff).

Oh believe me, this particular person would probably accuse us all of bullying her by excluding her, and then she would all report of us. This person just happens to be one of those people who love to make people angry.

And I know about almost all of the story, since I practically talk to my friend almost every day. I know it wasn't just that previous mentioned person that was the problem.

Some people just need to learn that if they don't know what something means, they should use google. Or wikipedia.

Edited by Runner, 16 September 2011 - 07:38 AM.

[TamaMum]

We respect the privacy of all our members so we don't share specific information about what one person has done with another.

From the replies you've just posted it is clear that either you don't understand or that you have been mislead about the way we judge reports about members or complaints about Chat problems and the way we deal with members (and how they respond towards TamaGuides or Admin).

I am going to suggest that we stop posting about this and discuss it further in PM since this is starting to take the whole topic off course. Hopefully I can explain some of the things you've maybe misunderstood about moderating, behaviour and site rules.

[Runner]

^Yeah, that's what I was thinking, about the whole PM thing. I was gonna add something crucial I forgot in to make it make more sense, but then I had to go to school so I really had no choice but to leave it the way it was. I technically shouldn't be on this site at school, so this reply is gonna have to stay short.

[graficks]

I think everyone's opinions, feelings and points are valid regarding this topic, but I'd like to point out very important: Enforcing rules and changes to Chat are only implemented for the goodness and safety of everyone here at TT. While I can see how some members are frustrated and/or confused why an approval system was needed for chat, it was done in favour of those who were experiencing problems. Obviously there were a fair number of users experiencing problems otherwise TT staff never would have implemented this. I think all users of TT need to understand how hard the staff work to keep this site up and running....and moderated of any problems, glitches and complaints.

The Admins and Moderators are here to help us, not to punish or ridicule us. I, for one, do not take TamaTalk for granted as an online community. I think it's amazing that users even have the option of voicing their concerns to an administrator. For the most part from what I've seen, even from browsing this topic, users' concerns are often heard and responded to. That goes a long way considering that TT staff are not paid employees and address these problems/concerns on their own free time. That, in my eyes, is a gift we should appreciate. If it wasn't for the TT staff we wouldn't have fun things like Chat, contests and the vast amount of help that is spread throughout this site.

Constructive concerns are good, it keeps the "ball" rolling in order to make things better for everyone.

[Space Unicorn]

I hardly see why this would make someone not ant to go into chat. What's so bad about it? Make one topic and let Admin do the rest. That's a pretty suckish reason to not go in, in my opinion.

Maybe there are new people that are shy to make an approval topic, you never really know...

[OldSchoolTama]

Maybe there are new people that are shy to make an approval topic, you never really know...

There shouldn't be a reason for someone to be shy, I think. No one else sees the topic you make except for you and Admin, as explained earlier in this very topic, HERE. The approval forum is a protected forum.

[joshnemo]

Personally, I am against having the Chatroom closed down. Most of the users are very nice and calm, and as there are only few who enter the room, rarely does anything become out of control.

[.chasm.]

It doesn't matter how many times the guides say that an insta-ban won't happen, people are still scared of it. It does feel like one false move and you're out, no matter how many times we're told that it isn't like that.

The approval system hasn't been that successful when it comes to spammers, either. The whole thing was meant to be a way of keeping the people who misbehaved out, but there are still spammers in the chat, and the occasional troll.

[OldSchoolTama]

The approval system hasn't been that successful when it comes to spammers, either. The whole thing was meant to be a way of keeping the people who misbehaved out, but there are still spammers in the chat, and the occasional troll.

Pardon me for possibly stating the obvious but if this is the case, why aren't they reported (this is meant to be a question posed to any chatter who still sees spammers and trolls in the chat room, almost in a rhetorical fashion, not meant to target any particular member)? That's why that system is in place. I don't think the approval system is meant to be perfect and we often give way more than second chances to those who keep breaking the rules, including those who say they'll behave and go right ahead and keep breaking the rules anyway. That has nothing to do with the approval system; it has to do with the particular personalities we deal with.

[.chasm.]

Pardon me for possibly stating the obvious but if this is the case, why aren't they reported (this is meant to be a question posed to any chatter who still sees spammers and trolls in the chat room, almost in a rhetorical fashion, not meant to target any particular member)? That's why that system is in place. I don't think the approval system is meant to be perfect and we often give way more than second chances to those who keep breaking the rules, including those who say they'll behave and go right ahead and keep breaking the rules anyway. That has nothing to do with the approval system; it has to do with the particular personalities we deal with.

It tends to be spammers who have been reported in the past, before the approval system was put in place. They have been approved, even though they have done the same multiple times in the past. Why are they still approved, especially if they've been given more than second chances?

[OldSchoolTama]

To give members the benefit of the doubt and try to turn over a new leaf. We don't auto-ban (unless the problematic member grossly violates a site rule), we PM all involved parties to hear all sides of the story, and we give many chances. I daresay there have been times for everyone when a second or third chance benefited their situation, no matter the situation, right? I think Admin kind of sums it up here, in one of the previous posts he made:

I can assure you that the intent isn't to remain hovering over anyone who enters chat with our fingers ready to click and remove their access at the slightest hint of a broken rule. I think the Guides and I all understand what online life is like. We know there are trolls... We know there are annoying people... We also know that there are people with nothing but the best intentions who sometimes make mistakes. If anything, I have worked really hard to give people the benefit of second (and sometimes 3rd and 4th) chances because I know what it is like. I think we try to be fair. Now the downside to all this fair ness and chances are people who say 'whatever' and try to wreak havoc anyway. This gives us a tool to block them out.

Now, I am still unsure as to why these people aren't being reported. What's the harm in reporting problematic members again and again? That's why the report function is there. If anything, this brings them to our attention so that we can take the appropriate action in a timely manner. If no one reports problematic members, how would we know what issues to deal with? You may think that we can just refer to the backlogs and sift out problematic members eventually, but honestly? Admins and Guides would be here forevermore trying to complete that daunting task. We do our best to remember repeat offenders. We may have an approval system in place but even before the approval system came to be, we also counted on other members (especially those who frequent the chat room) to be our eyes and ears, especially since Admins and Guides can't be around 24/7. There's even a section in the User Guide on how to report members in Chat.

So on the one hand, members are aggravated because there are spammers and trolls in the chat room (and sometimes, they don't do anything about it) and on the other hand, they become aggravated that there's now a new system in place to try and have more control over who gets in. This puts us in a bit of a bind. I'd like to remind everyone that the original issue was whether or not we should close down Chat outright. The approval system is supposed to be an alternative to that. All this didn't stem from nothing because there were more than just "a few" members having problems with Chat.

[.chasm.]

Now, I am still unsure as to why these people aren't being reported. What's the harm in reporting problematic members again and again? That's why the report function is there. If anything, this brings them to our attention so that we can take the appropriate action in a timely manner.

They are reported, but it isn't fun to take multiple screenshots every time the same person comes in, doing the same thing that they have done before. I know reporting isn't nearly as much work as what the guides have to do to sort everything out after the member has been reported, but the problem wouldn't be as big if people were given, say, three strikes, then banned from the chatroom - not permanently, but for a decent amount of time. I know that bans like that were used before, but I don't really think they are being used enough now.

Edited by .chasm., 21 September 2011 - 04:25 PM.

[Admin]

but the problem wouldn't be as big if people were given, say, three strikes, then banned from the chatroom - not permanently, but for a decent amount of time. I know that bans like that were used before, but I don't really think they are being used enough now.

Wouldn't a three strikes rule be seen as just as scary of a threat as being un-approved? I am struggling to see the difference here. The point of either of these things is, yes, to have the risk of losing your access to chat if you misbehave. Without this risk there would be little to no incentive for people to behave if they knew they could act like a brat and still be able to evade attempts at stopping them from coming in. The benefit of the approval system is it is not as easy to evade a banning. I have yet to see any evidence that shows the approval system is NOT working.

[.chasm.]

Wouldn't a three strikes rule be seen as just as scary of a threat as being un-approved? I am struggling to see the difference here. The point of either of these things is, yes, to have the risk of losing your access to chat if you misbehave. Without this risk there would be little to no incentive for people to behave if they knew they could act like a brat and still be able to evade attempts at stopping them from coming in. The benefit of the approval system is it is not as easy to evade a banning. I have yet to see any evidence that shows the approval system is NOT working.

If there was a three-strike rule, then people would be allowed a chance to improve their behaviour without getting banned immediately - that's the main difference. The second chances people are giving wouldn't have to go overboard, and I think getting banned for a set amount of time would be effective. If not, then they simply get banned again. This could quite easily work with the approval system, but I don't think that system has been effective yet, because people are still being let in to spam when they have been reported multiple times in the past.

[Admin]

I have to respectfully disagree with you. One thing I would like to avoid is locking moderators into having to give three strikes before banning a user. Sometimes there are minor problems like spamming and then there are major problems like posting inappropriate links and such. I'd much rather stay flexible so that there is some room to judge how serious a problem is and then deal with it. We had some major problems that led up to this whole change. I would not stand for having somebody who was doing some of those things and then expecting to still get two more chances before being locked out of chat. As far as the approval system not being effective because of previous spammers being allowed back in goes, it has been mentioned before that we started this with a clean slate for everyone. If you spammed in the past (or whatever) you get another chance to start fresh and stop the behavior. If there are still problems going on then we need to have them reported.