Animation Source Forums

Going sort of off-topic, now as I don't treally have much to say that hasn't already been said about the popular members being cut some slack. However personally I am for Conay's idea. Rather than make our posts public it would be better if we had some kind of moderator report system. I've had to contact Steet in the past regarding the fan news editors not doing their job (I had to forward it to Togo though.) and I felt rather guilty as I was talking about some of my closest friends on this website not doing their job. And suggesting that they be replaced. I don't think I would have been able to do that publicly on a forum board, so it may be best if this remains anonymous.

Yes, I personally wouldn't be able to do that, this is why I suggested the code.

Well, just firstly I'd like to re-mention that I said that I agree with you and Sora to an extent.
I think that if someone breaks the rules, it should be justified by how frequently similar instances occur, not by popularity. But I think 'work' and 'contribution' should also be taken into account.

Don't get me wrong, I 90% agree with this topic. But I'll use a real life example to explain the other 10%.

One of my friends was possibly the most popular girl at school last year. She's still popular at our new school, but there are more people and the year's only just started so yeah.
But the reason she is popular is because a) she's nice, b) she's pretty, c) she's smart, but most of all, d) she's insanely awesome at sports (mainly swimming). Because she trains, every day. Some days, she does morning training, about at least fifty laps of a fifty metre pool. Then she goes to school. Then she does homework. Then she does more swimming training. Then she probably does a few chores at home.

She deserves to be popular, and I think she definitely deserves a break from something, because she works hard. If she skipped her homework (which she never does), I think she has a right to do so and shouldn't be punished for it.

And so I think something similar should apply to all people who work hard, as it does here, but nowhere else. O_o

That's true. I found my own argument falling a bit weak there, lol. So I guess you 'win'.

Vivid, I see what your getting at, however - A) She chooses to Practice Swimming, no one forces her to do so. B) Even if she always does her homework, but misses one week, WHY shouldn't she be punished just like anyone else that misses there homework for a week?

It's the same with this site, if you have someone like Cat (Sorry Cat, just usng you as an example because your a "popular" member) started swearing in the Shout box, why shouldn't she be punished just like someone, like me? Even if she's posted 891274714 items on the site, she should still be punished like everyone else.

It's like really, a school teacher - He has provided SO MUCH to the school, and it's pupils, good results, money, everything! But one day, he is caught having an affair with a pupil, should this be punished? Or because he's contributed much to the school, should he be let off with a warning?

I think you're dodging in and out of extremes here, Conay. Your points go from missing homework to an adult having an affair with a pupil. But I'll address each individual point anyhow.

1. The person who is persistent on homework completion and all of the sudden misses one week. This is highly situational, and I'd imagine with a good record, the teacher would lend a curious eye to the reasoning behind this student's recent and unusual drop in homework submission. They wouldn't necessarily have discipline on their minds. Something like this requires some sort of investigation.

2. Agree fully. Older members should be held to the same set of rules as the new/unpopular ones.

3. It's beyond me why you suggested this, because if you look at the outcome of someone breaking the rules on a website and someone having an affair with a pupil, the similarities do not add up too well, chiefly because there are little similarities. It's like equating the social impact of a single person littering to a serial killer and asking if they deserve the same punishment. The answer is no.

-

Now, my opinion on the topic. The decision, or reluctance rather, of the administration to punish popular or contributing members is a smart decision. It's not fair, but it's smart. And it's not causing that much trouble, so it is a win/win for the site in that perspective. Steet is cleverly looking at the big picture, and as long as it does not become a global site problem then the decision to hold contributors/populars on a longer leash(thank you JC for pointing out my mistake) is somewhat effective. I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying I agree.

It most certainly is not a win/win for the public. It is an apparent win/win for the site because if there are those "higher-ups" that want to extend more slack to the popular members when they break the rules, those members will be more inclined to stay. The site wins because they still get to take advantage of that member's popularity and appease their fans. Which, in some cases for some people, they have a lot of fans. More site content for others to see, more site activity. Win/win for the site. Of course, the public does pay a price, but in most everything in history the public usually gets the blunt of the corruption from higher up in the hierarchy.

Favoritism also ties in to what I said above. A member with more output(output being content/popularity), is, on the surface, more valuable to the site because of what they bring to it.

It is illogical, but the system does what it is intended to do - keep the site popular. One person who does not contribute art or the like to the site, or very little of it, is less important material-wise to the site than anther who draws the attention of many with their works.




I am finding it somewhat difficult understanding why you'd agree with that line of thinking when not too long ago you got irritated at a member for equating an issue to illegal immigration across the Mexican/USA border to something on this site. Hypothetical examples can cause trouble if their impact extends outside of the threshold of the impact of the issue at hand.

EDIT: Nevermind about me calling out the hypothetical point. I misunderstood the intent. My apologies. I stand by the rest, however.

And that's what's wrong.

I don't care how much art or whatever somebody brings to this site. If they do something against the rules they should be punished like everybody else. If they don't then it just shows blatant favoritism and disrespect for the other members.

He's right, it is wrong. True, it may be in the best interest for the longevity of the site, but it's certainly not in the best interest of the people in the community (which comprise one of the most important aspects of the site.) The community and following the rules comes first.

And now I'll copy most of what I said in the Inactive moderators thread, because I mentioned a sort of moderator evaluation system that I think will work, if put into effect. It can be anonymous and similar to the report feature, where a member can explain the problem and which moderator is not doing their job. And, in the case of prejudice in favor of popular members occurring in warnings of the shout box, people can send in reports on the moderators that, instead of going to the normal reports section that we see on the banning page, it goes to Steet or Togo and they can decide if the moderator was acting fairly or if they were putting more favor toward a popular member.

That's true. I realise that now =)



I didn't mean it like that. I only meant to say that you win as in I now agree with you that your point is correct. Why would you assume I meant it like that