FANDOM


This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums
Forums: Index
Administration
Chat

Text Wall

Firstly - I've changed the chat "rules" to "guidelines" because they are causing too much tension and friction. Since they are all open to interpretation, it has led to chatmods and admins just sitting saying "I'll ban you" "no, I'll ban you", when admins can unban themselves, making it an exercise in futility.

The discussions on there have raised a fair point: What do you consider as inappropriate, or disruptive, or offensive, or bad? Because one chatmod considers it bad, should they immediately say "I'll ban you for that", or should we show some tolerance. For instance, earlier, Nerf said he was purposely acting in a certain way to prove a point, and he said how depressing and annoying it made people, so he could show what is wrong with the chat. Now, I agreed and said "You were acting like a dick". This led to an argument between chatmods where one said that was offensive, where as Nerf said it was fine. Is it still offensive if the person who it was aimed at doesn't find it offensive? Is it disruptive just because one person finds it so?

Is the problem here these rules, or perhaps the irregular following of them. I've seen people threaten banning after someone has said just one word in caps, like "THIS". They've been threatened with bans, though the rules clearly state "This above is not a ban-able offense, unless it becomes disruptive."

The rules are vague, which is perhaps how they should be, but then again, are they too vague? Is any of these a problem at all? Why can't the rules simply be there are no rules? Instead of rules, chatmods can just follow a policy of "is this user causing a problem". Don't ban for saying "F***", why not just ask them to stop, and then threaten the ban if they continue. Perhaps we have too many chatmods, or perhaps people should stop using bans as a threat when it suits them.

Everyone has different views on these rules and what counts as "breaking" them, which is why they are now guidelines, and which is why, I question the need for them at all. From what I've seen, the addition of rules has made chat worse. Instead, people should just ban from chat if that person is going somewhere which the people in the channel feel is "a no-go", and only after warnings of such. Chatmods need to realise they serve the role of ensuring the community are happy with what is happening in chat, not just themselves. Just because you don't want to talk about something, does that mean you should try and stop the discussion? No? Why? Because chat is about people talking and getting along, not just what a chatmod wants.

tl;dr

Changed rules to guidelines. Chat rules bad. Cause fights. Get rid of them. Replace with the idea of just putting the community first. Free bird. Chatmods stop threatening bans for everything. Make chat what it says on the tin, a place to chat.

- Kingcjc 23:14, August 13, 2011 (UTC)

Comments

And if we can't turn chat into something other than an over-bureaucratic way to talk, we may as well get rid off it. Having no rules (well, ignoring all rules), has always worked for IRC. - Kingcjc 23:21, August 13, 2011 (UTC)

  • The reason I was saying "I'll ban you" today, was because I thought Nerfblasterpro was joking around- apparently, he wasn't. I won't be on the chat anyways.. I don't care. Skdhjf(Talk!) 23:23, August 13, 2011 (UTC)
    Just the attitude needed. >_> - Kingcjc 23:25, August 13, 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate this forum. I just thought people were allowed to talk about their lives and stuff, maybe I was wrong. I gotta say, I do not like the caps rule at all. It's even more annoying than the caps themselves. What I don't understand is how people can talk about these things and use caps on the IRC, but not the chat. Just doesn't seem right. But I won't be on chat anymore, so if Tat prefers the old rules he may use them. I won't bother him or anyone. -NBP 23:23, August 13, 2011 (UTC)
  • The only problem here is trigger happy mods. Ban someone if they are being disruptive, nothing less. Don't threaten bans for everything. Caps is not a bad thing, how many times do I need to clarify that rule to mean no using caps in a disruptive way? Ajraddatz
    a lot. - Kingcjc 20:02, August 14, 2011 (UTC)
    No more. :P -NBP 00:07, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
  • Neutral I don't really mind having them as guidelines, as long as someone can be blocked for them (for example, if there's someone who is being really disruptive and continues after several warnings). (I'd prefer to get rid of the chat entirely, anwyay.) Jag 03:29, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
  • I agree with Adj, some chatmods are too quick to bring down the cold hammer of justice on unsuspecting users. Not pointing at anyone in particular. --Konicle2 19:50, August 18, 2011 (UTC)

Link to chat

The link to the chat has disappeared... why is it gone and can it be bought back? --TheLairOfRockwhales 19:15, May 5, 2012 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
http://lego.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Chat
lego.wikia.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2017-34
230057
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:GLFARLZAYZWU4NW2HCXABJ3QKRZR5KVU
<urn:uuid:e3df9066-e6fd-4b18-8ac3-d0eb6de496a1>
2017-08-18T08:54:23Z
151.101.0.194
text/html
sha1:CV7TESTCU7XWSJK6YECLH7J2H4CXYESW
<urn:uuid:6d88dc48-9c18-441f-8e95-e09a532376b0>
http://lego.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Chat
response
<urn:uuid:3bd5567e-1547-48e5-8ace-41f741b67d49>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-147-224-2.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2017-34
operator: Common Crawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for August 2017
publisher: Common Crawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf