I don't know how to put this. But I really think subforum or blanket ban would be bad for off-topic. I do think however that the staff need to be stricter in regards to how they react to what they perceive as threats to peaceful discussion on the forum. I could probably live with that.

Maybe have it so mods switched up their approach to moderating the forum when they think the general mood of the forum is getting quite heated. I think stricter moderation at times would help remind us of where we are.

pwhodges wrote:because I've done it, successfully.

What we have now seems successful to many people, but the staff have apparently become unwilling to keep it up. Couldn't there at least be an attempt to find some moderators that are, in members who are eligible?

There seems to be a good few listed staff members who don't appear to do any of the stuff that NemZ, Monk Ed and Xard have done as moderators. They seemed to do a good job of popping on, cleaning up the mess, giving their thoughts on discussion if they like, and then going again. More of that would seem adequate to me. Though I admit my potential ignorance in what other staff members do exactly.

I'm happy for more strictness on obvious attempts to wind people up or genuinely offend, but not for expressing an opinion because it may create a much despised tangent, or making light of something simply for humours sake.

Bagheera wrote:As someone who's been the target of excessive moderation in the past I welcome more intensive efforts, provided they're administered responsibly. One of the main issues I've had in pretty much all of my clashes with forum staff is disruptive users who pushed my buttons;

But they in turn would probably claim that you were disruptive and pushing their buttons, or that your buttons were too easily pushed. Also, the mods might not be around to warn anyone before the damage is done - we're only responsible for ourselves.

Sorrow wrote:There seems to be a good few listed staff members who don't appear to do any of the stuff that NemZ, Monk Ed and Xard have done as moderators. They seemed to do a good job of popping on, cleaning up the mess, giving their thoughts on discussion if they like, and then going again. More of that would seem adequate to me. Though I admit my potential ignorance in what other staff members do exactly.

What is this referring to again?

Staff members who aren't often active, or could maybe be doing some of the work load with cleaning up after users? I admitted being possibly off the mark here in what some admins do, but it's how it looks to me.

Again? I'm not sure what you're asking.

Sorrow wrote:Staff members who aren't often active, or could maybe be doing some of the work load with cleaning up after users? I admitted being possibly off the mark here in what some admins do, but it's how it looks to me.

So with "stuff NemZ, Monk Ed and Xard have done" you just mean normal mod activities then? Okay. (Others do mod though I guess we're the most active/visible members on current roster right now, especially Monk and NemZ.)

Sorrow wrote:Staff members who aren't often active, or could maybe be doing some of the work load with cleaning up after users?

Real life matters more than this forum, which is why a whole bunch of us are intermittently active. We don't like the idea of creating more stuff that we'd have to watch or cleanup after because we're busy enough with one thing or the other. We're not paid to be mods or admins, we're doing this because the site means something to us.

Tankred wrote:I do think however that the staff need to be stricter in regards to how they react to what they perceive as threats to peaceful discussion on the forum. I could probably live with that. (...) Maybe have it so mods switched up their approach to moderating the forum when they think the general mood of the forum is getting quite heated. I think stricter moderation at times would help remind us of where we are.

Nuclear Lunchbox wrote:If it's not implemented, the staff just needs to be on their game about cracking down on disruptive and uncivil posters.

Sailor Star Dust wrote:Just leave things as they've always been in Off Topic (light-hearted threads alongside the moderated case-by-case basis political threads), unless, again, somebody can give me an example of why and how our current system isn't working.

Rosenakahara wrote:There really isn't any way to win so honestly we should keep it as it is now

A.T. Fish wrote:Serious discussions already happen and people already get banned for going over the line, I don't know why this has to change. I get that the staff is fed up with it, but I believe this is only temporary, and also part of forum activity in general, conflicts happen from time to time but they get resolved eventually. Honestly, the recent wave of drama that came from discussing controversial subjects seems way smaller than the one that followed Q's spoiler policy and its many unjustified bans.

Merridian wrote:Business as usual with regards to how 'srs bidniss' threads are moderated seems like best approach, and that's what I advocate.

Trajan wrote:At this point, as long as the basic structure and outline of OT is left relatively intact, I'm fine with whatever solution we come up with. (...) I just want people to get along and leave OT relatively unharmed.

I think we've come to a (more or less) consensus. Subtle change seems to be in favor over anything drastic.

I think this topic has run its natural course. I hope everyone at least feels like they understand each other better now.