Rating Members (Page 9/12)
Bazooka OCT 28, 06:32 PM
Skidmark, Cliff and Forum, The 'cliques' in this forum could prevent the discussion of good information if they are allowed to vote out unpopular opinions. Then, after all individual viewpoints have been eliminated the rest can "jump on the bandwagon" and roll right over the cliff (one happy family). Popular vote should not be used and the cancellation of a PFF member should ONLY be done bey the Administrator.
******************************

quote
Originally posted by SKIDMARK: Cliff,I think it's a great idea but I also think you should have the final say when someone is voted out. This would prevent someone from being banned just for having an unpopular opinion. It would also prevent a clique from banning someone for not agreeing with their group. What does everyone else think?

**********************************

FieroHarry OCT 28, 10:16 PM
I love the idea,
Maybe it would cut done on some of the stupid sh!t that happens here....
I feel for the most part our members (97%)are great.
Its the other 3% I could do with out

------------------

"If you want to blend in, take the bus!"

Jaygee79 OCT 29, 12:11 AM
Cliff, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought he meant that he was going to have us vote on whether we think someone should be removed and then he would remove them if he saw fit, so as to weed out any possibility of 'cliques' voting out others.

Am I wrong? I think this is a good way to do it even if I am

just reread the original post and I was wrong. But I still think it's a good idea. Maybe a temporary suspension until a decision is made?

[This message has been edited by Jaygee79 (edited 10-29-2001).]

LZeitgeist OCT 29, 10:27 AM
I don't really know that any of this is necessary... I mean, Cliff keeps a good watch over things here, and if any of us are having problems with a particular member, we can just send Cliff a off-board note or Private Message, and I imagine that if Cliff is seeing a *lot* of justified complaints against a certain poster, then he can contact them privately to discuss the situation, or he can ban them if he deems it necessary.

The simplest solution is *usually* the best.

If Cliff doesn't mind us sending him private notes regarding problem individuals, then I'm not sure that any changes need to be made. However, if he would prefer to automate the system, then yes, a popular voting sytem would be the way to go... but with this many members at all levels of interaction, it will be a long, complicated process to keep it working properly and fairly for everyone.

Oh, and in response to a few earlier comments/concerns... I really don't think this sort of group would vote someone out for not expressing themselves precisely and succinctly - it's usually pretty easy to tell the difference between a deliberately rude message and a possibly poorly-phrased one. Deliberate rudeness would need to be quashed, but phrasing ability can be improved over time with care, use and attention *IF* one wishes improvement to be made. I think we're all patient enough to realize that. If the individual does not seek improvement, then if it becomes a large enough problem, than that would be something that would have to be looked at in time.

And as far as the whole 'cliques voting others off the island' thing - with this vast number of individuals here, I think it would take a pretty huge 'clique' in order to get someone banned who was actually undeserving of a ban. One might say that the 'clique' would have to be a 'majority', and if that is the case, that if a 'majority' finds a certain individual deserving of a ban, then doesn't it seem that the individual truly *would* be deserving of a ban?

Besides... I would think that bannings would not occur automatically - I'm sure the system would most likely send a red flag to Cliff, who would turn his attention to the individual in question and then make a personal decision as to whether or not a ban is needed at that time. That seems more fair, and more like something a fair-minded person like Cliff would put into play here.

Just my two cents worth...

------------------
Patrick W. Heinske -- LZeitgeist@aol.com
1988 Red Fiero Formula
- 1st Place - Stock Coupe - FOCOSEVA 2000
- 3rd Place - Stock Formula - FOCOA Nat'l 2001
- Class Winner - 1982 to Present - 2001 Tarheel Tigers All-Pontiac Show


EDIT - typos

[This message has been edited by LZeitgeist (edited 10-29-2001).]

bHooper NOV 01, 08:25 PM
so does this whole topic have something to do with the new "members list" thing at the top of the main screen?

------------------
hoop
Red 86 GT 5 speed
Black 86 SE Automatic

[This message has been edited by bHooper (edited 11-01-2001).]

DJRice NOV 01, 10:18 PM
Cliff,

Is there a way to base the rating on the ratio of posts in O/T versus the actual Fiero Channels? Maybe be less tolerant of trouble makers who almost never post in TD&Q or GFC?

Maybe you could build that into the BS flag that Archie mentioned. At least members would know what the Fiero/OT ratio is so they could better ID the trolls....(although they have been pretty darn obvious in the past).

84Bill NOV 02, 02:05 PM

quote
Originally posted by DJRice:
Cliff,

Is there a way to base the rating on the ratio of posts in O/T versus the actual Fiero Channels? Maybe be less tolerant of trouble makers who almost never post in TD&Q or GFC?


Well if thats the case just get rid of O/T all together, Viola! troublemakers gone. :/

Old Lar NOV 02, 03:19 PM
All the various comments are making the issue too complex.

1. This is Cliff's sponsored forum, he is footing the bill.

2. People can give Cliff input (a rating system)on the people they consider to be a problem.

3. Final decision rests with Cliff as to warning or removal.

4. If there are cliques concerns, Cliff is probably very astute to see through that attempt and choose to take no action.

5. Bottom line, this is Pennock's Fiero Forum. And if you intentionally pi** Cliff off, you are the weakest link, GOODBY.

hugh NOV 04, 09:44 AM
There are very few individuals who will,in time,be deserving of banning.As much as some people are irritating,I wouldn't want to be the one to decide if they deserved to be banned.Cliff has done an admirable job to this point and I think the system could be changed,but would it be improved?I think not.
Boomtastic NOV 04, 05:56 PM
Oooh oooh! Rape me!

Whoops - I read the topic wrong ..

------------------
Boomtastic