Interested in becoming a MovieChat Moderator? - General Discussion Discussion

[–] neverstandinalone (641) 8 years ago

I wouldn't mind. I'm retired. I have discernment. Timezone: Central Standard Time.

EDIT: I'm leaving my original comment, however, I withdraw any & all previous thoughts of "I wouldn't mind."

reply

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

I'm definitely interested. USA Eastern Standard Time. I'm a college student, so I have a reasonable amount of free time, but still classes a few hours a day on weekdays. I kept my head in the recent troll attack; that's something at least. ;3

reply

[–] neverstandinalone (641) 8 years ago

I've thought several times those who've been here for quite awhile might/could do a good job. Those who I responded to early on seemed to have a good head on their shoulders. You being one of them, Leia.

reply

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

Aw, thank you. That's very sweet of you. 😇
You seem to be a trustworthy, intelligent individual as well, so I salute you. 👏🏻👩🏻‍✈️

reply

[–] neverstandinalone (641) 8 years ago

Naw, I wasn't fishing for a compliment, just stating the truth.

OT:Are you using http://emojicopy.com/? Sometimes they look nice, then the expression doesn't come through when pasted over.

reply

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

I'm just using the Emojis on my iPhone. I wasn't aware how they came out for other people. 😬

reply

[–] neverstandinalone (641) 8 years ago

They're alright, same as on the link I mentioned. 😃

reply

[–] 9 (1235) 8 years ago

-

reply

[–] neverstandinalone (641) 8 years ago

-

reply

[–] Daft_Munks (4647) 8 years ago

I've probably not posted enough or been around long enough but I'm interested so I'll post, I'm from the UK (Greenwich meantime)

reply

[–] Popcorn Kernel (2368) 8 years ago

Something that could help prevent them (rather than waiting until they post and then cleaning it up) is more filters on the new account creation.
There were a lot of impostor or clone accounts being made, some had a slight difference in spelling, but others just changed the capitalization or added spaces. Those types of variations could be easy to block. jim and Jim should be considered the same name, not unique names. A space at the begging or end of a name, or more than one space in the middle, should not be allowed because the difference between the real name and the clone is invisible. (until you check the profile)
Also I don't know if they were using different emails for each account, or if you allow multiple accounts per email.

This wouldn't completely prevent all trolling, of course, but could at least make it less easy to make deliberate impostor accounts.

Also I found a couple of thread title tricks you might want to block. I will email you directly if that is okay.

reply

[–] Skyagent (15) 8 years ago

Actually, on this site, one can use one email to have multiple accounts. I know myself because I had done it today when klownz and I were trying to figure out if we could use our old IMDb account names on here. There should only be one email associated with an account name.

reply

[–] Popcorn Kernel (2368) 8 years ago

I agree. One account per email, it does not completely stop the sock puppets because there are disposable email generators that will forward to your main email. But it would make it slightly more difficult and time consuming, so it would slow them down a bit. There's no reason to make it so EASY to have 50 socks.

reply

[–] jmcd2007 (424) 8 years ago

I was successfully able to carry over my IMDb username here, so you should be able to do so as well...provided that somebody else didn't take it. I wouldn't think that Jim set up this website to accept duplicate usernames. That would get too confusing! LOL!

reply

[–] arvin g borkar (2854) 8 years ago

You can carry over your username, however, you can use your initial account on here. Whatever username you had on IMDb and your posts cannot be edited nor will you be able to be notified if someone responds to it.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] neverstandinalone (641) 8 years ago

" Sometimes someones troll, might be another ones debating partner." I think users whom contribute, as opposed to not contributing, know the difference, landofree. Whether in commenting, discussion, or debating, it's all the same for trolls. I was about to say 'true' trolls, but a troll is a troll. We can 'handle' the trolls.

It just doesn't look inviting to see so much on a site, nor does it make one feel welcomed to comment, discuss, OR debate, and it clutters the posts and the threads. Trolls are rather tiring. Checking user names, etc. before doing so limits many, and at the least, the REAL user having to explain they're not the one making the remarks is wasted time. I've seen several already who have felt compelled to set the record straight'. WHY should what is considered a pleasant experience be disheartening because of childishness?

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] neverstandinalone (641) 8 years ago

I agree with you, landofree. Please don't turn what I said around. There's a great difference in being a child and trolling comments. I made a childish comment on another thread, and I'm sure the others knew I was being childish.

You went way overboard in your explanations to me as if I were a child, and it was uneccessary.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] neverstandinalone (641) 8 years ago

" and that back and forth is my exact point; there needs to be parameters for what a troll is and isn't." That doesn't constitute 'troll'.

""because of childishness?" You do realize that young people comment on imdb and here too, don't you? Being a "child" is a fact, not necessarily a troll. And there are plenty of people with mental challenges that contribute to their comments appearing childish, or harsh/direct, but who have certain medical ailments that contribute to that. This doesn't mean they are a troll. So, the only way to start differentiating these kinds of comments would be to define what is considered trolling and why, as well as the punishment. Someone shouldn't be banished from commenting on a topic they love because they have mental impairments and don't understand why they were cut off. That's fair, no? Movies/tv/media is not just for certain people, it's for all/anyone, right?"

This was uneccessary.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Skyagent (15) 8 years ago

If they have a mental ailment and that causes them to troll, they should be banished. If that is the excuse used, then they need to overcome it. In the real world, they should be accommodated. When I am trying to write to people online and they border on being stalkerish, it is a whole different story.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 8 years ago

Being banned from a site is not on par with being fired from a job, or something. It's all sounding so dramatic! Especially as we get into << I'm sure [Jim's] legal team would advise as such. He wouldn't want to be sued for discrimination. >>
.

reply

[–] LLOwens (52) 8 years ago

One of the things that irked me most about trolls that used to frequent IMDb wasn't the spiteful parthian shots they left on various threads created by other members, but when they flooded various boards with numerous original post threads, sometimes taking up an entire page. So before banning those who make it a habit of posting trollish comments, first take away their OP posting privileges. I hope Jim keeps this board as free as possible--yet must temper this with the axiom that with freedom comes responsibility. Those who fail to comply by forum rules, the first step should involve having their OP posting privileges taken away as a warning. If such ones start flooding OP threads created by other members with trollish comments, the next step would be to limit the amount of comments they are allowed to post per day. If they still stubbornly refuse to comply with forum rules, they should then be banned from posting any comments. Again, with freedom comes responsibility.

reply

[–] StyxNyx (862) 8 years ago

I love that idea LL, sounds like the best one yet.

reply

[–] 9 (1235) 8 years ago

-

reply

[–] 9 (1235) 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

Mental illnesses are a different story. They should be allowed to enjoy themselves, but be gently reminded about what's civil and what's trollish behavior. Personally, I can't think of a time when mental illnesses would make someone troll...

Also, cool your jets, both of you. Arguing extensively about trolls seems counterproductive.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

I suppose that could be a good point, it just seems a bit odd. Also, part of the reason why I mentioned later in this thread that a separate mod forum would be useful to discuss such things.

I agree that people with mental issues shouldn't be punished just because they're different. However, it could be a bit difficult to tell if they actually do have a mental illness or not... Perhaps a warning system for the questionable posts?

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

That's a different story. If their posts clearly aren't abusive or spam, then that's fine.

reply

[–] desepticon (166) 8 years ago

Come on! Everyone knows what trolling is. Trolling is when you make a post specifically to get a negative reaction. There probably should be some rules posted in a prominent place though, just so everyone is clear.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] desepticon (166) 8 years ago

It's like pornography, you know it when you see it.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] desepticon (166) 8 years ago

Actually, that's not exactly true. There are no such guidelines. In fact, my comment was paraphrasing a Supreme Court ruling on the nature of pornography.

I like the idea of block/ignore, but I think we should have mods too. Belt and suspenders. We had ignore on iMDB and that did nothing to stop the onslaught of trolls that site became. Banish them to the void I say.

reply

[–] Catbookss (13664) 8 years ago

"We had ignore on iMDB and that did nothing to stop the onslaught of trolls that site became. Banish them to the void I say."

Exactly. If MC emulates IMDb's so-called solution to trolling, it'll end up as bad here as it got over there. No thanks.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Catbookss (13664) 8 years ago

Desepticon didn't say all trolls could be stopped. S/he said block/ignore wasn't enough. It obviously wasn't enough for IMDB, and it won't be enough here either.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Catbookss (13664) 8 years ago

Of course there are new trolls. Many of them are old trolls with new socks.

Ignoring obviously isn't enough. IMDB could have taken stronger and better action than they did, if they'd wanted to, and should have done so. Trolls overran many boards on IMDB, because IMDB didn't care about the boards there, as Col made clear.

It's not merely a matter of what's illegal; it's a matter of what kind of community you want -- here or anywhere else.

I have no problem abiding by any rules Jim will set in place, especially seeing as he began by saying they would be ruled by "common sense." I don't see why you're having such a problem with this, as to post *so many* times in this thread. (BTW, you did not start this thread and you're not the OP; Jim started it, and it's his OP.)

reply

[–] LLOwens (52) 8 years ago

Would definitely agree that the ignore button did nothing to prevent IMDb's boards from being overrun with trolls. So I believe the key is to take away the posting privileges of those who refuse to comply with forum rules. First step: Take away they privilege to post OPs. Second step: Limit the amount of comments scofflaws post per day. Third step: Ban them from posting any comments. I'm in favor of having this board be as free as possible--yet with freedom comes responsibility.

From personal experiences, as an 8 year member of IMDb, the irony in all of this is I've maintained the theory that the most persistent "trolls" on IMDb may have been board moderators. I've speculated that the ones that would remind me over and over and over again, that this is not a fan site, speaking disparagingly of the actor with whom I admired while at the same time putting a Hollywood "It girl"/American sweetheart type, on a pedestal, over and over and over again--yet for some odd reason such a "troll" would never ever post a single comment on said "It girl's/American sweetheart's" message board. I often wondered, why does this "troll" even care less, or should I say, care so much as to post several lengthy posts day-after-day, week-after-week, year-after-year, reminding me of how terrible my choice in actors was. And here's the clincher: This "troll" would follow me, or should I say stalk me, not just on the board of my fave actor, but on all her various movie boards as well--which caused me to wonder why would any "troll" have such a vested interest in putting down an actor and anyone who admired such an actor. To me it made no sense, unless they had some sort of agenda to promote certain actors/directors/films while doing their utmost to keep down the actors/directors/films they perceived as threats for whatever reason.

I've noticed some troll types popping up here and there while perusing various boards on this forum--yet nothing like the overzealous "trolls" I've come across on IMDb.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Catbookss (13664) 8 years ago

I don't know what you mean by your "original answer thread," however I see you've now edited out of your posts where several times where you referred to yourself as your OP.

This is only the 3rd time I've responded to you in this thread, and the 10th in this thread in general. You've responded 22 times, thus far.

If you want this site to be open to any and every kind of posts, that's fine, and you have your right to your opinion. as does anyone else who feels the same.

The result will be the same as what happened on IMDB. Others here don't want to see that, and I count myself amongst them.

Ultimately it's Jim's call. Not yours, and not mine.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Catbookss (13664) 8 years ago

Again, this is not your thread, it's Jim's. You are not the OP of anything in this thread, despite your wanting to declare yourself as such and then later editing that out.

I trust in Jim's decisions. I won't be responding to your other posts.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 8 years ago

<< It's like pornography, you know it when you see it. >>

I was thinking of this decision, too, on this topic : )

Was it re: LOLITA?
.

reply

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Popcorn Kernel (2368) 8 years ago

" You do realize that young people comment on imdb and here too, don't you? Being a "child" is a fact, not necessarily a troll."
-----------------------

This reminded of the fact that this site does not even have a terms of use.
It's something I strongly recommend and include an age limit.
Most standard is not allowing children under the age of 13, because the COPPA laws are so restrictive. This is for the board owner's own protection. No kids under 13, at all, with or without parental permission.

Between the ages of 13-18, they should have parental permission. Of course you cannot enforce that but you need it in your TOU anyway. It's CYA boilerplate but you may need to fall back on it one day.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Popcorn Kernel (2368) 8 years ago

Oh of course, any flag system will have abusers.

reply

[–] wheelin176 (2050) 8 years ago

Too bad common sense is not enough. I guess I don't understand users/trolls coming to a site just to act ugly.

reply

[–] desepticon (166) 8 years ago

I wish there really was a way to age restrict this site. It would solve so many of the issues IMDB had.

reply

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

Honestly, barely anyone reads the Terms of Use... I tried once before I knew about them, when I was like 8 and trying to sign up for Webkinz or something. I got so confused that I cried and gave up, then tried again like a few years later. That said, I do try to at least skim the Terms of Use.

However, a button to check that you're over 13 or something would probably be useful.

A "Rules and Regulations" type post would also be useful, just to clarify what is allowed and what isn't. For example, what levels of swearing are tolerated?

reply

[–] Popcorn Kernel (2368) 8 years ago

They don't need to read it, but by registering they are agreeing to it. Most people never read them but they are still agreeing to them by the mere act of registering. That agreement is then legal protection for the site owner.
It's mostly disclaimers- things the site owner is NOT responsible for. There is also usually a clause that says the owner can terminate any account for any reason. (right to refuse service)
The rules are general (things you definitely cannot do) but it doesn't mean those are the ONLY things you can't do. the right to refuse service covers the outlier cases that you couldn't predict, but you know it can't be allowed once you see it.

reply

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.

reply

[–] Kawada_Kira (7282) 8 years ago

"Between the ages of 13-18, they should have parental permission."

Come on. It's a movie discussion site. I think that's a little excessive.

reply

[–] Popcorn Kernel (2368) 8 years ago

No, it's standard on every social media site. They don't check IDs or ask for proof of age when you register, they don't ask for a signed permission slip, but having that CYA boilerplate in the TOU will protect them from lawsuits by parents.
Any site where you allow people to post or to communicate with other users needs this protection.
I know that nobody ever reads the TOU when they agree to it, but the stuff in there is there for a reason. it's not there to protect the members, it's there to protect the site owners.

reply

[–] arvin g borkar (2854) 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] soggybottom (127) 8 years ago

I'm with you Landofree.

I've been called a "troll" before for simply stating my interpretation of a movie that another poster didn't care for and couldn't handle reading.

I've also seen boards where someone didn't like a movie (and dared to post the reasons why) only to get branded by all of the board's regulars as an "obvious troll".

And I'm not a big fan of moderators simply for the fact they get too much power. It's too easy to delete posts (and threads) without knowing the whole story.

I think if Jim adds the "Block" feature (which is like IMDb's "Ignore" except it goes both ways) combined with the "Report" feature (which is already in place), I think that's all we need.

I'm sure that the above posters have the best intentions of being great moderators, but my experience tells me that it won't last. We're all human and prone to biases and errors in judgement.

reply

[–] Skyagent (15) 8 years ago

You do have a point. Actually an ignore button and report would be good enough. Really, the ignore button would be the best bet, so no one ends up being banned and the troll can maybe improve his/herself. If you knew that everyone in the vicinity ignored you and only new users had you unignored, I am sure it would probably make that troll stop.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 8 years ago

<< Sometimes people need to work out things for themselves, and if they get a lot of backlash for what they are saying, then maybe they'll learn something. >>

Tho I don't think people come here to do charity work, ie, teach people how to stop making antagonistic posts.
.

reply

[–] Catbookss (13664) 8 years ago

Agree. It's not difficult for people to behave in a normal, overall respectful way to others on their own. Cheeky humor is one thing (I notice you're quite adept at this ;), acting like an asshat is another.

I disagree with virtually everything LandOfTheFree has said in this thread. Having a bad day and having a momentary case of "board snark" is one thing; everyone experiences that at some time or another, whether or not they ever act on it.

Until very recently, this board was fine -- beyond fine, in fact; it was exemplary and friendly, without being saccharine.

reply

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 8 years ago

I think it's weird that there's this mounting HYSTERIA from some about potentially banning people. If a poster is mistakenly or unfairly banned, they'd just email the site, have their posting history reviewed and get reinstated....it's not like Child Protective Services was sent to their house and took their kids away.

So they were banned from a free chat board....big deal.

Grow the f€#k up and put on your Big Girl panties, people!
.

reply

[–] kaleidoscope0_0 (483) 8 years ago

Nicely said. I have a tendency to play devil's advocate because I honestly want to understand all sides, but that doesn't bode well with a lot of people. My sense of humor can be misinterpreted sometimes too.

reply

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [deleted] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kaleidoscope0_0 (483) 8 years ago

Rapport is an interesting facet as well. Some friends and I like to pick on each other. It's all out of love though. Some of my humor is self-deprecating. People assume I dislike myself, but it's a balancing act towards me not taking myself so damn seriously all the time.

reply

[–] LeiaOfLothlorien (1980) 8 years ago

That's actually a very good point. I know lots of people who swear at each other, tease and taunt each other, but only because they know each other enough that the other won't get hurt. It's harder to tell on a forum, but a good thing to watch out for.

reply

[–] Nipsey_russell (43) 8 years ago

I'm definitely interested and willing in becoming a moderator! As you know I've posted threads to other posters about trolls and tricks they use

reply

[–] klownz (478) 8 years ago

I am not interested in becoming a mod because it is a pain in the ass... been there got the T-Shirt on other sites LOL!

If you could look at this thread though: https://www.moviechat.org/movies/general/posts/58bf2a05c022c900119a23f4

I am possibly interested in helping your sites promotion & social media... I will definitely help you out no problems but just can't make up my mind if I want to take on a new social media project solo. It is very tempting to see what I can do with a general film site though as apposed to things i have done in the past on horror sites.

reply

[–] arvin g borkar (2854) 8 years ago

They might as well have given a virtual t-shirt. Not like people would hide when they cannot see the MOD imprinted on the t-shirt. lol

reply

[–] klownz (478) 8 years ago

I honestly have no idea what you are saying. Do you mean you would not like mods? If so why? I have no problem with mods but I never troll so it doesn't affect me either way.

Everyone gets reported over nothing but even a full blown retard mod who hates everything I post I doubt would delete my posts so I am fine with mods...

reply

[–] Skyagent (15) 8 years ago

No, I was just poking fun at the reward they gave you. I mean they give you a t-shirt when you are helping moderate and I was thinking to myself "So what could a t-shirt possibly be useful for?" So then I thought, "well instead of giving you a t-shirt, they should give a more intimidating look to the account names to really scare away the trolls."

You think of mods like cops. But behind a computer and giving you a shirt for all your work, it is not really doing much. It's like a cop without a gun and only a bullet proof vest.

reply