I don't use it but I always carry it with me just in case.

Great work, I can't articulate my position so I'll use depictions of stick figures.

Stick figures are always impressive and persuasive, if you want to make an impact use stick figures.

That's it,in a nutshell.I'll nominate you as underdog team leader.

Hey, that's so true!

(Too bad you were ironic, when what you said actually made sense)

I used exactly the one I meant to use, as it was the most applicable to what I was saying.

Great, now we can have a flamewar about xkcd.

Actually... that does sound like a huge improvement.

https://xkcd.com/386/

I'd call that "community-moderation", much like the term used in GOG's support documents "moderation-by-community".

I would think the term "self-moderation" would be along the lines of "self-discipline", or perhaps that of having a list of personal ratings rather than using the community ratings. Like was pointed out by another member in a later post, everyone already keeps track in their head how they feel about other people without need for a rating from the community. And like I pointed out in a previous post, the posts speak for themselves more accurately than any rating can. So, I believe moderation is already done individually by the members as they are reading each post, just like in any other activity in life, but most likely without using any sort of five-star rating system.

It seems to me for a rating system to have any relevancy to me then the ratings would have to be made by either me or someone I know is reputable on the matter. A forum is basically a bunch of strangers, so no one there is reputable. Obviously it would take more storage to record each individuals evaluation of all other members for only that individual's perusal. However, an individual is unlikely to evaluate all members, but instead only the select few members that gradually become known to that individual from reading through a select few posts. I'm not saying that should be done, I'm just saying my own ratings have more value to me than ratings from complete strangers.

I think enabling members to do self-moderation (as I'm using the term) would mean an individual could selectively craft their own personal view of the forum, hiding what is not interesting or does not match their interest, and focusing on supporting their own personal research. That might mean having all posts of another member hidden (or minimized) automatically, with the option to show a hidden post/thread/whatever when desired. That might also mean having a list of recent posts available for each member on that person's friend/chat list.

In essence, that is not much different than the list of categories for the games on the site: everything is hidden behind those category names until revealed by selecting a category. Of course, someone else came up with those category names and as such those name are not personalized for each member, therefore games might not be found in the category expected by an individual who might use the name differently. I mention this partly because there was a lot concern expressed about enabling individuals to hide all posts of specific members when someone shared a web browser extension named "JerkMuter" (sp?) for doing that. Personalization is simply about managing the noise (which is everything in the world), and having automation for that is perfectly fine when there is a way to reveal what is automatically hidden when a individual is ready to view more noise (to make sense of it).

I think moderating along the lines of ensuring the "right-thing" is said or that the phrases are phrased properly is already impossible enough for an individual to do for that individual's own expression, let alone someone else making those decisions for the individual about whether others have succeeded with that. So I say accept that each individual is already doing that work of moderating what is acceptable for that individual, rather than reassigning someone (group, team, or community) for doing that for an individual or for many. I mean, such a service would be inadequate compared to what can be done personally. Instead, it makes more sense to me to provide the means for hide/show for various parts of the forum (post, threads, posts by each member, etc.), and in particular for automating that simply by the individual's request rather than any categories or names the individual did not make personally.

So you are claiming to be such an outstanding citizen, supporting Vain and his Misogyny, Transphobic, Racist neo-Nazi Stormfront insults as you call out a whole bunch of forum members in this post, call me out in a thread you joined just to insult me and continue to insult me here. You've called many people names in threads from Marvel fanboy to worse, as well as butted into many other discussions to do the same, but somehow think you are "entitled" to call anyone out you wish. Explain to me how you aren't selectively going after your personal enemies again?

You have just confirmed my point how you are one of the serious problems on the forum. When you support certain name-calling and your own while attacking others its clearly hypocritical.

@fables Like I said. Look at Vain. Look at Breja. See what your selectivity has wrought and how this group of people lauding your decision are looking to use you to continue their own personal purging of these forums. They clearly think they are excluded from any discipline in what are clearly harassing actions designed to make certain others on this forum uncomfortable...

Just as when Vain tried to false flag me by responding to a post I had edited for minor spelling errors. He changed the words in my post to say I called him a Jew and tried to report me for it. Many people saw him do this....

I have not used foul language since the new moderation regime, but Vain and Breja don't seem to have changed at all.....

I feel like Skeletonbow and Bookwyrm are the only people ACTUALLY discussing the real issues at hand here. Almost everybody else is going the way of pretty much every other thread that tried to ask for suggestions on moderation, such as mine and Goodaltgamer's (before he left), right down to the upvote/downvote wars where one "faction" feels one way and upvotes everybody who shows this position, then a new "faction" swings in and votes the exact opposite. I mean, I get that you guys think that X individuals should be removed from the forum, but I'm not sure how much we're helping here with all this ad hominem noise.

Fables, I'm going to give you 3 pieces of advice that I believe nearly everybody here will agree on:
1. Eliminate rep. I don't care what you have to do to get rid of it, just rid us of it forever, sooner rather than later. It's ruined, we all know it's ruined, and we don't need a stupid number to judge for us who is and isn't right. We can figure that out for ourselves. It doesn't matter if there's nothing stored up to replace it. You can figure that out much farther down the line. For now, just rid us of this broken system.
2. Start banning as quickly as possible. The sooner, the better. I guarantee you that even saying "I have the ability to ban" is going to get you scores and scores of reports from trolls, alts, political zealots, and people with grudges. Ignore all of this and use the forum rules as your criteria. I'm sure there's people which a majority of us want banned, and we can debate on that all week if we want. That's gonna take forever for you to do properly while ensuring you're not being unfair. Just go through and rid this place of the confirmed offenders, then move on from there, since you'll at least begin to cut down on some of the nonsense. Prove to us that this isn't another empty promise employed by a paper tiger.
3. Start working on some means of fixing the account creation unless you feel like getting your chatbox filled with literal spam and ending up on the same pile of bodies in the dumpster behind your office as Konrad.

The natives seem restless of late. I wonder why. lol

In that case let me once more direct people to this script. Nothing to do with blues, and not a proper way to remove rep, but should cover most of the forum users' needs.

That's what you did to me, unprovoked, right here, and you were of course the starting point. This is your copyright strike on Breja for your own practices. No one even mentioned you. Before yesterday, I hadn't even mentioned you since last year, and back then only after the same personal assault you eagerly rendered in this thread.

This story gets more convoluted every time you tell it. Let's just write up something to copy paste the same way I'll gladly repost the rwarehall gamergate abuse collection every time you think you have to personally attack me over bullshit.

If I remember correctly, and we are talking early 2015 here, I demonstrated the utter exchangeability of your favorite dehumanizing enemy concept by substituting “SJW” with “Jew” in a quote of (just) one of your literally hundreds of vein popping hate fits in the gamergate thread. Of which I must have "reported" as in "clicked on the completely useless report button in the upper right because it was a festival of unhinged abuse" about a hundred as well. Always for the actual content of your posts, and just for that. There was no "false flag" operation, no shred of the dishonesty that you scream into other people's faces a hundred times a day.

It would have been stupid to try anyway as every forum software known to me lets moderators check out older versions of a post. I.e. good news, you were always safe from what no one ever attempted.

There was never any direct contact to GOG officials on the matter, though in retrospect, I should have gone that route long ago.

And that's all there is and ever was to your little war of the worlds story. When they make a movie out of it, tell them you do not want to be played by Woody Harrelson.

What now, you mean, five full days? Thunder and lightning, you must be bursting.