Updated TOS Rumors

Kahlyla

ohannabelle said:

I have nothing to contribute that hasn't already been covered except for this:

I have seen the picture of the cannoli and ice cream that received a warning.

Yes, it was a phallic looking cannolo. 

This is not the picture. I'm not posting a picture that received a warning. But it is really close. Like, fraternal twins close.

If this picture is offensive enough to receive an obscenity warning, then

A: Michelle Duggar is currently moderating the boards.

B: the person who issued the warning is far too sensitive to be on the internet.

C: it was a deliberate misuse of a poorly defined policy, used to target a specific member. 

I think we can eliminate option A. 

(Also, cannoli is the food of Gods. There is really no need for ice cream. That's overkill. )

Yes, this. This and the Louis CK video - I do not get.

Also, I FLOVE your proper use of the Italian singular. /nerdgasm

KatieinBkln

hellosweetie1015 said:

Well, I got my warning! Almost a full week later, and only because I (the one against whom the warning was warranted, and eventually issued) brought it to their attention. So yay? This discussion is having some kind of effect - although it doesn't really clear up my questions; I suspect if the disparity hadn't been brought up, I would still be warning-free. Which is a problem, given that my post was - clearly - just as warning-worthy as chibiyui's, and yet because it wasn't reported / went unnoticed, it didn't get warned.

@KnotRiley and @KnotHolly 

I don't like that you're seemingly fine letting the mods catch all the flak here. The mods are members who volunteer their time. You guys, on the other hand, are paid employees of XO Group, and I'm assuming you're paid to make these forums usable and enjoyable. Right now, between the CONSTANT technical issues, the moderation fiasco that led to this thread (on the board YOU took over, I'll point out), and your reactions here to our questions with doublespeak and politicking, I'd say you're pretty well failing at it.

These are the questions I have. I don't think I'll get answers, but I want them out there anyway. Perhaps they will be taken into advisement when you consider rewriting the TOS.

- What, exactly, are the mods allowed to do outside of their home boards? Are they allowed to do anything outside of their home boards? If WandaJune comes into Etiquette and sees a violation that - for whatever reason - hasn't been reported by other users, what is she allowed to do? Ignore it and hope Liatris spots it? Notify Liatris of an issue? Issue a warning that can be appealed to Liatris? Issue a warning that can be appealed to y'all?

- What, exactly, is the warning appeal process? If I were considering appealing my shiny new warning, how long do I have (five minutes, one day, three days, one week) before my appeal period runs out? To start the appeal process, do I PM the mod that sent the warning? Do I have the opportunity to defend myself? Who "judges" my appeal? The mod/admin who issued the appeal? A panel of randomly-selected mods? The two admins? Which admin in the last scenario would have overrule power, in the event that Riley and Holly disagree?

- Who had input into the current TOS/TOU/EULA/whatever? Did we, as members and daily users, have input? Was it just TK's employees? Did the mods have input? Was it put to a discussion here? I seem to remember a TOS poll that was winding down when I started posting, but that was over a year ago.

- Who will have input into the rewritten TOS/TOU/EULA/whatever? Will we, as members and daily users? Will it be just TK's employees? Will the mods have input? Will it be put to a discussion here? Will it be another poll?

- What factors did you consider when you made the decision to give mods a separate board? Did you consider the need for privacy in warnings? Did you consider the possible repercussions that have arrived in an "us versus them" mindset, coming both from the moderators and the members? Did you consider possibly allowing the moderation boards to be read by members who are not mods?

- Why, when it's obvious someone has received a warning (I'm thinking along the lines of "Removed for TOS violation" banners being modded in), is it against TOS to post those warnings? And if posting a picture of the warning is against TOS, is it ALSO against TOS for me to say "Oh, I got warned by "NancyModerator" for posting a bunch of middle finger gifs in the TOS PSA thread."? Where is that line drawn? Why is that line there? It seems to me wholly arbitrary.

- How are the mods trained to use the various functions they are privileged enough to use? Moderation features have been misused in the past, whether accidentally or on purpose. What is TK admin staff doing to improve the mods' understanding of their powers and when it is / is not appropriate to use certain of those powers (jailing comes to mind)?

Like I said, I expect to get zero answers, or if I do, it'll be politicking and useless doublespeak. Or the mods will step in and try, because the admins are off doing whatever they've been wasting their time with as the forum languished with consistently fucked quote boxes, log-in code, and whatthefuckever else is screwing up today.

I mean, I don't see why they should, or what loyalty they have to Riley and Holly (pretty sure they can't give y'all a virtual reach around, so that theory is out). 

I'm really trying to figure out why so many mods appear to be TEAM TK! regardless of whether someone has made a salient point. This knee-jerk reaction on the side of Authority is really troubling to me. We know you ladies. I know I personally have had a ton of lovely interactions with many of you. What do you have to gain from defending defenseless policies (warning for a Louis CK video, refusing to allow people to show the fact that they have been warned) or making up convoluted defenses for other ones? (They work 9-5, back off! Also they probably sometimes pop in after hours, so back off!). Why take it so personally when people bring up TOS issues? You didn't write the TOS. You do your best. Sometimes you fuck up and troll people with polar bears (Jesus Christ, what a sentence to write. This is absurd). Shit happens. 

But you aren't being accused of fucking up the world, here. The admins SHOULD be held to a higher standard, what with this being their actual job, and all. And I don't want to hear about the learning curve because they "just started" moderating CC. Nobody forced them to do that, and they did a piss poor job of it almost immediately. Why defend this? Why say things like you "know" that X Y or Z thing didn't happen/happened differently, when all you have to go on is the admins' word?

I'm pretty disappointed. Not because I disagree with the stance most mods are taking, but because it seems they've made an interesting and saddening decision to place themselves deliberately in opposition with the community members they know (and have interacted with for years, in some instances) in order to stand up for an authority that has been acknowledged to be suspect and deliberately vague many times prior to now.

FiancB

TL;DR

KnotRiley posts another thread that is basically the same as many other threads. Invites questions. 

People ask questions, many of which have been asked before. 

Other people step in to say that the people asking questions are being ridiculous and stupid and should just let it go or go away. 

Accusations fly everywhere. Admins go poof. 

The end. Watch for a rerun next month. 

KnotRiley

Hi all,

We apologize for not responding to each of your comments individually. We've been gathering together all of your comments, complaints and questions, trying to determine the best way to make sure each of you get the answers you're requesting. 

What we've decided to do is starting Monday there will be a few threads with specific topics on this board, they will be in regards to the TOS/Guidelines Clarifications, Moderator Clarifications and The Knot's Role in Community. We may add or combine one or two of those, but we believe after reading through everything those are the main points of discussion. We will take everything that has been posted here so far, and answer your questions as well as try to provide examples in order to create as much clarity as possible.

I'm sure many of you still have many more questions, so please feel free to leave them in this thread so over the next few days we're able to write up as much explanation, clarifications and examples as we can.

Thank you again for your patience. 

WinstonsGirl

Jells2dot0 said:

Being on Pacific Time or AZ time sucks on occasion. I know a lot of my TV shows are spoiled because of it! There isn't much that can be done but move!

Boxes

Personally, I love being MST.  We get our shows here at 9pm, but I can watch them on time shift starting at 6, so I can get to bed earlier.  I'll stop thread jacking now.  

Jells2dot0

WinstonsGirl said:

Jells2dot0 said:

Being on Pacific Time or AZ time sucks on occasion. I know a lot of my TV shows are spoiled because of it! There isn't much that can be done but move!

Boxes

Personally, I love being MST.  We get our shows here at 9pm, but I can watch them on time shift starting at 6, so I can get to bed earlier.  I'll stop thread jacking now.  

I generally love AZ time. There are times when it pisses me off, though. Like I said, TV spoilers. And dealing with certain businesses based on the EC. I'm going to be sad to leave it, but at least i'll be in CT, which isn't too bad

PrettyGirlLost

Jells2dot0 said:

Being on Pacific Time or AZ time sucks on occasion. I know a lot of my TV shows are spoiled because of it! There isn't much that can be done but move!

Um. . . DVR?

I often have to call scientific companies for tech support that have West Coast HQs at 9am or earlier east Coast time.  They employ staff to cover typical business hours for ALL time zones.  So even if no one in the state of Cali is awake at 9am EST, someone else is and can answer my question.

No moving necessary, just common sense in business practices.

I know a wedding website isn't as important as sites supporting cancer research, but XO could have staff around to handle issues after 5pm EST if they wanted to.

Jells2dot0

How would DVR solve spoilers???

Seriously- I was not suggesting that people actually move. It was sarcastic. Believe it or not, I have a sense of humor

larrygaga

KnotRiley said:

We take issues like racism and homophobia extremely seriously and work hard to address each instance of this on the boards. In cases where these comments are directed at other users (or “racially, ethnically or otherwise, objectionable language” is used - from our TOS) we absolutely address them. As for the other threads mentioned, we ask that you always flag those comments when you see them so that we can address them. 

BOXBOXBOXBOX

PrettyGirlLost

Jells2dot0 said:

How would DVR solve spoilers??? Seriously- I was not suggesting that people actually move. It was sarcastic. Believe it or not, I have a sense of humor

Nothing saves you from spoilers except staying off of the internet and telling your friends to keep their mouths shut, sadly.

thespeshulestsnowflake

PrettyGirlLost said:

Jells2dot0 said:

How would DVR solve spoilers??? Seriously- I was not suggesting that people actually move. It was sarcastic. Believe it or not, I have a sense of humor

Nothing saves you from spoilers except staying off of the internet and telling your friends to keep their mouths shut, sadly.

Staying off of Twitter too, I get more spoilers from there than the internet the day/night of the show.

KnotRiley

Hi all,

To make sure all of your questions are getting answered in an organized fashion we are closing this thread. Please take a look at this thread http://forums.theknot.com/discussion/1058950/tos-clarifications#latest for answers to any questions from this thread.

Thanks!