Quoting Telecine:

Quote:
Quoting Forget_the_Rest:

Quote:
Quoting Telecine:

Quote:

Ken,

I agree with you view on just about everything that you have said in this post. The one area where I think that you could effect some further improvements is in making some of the forum moderation actions public. The reputation system was a reasonable start but only showing positive reputation scores allows bad behaviour to go unpunished publicly.

I would like Invelos to publicy record the status of users in the user profile displayed in the forum. For example, Suspended, Permanently Banned. Making moderator action public will in my view generate greater confidence in the system.

I've thought quite a bit about this & although I used to think like you, I've changed my mind a bit. Compare it to being at work. If you receive a disciplinary for whatever reason, that stays between you and your manager (and other necessary people like Personnel/Human Resources). It certainly isn't made public to the average member of staff & rightly so. You wouldn't want other people to know about it there & I think the same should apply here.

This isn't the workplace and I don't believe that people can have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they are posting in a public forum. The behaviour is on display for all to see, the consequences of that behaviour are not.

A lot of bad behaviour on public forums is ego-driven. Publicly punishing bad behaviour is one way to keep the egos in check.

I agree.  People say things on these forum that they would never say in person.  Public notice of disciplinary action is more than reasonable under these circumstances.

Quoting Telecine:

Quote:


This isn't the workplace and I don't believe that people can have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they are posting in a public forum. The behaviour is on display for all to see, the consequences of that behaviour are not.

A lot of bad behaviour on public forums is ego-driven. Publicly punishing bad behaviour is one way to keep the egos in check.

If the people involved were only free users then I might be inclined to agree. However as paid users they do have more rights & I believe that the right to a private record is one of those rights. I think that a positive rating against users is enough to say who you should be more inclined to believe/trust/etc...

If you don't like how a specific user generally posts, then either simply skip over their posts or ignore them altogether in the options.

Quoting Telecine:

Quote:
Quoting Forget_the_Rest:

Quote:
Quoting Telecine:

Quote:


This isn't the workplace and I don't believe that people can have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they are posting in a public forum. The behaviour is on display for all to see, the consequences of that behaviour are not.

A lot of bad behaviour on public forums is ego-driven. Publicly punishing bad behaviour is one way to keep the egos in check.

If the people involved were only free users then I might be inclined to agree. However as paid users they do have more rights & I believe that the right to a private record is one of those rights. I think that a positive rating against users is enough to say who you should be more inclined to believe/trust/etc...

The are paid users of the database, not the forum. The forum is free and open to unpaid users.

So is the Software, with limitations.

Quoting sugarjoe:

Quote:
Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:

The forum atmosphere has improved significantly in the last several weeks and we intend to be vigilant in keeping the forums a nice place to visit.

*snip*

Thanks for the edit. 

Thanks to edit not necessary any more. 

Quoting Forget_the_Rest:

Quote:
Thanks for the edit. 

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
The votes on this profile (both Yes and No) cannot be categorized as abuses.

Thanks for taking the time to answer, Ken. I know you are busy and have better things to do than to have to come between in these matters and for that I apologize. I'm afraid I have to say that Invelos' stance in this particular matter only solidifies my resolve in not contributing anymore.

A NO vote with this explanation:
"The Japanese language is a "hidden" audio track, the data is misleading and INCORRECT"
Preceded by a PM stating he doesn't own the disc nor a BD player and as such can't verify my submission
is considered a valid NO vote then I have really nothing left to say. Other users voted NO but at least they stayed civil and verified the data with their own disc. Those users, even if we have a different opinion on how the rules need to be interpreted, earn my sincerest respect and I have had good, constructive discussions with them, for which my thanks.

Finally, what I have learned from all of this:
It's OK to vote on profiles you don't own and of which you don't even own the necessary equipment to perform verifications yourself. So from now on, expect me to vote on discs I don't own.

My final submission will be the document on Japanese romanization: an analysis of the issues at hand and some suggestions how they can be solved. I then leave it up to the community and Invelos to do with it as they see fit. I promised some users I would do that and I intend to keep my promise.

For the rest I'll be reading the forums and voting on submissions as well as updating my local database. Thanks all for taking the time to respond.

Quoting Taro:

Quote:
Like some users before me, I'm also done submitting online contributions.

I hope things will change in the future but until then, I'm out.

sorry to see you stop contributing, but I hope you will be able to again in the future.