Code of Conduct Necessary?

[Jamila]

I've never posted in this forum before because I generally try to keep a low profile at Interference and generally find things running well, but the recent activities in FYM regarding the Katrina aftermath and other issues has convinced me to bring this issue up for discussion here, especially for consideration by the mods.

Recently, U2.com flared up in several of their forums with some vicious and virulent personal attacks.

In response to this issue, Zootopia now has EVERY member read and resign a basic code of conduct on expected behavior and consequences for not adhering to that behavior before they log in to the Zoo.

To me, that is a VERY EFFEECTIVE mechanism to remind posters upon each log in that their behavior online IS BEING WATCHED and WILL BE DEALT WITH if they fail to live up to that code of conduct.

I know that Interference has a similar terms of usage when we all sign up for Interference, but I'm wondering if Interference wouldn't benefit by the same tactic as U2.com.

I think the need to resign a code of conduct upon each log in to Interference would make everyone a bit more conscious and conscientious about what they are posting here.

I would really like some considered discussion on this.

Thanks.



Welcome to Zootopia – please note our house rules!
People from all over the world take part in our boards, discussing everything about U2 at all hours of the day or night.

The boards are real-time so we can’t review messages or confirm their validity. Our team of Moderators are across the site every day but we are not responsible for the messages - posts express the views of their authors. We try to remove objectionable messages quickly and people who persistently abuse the system are banned. (If you have a question or complaint first contact one of our Moderators. If you feel that a post is objectionable use the ‘Report As Abuse’ function.)

We ask all users to remember the following guidelines which will help keep the vibe on Zootopia fun and friendly.

No posts which are libellous, defamatory, slanderous, abusive or harassing.
No posts which are pornographic or sexually explicit, messages or images.
No posts which denigrate any ethnic, racial, gender or religious group.
No posts which harass, threaten, defame or abuse other users or invade their privacy.
No harassment, intimidation or bullying of other users.
No promoting activity which is illegal or generally offensive.
No impersonating other U2.Com members, nor attempts to get a password, account information, or other private information from a member. (Only contact a user at their private email address if they have given you permission.)
No repetitive posts, no advertising or trying to solicit money.
No posting content that infringes the rights of a third party (copyrights, trademarks, patents, trade secrets, rights of privacy, etc)
Remember that your content is your responsibility and that content does not necessarily reflect the views of those who host the site. When you take part on the boards you agree that we shall not be liable for any of the content posted here.
Our Moderators monitor interactions between users and we reserve the right to take action to delete material which is obscene, lewd, excessively violent, harassing or otherwise objectionable. We reserve the right to reveal your identity in the event of a complaint or legal action arising from any message posted by you.
When you take part in Zootopia you agree to respect the rights of others and exercise good judgment.

Thanks for reading, enjoy the boards.

U2.Com / Zootopia Team


I accept the terms of this agreement

 

[U2Man]

"no trying to solicit money"




(sorry Jamila, couldn't help it)

 

[indra]

I think it would be a pain in the ass.

Do you really think anyone really reads through all that anyway? I didn't really read through it even now -- just scanned it. I certainly wouldn't each time I signed in...it would just be that much more blah blah blah going around.

I think the mods do a great job of reminding people of the rules and expectations here. I also don't see the people who need it the most actually believing it applies to them, so I can't see it doing much good.

Now a pic of Sicy in full banning mode.... that might have some effect!

 

[melon]

I don't want a fascist code of conduct. I think this forum operates well, as-is. It's not perfect, but I think it leads to reading each individual circumstance for what it is.

And if there are instances where there are perceived problems, we can always report the post or contact the moderators.

Melon

 

[Jamila]

Yea, I'm not suggesting that the mods don't do a great job.

I just think some of us (present company excepted) need to be reminded before we step into Interference that we ARE being held to a code of conduct and that we WILL face disciplinary measures if we abuse it.

Unfortunately, it's probably the people who would need the constant reminder that would be the same people who would forget it the moment they enter a thread.

At least this reminder would help the mods"justify" their actions when they have to take action against abusive posters.

Just an idea. And I thank you all for contributing.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

we have a faq actually which pretty much sounds like what you're describing: http://forum.interference.com/misc.php?action=faq

and we pretty much expect everyone to adhere to it. by registering, you're agreeing that you'll abide by the rules.

 

[Angela Harlem]

the faq is bloody brilliant. the problem lies with getting idiots to read the damn thing. the mods worked really hard on writing that and it is updated frequently.

fym is a different kettle of fish, but which still can run rather well with common decency remembered and adhered to. i still think 3 warnings and then privileges being restricted until they are no more is a good idea.

 

[yertle-the-turtle]

I'd like to think our members are mature enough to behave in a decent way without any reading of any riot act.

Sadly I usually think wrong.

 

[Jamila]

I just see a lot of viciousness in forums other than FYM though.

As I said, this actually would help the mods rather than hinder them.

 

[WildHoneyAlways]

While, in theory, one may think this is a good idea, in practice it would be useless.
A written warning really does no good; it's action (ie banning, restricting access) that will catch people's attention.
I think the mods are fair and ban/restrict when/where appropriate.

 

[Elvis]

We dont need to re-warn/sign people like the folks over at U2.com do. We have a much larger, more experienced, and simply incredible team of admins/moderators which really handle the balance of people quite well. When something/someone really gets out of line on an ongoing basis... they are dealt with whatever means necessary.

Curious to what extent?
To think of a few of the more serious results...

Got fired from their jobs.
Got the local authorities knocking at their door.
Got contacted by their county's District Attorneys office.
Got their Internet account(s) cancelled (and banned from future service).

The Internet is NOT anonymous.

 

[LoveTown]

i think the mods to a fantastic job here. I think being warned and then ultimately banned for repeated bad behavior is action enough. The mods are smart and they listen really well when people take complaints to them. I dont see a need to make up some agreement to say what is already common knowledge here.

 

[Palace_Hero]

Int. is PC enough without tightening the screws.