MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > We must observe an honor code of conduct

We must observe an honor code of conduct


If we are to function as a community, then it is imperative that we agree on what is unacceptable. Jim, I hold deep gratitude for your labor in maintaining the essence of the original forum and intend no disrespect. Simply, I wish to express concerns that I have about problematic policies from our previous setting that some people on here are considering replicating. I urge the staff of this board to not create a feature for ignoring others because that only encourages more bullying and offensive comments. It abets the belief in certain individuals that they are exempt from rules, and lessens the chance of sorting out disagreements. This board should be free of personal attacks including name calling and profanity, things that the former location has allowed, and it would be ideal for the latter to be banned altogether. A suggestion for the bewildering issue of disabled members is to apply the law that employers follow: those with conditions that do not prevent normal interaction with others are welcome, and those with conditions that do are not. On the Internet Movie Database there has been a young man with a very peculiar mental impairment that causes odd fixations, obnoxious outbursts, and repetitious speech, and an older woman with histrionic personality disorder who viciously harasses the majority of people whom she speaks to. Such actions are highly inappropriate and no one should be subject to those here. A discussion board should be a place where everyone can comfortably and civilly share thoughts. Instabilities may not be the faults of patients who bear ones, but those are certainly not ours either, and members should not be forced, at their expenses, to tolerate the side effects of others' anomalies. The worst problems on the first forum have been a lack of control and no discipline. Even the reporting option has never gotten anywhere because our last 'moderators' have always been notorious for neglecting complaints. We need to work together on these matters to ensure that MovieChat does not suffer the same fate that has met our predecessor. I would gladly moderate since I can easily spot abnormal behavior, but am afraid that it is currently not feasible. Complications make it impossible for me to be bound to a routine here, and it would be very unfair to all members if I only worked occasionally. Nevertheless, I have great value for our spectrum of connections to each other and hope to continue it in ways that surpass what we have been given elsewhere.

reply

Anybody who thinks the ignore feature is not enough and feels a need to police other posters is clearly too thin skinned to be posting on this or any other message board. We don't need fascists moderating, either, that's becoming an epidemic on other boards.

reply

There's a whole movement against people trying to push their agendas on others. The internet is about sharing ideas not stopping them.

reply

well said

reply

[deleted]

You must go now.

reply

Least anyone forgets, which apparently it seems to be the case, JIM is the OWNER and ADMINISTRATOR of MovieChat.org. I think he has the intelligence to know protocol concerning EVERYthing one needs to know in running a successful site. So, what in the world is this WE business?!!

NOW please, everyone needs to be patient, polite, stop posting any form of Doubtful Negative Nay-Saying, and let JIM handle everything!!! PLEASE!!!

reply

another person who wants to be a moderator ^^

reply

You do not know me at all, Mr. Smarty Pants.

reply

[deleted]

Oh MY GOD, I did not realize that when I was talking to you on that other thread you started that you were the type of person who calls people cunts.

reply

Yes, it's called being English.

It's these cultural barriers which moderators will have to overcome.

reply

I figured after I said that that you were going to say you were from one of those countries that uses that word. My bad.

reply

Not a problem and I used that word purposefully to elicit exactly this type of reaction from someone, I'm sorry it was you and that you find the term to be vulgar.

Moderation would require understanding cultural nuances and being able to define what is intentionally offensive and when some people would take offence to but not necessarily what all would.

If the terms and conditions of the site held particular things as inappropriate then I think people would adhere. As is it doesn't and so what is appropriate is a difficult thing to define without colonising someone else's nature state of being.

reply

Oh yeah, for sure. That is a much more widespread, common term in Great Britain. In America, it's a much more vulgar, offensive term for a woman. Like, the highest of the high on the list of swear words lol.

reply

I appreciate that it is an offensive term in the US but the US is not the rest of the world.

Hard cheese is what I say. I don't like people talking about US politics but I'd be out of my mind to suppose they would just stop because some guy from Doncaster doesn't want to hear what they've got to say.

reply

[deleted]

You will never get unanimous agreement on what is unacceptable.
You will never find a place where everyone will always be comfortable.
Because the things that make one person comfortable may be anathema to another.
You claim you can instantly spot 'abnormal behavior' (in others, of course) but this brick of authoritarian text, including the 'MUST' in the subject line, is a red flag to me of abnormal behavior itself.
How about we just let jim try it his way before making demands of what others 'must' do?

reply

Ignore/Block feature as simple as that.

porn links and spam can be autoblocked.

reply

Dazed, the option for ignoring members literally ignores the trouble that brings people to use it in the first place. What is being part of an online community worth if we cannot properly speak to each other and have decent conversations? Problems cannot be solved if those are neglected. Popcorn Kernel, I don't expect unanimity for a code verbatim. My statement is a generalization based on common sense. Of course we cannot control every thought and feeling of individuals here, but this forum will meet the same miserable failure that its breeding ground has if we don't follow a set of typical rules. Obviously it has not occurred to you that I use the word 'must' to stress the value of propriety which is out of respect for all members, not just myself. It is an observation that this place is important to all of us, not sheerly for being authoritative. I explain my ability to assure everyone that I know the difference between a person who innocently struggles without disruption and someone who is out of control and unjustly upsets others since I would not shun the former. Neverstandinalone, if you want everyone to be polite, then why do you have objections to my ideas? Civility is my chief motivation. I ask all of you to please remember that Jim has requested our views which means that he is open to advice, and I am far from the first one to offer any. If the rest of you can delve in to the matter without being fiercely harassed, then I should be able to as well. Wilson, I question how thick your skin is if you idiopathically get defensive, try to intimidate others, have vulgar outbursts, and feel the need to display my work instead of yours.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

The thing about free speech, is that you get to say your opinion, and then other people ALSO get to say what they think of your opinion. It might be that people disagree with you.
Many times when people demand the right to say their opinion, they want to do so without any critical analysis or debunking by others.
I'm getting that whiff here.

Learning message board etiquette is a good idea. Reply to the person you are talking to. Every post has a reply button under it.
Another gentle and polite suggestion for the wordy snowflake, is to EDIT. No one likes bricks of text that express an idea that could have been put in 2 or 3 sentences.
When clarifying a point that you didn't express clearly the first time, you do not need to include an insult to the readers such as "Obviously it has not occurred to you ". It makes you look defensive and like you are just arguing for the sake of argument.
The world does not owe anyone comfort. It owes them safety and justice, but not a foam padded world or safe space to never feel challenged or disagreed with.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Of course it is possible, but there are very sensy people who will perceive any disagreement as 'you're attacking meeee!'
Or else they post something that proves unpopular, and they cite 'free speech' but what they are really demanding is the right to speak without anyone else being allowed to disagree.
Free speech has to go both ways. When you put your views out there, other people also get to counter with their views. You (general you, not you specifically) don't get to dictate that only people who agree with you are allowed to respond.

And also, I don't think that simply insulting someone should be against the rules. It's not nice to do, but making that a rule will open the door to too much childish reporting of posts. "He said I was stupid! She said I was ugly!".
I think the rules should be well defined but also quite limited to only the worst type of offenses.
- violating someone's privacy. (doxxing)
- Spam
- solicitation for money (even for legitimate need or charity- because people have no way to check up on that and this isn't the place for it.)
- posting links to a site that has a virus, spyware, or anything that would harm someone's device.
- hate speech (specifically defined)
- Flooding (starting multiple threads for the same subject or multiple threads with offensive subject lines)
-trolling
- impersonating any existing moviechat user or mod
- threatening violence or threatening a privacy violation against another member.
- hacking another member's account
- Anything that severely interferes with the use of the board, breaking a thread with code hacks, etc.
- Advocating any serious crime.
- posting links to hardcore porn or obscene violent content. (simple nudity does not qualify as porn, but please be considerate and use a NSFW tag for nudity)
- sockpuppets (multiple accounts used by the same person)

These are very specific infractions. That's just a rough draft of possible TOU.
Other things like flaming, insulting, arguing, debating, personal disputes, etc, are just part of online life, and part of adult life off the internet too. People will not always get along. I think that an ignore and block feature can take care of those types of things. Mods should not be nannies trying to make little kids play nice all the time.

reply

On the other hand, you don't get to dictate that people can't be sensitive. Some people just are. Being proud to be a dickhead isn't better than being a crybaby.

reply

I don't think you can ever legislate people to not be dickheads or crybabies. Both are irritating, and both of those should just be outside the scope of moderation. Rather than trying to legislate personality types, the rules should be focused on specific ACTIONS.

reply

You certainly can legislate not being a dickhead. That's why you have mods, to stop people from the _actions_ of flaming and insulting, which are not normal behaviors. Arguments happen, and then a neutral person steps in. But I'm pretty sure a lot of the people on both sides of the discussion in the several threads on this topic are the same person, talking to themselves, and hopefully that too will get taken care of.

reply

we dont need mods. just ignore/block

if this place is not like imdb, less people will come here.

reply

I think both are needed.
Triage the issues, what cannot be solved by ignore/block, then a mod can step in.
the first resort should always be ignore the person you don't like, but if they are breaking one of the TOU then a mod can step in. ( assuming there will be a TOU at that stage)

reply

We are seeing the effects of bad moderation on other imdb messageboard offshoots

reply

Yes, bad mods exist, bad cops exist. It doesn't mean we should never have mods and cops.

reply

IMDb moderation was perfect. Maybe jim needs to contact col needham and get his software

reply

Yes- actions which can be done by anyone can be restricted.
but *being* a dickhead, or any other type of person, is beyond the scope of moderation.
that is why you focus on the action and not on the person or their personality.

You bring up a good point of sockpuppets, which I think should be restricted as well. I will add that to my rough draft list (which is just my opinions, not anything I am demanding jim use)

reply

That seems like a good baseline, at least. Can't think of anything specific to add; I think you covered the most important things.

EDIT: Actually, it would be nice to have it stated how much profanity is allowed. Should we star-out swear words like f***? Avoid them altogether? Or just swear away without restraint?

reply

[deleted]

It is interesting, but then again, perhaps we just get used to such words as we grow up. My little brother still gives people who swear disapproving looks, and he's 15 years old! Btw, are you from the U.K.? "Bloody" is less of a swear here in the USA, lol.
Of course, intent does matter and words can hurt even if they aren't necessarily profane.

reply

[deleted]

Lol, yeah. 2-3 years ago, I wouldn't even think of saying/typing f***, but now I suppose you could say I'm desensitized to it, between High School followed by college, in addition to Game of Thrones. XD

The situation does matter, too.

reply

LeiaOfLothlorien, that is a great question. We should just avoid profanity. This is a message board, and it is very childish to type vulgarly. It is one thing if a swear word slips out in person during a very upsetting emergency, but it is simply obnoxious to curse online where there is no excuse for it. In an instance where someone wishes to show strong disdain, words such as 'cursed' or 'blasted' can be used instead of offensive ones.

reply

[deleted]

That's an interesting opinion. Personally, I don't tend to swear much. I actually swear more online than in person. My mom recently "congratulated" me on shouting s*** when I hit my head on the car door really hard, because she had rarely heard me swear before. I don't think it's "childish", though. Children shouldn't even know strong swear words, let alone use them. However, I agree it can seem immature in some situations.

reply

[deleted]

Which of the things on my list do you think should be allowed?

Yes, it's a long list but it's quite limited in the sense that none of them are things a normal poster does and would ever need to worry about. (unlike milder grey area things like arguing or saying 'you're stupid', which I would not make a rule against.)

reply

[deleted]

I like it. I like it a lot!

This is the type of guidelines we should have set up prior to anyone getting the keys to the cells.

reply

Popcorn Kernel, I would never, or expect anyone else to, report a member for a matter such as "He called me stupid." While it is a petty thing to say, it is not particularly inciting or worth fretting over. I am trying to clear the forum of harassment, profanity, and generalized misuse of threads. Harassment is making vicious, unnecessary comments that tend to be false or unfounded anyway, not a simple, sweeping sentence in the manner of "That's a lame question." Links to nude images or any other unsuitable material have no place here. You might gather from this thread that I am a highly sensitive person, but that does not mean that I expect everyone to agree with me at all times. One of the best ways to show sensitivity is to be respectful of others even when you feel the need to correct or argue with them. Many of the world's greatest assets would not exist without debate. However, since this is a locale where most visitors are adults and NOT the elementary school playground that you are worried about taking over, it is only reasonable for speech to be civil. Of course nobody likes everybody, but social attacks are not a normal part of adult life. People who are psychologically grown do not engage in such activity. Here we should be free of the personal insults and vulgarity that might appear in a school corridor. If we are not children who require behavioral babysitters, then we must talk as though it is so.

reply

Thank you ever so much, smns65! I highly appreciate your being able to fully comprehend my ideations. Your post is a lovely complement to my original one.

reply

Popcorn Kernel, I live for analysis and always invite others to comment on my statements as long as they can do so appropriately. There is nothing for me to edit. Forum members should be prepared to read long posts. Not everything can be fully explained in a handful of words, and I feel that the rest of you deserve to know all of the reasons behind my ideas since these are applicable to everyone here. Dogmatic people irk me to no end so I certainly do not want to replicate their social approaches. I have not insulted you. It is clear that you have misunderstood me, and I have a right to bring that to your attention. The fact that it has happened does not mean that I have failed to communicate. Just like this board is not the whole country, it is not the whole world. It is a small, personal setting that ought to be a controlled environment. If you value justice, then surely you can see why it is unfair for harassment to be tolerated in a situation that should have some degree of authority exercised over it. Merely disagreeing is not hassling.

reply

You cannot demand that people read every word of your posts when it's a 4 inch brick of text. Especially when the same ideas could easily be expressed in a few well composed sentences.
When you say things like forum posters *should* read a long post, or 'we must talk like ____', you are expecting (even insisting, with words like MUST) a world where everyone adapts to your preferences, rather than you adapting to the world. It's an authoritarian viewpoint that also has a large blind spot.

Not just focusing on language, but on overall attitude, it is helpful to remember that the only person you will ever have complete control over is yourself. Of course we all have ideas of how we'd like others to act, but you cannot dictate all of those things. Something like reading a long post with no paragraph breaks, you cannot make a rule for that. You can't mandate it. And trying to do so will only lead to frustration for yourself and resentment for the people you are trying to control.

reply

Popcorn Kernel, I have made no attempt to demand that anyone reads my posts. Of course no one is required to which is why there is no sense in reading a post and complaining about its length. If it is too long for some people, then they should refrain from reading it. Just as there is a right to post short verbal collections here, there is a right to post long ones. Paragraphs are not for situations in which only one topic is presented. Besides, breaking a post into sections does not lessen its quantity. Any ease that one finds in paragraphs in correlation to how much there is to read is purely psychological. I have potent moral and social objections to controlling natures, so there is no need to fear that I carry one. You simply do not understand my intentions and perspective, and for the welfare of both of us, I will end our discussion here.

reply

[deleted]

TM- you are an idealist and sensitive, IMO, but I see the world differently. You simply cannot "talk civilly" to some people. It can't be done. So for the pleasure and peaceful use of these boards, "Ignore" will work for the WHOLE.

reply

Lennonforever, your observation is warmly welcome. Thank you very much. Of course we can always speak with decency, and you are helping me prove that. You acknowledge my position and understand it, and don't degrade it despite your not sharing it. This is precisely what I mean by polite disagreements. There is no reason why our debates cannot always occur in this form.

reply

Cheers

reply

Trolls, bullys and the like are certainty an annoyance and I can't stand that nonsense, but I think freedom of speech is more important than the way I feel about some of the posts I read.

If people cannot tolerate it, then they shouldn't be on public forums.

reply

ignore/block

reply

I agree.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

You should've what the administrator said at imdb2. He called you a pos. Said you had a thousand accounts and doxed people. Also a homo Muslim who posted that hardcore gay porn spam on multiple boards. God he got personal.

Yeah I agree, the administrator over there made his friends moderators who ban if they don't like you instead of real violations. I even saw him mock users for asking questions. Someone who posted in 2005 remembered to make a site and saw it was closing? I don't think so. Has to be a regular.

reply

Wow what a goddamn liar that admin is. S/he is mad because i am exposing that POS

And no, i didn't post any porn. Someone else did. S/he used that as an excuse to ban me.

I was dominating that place and Admin(Betty) got jealous

She gets jealous of everyone and bans them

"Yeah I agree, the administrator over there made his friends moderators who ban if they don't like you instead of real violations. I even saw him mock users for asking questions. Someone who posted on in 2005 remembered to make a site and saw it was closing? I don't think so. Has to be a regular. "

Exactly. This should not happen here

reply

Betty sounds familiar. Was that silent siren or that post menopause troll on politics who was paranoid and fought everyone?

reply

Silent Siren is still there using other ids

no Betty is a very old IMDB troll

She was a 'Soapboxer' too

I am 100 percent sure "John Carter" is her alias.

She likes controlling things. She likes controlling the flow of discussion. She wants to control the narrative, and "John Carter" talks and behaves exactly like Betty.

I was "Trump" there. Yes, i was one of the founding members and promoted that site everywhere. Then she banned me because she hates me and other people told her to ban me.

reply

I apologize to all of you for my misplaced posts. I don't know what is wrong. Everything that I submit goes to a random spot on the thread. I always use the respective reply button.

reply

You should start a new thread on it.

reply

And you just did it again.

reply