| ||
|---|---|---|
|
New Guidelines for Commenting[]
Hey guys. This is what popped into my mind just by glancing at one of the pending approval sections.
- Do not post just to restate a comment. This creates clutter and long, long sections.
- Compliments are great, but they cause clutter. Do not post just to say, "Great job!"
- Exception:If there have been no constructive comments for 24 hours, it is permitted to say, "I see nothing wrong, wonderful job."
- Do not post conversational comments; that is, comments with no constructive merit. This is not a chatting page, this is for solid, constructive criticism.
- The artist is entitled to his/her opinion as well as others, and well-worded, polite debates are permitted. This may be about color, markings, or the formation/texture of the image.
Those are the immediate bullets that jumped into my head. If any of you disagree or have more ideas, please post here. I hope we all want to be operating at top efficiency. --Bramble -Hyuu~ 23:22, September 10, 2010 (UTC)
- These all look pretty good to me, if I think of anything else I'll let you know. Wicked MousehUser blog:Mousetalon/MemorbiliaDefying Gravity!!! 13:53, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good to me.User:Ashshadow/Sig 19:59, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
Looks good to me as well. WhiteStorm is back! 22:21, September 18, 2010 (UTC)
Looks good. Willowheart1231 22:29, September 18, 2010 (UTC)
Considering the mega cat fight I just archived, I had better put up some tenants on behavior during discussion as well. I hope all of you who are being silent really have no ideas and aren't just ignoring this post. --Bramble -Hyuu~ 04:27, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
...**sheepishly** Sorry about the catfight, on my behalf, at least. I got a little worked up over just about nothing. In regards to the future as well as the recent past, I think that some behavior guidelines might be a good idea. And the silence on my part was, yes, no ideas =) llwildheart™l 10:53, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
Maybe an additional "Cat Fight" policy should be put into place. Something like "Anytime a discussion for an image turns into that argument between two or more people that image is immediately declined and the discussion is archived. The image may not be resubmitted for a week." I say two people because that way someone who wants to black-ball an image can't have it done by making one aggressive comment. I also think that aggressive/combative behavior in these discussions should result in an automatic 24-hour ban against the users. The phase "Personal attack" comes to mind in dealing with that. But I'm harsh and I don't have time to mediate conflicts much ;) so I'll leave that decision to you. Kitsufox Den/CoSC 13:09, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
I was just being silent because I didn't have anything specific to say, but I agree with some sort of behavior guidelines, as sometimes things get out of hand that shouldn't really be a problem in the first place. I would like to say thank you, too, because it's bothered me for some time now when I look at a page and there's been five different people with the same comments reworded (or sometimes said exactly the same). I think these commenting guidelines are excellent. :) User:Icethroat21/Sig 15:33, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
I sort of agree with your "Cat fight" policy, Kitsufox, but I don't think that the image should be declined, because the argument might not be the image creator's fault, so it wouldn't really be fair to the user if their image was just declined because two other people argued about it. I do agree with the 24-hour ban on any user that makes an aggressive/combative comment, though. But that's just my opinion. Rainwhisker567 16:46, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- Part of my theory on declining the image automatically would be to discourage all non-constructive negative comments. It does need some improvement, though. Such as removal from the project if you're involved in X number of conflicts within a certain time period. Part of the "automatic image decline" part of my idea is that it will turn people who start these fights into exiles that others ignore because they've been interfering with progress. It should, theoretically, also discourage response to combative comments because people wouldn't want to get caught up in a fight-ending decline/archive action. Sure, the artist might not be involved in the fight, but frankly, I don't care ;) I'm more concerned with making fighting so ludicrously undesirable that anyone willing to undertake it will get treated like a poo on the sidewalk that no-one wants to have anything to do with. Theoretically, with the 24-hour Ban and the "fighting gets the image declined", It shouldn't happen. Because people who see aggressive/combative comments should feel the need to do nothing but inform a Sysop rather than respond. And if no-one responds it doesn't become a fight. As a sort of compromise thought, though... Perhaps automatic decline could be limited to those conflicts in which the artist is involved. Kitsufox Den/CoSC 16:55, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry for that 'catfight'. I didn't think I was coming off so rude, I'd say. I was just saying my opinion. :P And as for the punishments, maybe a warning first? ☄ℱrostheartϡ Hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia 16:57, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- Ha ha, a poo on the sidewalk. I agree, these look fine as long as the image doesn't get declined when the artist isn't involved. Yes, perhaps a warning first, unless it's something uber bad. Mossy ♫ go away. 18:25, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- If there is a fight going on on another artist's image, those comments could be romoved or archived, so that the poor artist doesn't suffer. Wicked MousehUser blog:Mousetalon/MemorbiliaDefying Gravity!!! 18:56, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with what you're saying, Kitsufox, and I think that maybe it should be automatically declined if the artist is involved in the conflict, instead of automatic decline when two other people argue on the image, because then someone could just argue on an image because they want it declined. Although I doubt many people would do that to someone. As I said before, I sort of agree with your idea, mostly because it will encourage others not to fight, or else the image will be declined and they would be punished. It would limit fighting in the project, so I agree with this idea. Rainwhisker567 19:48, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- The 24-hour block for comments of an aggressive/combative nature needs to be layered with the end of the discussion for fighting thing and a boot from the project for continuous fighting. An ignored aggressive comment wouldn't end it, only one that someone responded to. Kitsufox Den/CoSC 12:49, September 20, 2010 (UTC)
- I definitely agree with there being a warning first. Besides that, it sounds good. WhiteStorm is back! 01:52, September 20, 2010 (UTC)
(S) - Banning idea's good, but not the image, unless the artist is at fault. And maybe a warning for 1st and 2nd time offenders, then a ban? And maybe after a certain number of times, you're removed from the project? Mosswhisker & Stealthfire Want to chat? 01:59, September 21, 2010 (UTC)
- Such behavior isn't tolerated elsewhere on the wiki. Why would it be tolerated here? We already give 1-2 warnings on the main wiki, here we're talking about somewhere that seems to need tighter rules. That says to me a zero tolerance policy. It's only a 24-hour ban that I suggested. Just enough time for someone to think about what they've done, and what they should do differently in the future. Kitsufox Den/CoSC 12:45, September 21, 2010 (UTC)
I think the ban is perfectly reasonably, but what if the argument isn't at all the artist's fault? It seems unfair to them to decline their image, just because some other people are arguing underneath it. And if it was sparked by the artist's charart, how were they supposed to know that it would happen? Just my opinion. Think about it. llwildheart™l 22:54, September 22, 2010 (UTC)
Oops. **reasonable, not reasonably =P llwildheart™l 22:57, September 22, 2010 (UTC)
I will post more on this when I have more time to look over the full discussion and actually think up some good points. In the meantime, comments are welcome here. --Bramble -Hyuu~ 14:40, September 24, 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think warnings are necessary. The fact that these guidelines are being put into place is warning enough in my opinion. Also, with the amount of members wanting to do charart, anyone causing unecessary trouble and being unable to reason out their arguments on a particular issue (because we can't just say that no debate on issues is allowed else it's avoiding the problem) in a calm and polite manner do not deserve to have the privilege of posting and commenting on art while others cannot do the charart as there are few remaining. I may be picking up the wrong end of this, but I believe that only the people involved in the argument should get any kind of punishment, be that a ban or whatever, not sweeping this out to automtically include the artist just for daring to post their art... sometimes arguments are had on art and the artists themself isn't even involved. I think each case almost needs to be treated individually with the knowledge held by all users that conflict and argument will not be ignored and passed over. --SandyTalk 21:16, September 26, 2010 (UTC)
(S) - I agree with Sandy; that seems right. Mosswhisker & Stealthfire Want to chat? 21:47, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
Consensus[]
Then this is the main consensus:
On commenting:
- Do not post just to restate a comment. This creates clutter and long, long sections.
- Compliments are great, but they cause clutter. Do not post just to say, "Great job!"
- Exception:If there have been no constructive comments for 24 hours, it is permitted to say, "I see nothing wrong, wonderful job."
- Do not post conversational comments; that is, comments with no constructive merit. This is not a chatting page, this is for solid, constructive criticism.
- The artist is entitled to his/her opinion as well as others, and well-worded, polite debates are permitted. This may be about color, markings, or the formation/texture of the image.
- Caps, multiple exclamation points, and insults are not permitted.
On comments of an aggressive/combative nature:
- If a fight starts up between two or more aggressive users on the talk page, the participants are to be given a 24-hour ban. Their comments will be struck out.
- If the artist is involved, he/she will also be given a ban and the image will be declined. It may not be re-submitted for a week.
- If the same users start a fight more than two times, they will be given a ban and they will be removed from the Project.
I agree with Sandy in the fact that there need be no warning; the guidelines are open for reading, and any user should know that aggression is un-fitting for a discussion page. --Bramble -Hyuu~ 23:28, November 22, 2010 (UTC)