 | | | | | | |
| |
|
Calling hi-jinx is. .... well I don't really know what it means. I think it
came from a South Park episode. My employees have been using it for a while
so I started using it.
I read the thread I didn't see anything that explained why he was taking
this measure. You are right, it is his baby and he can run as he sees fit. I
don't blame him for keeping his butt off the grill. If he wants he can make
us dance in his front-yard with hotdogs in our ears before we upload a pic.
Most websites make you be a member even if membership is free, that would
limit a lot of freeks right there and get rid of most people who aren't
serious about Brickshelf. As for uploading inappropriate material, isn't
this place pretty well self policed? Aren't there like 20-30 big-wigs like
yourself that are here daily.........ahem hourly.
I just want to know what the worries are and if there is anything I can do
as long as I don't have to put hot dogs in my ears.
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Jim Schifeling writes:
> > Wouldn't it be just easier, quicker and better to have kids get permission
> > and have a gate? What exactly are we all worried about? Has someone posted a
> > snuff film or something?
> > I think this is nonsense but I don't know the how and why of it all yet.
> >
> > I have to call hi-jinx until someone explains it.
>
> While I have no idea what "call hi-jinx" means (Is it like a spell cast or
> something?) I think it's *been* explained already. To my satisfaction,
> anyway. Read the entire thread, it's not that big.
>
> It's not clear to me that having "kids get permission" addresses the issue
> of people uploading things that are kid inappropriate. Perhaps you could
> elaborate on how it does, instead of casting aspersions.
>
> The bottom line is that BrickShelf is a free resource that Kevin has
> provided to us all, at no small cost in time and effort, and I support
> whatever decisions he makes about how to provide it and what administrative
> actions to take. It is, after all, his liability that is on the line, not
> yours or mine.
>
> Further, I have been moderating away like mad every chance I get (although I
> suspect I'm only putting in a small fraction of the effort that others
> have)... To Mark P's point, I have not been taking the time to adjust folder
> placement, rightly or wrongly. I have just been approving or disapproving in
> order to get as many folders back on line as fast as I could. If there are
> particularly egregious examples, drop me (or any moderator) a note, and
> perhaps they will be corrected. I will try to do better going forward.
>
> I'm not sure who all the moderators are though, other than myself. Kevin
> told me some of them but I forgot. There are a number of them though.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.publish, Jim Schifeling writes:
> I just want to know what the worries are and if there is anything I can do
> as long as I don't have to put hot dogs in my ears.
I don't have all the details and I'd rather Kevin himself answered if he has
time.
That said apparently someone uploaded porn. Again. (this isn't the first
incident)
Kevin had set up a system for post review so that anyone with moderator
login could mark a file as invisible and mark the ID for action by Kevin.
This incident must have been bad enough that he felt he needed to move to a
prereview scheme from post review.
Several people have suggested some ways to streamline the process and I
think they're good ideas:
- marking certain users as trusted so that their content does not need
moderation (suggested by at least John Barnes if not others as well)
- allowing moderators to visit certain users folders and review them all at
once one after another instead of getting random folders.
I like both those ideas. But maybe Kevin (and Dan??? I get hints that Dan
has some knowledge on what the moderation function does maybe because he
helped with it?? I dunno) is too busy moderating to implement those. His call.
As to what you can do to help, I dunno....
One thing I would ask people to do at least for now would be to NOT shuffle
folders around by deleting and reloading, and NOT add pics to existing
folders, as those both appear to cause the whole folder to get marked as
needing review.
At least for now, till the backlog is chewed through.
If the folder has 100 pics in it and you add one, that means that 101
thumbnails need to be downloaded to the moderator before they can clear it.
That just slows things down.
Again, Kevin is authoritative on this topic and I am not. I'm just
speculating on incomplete knowledge. But you know my view, speculation is
often useful.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"crunch-o-matic" <naughty.monkey@verizon.net> writes:
> Calling hi-jinx is. .... well I don't really know what it means. I think it
> came from a South Park episode. My employees have been using it for a while
> so I started using it.
I remember "calling shenanigans" from South Park, but not hijinx.
--Bill.
FUT: lugnet.off-topic.fun
--
William R Ward bill@wards.net http://www.wards.net/~bill/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMAZING BUT TRUE: There is so much sand in northern Africa that if it were
spread out it would completely cover the Sahara Desert!
| | | | | | |
