Forum rules link is out-of-date

matthiask · 2024-08-10 01:41:50

The link to the forum rules appears out-of-date.

Going to Rules (next to Index and User list in the header) > README: Forum Rules, leads to a post from 2011 that does not link to https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Genera … nes#Forums which I believe to be the current forum rules.

I've seen some moderators link to https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?ti … of_conduct when referring to the rules in older posts, however, this page now redirects to https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/ which does not contain the forum rules.

The current rules finding/reading experience is not that great. It involves quite a bit of jumping around with posts that link to other posts that link to yet other locations.

I would suggest replacing the README: Forum Rules link with https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Genera … nes#Forums.
This would solve the jumping around and link to a central and maintainable location.

Allan · 2024-08-10 02:36:57

matthiask wrote:

The link to the forum rules appears out-of-date.
Going to Rules (next to Index and User list in the header) > README: Forum Rules, leads to a post from 2011 that does not link to https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Genera … nes#Forums which I believe to be the current forum rules.

The 2011 post is still fine. Those wiki "guidelines" (not rules) for the forum are not under the forum team control.

matthiask · 2024-08-10 02:46:33

Allan wrote:

The 2011 post is still fine. Those wiki "guidelines" (not rules) for the forum are not under the forum team control.

Are you sure? Several links are out-of-date and other things are missing.
A non-exhaustive list:

Rules on necro posting
Screenshot rules
Code rules
Bumping

Regardless, would it not be best to compile them into a single place?

Last edited by matthiask (2024-08-10 02:48:55)

lahwaacz · 2024-08-10 06:42:27

Allan wrote:

The 2011 post is still fine. Those wiki "guidelines" (not rules) for the forum are not under the forum team control.

They are, they were even written by forum staff. Whether they are watched over or "controlled" by forum people or wiki people now is not relevant.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2024-08-10 10:14:47

The forum rules are so hard to find even the mods don't know them

I was recently given an official warning over the public boards rather than by private message, as the rules stipulate. I don't mind at all but it does indicate how unclear this stuff is.

matthiask · 2024-08-10 16:02:21

IMO, the current situation is not newcomer friendly. It could dissuade users a) from contributing b) from trying to understand and, as a result, follow the rules.

The only reason I found out about https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Genera … nes#Forums is because a mod linked to it when telling a user not to necrobump. This surprised me because I read the rules as they are currently, and they do not mention anything regarding necrobumping. So it would seem mods are taking the Arch Wiki as the authoritative source of the forum rules but this is not reflected in the actual rules content on https://bbs.archlinux.org/misc.php?action=rules.

Lone_Wolf · 2024-08-10 17:24:16

Matthiask, please send a message to forum@archlinux.org to alert the whole forum staff of this.
(a report is not suitable imo)

https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-o … -the-staff

seth · 2024-08-10 17:33:24

IMO, nobody ever reads those rules anyway
When in Rome, just do as the Romans do. If you step out of line, you'll get nudged back in.

I'll point out that the rules link sublinks fsckd's forum post that links https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct which then links on to https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/General_guidelines - you've just discovered an important aspect of archlinux. There's no end to the things you're gonna read up.

---
When in New York, shout "Fuck you!" and "I'm walking here!" all the time - can't go wrong

nl6720 · 2024-08-10 18:27:56

I've tried discussing this in https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Talk:G … orum_rules and https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=277613 in the past, but that didn't lead to anything.

ewaller · 2024-08-10 22:26:01

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

The forum rules are so hard to find even the mods don't know them
I was recently given an official warning over the public boards rather than by private message, as the rules stipulate. I don't mind at all but it does indicate how unclear this stuff is.

Noted, You make a solid point there. We actually do know the rules. I have been known to bend them on occasion. Most of the time my admonishments are in private.
Sometimes I will comment in public. Perhaps I should not. I generally only do it if I have respect for the person and they should know better, or if they have earned public abuse (trolls, spammers, racists, misogynists)

seth · 2024-08-11 08:05:44

As a general rule, for first-time offences a warning is usually the appropriate reaction, unless the occurrence is judged to be especially flagrant, in which case a ban may be issued immediately. Such a warning will usually be communicated in private to the user and needs to be acknowledged in writing in order to make sure that the user has read and understood the scope of their transgression. If the warning goes unheeded, further action will be taken, commonly resulting in a temporary or permanent suspension.
All actions taken, such as warnings or suspensions, will be communicated to the affected user(s) in private.. If a user feels treated unjustly by such a decision, they may appeal to the appropriate channel as described in the next section. If possible, the appeal should be handled by a different staff member this time, e.g. by a different moderator, or the project leader if necessary.

1. How does one maintain the suspension of an account (temporary ban?) private? It's indicated in the avatar box.
2. "usually" or not? And it only counts if the offender responds?

The way I read that is that nudging the user only on the board is insufficient as the focus seems to be on getting them aware of their misbehavior and private banning is technically not a reality.
Also the defacto standard behavior is to call people out publically and to also signal ("take one week off") the anyway publically visible ban.

It's certainly a very good idea to dm them on top to make sure they're aware of the situation and the warning doesn't get lost in the forum noise (leaving aside that one has to be subscribed to the thread and get mails for the next post after the last visit, the moderator comment might simply not be that next post) but I would not deem private moderation necessary - or a good idea.

The moderator publically calling out misbehavior establishes netiquette to bystanders and also calms the situation because there's no longer a necessity for peer counterspeech and since mods in their official capacity will frequently assume a professional stance in reminding of and enforcing the guidelines (combatting the user would then likely happen during the private appeal?) I don't see any problem with that either.

Like we're not painting guardrails in camo… because that would only lead to a lot of bent guardrails.

Arch Linux

#1 2024-08-10 01:41:50

Forum rules link is out-of-date

#2 2024-08-10 02:36:57

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

#3 2024-08-10 02:46:33

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

#4 2024-08-10 06:42:27

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

#5 2024-08-10 10:14:47

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

#6 2024-08-10 16:02:21

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

#7 2024-08-10 17:24:16

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

#8 2024-08-10 17:33:24

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

#9 2024-08-10 18:27:56

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

#10 2024-08-10 22:26:01

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

#11 2024-08-11 08:05:44

Re: Forum rules link is out-of-date

Board footer