Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Darth Vader

Make Shiachat Shiachat again

notme

We have given leeway for members to air their grievances in a polite and reasonable manner, but this is definitely not permission to condemn individual moderators or discuss specific details of a moderator action (beyond generalities). According to rule #9, discussions on moderator actions are to be discussed privately by PM.

 

 

Message added by notme

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

Do you dislike the new, complicated check mark style navigation method?

 Do you think the website navigational changes are confusing, time wasting and unnecessary?

The new system lets you see a list of topics from multiple subforums (or even the whole site), all on one page, all at once. Makes it much easier to browse new topics.

In the old system, you had to open each subforum one at a time, either clicking the back button constantly, or having multiple tabs/windows open. It was horribly inefficient. 

The only appeal of the old system was its familiarity, definitely not its functionality.

18 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

And above all, do you think there should be new elections for new admin and mod team?

Admins and mods are usually well standing members of the site who can be entrusted with sensitive information, and to collaborate in maintaining rules.

Although usually selected by other staff members, somebody is unlikely to become a mod or admin if they are controversial and aren’t in good standing with the general community.

Although the “election” format was tried, do you think there’s a huge spring of eligible, qualified, motivated candidates? Ones who who don’t disappear for a few months? And are willing to do lots of tedious work? We have lots of big talkers, but not many who can handle the seat.

17 hours ago, Bakir said:

There are many categories that make thread creation harder and navigation futile. Thus, people will just go to their activity streams instead of using categories.

 7-12 main categories is actually a reasonable margin.

Originally, in the “good old days”, there were 40+ subforums, navigated by the inefficient system described above. Because of this, many were abandoned ghost towns.

It has since been reduced to around 25, which admittedly is still quite high. We’re open to ideas to reducing this, and if you have specifics on which subforums should be merged or changed, let us know.

17 hours ago, Bakir said:

I would also like to add, sad and confused reactions may not be the most fitting in this forum. If you are confused about a post, reply and interact verbally, don't react with an emoji... As for sad, "my prayers" seem to work perfectly fine instead.

The reaction emojis are still a work in progress. Data is gathered on how often each are used, and whether they are appropriately used. They can always be added/changed/removed.

17 hours ago, Bakir said:

I would try to keep things more simple all in all...

That’s the goal.

17 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

Thats why when you click to start a new thread it will present you with a long list of subforums to again click and choose where you want to make your post. With the attention spans people have today by that time you are already starting to forget some of the content you wanted to post. Which made me think, why not make it like it was?

You’re complaining that is time consuming, but clicking on 40+ subforums one-by-one was fine? For this reason, many new topics in the old days were lazily placed in “General Discussions” (even though they really belonged elsewhere), because it was easy. Today, with the new system, members are better at placing topics in appropriate places. That’s a good thing if we care about organization.

The current layout (the “fluid” style), is similar to the style used by Reddit, Facebook newsfeeds, news sites, etc. That’s better designed for those with low attention spans.

Of course, the process can be even easier with reducing the number of subforums, which again, we’re open to specific proposals.

17 hours ago, Aflower said:

I miss the old SC too. I was a member about 10-12 years ago but I’ve forgotten my old user name. There were many more knowledgable members then both in terms of religion and life experience too. It had more of a community feel then. I remember the debates on the threads would go on for many weeks and most members presented their point of view in a restrained and polite manner. I wonder what happened to all those members. 

This nostalgic sentiment is common, and I’m convinced it has more to do with remembering our younger days, when the internet was more fresh and exciting in our minds, and we had more free time to hang around. As we get older, we lose that wonder, and we often blame the site, rather than our own weariness.

Objectively though, there’s really little inherently better about the past than now. Good topics and members existed then and now, but if you dig deep in the archives, you’ll see a lot of junk. 

17 hours ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

On the other hand, the mailbox format keeps the users informed about the newest threads in each section.

That’s exactly the point. The old system was s nightmare to find new topics, unless you had the patience to open each subforum one at a time.

17 hours ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

Never had any problems with the administration panel, honestly. In fact they have been very helpful and very accessible, especially sister @Hameedeh and brother @Qa'im.

Thanks a lot, we appreciate it.

17 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

Of course they are helpful and fine. Therefore it is our duty, as a nation, to respond by asking to change them. Just for fun and tradition's sake.

Running the site is serious business. Changing management “for fun” is not wise. Also not sure what “tradition” you’re referring to.

16 hours ago, 2Timeless said:

I think admins and mods do need to change, maybe not all, but definitely a handful at least. I've come across my fair share of abusers of "power" on this site. Also, I don't really like the hierarchical system, changing it up would get rid of that, and make it more of a communal site.

Mods typically change after long inactivity or quit for other reasons. It’s an important job, and uses skills that develop over time, which is why long term stability is important. Changing mods is difficult, because it takes a while to “catch them up to speed” with a radically different site interface and experience. Only those who have done it will understand.

As someone who works with the mod team frequently, I can assure you there’s no widespread “abuse” of any power. Actions are taken for a reason, often after team consensus. Mistakes in judgment are made, which only underscores the necessity of maturity and experience.

The site is not hierarchical by most standards. Unlike many forums, we don’t have paid premium members, and most site features are accessible to everyone.

16 hours ago, Dreamcatcher said:

As for old members, can't bring them, they are over that phase of their life.

Whether people stay or not is up to that individual, for whatever reason. Likely more outside personal reasons.

16 hours ago, Islandsandmirrors said:

A mod or two needs to change. A couple of them aren’t really fair and do a poor job at remaining neutral. They need to stop abusing their power, like @2Timeless said.

I can assure you, mods do the best they can, and I trust their actions are always in the best interest of the site.

16 hours ago, Akbar673 said:

Admin team should be someone with an IT background

We have that covered already.

16 hours ago, Akbar673 said:

As far as the Mod team goes...new Mods should be selected by a qualified committee of Admins, Mods, etc...basically the people that are running the forum already so they know who is qualified to become one

That’s mostly what is done historically. The previous election was a experiment.

It’s clear to me, as most members have a limited understanding of the full scope of mod responsibilities, they may not be the best to make penultimate decisions on staffing.

15 hours ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

You speak the truth, we want quality, not quanity. The last election ruined SC in my humble opinion^

As somebody who participated in it, I can understand that feeling. To be fair, it was a first time experiment, and it had its positives and negatives. It generated excitement but also escalated grudges and factionalism as well. But overall, it ended on a good note.

15 hours ago, Laayla said:

Alhamd'Allah I've been here for over a decade.  I love ShiaChat, I can be anywhere in the world and I will return to SC!

That’s appreciated.

15 hours ago, Laayla said:

I highly dislike the fluid system.  I don't understand why we can't have the old version.  It was perfectly fine.

I believe this is only nostalgia talking. As I stated above, there’s virtually no advantages of the old system from a functional POV, and it was more tedious. 

The new system may have a slight learning curve for some, but overall, it’s made the site a much more pleasurable experience.

15 hours ago, Laayla said:

Some mods are active more than others.  I'm glad there is an array of mods, some I get along great others have beef with me because I voice my opinion strongly.  

That’s an important point. Mods are diverse, with varying levels of time commitment, expertise, and style.

15 hours ago, Laayla said:

Clearly, some can't handle my bluntness, they want to "keep the peace."  

Bluntness is fine, as long as it’s within the rules. Of course, sometimes bluntness in bad taste is counterproductive.

15 hours ago, Laayla said:

I don't settle for compromising my beliefs, so I take the warnings.  Once they want me out of this forum, well so be it.  Alhamd'Allah I don't regret any of my posts, and I've learned from other members so much.

For me at least, to regret is an important part of the learning process. I definitely regret some posts I’ve made in the past.

14 hours ago, Irfani313 said:

Only a veteran member like yourself could start it, others who are not as equals as you are, would get banned.

You make us sound like the Gestapo or SAVAK. Chill dude.

14 hours ago, Irfani313 said:

In real life, in my workplace, we get rid of managers who fire lots of people or under whom many employees quit in short period of time. We need to have the same mentality here on SC, just go back in the “banned” thread and fire all of the Mods who have banned the most amount of members. We don’t need to be mommie’d by a KG teacher who corners each and everybody on small infringes only to announce a ‘bring your favorite toy day’ to look good to parents. 

Generally, members aren’t banned by the whim of an individual mod, but by consensus among the mod team, typically after long discussions, and only after multiple prior warnings, suspensions, mod previews, and a million chances to correct rule violations you guys don’t see.

14 hours ago, Irfani313 said:

Number one being above, I think the Dev team went too overboard from the old SC look and feel. Currently things are all over, hard to find, (it took me three clicks to get to this most recent thread of yours).

For me, it took only one click.

14 hours ago, Irfani313 said:

Site owners handed SC to trigger happy mommies (some baseball wielding dads too) and video game developers and this is what we got. 

Not sure who on the team fits these descriptions exactly.

14 hours ago, Irfani313 said:

The only reason I now come here time and again is to get ideas on a few things I’m working on, and for a few of you here who I would love to make my friends in real life, given we SC’ers ever meet in the ‘day of Hashr’. Other than that, #2 above mentioned people have made SC a dead Texan wasteland with tumbleweeds all over. 

The amount of time you spend here is your personal choice. On one end, people don’t show up, but then complain the place is dead? And then pretend these are not mutually exclusive occurrences? 

13 hours ago, notme said:

a lot goes on behind the scenes that members aren't aware.

Agree x 1000%.

13 hours ago, notme said:

I think the team that we have right now is outstanding. We balance each other very well. 

Also agree 1000%.

12 hours ago, Islandsandmirrors said:

I agree that each mod has their own strengths and weaknesses, but I also think mods are meant to stay neutral where there is chaos on some threads. Not going to name any, but I have noticed that a couple can get very nasty and personal in a way that I feel is inappropriate for a mod

Mods are still members, and are allowed to express their opinions and biases on topics as they wish, just like anyone else. It is up to an individual mod to determine how they participate.

From an action taking standpoint, the consensus style of moderation lessens vigilantism. In fact, individual mods who get caught up in a contested public discussion are more likely to seek consultation with other mods to ensure a fair outcome, in my experience.

12 hours ago, Islandsandmirrors said:

I wrote a poem once on this site, and a mod removed it although it violated no guidelines, and it was removed because the mod personally didn’t like it. Other mods saw it and thought it was fine, but another mod removed it, and the other mods said sorry and backed that mod up because they obviously would not tear each other down or question another’s decisions.... to me, this particular act seemed like an abuse of power and inserting personal feelings where there should be none. 

Different interpretations of the rules exist, and those mods who are most active usually will direct the course of action. Any mod action can be appealed privately, and the team will discuss it and will either reverse or confirm the action.

12 hours ago, realizm said:

:salam:

Number one rule for a forum is longevity.

Better off with a loyal team than members changing every two months. 

You talk about elections here, I say be grateful to those who dedicate their time. Because they stay on duty while members tend to come and go so quickly. 

Just see how often we see members getting hyperactive for 6 months and then disappearing.

Having devoted, stable people who think beyond themselves is all we can ask for. 

We have lots of backseat talkers who will go as soon as there’s nothing in the site for “me”. 

12 hours ago, 2Timeless said:

Also, there is a huge lack of consistency with the way members are treated by mods and admins, which highlights the biased nature of many members of the team.

More like it highlights the fact that mods are unpaid volunteers who can’t devote 24/7 to reading every post in the forum. And also they have certain information that you don’t have, which often explains the discrepancy between how mods see a member and how an unknowing public sees that member.

Also, interpreting laws and guidelines is a difficult task, which is why people get years of high education to do it. But mods try their best.

12 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

Btw my purpose with this thread was MOSTLY to say HI , and that I am back. So, hi. :D I am not whinging. And I really did not intend to be serious about complaining. I do however preferred the old style of the website.

Hi

12 hours ago, Maryaam said:

This place was irrevocably changed after the mega banning spree over a few months for anyone who irritated specific mods. I was even threatened with being banned - even mild mannered me..

Not sure what time you are referring to. 

I can assure you as well, in our present time (can’t speak for the past), “irritating” mods is not a criteria for getting a ban. Many members are irritating, but they don’t get banned. In fact, we have quite a high tolerance, and are far from “trigger happy”.

12 hours ago, Maryaam said:

We lost so many members that contributed to interesting ongoing discussions, debates with their varied and extreme viewpoints.  It was interesting and thought provoking and passionate!   When you checked in there was always some topic that grabbed your attention. There definitely were some characters on here, but I totally disagreed with banning 90% of them.  

With all due respect, how can you have an opinion on the validity of any ban without all the corresponding facts and knowledge (especially what’s behind the scenes). Relying solely on what you see publicly paints a very incomplete picture.

There’s many misconceptions that need to be addressed. Firstly, members aren’t banned solely for their viewpoints or opinions, unless it’s overt blasphemy (which is rare, and banning is generally uncontroversial). Members get banned because of repeated breaking of rules, both publicly and privately (especially by PM). Finally, permanent banning is rarely the first step, and often many warnings and temporary measures take place first. All after mod consensus of course.

12 hours ago, Irfani313 said:

Mostly because some MODs are hellbent on kicking each and everyone of these to the curb. Go back to the banned thread and see how many were banned soon after they came in or were treated like juvenile criminals -:) once they logged in initially. 

Mods only enforce rules the best they can, and mistakes are made. To say mods are inherently vengeful is silly. The banned members thread was created for transparency, exactly to allievate your concerns.

Banned members are a very tiny fraction of the site. A much larger portion (and of much more significant impact) of this site are voluntary inactive members (like yourself, as you’ve admitted). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Irfani313 said:

I bet at least three Mods on here are itching to chew us alive

Mods must be the most civilized wild beasts ever.

11 hours ago, Darth Vader said:

I have to disagree for now. Its just a shadow of itself. I think time will tell.

Then be part of the solution. We don’t function on pure predestination in our faith. We have the power to elevate our destiny.

The biggest drain on this site is not the loss of a couple banned members, but the huge numbers of inactive members who can’t put in even the tiniest amount of participation.

11 hours ago, Akbar673 said:

Wait...what ?!?!?

That’s just a small sample for you on the kind of stuff we deal with.

8 hours ago, Islandsandmirrors said:

I should mention that for that particular poem I wrote, i PMd an admin saying that posted the poem and copied it into the message. The admin said it was fine. A few hours later, a mod took it down. 

The admin said that the post was taken down and I know it didn’t violate SC rules. 

If you like, re-send it again by PM to staff and it can be re-reviewed.

7 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

I think there needs to be justice, and Shiachat mods need to understand this. There should be no bending of the rules. If one user insults a maraja, then straight up ban him, our site doesn't need those kind of users. There's nothing to lose.

Instead, our mods would rather watch the thread escalate and then send a mod note saying - "I'm proud of you Shiachat users for arguing responsibly".

Rules are rules.

While the rules are firm on insulting personalities, there is also flexibility. To quote directly from the guidelines:

“The Shiachat.com team does however reserve the right to keep such threads open granted that it is put under heavy moderation and all parties engaged in the debate maintain a certain level of respect and maturity.”

7 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

You're a great mod, one who I really respect.

Imo there is nothing harsh about following the rules when it comes to banning.

Interesting reminder. Mods receive many complaints and reports from many of you calling for the banning or disciplining of members.

When mods don’t comply to these requests, they are called insensitive, supporters of corruption, betrayers of Islam, betraying their duties etc. When mods do ban, they are trigger happy tyrants and vicious beasts with a sadistic agenda.

Looks like mods can’t win either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of needless alarmism.

Let us please move over simplistic, monocausal-deterministic junior high school blame- games and suggest concrete, workable solutions to re- invigorate the site.

Sincerest apologies if I came off as being disrespectful or harsh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Reza said:

The new system lets you see a list of topics from multiple subforums (or even the whole site), all on one page, all at once. Makes it much easier to browse new topics.

In the old system, you had to open each subforum one at a time, either clicking the back button constantly, or having multiple tabs/windows open. It was horribly inefficient. 

The only appeal of the old system was its familiarity, definitely not its functionality.

With all due respect, even now we are clicking constantly. Click to select a subforum then select another and both are selected. Then you click the old one again to deselect it. Click-click-clickity-click. But the layout makes the website look like Gmail. Just saying.

A wise person appreciates a bit of criticism and takes it constructively, which I am happy to see. Tbh I was surprised to see how many SC'ers responded to this thread. We should care for each other. As for me, I am always up for positive contribution to the site and like to post content after content with each of my fabulous posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Reza said:

Generally, members aren’t banned by the whim of an individual mod, but by consensus among the mod team, typically after long discussions, and only after multiple prior warnings, suspensions, mod previews, and a million chances to correct rule violations you guys don’t see.

In fact, I think that in several cases that I can recollect, the mods have been too lenient towards the members in question. 

If only those louts were given a nice twisting of their ears and hauled up for their uncivil and uncouth behaviour then and there, we could have greatly curbed the toxicity and garbage-sprinkling that goes around in many of the threads in the guise of 'putting strong opinions' and 'free discussion/expression'.

We can do without such social pollutants alright. Their presence was never indispensable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can please just take one thing away from  this thread is to change the draining format back to what it was.  It has been over a year and I'm not going through nostalgia as @Reza mentioned, this format is horrendous.

BTW, Banned Members thread is not being updated.  Warning points should not stay indefinitely a point should be removed once a year and pardons should be made during 3id.

Who says yay?  :)

(I wonder who is the Resistance lol)  @hasanhh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, please, take it easy on the warning points and banning, agree to look into it and everyone will be happier. Like Laayla has so wisely suggested, the warning points should not be permanent. And 3 instant warning points in stead of 1 are not very helpful. People make mistakes and in Islam it is so very mustahab and wholesome when we forgive mistakes.

If not then no big deal.

Edited by Darth Vader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2018 at 7:28 AM, Darth Vader said:

:salam:

Fellow SC'ers, I bring to you my proposal to make this place what it was originally.

Do you dislike the new, complicated check mark style navigation method?

Do you think the website navigational changes are confusing, time wasting and unnecessary?

And above all, do you think there should be new elections for new admin and mod team?

To make ShiaChat, SHIACHAT again.

THEN THIS IS THE THREAD YOU SHOULD VOICE YOUR CONCERN.

Now is the time.

JUST SAY NO TO HIM. :D

[Mod Note: Huge image was removed from this quote. See the image in the quote above.]

We cant share phone numbers but we can give our facebook url on our profile, what's the difference?

Admins are biased here, if you reply them in some discussion against their view point they will keep an strict eye on you and then ban for xyz reasons.

Are you the owner of this website because I would like to speak with one who manages admins.

Edited by Hameedeh
Quote was shortened in length.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Karbalai110 said:

Are you the owner of this website because I would like to speak with one who manages admins.

I actually am the rightful owner of this website. It was..usurped from me. :liar:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Reza
Salam. Thank you for your comment. I just wanted to add that all the SC members are great - both then and now. I did not say that the members were better then. I just meant to say that when I was a  young teenager I appreciated that there was a mix of young SC members and some others who had more life experiences that I found insightful. 
 
Edited by Aflower
P.S. I don’t know why my message is formatted so oddly. I can’t edit it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...