All The Tropes Wiki Project, Part XXIV

[robkelk]

It occurs to me that we need to tweak "How We Do Bans Around Here" to account for moderation and to make it clear that bannable actions don't need to actually make it to a publicly visible wiki page to count as violations.  Anyone care to propose some draft language to that effect?

For consideration:

We have been using Moderation for new tropers' posts since early 2021; some edits are not immediately visible when they are made. However, this does not change the fact that the edits have been made; an edit that violates the wiki's Terms of Service or other rules is still subject to these rules, whether it is in the Moderation queue or the publicly-readable wiki pages.

That's better than anything I came up with.

Concur, Rob did good work on that.

Thanks.

With three mods in agreement, I'll add it to the page, then.

Forgive me if this is already in there somewhere, but...

You may want to add in a simple (Okay, make that "succinct and well-worded") "But Why?" to that.  Because we all know that there's going to be people who will push the envelop just because they don't understand why it's important to follow the rules.  And there will be a lot less frustration to go around when you can point to this and say, "This is why we're giving you this infraction."  They'll either get the message right away and amend their ways, or continue to be an issue.  In which case, you know pretty well right away that they're going to continue to be a thorn in your side.

"But why is it so important even if the edits are not publicly viewable right away?" you may ask.  Simply put, our time is valuable.  And wasting our time with edits that are in violation of our very succinct and clearly posted rules and guidelines is very much not appreciated.  The moderation queue was put into place primarily to prevent drive-by vandalism and spamming by advertisement bots.  It was, by no means, ever meant to be a system to keep newer users in check at the time it was implemented.  That is merely a side effect of the moderation queue, and a desirable one as it prevents edits that could cause us problems, legal or otherwise.  This means that the moderation queue is a safety net for us, not you.  Please respect our staff by abiding by the rules and guidelines.

Please also note that our rules and guidelines are always evolving to better convey what we feel is conducive to the wiki as well as the community that is involved in it.  Edits that violate the spirit of our rules, if not the exact wording, could still have you being infracted.  Rest assured, however, that we will welcome any politely worded and sensible suggestions to amend our rules and guidelines.

(Also note: this does not mean that you should suggest changes to the rules because you feel that yours is a special case that needs exempting.  What we mean is that we will welcome suggestions that promote a better understanding of the rules.  You are thusly forewarned, once again, to respect the administrators of this wiki by not wasting our time.)

Likey?  No likey?

Hmmmmm... If we start explaining why particular rules exist, will some people expect that they're entitled to have us explain why all rules exist?

More importantly, will the disruptive influences point at the given explanation and attempt to rule-lawyer their way out of an infraction, thus wasting our time anyway?

Beige Prose is the standard for documentation because it's straightforward and direct. Add extra text and one adds more points where that straightforwardness can be lost in unintended ambiguity.