![]() |
When to use triangle?
It is a small black triangle at the bottom of each post -
It specifically state to only use it to report the following: Note: This is Only to be used to report spam, advertising messages, and problematic (harassment, fighting, or rude) posts. Are there any other instances when it might be appropriate to use it? Examples: too much personal information - such as a phone number, etc. a post of some "importance" that seems to have been posted to a non-relevant thread and perhaps should be moved? |
Hmmmm, never knew what it was for
|
It can be used to report any issue. I like to see it used instead of a PM to a particular moderator because the issue is then handled by the first moderator to get to it... instead of waiting for the PM'd moderator who may be unavailable for many reasons.
|
From the way it was worded, I got the impression it was only to report "bad" things.
|
Originally Posted by bearisgray
(Post 8334181)
From the way it was worded, I got the impression it was only to report "bad" things.
|
I love the above answer. lol
|
Originally Posted by QuiltnNan
(Post 8334182)
there are many things on the QB that don't work they way they are described, or that their purposes have changed. If the triangle gets something 'fixed' in an expeditious way, I say 'go for it'
|
Originally Posted by feline fanatic
(Post 8335216)
If that is the case then the rules/descriptions/instructions need to be updated. It is ridiculous to get cited for an infraction of QB rules when that rule isn't clearly stated and posted, has changed, directly contradicts itself with another rule (or even in the same rule), doesn't work the way it is described or subject to different interpretations. It is no wonder the QB is a mere shadow of what it used to be in terms of active participants. Many have left or worse yet banned due to different interpretations of the QB rules or feeling bullied because a rule they were accused of breaking isn't clearly defined and posted.
|
members are not banned for an 'interpretation' of the rules... banning is for clear violations after multiple warnings. an example of a 'thing' that does not work as intended is the huge amount of PDA the swaps forums... that is not their intended use, but we let it go. there are other examples, but too much to be listed here.
|
Interesting. I never noticed it or thought about it. Nice to know.
|
Originally Posted by QuiltnNan
(Post 8335256)
members are not banned for an 'interpretation' of the rules... banning is for clear violations after multiple warnings. an example of a 'thing' that does not work as intended is the huge amount of PDA the swaps forums... that is not their intended use, but we let it go. there are other examples, but too much to be listed here.
|
Originally Posted by NZquilter
(Post 8335727)
What does PDA mean?
|
Originally Posted by QuiltnNan
(Post 8335810)
Personal Diaries and Announcements
|
PDA is also frequently used for "Public Displays of Affection"
|
Before I asked, I googled PDA. https://www.google.com/search?q=PDA&...=silk&ie=UTF-8 Yeah, not that type of PDA! :D
|
Originally Posted by bearisgray
(Post 8336082)
PDA is also frequently used for "Public Displays of Affection"
|
Originally Posted by feline fanatic
(Post 8335216)
If that is the case then the rules/descriptions/instructions need to be updated. It is ridiculous to get cited for an infraction of QB rules when that rule isn't clearly stated and posted, has changed, directly contradicts itself with another rule (or even in the same rule), doesn't work the way it is described or subject to different interpretations. It is no wonder the QB is a mere shadow of what it used to be in terms of active participants. Many have left or worse yet banned due to different interpretations of the QB rules or feeling bullied because a rule they were accused of breaking isn't clearly defined and posted.
it is the responsibility of every member to read them. then if you have questions or concerns, send me a PM or email. and don't get your knickers in a twist if you get pinged for breaking a rule you didn't even bother to read. when moderators don't "creatively interpret" a rule to suit the personal preference or mood of a specific member, they very often get criticized (to put it mildly.) therefore i do not require them to "interpret." the rules are the rules. they don't have time to look into the nooks and crannies of all the gray areas. We shouldn't even need a lot of the rules. Unfortunately a few boneheads here and there have made them necessary because - apparently - good manners and common sense can only be expected if the requirement is put into a written rule in excruciating detail. we just about never ban anybody until they have had ample warning and advice about the problem they caused, might have caused, or were trying to cause. if somebody gets the boot because of one incident, you can bet your bottom dollar it was something really bad. this is not the Wild, Wild West; it ain't FaceBook, Twitter, InstaGram, or any of the other places in which people are allowed to act however they want, or treat others however they want. you can find a link to our rules from a variety of locations if you just take the time to look. for one thing, they are posted as an announcement at the top of every forum/section. i am always open to suggestions. i also consider it helpful if somebody notices what they believe might be a need for correction or clarification. All polite contacts are appreciated. (i do make a mistake about every 20 years or so.) snot-o-grams will be ignored. for the sake of convenience within this thread, here is the link: https://www.quiltingboard.com/main-f1/announcements.htm |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:08 AM. |