Moderation

[delete this account pls]

The FG thing is just a joke, on my part. I don't really mind if a thread gets moved there.

[WhiteHaven]

Ähm - I read this thread and I don't have anything interesting to say. But one question. What is FG?

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Forum Games

[Young Wolf]

Question:

Is there still a YW alert that goes off in the Moderator Section whenever I post that makes one of you scurry over to my last post and deem it worthy or not?

Just curious.

Thanks.

YW

[The_BlauerDragon]

FWIW, my personal experience of your posting style is that it has improved markedly. Not that I've relentlessly pursued your posting contributions while sticking needles in a small blue lizardy doll, just sayin'.

Thank you... though I now have to wonder about those random stabbing pains I've been having...

Now, if I may say a word in defense of the Mod team here, to explain some of their importance from my own experiences:

I think, for me, when I first came to the general chatter forum I was not putting very much thought into how I worded things or what I said. A lot of people took me for an idiot, and many more took me for a troll. I ended up on the "Ignore" lists of a few people whom I am quite sure I would've enjoyed having continued discussions with. That's my fault, and my bad.

In regards to what Mormont said earlier; I think, perhaps, that I was misunderstood. When I mentioned the hostile nature of general chatter, I wasn't trying to grind an axe and I wasn't trying to solicit pity. It was simply an observation based on the fact that many of the views and opinions that I hold are completely incompatible with those of a majority of other posters. I actually like that hostility in many regards. When people can be passionately antagonistic in a way that still leaves room for thoughtful debate, it not only makes for a very lively debate but it also makes for a very informative discussion. You can learn a lot here, if you just try to make yourself understand what the other people are saying (and why). I was also wanting to say that I have not seen a marked increase in hostility, antagonism, or moderation. If anything, I've seen a pleasant decrease.

I think that may be a key factor in regards to the "self policing". I've always applied a heavy filter in regards to what I post. I haven't said even half the things I might have wanted to say, because I knew that no-one would understand. All that self policing aside, I didn't really start self policing from the right perspective until after I'd been heavily moderated a few times. For some people, simply getting flamed by other posters is enough to make them see the light. I was never phased by the flames, and would occasionally start dancing in the fire, so it was only natural that it took a bit more heavy handed approach to get me to understand. Some people are going to be like that. So updating the FAQ might be a great step to take, but even the greatest FAQ in the world isn't going to deter those who do not take the time to read it (or who read it, but ignore it anyway). I started off with a filter of "They'll think that I'm psychotic if I say that" and I had to learn through trial and error to apply various other filters, such as the "Is that a really hurtful thing that could genuinely offend someone" filter and the "Does that actually make sense" filter (and let us not forget the "Will I look like I'm trolling if I post that?" filter). Without that moderation, I would have most likely remained oblivious to the need for developing a modicum of tact until I had only 2 or 3 people left to talk to.

So, um... yeah. It is not easy for me to say this, but... Thank you all for moderating some sense into me. Keep up the good work! :cheers:

[Ran]

YW,

While Invision allows selected posters to have all of their posts screened by moderators, rather than letting them post directly, we've never used that on anyone. I'm not really sure how it works, really... are you volunteering? ;)

[Young Wolf]

YW,

While Invision allows selected posters to have all of their posts screened by moderators, rather than letting them post directly, we've never used that on anyone. I'm not really sure how it works, really... are you volunteering? ;)

Oh so its just Mormont that has that set up for me.

Yeah, why not? Id hate to not let the rest of you not be able to join in on the fun.

[The_BlauerDragon]

YW,

While Invision allows selected posters to have all of their posts screened by moderators, rather than letting them post directly, we've never used that on anyone. I'm not really sure how it works, really... are you volunteering? ;)

Hey, if you need a test subject... I'm willing to do my part to help better the boards.

[MinDonner]

(snip)

So, um... yeah. It is not easy for me to say this, but... Thank you all for moderating some sense into me. Keep up the good work! :cheers:

:cheers:

I will say this though; sometimes the moderation does seem a little too pre-emptive, so much so that we're not even given the chance to self-police. Obviously we don't want the really nasty flamewars, but sometimes the less serious ones can be hilarious as well as educational... :leaving:

[Yagathai]

Seriously guys? I'm willing to bet that there has been more kissing up to mods in this thread than in Mormont and Xrays respective bedrooms. Y'all are getting old. Have you forgotten -- the mods are The Man. Fight the power, you bourgeouis motherfuckers!

[awesome possum]

It seems to me that sometimes, not often but sometimes, a mod will make a decision to close a thread, delete a post or make a threat to do so not because of board policy but because of personal preference/distaste.

[Lord O' Bones]

Fight the power, you bourgeouis motherfuckers!

I do that via PM. Or I get deleted. Should I cc you in the future to establish my bonafides? :P

[mormont]

Seriously guys? I'm willing to bet that there has been more kissing up to mods in this thread than in Mormont and Xrays respective bedrooms.

Can't speak for Xray, but you ain't setting the bar very high there in my case. :P

[Relic]

I will say this though; sometimes the moderation does seem a little too pre-emptive, so much so that we're not even given the chance to self-police. Obviously we don't want the really nasty flamewars, but sometimes the less serious ones can be hilarious as well as educational... :leaving:

I fully agree with this. Without getting into specifics i think that sometimes you guys take moderating a little too seriously. A lot of us, especially the old timers, know what the limits are. We dont need to be constantly reminded.

I want to add that im pretty impressed this thread is still open. i think having a discussion openly can only be helpful.

[TerraPrime]

Re: TheEvilKing

I think it's more to do with the mods having nothing to do but feeling the need to actually do something, rather than anything else, so they pipe up with warning every now and then when anything remotely offensive or antagonistic is posted.

With all due respect, you thought wrong.

I don't know of any moderator who's sitting around looking for stuff to do. I think we'd all be perfectly happy if we don't have to issue a single warning or make another deletion ever again. Evah.

Re: Pre-emptive modding

It's a balance between knowledge gained from previous painful flamefests against letting people have a chance at moderating themselves. There are some threads, and some users, and some users in some specific threads, whose behavior pattern is predictable. Sometimes the moderators just take a short cut and close a thread that is 90% likely to end in flames while we're not watching.

Re: Moderating in general

It's not a precise science. If it were, Ran could have just set up a javascript.

That said, we take into consideration more than just a single post in deciding how to mod. Things like the general mood of the board recently, whether there has been a fiasco in similar topic recently, whether the key participants are likely to be receptive to mod warnings, how many stupid/idiotic/soul-crushing/intellect numbing posts we've read that day prior coming to a problematic post, etc. Not all of these are tangible and quantifiable. So I think it's only natural that some users will disagree with specific moderator actions.

By and large, our users are amazing. There are, as a percentage to total posts and users, a very small amount of material that require actions. There are days when not a single post has been deleted. Then there are days where we have a couple threads closed with a dozen deleted posts.

I will also say that I only wish I could moderate more based on my own sense of distaste. Alas. Of course, I do get more of a say than users do: that's part of what being a moderator means. In most cases, there's a clear consensus amongst mods on things like thread-closing, even if the users only see a point-person. If anything looks uncertain, one of the mods will bring it up and there'll be a discussion. So it has a lot less to do with one person's sense of distaste, and more to do with what we as a group decides to do.

Finally, I will point out that we have never had a thread on why the moderators are having such a light hand in moderating posts recently. Just food for thought. :)

[Guest Raidne]

Gods, I've never really thought of that. So if you're a mod, and you're reading a completely repetitive soul-crushing thread, you can't just skip past all the lame-ass posts and read what you want. Man, that would be terrible.

But why not just wait for people to report stuff?

[Guest Ro_]

Gods, I've never really thought of that. So if you're a mod, and you're reading a completely repetitive soul-crushing thread, you can't just skip past all the lame-ass posts and read what you want. Man, that would be terrible.

But why not just wait for people to report stuff?

It also means mods can't put people on ignore. No one deserves that hell. And I am guessing people don't hit the report button because they don't want to be seen as a complainer, or they don't know how it works.

[Guest Raidne]

I have reported maybe two or three times in the time I've been here, that I remember, and the mods have always been really nice and very responsive. Same as when I've asked for an explanation on something of mine that's been...tampered with, also.

I hate, hate, hate thread closings, but I think the deletions and explanations are done very, very well. Not that anyone cares. :)

But now that I understand the amount of swill people have to read to keep a thread open, I'm a little more sympathetic to that as well, although the devil on my shoulder is tempted to open up about 8 threads on abortion, gay marriage, prison rape, banning the veil in public schools, whether it's anti-semitic to be pro-Palestinian, women in combat, women in sports (oops, already have that one!), and champagne.

[niamh]

Finally, I will point out that we have never had a thread on why the moderators are having such a light hand in moderating posts recently. Just food for thought. :)

Nobody wants to wake the dragon so we don't :P

But the day I can call someone a lazy hoor without deletion, I shall certainly make such a thread.

[IheartTesla]

Is it just me or has moderation on the boards been a bit more heavy-handed of late? It seems like there have been more deletions, threats of deletions and closings and closings in the last month or two than usual. Has there been some shift in moderation policy, or are the mods simply getting drunk on power?

Since this meta-thread has lived this long, that is actually a data point that the moderators are being more lax than usual. I presume that was the original ironic intent of this whole enterprise.