How highly do you rate the moderators?
- Thread starter azzaman333
- Start date
- Status
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
I posted sober once, didn't like it 
I know, cuz then you have to be all logical and make sense. No fun that way!
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
Newton was probably not being logical when he thought the force pulling an apple to the ground was the same force keeping the moon orbiting the earth.
Einstein probably wasn't either when he doubted Newton
Embrace random nonsense!
EDIT: On topic, Turner is a good mod. Don't wind up people in computer talk unless you make a serious point afterwards. Although you should get a slight let off if the joke is rather amusing.
Einstein probably wasn't either when he doubted Newton
Embrace random nonsense!
EDIT: On topic, Turner is a good mod. Don't wind up people in computer talk unless you make a serious point afterwards. Although you should get a slight let off if the joke is rather amusing.
TheAlamo
Prince
No excuse. I have posted drunk, and never been infracted while doing so.
Yeah but that's just because you're a moderator and mods can violate the rules all they want. Same reason cops get away with speeding or running red lights.
Nope, because I know how to handle myself when I'm inebriated. Nor do I use being drunk as an excuse.
I don't know what possible excuse or argument could be made that this suggests moderator consistency. In fact, it just seems to confirm a very inconsistent and lax attitude, and suggests a really insulting view of non-moderator posters on the forum. I'm not going into specific instances/trends as we are not supposed to here though perhaps I should otherwise, but really:
Why in the world would mods even considering allowing some posters to express the same statements/posts as others, and infract some and not others? Certainly not in the name of consistency. And I can say from personal experience it does happen all the time. Many times I've reported, say, a dozen posts of virtually the same problematic thing and only a single one is acted on - or sometimes nothing is, yet there will always be some other post I see eventually someone else has already caught/presumably reported. And if I was one of the posters on the other end - receiving the infraction, it would be and is outrageous to see the dozen other posters who just posted the same offensive material to not be penalized in any way. Certainly goes a long way towards explaining persistent rumors/hints at certain mods being biased and picking on those they dislike for whatever reason.
I could make a list of these numbers or responses for a dozen different posters, including myself, and they would be nothing close to each other in any way. From 0.00 to 1.00 or essentially on a percentage scale of total numbers of posts, infractions etc..., the standard deviation is probably about .8 Some posters get infracted for almost every single thing remotely close to the line, others never seem to get infracted for anything.
After reading all the feedback in this thread, I'd be willing to revise my statements on moderator consistency to "absolutely awful" and change my poll vote accordingly, but too late for that I guess.
And to clarify any earlier remarks - yes, I guess the written rules may not be controlled by the mods, and I do feel the rules do not encourage consistency - but leaving that aside moderator consistency seems more inexcusable by the day. I'd pretty much welcome an attempt to actually be serious and "crack down on everything" as that would be more consistent, with the side benefit of many posters being banned in very short order which may clean a lot of things up. But as things are, moderation has gradually gotten stricter since a good year or two ago when all the time posts would fly that couldn't now, but it's been a poor development at the cost of consistency and much enjoyment across the forums.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
What he is saying is that people who are infracted usually complain of bias or inconsistency. This does not necessarily mean that there is bias or inconsistency, it may mean that the person making the observation is not being objective about it.
I'm pretty sure that is not what was implied - it sounded like he just preferred to ignore reports of other posts by certain posters (those that had he'd infracted). However, I may have mistook the meaning. But apart from that statement, I can confirm anyway from my own experiences that this general type of occurence is true - it happens very frequently that several posters will make a post of almost exactly the same nature - whether it's spam, an insult, or something - in different threads. Often only one moderator will infract one person in one of those threads - and in that case it's very reasonable for the "victim" if you will to point out the inconsistent moderation, the dozens of other posts that had never been infracted for the same "offense". I've even seen posters kind of "dare" each other to post something that another poster just "got away with" in another thread.
I've said elsewhere around here I don't take time to report posts much anymore due to such frustratoins, but I certainly can give many specific examples in private, where I or others have seen/reported many controversial posts, none of them acted on by the mods, yet some random poster somewhere was infracted due to some whim of moderator inconsistency. Again, I'd be really ok if the mods wanted to be strict and infract everything, but if that's not the case, some minor violations which get infracted based on random flights of fancy I'd really rather leave alone. The forums certainly allowed more language or minor "flaming" and a lot of similar things in the past, that much is evident, and a lot of posters seemed to prefer that way.
I've said elsewhere around here I don't take time to report posts much anymore due to such frustratoins, but I certainly can give many specific examples in private, where I or others have seen/reported many controversial posts, none of them acted on by the mods, yet some random poster somewhere was infracted due to some whim of moderator inconsistency. Again, I'd be really ok if the mods wanted to be strict and infract everything, but if that's not the case, some minor violations which get infracted based on random flights of fancy I'd really rather leave alone. The forums certainly allowed more language or minor "flaming" and a lot of similar things in the past, that much is evident, and a lot of posters seemed to prefer that way.
Abaddon
Deity
All that has changed over the years is that cfc has got a lot more prudish. changed from "be reasonable" to "pg13" to "U". Which is very lame. It is also incredibly inconsistent- furry thread is allowed, discussing the BNP isn't?!?
Heretic_Cata
We're gonna live forever
Well, one is a deeply disturbing sexual fetish that should be taught to all kids and the other is politics. And we all know kids are too stupid to understand politics so we shouldnt overload their brain.
In the case of one, threads on the subject invariably turn to flaming and trolling. In the case of the other, the thread was closed only after almost every poster insisted that the subject of the OP was something it clearly wasn't (a view the thread was intended to combat, but some prejudices are apaprently too deeply held).
It would be more accurate to say that furryism is an alternative lifestyle, and that the BNP party promotes racism. While there are sexual fetishes associated with furries, just because one is a furry doesn't automatically mean they're in it for the sexual aspect. Reading the wiki article on it, the sexual side of it isn't even mentioned for the top half of the page. The BNP does nothing but spew hatred and tries to get more people to think like them. I don't see a bunch of furries running around trying to make everyone else think like they do.
Alternative lifestyle =/= disturbing sexual deviancy.
Alternative lifestyle =/= disturbing sexual deviancy.
You misinterpreted what I wrote, and should reread ainwood's post. Posters respond to infractions with a litany of reasons why they shouldn't have been infracted that include: you're picking on me; you let Billy say it all the time; you hate me; you are prejudiced against my politics; etc.etc. Most of the time they are just trying to get off the hook. In my case, I rarely infract off a reported post message. I go back into the thread, and read the posts before and after the reported one to see what was said before and after. Then I infract as necessary.
Such numbers would be quite interesting to see. And while I do not expect anyone to actually go through the exercise, a hundred answers would be pretty interesting.
Moderator Action: Per ainwood, below, please do not post your infraction point totals in this thread.
Thanks, you are correct.
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
On the infractions tab of your profile.
EDIT: I'm pretty sure someone like Till could write a script that could collect the data automatically if there is a way (maybe with admin privileges running the script) to see if a post has been reported or not and collect the total infraction point data.
EDIT: I'm pretty sure someone like Till could write a script that could collect the data automatically if there is a way (maybe with admin privileges running the script) to see if a post has been reported or not and collect the total infraction point data.
Heretic_Cata
We're gonna live forever
Well, you're right, i dont see a *bunch* either.
Anyway, i dont think Abaddon meant he wanted to make a pro-BNP thread. Pro-BNP stuff should obviously be banned. I think he wanted to be able to talk about the party and whatsit doing.
Well, you're right, i dont see a *bunch* either.
Anyway, i dont think Abaddon meant he wanted to make a pro-BNP thread. Pro-BNP stuff should obviously be banned. I think he wanted to be able to talk about the party and whatsit doing.
That's understood. However, as Eran previously stated the BNP threads quickly dissolve into troll and flame fests, which is why we don't allow them. Honestly, we'd probably do that with any subject that gets out of hand.
I'm reporting your post for smugness.
EDIT: Done
That's hilarious.My point was that it can be done. It doesn't matter how many posts a person has, you can post in such a way not to earn an infraction.
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
British people have a tradition of self deprecation and taking the piss out of everyone. It's how we bond.
I'm sure I'd be shot if I lived in America.
I'm sure I'd be shot if I lived in America.
I'm just wondering at what point I can redeem some points for cash back rewards.
- Status
