That's what some of us have been doing for YEARS. Literally.
And some of them are still here.
Invisible mode, reported posts and pms: communicating with moderators
- Thread starter Buster's Uncle
- Start date
BU: Some of your posts in this thread are more suited to the PD of PDMA thread. can I move them and their replies over there? this thread is about quick answers and not for long discussions.
Ah another thinking like me. ^^^
Ah another thinking like me. ^^^
Buster's Uncle
AC2 Owner
Of course; use your good judgment, and move as you think best - the courtesy of asking wins you an internet.
-But that last post is a real question/request.
-But that last post is a real question/request.
Sometimes a mod check in just for a short browse, not having the time for more. Or through tapatalk, where writing is a pain. It's perfectly reasonable to activate ghost mode in these situations. Otherwise you get PMs where members expect somewhat immediate action from you, since you're listed as active. If there's no reply, they are disappointed or think they are being ignored.
The only reason I don't use ghost mode for these situations is that I'm too lazy to switch back and forth...so if I'd enable it, I'd probably never disable it
As for ghost mode for regular members, that's entirely up to them to decide if they want those data to be shown to the public or not. It's not dishonourable or cheating or anything of the like but entirely a matter of personal preference. Just like entering your birthday, location, rl interests etc is.
I don't know why people so love to liken imperfect forum administration to Orwellian nightmares or fascist states; I wonder what they'd make of a real fascist state. Be that as it may, you seem to have jumped from complaining about forum administration to complaining about no-one taking notice of the evidence, without going through the intermediate stage of actually presenting any.
Now perhaps I'm wrong and you have presented such evidence elsewhere on this site, or via PM to someone. But you haven't in this thread, at the very least. If you can post links to where you've presented evidence in the past, or PM me with specific examples of what you're talking about, we might get somewhere. But we won't get somewhere if all you do, when we ask for specifics, is complain that we won't pay any attention to them.
"You have your fundamental attitude all wrong" may be a consistent thesis, but it's not a specific one. What's wrong about it? What cases can you point to of it having negative effect? What should we do to put it right? You can "refuse to get bogged down in" "details and evidence", but if that's your choice you can't really complain if we say we don't understand what you're complaining about.
I genuinely don't understand what you're complaining about, at least on the basis of this thread. You've said that you think using invisible mode is a bad idea - though you haven't really specified exactly why - and you've implied that moderators should be speedier about responding to PMs. I've tried to respond to these concerns, which even if they're justified (and in many cases it's true that we don't reply to PMs quickly enough), strike me as relatively minor concerns. I don't see what your justification is for the sweeping negative statements you've made, and just as importantly, I don't see any suggestions for how we can improve things. If you're resigned to not being listened to, and you can't be bothered to give us specifics that you think we won't pay any attention to, what exactly is your purpose in making these posts at all?
Buster's Uncle
AC2 Owner
I've been posting in the PDMA thread, going back 11 days now, talking about all these things. Spending hours a day trying to explain, so perhaps my frustration is understandable.
It's a simple premise, that the mission of the staff, or what it should be, Maximum Happiness for the Maximum number of People, has gotten lost somewhere. I have provided many examples, beginning with the PDMA rule, and had them dismissed out of hand each time - there's an aggregate attitude on display in staff answers that's disturbing, emphasizing, as they so often do, that reversal on policy X would be inconvenient to whichever staffer is talking. It's a consistent theme.
There's a tone to management culture here (and I could blow many hours searching and quoting examples from just the threads here in Site I've participated in in 11 days to make the ultimate TL;DR boring post of hater compilation) that the members are a rabble, a rather nasty one, that they're always one bit of letting up on staff control from burying you in complaints and bad behavior and making your online lives miserable.
I say rhetorically - cry me a river. Show some concern for my problems, as befits a leader, before expecting me to have compassion for yours. (The first time I made mod somewhere, an owner insisted that I note my staff status in my postbit; I didn't want to, not to avoid the responsibility and visibility that is part of the job, but because I didn't think it made me special and didn't want it to make it more awkward to speak in my private capacity as another member [and it turned out I was right about that last] but Solver's house, Solver's rules, so I complied, changing my user title to read "Moderator/Servant". Go check - nobody's changed it since I left. I thought throwing servant in there really said all the right things, and I still do.)
You're asking me to write a book, is all - please go read from the middle of page three of the PDMA thread on, and I'll try to answer any questions you have left afterwards.
It's a simple premise, that the mission of the staff, or what it should be, Maximum Happiness for the Maximum number of People, has gotten lost somewhere. I have provided many examples, beginning with the PDMA rule, and had them dismissed out of hand each time - there's an aggregate attitude on display in staff answers that's disturbing, emphasizing, as they so often do, that reversal on policy X would be inconvenient to whichever staffer is talking. It's a consistent theme.
There's a tone to management culture here (and I could blow many hours searching and quoting examples from just the threads here in Site I've participated in in 11 days to make the ultimate TL;DR boring post of hater compilation) that the members are a rabble, a rather nasty one, that they're always one bit of letting up on staff control from burying you in complaints and bad behavior and making your online lives miserable.
I say rhetorically - cry me a river. Show some concern for my problems, as befits a leader, before expecting me to have compassion for yours. (The first time I made mod somewhere, an owner insisted that I note my staff status in my postbit; I didn't want to, not to avoid the responsibility and visibility that is part of the job, but because I didn't think it made me special and didn't want it to make it more awkward to speak in my private capacity as another member [and it turned out I was right about that last] but Solver's house, Solver's rules, so I complied, changing my user title to read "Moderator/Servant". Go check - nobody's changed it since I left. I thought throwing servant in there really said all the right things, and I still do.)
You're asking me to write a book, is all - please go read from the middle of page three of the PDMA thread on, and I'll try to answer any questions you have left afterwards.
First you complain about that users are not treated with respect (as one of the complains).
Now someone wants to listen to you, to improve the situation, and you refuse to help.
Do you think this is a positive attitude? If there's a situation, and it's not going anywhere, then someone has to make the first step. You've concluded that no one here is going to make it, but there's the will to make the second step if you make the first one. So why do you not do it?
You've wrote a lot about respect and forum culture. It's time to show that you take that serious by showing us that you want to improve this forum culture.
Now someone wants to listen to you, to improve the situation, and you refuse to help.
Do you think this is a positive attitude? If there's a situation, and it's not going anywhere, then someone has to make the first step. You've concluded that no one here is going to make it, but there's the will to make the second step if you make the first one. So why do you not do it?
You've wrote a lot about respect and forum culture. It's time to show that you take that serious by showing us that you want to improve this forum culture.
This is exactly what the forums provide.
Are you maybe confusing 'maximum amount of people' to mean you?
Buster's Uncle
AC2 Owner
No. Please read what I actually said. I said I'd already covered most of this.
I'm trying to swear off cheap shots, and I'd like some of that back, thank you.
I'm trying to swear off cheap shots, and I'd like some of that back, thank you.
I just spent 20 minutes reading everything you wrote...it seemed a little unfocussed and the subject kept changing.
You demand respect but dont seem to give much back... just saying
Your signature is very disrespectful to the admins and mods (i am neither obviously)
You demand respect but dont seem to give much back... just saying
Your signature is very disrespectful to the admins and mods (i am neither obviously)
I haven't read that thread yet. (It's very intimidating.) But I will do so.
I'm not convinced that that is what the mission of the staff should be; apart from anything else, it's conceptually rather complex, in that one cannot generally maximise both the overall quantity of happiness and the number of happy people, so one needs some kind of rubric to offset the two goals against each other, and there are different ways one can do this. More generally, while I'm usually sympathetic to utilitarianism, I'm not so sure that it's a practical guide to forum administration. For one thing, are we talking only of the happiness of the members, or of society in general? One could administrate a forum of neo-Nazis by permitting racist posts, and that would please the members, but it wouldn't be a good thing to do. A more realistic example: suppose one member makes a post in which he uses a homophobic insult against another member. And suppose that it's actually done in good humour, and these two members are old friends, and this is simply how they interact, and neither they nor the other forum members are at all offended by it. Nevertheless, we still wouldn't allow it, because it's a public forum, accessible via Google, and that kind of thing could be seen by non-members who don't know the context and for whom it could be extremely damaging.
Buster's Uncle
AC2 Owner
All solid points, Plotinus, and I completely agree.
None of which refutes my assertion in any way, however, but underlines a sub-point I keep trying to make, that life and truth are not simple. 'My house, my rules' is the way it MUST be (I do not argue otherwise) but it's also treating everything like it's really that simple, when nothing is that simple. Maximum Happiness in some reasonable balance of all the factors is still the goal, and rules are just the tools, not the end.
None of which refutes my assertion in any way, however, but underlines a sub-point I keep trying to make, that life and truth are not simple. 'My house, my rules' is the way it MUST be (I do not argue otherwise) but it's also treating everything like it's really that simple, when nothing is that simple. Maximum Happiness in some reasonable balance of all the factors is still the goal, and rules are just the tools, not the end.
Who's the "us" you refer to, The_J? "Us" as in the forum membership as a whole, or are you still acting like a moderator when you're not one anymore?
I'm not familiar with the references in his signature, but he does run a gaming forum in his own right (like some others of us here), and is therefore entitled to have an opinion on how to run forums in general. If you object to his signature, report it and let the mods sort it out.
I meant everyone who's reading this here.
His signature seems to suggest that the admins/mods here have autism & compromise issues.
IT is no doubt a poor attempt at humour to be shared with other mods and former mods
Reporting someone to the mods who is having a conversation with the mods & admins would be pretty stupid, dont you think?
Buster's Uncle
AC2 Owner
You know what? I need to make the point, and I could quibble that I'm pointing out an appearance, not making an accusation, but you're right; it's rude, and I'll go change it now.
Edit: Done.
Interestingly enough, I've gotten an unexpected side benefit from all this rambling conversation straddling two threads - we're training a group of CMNs right now, and the CMN in charge asked me to participate in the leadership/management style part of the training. All this talk has helped me organize my thoughts (laugh all you want; this has helped.
) and crystalize my thinking.
Anyone curious about what I'm telling my own upcoming managers? I've said it all here already, but this is more focused...
Edit: Done.
Interestingly enough, I've gotten an unexpected side benefit from all this rambling conversation straddling two threads - we're training a group of CMNs right now, and the CMN in charge asked me to participate in the leadership/management style part of the training. All this talk has helped me organize my thoughts (laugh all you want; this has helped.
) and crystalize my thinking.Anyone curious about what I'm telling my own upcoming managers? I've said it all here already, but this is more focused...
*shrug* Just mentioning one of the options you have when you see something you consider offensive.