Maybe a new Moderator or 2 for OT?

[MobBoss]

I tend to agree with Mobboss in this. Mods should keep a low debating profile in the hot discussions about which they have been particularly vocal or have strong feelings. But they should post freely in general discusion or informational threads. I think it keeps the roles cleaner and reinforces the general position that mods should show restraint and discipline.

Precisely. I have no problems what-so-ever with a mod sharing information about a subject they are proficient in or have experience with. However, I dont need a mod questioning my morality/intelligence/reasoning/agenda etc. if we have a difference of opinion about a highy controversial and debateable topic.

If I cop pulls me over on the road, I want him to simply inform me as to what I did wrong and issue me a ticket while having a venue to challenge an infraction that may have been based upon misinformation/misunderstanding (yes, even mods can be misinformed on what a words use is). What I dont want is (for example) for him to devolve into a poo slinging ape simply because he thinks religions (and those that practice it) are utter stupid while my particular religion is important to me. Or vice-versa.

 

[classical_hero]

I disagree with MB. While he uses the cop for an example, but what about times when you are talking to a cop who i not on duty? IS he not allowed to show his positions on what he believes, while he is not on duty? The only way a mod differs from a regular poster is that they have been given authority by the owner of this site, to make it run smoothly. They still should be allowed to have disagreements with other posters on certain issue, because it makes thing lively. What Mods most definitely should not do is react the way how some posters react. It is easy for a mod to be able to seperate his duties from his posting.

 

[MobBoss]

I disagree with MB. While he uses the cop for an example, but what about times when you are talking to a cop who i not on duty?

Thats analogous to talking with an OT mod outside of OT - while they are not on duty. If you wish to talk about Civ4 with a mod thats off duty, by all means do so...in the appropriate forum...or in private.

Just like you would an off duty cop.

IS he not allowed to show his positions on what he believes, while he is not on duty?

Only to a limited extent.

The only way a mod differs from a regular poster is that they have been given authority by the owner of this site, to make it run smoothly.

And thats precisely why they should be held to a higher standard...just like cops.

They still should be allowed to have disagreements with other posters on certain issue, because it makes thing lively.

Things are lively enough without the prison guards getting in on the riot. Sorry, but you are just flat out wrong on this idea. Mods 'getting in on the action' isnt condusive to 'things running smoothly'.

I have a saying for you and its a good one. 'Familiarity breeds contempt'.

What Mods most definitely should not do is react the way how some posters react.

So your going to ask a human to not act like a human? It doesnt work. I have indeed seen mods react the same exact way other posters do. Many times.

It is easy for a mod to be able to seperate his duties from his posting.

For some yes, when they stick to informational/educational topics. Those that choose to get into those 'lively' arguements - not so much.

 

[azzaman333]

So, what exactly makes behaviour that is unacceptable for a moderator acceptable for an average poster?

 

[MobBoss]

So, what exactly makes behaviour that is unacceptable for a moderator acceptable for an average poster?

Whoever said it was acceptable behavior in a poster? Thats why they get warnings and bans is it not?

My point is a mod that argues in threads is infinitely more likely to engage in behavior that should earn warnings/bans as opposed to one that doesnt.

Simple actually.

 

[azzaman333]

Whoever said it was acceptable behavior in a poster? Thats why they get warnings and bans is it not?

I don't see moderators getting warnings and bans from participating in threads. Maybe because they can restrain themselves is why they are moderators in the first place?

My point is a mod that argues in threads is infinitely more likely to engage in behavior that should earn warnings/bans as opposed to one that doesnt.

I don't see moderators getting warnings and bans from participating in threads. Maybe because they can restrain themselves is why they are moderators in the first place?

 

[GenMarshall]

My point is a mod that argues in threads is infinitely more likely to engage in behavior that should earn warnings/bans as opposed to one that doesnt.

Simple actually.

Why does that remind me of stories of an older mod back in the day? Before our time in OT. Sorry if I am opening up old wounds .

 

[MobBoss]

I don't see moderators getting warnings and bans from participating in threads. Maybe because they can restrain themselves is why they are moderators in the first place?

Or maybe because they can simply remove the entire post/thread.

You dont see it because you dont have the ability to see all, be all, here at CFC.

But I have indeed had mods do this very thing in arguements.

Dont want to accept that? /shrug. Cant help you.

Look, I am not here to argue this particular point. It is my opinion. Some agree, some dont. But lets stick to reality. Not all mods are equal, and some are much better at what they do. In my opinion, the best mods are the ones that keep their OT argueing to a minimum. For the reasons I have stated.

 

[GenMarshall]

But I have indeed had mods do this very thing in arguements.

Dont want to accept that? /shrug. Cant help you.

In the years that I have been here, I have not seen that happening here. Care to explain or elaborate it to the people who are not members of thoes forums who have had mods abuse their powers and do the very thing you describe?

 

[azzaman333]

Or maybe because they can simply remove the entire post/thread.

What does that have to do with anything?

You dont see it because you dont have the ability to see all, be all, here at CFC.

And you do?

But I have indeed had mods do this very thing in arguements.

Probably because... shock... you broke the forum rules.

Dont want to accept that? /shrug. Cant help you.

You seem to believe you are infallible on these forums. I can't help you accept that you aren't, you'll have to do it yourself.

Look, I am not here to argue this particular point. It is my opinion. Some agree, some dont.

Then stop acting as if your opinion is fact.

But lets stick to reality. Not all mods are equal, and some are much better at what they do.

Most definately.

In my opinion, the best mods are the ones that keep their OT argueing to a minimum. For the reasons I have stated.

Can you measure the ability of a moderator from their OT arguing? If the answer is no, then you do not have the cause of good/bad moderating.

 

[MobBoss]

And you do?

Nope. But I do know that a mod can remove specific posts and threads.

Probably because... shock... you broke the forum rules.

Sigh. No. Mods are not superhuman. And yes, I actually did petition TF about one a mod in the past that, inho, exceeded his mandate and I got a formal apology.

You seem to believe you are infallible on these forums. I can't help you accept that you aren't, you'll have to do it yourself.

Sounds to me like your issue isnt about my suggestion, but rather, with me. I dont claim infallibility, I merely have my opinion based upon my experience with certain mods in the past. If you have an issue with that, sorry, I am fresh out of give a crap.

Then stop acting as if your opinion is fact.

Part of my opinion is based on facts, but I have been clear in stating my whys and wherefors of my opinion. Again, dont like it? /oh well.

Can you measure the ability of a moderator from their OT arguing? If the answer is no, then you do not have the cause of good/bad moderating.

In my opinion that answer would be yes. Someone who engages in petty trollish comments because they feel they are losing the arguement doesnt have good mod skills.

 

[The Yankee]

I'm going to stay away from the debate over whether a moderator should or shouldn't overtly participate in OT's threads, since a)I'm a moderator and b)I'm still active. The only thing I would wonder would be how to identify and keep moderators, whether it's on OT or anywhere else on CFC, if the best way is to only stick to moderating after they've been inducted.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I'm going to stay away from the debate over whether a moderator should or shouldn't overtly participate in OT's threads, since a)I'm a moderator and b)I'm still active. The only thing I would wonder would be how to identify and keep moderators, whether it's on OT or anywhere else on CFC, if the best way is to only stick to moderating after they've been inducted.

I don't think that MB is advocating that mods not participate, only that they show restraint in threads about which they have very strong feelings that might cloud the objectivitiy needed to moderate such a thread well.

 

[azzaman333]

Nope. But I do know that a mod can remove specific posts and threads.

But what does that have to do with anything?

Sigh. No. Mods are not superhuman. And yes, I actually did petition TF about one a mod in the past that, inho, exceeded his mandate and I got a formal apology.

Mods make mistakes.

Sounds to me like your issue isnt about my suggestion, but rather, with me. I dont claim infallibility, I merely have my opinion based upon my experience with certain mods in the past. If you have an issue with that, sorry, I am fresh out of give a crap.

When mods make posts that break the forum rules, they get infracted/banned by other moderators. Is it that hard for you to see?

Part of my opinion is based on facts, but I have been clear in stating my whys and wherefors of my opinion. Again, dont like it? /oh well.

Which facts would they be?

In my opinion that answer would be yes. Someone who engages in petty trollish comments because they feel they are losing the arguement doesnt have good mod skills.

If a moderator engages in trolling, then they will get an infraction like everyone else.

I don't think that MB is advocating that mods not participate, only that they show restraint in threads about which they have very strong feelings that might cloud the objectivitiy needed to moderate such a thread well.

I quote Mobboss' first post in this thread.

My number one quality in a mod would be:

Stop posting.

 

[MobBoss]

Mods make mistakes.

Mods make less mistakes if they refrain from argueing with posters.

When mods make posts that break the forum rules, they get infracted/banned by other moderators. Is it that hard for you to see?

Do they? I have never seen this. If you have something to prove this by all means offer it.

If a moderator engages in trolling, then they will get an infraction like everyone else.

Have you ever seen a mod get an infraction? All I have ever seen was the post simply removed.

I quote Mobboss' first post in this thread.

Unless you want to blatently misrepresent me (which fyi is a violation of the tos), then you should also quote where I agree with Birdjaguar after I clarify and respond to his statement.

 

[Abaddon]

If a mod CAN'T distinguish between their own posting, and unbiased modding, they shouldn't be one.

In all my time here, I have NOT seen a conflict in interest in this way. If anything all the mods are at leasy adept at keeping their own politics OUT of the MODing.


I think the forum should have enough Mods that there is ALWAYS one online, with many more being best (I have no idea how many people click "report" every hour or so, but I think anything reported should have a response within 5 minutes. We all know the threads when there is NO mod response.

 

[azzaman333]

Mods make less mistakes if they refrain from argueing with posters.

Mods should not moderator a topic they are heavily invloved in.

Do they? I have never seen this. If you have something to prove this by all means offer it.

There is only 1 set of forum rules which covers everyone, including moderators. If they break the rules, why would they not recieve the same consequences as anyone else?

Have you ever seen a mod get an infraction? All I have ever seen was the post simply removed.

You can infact get infractions on deleted posts...

Unless you want to blatently misrepresent me (which fyi is a violation of the tos), then you should also quote where I agree with Birdjaguar after I clarify and respond to his statement.

You blatantly misrepresent yourself then by making that part stand out.

 

[IglooDame]

I'm going to stay away from the debate over whether a moderator should or shouldn't overtly participate in OT's threads, since a)I'm a moderator and b)I'm still active. The only thing I would wonder would be how to identify and keep moderators, whether it's on OT or anywhere else on CFC, if the best way is to only stick to moderating after they've been inducted.

I'm not going to stay away from the debate, now that I'm a) not a moderator and b) not still active (to anything approach the degree I was, anyway).

If you expect moderators to stop doing what brought them here in the first place in addition to spending a bunch of time and dealing with the usual headaches associated with moderating the forum, you're simply not going to have moderators.

And on the other side of the fence from moderators who are having less fun here but sticking with it anyway and perhaps occasionally stepping over the line, we have a few posters that consider it fun to see how many people they can piss off while still staying just barely inside the trolling line, or how much spam they can get away with, or how many holes they can find in the rules. It is these users having their fun, I would argue, rather than moderators continuing to participate, that are having more of a negative impact upon the forums, and OT in particular. This thread to me smacks of arsonists complaining that their local fire departments need to respond more quickly to 911 calls.

 

[MobBoss]

Mods should not moderator a topic they are heavily invloved in.

Thats pretty much what I am saying. Glad you came around to my point of view.

There is only 1 set of forum rules which covers everyone, including moderators. If they break the rules, why would they not recieve the same consequences as anyone else?

Since you havent proven this with any legitimate offers of proof since I first asked, I remain skeptical.

You can infact get infractions on deleted posts...

Then by all means show me where a mod has gotten one.

You blatantly misrepresent yourself then by making that part stand out.

No, I make an initial comment and then clarified it. If you refuse to recognize my clarification, then you misrepresent my point by removing the context.

 

[MobBoss]

If you expect moderators to stop doing what brought them here in the first place in addition to spending a bunch of time and dealing with the usual headaches associated with moderating the forum, you're simply not going to have moderators.

No one is forced to be a mod, if you think its going to impinge on your fun, dont do it. Your point here is precisely why I am not sure I would accept such an offer as I like to argue too much.

And on the other side of the fence from moderators who are having less fun here but sticking with it anyway and perhaps occasionally stepping over the line

It shouldnt ever be ok for mods to 'occasionally step over the line'.

we have a few posters that consider it fun to see how many people they can piss off while still staying just barely inside the trolling line

Again, the problem isnt people who following the TOS or even toe that line - the problem is in the ones that dont.

or how much spam they can get away with, or how many holes they can find in the rules. It is these users having their fun, I would argue, rather than moderators continuing to participate, that are having more of a negative impact upon the forums, and OT in particular.

I would argue that its not the people following the TOS that are the problem, but those who cant contain their emotion enough in a debate and devolve into a flaming troll. When that happens to a mod, its even worse.

This thread to me smacks of arsonists complaining that their local fire departments need to respond more quickly to 911 calls.

Nice way for a former mod to describe the users. I personally think the majority of the mods do a great (and thankless) job. But there are a couple that could benefit from my advice and stay away from debating heated topics.