Moderator Disposition and Effectiveness

[Toasty]

I know for a fact that Sultan desires to be a moderator, and I personally think he would make a "mighty fine" one.

Someone else pointed out a problem with this, especially in the case of OT, that it is hard for anyone that is a significant member of the OT community to not have been warned, banned, etc. etc. at least once or twice by the time a moderating position does become open.

I also have considered the thing about left-wingers becoming moderators; in the past, many have felt that the left was more harshly dealt with than the right, myself being one of them. Because a major part of what Thunderfall, and to that extent the moderators, have to go on when choosing the new mods is track record, those of use who are left-leaning are at a disadvantage (of course, this assumes all left-leaners want to become moderators ).

If the OT forum is going to have moderators that are going to moderate a political forum, then the moderators must be balanced in their opinions for general "customer satisfaction." Most of the situations that caused trouble in the past could have been avoided had the moderation not behaved in ways that some percieved as slanted. I am glad to see there is an effort to correct this, however, I wonder about the practicality from the after-effects of the old system. I also know that not everyone concurs with my views on the way it was, and I don't know whether the Site Admin agrees or disagrees with me because I don't have access to that information. I do, however, hope they will take it into account how many posters do have this opinion, and could possibly feel cheated if things go back to the way things were.

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

Left and right wing should have no bearing on a moderator, even in the political forum... because the moderators shouldn't be judging the content of the posts beyond checking that they don't overstretch the flaming/trolling boundaries. It took me a while to learn to play by the rules, and I'm grateful to AoA primarily for showing me what the rules were, and how to be able to express myself political, even at full rant, without crossing the delicate line. It could seem like a double standard because sometimes people who flamed "from the right" got away with it, but again once you spot the line being crossed it is easy to see how it is done and how to restrain it. I don't feel like I was treated unfairly for my political opinions in here, but treated fairly for how I expressed them.

That's why I'd make a good moderator: I learned that if you are just going to beat your head against the wall you aren't going to get results and maybe end up a problem case. Because the times when I was moderated, I was able to discuss it with the moderator, and learn exactly what I'd done wrong, and NOT repeat it, I'd do better than someone who maybe was able to get away with more obnoxiousness without learning the lesson.

Would I be willing and able to drop the boom on someone who was saying things I agreed with but that violated the spirit of the site - such as someone who just wanted to say "Bush is an idiot" in the standard trollish way? Absolutely. I've even had to argue "from the right" (well, really, from the bastions of civility) against such posters before. I've reported foul language or inappropriate images regardless of whether the poster was a 'friend' or 'opposition' poster.

America, France, Iran, even Canada would be safe from trolling under my watch. Vote Sultan Bhargash, for a change...

(or at least give me the humor forum)...

whoops I'm campaigning again...

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Originally posted by Toasty
If the OT forum is going to have moderators that are going to moderate a political forum, then the moderators must be balanced in their opinions for general "customer satisfaction."

IMO, Political preference is not a consideration for the position, but the ability to fairly judge all posters, no matter what their preference is.

 

[Toasty]

Ideally, political affiliation shouldn't be part of the moderator's qualifications, but because of the way things have been set up, it is necessary. It is a lot clearer when someone crosses the line when they simultaneously offend you, and conversely, harder to see when they don't. To some the line is more clear than to others, and that is why they are moderators; but the line is never perfectly clear, nor is it in the exact same place for the same two people, and thus why it is necessary to have moderators from both sides of the political spectrum if we are going to have moderators who are politically involved in the OT discussions.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

There is also a background sort of bias that can not be overcome soely by wanting to. A person of a particular nationality or other group can because of his experience in that group, FAR mor easily recognize trolling and bashing aginst that group than against other groups. He knows where his own buttons and buttons of his nieghbors are. It is harder to recognize some trolling against other groups. Also be cause of such familiarity, he is more likely to infer malicious intent rather than insensitivity or ignorance when such familiar buttons are pushed. Longer and broader experinces among more roups is very helpful.

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

True enough, Lefty. I went to college at the height of P.C. penetration and learned a lot about sensitivity towards various groups; there's the first distinction. Then you hit it on the head with the "infer malicious intent" because even when you are overly sensitized towards women, minorities, etc. you can be pulled by the pendulum so far that you are ready to take offense at the innocent fumblings of well meaning white men.

I think it is easier on a forum than in real life to sort though this: the words "idiot", "*ssh*le" etc are right there to be seen and taken for what they are. No need to read into those; and if you can't demonstrate the "dark biases" you presume in broader worded posts they probably aren't there.

 

[JollyRoger]

Sultan as a mod? I fear his first act of moderation would be to demonstrate his lack of bias by iceberging with prejudice the first port-leaning Titanic he saw.

 

[Chairman Yang]

Chairman Yang for moderator!

End of discussion.

 

[Greadius]

I sniped and forgot about it. I'd be a terrible mod... though I'd be amazingly fair, even handed, nice, kind, consistent, and ruthless, I don't know any of the rules and don't want to learn them.

I'm here for war :tank:

And occasional civ3 advice now that I'm play again...

Though if you're going to make Sultan one I want to do it too so I can edit his posts when he's not looking

 

[carlosMM]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
There is also a background sort of bias that can not be overcome soely by wanting to. A person of a particular nationality or other group can because of his experience in that group, FAR mor easily recognize trolling and bashing aginst that group than against other groups. He knows where his own buttons and buttons of his nieghbors are. It is harder to recognize some trolling against other groups. Also be cause of such familiarity, he is more likely to infer malicious intent rather than insensitivity or ignorance when such familiar buttons are pushed. Longer and broader experinces among more roups is very helpful.

and having moderators with different backgrounds - when in doubt you can chek withn the others, what one misses the other catches....

wise words from you, Lefty

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Chairman Yang
Chairman Yang for moderator! .

I suppose we could create a forum suited to his special talents. I need to consult with Dante Alighieri on the design.

 

[D' Artagnan]

Vote for me ! I have a totally clean CFC record

 

[CurtSibling]

I'd rather vote for Tippa Gore!

 

[Zcylen]

Originally posted by D' Artagnan
Vote for me ! I have a totally clean CFC record

does the word "clean" has now a double meaning?

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

Let's call it "Paris clean"...


self-warned for nation trolling etc...

and you know I'm just kidding D'Artagnan...

 

[kring]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola

I suppose we could create a forum suited to his special talents. I need to consult with Dante Alighieri on the design.

The problem I have seen in the OT is that sometimes people post an immediate response when they are angry or upset after reading a poster's comments.

Dralix made an excellent point in post # 46 of this thread:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54167&pagenumber=2

Originally posted by Dralix


IMO, all Lefty has done is spell out some specific instances of things that are already against the forum rules.

Let's all try to show a little respect for each other. Or failing that, at least some civility.

 

[D' Artagnan]

Well, Sultan Bargash, seems TF hasn't chosen you ! Maybe the next time ?

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

The only thing that bothers me is that TF never answered any of my pms about being a moderator over the months, even just to say, "forget it pal"...

Col is a surprise to me but an excellent choice, someone I've known from a couple forums to be a very balanced person and look forward to seeing him moderate.

XIII or Knight-Dragon as I like to call him, is no surprise at all... his long unblemished history and his geographic location make him a perfect addition to the team.

Eyrei I'd like to say more about but really don't know too well; I'm sure from the other two that the selection committe knew what they were up to.

Congratulations to all of you who made it; feel free to PM me your tips on getting chosen. What I'm most curious about is if any of you volunteered or were just asked and accepted.

 

[Dell19]

I think they were all asked... Of course I am completely bitter at the lack of a specific Sports Talk mod postion...

 

[Toasty]

I think we need specific moderators in the Avalon Hill's Diplomacy & Never-Ending Stories forums, but that's me .