PD of PDMA

[Buster's Uncle]

BTW, while I was searching for something else today, I did see Matrix infract for trolling in AC a few years ago. I had forgotten that incident.

Lefty, of course, has his own way of treating those that misbehave on his turf.

[poker face] According to site rules I may not respond to this observation, but I may state my opinion that I find Mr. Scaveola usually worth listening to, even when he's wrong, and I wish he spent more time playing SMACX and talking about it. Do you ever still play, Bj? I know of this really GREAT forum...

Sounds like me, but to confirm it, I'd have to actually go look and "I can't be arsed" to do so.

I could, and it was you . I'm chalking it down to excess frankness and letting it go, as you don't seem to talk that way constantly, and I'd rather move forward.

Please be careful of drawing assumptions from a limited sample. Our staff discussions draw more of the mod staff to post and the discussions feel less adversarial. Strong voices on both sides can't help but create more drama than is needed.

Message received.

However, I do what everyone does; deduce and form opinions according to what I do observe and know, and it's a bit much to tell me there's more relevant information, but I'll have to take your word for it. -And your assessment of it.

CFC is an escape for many, as our success tells us, but it is not all crap as you may want to think.

I keep being told that, and I keep seeing more evidence otherwise. It's not like I'm on a hunt for it, I just keep seeing more by virtue of simple looking around - and not in the 'zoo' fora, at that. Staff tells me I don't know what I'm talking about every other sentence, so I hope no one complains that I do a little reading now.

There's hope for some many of you, and I can't say I'm invested in compiling more evidence for a case I think I already made. I'd rather talk about moving forward at this stage, and disingenuous denials aren't getting any traction in Buncle's brain.

Purple: Well, you may not have seen it, but it is a constant discussion topic in staff.

See previous remark about asking me to take it on faith. Perhaps a dialing-back of the constant show of distrust for the membership would make it easier for us to believe in (generic) you.

Yes, so we have to use our ingenuity to find ways to have those discussions be useful and work for positive changes.

Maybe that's a perfectly pragmatic way of looking at it, but it sidesteps that we still have to find (annoying, awkward, infuriating) workarounds to discuss important issues, which is the 1,000,001st symptom of everything being twice as hard to do at CFC for reasons I've advanced some theories about. (And I'm probably only exaggerating the figure by an order of magnitude - 1,001st is still too many. This is the meta-issue I keep going on about; the aggregate of all the annoyances looks like that Randist teen I mentioned.)

Please no one tell me I should use the report button to do it. Jesus.

NESers know what they want; my job is to help them play their games and have fun in a friendly setting. They do not need me to be creative, engaging, or inspiring. They have those qualities in spades among the posters who hang out there. Mostly, I try to stay out of their way so I don't get run over.

NES is probably a bad example of a place to try what I'm talking about, actually - I just used an example you mentioned, but forum games forums are pretty atypical, I think. You probably have a more appropriate spot in your domains, but I wouldn't know where. (I do have some ideas for AC, but I already raised them with Petek, and they're mostly about creating activity...)

You are not Thunderfall, but it would be nice if someone ran a test project and could point out the results to someone who is the boss of the others...

Thank you for your confidence in me.

Thank you for talking to me with the bull dialed all the way down, or fairly close to it. That is to be encouraged, and you'll note I'm trying harder to be polite in response. Respect draws respect.

The stakes are too high for a "throwaway the rules" change, but conversations like this do provide an impetus for folks to try new things.

I had hoped as much...

No laughter here, Intelligent discussion has always one of our goals at CFC.

That's a good goal. It's a major priority of mine as well.

 

[Birdjaguar]

My responses here are my own and in know way represent those of CFC, other mods or the staff.

BTW, while I was searching for something else today, I did see Matrix infract for trolling in AC a few years ago. I had forgotten that incident.

[poker face] According to site rules I may not respond to this observation, but I may state my opinion that I find Mr. Scaveola usually worth listening to, even when he's wrong, and I wish he spent more time playing SMACX and talking about it. Do you ever still play, BJ? I know of this really GREAT forum...

Not since I upgraded computers a couple of years ago. I haven't installed it on the one I use now. I NES when a good game is up; I play Civ some, EU4 and Skyrim from time to time. Mostly I work at a job that keeps me pretty busy.

I could, and it was you . I'm chalking it down to excess frankness and letting it go, as you don't seem to talk that way constantly, and I'd rather move forward.

But context for my opinions is important. When I taught 4 graders in my youth, the balance of responsibility was different than it should be here. 15 year olds are not 25 year olds and they are not 35 and older. I expect less from those who are teens and even those who are still in college. While I can shout "be responsible!" all day to them, the internal forces of youth and freedom on the internet far outweigh the voice of restraint. I'm pretty sure we could eliminate the need for any serious moderation by vetting our members more thoroughly, testing them for their knowledge of Civ game content, and cutting off posting privileges at the first sign of misbehavior. Of course we would have a very different site. I used to frequent such a site.

Every moderation action begins with a post by a member. Better posting (posts that further the sites purpose) means less moderation. The rules build fences and the more fences the greater the opportunity to both break the rules and infract people for breaking them. The more rules and fences you have reduces the responsibility of everyone (mods and members) to be careful and thoughtful about what they post. Mods quote rules, members quote rules, members accuse other members of breaking rules, and everyone has their own interpretation of the rules. The rules are a bigger issue than the behavior many times. We have a PDMA rule. We have that rule because in the past some members abused the lack of it in public discourse. they were irresponsible in their actions, abused their freedom to speak out and a new rule was created.

[Full disclosure: I was not a mod when that rules was created and I am making up a version of what happened that seems reasonable and accurate in general.]

I do not have high expectations of those under about 22 to care much about responsibility on an internet forum regardless of how they live their real life. Many will demonstrate it among close friends and community members here because those relationships are important to them. If we had an open discussion of PDMA, I would expect that those who in general treat others and the forum with respect would carry that over into the PDMA threads and those who are disdainful, hateful, mean, aggressive, selfish and unkind would bring those same traits there. Probably ruining the discussion for everyone else. I would support a PDMA discussion thread, but I'd would not make it open to all.

Now back to the rules and fences.By knocking down the fences (fewer rules) individual responsibility goes up and, to be frank, I do not think many of our members are ready for such freedom, especially in areas where discussion and drama ridden topics abound. they are not bad people, just young and inexperienced and at an age when power, pride and hormones are a bit out of balance. They often need a steadying hand from time to time.

And you are correct, it is all about the relationships between members and between members and staff. those relationship go a long way to taking down fences. but the diversity of both our membership and our staff make the paradise you envision less than realistic.

some of the questions that come to mind:

• How do we build better relationships between members? Can we do that at all?
• How do we build better relationships between staff and members?
• What results are reasonable and even possible for either of these efforts?
• What is the best response for those who are slow to be responsible for what they say and do here?
• How do we treat those for whom the opportunity to speak out is more important than the community?
• Why should the staff subject themselves to such radical changes when the site is very successful and its probably just a few spoiled apples who feel their personal needs are not being accommodated?

However, I do what everyone does; deduce and form opinions according to what I do observe and know, and it's a bit much to tell me there's more relevant information, but I'll have to take your word for it. -And your assessment of it.

I keep being told that, and I keep seeing more evidence otherwise. It's not like I'm on a hunt for it, I just keep seeing more by virtue of simple looking around - and not in the 'zoo' fora, at that. Staff tells me I don't know what I'm talking about every other sentence, so I hope no one complains that I do a little reading now.

There's hope for some many of you, and I can't say I'm invested in compiling more evidence for a case I think I already made. I'd rather talk about moving forward at this stage, and disingenuous denials aren't getting any traction in Buncle's brain.

See previous remark about asking me to take it on faith. Perhaps a dialing-back of the constant show of distrust for the membership would make it easier for us to believe in (generic) you.


Maybe that's a perfectly pragmatic way of looking at it, but it sidesteps that we still have to find (annoying, awkward, infuriating) workarounds to discuss important issues, which is the 1,000,001st symptom of everything being twice as hard to do at CFC for reasons I've advanced some theories about. (And I'm probably only exaggerating the figure by an order of magnitude - 1,001st is still too many. This is the meta-issue I keep going on about; the aggregate of all the annoyances looks like that Randist teen I mentioned.)

Please no one tell me I should use the report button to do it. Jesus.

I am running out of breadth. A log of moderator actions would go far to demonstrate what and how the mods are moderating, as well as, show the depth and breadth of what is moderated and what is not. Maybe we need to make a "no reporter's name" version of the reported post log so you all could see what we see every day. For fun we could have a button on each in which those who viewed it could vote on whether or not to infract. Unfortuately, I think dishonesty would creep in and you all would not want to infract friends and would want to infract those you didn't like or respect. If we could count on honesty, it would be a cool opportunity for us all to learn.

NES is probably a bad example of a place to try what I'm talking about, actually - I just used an example you mentioned, but forum games forums are pretty atypical, I think. You probably have a more appropriate spot in your domains, but I wouldn't know where. (I do have some ideas for AC, but I already raised them with Petek, and they're mostly about creating activity...)

You are not Thunderfall, but it would be nice if someone ran a test project and could point out the results to someone who is the boss of the others...

Thank you for talking to me with the bull dialed all the way down, or fairly close to it. That is to be encouraged, and you'll note I'm trying harder to be polite in response. Respect draws respect.

I had hoped as much...

Maybe later...

 

[Buster's Uncle]

I think I'll shock you by not quibbling and stating general agreement. Mostly.

That's a good set of questions. I have a philosophy, not, you know, a detailed set of ready answers covering every eventuality.

We had a Boy Wonder at the Frog Pond, back when I was just a newb. 14, scary smart, very witty and funny, could generally keep up with the grownups just fine. -And then would make fun of Justin Bieber, as if anyone else even wanted to hear the lastest flavor of the month marketed to kids mentioned. Changed his mind six times before breakfast - he was a good kid, but not one who could pass as adult for five minutes. Fun, but you could rely on being let down if you needed someone having your back. There's nothing wrong with kids, and I apologize to any teenagers who see this that I'm being so dismissive, but even the good ones, which I imagine is a non-trivial portion of the kids we got here, are still kids.

I'm good with kids (got two new ones on my forum, and they're sparking the place up in a good way - all callow enthusiasm, but positive energy nonetheless) but I wouldn't dream of telling you exactly how to handle yours without meeting them first.

...Mine? I treat them in the way you'd expect me to say I treat them. It's working out so far. [shrugs]

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I have never dismissed a teenage forum member just because of how many times they've been around the Sun. The Dune forum I used to run was originally created by a 12-year-old - yep, someone not even old enough by Invision's rules (minimum age with them is 13). He was intelligent and mature, much moreso than many of the people on that forum who were 2 or 3 times his age.

 

[peter grimes]

One thing to keep in mind is that not all mods are posting in this thread and it is the more vocal ones who are. Please be careful of drawing assumptions from a limited sample. Our staff discussions draw more of the mod staff to post and the discussions feel less adversarial.

I haven't had enough time to read this thread yet, so I can't speak intelligently on any issues raised. My silence here is from ignorance, not from ignoring

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Maybe we need to make a "no reporter's name" version of the reported post log so you all could see what we see every day. For fun we could have a button on each in which those who viewed it could vote on whether or not to infract. Unfortuately, I think dishonesty would creep in and you all would not want to infract friends and would want to infract those you didn't like or respect. If we could count on honesty, it would be a cool opportunity for us all to learn.

So redact the name(s) of the people who actually made the posts in the first place. Remind people that moderators sometimes have to infract friends, and ignore posts made by people they may not personally like (but whose posts were not in contravention of the rules).

 

[Buster's Uncle]

There are reasons to object to the reason portion of the report being published even with names left out... That's what happened to me, only in private, and names were deduced and trouble was caused. Sorry; just sayin'.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

^It's true that this can happen here if OT examples are used, especially if examples are used from posters whose writing styles are quite familiar and distinctive. Even if a few details were changed, a lot of us have posting habits that readily identify us with no username necessary.

 

[ori]

Given google (and other search engines) indexes all posts here redacting the name of the poster is going to do exactly nothing to ensure that the name is kept hidden since just googling the text of the post in question will point to that specific post.

 

[Maniacal]

I have never dismissed a teenage forum member just because of how many times they've been around the Sun. The Dune forum I used to run was originally created by a 12-year-old - yep, someone not even old enough by Invision's rules (minimum age with them is 13). He was intelligent and mature, much moreso than many of the people on that forum who were 2 or 3 times his age.

I find that those people are an exception rather than common, and even fewer aren't severely handicapped by a simple lack of life experience.

More so when it comes to OT discussions though, but they do make the worst moderators even if they seemed like good material beforehand.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I think I'll shock you by not quibbling and stating general agreement. Mostly.

That's a good set of questions. I have a philosophy, not, you know, a detailed set of ready answers covering every eventuality.

I'm to old to be shocked much any more. Having a philosophy is an excellent thing. I have several depending upon what the topic is.
but for any philosophy to useful it must translate into the pragmatics of application. Otherwise it is an exercise in intellectual gymnastics.

If your Website moderation philosophy cannot provide answers or at least sound guidance to my questions, what good is it? My sig is a significant part of my philosophical out look for moderating here and for life in general, but if i cannot demonstrate how to actually apply it when faced with real post and posters, then I am just blowing smoke.

How do we build better relationships between members? Can we do that at all?
How do we build better relationships between staff and members?
What results are reasonable and even possible for either of these efforts?
What is the best response for those who are slow to be responsible for what they say and do here?
How do we treat those for whom the opportunity to speak out is more important than the community?
Why should the staff subject themselves to such radical changes when the site is very successful and its probably just a few spoiled apples who feel their personal needs are not being accommodated?

Platitudes about how we should treat one another are a fine thing and can be important to changing ones thinking, but to be practically useful, the hard work of finding ways to implement such desires must be found. I was hoping that you had some substance to offer to help us actually move forward in trying to shift our moderating paradigm. That is why I posed my questions. Answering those and others are the hard work ahead of us.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

Phooey. I did my time in school and this is too much like work, but I can't stomp in here telling you to clean up your act in good faith without obligating myself to take a run at good questions you raise. I am going to try to make quick work of it, though - I seem to communicate better when I'm brief, anyway.

However, duty calls, and I'll get back with those answers as shortly as I can...

 

[Buster's Uncle]

How do we build better relationships between members? Can we do that at all?

I've suggested mediation already. I think, for reasons I've already tried to explain, "take it to PMs" is deeply problematic and frequently encouraging the no-class among us to behave more badly without an audience to be embarrassed in front of. Some of it is my answer to everything - get out in front of it and try to influence your people to a better culture. That's not just the speeches, but the tone with which you address members - if staff is rude by default, what surprise that the kids are? You are a leader automatically, by virtue of your position, and everything you say or do, and fine details thereof, sets a tone and a style for where you manage - influenced, of course, by the style/tone set in the other CFC subs they've been in.

(Pertinent to everything I say is that I'm a native of the Southeastern US, where standards of courtesy are different than most of the US. AC2 is a minority US site, BTW, or close to it. I know where most of my people who've posted more than five times are from, and have a pretty good idea of how old most are.)

I do think it can be done. It will probably be a slog, but people can be pretty great if you go at them just right.

I know most of this's still awful vague. I'm going to save these questions, and I may bring you more if it hits me - via PM to keep a coherent thread to it, I think.

This is taking and running longer than I'd hoped to even high-point free associate something approximating good, thoughtful answers. If I work through the list and publish as I get to each one, would I get gigged points for double (etc.) posting? I'm really asking. I want to be a good citizen and play fair.

 

[antimuff]

Call me crazy, but type them up in a word doc and c/p it when you're done.

Unless you really want immediate feedback.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Phooey. I did my time in school and this is too much like work, but I can't stomp in here telling you to clean up your act in good faith without obligating myself to take a run at good questions you raise. I am going to try to make quick work of it, though - I seem to communicate better when I'm brief, anyway.

However, duty calls, and I'll get back with those answers as shortly as I can...

I do not know what you do for a living, but I do recall saying you were approaching 50. I was in school quite a while ago also, but my current RL job is actually work compared to what I did in school. Such questions are part and parcel to solving problems. If you don't ask and answer the right questions, you will not make any progress. Many folks see a problem like "no discussion of PDMA" and say that to fix it, we need to open a PDMA thread or forum and we will be done. Failing to put such changes into a larger context will only doom the process to "the law of unintended consequences".

If the problem is "poor leadership that leads to poor attitudes on moderation, which leads to poor moderation and shackled members", then just getting new moderators will not solve the problem. With such a paradigm shift you need a new foundation followed by a whole new structures built upon that foundation. Serious thoughtfulness is required both to build the new world order and to then implement it and hire new folks who are capable of carrying out such a plan.

It is a tall order. An ambitious one. How do we proceed? Do you have a 5 or 8 or 10 step plan that we could flesh out? What would the first step be? Start me down your road. I'm up for it.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

I'm working through the list, but a friend's sister just died, so priorities.

You do know that I'm not really talking for your benefit, but ainwood's and ultimately Thunderfall's? It's huge if I can convert anyone to the kinder side, but real change would take a top-down attitude adjustment. That's step one of the master plan you ask for. Seriously; nothing so big happens in Thunderfall's house w/o Thunderfall's consent, and it looks to me like ainwood's, too - and that's a tough sell, and they not only have to consent, but MAKE it work. I'll try to think of more, but jeeze, this is asking a lot of a dissident hippy protester. That's not a real complaint, mind you.

I've saved your latest to consider as part of the questions - I was a site mod (technically a limited-access admin/sheriff of smilietown) briefly at WPC, and I was the only one there who read every single post, but that leaves this is still way out of my league for coming up with specifics, being a very different place as well as not much bigger, by your scale, than what I run by myself now. I expected you to be charmed and take care of all the details yourself when I persuaded you. (That's not entirely a joke.) But I will try to see what I can come up with.

Unless you really want immediate feedback.

Notepad, and I'm putting a lot of time into all this; of course I want immediate.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Thanks, but there is no rush. Good ideas need to percolate.

BTW, the biggest and hardest part of convincing the highest echelons of authority is to have a good plan. When my staff comes to me with a good idea, my first question is "'Ok, how do we do it?" If they say "I don't know", then I tell them to come back when they do. At that point it is worth spending my time on.

 

[antimuff]

Notepad, and I'm putting a lot of time into all this; of course I want immediate.

Well, then, consider it a lesson in patience.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

You're right, of course.

 

[antimuff]

Son, I'm always right.

Anyways, what's the big deal? Discuss, don't discuss.... does it really matter in the long run?