PD of PDMA

[Buster's Uncle]

Following on that thought:

After all, maximum happiness for the maximum people is the name of the game.

Would anyone care to quibble, point out exceptions, or disagree?

 

[Camikaze]

Well, at least this time I didn't have to wait 2 months before you answered me. Thanks for that bit of consideration, at least. But it's still arrogance. Both of you have now demonstrated the attitude that if it's not important to you, it's not important to anyone.

As for your "get a life" crack - I didn't like it when William Shatner said it, I never saw the "humor" in it, I thought it was mean-spirited and a slap in the face to the people who had helped put food on his table through the years (yes, I know there are rabid, drooling Star Trek fans; I was never one of them), and your post reads like it's also something The_J. said. That's not correct. That's what you're saying right now, and it's damned rude.

Firstly, my post was a little poorly worded, and so you haven't interpreted it correctly. I wasn't saying that you should get a life, but that my 'favourite' response to an infraction are the ones where the infractee tells me to get a life, even though they're the one in the process of complaining about moderation on the internet.

Secondly, I don't really consider an appreciation of irony to be arrogant. Okay, so some people actually do take infractions really seriously. That's fine. It's the internet and fairly anonymous, but sure, I can kinda understand why you might be indignant at someone calling you out on something if you think they're in the wrong. My point in this aside about my 'favourite' type of response is that taking it too seriously, whilst accusing the moderator of doing the same, when the moderator is just enforcing a guideline in a private venue fairly dispassionately, can sometimes bring a smile to my face. Any questions will still be answered, but then not answering questions wasn't at all what I was talking about.

As far as that goes, receiving an infraction is not a gateway to an endless conversation, or to wasting moderator time (nor is the mere designation of a moderator as holding such a position a reason for them to have to engage in any discussion a user wishes to bring up, no matter how unreasonable). Yes, genuine questions are of course answered, and significant latitude is allowed in determining what is 'genuine', especially with newer members, but if you're receiving your 50th flaming infraction for calling someone an idiot, and asking why you received it, don't expect the moderator to be longwinded and pleased to enter into a 10 page long debate as to the interpretation of the rule, and the reason for the rule. Point being, yes there are circumstances in which a moderator might be something other than completely welcoming and comprehensive in response to a PM, particularly an unsolicited one.

I will gather the information, and PM someone on staff. It likely won't be you, since I don't want to wait another umpteen months for a reply.

Yes, that might be a good idea. I don't have time for much moderating most days now (hence I haven't read all posts in this or other SF threads), and I'm quite behind on my PMs. I wouldn't want to make people wait months for something.

This may be another reason why moderators can appear reluctant to engage in lengthy PM discussions at times. Sometimes you have enough time for either a short (and seemingly terse) reply, or no reply at all.

 

[Takhisis]

Really, Camikaze, this is odd. You coem and say that you don't have the time to read the thread so you haven't read it, The_J is not a moderator any longer… so why are you two poster? It takes a lot fo credibility from anything you post.

 

[Camikaze]

I was initially just replying to one particular post, and this thread has a few strands of conversation. My recent posts haven't had much to do with a moderator log, for example, though I don't think failure to address that aspect of the thread really invalidates what I'm saying about another aspect of it (just as your failure to address that issue in your post just now doesn't invalidate your query, I suppose).

That The_J decided to depart () doesn't disqualify him from having an opinion on site moderation and sharing it; removing his badge presumably didn't remove his experience, probably the most extensive of any moderator on this site.

 

[The_J]

If both anything you mentioned is an indicator for credibility, than you (and your post) also don't have any ^^.
Or going in the other direction: Keeping up with this, even due I shouldn't give a crap about it, and Cam doesn't have the time to, shows rather that we're still interested in what's going on (to some degree).

Look, The_J asked for specifics. He didn't ask me to PM him anything. He didn't offer to PM me. The implication of his post is that he expected me to provide the information here. In public. Where he knew damn well that if I did, it would be immediately deleted and I would get a hefty PDMA infraction.

Well, I assumed that
a) you know the rules
b) I know the rules
c) I know that you know the rules
d) you know that I know the rules
and that there's only one outcome out of this.

The "real" information is in the Tavern (there are many such discussions) and there are probably some in the Chamber (not sure, since I rarely read that forum these days). You now know where to look, so the only thing stopping you is an unwillingness to see if you might be wrongmistaken.

I thought you were talking about other forums.
But no, that's not of any RL importance.

Oh. So if you (by your own preferences) don't care to bother with unimportant things (ie. discussions), and nothing here is of any importance regardless of where it is on the site, why are you still here?

Bad habit from the past. I really shouldn't be here anymore, but that's sometimes harder than you might think.

Since I don't believe for a second that I'm the only person on the planet typing words on a screen and sending them to other people to read and maybe reply, I am doing the courteous, ethical thing: I assume that all of you are real people (except the spambots; I know those aren't real), and I accord you the courtesy of realizing that the things you say are important in your lives - important enough to post/PM about - are indeed important. Just because I might not be able to directly relate to them for some reason, that doesn't give me the right to stick my nose in the air and say those concerns are unimportant, period. They are obviously important to the person who wrote about them, and the considerate thing to do is to acknowledge that.

But that's all relative.
Not every post about if Obama is a socialist or if a farm on a banana field is better than a plantation are of utter RL importance.

You had said that just because a minority of people perceive a problem exists, it's not a problem. I say that's nonsense, and that you appeared to be saying that the majority is ALWAYS right. There are many instances throughout history and in present day where it's clear to anyone not blinded by arrogance, apathy, or greed that the minority CAN be right (or demonstrably is right). And in any population, there will be people who privately agree with the vocal minority but who don't speak up publicly. So don't assume the minority that speaks up is all there are who feel that way.

That still doesn't help us determining if there's a problem or not.

So you (hypothetically) say something like, "This post was reported. I can't tell if it's something I can ignore or if I should do something about it. Personally I don't think it's important. What do you think?"

If that's the case, and you genuinely are unsure, that's fine. That's an excellent reason to consult another mod. But if you're having a knee-jerk reaction that "Poster X" said something you personally consider unimportant or even stupid and therefore do nothing about, that's not fine. Poster X may consider what he/she said to be quite important, and any issues that might arise from it such as trolling, flaming, infractions, etc. are not things you should shrug off because YOU PERSONALLY may consider unimportant and not worth the time to ask another moderator about.

I can tell them my judgement, and tell them to consult another mod about it.
If that's then not important enough for them to do so, then it's probably not important enough at all.

And seriously: Somewhere there has a line to be drawn. That line is set by the rules, and the mods interpret them. And if I say it's not a problem according to the rules, and the other moderators say the same, then there's not a general problem, no matter how the user who sees it as a problem sees it.

Some users see it as a problem that they can't flame everyone here. I'm pretty sure that's a real problem for them, and that they consider it important and of urgency for their life. But as a mod I could say otherwise, and decide that it's not a problem.

Would anyone care to quibble, point out exceptions, or disagree?

Why should anyone disagree?
What do you again want to achieve with this?

 

[Takhisis]

I was initially just replying to one particular post, and this thread has a few strands of conversation. My recent posts haven't had much to do with a moderator log, for example, though I don't think failure to address that aspect of the thread really invalidates what I'm saying about another aspect of it (just as your failure to address that issue in your post just now doesn't invalidate your query, I suppose).

I didn't mention validity. I mentioned credibility.

That The_J decided to depart () doesn't disqualify him from having an opinion on site moderation and sharing it; removing his badge presumably didn't remove his experience, probably the most extensive of any moderator on this site.

Nooo. But his answers aren't official anymore, and he answers as if they were.

If both anything you mentioned is an indicator for credibility, than you (and your post) also don't have any ^^.
Or going in the other direction: Keeping up with this, even due I shouldn't give a crap about it, and Cam doesn't have the time to, shows rather that we're still interested in what's going on (to some degree).

tl;dr: no you!

Why should anyone disagree?
What do you again want to achieve with this?

Do you even read your posts? Do you notice the awful tone in which you reply?

 

[Camikaze]

I didn't mention validity. I mentioned credibility.

My post is less trustworthy or believable because I'm not replying to everything in the thread?

 

[Buster's Uncle]

Why should anyone disagree?
What do you again want to achieve with this?

Ah, but don't you see that the answers are the same?

I'll keep it short so you'll actually read it - you're too bright to have serious comprehension problems.


Maximum happiness for the maximum number of people is the name of the game. No one should disagree.

A 'my way or the highway' management style makes a nontrivial percentage of the people unhappy - a lot of whom aren't troublemakers, but are proud.

Therefore, running the forum like a fifteen year-old with Asperger's and a copy of Fountainhead is a suboptimal moderating strategy.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Really, Camikaze, this is odd. You coem and say that you don't have the time to read the thread so you haven't read it, The_J is not a moderator any longer… so why are you two poster? It takes a lot fo credibility from anything you post.

Ohcrap. Takhisis, thank you for pointing out something I'd totally missed. I've been so busy on so many sites lately, involved in a variety of rather intense discussions, that I missed something that was literally right in my face.

The_J is doing something that I was told a long time ago not to do: trade on my past position of moderator to imply that what I said was official (note that I have never done that).

So that little "Valka is spouting BS, and let's see the proof" speech The_J threw at me upthread is completely inappropriate, and thank goodness I never PM'd a damn thing. That's not to say I won't follow up with someone, but it'll be a legitimate staff member.

Well, The_J, there were a number of your comments I'd intended to address. But now that Takhisis has pointed out something I ought to have noticed myself, I obviously won't be doing it the same way I would if you actually had any authority to demand answers and proofs from me.

That The_J decided to depart () doesn't disqualify him from having an opinion on site moderation and sharing it; removing his badge presumably didn't remove his experience, probably the most extensive of any moderator on this site.

It disqualifies him from acting as though he's entitled to demand proof from me of things I've maintained have occurred. As for his experience, that's really hilarious in a 100% non-funny way. How many of you currently on staff have acted as though I should have suddenly developed amnesia regarding my time as a moderator here, and forever shut up about my experience? As for his having the "most extensive" experience... I rather think that's an exaggeration, as no moderator that experienced would be acting like he's been in this thread.

Nooo. But his answers aren't official anymore, and he answers as if they were.

Excellent point.

Do you even read your posts? Do you notice the awful tone in which you reply?

It's frequently the same way some of the more notoriously mean-spirited Tavern posters reply. Only their point of view matters, and everything else is either not important, not valid, not real, etc.

 

[ainwood]

Perhaps it might be more constructive to get back to the topic at hand?

 

[Loppan Torkel]

The possibility of PDMA?

..or a thread of collected MAs, or mods mediating between members or better Leadership.

Is it possible to make an official appeal-thread in Site Feedback? Maybe it would be beneficial for the mods to make the complaints more visible.

 

[Kyriakos]

^I don't think this would be a good idea at all (don't see it happening either).
Would you really want a thread where those posters will keep on posting what case they are unhappy with? There would be no point in maintaining the current system of theoretical anonymity of what infractions are given.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Just wondering... have any staff followed the link I provided to TrekBBS, to see their Moderator Actions forum? (it's way down toward the bottom of the page, so it's a long scroll)

I'm not endorsing it as 100% effective, since I honestly don't know - I've never had any problems there that couldn't be handled via PM. I also suspect that a fair percentage of the issues that get raised there are actually fairly trivial. But they're important to the persons who posted them, and at least the staff is shown to be doing things, considering issues, etc.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

I'd add that if you don't care about your people's feelings, well, that's not the best time to be frank and honest about something. Your people need you to care, or at least fake sincerity well; that's leadership, too, and not what CFC does best.

...

Question to ain: I approve of something I saw you do the other day - may I engage in PDMA to praise you? I'm serious, and it's on-topic to at least stuff I've been talking about.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

^I don't think this would be a good idea at all (don't see it happening either).
Would you really want a thread where those posters will keep on posting what case they are unhappy with? There would be no point in maintaining the current system of theoretical anonymity of what infractions are given.

Not sure I'd care. I'm not sure why the anonymity of infractions would vanish. It's still possible to PM, but if you've been infracted and would like to ..object.. in public, there'd be a place for it.

 

[Kyriakos]

^I doubt this can happen without bringing up other issues that may be deemed related by the posters in such a thread, which ultimately will defeat the purpose of keeping anonymity and moving on. Instead it will increase the unhealthy attitude some might have towards the forums here as some sort of arena where one will either make it or perish. Or, on the other edge, equally unrealistically, view the discussion forums as some sort of space where one can actually improve something in his/her life. :/

 

[Loppan Torkel]

I wouldn't be difficult to abandon such an experiment though.. just delete the thread

 

[Buster's Uncle]

Close, I should think; deletion should be a last resort.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

^Agreed. That's how it's handled at TrekBBS. It serves as a guide to others as to how not to bring up grievances in public. I guess one thing people have to learn in every forum they visit is how to pick their battles, and where to fight them.

 

[Birdjaguar]

You have given me the best answer yet, though. None of that 'we can't be arsed' nonsense, and from a fellow with a reputation for being interested in trying new things. I am indeed "calling for a paradigm shift the way all moderation across the forum is thought about and conducted."

for the most part such shifts work to the benefit of all, except when masterminded by those with selfish intent.

I've never seen Matrix so much as browse AC in well over four years, and Petek is a VERY laid-back gentleman, so of course the answer is zero - I'll do you one better and admit that I've never seen a warning or infraction there at all; but then, we're not talking about a folder with an exactly impressive per-day post average, are we? I don't behave myself in there when I post because I fear Petek, or think Matrix will ever show up, or a supermod will wander by (though two other SMACers among the staff are known to me). My idea of decent behavior has always been good enough there. Most people's is, witness that a not stone-dead folder effectively went without a mod for years. (I find it hard to believe too, honestly.)

I'm not sure that I've ever seen Matrix active either. Just so you know, ainwood is working on a project that will clean up some of active/inactive roles of those listed as moderators. Its ETA is unknown, but promised.

The AC forum is another example that clearly offsets any claim that the moderation at CFC is uniformly "gestapo". There is a broad range of moderation styles across the forum. Lefty, of course, has his own way of treating those that misbehave on his turf.

You have me correctly pegged as a passionate egalitarian with a radical streak - in my showbiz days, I was migrant labor, and boy, oh boy, did I not like being treated like migrant labor. And CFC treats members like migrant labor WAY too much of the time.

You can tell me that I see an imaginary problem outside off-topic areas, but what I witness every time I browse Site puts the -it turns out not to be the case, to put it diplomatically. Was it you or someone else who answered me pages ago admitting that yes, it's the kids fault? Whoever it was, good job on the manning up and taking responsibility. There is an institutional bad attitude here. It shows unmistakably in roughly 80% of the posts from staff members in this very thread.

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

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. Strong voices on both sides can't help but create more drama than is needed.

As long as you think of the kids as a troublesome rabble (and this is an all-staff "you", as it's too much work to keep track of precisely who said which arrogant/self-centered/lazy thing), you are nothing but a dirty bossman, and you. are. part. of. the. problem. The world is full of crap managers who don't care who they hurt, and CFC is part of the crapulence of life when it ought to be an escape from the crap. I don't see rabble posting in Site, I only see clearly intelligent people clearly interested in the welfare of their online home - so why do I keep seeing bossman behavior?

No one on staff seems to be able to admit that there's a problem there.

Blue: We are all (staff) part of the problem, but we are also the solution. any changes will have to come through us and be supported by us (or our replacements). CFC is an escape for many, as our success tells us, but it is not all crap as you may want to think. Could it be better? Of course. Could moderation be improved? Of course. Could posters improve their posts? Of course. One of the first steps is to know what we can change and what we cannot change.

Bold: You may see only intelligent people whose only interest is in the well being of their internet home, but that is not all that is here. As a mod I see a lot more. I see anger, hate, disdain, meanness, ridicule, and needless hurt that accompanies the kindness, fun, camaraderie, intelligent conversation and learning that also goes on here. The rules have been an imperfect bulwark against the meanness of human nature.

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

Yes. As I keep pointing out, some of the rules themselves make discussing the rules extremely difficult - at best, awkward.

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

It's a thing you can work on of your own initiative, (I assume.) What do you need your people doing in NES? If the answer isn't "what they're already doing", think a little about why NES needs it and why doing it would be good for the group and the individual participants. Write up a little something expressing your thoughts, and explaining why cooperating is The Right Thing To Do, and how they will profit. Shoot for the moon, man. Inspire them to greatness.

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.

Leadership.

If, hypothetically, what your people are doing is fine, and the general tenor of the culture/conversation there is satisfactory and sound, but you could really use more activity, same goes for encouraging recruiting. Or say you'd like to see more AARs -hard to go wrong with lots of entertaining AARs- then put up an announcement, or start a thread. You have demonstrated considerable eloquence in this very post I'm replying to, and I can tell you're a real thinker; You Can Do It.

-See what I just did? It's not that hard to do with some basic communication skills and a Dream you want to share.

A citizen could do it. You definitely can. I see you already have the tools you need, provided you have a good relationship with your charges.

Thank you for your confidence in me.

As to something staff-wide, that would be up to Thunderfall (or ainwood, depending) - using pretty much the same technique, adjusted for the intended audience and the leader's own style.

Well yes; of course you're right about tampering with a winning formula. I submit that you ought do a pilot program in NES, site policy for mod conduct/style and the admins permitting.

For the most part NESing is my domain, but not every mod or admin would agree that is could or should spread beyond the borders of NESing. To apply my standards in say OT would be difficult without an OT staff that all toed my line on how to deal with situations. That is probably not possible an may not even be desirable. Staff diversity is its strength and its bain. All the active staff are pretty familiar with my thinking on how we moderate, what I prefer and what I don't like.

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.

Yes. What works, works. I couldn't possibly decide the precise details of how to do it for anyone else without knowing all they know. Some citizens need a firmer hand than others. Some don't mind when you do X, and others do. Kinder and gentler -and FAIR- isn't exactly the same treatment for everyone at all times, but what is appropriate and maximizes happiness in each case and for everyone in the long run. After all, maximum happiness for the maximum people is the name of the game.

On reflection, I've made a mistake in my approach in this thread; I've gotten so used to being King Poop of Dung Mountain that I thought the Captain Kirk-style speeches that work so well there would work here. (Actually, I'm only High Vizier Poop; the owner claims I'm an equal partner, but I didn't set up the forum and I don't pay the server bills.) Silly of me; the speeches get a huge boost from my Admin status, much as I'd like them to succeed on their own merits, and they're never about telling the members they suck and need to do better. Here, I'm just another member with stories about moderating somewhere else, and that is only a credential that I'm not talking completely out of my butt, and something about 1/3 of everyone can claim, moderatorship not being all that hard to get somewhere. (I signed up at AC2 and an hour later, without any discussion or warning, I was suddenly Administrator.)

However ideas are powerful, and I have some I want to persuade people here of. I'll try to dial the pomposity way down, henceforth.

Please stop laughing so hard, The_J.

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