2.) A generational fracture into "teenagers" and "post-teenagers" and "middle-aged." This would not be a problem, except that the second group chafes under the rules which govern the first well (the third being something of a wild card).
I can see why it might look this way to you, since you've moved from one group to another during your tenure here, and since there are certainly teenaged problem posters. I think it's completely wrong. The only thing those groups have in common is their chronological age. We have some sensible posters that are 15 and some that are 35, and some awful ideologues and trolls that are 15 and some that are 35. No age group has a monopoly on anything. Maybe the teenagers make for a larger percentage of problem posters, I can't say since I don't know how old everyone is, but it's absolutely not fair to damn them all, or to excuse all, or most, of the "adults".
This means, first and foremost, acting as human shields and interjecting lots of so-incredibly-reasonable content into the thread so that people have an opportunity to post about the topic without freaking out.
That's because mods usually find themselves coming to CFC only to do moderating (after a while), with little time or energy left to do regular posting. Or to simply interact with posters.
Because everything we post is held to a higher standard and might be construed as representing the site, in the end we ended up not saying anything much anymore so as not to get caught up in these.
Once you start moderating (esp OT!), you'll find that you have little time, or energy left to do normal posting. Particularly when you must ensure that your posts must now be above par, since you're now a mod. It takes a lot of effort... most of us will rather concentrate on moderating, rather than try to do both at once...
The "leading by example" that Gogf mentioned is an excellent point.
But you don't need to be the ones posting the good posts in order to lead by example. There are a lot of good posters who have sadly decided to become mods and stop posting. But they are still capable of recognising good quality posts when they see them.
(Re: blue: I don't consider plain text posts by mods to be mod-hatted. Mod hats bold and color text. Sure, mods should set an example of lawfulness, but it's not as though El Mac's (awesome) science commentary is somehow representative of the mod borg.)
Well, Mise beat me to it. Gogf's point is great, and some mods would be
perfect for such a thing, except that becoming a mod kills exceptional posters. This sapping of talent is without a doubt one of the causes of OT's arthritis.
Supposing mods haven't got the time or will to compose proper quality posts, they can still help steer discussion without petty vandalism (edit: or "elitism"). Participate in the discussion, even if it's just mildly prodding questions. Ask for clarification and expansion of good ideas. Engage the best posting. Carrot. Call out crap posts conversationally - without necessarily wearing the mod hat and without needing to debate infraction - so the rest of us (that aren't allowed to do it bluntly) can see it disarmed and move on. Point out the quicksand before anyone falls in. This could work exceptionally well in the RD zone, where mods are already expected to be more active.
I think the infraction system is an improvement. It allows for a clearer recording system, and bans are more systematic.
Back in my day, I do warnings, and then random bans (1 week for typical, 10 days to 2 weeks or more for more persistent ones), depending on how irritable I find a problem post is and how many warnings I can search or simply recall. I seriously doubt people will like that kind of random system now.
I fully support arbitrary bans. It's too easy to game the infraction system. It's no secret that some of these fence-dancers are #fiftychat regulars. Too many times to count, I've seen posters behave just as long as it takes for their points to expire. "I want to troll [poster] but I have to wait until tomorrow afternoon when I'll be back down to 4 points." You can get away with damn near anything if you pace yourself. The system is probably an improvement in dealing with the vast majority of posters, but it's completely broken by some of the problem posters - the ones that most need to be restrained.
Unfortunately, riding the system isn't the province of problem posters alone. Some of the best posters on OT do it too. That, in my opinion, should be let slide, and arbitrary bans should be restricted to posters that
don't contribute within their rule-skirting. We all know who belongs to which group.
the RD substitute for
and
? It appears it is being used in this very RD thread in an unnecessary way. I would certainly read an unnecesary smilie as somewhat trollish by RD standards when you have the entire English language to maturely make your point. I'm not meaning to call those posters out, but merely trying to get some clarification. Anytime I see
.
