Reform of CFC Public Discussion of Moderator Action Rules

[ywhtptgtfo]

I have been informed that Thlayli has been banned. On what grounds was the ban for?

It's hard not to read this action as deliberate silencing of criticism on spurious grounds, and that certain mods have been looking to reprimand Thlayli for his outspokenness...

They did lock that PDMA thread from a few months ago too and then tried to bury everything under the rug.

My sentimental is that things are unlikely to change for the better in the near future. The best thing to do is to move to a better forum and forget about this. It's best for both parties in fact because one gets to inflict themselves on yet-willing recipients and the other gets to excuse themselves from such pleasures.

Edit: It's unfair for me to demonize every moderator here, but one bad encounter with a few did sour everything for me. I will try to remember to be fair in my comments.

 

[Birdjaguar]

They did lock that PDMA thread from a few months ago too and then tried to bury everything under the rug.

My sentimental is that things are unlikely to change for the better in the near future. The best thing to do is to move to a better forum and forget about this. It's best for both parties in fact because one gets to inflict themselves on yet-willing recipients and the other gets to excuse themselves from such pleasures.

Edit: It's unfair for me to demonize every moderator here, but one bad encounter with a few did sour everything for me. I will try to remember to be fair in my comments.

Locked public threads are not an attempt to bury things. Deleting them would be. Sometimes discussions can get heated or repetitive enough to warrant locking and waiting for a new discussion to start. I do not know the circumstances surrounding the thread you mentioned.

How would you characterize a "better forum"?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Locked public threads are not an attempt to bury things. Deleting them would be. Sometimes discussions can get heated or repetitive enough to warrant locking and waiting for a new discussion to start. I do not know the circumstances surrounding the thread you mentioned.

How would you characterize a "better forum"?

I think the point is that locking a thread is a way of denying people the right to have their say, since the rule is that once a thread is locked, people are not allowed to start a new one on the same topic.

At the very least, it's really annoying if someone has asked a question and the thread gets locked before someone else can post an answer.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

Locked public threads are not an attempt to bury things. Deleting them would be. Sometimes discussions can get heated or repetitive enough to warrant locking and waiting for a new discussion to start. I do not know the circumstances surrounding the thread you mentioned.

It most certainly can be. It's more preferable to deleting the thread too, since it does not send an explicit signal on the intent. Come on, many of us here are adults who worked for years... we aren't that naive.

How would you characterize a "better forum"?

I think a good forum would be one where moderators only step in when there's real trolling involved and that they do so with courtesy when possible.

Threads like this occur obviously because some moderators deviate from such operational parameters.

At this point, we are well past debating whether or not moderators deserve public scrutiny. It's really just a matter of whether or not the moderating team will continue to defy public opinion and risk losing more members.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

I wanna mention that I’ve been pretty impressed with what Bootstoots has had to say lately, and a friend in a better position to know tells me he’s on the level.


-And I’d like to talk about where I’m coming from when I speak up in these PDMA threads:

I had a lot of bad experiences with forum management as a newb, yet ended up running a place myself, and turned out to be good at it, to the surprise of everyone, including me. Apparently, I learned a lot of good lessons from seeing it done wrong.

I had an annoying experience at my first Civ/SMAC forum with a moderator who left alone heavily-modded art-free scenarios posted in the general forum, but threw a thread I posted featuring an altered Sister Miriam I did as a discussion piece about what the ugly portrait of the church lady said thrown into the modding sub where only modders would see it. I still get my back up when I see the art side discriminated against.

At the next place I joined -Zack can back me up on this; he was involved- I fell in with a group that kinda wrecked the OT with a silly joke-fest running through most every thread. I was a newb who didn’t know any better, and I still resent the management letting it go on for weeks without asking us to cool it, then coming down like a ton of bricks, rudely-and-late, pretending guys who meant no harm were the bad guys. The whole thing was a mess, and got incredibly stupid before it was over. I certainly contributed my share of stupid - but I wish all those mods and admins keeping up their end of the stupid hadn’t; none of them could plead being ignorant newbs.

At the next place I joined -Zack can back me up on this; he was involved- I got infracted twice for answering a question and replying to the follow-up --- in a OT ‘jokes’ subforum where you wouldn't exactly expect that sort of devotion to topic discipline. Oooookay; X’s house and X’s rules, but I was pretty much done with a place that inexplicably harsh. I got mod-shouted at, via PM. in the process, and also for contacting the mod offering to help out with a problem member I was close to. My dad is dead, and no one else had best try to replace him in talking to me that way.

The next place? That was so ugly and lame that I left the community entirely for six months, and hope Zack keeps his mouth shut. There are some bad people out there, and this one had talked his way into a mod position, which he abused (and took it to stalker-y levels of PM slander and harassment for over a year after I finally rejoined our community. I try to forget both my crazed stalker stories, for my own peace of mind.)

-I have more stories -lots- but the point of the last few paragraphs is that THEY DON’T COVER FOUR WHOLE MONTHS - arbitrarily unfair moderation, over-slack moderation, too-harsh moderation, power-mad/evil moderation, all in my first 3.5 months. If I hadn’t gotten another modding project going that I desperately needed to share later in the year, I’d have not lasted four months around these here Civ forum circles. I left swearing to never expose myself to such abuse again, but that darn creative urge managed to get the better of me.

[shrugs] And here I, who had so much bad experiences with The Man so early and often, find myself The Man at my own place. I have to never forget how it felt to be on the receiving end of a nerd-with-a-badge’s bad day. I refuse to be THAT guy, making people who only wanted to hang out chatting with friends feel all crappy and powerless. Moderating/administering/owning is a pretty thankless job that SOMEbody has to do -I consider myself the janitor far more than the boss- but I’ve been lucky with the results of trying to empower my people and make them feel liked and valued. I most certainly avoid moving people's threads around whenever I'd like, and let a good deal slide that I'd like to step on - most things are simply not worth the upset that using my powers will cause. I save it for the really important stuff, or when members ask for some janitor services. My people love me, not least because I love them. I’ve been lucky at my little specialty forum, but it ain’t all luck, y’know? It takes a lot of hard work and patience and thought, but I’ve figured some things out. At the center of what I got right was establishing a mature forum culture that doesn’t require me to spend a lot of time managing the people, ‘cause they police their own individual behavior, and a soft word here and there usually is all that’s needed.

Maybe I’m deluded that I’ve found a better way, and maybe talking up an environment of respect running in all directions is never going to do CFC any good -it certainly doesn’t endear me to the management, but I hope they do perceive that I mean to try to help, notwithstanding a certain amount of grousing- but I’ve got years of thought and experience backing up what I’m saying, from BOTH sides of the power equation. I’m not a chimp, and this isn’t just empty talk. Forum management is my real hobby, and I don't get to talk shop much.


SO - for several PDMA threads here in a row, many reasons, of various quality, are given why PDMA is necessary. I asked, several PDMA threads ago, why no other Civ forum I’m aware of needed a similarly-restrictive policy - IIRC, no attempt to answer that question has ever been made by anyone.

 

[Birdjaguar]

It most certainly can be. It's more preferable to deleting the thread too, since it does not send an explicit signal on the intent. Come on, many of us here are adults who worked for years... we aren't that naive.

I think a good forum would be one where moderators only step in when there's real trolling involved and that they do so with courtesy when possible.

Threads like this occur obviously because some moderators deviate from such operational parameters.

At this point, we are well past debating whether or not moderators deserve public scrutiny. It's really just a matter of whether or not the moderating team will continue to defy public opinion and risk losing more members.

Fair enough.

And...

So moderation policies are a big factor in determining what you see as the "better forums".

If you could have only one of the following which would you choose?

Elimination of the non swearing rule except when used in name calling
or
Significant relaxation of the no flaming & trolling rules
or
Some meaningful PDMA discussion allowed

Choose only one.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

Fair enough.

And...

So moderation policies are a big factor in determining what you see as the "better forums".

I feel that edge in your tone, which is sharpened by your use of quotations.

There are many ways to make a forum better. Better content, better crowd, easier navigation, more applicable partitions, etc, etc, etc.

But trivially, the elimination of what's widely considered "net-negatives" would also contribute towards making a better forum. In our case, I consider the ban on PDMA to be a major "net-negative" because it shelters moderators from bad behaviour, which is obviously a flash point for many.

With that said, can we go further than this? Certainly we can - in many ways. However, I'd consider it an achievement if we can even get past this current block.

Now, I hope that clarifies what would help constitute "better forum"?

If you could have only one of the following which would you choose?

Elimination of the non swearing rule except when used in name calling
or
Significant relaxation of the no flaming & trolling rules
or
Some meaningful PDMA discussion allowed

Choose only one.

Hmm... those are all undesired choices.

Some tolerance towards minor swearing (i.s. shxt, crxp, hxck, dxmn) is certainly welcomed because most of us aren't kids to be patronized in such a manner but then it doesn't really address the root problem does it?

Significant relaxation towards trolling is not useful because the problem here is not about the standards being too strict but that some staff members appear to be unable to adhere to them in a consistent manner. They could go easy on people who engage in endless uncivil disputes and then choose to go hard on someone over some scraps.

Finally, allowing meaningful PDMA is definitely desired. But what defines meaningful? Why some meaningful PDMA and not all?

With that said, I believe there's nothing more I need to say at this point. If you truly want to help in this, then you already have more than what you need to begin addressing the issues at hand. If you do not want to help in this, then no amount of additional discourse will sway you.

Anyway, good luck to you all. I will check back in a week to see if this is getting anywhere.

 

[JollyRoger]

If you could have only one of the following which would you choose?

Elimination of the non swearing rule except when used in name calling
or
Significant relaxation of the no flaming & trolling rules
or
Some meaningful PDMA discussion allowed

Choose only one.

Significant enough relaxation of the no flaming and trolling rules so that an informed reader of the flame or troll could infer that swearing and PDMA are being implied.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I feel that edge in your tone, which is sharpened by your use of quotations.

There are many ways to make a forum better. Better content, better crowd, easier navigation, more applicable partitions, etc, etc, etc.

But trivially, the elimination of what's widely considered "net-negatives" would also contribute towards making a better forum. In our case, I consider the ban on PDMA to be a major "net-negative" because it shelters moderators from bad behaviour, which is obviously a flash point for many.

With that said, can we go further than this? Certainly we can - in many ways. However, I'd consider it an achievement if we can even get past this current block.

Now, I hope that clarifies what would help constitute "better forum"?



Hmm... those are all undesired choices.

Some tolerance towards minor swearing (i.s. shxt, crxp, hxck, dxmn) is certainly welcomed because most of us aren't kids to be patronized in such a manner but then it doesn't really address the root problem does it?

Significant relaxation towards trolling is not useful because the problem here is not about the standards being too strict but that some staff members appear to be unable to adhere to them in a consistent manner. They could go easy on people who engage in endless uncivil disputes and then choose to go hard on someone over some scraps.

Finally, allowing meaningful PDMA is definitely desired. But what defines meaningful? Why some meaningful PDMA and not all?

With that said, I believe there's nothing more I need to say at this point. If you truly want to help in this, then you already have more than what you need to begin addressing the issues at hand. If you do not want to help in this, then no amount of additional discourse will sway you.

Anyway, good luck to you all. I will check back in a week to see if this is getting anywhere.

I am actually supportive of loosening the PDMA restrictions or providing a place/way for PDMA to happen. Such questions help me better understand how posters think about the problems and prioritize them. Don't expect much progress when you come back, but please do come back.

Significant enough relaxation of the no flaming and trolling rules so that an informed reader of the flame or troll could infer that swearing and PDMA are being implied.

As always, a welcome addition.

 

[Nuka-sama]

Elimination of the non swearing rule except when used in name calling
or
Significant relaxation of the no flaming & trolling rules

I think the first one should already be a part of the forum itself, but maybe a compromise could be made for those who want to be treated like adults, and those who want this to be more "family friendly"? League of Legends for example, is a game for all age ranges, and automatically has a "Language filter" that turns any swear into a "****", but can be turned off if one chooses. What if we have that?

The second one I think should be relaxed, though still kept in a relatively civil manners.

Would having both of these be possible?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Some tolerance towards minor swearing (i.s. shxt, crxp, hxck, dxmn) is certainly welcomed because most of us aren't kids to be patronized in such a manner...

The first word in your list is currently prohibited, and personally I'd prefer it remain prohibited. The other three words (I take it you mean "crap," "heck," and "damn"?) are currently allowed, and I use two of them fairly often.

I am not sure if a "BS flag" smiley would be allowed or not. I rather suspect it would be considered to be trolling. It sure would save a lot of typing at times, though.

I am actually supportive of loosening the PDMA restrictions or providing a place/way for PDMA to happen.

What kinds of PDMA restrictions are you supportive of loosening?

 

[Brian Shanahan]

Some accusations of bias are not baseless. I recall being told by some veteran members who have been here a lot longer than I have of a moderator from many years ago (long before I was even online, never mind a member here) who abused his authority and infracted people if they happened to disagree with his opinions on certain topics. That person hasn't been a moderator for many years, and from what I can surmise, left the forum long ago.

You don't have to go back even that far. Look at what happened in the Civ5 forum back in 2010 and 2011. Extremely biased moderation (which as far as I can see was prompted by corporate bullying from 2K/Firaxis, but still inexcusable) meant that in a number of cases pro-Civ5 posters were allowed egregious violations of forum rules, up to and including personal abuse of other posters without sanction, while posters against Civ5 were infracted andbanned for inoccuous and accurate statements that the game on release (and for a long time after) wasn't any good and in fact barely playable due to many game breaking bugs.

This craven capitulation to corporate interests is why I barely come onto this site any more, let alone post on it. And there are a number of valued forum members who also think like me and are also essentially former members.

 

[filli_noctus]

You don't have to go back even that far. Look at what happened in the Civ5 forum back in 2010 and 2011. Extremely biased moderation (which as far as I can see was prompted by corporate bullying from 2K/Firaxis, but still inexcusable) meant that in a number of cases pro-Civ5 posters were allowed egregious violations of forum rules, up to and including personal abuse of other posters without sanction, while posters against Civ5 were infracted andbanned for inoccuous and accurate statements that the game on release (and for a long time after) wasn't any good and in fact barely playable due to many game breaking bugs.

This craven capitulation to corporate interests is why I barely come onto this site any more, let alone post on it. And there are a number of valued forum members who also think like me and are also essentially former members.

You remember that period quite differently to me. Whilst for the most part the threads were civil there were a few flamefests with infractions handed out to both sides and there was a pile of threads on the subject of "This game sucks" with a few "This game rules". Infractions were handed out for some of the "sucks" threads due to profanity whilst the "rules" threads escaped that as there wasn't the strength of feeling that the outraged anti-CiV posters had.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

I am actually supportive of loosening the PDMA restrictions or providing a place/way for PDMA to happen. Such questions help me better understand how posters think about the problems and prioritize them. Don't expect much progress when you come back, but please do come back.

We don't get anywhere by repeating ourselves ad infinitum. How about we shake things up a little and do a public demo to see how well this works? I got something I want to publicly bring against the Super Volunteer known as "ori".

Since civility is such a concern for the moderators, I will guarantee civil conduct on my part. Given the high standards that moderators hold themselves to, my recipient should have no trouble defending himself.

I think this is a reasonable request. Do you?

 

[gay_Aleks]

And this thread was this close to dying for good..

 

[hobbsyoyo]

To be honest, I only see allowing PDMA to become a place for cliques to gang up on moderators they feel have slighted one of their members.

I also see it would become a place that would get spammed by every butthurt person who's been infracted with insults, rants and pointless whining.

On the other hand, I don't think the appeals process is very good as it's extremely one-sided. A person makes their case and a group of mods discuss it in private with the agrieved party having no insight into the discussion.

Couldn't the mods create a semi-private thread for people to discuss their infraction with the mods and only the mods? That would give the infracted person a chance to adequately defend themselves without it become a circlejerking forum of piss and vile that I suspect a PDMA thread would quickly devolve into.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

To be honest, I only see allowing PDMA to become a place for cliques to gang up on moderators they feel have slighted one of their members.

What makes you think the majority of cases would be cliques ganging up on moderators? Do you see any cliques here making demands? How many cliques are here in CFC?

 

[JollyRoger]

Some of us prefer to be backed by cults rather than cliques.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

I also see it would become a place that would get spammed by every butthurt person who's been infracted with insults, rants and pointless whining.

This. This is the actual reason IIRC, and was what actually happened back in the earliest days of CFC when TF was moderating himself. Not that I was around to witness it then but heard it often enough...

On the other hand, I don't think the appeals process is very good as it's extremely one-sided. A person makes their case and a group of mods discuss it in private with the agrieved party having no insight into the discussion.

Better than the old way - which is just having one admin (TF) deciding. At least now you have 3 to look at it and decide in concert.

Also the infracting mod in question has no access to the discussion (except for a tell that there's an appeal), so there.

Couldn't the mods create a semi-private thread for people to discuss their infraction with the mods and only the mods? That would give the infracted person a chance to adequately defend themselves without it become a circlejerking forum of piss and vile that I suspect a PDMA thread would quickly devolve into.

You can discuss the infraction with the mod in question thru PMs, as the infractee with the infractor. Not sure what the system is like these days, but I think you can also discuss with a higher-up, like a supermod. Mods are reasonable; so long as you can discuss it politely and like an adult, they're more than happy to sort it out with you (or shld be!).

The appeals system is only to serve as a last, formal resort.

Over the years, I think the CFC system has become an overly elaborate, resource hungry and cumbersome thing. Probably a lot easier to do it like some other sites, where the rule is don't be a jerk or else...

 

[Valka D'Ur]

This. This is the actual reason IIRC, and was what actually happened back in the earliest days of CFC when TF was moderating himself. Not that I was around to witness it then but heard it often enough...

Better than the old way - which is just having one admin (TF) deciding. At least now you have 3 to look at it and decide in concert.

Last time I counted, there were 7 admins.


BTW, not every group of people with a common interest is a clique. Sometimes they're just a group of people with a common interest.